09/14/1981 Meeting (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

available could be developed to urban densities when annexed. This will happen mostly in the River Road/Santa Clara area. Glenwood would be included with a slightly different status. Eugene will work with Springfield to determine who - would be the best provider of services in that area. The resolution has been approved by the City Attorney in terms of wording. It is a resolution that is very limited in that it will only be in effect until Metro Plan acknowledgment. At the time of acknowledgment the City will need to negotiate a new kind of agreement with the County based on the plan itself. Mr. Farah is be working on acknowledgment. Until that time this resolution would be used. Mr. Chenkin characterized this resolution as a departure from the City's original position. The City had been receiving a number of referrals from the County over the years for lot splits and minor partitions in the River Road/Santa Clara area, and we have always replied these decisions would lead to increased development and urbanization without urban services and, therefore, the City would have to take exception. The City never had a mechanism like this that they could use that would assure that development would ultimately occur according to a conceptual plan that would show full development at urban densities and that the property would ultimately come into the City and would have a full range of services. It is a compromise. The City will not have compromised any principles, but it would be in line with the City's thinking at the present time regarding development and a long-term solution to the problem of River Road/Santa Clara. Ms. Wooten asked if this were a City Councilor a Planning Commission sign-off. Mr. Chenkin responded that the resolution would provide the Planning Department with standards so that it could sign off administratively. If the resolution was not passed, they would have to bring each and everyone of the applications to the council. The resolution gives administrative direction. e Ms. Schue asked if there was any provision in the regulations that relates to where the sewer will actually go, or is that necessary in the planning of the septic tank. Mr. Gleason said that they were not in a position to provide that kind of direction. They do not know where the trunk line or the laterals will exactly be; therefore they cannot give the property owner that information. As soon as they know, they will have an acknowledged plan and an acceptable process. Ms. Smith asked if, in terms of the Cityls position in phased annexation, by adopting this policy, the City would be more on record as supporting phased annexation versus forced annexation. There is a strong need to communicate that phased annexation is the way the City is wanting to proceed, even more so than in the past. Mr. Gleason said that this was one step in the direction of phased annexation--working that policy out over the years voluntarily. Ms. Smith asked that this be conveyed to the residents of River Road/Santa Clara to allay fears that were there. She asked staff to bring back to the council direction to more clearly define their position. Mr. Lindberg agreed. He said without a statement of general direction this appeared to be a blackmail letter and council did not intend it to be so. Now the City is more permissive in its annexation policy and is guaranteeing e MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 14, 1981 Page 2