Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/10/1984 Meeting (2) - M I NUT E S Eugene City Council City Council Chamber December 10, 1984 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Brian Obie, Cynthia Wooten, Ruth Bascom, Debra Ehrman, Richard Hansen, Freeman Holmer, Emily Schue. Regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon, was called to order by His Honor Mayor Gus Keller. I. PUBLIC HEARING A. Historic Preservation Program Code Amendments (memo, background information distributed City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced the agenda item. Jerry Jacobson of the Planning Department presented the staff report. He said the reorganization of the historic preseryation program would streamline the program to respond to the City's reduced funding. He reviewed the Historic Review Board (HRB) and Planning Commission consideration of the reorganization which would reduce the number of public hearings required by the regulatory process, provide for loans to be handled administratively, tit change the compo- sition of the HRB, and provide detailed procedures for notification and appeals. He noted the Council would be removed from the regulatory process which involves landmark designation, moving and demolition of historic land- marks, and removal of landmark status. HRB members would continue to be appointed by the mayor and confirmed by the Council. The Oregon Parks and Recreation Division recommended adoption of the reorganization plan. Answering questions, Mr.Jacobson said the Planning Commission will be the final authority in the historic review process, but the council can initiate landmark designation and historic preservation projects. Ms. Decker of the Planning Department said a person with interest and experience in public relations should be on the HRB because the planning staff does not have the time or expertise to properly promote the public involvement and education component of the historic program. Mayor Keller opened the public hearing. Carole Daly, 1609 Washington, is Director of the Lane County Museum and a member of the HRB. She urged the council to adopt the recommendations. Mayor Keller closed the public hearing because there were no other requests to testi fy. Responding to Councilor Obie's suggestion that Council consideration of the - reorganization be postponed to January, Mr. Jacobson said the HRB has only two members and some people are waiting to act on historic preservation applications. The matter was scheduled for consideration by the council on December 12. MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 10, 1984 Page 1 B. Appeal of Annexation/Zone Change Request (Emilia Coven) (AZ 84-1) e (memo, map, background information distributed) City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced the agenda item. Jim Croteau of the Planning Department presented the staff report. He said the appeal was to the recommendation of the Planning Commission to approve the request to annex and apply City zoning to a 5.5-acre parcel (Tax Lot 700) east of South Shasta Loop Road and north of East 43rd Avenue. Commission approval of the request included a condition that recorded legal access be provided prior to council consideration of the request. The request was the first to be con- sidered by the commission and council under new, simplified annexation procedures. Mr. Croteau said council consideration of the appeal was limited to issues raised in the appeal statement and evidence in the record. Interest in the annexation and rezoning request was enhanced by the applicant's wish to seek a future conditional use permit for a Looking Glass Stepping Stone Lodge on Tax Lot 700 if the annexation and rezoning are approved. A conditional use permit request is heard by the Hearings Official. The official's decision is appealable to the Planning Commission. Mr. Croteau emphasized that a specific future use of Tax Lot 700 was not germane to council consideration of the appeal. Responding to questions from Councilors Bascom and Hansen, Mr. Sercombe said a new annexation and/or rezoning request for Tax Lot 700 could not be initi- ated for a year if this request is denied. If it wished, the council could - remand the request back to the Planning Commission for additional findings. In that case, the council might hear another appeal of the commission's decision. Denial of the request would finalize City action. An appeal could then be made to the Land Use Board of Appeals or a request could be made to Lane County to permit the intended use. Councilor Holmer asked if the council was prohibited from conSidering future uses of Tax Lot 700. Mr. Sercombe said the council could consider the availability of public services and all permitted uses in the requested zone. Issues such as compatibility of uses are more appropriately raised in a conditional use permit hearing. When Mayor Keller asked for ex parte contacts and conflicts of interest, Mr. Sercombe said councilors should disclose with whom they had conver- sations about the request and appeal, the substance of conversations, and whether the conversations would impare their judgement. Ms. Bascom attended a meeting of the Shasta Valley Neighbors in September at which the proposed annexation was discussed. It did not alter her effort to consider the appeal fairly. A phone call from Loretta Clausen expressed the concern of an abutting property owner. Visits with Jim Forbes and Roz Slovic were to gather information about Looking Glass services. Ms. Slovic asked to lobby Ms. Bascom about the importance of the Looking Glass program. Ms. Bascom would try to consider the issue fairly. In the council deliberations, she would do her best not to use any information that was not part of the record. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 10, 1984 Page 2 e Nan Phifer, president of the Oak Hills Neighborhood Association, had pro- vided Mr. Holmer with an association bulletin and told him of the steps she was taking to obtain the opinions of neighbors. The contact would not interfere with his ability to arrive at an appropriate decision. Mayor Keller entered the staff notes and the minutes of previous meetings into the record and opened the public hearing. He said testimony about new issues would be disqualified. Mike Farthing, 975 Oak, represented the appellants. He asked about a letter he had submitted to the council about procedures and was told it had been received. He said any of the 19 objections stated in the appeal could be grounds for reversal of the Planning Commission's recommendation. Empha- sizing the importance of the annexation and rezoning criteria, he said the applicant had not addressed some criteria and had failed to present evidence for a positive finding for other criteria. The Planning Commission findings were not sufficient. They were conclusions and, apparently, had not been reviewed by the commission which had not indicated how it resolved con- flicting evidence. The recorded access easement required by the commission recommendation had not been obtained and the commission would probably deny the request if it knew the easement could not be obtained. Referring to Sections 9.158 and 9.678 of the code, Mr. Farthing said the criteria for the annexation and zone change require the provision of ade- quate public services and facilities in a timely and logical manner and con- sistency with applicable comprehensive plans, special area studies, and e refinements plans. The applicant did not submit evidence of adequate pro- vision for transportation, storm sewers, fire protection, sidewalks, or legal access. The code requires proof that the level of services and facil- ities necessary for the permitted uses and density will be provided. The proposed RA zoning would permit five to six units per acre; therefore, services and facilities should be available for 20 homes on the site. He also questioned whether 43rd Avenue is a legal street. Mr. Farthing wondered why the Commission findings indicated the Urbanization Report applied to ,the request and the South Hills Study did not. The Urban- ization Report was not part of the Metro Plan and had not been considered by other jurisdictions. The entire South Hills Study was incorporated into the Metropolitan General Plan and, therefore, the whole study was applicable to Tax Lot 700. The study states that other available property in the city must be evaluated before property in the South Hills can be annexed. The study also requires a PUD suffix on Tax Lot 700. Mr. Farthing said Statewide Planning Goals 7, 11, 12, and 14 are appli- cable. He read Policy 7 on page 11-B-4 of the Metro Plan about the conver- sion of urbanizable land to urban land through annexation and said the com- mission's findings did not address the LCDC goals. There are about 1,500 acres of vacant residential property in the city. He questioned the need for five more acres. He suggested the annexation might make it difficult for residential property owners to develop their land. He pointed out Statewide Goal 14 requires the availability of enough land to provide market e choices and the encouragement of development within urban areas before converting urbanizable areas. M1NUTES--Eugene City Council December 10, 1984 Page 3 e Mr. Farthing asked for rebuttal time. Michael Clausen, 4393 North Shasta Loop, was an appellant and said he is an expert in watershed drainage and forest lands. He asked councilors to look at photographs of flood conditions in his neighborhood. He discussed ade- quate public facilities and a statement on Page I-3 in the Planning Com- mission staff notes that adequate storm sewers are available and the site is not subject to flooding or inundation. Mr. Clausen said he and Tom White have to wear hip boots to divert the water because the area is inundated by storm and ground water. He digs ditches and dams to prevent storm runoff from destroying his yard. Flooding continues for about six months of the year. Checking the geologic survey in the Planning Department, Mrs. Clausen had found that the overlay was missing. It was in the South Hills Study. It describes the area of Tax Lot 700 as a 9, which is the worse area in the study from the standpoint of soil stability. Loretta Clausen, 4393 North Shasta Loop, said council denial of the appeal would not comply with the Planning Commission recommendation because proof of legal access had not been presented. She did not believe the access is available. Bill Van Vactor, 3945 Spring, said the proposed annexation would not result in a logical boundary and the City would not be able to deliver necessary services to Tax Lot 700. The property would be abutted on three sides by e property in the county and the access, if it were provided, would be through Tax Lot 2800, which is in the county. It would be difficult for the City to deal with public facilities, flooding, transportation, or fire problems. He said the Lane County Planning Department referral indicated that a larger area might be more appropriate for annexation and the Eugene Public Works Department referral indicated that access should be from the south, that 43rd Street should be paved when Tax Lot 700 is developed, and that right of way will be required from Tax Lots 2800, 3100, and, perhaps, others. Roger King, 1895 East 43rd, said the proposed annexation did not make sense. He has lived outside the city limits for 38 years. There is much runoff. A natural spring develops into a brook in the winter and goes to Tax Lot 700. It becomes a swa1e. His house is isolated. In the summer~ the area becomes very dry. People hunt in the area and will continue to do so. The sheriff could not make it up the hill in the winter. Tom Slocum, 2610 Highland Oaks, said that Pleasant Highway provided legal access to Tax Lot 700 at one time, but Pleasant Highway has been vacated. Recent access was via a driveway though Tax Lot 2800, which was owned by the brother of the owner of Tax Lot 700. A formal access easement agreement had not been written. Land would have to be condemned or granted from Tax Lots 2800 and 3100 to improve 43rd Avenue. He thought the intended use had influenced the planning staff. He urged the council to uphold the appeal. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 10, 1984 Page 4 e Rodney Jackson, 1754 East 43rd, lives on the gravel portion of 43rd Avenue and said adequate drainage is not provided. The catch basin of the north ditch is not cleaned regularly by the City. The neighbors keep the ditch on the south side clean. Rain drains down the paved portion of 43rd Avenue. An access road would increase the drainage problem. Heather Steen Bowlby, 3890 Vine Maple, has fought fires in Idaho for five seasons. She was concerned about fire protection for residents of Tax Lot 700. An escape route from a fire is always necessary and there is only one narrow road to Tax Lot 700. The hydrant is .3 miles away, so pumper trucks would have to be used. A second vehicle of any kind would block the escape route. Hazardous conditions exist. The existing driveway does not meet developmental standards for a single-family dwelling. A memo to the Fire Marshal indicates the existing access lane is too long. She had great dif- ficulty finding out which jurisdiction provides fire protection to the area. Richard Block, 4391 North Shasta Loop, said the testimony he had planned was not rel evant. Ed Finder, 1425 E. 43rd Avenue, said members of the Southeast Firs Neighbor- hood Association had voted on the annexation request on October 29. Most were opposed. Tax Lot 700 is isolated from school, libraries, public trans- portation, and the YMCA. There are no sidewalks and the nearest city bus is one-half mile away. e Karen Rivenburg, 4233 North Shasta Loop, had presented a print-out to the Planning Commission that listed 389 vacant properties ~etween one and ten acres. She said the need criteria was not met by the applicant. John Dickinson, 4310 North Shasta Loop, asked the Council not to "rubber stamp" the staff's recommendation. He emphasized the recorded legal access requirement in the Planning Commission's recommendation. He said a letter of intent is not recorded legal access. He did not think the access would be obtained. Leland M Roth, 4336 North Shasta Loop, showed slides that illustrated access problems in the area. He did not think Tax Lot 700 is the appropriate location for a Looking Glass facility. Nan Phifer, 1980 Kimberly, is president of the Oak Hills Neighborhood Asso- ciation which met on October 22. More people attended than usual. Some were not members. 76 qualified members voted on the proposed annexation. The vote was two in favor and 74 opposed. D. M. Regan, 560 South 4th St., Springfield, owns Tax Lot 3100. Only the Clausens had contacted him about the proposed annexation. The council recessed for about ten minutes at 8:50 p.m. Because the appellants had spoken for about 50 minutes, Mayor Keller said - opponents to the appeal would have from 30 to 50 minutes to speak. MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 10, 1984 Page 5 e Allen Johnson, 915 Oak, represented the applicant. He had been told the council would consider only the existing record, although it seemed to him other things had been discussed. He asked those present who represented Looking Glass to stand. About 25 people stood. Mr. Johnson said they had been at the Planning Commission hearing but had not been permitted to test- ify in favor of the request. Mr. Johnson pointed out the council could modify the decision of the Plan- ning Commission or add conditions to the council's recommendation to the Boundary Commission. Plans called for an access easement across Tax Lot 2800 to 43rd Avenue to Dillard Road. The earnest money agreement with the owner of Tax Lot 700 included an agreement to provide the easement. How- ever, Mr. Johnson understood an offer had been made on Tax Lot 2800 and that complicated the access problem. He pointed out access is not one of the criteria for annexation. Many large properties have been annexed without access to the whole parcel. Access becomes an issue when a specific use is identified in a conditional use permit request. Urban levels of service in the Metro Plan mean roads that lead to the site. The zoning requested would permit only a single-family dwelling and access to one house exists. Referring to access via 43rd Avenue, Mr. Johnson said the issue was first raised in a memo submitted by Mr. Farthing to Mr. Croteau on Friday, December 7, 1984. It was not a proper subject of the appeal because it was not raised at the commission hearing. Mr. Johnson was prepared to introduce evidence of dedicated public right of way along 43rd Avenue through the Sweetbriar Subdivision. e Discussing services and facilities, Mr. Johnson said the requested City zone is the same as the existing County zone. Annexation was requested because urban services are available to Tax Lot 700 which is adjacent to the city limits and a City sewer. The council should decide whether the City will offer services to Tax Lot 700. There is a storm sewer plan. There are pub- lic roads, schools, electricity, and fire protection. Annexation would extend those services. The city limits are on the north and west borders of Tax Lot 700. A logical boundary will result. Past annexations have had private access to the site over land in the county. The adopted portion of the South Hills Study requires that PUD considerations, soil and drainage considerations, and sidewalks be dealt with when a specific use is pro- posed. They are not appropriate subjects in an annexation hearing. Mr. Johnson said the question of need is addressed by the designation in the Metro Plan which is a legislative decision. He referred to a legislative overlay to comprehensive plans (ORS 197 752) which ensures that compre- hensive plans will be implementated inside the urban growth boundaries. Mr. Johnson had submitted supplemental findings to Mr. Croteau. He asked the council to interpret the relationship of the Metro Plan, the South Hills e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 10, 1984 Page 6 e Study, and the Urbanization Report. He suggested an interpretation on Page 5 of the findings he presented. Only six pages of the South Hills Study were adopted, and, if a conflict exists, the Metro Plan is dominant. The ubanization report intreprets the Metro Plan and requires annexation in south Eugene because services and facilities are available. Copies of the the Urbanization Report Draft were sent to Springfield, Lane County, and the LCDC staff. Jim Forbes, executive director of Looking Glass, asked the council to look at an aerial photograph. He said the Looking Glass program would be detailed at the conditional use permit hearing if the annexation and rezon- ing are approved. Clark Cox, Jr., #9, 1085 Patterson, urged denial of the appeal and said the conditional use permit hearing would indicate whether access, safety, and drainage problems had been resolved. During staff comments, Chief Hall said Tax Lot 700 has no fire protection now. The City can provide protection to it without jepardizing the rest of the city. After annexation, development on the property must meet City standards. Answering questions from councilors, Mr. Hall said fire equip- ment can travel on the existing road into Tax Lot 700. Mr. Croteau said the road that serves Tax Lot 700 is a private driveway and is the road for which the Planning Commission wanted a dedicated easement. Mr. Teitzel said both sanitary and storm sewers are adjacent to Tax Lot 700 e and access can be extended to it. Answering questions from councilors, Mr. Teitzel said the drainage ditches along 43rd Avenue are the type that plug up when an unimproved area drains into them. Most of the water off Tax Lot 700 would be diverted before it got to the ditches along 43rd Avenue. Problems caused by water that comes off land that is in the county cannot be solved by the City. Mr. Sercombe said the annexation and rezoning request would be consistent with the statewide goals if the council found it is consistent with the Metro Plan. When the council adopted the South Hills Plan in 1974, it spe- cifically repealed anything in the study that was inconsistent with the res- olution at the beginning which provides policy guidance. The council could eliminate the recorded access requirement of the Planning Commission's rec- ommendation. The appellants should specify how they were prejudiced by the procedures indicated in their letter to the council. In rebuttal, Mr. Farthing emphasized there is no legal access to Tax Lot 700 and annexation which converts urbanizable land to urban land requires legal access. The appeal statement indicated that 43rd Avenue is not legal access to Tax Lot 700, so it is relevant to the appeal. Presently, the Metro Plan indicates LCDC goals must be considered during the annexation process. ORS 197 752 indicates urban land should be used in accordance with local stan- dards. Local standards do not require annexation of residential land. When the South Hills Study was re-adopted as part of the Metro Plan, no differ- entiation was made between the resolution and the rest of the plan. Even if e the Eugene Council did not intend for all the South Hills Study to MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 10, 1984 Page 7 be included, Springfield, Lane County, and the LCDC certainly thought the e whole plan was included. The Urbanization Report has not been considered by other elected bodies or in a public hearing. It is not a proper land use policy. Mr. Farthing asked if the access to Tax Lot 700 was considered desirable by the Fire Department. Because no one else wished to testify, Mayor Keller closed the public hearing. Mr. Gleason pointed out the council would have to weigh the testimony, deliberate, review findings from both sides, and then develop findings. He suggested the council postpone its action. Mr. Sercombe pointed out only one council meeting was scheduled before a council decision was required. He discussed time frames for possible actions. Answering questions from Mr. Obie and Mr. Hansen, Mr. Croteau said 43rd Ave- nue is a dedicated right of way to the west corner of Tax Lot 2800. From there, it is a private road. The City has considered annexation of prop- erties with many types of access. Access has been provided for some time by county roads. Access to some properties on OWl Road was provided by a legal gravel road in the county that did not meet City standards. Many residences are accessed by long private driveways similar to the one which provides access to Tax Lot 700. Future access to Tax Lot 700 will have to be via Tax Lot 2800 because Pleasant Highway has been vacated. If additional develop- e ment of Tax Lot 700 is proposed in the future, City processes will require legal access. Mr. Sercombe said access to landlocked parcels can be com- pelled by the "way of necessary" procedure in the statutes which requires the County Road Master to condemn either public street or easement access. The property owner pays for the access. Mayor Keller repeated a question asked by Mr. Farthing about the desir- ability of the access to Tax Lot 700 for fire protection, but Chief Hall had left the hearing. Mr. Gleason said the existing access was probably suffic- ient for the single-family dwelling. Access for additional structures would be an issue in a conditional use permit hearing. Answering a question from Councilor Erhman, Mr. Sercombe said the applicant could withdraw the request before it goes to the Boundary Commission. Ms. Bascom pointed out Tax Lot 700 is in her ward. She discussed the issue of other appropriate properties in Eugene which could be used by Looking Gl ass. The issue was raised in the ninth and 13th objections in the appel- lant1s statement. A property at 19th Avenue and University Street was an example of a site that is available and appropriate for Looking Glass use. The north part of her ward is an ideal location for Stepping Stone Lodge because it is near schools, the library, medical services, and the YMCA. Failure to consider that issue carefully meant the Planning Commission's recommendation for approval was in error. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 10, 1984 Page 8 In addition, Ms. Bascom said diversity is welcomed in many parts of the e city. It is welcome in her neighborhood. But the people are homogeneous in the neighborhood around Tax Lot 700. Stepping Stone Lodge might not be appropriate there. She suggested the council deny the request and ask the staff to develop findings for denial. Annexation would lead Looking Glass to costly litigation which it might not win, money would be spent for a poor location for the lodge, and the annexation would delay a search for a more suitable site. Mr. Obie was concerned about land uses. He said nearly all the Planning Commissioners were concerned about legal access. City services could not be provided to Tax Lot 700 under present conditions. Annexation would be pre- mature because access cannot be provided. If access were a reality, Mr. Obie probably would recommend annexation. Mr. Obie pointed out the City owns properties in the south hills on which Bancroft loans were obtained. The properties were not developed. There- fore, the advisability of annexing additional property should be carefully considered. He preferred to uphold the appeal, but he would consider send- ing the recommendation back to the Planning Commission for consideration of the access condition. Counselor Schue emphasized that the use of Tax Lot 700 was not an issue. City services were the issue. Access existed. Fire protection could be provided to the existing structure. The property owner wanted the property to be annexed and would hook up to the sewers and pay taxes. She would vote e to deny the appeal. Problems would have to be resolved if the use of Tax Lot 700 is expanded. Ms. Wooten agreed with Ms. Schue. She said it was not the council's job to decide whether there was property better suited to the applicant's use. The Planning Commission had not erred on that basis. The record indicated City services could be provided. She favored remanding the appeal to the Plan- ning Commission for clarification of the access issue. Mr. Holmer agreed with Ms. Schue and Ms. Wooten. Councilor Hansen initiated a discussion of processes. He favored denial of the appeal. Ms. Brody reviewed the options available to the Planning Com- mission if the council remanded the request. Mr. Sercombe pointed out a State law required all land use issues to be decided within 120 days at each level. Ms. Erhman said she had visited Tax Lot 700 via Dillard and North Shasta Loop roads. The lot is adjacent to the city boundary and she thought annex- ation is appropriate. It was unfortunate that a future use had become the issue. Mr. Keller said the issue of accessibility was valid and the Planning Com- mission's condition was unusual. He encouraged the council to resolve the access issue. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 10, 1984 Page 9 e Mr. Obie moved, and Ms. Schue seconded, to remand the appeal of the Planning Commission's recommendation for approval of the annexation and zone change request for property east of Shasta Loop Road and north of East 43rd Avenue to the Planning Commission for clarifi- cation of the access issue. Mr. Hansen said the commission recommendation was clear, but pUblic access was not required by the code. He thought the council should act defini- tively. Ms. Schue agreed with him. Ms. Wooten was willing to withdraw the second, but Mr. Obie did not withdraw the motion. Roll call vote; the motion was defeated 2:5; Councilors Bascom and Obie voting aye; Councilors Wooten, Ehrman, Hansen, Holmer, and Schue voting nay. Res. No. 3888-- A resolution forwarding a recommendation to the Boundary Commission for annexation of property located east of Shasta Loop Road, north of East 43rd Avenue to the City of Eugene and Lane County Metropolitan Wastewater Service District. Ms. Wooten moved, and Ms. Schue seconded, to adopt the resolution. e Responding to a question, Mr. Sercombe said the council should provide find- ings if it wished to deny the appeal. Mr. Gleason suggested the council tentatively approve the annexation and instruct the staff to prepare find- ings. Ms. Wooten and Ms. Schue withdrew the motion and second. Ms. Wooten moved, and Ms. Schue seconded, to tentatively deny the appeal and to instruct the staff to provide find- ings to support the council's final adoption of the Resolution 3888. Roll call vote; the motion carried 5:2; Councilors Wooten, Ehrman, Hansen, Holmer, and Schue voting aye; Councilors Bascom and Obie voting nay. Mr. Obie voted against the motion because he did not want to ignore the Planning Commission's recommendation. Ms. Wooten shared that concern and hoped the access issue would be solved expeditiously. The hearing was recessed for about five minutes at 10:25 p.m. C. RIVER ROAD-SANTA CLARA LAND USE ELEMENT (memo, background distributed) City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced the agenda item. Tom Hayes of the e Planning Department presented the staff report. He pointed out the Citizen Advisory Team, the Policy Committee, and the Planning Commission recommended MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 10, 1984 Page 10 ~ approval of the land use element draft of the River Road-Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan. Revisions and errata recommended at the joint Lane County/Eugene Planning Commissions meeting were inserted in the draft. Referring to the last page of the revisions and page 2-29 of the draft, Mr. Hayes said most of the Irving Light-Medium Industrial site is zoned M-l. During preparation of the draft, the area was considered RA, but the staff and the Planning Commission agreed that knowledge of the actual zoning would not have changed the recommendations. Mayor Keller opened the pUblic hearing. Andrew Nordahl, 108 Bauer Lane, is a real estate salesman. He submitted written testimony. Discussing properties on River Road north of Maxwell Road, he said the east side of River Road is designated RP on the Metro Plan. Some owners of property on the west side had signed a petition requesting the RP designation instead of the existing residential desig- nation. Mr. Nordahl said RP development will not impact traffic any more than residential development and the RP designation will encourage property development. River Road has much traffic in that area. The River Road/Be1tline intersection traffic count is 2,200 and the River Road/Maxwell intersection count is 1,100. Some property owners may favor annexation to Eugene if the City supports the RP designation on the west side of River Road. He will oppose annexation if the residential designation is supported. Jim Hale, 4064 Meredith Court, supported the changes proposed by the P1an- /~ ning Commissions. He appreciated the notices mailed to property owners by Eugene. It is important to discourage additional strip development along River Road immediately and the land use element draft does that. Commercial development of small parcels will not get traffic off River Road and the businesses will often fail. Property values will go down. Redevelopment to medium-density residential development in some areas, such as north of Max- well Road, might be appropriate. The RP zoning district is not appropriate there because it will provide for too much professional-office use. Mr. Hale said the existing M-l zoning south of Irving Road and east of Northwest Expressway is not acceptable. The Special-Light Industrial zoning district would be appropriate because it will not be negatively impacted by the railroad and it will not negatively impact the adjacent residential development. He urged the council to support an amendment to the Metro Plan for that area. Jim Win~er, 902 Irving Road, owns a ten-acre farm. Because of the confusion about t e designation and zoning in his area, he was not sure how his land is zoned and he questioned the validity of a petition recently circulated in the neighborhood. Bruce Tait, 465 Hunsaker, owns property at 330 River Road. He asked if the council had received his written testimony. Referring to page 2-20, he said the area will become commercial. He reveiewed the existing development and zoning and plans for the Chambers Connector. He urged the council to sup- port commercial zoning for his property. The site is not safe for resi- ~ dentia1 use. MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 10, 1984 Page 11 e Harold Chapman, 51 Chapman, urged adoption of the draft and its recom- mendations. It was the result of much hard work and citizen involvement. He thanked the City for mailing notices to property owners. He al so urged support for the changes suggested by the Planning Commission. He lauded the homework done by commissioners. He particularly urged support for the words "Prohibit the expansion. . ." in Policy 3.0 on page 2-15 of the draft. He supported whatever zoning or designation is needed to control development and to protect the surrounding neighborhood south of Irving Road and east of the Northwest Expressway. Compatibility of the industrial and other uses should be resolved. Lee Hunsaker, 155 Myoak, urged adoption of the draft and the changes sug- gested by the commissions. It will discourage piecemeal commercial devel- opment. He specifically urged approval of the recommended wording for Policy 3 on Page 2-15 because "prohibit" is stronger than IIstrongly di scourage. II Jack Danby, 1151 Irving, did not want M-l zoning for his area. It is a beautiful residential area, but the air quality is bad. He did not want more pollution. He suggested the council look at the area with "fresh eyes. II Leroy Sherman, 1044 Irving, owns eight acres. It is a nice residential area. Industrial development is not appropriate. The Irving/Northwest Expressway intersection is unsafe. He suggested industrial development is appropriate for the airport area. e Edward Phelps, 2734 Kalmia, had distributed the petition mentioned by Mr. Winger. Mr. Phelps had not known the area is zoned M-l. The area should be residential. He read from a statement by the Lane Regional Air Authority which indicated, in some cases, landscaping and building will not be ade- quate to solve air quality problems and buffer zones may be necessary. Mr. Phelps said the Green Acres Golf Course and a home were removed from the tax roles to provide a railroad overpass at Irving Road and access to the Northwest Expressway. However, the property was used for an EWEB sub- station. The substation could have been placed on farm land which would have remained on the tax roles. The EWEB substation and reservoir could have buffered the residential area. Mr. Phelps said the Beltline Road overpass and the Delta Highway and Belt- line Road exits were not properly planned and/or constructed. Mr. Phel ps wanted to rescind his statements opposing the Citizen Advisory Team recom- mendation at the joint meeting of Planning Commissions. Campus-type, special light-industrial development could be appropriate. He asked those present who were willing to compromise with the special light-industrial zoning to stand. Several people stood. He also asked those who were opposed to M-l zoning for the area to stand. Additional people stood. Steve Cornacchia, Suite 316, 99 West 19th, represented a joint venture. He is a Springfield Planning Commissioner. He recommended the words IIStrongly discourage the expansion" be left in Policy 3 on page 2-15 in order to pro- - vide flexibility because site specific changes will not be made in the draft. He spoke of an unattractive apartment development which the owners intended to convert to commercial use. MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 10, 1984 Page 12 - Because no one else wished to testify, Mayor Keller closed the public e hearing. The council will consider the draft again on January 9, 1985. Ms. Wooten and Mr. Obie asked the staff to clarify the zoning issue and to discuss alternatives the council may choose. at 11:15 p.m. Lou Rari ck) BLR:dbj0100C e . MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 10, 1984 Page 13