Staff Report - Laserfiche WebLink

this date, one neighboring property owner, Patrick Holleran, submitted testimony regarding the proposed annexation (see Attachment D) expressing concerns about potential impacts that future development may have on his property and the surrounding area. He expresses concern about the map included with the public notice showing Central Boulevard connecting to 301h Avenue and Spring Boulevard, noting that it is unpaved and provides no through connection. He also raises concern about the provision of necessary utilities such as wastewater service, water, power and access for emergency response. Specifically, he states that he has been approached by the owners' representatives about obtaining a utility easement through his property and has not agreed to an easement, which is potentially problematic and likely to have a considerable impact on the land and other property owners in the area if the easement is not granted. As a result of these concerns he requests that council defer action until a public hearing can be held. Staff requested additional information from the City's Public Works Department and the applicant to assist in responding to Mr. Holleran's testimony (see Attachment Q. Public Works staff confirms that key urban services can be provided to the subject property in an orderly, efficient and timely manner within the adjacent city owned area of land consistent with EC 9.7825(3). This adjacent right-of-way is currently unpaved and any future street or access improvements would be reviewed for conformance with city standards. Public Works staff also confirms that the lack of an easement across Mr. Holleran's property is not problematic and does not preclude the annexation or development of the Furtick property, as there are other feasible alternatives to provide services. The applicant's representative supplied supplemental information (see Attachment F) that indicates the applicant will no longer seek any utility service access through Mr. Holleran's property, and submitted a revised map showing all utility line connections located within City right-of-way from Central Boulevard to the subject site. Referral comments from other affected agencies including Lane County Public Works and EWEB also confirm that the property can he provided with the minimum level of key urban services consistent with the approval criteria. Based on this information confirming the minimum level of key urban services can be provided consistent with the annexation approval criteria, a public hearing is not recommended in this instance. Additionally, future development of the subject property will be required to meet applicable Eugene Code standards for public improvements, including streets and utilities, and any land division proposal (partition or subdivision) for the subject property will provide for opportunity for public review and comment through a land use application process. Additional background information regarding this request, including relevant application materials, is included for reference as Attachment C. A full copy of all materials in the record is also available at the Permit and Information Center located at 99 West 101h Avenue. RELATED CITY POLICIES The Metro Plan contains the policies that are related to this annexation request. The Laurel Hill Plan and South Hills Study are the refinement plans applicable to the subject property. The policies applicable to this request are addressed in the Planning Director's findings and recommendation (Exhibit C to Attachment B).