The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPermit Miscellaneous 1980-04-29LANE PLANNING COUNTY COMMISSION ALL ITEMS OPEN TO THE PUT]LIC I trlD Ha"bo,DE TENTATIVE WORK SESSI0N - 5:00 P.M. - PARKS CONFERENCE ROOM 1. Metro Plan ND(T REGULARLY SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: 5I2O/80 GENERAT II{FORMATION Plannirrg Comrnission approuaZ of the Ifollowing constitut." or,1y a recommenda- ',tion to Lhe County Commissj-oners, whowill irold subsequent public hearing(s)*before the action becomes final: 'Zoning or Rezoning (LC 10.315.60)(Denials rnust be appectled uitli.n 10 daysx)'Amendnrents to Lane Cocle'Action on Comprehensive plans I 'County or Public Road Marrers (LM 15.140[2])(l')etna'Ls nust be appealed uithin 10 daysi)-' Plann.ing Cornmission actions on thefollowing will be considered final 10 daysfrom tlre date of fhis hearing, unless appealed to the County Commissioners withlnthat 10-day periocl. (/rppeals may be filed j by any inEeresEed party or County offlcial): j 'Unzorred Area Development permit (LC 9.700) l ' Unfavorable Rezoning l{ecommendations(r.c r0.315-55) *N<tl.i.c,e oJ' Boanrl |u:arings wiLL be mailed.lo.t,ll.,l.:)a]llei)eT'sOnsuthoreceiuednotieeof this l'l.artrtirtry Cctnrntsston hear.ing. please con'Lctc:L. Lhe ()cttgttg t'Lanning OiuZsion offieeol: 12li l;;. []th Auettttp., [L'ugene (6BZ-4186) or(toll -)'t,ce I-800-452-6JZ-g) for funtherittJ'onnutiort t,egariling Board hearing dates Ot: tt|tytl:71'1. procedut't:s. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (Elected 0fficials) 0tto t' lioof t , Cha i rman Vance ['reentan Geral d Rust Harolcl tlutherford Archie l,Jeinstein April 29, 1980 Harris Hal1 125 E. 8th Ave. Eugene, 0regon AG E N D A 7:00 P.M COMMUNICATIONS MTNUTES I LlL5/80, 3125/BO Final Action - Eugene-Springfield Metro Area General Plan Update (approval of recommendation to Board of Commissioner No public testimony will- be received). Eugene-Springf ield Metropolitan Area Corrective Zoning. L PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS i l..ay Advi sory Group to County Conrrni ss i oners ) Denni s Cuddeback, Chai rtttan Gary Sutley, Suzanne Boyd, Gene Jatllus, ,inger Dingnran, Clark Roeder, Rona'ld llansen I 2 t PUBLIC HEARING: April 29, 1980 LANE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MI NUTES Harri s Hal I Ex-Of f i c'io: Chri sti e McGu'i re, Ass'i stant Le gal Counsel. Suzanne Boyd made a motion that the items on the agenda scheduled for the meeting be changed. The Corrective Zoning will be heard first. Dr. Roeder seconded the mot'ion. The motjon passed unanimously. Fugene-Sprinqfield Metropol itan Corrective Zonjng. Mr. Phjl Bredesen presented the Staff Report concerning the areas concerned with the correct'ive zoning. Mr. Bredesen presented the Background/lntro- duction material before directing attention to each spec'ific area to be considered. Mr. Bredesen stated that the recommended proposal for rezoning portions of the metropolitan area are intended to correct older zoning no longer consistent with required state law. The changes are necessary for compliance with Statewide Planning Goa1s, which 'include the necessity for consistency with the adopted plan for the area--the Metropolitan Area 1990 General Plan. Mr. Bredesen continued his staff presentation by going through the Basis for Decision, Princip'les Used in Developing the Recommendations, and the Action of the Planning Comm'ission. These specific topics are included in the staff report which is attached to these m'inutes. Mr. Bredesen then presented each specific rezoning proposal as follows: (The maps concerning each area is attached to these minutes) Area 1 Thjs js the north Springfjeld area. It is bordered on the east by the bridge over the McKenz'ie for Marcola Road, on the north by the McKenzie Rjver, on the south by Springf ie'ld, and on the west by Gamebjrd V'i1'lage. 1990 Plan Designation: Low Density Residential and Agriculture. PRESENT Planning Commission Members: Clark lrJ. Roeder, Gene James, Ginger Dingman, Dennis Cuddeback, Chairman, Gary Sutley, Ronald Hansen and Suzanne Boyd. Staff Members: Phjl Bredesen, County Planner, Lee Mjller, and Suzanne L1oyd, Recording-Eretary. Current Zoning: Agriculture, Grazing, Tinrber_Raising (AGI), Suburban nesl?entTal-Inn), 5ing1e-Family Resident'ial ([n-t], covering one lot). Proposed Zoning: Exclusive Farm Use (EFU), Suburban Residential (RA), il<cfisl-ve-FE-ifr-Use/ Inter jm Agricul ture (EFU/IA). Mr. Bredesen made reference to the fact that jt was djscovered that the EFU designation could not be used with the IA designation, therefore, the Planning Commission would need to address this quest'ion when del iberating. of the so'il 'in this area is very good farmland. However, over the course he last 15-20 years, a great deal of this area has been developed into Page 1--Lane County P'lann'ing Comm'ission M'inutes--April 29, 1980 hlP 25317-341 Mo of st t*,t \ \\1 p Bropose{ p1g1g: Public Reserve, Forest Management, and Neighborhood Commercial. The area currently zoned Publjc Reserve is proposed for the same. The adiacent Garden Apartment Res'identjal District is proposed for Forest Management. Thi s s j te 'is di ff icul t for construction and the 'idea of apartments in this area 'is premature. The areas currently zoned Neighborhood Commercial al ong McVay are proposed to rema'in the same. The rest of the area'is proposed for Forest Management. The LCC basin is a discrete unit that will eventually be urbanized. Some significiant parceling activity has occurred inportions of the basin. Domest'ic waterin the area js difficult to obta'in unless serv'iced by a collective system. Soils in the area are good for forest uses. Hcwever, these uses are 'intermjxed with some nonproductive soils. Area 11 Area 11 consists of that portion of the Metropofitan Plan area that underlies a large portion of the length of Springfield. It js bounded by the !'lillamette River on the west, the Middle Fork of the W'illamette on the south, Jasper Road on the east, and Springfield on the north. It does not include Glenwood, which will have its zoning adiusted as necessary after the adopt'ion of the Metro Plan update" 1990 Plan Designation: Industrial, Rural, Low Density Residential, Agriculture, Regional Parks and Trails and 0pen Space, and Sand and Gravel Extract'ion. Current Zoning: Agriculture, Grazing and Tjmber Raisjng, Farm-Forestry-20, Suburban Resident'ial , and Suburban Residential/Mobile Home. Proposed Zonjng: Forest Management, Exclusjve Farm Use, Suburban Resjdent'ial, RA with mobjle home suffix, GR-10 with a quarry mining suffix, and Exclusive Farm Use/lnterim Agricu'lture. Much of this area is in the 100-year floodplajn of the Middle Fork, and js cornprised of excellent farmjng soils. 0ther areas are developed extensively, which has removed agricul ture potent j al . Much rema'ins undevel oped. l^,j th the exception of one soil type in the area, all are agrjculturally rated at Class IV or better. This area is farmland that is slowly being encroached by development. Most of the area currently zoned AGT'is proposed for EFU. That anea currently zoned RA js proposed for the same. The existing mobjle home park is proposed for RA/MH. The operation of the Springfield Quarry operationis proposed for GR-10/QM whjle the land 1y'ing inimediately west and east of the quarry is proposed for EFU. Area 12 This area is located at the "southeast corner" of Springfield, and includes the Jasper area. It is bounded on the west by Jasper Road, on the north by the Springfield city limits and on the south and east by the limits of the Metro P1 an juri sdictional boundary. 1990 Plan Designation:Low Density Residential and Rural. Page 6--Lane County Planning Comnrission Minutes--April 29, 1980 l,,JP 25317 -341 ':L \ */ Cur[ent Zoning: Heavy Industrial District (M-3), Farm Forestry-20, General Rural-10, Agricultural, Graz'ing and Timber Raising*5. Proposed Zoning: Heavy Industrial (M-3), Forest Management, General Rural-10, and General Rural -LAltnterim Agricu'lture. The only types of zone change proposed for thjs area'is that concerning those areas currently zoned FF-20, as well as the GR-10 found along the north sideof the ldallace Creek Road, wh'ich is proposed for the Forest Management Di strict. This concluded the presentation of the staff report. Mr. Lee M'iller made some comments concerning the zoning changes and why these matters are before the Planning Cornmission at this time, rather than waitinguntil after the updated Metro Plan has been adopted. He commented that there vlas a requirement to subm'it for compfiance with the state all necessary planning actions by July lst. He felt that the Planning Commjss'ion could make some recommendations to the Board of Commissjoners based upon the ex'isting 1990 Plan, and based upon the recommendations that the Commission is about to make to the Board and the Metro Updated Plan. The Planning staff tried to stay away from making any recommendatjons at this time jn those areas where the fina1 planning decision had not been strongly indicated or settled. He went on further to explain about the IA zoning and that the current IA zoningdistrict does not al low 'it to be used with the Exclus'ive Farm Use Zone or Forest Management Zone. These combinatjons were used wjthin the Urban Growth Boundaries because ultimately the land will be developed to an urban-type devel opment rather than a resource type of use. Mr. Miller went on to suggest that the Commission had two alternatives jn order to correct the interim agriculture zoning usage; one would be to continue the hearing to a date more than a week away and the change could be advertised jn the zoning djstrict so you could consider also putting the IA zoning into the zon'ing district so that it could be combined with the Exclusive Farm Use zone and Forest Management zone. Another consideration would be to apply the IA zoning at a later date, apart from this ordinance, as long as the Commissioners would hear the recommendations concerning the zoning and the change in the ordinance. Mr. Miller made reference to a letter recejved from Mr. tnljlljam D. Bain, Director of the Departrnent of Assessment and Taxation. In that letter, MF. Bain raised a number of questions. That letter is attached to these Minutes and marked Exhibit "B". Mr. Miller went on further to state that when a governmental agency initiates a zone change the property owners would not have to pay the penalty caused by a change in zone away from a resource-type use, but if jnjtjated by the property owner, then they would have to pay the penal ty. Some comments were made at this point concerning notice of the meeting. Legal Counsel also made several comments, stat'ing that the hearing v,tas being treated as a leg"islatjve hearjng and notjce vvas given. Page 7--Lane County Planning Commission Minutes--Apri1 ?9, 1980 hjP 2s317-341 ;r'1.g \ I PUBLIC TESTIMONY Charle: Larson,85100 Cloverdale Road, Creswell,Oregon, referred to Map #7, Tax Lots 2300 and 2200. Mr. Larson stated that he felt that adequate notice was not given. He was opposed to the rezoning on his property because the change to Exclusive Farm Use zoning would decrease the value of his property by approximately 75 percent. He stated that the property is owned in a Pension and Profit Sharing Plan. This particular land js not farm land, only capable of growing grass. This property had been previously zoned manufacturing because it is between the proposed Expressway and the railroadtracks. If the zon'ing is changed to Exclusjve Farm use, a very severefinancial loss would be suffered. Mr. R. Q. Burley,2970 East 38th Avenue, Eugene, 0regon, referred to Map #10-- Lane Comnunity College Basin area. Mr. Burley made reference to proper sewage disposaf in that area, and he felt that there was sufficient land for sewagedisposa'|. He stated that there was no reason for the property in that areanot being developed. He made reference to domestic water in that area, and stated that EWEB has a main running out to the co1lege, and that obtaining water is not a problem. He stated that there was considerable brush jn the area and not good forest management property. Mr. Burley was mainly opposedto the rezoning because it would not permit development of the property inthat area for quite a few years. R. A. Matott, 1810 Harbor Drjve , Springfield,0regon. Mr. I'latott made Page B--Lane County Planning Commission Mjnutes--April Zg, hlP 25317-341 reference to Map #11. He wanted a clarifjcation of the zoning on a particular sectjon on the map. Mr. Bredesen answered his quest'ion. ffierence to Tap *2. He asked a quesiion-regirdt ni trre urban growth boundary. He represented a group called People to Preserve Agrjcultural Lands. Hestated that the People to Preserve Agricultural Lands are generally pleased with the direct'ion that the County is taking jn zoning different aiehs. Hefeels that the resource lands jn our area should be preserved. Mr. Jim Saul, Post 0ffice Box 1650, Eugene, 0regon 97440, made reference to Maps 2, 7, and 9. All the properties that Mr. Saul was concerned with werew'ithin the Urban Growth Boundaries. He felt that adequate notice was notgiven. Mr. Saul felt that any rezoning should be condistent wjth the Plan Update rather than with the 1990 Plan wh'ich'is about to be replaced by the Updated P'lan. He fee'ls that the rezoning is premature. Mr. Sau'l staled thatthe areas he js concerned with are within the Urban Growth Boundary and ifgiven an Exclusive Farm Use zoning would serious'ly penafize the property owners. The Exclusjve Farm Use zoning shou'ld be further investigated concerning use wjthin the Urban Growth Boundaries. Mr. Michael Farth!n[,975 0ak !!1eet, Bth F)oor, Eugene,0regon. Mr. Farthingllan atto:Fney-fep6ienting l^I'ildish [and compiny. llr. rarthing stated thatnotice was just received of the hearing and he dla not have adlquate t.ime forpreparation. Mr. Farthing referred to Maps 3, 5, 1l and 12. He stated thathe felt the zoning-was premature--that thb zonin! should be done in-io,rpii'ancewjth the Updated Plan rather than the 1990 Plan. He stated that he fell therewere no precise soils maps included in the reports, and there is nothing sjia-about any particular properties. Mr: Farth'ing went on to djscuss at leigththe inadequacy of not'ice given to this hearing. Mr. Farthing suggested ihat 1980 \\ j the propert'ies he i s concerned wi th be zoned as sand and gravel . l-{e went onfurther to make reference to the EFU/IA designatfon which he feels isinconsistent with the plan designation. Mr. Farthing went on further to djscuss properties on the maps and objectionsto the rezon'ing suggested for the areas. His majn concerns were that at thjstime there is no need for the rezoning changes, that there js no acknowledgedplan at this tjme, and the Planning Commission should wait until the Updated Plan has been adopted. He also felt that there was no data to support each'individual zone change. Ranlg]l Hled'ik, Post Off ice Box 7428, Eugene, 0regon, of Wjld'ish Land Company. Mr. Hledick felt that some rezoning is premature and that the P'lanning Commission should wa'it until the Updated Plan has been adopted. He also feltthat adequate time and notice was not given. He also stated that the rezoningof areas with'in whjch there are sand and gravel operations would not be cunpatible to sand and gravel operations that currently exist as cond'it'ional use permits. Mr. Lee Miller made several comments at th'is point concerning why the Lane County Planning Commission was now reviewing the zone changes. He stated that these zone changes were open for alterat'ion and correction at such time as changes were needed. Mr. Mjller stated that the reason the meet'ing was being held at this time to consider the zone changes, was to meet the July 1 date. Mr. Jim tle t]m Bri tton ing of the 245 t,lest 25th Avenue, Eugene, 0regon. l4r. Britton felt that heaning was premature. Mr. Brjtton stated that he was {;r I opposed to the city-ovrned lands, County-owned lands and school district areas being zoned as Exclusive Farm Use. Mr. Brjtton made reference to several maps and pointed out the EFU zoning. Mr. Britton also stated that he had needed more tjme for preparatjon. He felt that the zoning should be done after the Plan was adopted. Mr. Gordon Elliott, 938 Jefferson Street, Eugene, 0regon 97402. Mr. Elliott mad'e reTererrce to-tfrree parcels which he owni on l,lap #6. Mr. Elliott objectedto the Exclusive Farm Use zoning. Mr. Elljott went on at length discussing various zonings, and requirements on various zonings. Deborah Brewer, Governmental Affairs Coord'inator, EWEB, 500 East 4th Avenue, Eugene,Oregon 97440. Ms. Brewer mentioned the inadequacy of the notice for the extens'ive amount of proposed zone changes. She also felt that the timingof the present hearing was premature. She al so mentjoned that some of the proposed changes would affect long-range plans wh'ich are being made by EWEB, and she would l'ike more time to address each of the specific zone changes that would affect these long-range p1ans. Vern Kj I patrick, 1 reference to Map #2400. Mr. Ki 1 patr p'lans to devel op t 709 Skyf ine Boulevard, Eugene, 0regon. Mr. KiIpatrick made zoning 'in hi s area was usable for agricultural industr.ial . Page 9--Lane County Planning Comrniss'ion Minutes--Apri1 ?9, 1980 hJP 25317-341 r. Kilpatrick was concerned with Tax Lots 2300 and ought the property with industrial zoning, and has operty. He would suffer a substantial loss if the changed to Exclus'ive Farm Use. The property is not uses. He requested that the zoning rema'in as 7. M ick b he pr \ tl J vslnon Gleaves, 975 Oak street, Eugene,0regon, attorney for l,lildish Land Company. Mr. Gleaves was opposed to the rezoning at thjs tjme, and objectedto the zoning of large segments of property. He felt that the Commissjon did not have a right to recommend zoning to a classification which does not ex'istat this time (EFU/IA). He also made mention of the fact that there was nosoils information. He too ment'ioned the fact that there was not adequate notice g'iven. The tax issue presented by Mr. Ba'in was also of concern to h'im. PLANNING COMMISSiON DELIBERATION AND ACTION Mr. Cuddeback made several comments before the Planning Commissjon began theirdeliberation. He stated that the Planning Commission haci several alternatives--they could take action on what had been presented, they could take wrjtten testimony at a date certa'in, or they could dec'ide on another date after the Plan's adoption, and schedule another hearing. Susanne Boyd stated that she was concerned about the'lega1 notices. She felt that the people affected by the zone changs should be notified. Gene James stated that he felt written not'ice should be gjven just l'ike any other zone change hearing. Suzanne Boyd asked what the consequences m'ight be if the July 1 date was not met. Lee Mi'ller responded that there would be an additional 60-day period after the July 1 date before any enforcement action would be taken. Dr. Roeder asked Legal Counsel if she felt adequate notice of the hearing had been given. She responded that in her opinion, legal notice given had not been adequate. There was some discussion at this point about rescheduling the hearing for a date certain, or wa'itjng until the Commissioners had an adopted plan to work with. The Commission discussed the varjous methods of notjce of any future hearings, such as notjce jn the Register Guard and individual written notice. Mr. Mil'ler mentioned that ifjndividual written notices were required to be sent out, it would take a great deal of t'ime. Ginger Dingman stated that the rezoning should be put off untjl a Plan is adopted. She also felt that adequate notice had not been given. Ginger Dingman made a motion that the hearjng concerning the rezoning be putoff until a Plan is adopted, and new not'ice would be given" Gary Sutley seconded the motion. Lee Miller stated at this point that the dec'ision being made by the Planning Comm'ission be comntunicated to the Board of Comm'iss'ioners, and the consequences of the dec'isjon would be up to the Board. Gene James asked that Legal Counsel do some research concerning the giv'ing of 1egal notice. He al so di scussed the interim zoning possib'il jt'ies. It was also discussed that perhaps a meeting could be set up between the Planning Commiss'ion and the Board of Commissioners to go over the decis'ion and what action the Board of Commissioners wishes to take. Both Gary Sutley and Ronald Hansen agreed wjth the facts that the Commiss'ioners should wait until there is an adopted Plan before any rezoning is done. The mot'ion passed unanimous'ly. FINAL ACTION . EUGENE.SPRINGFIELD METRO AREA GENERAL PLAN UPDALE TApIE0VT-L-TI-TrC]II'IMENDFrI0-ru To-B-oARD- oF-T0mfi'ISS-r 0 NE R s ) . Chairman Cuddeback made several opening comments concerning the Eugene- Springfield Metro Area General Plan Update. Mr. Bredesen suggested that any motjon made concerning the Metro Update should include: Eugene Re-Write Page 10--Lane County Planning Comm'ission Minutes--Apri'l 29, 1980 I,'JP 25317 -341 \ ::.. j ,4 (Basic Document) as amended in Appendix A; Appendix B, diagram changes from Springf ield, non-el im'ination of heavy industria'l designation from 3ist andMarcola area, elimination of Item 53; Appendjx C, list of the proposed plan diagram changes from the city of Eugene; Appendix D, creation of lightindustrial designation along Highway 99, just south of Airport Road; and Appendix E, new plan designat'ion for G'lenwood area. At this point there was some discussion concerning any discrepancjes or mod'ification of language jn the Metro Update. Any disagreements would be noted and identified and those w'il I be identif ied as the Lane County position. Suzanne Boyd made a motion for the Metropolitan Update Plan, as amended,including Appendix A, Eugene Re-Write, as amended, plan diagram changes from Springfield;, Appendjx B, whjch'includes retentjon of the heavy industrial on 31st and Marcola, and the elimination of Item 53, related to Mt. Pisgah; Appendix C, the list of proposed Plan D'iagram changes from the City of Eugene; Appendix D, creation of l ight 'industria'l along Highway 99, south of A'irport Road; and Appendjx E, new plan designation for Glenwood, which would delete one low density residential node shown on the original revision. The Planning Commission would also send along position papers concerning some of the areasthat they have not been able to resolve. Dr. Roeder seconded the mot'ion. The mot'ion passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at l0:20 p.m. Recording Secretary Page 11--Lane County Planning Commissjon Minutes--April ?9, 1980 l,lP 25317-341 :f /_b n5 b ll t-/v /- 2rl SIGN-UP SIItiET IiOIT P[OPLIi 'fI'S'I'IFYING BIit-ORIi TIIIi I-ANI COUN't'Y t)LANNINC CO]fl,tISSION ilrrc: l/tc T II'II1:(/(-/)/':.PLACE:,/'/rrtno #*4v NAl'{E ADDRESS B"RLCY ).q"1 o f.rrsT3!,*trvr - t:U GEN T: /tr-I? ea #&*,4fi,4, { 6-r* € 4n4o I o oc."k-Et - s& flnov d CE quo [l-"..{o I e'-a..t t {1,1 E, L{t f",r{1;/4?s 'la I v rK i C/L ?c,T3.,x +1ZB e ,'u(L t{ ?9O i tat,r-'>f;$!..fi^;l & Z t- L<l .-* t- 4-:- lJ ,''i (r.,;-, L /i,/€ .bL...,,O fi;/"41<* ta:foo AAt-q ??S a,.?z '/€ / 3 AlhL A ( ?^o l$ ',oary*o^r.- y' \ /: CIT T OF SPH,I\TGFIEI-]] SPRINGFIELD. OREGON 97 477 PLAN N I NG DEPARTTV'I ENT 28 April 1980 Lane County Planning D'ivision Phil Bredesen Public Service Building 125 East Eighth St. Eugene, Oregon 97401 d 126 NORTH FOURTH 126-3759 a i ..r. D Dear Phi I , The Springfield Planning Department has reviewed the Lane County planning staff proposal for correctjve zoning jn the metropofitan area and would fike tb subnrit the folIowing comments and recommendatjons for consjderat'ion by your staff and Planning Commission. Springfield's planning staff concurs wjt'h almost alj of the proposed zoning designations and feels that they are appropriate for the areas where they are used. Four changes are suggested, as described below and on the attached maps. 1. Ma one- chan e RA des'i nat i on AGT-S i rn ar T se parce s are arge enough to be ma i nta'i ned i n an interjm agri- the creation suri ng the i ng woul d ide range of culture use. The P roposed RA des'i gnation would Permit of a significant n umber of residential lots without en provisjon of a ful 1 range of urban services. AGT-5 zon 'iscourage ompati b1 e two- chan prema tu re urbanization while permitting a w c i nterim agricultural act'ivities. 2. Ma I S area sno erent rn nation to EFU IA in attern area use, parce s'l zg ,prox'lm ity to areas pro posed for EFU/IA al one EFU / IA zon'ing woul d aPPear es 'is most dj acent AGT-5 desi I and ther ui ty a. urban uses or soil tYPe from o zon'ing. For Purposes of conti n to be best su'ited for th'is are 3. Ma eleven- cha e RA des'i nation to EFU IA in attern area genera rat ona e ort irst o our sugges ange appl i cabl e to this area as well. EFU/IA zoning s eems to be appropri at e as EFU zoning is proposed for lands directly a to the eas t and south. twelve- chan e FM desi nation to FM IA 'in ou tl ined area D growth boundarY. Adding th (or an equivalent designat ionversion of these urbani to Springfield. most a of this area fa Ttfri n Spri ngf i ei d terim Agricul ture c woul d faci I 'itate t e lands to urban as o a I ej z s ln n) bl sp omb he th Foposed urban ining district even tual ey are annexed 4. Ma EXiIBIT IIAII