My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Staff Report
>
OnTrack
>
Annex
>
2016
>
A 16-10
>
Staff Report
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/3/2017 4:03:10 PM
Creation date
2/2/2017 5:48:14 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
A
File Year
16
File Sequence Number
10
Application Name
FURTICK, DON
Document Type
Staff Report
Document_Date
1/23/2017
External View
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Attachment F <br />ranch <br />( A- <br />PNGINEERING-- <br />Sinve 19' <br />January 13, 2017 <br />Nick Gioello <br />Planning & Development <br />City of Eugene <br />99 W 1othAve <br />Eugene OR 9401 <br />RE: PUBLIC COHNUK14T RESPONSE <br />FURTICKANNEXAITON (A 1b-io) <br />Branch Engineering Inc. Project No. 16-2C)8:01 <br />Dear Nick, <br />This letter is to address the confusion Mr. Holleran expressed in his January loth email to <br />yourself and Councilor Zelenka. <br />His first point demonstrates a misunderstanding of the Vicinity Map shown on our <br />mapping. Nowhere do we state that the Vicinity Map represents drivable surface existing on the <br />ground as Mr. Holleran is asserting. Several years ago our office purchased digital copies of the <br />Tax Maps from the County Assessor's Office. The Vicinity Map is a clip out of the digital tax map. <br />The Tax Maps show ownership as reported to the Assessor's Office, not improvements. The city <br />has reported to the Assessor's Office that they have street right-of-way ownership in the area to <br />which Mr. Holleran is objecting. <br />His second point demonstrates confusion on two sub-points. The first sub-point is why <br />the owners representative approached him about swapping the existing access easement for a <br />utility easement. The intent was an attempt at being neighborly by proposing an idea that could <br />be seen as a positive for both parties. Mr. Holleran and his wife would no longer have the risk of <br />a driveway being constructed in their side yard. The site would gain flexibility for utility <br />connections. However, since Mr. Holleran has been difficult to contact we have chosen to proceed <br />without the additional flexibility and leave the driveway easement intact. Mr. Holleran seems to <br />be expressing confusion though about the fact that this in no way makes the site undevelopable. <br />The second sub-point is the ability of the city to provide utility connections to the site. The <br />application material previously submitted demonstrates that this is possible; however, since Mr. <br />Holleran expressed some difficulty visualizing the discussion, the mapping has been updated to <br />- - provide a visual of the utility discussion: <br />EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD SALEM-%n2ER <br />310 51h Street, Springfield, OR 97477 1 p. 541.746.063' 1 f: 541.746.0389 1 '-ff.v .branchengineering.com <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.