June 16, 2017 <br />Page 6 <br />5) Tax Lot 17042800-00101 (2 acres) shows as Developed Residential Lands on BLI <br />Map 4. Property Explorer shows the lot as zoned LDR, and as Vacant with an accessory <br />building permitted in 2004. The Metro Plan designation is LDR/MDR. The land has an <br />improvement RMV of $10,260, with a permit description of new metal roofed shelter with <br />concrete slab and new informal gravel parking area. Should some portion of this lot show as <br />vacant or partially vacant MDR? <br />D. Potential Errors in Considering Land "Committed or Protected Lands" (up to 103 <br />du) <br />1) Tax lot 18040412-00200 (2.77 acres) shows on BLI map 7 as "Committed or <br />Protected Lands," and not part of the vacant or partially vacant residential land supply. <br />However, property explorer and the Eugene Zoning Map for the lot shows it as R-4, HDR, <br />with a Site Review Overlay, and with no associated addresses. The Land Use Code is listed <br />as Parks and the Land Use Description is listed as Open Space, Natural Area, Wetland. The <br />zone is not shown as PRO (Parks, Recreation & Open Space). The property is listed as <br />privately owned. The property does not show any development or building permits. Tax <br />records show an improvement RMV of zero. It is listed as HDR in the Metro Plan. Should <br />the lot be listed as Vacant HDR rather than "Committed or Protected Lands"? <br />2) A portion of tax lot 18040412-00100 (12.07 acres) shows on BLI map 7 as Vacant <br />HDR. However, the rest of the lot, to the East of the portion shown on the map, is not <br />included, and is shown as "Committed or Protected Lands." Property Explorer shows the lot <br />as both R-4, HDR and R-2, MDR, with no associated addresses. The entire lot is listed in <br />property explorer as vacant and privately owned. Tax records show an improvement RMV of <br />zero. Land use records (Z 07-11) show the zoning was changed in 2008 from R-1 LDR to <br />split zone of R-4 HDR (west 8 acres) and R-2 MDR (east 4 acres). The Metro Plan shows a <br />split designation of HDR and MDR. Should the east 4 acres of the lot be shown in the BLI as <br />R-2 MDR, rather than "Committed or Protected Lands"? <br />E. Potential Error Where Metro Plan Designation Lower than Zoning (up to 78 du) <br />I found 11 instances where lots appeared to have a lower designation in the Metro Plan than <br />the zoning. Four involved property zoned MDR, but designated LDR or split LDR/MDR in the <br />Metro Plan, five involved property zoned HDR, but designated MDR in the Metro Plan and <br />two involved property zoned HDR but designated LDR in the Metro Plan. Although any <br />zoning changes would need to be consistent with the Metro Plan, development presumably <br />could take place consistent with current zoning. Any reduction in zoning would require due <br />process and would involve potential reduction of land value. It is not clear that the City can <br />simply downzone property by changing the designation in the Metro Plan, and presumably <br />that was not the intent of the Metro Plan. Thus, it seems that the BLI should use the Metro <br />Plan designation unless it is "lower" than the existing zoning or refinement plan designation. <br />1) Tax lots 17042614-05501 (1.01 acres) and 17042614-05900 (0.31 acres) are shown <br />on BLI map 5 as vacant MDR, and are MDR in the Metro Plan. However, the building permit <br />data base and property explorer all show the properties as being zoned HDR, R3. Should <br />they be listed in the BLI as vacant HDR? <br />