My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PUBLIC COMMENT – LLOYD HELICKSON (6-16-17)
>
OnTrack
>
CA
>
2017
>
CA 17-1
>
PUBLIC COMMENT – LLOYD HELICKSON (6-16-17)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2017 1:48:10 PM
Creation date
6/21/2017 8:45:51 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
CA
File Year
17
File Sequence Number
1
Application Name
UGB ADOPTION PACKAGE
Document Type
Public Comments
Document_Date
6/16/2017
External View
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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
June 16, 2017 <br />Page 7 <br />2) Tax lots 17042614-06000 (0.64 acres) and 06100 (1.05 acres) are shown on BLI <br />map 5 as partially vacant MDR, and are MDR in the Metro Plan. However, the building <br />permit data base and property explorer all show the properties as being zoned HDR, R3. <br />Should they be listed in the BLI as partially vacant HDR? <br />3) Tax lot 17042614-05500 (1.73 acres) is shown on BLI map 5 as developed when <br />property explorer says it is partially vacant zoned HDR (vacant and single family housing). It <br />is shown as MDR in the Metro Plan. Tax records show an improvement RMV of $971. <br />Should it be listed as vacant or partially vacant HDR, rather than developed MDR? <br />4) Tax lot 17043533-04700 (0.85 acres) shows on BLI map 7 as vacant LDR. Property <br />explorer and the Eugene Zoning Map show it as zoned R-2, MDR, with no associated <br />addresses, and as "Vacant, Unused, Undeveloped Land." The Metro Plan designation is <br />LDR and MDR. Should this lot be listed as vacant MDR rather than vacant LDR? <br />5) Tax lots 18030633-07100 (0.17 acres) and 07200 (0.17 acres) show as vacant LDR <br />on BLI map 8, and are LDR in the Metro Plan; property explorer shows them as vacant, <br />zoned MDR, R2. Should these lots be listed as vacant MDR, R2? <br />6) Tax lots 18030641-01100 (0.21 acres) and 01200 (0.21 acres) show as developed <br />on BLI map 8, and are LDR in the Metro Plan; property explorer and the zoning map shows <br />the property as zoned HDR, R3. Should this be listed as developed HDR (but still is <br />developed and does not add capacity)? <br />7) Tax lot 17031800-01100 (0.12 acres) shows as developed on BLI map 8, and is <br />LDR in the Metro Plan. The zoning is MDR, R-2, and the property has a land use description <br />of Automobile Parking (Non-Structure/Retail). The county tax records show "0.00" RMV for <br />structures, and show a property classification of Residential Vacant. Should this be listed as <br />vacant MDR rather than developed LDR? <br />F. Potential Error Where Metro Plan Designation Lower than Refinement Plan <br />Classification (up to 28 du) <br />A group of lots along River Road are zoned LDR and designated LDR in the Metro Plan, <br />whereas the Refinement Plan (River Road Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan (1987)) calls for <br />the lots to be MDR. Two of the lots are owned by the City (acquisition approved November <br />2015) which intends to build low income MDR multifamily housing on the lots (land bank for <br />"50-60 affordable housing units"). The City's intention was shown in a November 22, 2016 <br />annexation request, since one of the lots was not within the City (A-16-0011). Property <br />Explorer shows: <br />Lot 1 - 17041333-00100 (0.92 acres) Vacant (developed in BLI map 5) <br />Lot 2 - 17041333-00200 (0.86 acres) Vacant (developed in BLI map 5) <br />Lot 3 - 17041333-00300 (0.84 acres) Vacant, owned by City, (vacant in BLI map 5) <br />Lot 4 - 17041333-00400 (0.29 acres) Dev-Single Family, owned by City <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.