My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Misc.- Planning Dir Recommendation to CC
>
OnTrack
>
A
>
2014
>
A 14-6
>
Misc.- Planning Dir Recommendation to CC
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/17/2014 4:02:44 PM
Creation date
11/14/2014 10:17:33 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
A
File Year
14
File Sequence Number
6
Application Name
DREYER
Document Type
Misc.
Document_Date
10/20/2014
External View
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
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
Exhibit C <br />Page 1 of 3 <br />Planning Director's Recommendations and Findings: <br />Dreyer, Cynthia and Thomas (A 14-6) <br />1W <br />Application Submitted: August 19, 2014 <br />Applicant: Cynthia and Thomas Dreyer <br />Map/Lot(s): 18-03-04-31: 100 and 201 <br />Zoning: R-1/UL Low-Density Residential with Urbanizable Land Overlay <br />Location: East side of Capital Drive, south of Hendricks Park <br />Lead City Staff: <br />Becky Taylor, Associate Planner, (541) 682-5437 <br />EVALUATION: <br />Based on the information provided by the applicant, the City has determined that this request complies with <br />Eugene Code (EC) Section 9.7805 Annexation - Applicability. As such, it is subject to review and approval in <br />accordance with the requirements, application criteria and procedures of EC 9.7800 through 9.7835. The <br />applicable approval criteria are presented below in bold typeface with findings and conclusions following <br />each. <br />EC 9.7825(1) The land proposed to be annexed is within the city's urban growth'boundary an&is: <br />(a) Contiguous to the city limits;"or <br />.(b) Separated from the city only by a public right of way or a stream, bay, lake or other body <br />of water. <br />Complies <br />Findings: The annexation area is within the City's urban growth boundary (UGB), and is <br />®YES <br />❑ NO <br />contiguous to the City limits, consistent with subsection (a). Abutting lands to the north, <br />south, and west are in City limits. <br />EC°9.7825(2) The proposedrannexatiorn is consistent with applicable policies4n the Metro Plan and in <br />applicable refinement plans. <br />Com <br />plies <br />Findings: The proposed annexation area is within the UGB. Several policies from the <br />®YES <br />❑ NO <br />Metro Plan generally support this annexation by encouraging compact urban growth to <br />achieve efficient use of land and urban service provisions within the UGB, including the <br />following: <br />C. Growth Management, Goals, Findings and Policies: <br />Policy 8. Land within the UGB may be converted from urbanizable to urban only <br />through annexation to a city when it is found that: <br />a. A minimum level of key urban facilities and services can be provided to the area <br />in an orderly and efficient manner. <br />b. There will be a logical area and time within which to deliver. urban services and <br />facilities. Conversion of urbanizable land to urban shall also be consistent with the <br />Metro Plan. (Page 11-C-4) <br />Policy 10. Annexation to a city through normal processes shall continue to be the <br />highest priority. (Page 11-C-4) <br />Policy 16. Ultimately, land within the UGB shall be annexed to a city and provided with <br />the required minimum level of urban facilities and services. While the time frame for <br />Dreyer (A 14-6) November 2014 Page 1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.