My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Public Comment
>
OnTrack
>
Z
>
2015
>
Z 15-5
>
Public Comment
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/18/2015 4:02:33 PM
Creation date
9/17/2015 11:01:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
Z
File Year
15
File Sequence Number
5
Application Name
LAUREL RIDGE
Document Type
Public Comments
Document_Date
9/17/2015
External View
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 1
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
9/2/2015 Testimony from Tom Halferty on the Laurel Ridge zone change <br />I would like to supplement the oral testimony I gave at the hearing on August 26, <br />2015. I live at 4510 Manzanita Street in Eugene. This testimony addresses the <br />approval criteria in Eugene Code 9.8865 (1) metro plan compliance, and <br />specifically use of the metro plan diagram to determine the extent of parks and <br />open space (POS) designated by the diagram on the applicant's property. <br />I would like to point out that the question of POS on the applicant's property has <br />already been addressed by the Eugene Planning Commission, the Land Use Board <br />of Appeals, and the Oregon Court of Appeals. In that case, the applicant <br />maintained that no POS designation existed on their property. LUBA said that <br />they should work with the City to "do the best they can with the tools at their <br />disposal to accurately overlay their property onto the metro plan diagram to <br />come up with a delineation of the POS portion. <br />The applicant actually already did that as a part of their whole development <br />proposal last time using the most up-to-date and accurate mapping and GIS <br />including tax lot and Lidar (laser aerial photography accurate to within about 3 <br />inches). That, I believe was their map 7.0. It showed about 40 acres of POS. <br />Instead of using the best tools at their disposal, this time they crudely manipulated <br />their property over the metro area diagram to come up with a little over 20 acres. <br />Engineering geologist and neighborhood co-chair Gunnar Schlieder did an <br />excellent job at the hearing of showing that manipulation (whether innocent or <br />intentional) in the rotation of the diagram with respect to the property (not skewed <br />the same) and a mistake in east-west alignment. Correcting for those, Gunnar <br />came up with 40 acres, about the same as the applicant's previous map 7.0. <br />The applicant's attorney stated that they want to know where that line is, if their <br />demarkation is not the correct one - and that the City should tell them where it is <br />(so they don't have to waste time and money going through this exercise again.) <br />LUBA's advice to the applicant still holds true to work with the City to "do the <br />best they can with the tools at their disposal." That process would likely come up <br />with a map very similar to the applicant's 7.0 showing the POS lands on their <br />property. Please deny this current zone change application. ,-Received <br />Thank you. <br />SEP 0 2 2015 <br />City of Eugene <br />Planning Division <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.