Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPublic CommentsSULUVAN Althea C From: SULLIVAN Althea C Sent: Monday, July 31, 2017 2:59 PM To: 'Pat Holleran' Subject: RE: Furtick Partition Application Patrick, Thank you for taking the time to provide a comment, I understand that the timeframe is frustrating in this case. If you want to call me I would be happy to explain how this particular application and process differs from one that would go to a public hearing. Best, -----Original Message----- From: Pat Holleran [mailto:holleran@shannontech.com] Sent: Friday, July 28, 2017 6:31 PM To: SULLIVAN Althea C <Althea.C.Sullivan@ci.eugene.or.us> Cc: Larry Weinerman <weinerman.larry@gmail.com>; Betsy Datri <betsy_datri@hotmail.com>; Bill Blix <wbblix@comcast.net>; Katie Dixon <kmdixon@comcast.net>; DODSON7487 <dodson7487@comcast.net>; Donna Holleran <dholleran@hotmail.com> Subject: Furtick Partition Application Ms. Sullivan: We received a notice about the "Proposed Land Use Action" for the "Furtick Partition" in the mail this afternoon. This is for a parcel of property owned by Don Furtick. This property borders our own property on its north side. According to the notice, we have until August 10th to submit comments about the petition and apparently cannot raise issues after that date. As it happens, we are out of town until after the 10th and have no time nor the ability to inspect and understand the application materials and submit intelligent comments. In truth, issues involved in plans like these require access to legal and/or land use expertise, but 9 or 10 working days are not nearly enough time to gather such information. This timing is completely unreasonable and puts us and our neighbors whose properties will be affected at a complete disadvantage. Why have you never shown us these materials or discussed them with existing residents before this action is imminent? There is no imaginable reason why the review process for this petition has to be so short or a decision has to be made so quickly, and this timing ill serves local citizens. And, apparently, there will be no meeting or hearing to discuss the issues and ask and answer questions relevant to the plan and its effect on the area. A hearing also insures that residents' comments are actually heard and understood and that relevant information is taken into account. The absence of face to face discussion is unreasonable, and a process like this is unlikely to result in a plan which is both well thought out and acceptable to everyone affected. I do not understand the point of creating 2 parcels, but I see on the "site plan" that the applicant continues to insist on which which is routinely used by hundreds of residents converting the city's EWEB Recreation Trail west of his property, destroying the trail and and compromising the city's every week, to a very wide road servicing only their own property, resented to a large number of area Ribbon Trail which the Furtick property borders as well. When this idea wasp letel p oposal Y residents in a review of Furtick's other development plan severoal.emonths ago it was vehemetly t onab e yet unamended idea rejneacted unacceptable by almost everyone at the meeting. Putting this b1 People in this area deserve to without further discussion and virtually no time to provide intelligent feedback is wrong. know what is going on, and this process needs to accommodate the schedules of local residents as well as the developer. Patrick Holleran 2930 Central Blvd. Eugene, OR 97403