Item 2G: Res.on LID/West Univ. - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

..... Original Message ..... Fr m: BROGDEN Lynn Sent: Thursday, IVlay 05, 2005 9:58 AM To: 'spickerman@orbuslaw.com' Subject: FW: Eugene Garden Club Assessments/West University Alley ]'mprovements Dear Mr. Spickerman: This e-mail is in response to your e-mail (below) in which you misconstrue the information that was provided to you in a letter from me dated April 21, 2005 regarding the land use factor selected to determine the proposed assessment for the Eugene Garden Club for alley improvements. Contrary to your written statements, the land use factors in the assessment methodology for alleys are unrelated to the vehicle trip generating characteristics associated with the use of an individual property or its allowed use under the zoning. Furthermore, the assessment methodology is completely unrelated to the transportation system development charge methodology. The section of the Eugene Code pertaining to alley improvement assessments does not include any language regarding vehicle trip generation rates. The table in Eugene Code 7.175 (6) simply assigns a factor from 1.0 to 10.0 to a land use category and for those uses not listed in the table, directs the City Engineer to select a factor according to the most intensive use of the parcel most comparable to the uses listed in the table. Your letter dated April 14, 2005 has been included in the Council packet. However, your e-mail dated May 4, 2005 was submitted too late to be included in the Council packet. However, copies of your e-mail will be distributed to the Council in advance of their consideration of the formation of a local improvement district for alley improvements in the West University Neighborhood. Sincerely, Mark Schoening, P.E. City Engineer ..... Original Message ..... From: .]ames W. 5pickerman [mailto:spickerman@orbuslaw.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2005 10:57 AlVl T : cepweng2@ci.eugene.or.us Cc: mgenereth@aol.com Subject: Eugene Garden Club Assessments/West University Alley :Improvements Mr. Schoening, I received your letter assigning the Garden Club to the highest category of traffic use. I have difficulty seeing the comparison to an office use when there is not regular daily use of the building and the club does not even have phone service there (the bridge club has a line and plugs in a phone when they are there.) I would expect uses would be categorized in accordance with ITE trip rates since the City relies on those for SDCs. It is difficult to see how General Office came to be ranked with Commercial in the assessment table, other than the fact they are both commercial-type uses (which the club is not.) That certainly is not consistent with the ITE trip rates. It cannot be reasonably claimed that the Garden Club use will generate a level of alley traffic comparable to a Commercial use, particularly since there are only six parking spaces on the site. I would ask that you reconsider the categorization of the Garden Club. I also request you enter this and my past correspondence in the record by inclusion in the Council packet. Thank you for your consideration of my comments. JWS