My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Resolution No. 5287
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Resolutions
>
2020 No. 5286-5314
>
Resolution No. 5287
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/22/2020 4:09:51 PM
Creation date
1/22/2020 4:00:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Recorder
CMO_Document_Type
Resolutions
Document_Date
1/22/2020
CMO_Effective_Date
1/22/2020
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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 <br />Planning Directors Findings and Recommendation <br />Annexation Request for Steinhouse, Elizabeth <br />(City File: A 19-7) <br />Application Submitted: September 9, 2019 <br />Applicant Elizabeth Steinhouse <br />Property Included in Annexation Real Tae Lot 3900 ofAssessors Map 1704-2342 <br />Zoning: R-1 Low -0ensltyResidential and /UL Urbanlrable Land Overlay <br />Location: Vacant property to the west of 830 Willow Avenue <br />Representative: Elizabeth Steinhouse <br />Lead City Staff: Althea Sullivan, Ory of Eugene Planning Division, 541£82-5485 <br />EVALUTATION: <br />Based on the Information provided by the appllcenq the Otyhas determined that this request Muddles <br />with Eugene Code LEG) Semon 9.7805 Annexation -Applicability. As such, It is subject to review and <br />approval In accordance with the requirements, application criteria and procedures of EC 9.7800 through <br />9.7835. The applicable approval olterla are presented below In bold typeface with findings and <br />condusionsfollowmg each. <br />EC 9.M25(l) The land proposedto beannexed iswithinthe crtys urban growth boundary and is: <br />(a) Contiguous to the tlty limits; or <br />(b) Separated from the city only by a public right of wry or a stream, bay, lake or other <br />body ofwater. <br />Complies <br />Findings: The annexation area lswlthlnthe CYq/s urban growth boundary(UGB) and is <br />cnfamous totheCityinnitsalong the northern property line, consistent with subsection <br />NO <br />YES <br />(a). <br />EC 9.7825(2) The proposed annexation is conaistentwith applicable polices in their Plan and in <br />aapplicable refinement lane. <br />Complies <br />Findings: Several policies from the Metro Plan provide support for this annexation by <br />encouraging compact urban growth toachieve efficient use of and urban service <br />® <br />E] NO <br />YES <br />provisions within the URGE, [housing the following polities from the Growth <br />Management section (In ltcllctext): <br />Policy B. Land with In the UGB may be convenadfrom urbanlzable to urban only <br />through annexation to c city ween It isfou no that <br />e. A minim um level of Ary urban facilities an dservlces can be provided to the <br />area in an orderly and efficient manner. <br />b. There will be e logical area and dm e within which to deliver urban servicer <br />andfaciptler. Conversion of urbanlzable land to urban shall also be <br />consistent with the Metro Plan. (page 11 CA) <br />Policy10. Annexation to a city through normal processes shall continue to be the <br />highest priority. (pay ell C 5). <br />Aeinn Ouse, Eli (A 13h) 0clober 2913 EYE <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.