Ordinance No. 20351 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

3. For allegations of error on the Eugene Overlay Zone Map: a list of the tax lots and a description of any right-of-way alleged to have been incorrectly included in the /WR Water Resources Conservation Overlay Zone. 4. A description of the alleged error and the proposed correction. (b) Approval Criteria Based Solely on Aerial Photoqraphy and Geoqraphic Information System Data. 1. For allegations of error on the Goal 5 Water Resources Conservation Plan Map: it is clear that, at the time the city adopted the Goal 5 Water Resources Conservation Plan Map, that Map showed an incorrect location of the identified Goal 5 Water Resource Site. 2. For allegations of error on the Eugene Overlay Zone map: it is clear that, at the time the city applied the /WR Water Resources Conservation Overlay Zone to the subject lot(s), the city was incorrect in its determination that the lot(s) contained a Goal 5 Water Resource Site or a /WR Water Resources Conservation Area. (3) Correction Based on Additional Information. An application submitted pursuant to this subsection (3) shall be processed under the Type II application procedure (EC 9.7200 - 9.7230). (a) Application requirements. 1. The materials required under subsection (2)(a). 2. If the alleged error is in the city's measurement of the conservation setback (as opposed to the location of the resource itself), a site plan drawn to scale, showing all of the following: a. The location of the boundary of the resource as mapped by the city in the Goal 5 Water Resources Conservation Plan; b. The alleged correct location of the boundary of the /WR conservation area for the resource in question based on EC 9.4920; c. The distance in feet from the nearest point of the alleged correct location of the boundary of the /WR conservation area of the resource in question to the subject property. 3. If the alleged error is in the mapping of an upland wildlife habitat site or a riparian site (as opposed to the measurement of the site's conservation setback): a. A detailed written description of the mapped area claimed to be incorrectly included within the resource site in question, including an inventory list of plant species and the relative frequency of plant species listed; b. The location of the boundary of the resource as mapped by the city in the Goal 5 Water Resources Conservation Plan; c. The alleged correct location of the boundary of the /WR conservation area for the resource in question; and\ d. Color photographs of the area claimed to be incorrectly included within the resource site in question. 4. If the alleged error is in the mapping of a wetland site (as opposed to the measurement of the conservation setback area), a wetland determination or a wetland delineation report and map, and a signed concurrence letter from the Oregon Department of State Lands, indicating that the determination or report is consistent with Ordinance - 13