My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 3D: Resolution 5083 Annexing Land to the City of Eugene (River Ridge Golf Complex - A 12-6)
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2013
>
CC Agenda - 04/08/13 Meeting
>
Item 3D: Resolution 5083 Annexing Land to the City of Eugene (River Ridge Golf Complex - A 12-6)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/5/2013 11:38:12 AM
Creation date
4/5/2013 11:00:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
4/8/2013
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
118
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
Attachment C - Application Materials <br />�� Rs <br />Mr. Jim Crotcau <br />February 29, 1988 <br />Page 2 <br />As we have previously discussed, there is some confusion about the <br />status of the southern 12 acres. This portion of the property was <br />originally within the urban growth boundary but rcmovcd as a result of <br />amendments adopted during Mid - period Review. Even though the <br />property had been removed from the urban growth boundary, it was <br />apparently included in the rezoning which occurred when Lane County <br />transferred jurisdiction to the City of Eugene. <br />Rov Burns of the Land Management Division is checking several <br />matters at this time: <br />a. Whether the rezoning to AG /UL was actually effective since the <br />property was not within the urban growth boundary, or whether it <br />retains the prior AGT /U zoning. If the property retains the prior <br />AGT /U zoning, rezoning would not be necessary since golf courses <br />are allowed conditionally in that zone. <br />b. If rezoning is necessary, he is trying to determine if there is an <br />expeditious way to have the City Hearings Official act on behalf <br />of the County. <br />Roy indicated that he would have a response to these questions by <br />Tuesday, March 1, 1988. However, that is after the filing dzadline for <br />the March 30 hearing and we did not want to delay proceeding with the <br />northern portion if the southern area could not be included. <br />Mr. Ric Jeffries will be developing the driving range and will be involved in the <br />golf course development_ I understand that his attorney is a partner of Mr. <br />Spickerman. I wanted to call this to your attention so that you could advise Mr. <br />Spickerman and arrange for an alternative hearings official in the event he has a <br />conflict. <br />I would stress the importance of being able to proceed with the driving range <br />portion of the development as swiftly as possible. The golf course portion ca•n <br />proceed on a different schedule. <br />I would be happy to respond to any questions you may have concerning these <br />applications. <br />Sincerely, <br />/ <br />im Saul <br />{G RECE <br />Encl. .�, 91988 <br />cc: Mr. Ric Jeffries (with encl.] clli o r.UU re <br />DEYELOff D e M MM <br />Saul & Associates <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.