Terra Linda Park - Laserfiche WebLink

New Search

Related to property values, you mentioned two River Road sales that you wished to have considered after the fact. No address is given for the parcel. you say your church paid $100,000 per acre for– so we have no way of analyzing that sale. You also mentioned that the Gerots were paid $296,000 for a subdivided acre off River Road. As finished lots, the per acre unit value is distorted when compared to the value of "developable acres" of land. In the case of the Gerot acquisition, the City purchased the individual developed lots, net of dedicated rights of way (which were not compensated for) and the Gerots incurred all costs of engineering, construction of streets, utilities, etc. It is fairly typical for undeveloped land to sell at about the same price per acre as the individual finished lots. The appraiser further reports that your attorney supplied us with three additional "sales" at the time of negotiation. Those comparables revealed two sales for approximately $65,000 per acre each. A sale on Anderson Lane was considered to be a somewhat superior property and the sale on North Park Avenue was reported by MLS to be an "other than cash sale." The attorney also enclosed a "sale" at 4670 River Road, which was actually a listing of developable land with an old house on it. The listing had gone unsold after six months exposure on the market (listed for less than $60,000 per acre). The appraiser adds that it is noteworthy that this parcel subsequently sold in a better market—July of 2003—for $65,657 per acre. After examining these "sales," the City feels it gave you the benefit of any doubt in the final settlement of$65,000 per acre. • "We'll take care of it and keep the weeds down (they haven't)." "We'll take care of the trees just planted around the perimeter; we have people water during the summer. So you may remove the drip lines to the trees." We have standards for the mowing of undeveloped property. Those standards are set up both for property management issues and to comply with the provisions of the vegetation requirements contained within Eugene Code. I also agree that we are responsible for the maintenance of trees on the property that are intended to stay. It is my understanding that we have been meeting those obligations. However, it is very important to us that the neighbors of our park land feel we are good neighbors. I would be happy to talk to you about any specific maintenance concerns to determine if there is something we can do to make you feel more satisfied with us as a neighbor. • "If we buy this, it will not be used for a park for at least 10 to 15 years." Without being a party to the conversation, it is hard to know how this statement may have been made. The Parks and Open Space bond measure, passed by the voters in 1999, created a fund for the acquisition of parkland for future development. Unfortunately, it did not supply sufficient funds to develop the parcel we purchased from you. We will be looking at future park bond opportunities or the use of Park System Development funds to provide monies to develop this land into a more formal park. Since we are still looking at how to fund the development we have not set a schedule for this action. I personally will be a little surprised if we were to develop the property within the next five years but also surprised if we had not done some development before ten years have passed. • "If you refuse to sell we will be forced to 'take your property.'...Then 4-1/2 months ago Russ Royer says "I don't think it was our intention in your case."