12/03/1985 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

more urban, before development started, in order to avoid a conflict resolu- e tion process later in determining the significance of the resource. He said he thought present proposals were good, but could be made better by including in the working paper how an inventory of land not yet covered could be done, so that sites could be identified before they become a problem for developers or projects. He also said he thought the resources should be considered an asset to the community rather than a hindrance to development, adding that some communities in California had uncovered archeological resources inside the cities and had built museums and tourist attractions. He said he knew of two sites in Mt. Pisgah on lane County land, a site in Skinner Butte Park, one in the Washburn Historic District in Springfield, and one in Wi11amalane's Dorris Ranch Park. Mr. Silvermoon said he thought policy #36 (item 8), dealing with newly iden- tified resources, was contradictory in stating both "In no more than 30 days" and "in a timely manner. II He said if an exception to the 30 days was intended, that should be clarified. He also said he thought it was important to make explicit interim protection for the resources or site for the time between identification and completion of the process. Mr. Si1vermoon referred to the proposed deletion of Policy #1, (volume 2, page 39-40) under the energy element. He said he understood that the policy dealing with a metropolitan energy management plan would be replaced with a new policy to: "Use and continue to update information and recommendations contained in the 'Lane Electric Energy Planning Program: Final Report. III He said he had finally obtained a copy of the report after trying unsuccessfully e for two weeks. He said neither EWEB nor the Eugene Planning Department had a copy of the report, but l-COG eventually had located one, and he added that when staff made the recommendation, they had not read the report. Mr. Silvermoon said he had not had time to read the report in detail, but it dealt only with electrical energy, and not with other forms of energy in the metropolitan area. He said the report did not include a number of actions called for under current policy, including establishing current and projected energy demands for various sectors of the metropolitan economy. He suggested that staff be directed to rework the pOlicy, adding that he understood the need to use information already developed, but the policy should not be replaced with the report, especially since EWEB had claimed the report con- tains outdated information. He said a policy incorporating current policy and the information from the report would be important to the metropolitan area. Mr. Silvermoon said the policy calling for a Growth Rate Management Study on page 9 of section II, volume 2, was proposed for deletion and replacement by a policy discussing the impacts of growth. He said the new policy did not have the same intent as the original, adding that he thought feasibility studies should be done when growth was not rapid and exerting pressures. He sa i d he thought the constituency still existed in the area to do that type of study, and doing the study now could diminish future controversy that might result. e MINUTES--Joint Public Hearing--Metro Plan Amendments December 3, 1985 Page 3