Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Planning Commission voted 3-2 to recommend approval of the proposal to the Eugene City <br />Council. A public hearing before the joint elected officials was held March 13, 2012. A total of 13 <br />people testified at the joint public hearing. Of those testifying, one person testified in support of <br />the proposal, two people expressed concerns or had questions about the impact, and the <br />remaining 10 people testified in opposition to the proposed amendment. Those in opposition to <br />the amendment expressed concern about the loss of regional planning and collaborative decision <br />making, risk to water quality, and loss of decision making authority for the City. <br /> <br />Subsequently, the City of Springfield, Lane County and the Springfield Utility Board worked <br />together to reach an acceptable solution to ensure that Springfield’s drinking water sources that <br />fall within this area would remain adequately protected once removed from the Metro Plan <br />boundary. On March 18, 2013, the Springfield City Council voted 6 to 0 to approve the <br />amendment to reduce the Metro Plan boundary to become coterminous with Springfield’s urban <br />growth boundary (UGB). This action, if approved by all three jurisdictions, would affect <br />approximately 8,130 acres, all of which would come under the jurisdiction of Lane County and the <br />Lane County Rural Comprehensive Plan, except that specific issues related to drinking water <br />protection would remain a joint-governance matter between the Lane County Board of <br />Commissioners and the Springfield City Council. <br /> <br />The Springfield City Council also voted 6 to 0 to approve the provisions of an Intergovernmental <br />Agreement (IGA) between the City of Springfield and Lane County regarding a number of land use <br />matters, but principally actions to protect Springfield Utility Board drinking water source areas. A <br />copy of the draft IGA is provided as Attachment C. <br /> <br />The Lane County Board of Commissioners has tentatively approved the proposal, and is scheduled <br />to take final action on June 4, 2013, after both cities have taken action. <br /> <br />As noted above, this proposal only pertains to the Springfield side of the Metro Plan Boundary. <br />The scope and timing of a future Lane County-initiated proposal to amend the boundary on the <br />Eugene side of the Metro Plan has not been established, and will be subject to a separate public <br />process. <br /> <br /> <br />RELATED CITY POLICIES <br />Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan <br /> <br /> <br />COUNCIL OPTIONS <br />No formal action is required at this time. Council action will be scheduled for a subsequent <br />meeting; options will be provided at that time. <br /> <br /> <br />CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION <br />No action is required on this item. Therefore, no recommendations are offered by the City <br />Manager. Council action will be scheduled for a subsequent meeting; the City Manager will <br />provide a recommendation at that time. <br /> S:\CMO\2013 Council Agendas\M130513\S1305135.doc <br /> <br />