My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 3: Ordinance on Downtown Code Amendments
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2008
>
CC Agenda - 06/16/08 Public Hearing
>
Item 3: Ordinance on Downtown Code Amendments
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 12:44:08 PM
Creation date
6/13/2008 9:39:49 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
6/16/2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
46
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
<br />Mr. Hledik reminded everyone that the tour for the Opportunity Siting and Infill Compatibility <br />Study was meeting at the Atrium at 5 p.m. <br /> <br />Mr. Hledik stated that the joint hearing with the Springfield and Lane County Planning <br />Commissions on the Interstate 5 Bridge was scheduled for 6 p.m. at the Bascom-Tykeson Room in <br />the Library. He emphasized that the focus was fairly narrow as it was on an exception to Goal 15 <br />in terms of amending the MetroPlan. He said the Eugene Planning Commission would also be <br />looking at a text amendment to the Willakenzie Area Plan that would allow fill within 35 feet of <br />the river. He underscored that no action was to be taken and it would benefit the process to bring <br />up any questions that might arise at this point. He thought they would reconvene with the two <br />planning commissions for deliberations in early June, noting that June 3 had been suggested. <br /> <br />Mr. Nystrom explained that there was a time issue in the larger scheme of things. He said they <br />were trying to get this done prior to the City Council summer break as well as trying to <br />accommodate the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) and its permitting process, which <br />had federal standards to meet. <br /> <br />Mr. Duncan asked if the planning commissions had much to say about the bridge. It seemed to him <br />like the answer was already there and the federal government would construct the bridge even if <br />everyone said no. Mr. Nystrom responded that the State was the applicant and it was going <br />through a federal process. He agreed that it would be surprising if the jurisdictions decided to “cut <br />off Interstate 5.” He underscored that the focus of the commissions’ deliberation was narrow. He <br />said there was a provision in the MetroPlan that was triggered by the potential of the placement of <br />fill in the river. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Mr. Carroll, Mr. Nystrom confirmed that the materials provided to <br />the Planning Commission on this issue would provide what they needed to understand it. He felt <br />there would be more information available at the next evening’s public hearing. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Mr. Duncan, Mr. Nystrom stated that the City of Eugene was the <br />lead and that Heather O’Donnell was the lead planner on the item. <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene Planning Commission April 28, 2008 Page 14 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.