My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda - 04/19/05 JEO Mtg.
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2005
>
CC Agenda - 04/19/05 JEO
>
Agenda - 04/19/05 JEO Mtg.
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 11:20:13 AM
Creation date
4/14/2005 4:45:01 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda
CMO_Meeting_Date
4/19/2005
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
87
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
included. He agreed with Commissioner Belcher's remarks about internal consistency issues. He urged <br />caution in considering amendments to the Metro Plan. He suggested that the Springfield Planning <br />Commission take additional time to deliberate the matter and reminded the commissions that it was <br />essential for elected officials to support the proposal. <br /> <br />Commissioner Carmichaei thanked staff for their compelling presentations and agreed with <br />Commissioner Beyer about the magnitude of the issue and the need for support from elected officials. He <br />suggested that the commissions take an additional seven days to review the language, leave the record <br />open, and then meet individual to vote. <br /> <br />Commissioner Lawless agreed with commissioners Beyer and Carmichael that it was important to take <br />additional time to carefully consider the implications of a Metro Plan amendment and the proposed <br />language. He suggested that the Eugene Planning Commission also deliberate the matter independently <br />and supported the seven day extension of time. <br /> <br /> Commissioner Herbert moved that the Lane County Planning <br /> Commission recommend approval of the Metro Plan Growth <br /> Management Policy 15 amendment to provide greater flexibility in <br /> service delivery for a public safety district. <br /> <br />Commissioner Kirkham declined to accept a motion until deliberations had been concluded. <br /> <br />Commissioner Siekiel-Zdzienicki agreed with Commissioner Carmichael that the commission should <br />extend the comment period and deliberations for seven days and tighten the language and discuss the <br />matter separately. He repeated his request for a copy of the June 28, 2004, Eugene City Council work <br />session minutes. <br /> <br />Commissioner Cole said his main concern was uncertainty about how many districts could .be created <br />under the amendment and wanted to see revisions to the language that would restrict the amendment to a <br />single district. <br /> <br />Commissioner Decker remarked that a recommendation from the planning commission to the council <br />carried some weight and she agreed with the need for additional time to review and discuss the proposed <br />Metro Plan amendment. <br /> <br />Commissioner Moe said it was the consensus of the Springfield Planning Commission to delay action on <br />the amendment. <br /> <br />Commissioner Lawless said it was the consensus of the Eugene Planning Commission to delay action on <br />the amendment. <br /> <br />Commission Hudspeth disagreed with Commissioner Lawless. He said he did not feel that action should <br />be delayed and the commission should move forward with a vote of support and further deliberations <br />would occur when the issue came before the City Council. <br /> <br /> Commissioner Herbert moved, seconded by Commissioner Esty, to <br /> recommend that the Lane County Board of Commissioners adopt the <br /> Metro Plan Growth Management Policy 15 amendment to provide <br /> greater flexibility in service delivery for a public safety district. <br /> <br /> Commissioner Herbert expressed confidence that the commission had the support of local elected <br /> officials, specifically the Board of County Commissioners. ' <br /> <br /> MINUTES-Joint Planning Commission Public Hearing February 1, 2004 Page 6 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.