07/14/1986 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

----- review, and the two processes had been combined as much as possible. She also said the Lane Council of Governments board in June had ratified the Metro Plan e Mid-Period Review amendments. Ms. Bishow said the periodic review had been designed by the State Leg;slature to ensure that acknowledged planning programs remained consistent with State goals. She reviewed the four main factors for conformance with State goals: 1) that the community has not changed to warrant readjustment of comprehensive plans, 2) that the community address any new goals or changes to State goals, 3) that the community address any changes to State agencies or programs, and 4) that any requirements pending at acknowledgement had been carried out. Ms. Bishow added that the State had made no requirements of Eugene at acknowledgement. She also said staff had prepared findings to substantiate conformance with all four factors, and those were included in packets. Ms. Bi show rev; ewed changes descri bed in the order. She noted that the Department of Environmental Quality had been concerned that the working paper dealing with air quality be updated along with the Metro Plan update. She said DEQ had requested that a plan policy be included to include an air quality reassessment as part of the next major update. She said similar requests had been made of Springfield and Lane County. Ms. Ehrman asked whether the City had the capability to conduct such a study, or whether it would contract with someone like the Lane Regional Air Pollution Authority. Ms. Bishow said the City would work closely with LRAPA, and all working papers probably would be updated during the Metro Plan Update. Ms. Bishow said some changes had been made to the final order as a result of the recent appeals court decision regarding the Riverfront Plan amendment. e She noted a revision on page 2 of the order, adding to section E a reference to the plan amendment that occurred and concluding that the plan amendment was in conformance with statewide goals. Ms. Bishow said a revision on page 3 would add language concerning the Riverfront Park plan amendment and the Bloomberg Road area and would conclude that the two amendments did not significantly affect the overall industrial and commercial land inventories of the Metro area and that the cumulative effect of the amendments would comply with the plan. Ms. Decker said a new use, not contained in the Metro Plan, also had been added, but would result in no change to the inventory. Ms. Wooten asked about the change to the Bloomberg Road area. Ms. Bishow said that plan amendment had changed a property designation to Rural Industrial, which had essentially recognized an existing use and had allowed expansion of that use. Ms. Bishow noted that packets contained written testimony from Richard Gold and staff responses to hi s major comments; testimony from Al Urquhart, primarily on the Riverfront Park amendment; and written testimony from Barbara Kelley about the proposed wetland fill near Valley River Center. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council Dinner Session July 14, 1986 Page 4