Laserfiche WebLink
<br />- Ms. Bascom referred to high priority proposed actions listed under the <br /> Westmoreland area on page 30 of the draft plan and reported that at the <br /> public hearing, the topics of identifiable entries, a neighborhood <br /> playground, and a bicycle crossing on 18th Avenue received the most <br /> attention. <br /> Mayor Miller commended staff for its work on the plan. <br /> Res. No. 4127--A resolution concerning the Eugene Parks and <br /> Recreation Plan and repealing City of Eugene <br /> Resolution Nos. 3774, 3877, 3937, 4000, and <br /> 4053. <br /> Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Mr. Rutan, to adopt the <br /> resolution. <br /> Mr. Holmer said he considered the findings contained in the resolution <br /> extensive and he questioned why they needed to be so lengthy. He asked about <br /> the expansion of the Joint Parks Committee from seven to fourteen members and <br /> said he understood that was a temporary change during the drafting of the <br /> plan. Mr. Holmer also questioned reference to IIsignificant community and <br /> neighborhood involvement.1I He was curious about the outcome of the plan's <br /> review by the Department of Land Conservation and Development and the <br /> planning directors for Lane County and Springfield. Additionally, Mr. Holmer <br /> observed that while the draft plan would function as an inventory of <br /> recreation needs and opportunities, it failed to commit the City to begin its <br />e Goal 5 qualitative analysis. Finally, he described the draft plan as a good <br /> administrative document, but he said because it was too comprehensive, lacked <br /> priorities and policies reflecting land use regulations, and had not been <br /> adequately analyzed by councilors to be sure its policies and priorities were <br /> those of the council, he urged the council not to endorse it by resolution. <br /> Mr. Bennett agreed with Mr. Holmer1s opinion that the draft plan had not been <br /> adequately analyzed by councilors and he questioned the need to adopt the <br /> plan by resolution. <br /> Mr. Gleason responded that formal adoption of documents such as the one <br /> before the council provides guidance to the City's boards, commissions, and <br /> staff in the preparation of budget documents and represents the council's <br /> general consensus in the direction for future agendas. <br /> Mr. Sercombe pointed out that findings are necessary because the plan adopts <br /> some land use regulations. He said the plan could be interpreted as the <br /> implementation of plan direction contained in the Metro Plan. It a 1 so <br /> functions to implement parts of the LCDC Goal 8 (the Parks and Recreation <br /> Statewide Planning Goal). <br /> Mr. Bennett stated that he would vote for the resolution, but he wanted to be <br /> on record as acknowledging that he was not knowledgeable about every aspect <br /> of the plan. <br />e MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 10, 1989 Page 6 <br />