12/03/1985 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Index No. B-6 Booth-Kelly Mixed Use e Mr. Gordon presented the staff report, noting that revised maps had been included as part of the planning commission record. Ms. larson opened the pUblic hearing on diagram amendment 8-6. No testimony was offered, and Ms. Larson closed the public hearing. Index No. B-7 Washburne Historic District Mr. Gordon presented the staff report. Ms. Larson opened the pUblic hearing on diagram amendment B-7. No testimony was offered, and the public hearing was closed. Index No. B-8 Springfield Millrace (inside UGB) Mr. Gordon presented the staff report, referring to revised maps in the record and noting the differing recommendations on the item. Ms. larson opened the public hearing on diagram amendment 8-9. No testimony was offered, and the public hearing was closed. Ms. Schue asked for an explanation of the differing recommendations. Mr. Gordon said all three planning commissions had made their recommendations using the same information base. Joe Hudzikiewicz of Lane County said the e lane County Planning Commission had expressed concerns about Springfield's ability to finance the project, about encouraging trespassing on the lands, and about surrounding agricultural uses. He added that commissioners also felt more study was needed before they would be convinced of the project1s necessity. Ms. Bascom asked about the origin of the proposal. Springfield Planning Director Greg Winterowd said the proposal had existed for at least two years. He said a downtown commission had been formed three or four years ago to examine the G-P mill site known as the Booth-Kelly site, along with the down- town area. He said the commission and staff had felt the site should be developed as a recreational resource. He said changes to staff recommenda- tions had been suggested by representatives of G-P, and the intent was to keep the site open for the long-term project, which he added was not presently funded. Mr. DeFazio asked what the practical effect on area property owners would be of designating open space. Mr. Winterowd said there would be no practical effect in the short term. In the long term, he said it might be possible for the City to acquire some of the land or to have it donated. He said the alternative--to designate the area as natural resource, which would limit even agricultural activity,--was not wanted. He also said the open space designa- tion would in no way limit agriculture or give people the right to trespass on private property. e MINUTES--Joint Public Hearing--Metro Plan Amendments December 3, 1985 Page 9