05/13/1991 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e Mr. Robinette said it was his inclination to follow the Planning Commission's recommendations. He asked if anyone disagreed with this. Ms. Ehrman said she was concerned that Mr. Dafoe did not seem to think that extending the UGB was a major issue. She said he and others involved in this issue should be aware that this kind of a change to the UGB was not taken lightly. Mr. Nicholson said the testimony from the wildlife biologist was very differ- ent than anything in the record. In addition, he said Mr. Dafoe had made statements about his motives which were different than anything he had stated for the record. He said that if he could believe Mr. Dafoe's recorded moti- vation for seeking an extension of the UGB, and that the mitigation plan was completely adequate, he would have no problem voting in favor of this amend- ment. However, he said the testimony seemed "shaky." e Ms. Bascom said that while the State biologist had amplified the variety of impacts which would occur due to the Blue Water Boats project, he had not altered his original position. Mr. Nicholson said the biologist felt the impact of the project would be negative, but this was not recorded in his letters to the elected officials deciding this issue. Mr. MacDonald said he had read these letters very closely. He said the State biologist had been consistent on the wildlife impact and the ability to miti- gate th~s impact. He said that over a period of time the biologist's knowl- edge base had broadened, although he had not fundamentally changed his posi- tion. Ms. Ehrman asked if the council had discussed the role of the Metropolitan Planning Commission (MPC) as a resolver of disputes. She said representa- tives to the MPC from the council could represent the council's position but asked what would happen if an issue could not be resolved. Ms. Childs said all three jurisdictions would have to approve the amendments to the Metro Plan in order for any of them to be adopted. She said that even if the MPC approved the amendments, they would still need the approval of the three jurisdictions. (Mr. Green arrived at the meeting.) Ms. Bascom said further negotiations on this issue might be needed. Ms. Childs pointed out that the site plan for the Blue Water Boats project was greatly modified during the course of three separate public hearings held before the three planning commission public hearings. Mr. Boles said it was possible that one of the jurisdictions might be recal- citrant to approve the plan in which case some kind of resolution would be needed. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 13, 1991 Page 4