02/07/1979 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

3. Two sites have been identified as possible areas for a third regional shopping center if the community wishes to consider: one in Beltline/ West 11th, and one at the Springfield Airport site. e 4. Sand and Gravel resources are designated as needed by the year 2000. 5. There are no opportunity areas designated in the three plans. 6. Mixed-use categories are designated, responding to some of the neighbor- hood refinement plans. 7. Strip commercial, neighborhood commercial, and very small-scale light industries are not shown on any of the three diagrams. Included in the text are some minimum locational standards that the City might wish to use in developing these areas. Mr. Chenkin said the major differences in the three diagrams from the 1990 Plan are in the residential allocations and the change of the urban , growth boundary. Some controversial issues that will be faced throughout future hearings would include the whole idea of a compact urban growth: What degree? Also the statement that minimum key urban services include sewers and they will be available only upon annexation will create some discussion. Mr. Chenkin encouraged Councilors to attend the Forum on February 17 at the Fairgrounds. He said there would be eight separate exhibit areas including residential density, with a slide show on public facility planning. ~ Participants will be able to register a preference for one of the three alternatives, or other suggestions. They will be able to indicate their likes, dislikes, and suggestions for ch,ange, and MAPAC members will be available to take testimony. Possibly within two weeks following the Forum, the suggestions will be categorized and sent to MAPAC, who will consider them and send them on to MPPC. The recommendations will be sent to the cities and Lane County in late spring. In response to a question from Mr. Delay reqarding timing and adoption by the three jurisdictions, Mr. Chenkin said some mechanism will have to be worked out to keep all three jurisdictions on the same path. After the plan is adopted, it will become an official update plan for the area. He noted the General Plan itself is not in and of itself sufficient to satisfy LCDC compliance. It would be one of several components for area-wide compliance. Mr. Delay wondered if the process would result in a specific definition of the Urban Service Boundary. Mr. Chenkin said very definitely it would be specifically described by property boundary lines, ridgelines, rivers, etc. In response to a question from Ms. Smith, Mr. Chenkin said if the three jurisdictions do not agree, a mechanism used in the past might be possible. That mechanism was to have delegates from each body work out the differences in order to reach a compromise by the juridictions. e 2/7/79--6 bO