02/25/1980 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Public hearing was opened. e Speaking against the Airport Master Plan Update: Vernon Gleaves, 975 Oak Street, identified himself as an attorney repre- senting Mr. Drake, the property owner at the corner of Greenhill and Airport roads. Mr. Gleaves stated that the original notice of tonight's meeting did not appear in the February 18 newspaper, but did appear on February 19 and 20. This gave the public four days prior to the hearing and he submitted that this was an inadequate amount of time to prepare to attend a public hearing. Mr. Gleaves recommended that the update be amended so that it stated that all land within the vicinity of the airport be included, not just City-owned land. He further stated that if this is adopted, the Council would be adopting a land use plan and they would be performing land use action. He further stated there is no mention any- where of attempts to apply the State land use goals. He stated that the memo presented by Bob Shelby fails to recognize County involvement in the airport development. Discussions with the County ought to be part of the process as rerouting or closure of Greenhill cannot be done without the County either. He added that the plan is defective and the amendments do nothing to correct the problems. e Mr. Shelby noted that in this particular matter Lane County, not the City Council, has jurisdiction and final authority to make decisions regarding land use planning. He further stated that this should be a cooperative project between the Council and the Lane County Commissioners. Michael Farthing, 975 Oak Street, stated that he represented the Shephards, who own Bond Sports Center. He showed a map of the location of the proposed general aviation runway, and the location of the Bond Sports Center, which consists primarily of softball fields. He further stated that the Bond Sports Center serves a great many people who play softball and if this private company were forced to close down because of the airport, it would then be the responsibility of the City to provide softball programs for the people who are currently patrons of Bond Sports Center. He stated that he was not sure why the City objected to Bond Fields being located where they are, since most accidents occur one to two miles from the end of the runway, which would put Shasta Ballfields, owned by the City, much closer to the end of the runway. He further stated there had been no problems last year in operation of this sports center and that they do not expect any problems in the future. Mr. Farthing continued by stating that even if the Metro Plan Update is adopted and land is zoned EFU, that would still allow softball fields as a permissible activity within that zoning. Mr. Farthing stated that he felt Lane County should approve the update. He noted additional objections in regard to the closure of Greenhill Road that citizens' participation, which is Goal 1 of LCDC, had been violated; that Goal 12 states that uses such as the airport could not be on Classes 1 and 2 soils unless all other alterna- tives had been checked out. He further stated that the Council should examine what is really going on out there and see if the Bond Sports Center is filling a need. e 2/25/80--5