My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06/04/1980 Meeting
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Minutes
>
Historic Minutes
>
1980
>
06/04/1980 Meeting
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/27/2007 6:21:43 PM
Creation date
11/2/2006 5:40:38 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Minutes
Meeting_Type
Meeting
CMO_Meeting_Date
6/4/1980
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />.- <br /> <br />The meeting was recessed to the McNutt Room for the last agenda item. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />VIII. METRO PLAN UPDATE PRESENTATION/DISCUSSION <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Jim Croteau, Planning Department, stated that the Elected Officials <br />Coordinating Committee had compromised on wording for the North Spring- <br />field Pl an issue. The suggested wording would read: II In cases of con- <br />flict, the MetropOlitan Area General Plan will prevail. The North <br />Springfield Community Plan (Part I) and the Gateway Park Development <br />Plan standards are completed superseded by this plan for lands inside <br />the City limits of Springfield and for lands annexed to the City of <br />Springfield. The North Springfield Community Plan will remain in effect <br />for lands outside the City of Springfield, and will be promptly updated <br />to conform to the policies and land use designations of this plan." He <br />noted the vote to approve this was 6-0. <br /> <br />Mr. Delay stated he agrees with this language in terms of the status <br />quo but is concerned where the statement says that the North Springfield <br />Community Plan will be promptly updated to conform to the policies and <br />land use designations of this plan. Mayor Keller stated that in essence, <br />the plan is first and we must conform to that general plan. Mr. Croteau <br />stated the plan is the overall guide and this wording indicates there <br />are some conflicts that will have to be dealt with as soon as they arise. <br />Mr. Delay stated that his concerns are that this implies that the County <br />should be doing the refinement plans, which may be all right outside the <br />city limits, but not if those areas are to be annexed to the cities. <br />Mayor Keller noted he thinks this item is a trade-off. <br /> <br />Mr. Croteau stated the second item for compromise was the Glenwood jur- <br />isdiction item and the recommended policy will be: "Upon adoption of <br />the plan, Eugene, Springfield, and Lane County shall appoint a joint <br />elected official task force to study and determine which city or cities <br />shall have ultimate responsibility for providing key urban services <br />through annexation to the Glenwood area." <br /> <br />Mr. Delay asked what effect this would have and if the task force would <br />have the final say. Mayor Keller noted that they would have a recommen- <br />dation that would go back to the elected board bodies. This will be <br />two elected officials from Eugene, two elected officials from Spring- <br />field, and one from lane County. He noted the need for involvement <br />of Glenwood residents. It is a giant step that Springfield felt the <br />residents of Glenwood should be involved. <br /> <br />Mr. Croteau noted there is a movement toward resolving the juriSdictional <br />boundary dispute over Mount Pisgah. Information will be presented to the <br />Elected Officials Coordinating Committee on June 5. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />6/4/80--9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.