06/11/1980 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Page stated that numerous organizations, including the Oregon Energy Extension Service, Eugene neighborhood associations, University of Oregon, I local realtors, and utility companies, are assisting in developing the ,projects. In addition, investor-owners of apartment buildings contacted e .. about the proposed low-interest program have responded positively and have i indicated a willingness to participate in the program. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to submit a letter to HUD in support of the of Eugene HUD innovation grant application. motion carried unanimously. The meeting was recessed to the McNutt Room for continuation of the agenda. to authorize the Mayor joint Lane County/City Roll call vote; VIII..METRO PLAN UPDATE Jim Farah, Planning, stated that at the June 17 meeting, it is the hope of the Metro Team that all three juriSdictions will agree on a consensus which the Elected Officials Coordinating Committee has reached. On June 24, there will be another joint meeting and they are expecting to have the plan adopted at that meeting. They met with the LCDC representative on June 10 and July 1 is still the deadline for submission of the plan. The first major change in urban and urbanizable land (phasing and surplus land) is on page II-D-1. The Willow Creek Basin can accommodate more than the project population. It is not reasonable to develop only half the basin at a time; the need is to plan for the whole basin at once. That I basin is the trade-off for the land in Santa Clara if Lane County and e Eugene cannot agree on the annexation of Santa Clara by the mid-1980's. ,i There are major political problems with annexing Santa Clara. Mayor Keller noted this would be an issue on June 12. Mr. Delay asked for clarification regarding the questions that were raised regarding EWEB1s 'planning. Steve Gordon, L-COG, stated that LCDC Goal 14 has seven cri- . teria, one of which is public need, based on a 20-year projection. : Another is the orderly provision of public services. Social and envir- onmental consequences and other items are the other criteria. It is said by some that an urban growth boundary that contains more land than what would be based on that need would be in violation of that goal. They are : trying to plan for efficient public service delivery, especially gravity- based services. School District 4-J and EWEB have concerns that if the urban growth boundary contains more land than is needed in 20 years there would be time problem and they would not be able to serve this area within the next five or ten years. They would like to have assurances that capital improvements will not be required faster than they can afford them and would prefer to see phased development. Mr. Farah noted that this would be phased development, even if the plan is done all at one time. " Mr. Gordon noted these were the major points raised at the public hearing and they would have material to the councilors by June 13 or June 16. . 6/11/80--16