Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> Mr. Greenleaf stated that LCDC hopes there will be a single submission <br /> from the metro area. Since this is not yet the situation, they are <br />- looking at ways to promote reconciliation on the remaining issues. One <br /> approach was stated in this letter and it was presented to the County last <br /> week. He said there are two phases of review--the first is a completeness <br /> check, and the second is to acknowledge the plan as being in accordance <br /> with the Statewide Planning Goals. The letter from LCDC states what else <br /> needs to be submitted before they can proceed with the review process. <br /> The urban growth boundary must be agreed upon by the cities and the <br /> County. This letter went beyond the completeness check in hopes of <br /> helping to resolve this issue. <br /> Mr. Greenleaf said that if Lane County would adopt the plan which Eugene <br /> and Springfield have adopted and would then file formal objections before <br /> LCDC, this would be the best method. This would allow LCDC to move <br /> forward with review of the plan. Or, agreement could be reached locally. <br /> Another option would be mediation which would be handled by LCDC and would <br /> be advisory rather than binding. With mediation there is no set of <br /> administrative rules and it is not the most suitable approach. This <br /> approach singles out the issue whereas it is really part of the total <br /> plan. Mediation does not provide for much agency participation. The <br /> final option is that of an enforcement order which puts pressure on the <br /> local jurisdictions to resolve the issue. He does not feel this is the <br /> best device to use. <br /> Mr. Obie asked if an enforcement order would follow if nothing is done. <br /> Mr. Greenleaf responded that it would. Mr. Obie asked what the mechanism <br />e would be. Mr. Greenleaf stated that staff would prepare an enforcement <br /> order which would constrain a certain area's development. They could. <br /> restrict rezonings, subdivisions, building permits, etc., in either the <br /> contested area or the total area, depending upon the circumstances. ~. <br /> Obie asked how long this type of order would take to become effective. <br /> Mr. Greenleaf stated it could be between 30 and 60 days. Mr. Obie asked <br /> how long it would be from now until something like this would happen. ~. <br /> Greenleaf stated that it would probably not be issued until at least the <br /> October commission meeting. Mr. Obie asked him, if it would be 90 to 120 <br /> days from now, what would happen in the meantime. Mr. Greenleaf stated <br /> that in the meantime, one would still operate under the old plan, but <br /> since Eugene has adopted their version, it is unclear what would happen. <br /> Mr. Delay thanked LCDC for proposing a simple resolution and stated that <br /> many people appreciate their help. Regarding a moratorium on development, <br /> he asked if enforcement orders are punitive in nature or designed to <br /> inhibit development in contested areas. Mr. Greenleaf stated that <br /> they have been used both ways--the intent of the enforcement order is to <br /> inhibit development but it has a punitive effect. Mr. Delay asked if the <br /> commission will design the enforcement order around those contested areas. <br /> Mr. Greenleaf responded that that is the intent and to try to reconcile <br /> the issue. Mr. Delay asked if it would be likely that an enforcement <br /> order would inhibit development in areas that are not contested as within <br />- <br /> 9/3/80--5 <br />