My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item B: Delta Sand and Gravel Metro Plan Amendment
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2007
>
CC Agenda - 02/21/07 Work Session
>
Item B: Delta Sand and Gravel Metro Plan Amendment
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 1:12:36 PM
Creation date
2/15/2007 8:51:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
2/21/2007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
119
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 />Ms. Colbath explained that the Eugene Plann_jng (~ommission denied approval based on non-mitigatitlg <br />factors and based its approval 011 the 150 foot variance being approved. <br /> <br />Ms. Colbath adjourned the Eugene Planning Commission 111eeting at 8: 15 p.1l1. <br /> <br />The Lane County Plallning COmtllission took a brief one minute recess. <br /> <br />Mr. Carmichael said t\\'o issues needed to be addressed, that of a zone change request and the 1,500 foot <br />setback. <br /> <br />~lr. Ho\ve explained that because of\vhere the Planning C:0111nlission ended up on the post acknovvledgenlent <br />plan amendment, PAPA, the Plaluling Conlmission \vas reconunending that the applicant had not met the <br />requirenlcnts for that, therefore, the Planning COmtl1ission could not proceed \vith the zone change and the <br />varIance. <br /> <br />Mr. Siekiel-Zdzienicki said the setback \vas like sacred land that served as a buffer zone-"don't 111ess \\'ith." <br />The proposal to put the aquaclude in the setback \vas classified as construction by (~ounty Counsel, and <br />construction should not be in the setback. lIe disagreed vvith the applicant that the aquaclude could be and <br />should be in the setback. He said the UGB \vould gradually expand and it \vould be a mistake to minimize <br />the setback where it adjoi11ed the tree nursery. He opposed a variance from the setback. <br /> <br />In response to Ms. Arkin, Mr. Becker said the Plamlmg Conlmission had made a recommendation in <br />opposition to the zone change, thus the 'variance was a 11100t point. <br /> <br />Mr. Ho\"ve suggested that the Planning Commission detemlined that as a result of the recomnlendation of the <br />PAPA not meeting the Metro Plan requirel11ents, the application for the zone change and the setback varial1ce <br />were not appropriate to be dealt with at this time. <br /> <br />Mr. Carmichael asked if the Planning COl11ll1ission \vas ,vining to accept _Mr" Howe's statement as a motion. <br /> <br />Mr. Dignam proposed accepting Mr. Ho\ve's staten lent as a motion. ivfr. <br />Becker seconded the 1110t10n. The motion passed unanimously, 6:0. <br /> <br />Mr. Carmichael said the next meeting ,vould take place on at 5:00 p.m. 011 Tuesday, Septelnber 5, 2006. <br /> <br />Mr. Carmichael adjourned the ~al1e County PIanningConunission at 8:23 p.ll1. <br /> <br />(Recorded by Linda Henry) <br />nl: \2006\lane county1dand managetnent division \planning comnlission \lcpc060830.doc <br /> <br />MIN-UTES- August 30, 2006 <br />Joint Lane County and Eugene Planning C0l111nission <br /> <br />Page 12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.