Ordinance No. 19977 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

whiteaker Plan, 9. The Whiteaker Community Council and whiteaker Planning Team j ointly sponsored a special public forum on the draft whiteaker Plan in June 1993. Notice of the public forum included a summary of the plan that was mailed to over 5,000 whiteaker residents, businesses, and property owners, with full copies of the June 1993 Draft whiteaker Plan also available for review. A display ad regarding the June 1993 public forum was placed in the UG Emerald and Register Guard. A special news release was provided to local media along with a public service announcement. 10. The planning team held three meetings following the June public forum to review public comments on the draft plan. After making changes to the June draft, the planning team forwarded a revised September 1993 Draft whiteaker Plan to the Eugene Planning Commission. 11, Notices were mailed to over 5,000 whiteaker residents, businesses, and property owners concerning the opportunity to comment on the Draft September. 1993 Whiteaker Plan and related implementation items being processed concurrently. 12. In the fall of 1993, in response to the high degree of public interest in the project, the Planning Commission held three public hearings on the draft plan and related implementation items being processed concurrently. Public testimony included about 8 112 hours of oral testimony and 37d pages of written tesstimmony. Ten petitions were submitted on various issues with a total of 257 signatures. 13. 4n March 14, 1994, after 23 work sessions that focused on the wbiteaker Plan and related implementation items, the Planning Commission completed its initial review of the entire draft plan and related implementation items. The Planning Commission agreed to solicit public testimony on the packet of tentative recommendations, Based on the Draft Plan, the Commission also initiated the proposed amendments to the Metro Plan Land Use Diagram. 14, an April. 1, 1994 a referral notice was mailed to the Lane County and Springfield Planning Directors concerning the proposed amendments to the Metro Plan Diagram. Both jurisdictions agreed that the amendments were minor plan amendments and did not substantively affect their jurisdictions. 15, At least twenty days prior to the Planning Commission May 3, 1994 public hearing, no~.ce was mailed to all property owners and occupants of propert~r subject to the proposed Metro Plan. Diagram amendments and within 300 feet of the subject property. The notice included information about a special public EXHIBIT A. - -Metro Plan Diagram Amendments Findings and Conclusion Page 3