Item B: Parks, Recreation and Open Space Comprehensive Plan

Home Browse Search

e) Advertising for public involvement opportunities during the PROS planning process was extensive. It included: · Speakers Bureau presentations to 44 community groups, including the Chamber of Commerce and Homebuilders Association · Ads in Register Guard & Eugene Weekly · News releases · A Special Edition Eugene Outdoors! featuring the comprehensive plan · Public Meeting Calendar · Fliers & posters · Neighborhood Group Newsletters · Thorough updates on our website and calendar of events · The March Working City episode was dedicated to the comp plan and future of POS. Staff acknowledge that advertising did not make it explicitly clear that the PROS planning area contains land outside Eugene's City limits and UGB. As a result, staff have made every attempt to meet with property owners who have expressed concern on an individual basis. f) The Metro Plan, Parks and Recreation Facilities Element does identify main types of parks and recreational facilities that have been developed. It does not preclude new park types from being identified. In fact, objective 3 encourages the development of local means to determine the level and types of park and recreation facilities necessary to serve the needs of residents of each jurisdiction. g) See staff's response to Planning Commission question 2, above. The new level of service target was determined through an extensive information analysis including: · public involvement; · a review of local, state and national trends in sports and recreation; · parks and open space classifications; · a current parks and open space inventory, including evaluations of park amenities, facilities, and natural areas; · and a comparison analysis to other Oregon and regional communities. The methodology used in the PROS Planning analysis is consistent with that recommended in the Metro Plan. h) See staff's response to Planning Commission question 3, above. The City owns and manages multiple facilities which are located on school district properties. These facilities include athletic fields, children's play areas, skateparks, and tennis courts. These facilities are counted in the inventory of existing park and recreation facilities. However, the land which they are constructed on is not owned by the City of Eugene, and is therefore not included in the inventory. This is the case with Shasta Ballfields, which is constructed on property owned by the Bethel School District 52. Attachment A October 31, 2005 Page 16