Item B: Parks, Recreation and Open Space Comprehensive Plan

Home Browse Search

Public Te&iimony Deborah P. Jeffries Page 3 and other examples I could provide lead me to believe the answer is yes. I simply cannot believe that no one in Planning or Public Works knew of the 1988 Greenway permit. To make matters worse, City Staff is insisting on including a linear park on property that is outside their legal planning area. While I respect the state and local planning process that we follow, I do not believe anyone should be subject to the harassment and time commitment necessary to debate with a local government on planning & property rights that are not in that local government's jurisdiction. The PROS Plan I. The Plan is inconsistent with a key objective and implementation strategy of the River to Ridges, June 2003 document. On page 25 of the Rivers to Ridges, the first implementation strategy states: "Rely on voluntary participation of property owners when acquiring land or purchasing conservation easements. n The PROS plan has no such language. Staffhas stated that the City "prefers" to work with willing sellers, but they decline to adopt the language used in the Rivers to Ridges endorsed plan. PROS Executive Summary, page x "Identify and pursue opportunities with willing sellers as the preferred approach when evaluating parkland and natural open space acquisition options. Consider willingness of seller as a key criterion when prioritizing acquisition opportunities. " So, what are the other approaches? I doubt any Commissioner would have supported the River to Ridges project if the strategy read something like: "A key objective of this study is to devise strategies that mayor may not infringe upon the rights of property owners. While voluntary participation is welcome, it will not stop the acquisition of property from unwilling sellers". Note, the PROS planning area is suspiciously similar to the River to Ridges planning area used in the June 2003 Vision and Strategies Metro Regional Study endorsed by all local area governments, planning and park groups. However, this was not a refinement plan document. II. The Plan is not comprehensive in assessment of existing Parks, Recreation & Open Space. The Planning Area (Chapter 1, page 2 & 3) states "the City of Eugene provides the majority of parks, facilities and programs within this planning area. " This is false. There are over 2500 acres of West Eugene Wetlands (the Nature Conservancy), over 30 acres of school sports fields and more than 300 acres of golf courses in the planning area. None of these recreational facilities have been included in PROS. Add to this the City's GoalS ordinance controlling over 1300 acres of open