Item B: Parks, Recreation and Open Space Comprehensive Plan

Home Browse Search

Public Testimony Deborah P. Jeffiies Page 6 3. Staff should then provide an analysis of whether the current UGBarea meets the population ratios outlined in the PROS. Obviously, if 4000+ acres have been left off, the City is a bit closer to meeting future PRO goals than is reflected in the "missing PROS Draft". 4. Council should decide if they want the Staff to expand to Outside the City's jurisdiction in the planning process for Parks and Recreation. In other words, is Council willing to identify where the City is going to expand the UGB within the next 20 years (which is the parameters of the existing PROS)? City Parks Staff have been operating outside of the Planning process with this study and proposal. NOONE wants to discuss or state that the Draft effectively supports UGB expansion - but it does. (Kind oflike not talking about the elephant in the room). If the City Council answers yes to this question, then the County and property owners outside the UGB should be invited as an active partner in the process as well as, not an after thought as is happening now. 5. Then the step of locating future Park and Recreational needs should be done. (Note: I did not include Open Space because those needs are well met) The whole point to PROS is proper planning and management of Parks, Recreation and Open Space. No entity can develop a success and economically responsible plan without accurate information in the first place. The document does not meet that standard. Ms. Riner reported to me that PROS cost $200,000. She also stated the project did not have funding to inventory property not owned by the City of Eugene. Obviously PROS is not a comprehensive study, consequently any planning using the study will not be comprehensive either. The PROS comprehensive plan should NOT be forwarded to Council. It should be returned to Staff with direction to make it truly comprehensive of the planning area that is within the City's jurisdiction.