Item B: Parks, Recreation and Open Space Comprehensive Plan

Home Browse Search

Section IV, Policies (6) requires: Public hearings by the governing bodies for Metropolitan Plan amendments requiring participation from one or more jurisdictions shaH be held within 120 days of the initiation date. Metropolitan Plan amendments that require a final decision from all three governing bodies shall be concluded within J 80 days of the initiation date. When more than one jurisdiction participates in the decision, the planning commissions of the participating jurisdictions shall conduct ajoint public hearing and forward that record and their recommendations to their respective elected officials. The elected officials also shall conduct a joint public hearing prior to making a final decision. The time frames prescribed in connection with Type n Metropolitan Plan amendment processes can be waived if the applicant agrees to the waiver. The requirement for joint hearings of the necessary jurisdictions is so that there will be a single record upon which all of the parties are basing their recommendations and decisions. Despite this requirement, only the Eugene planning commissioners are present at this hearing on the expanded plan boundary. Instead, the Lane County planning commission is scheduled to hold a separate hearing at a later date. Section IV of the Metro Plan also provides a diagram of the process for adopting metro plan refinements and regulatory measures. The text on the diagram explains: This special process is established for referral and reviews to the metro plan (neighborhood plans, special area studies, etc.) and regulatory measures (zoning measures, etc.) initiated by one or more of the jurisdictions. In most circumstances (emphasis in the original document), refinement plans are consistent with the metro plan and do not require a plan amendment... The plan amendment process applies only when Metro Plan refinements or regulatory measures result in specific Metro Plan amendments being initiated. The proposed refinement plan clearly faUs within the exception process for the adoption of refinement plans because it proposes an amendment to the Plan boundary for Goal 8 planning. Staff s consistent response to concerns about the planning area expansion is that there is no problem as long as no regulations are to be imposed on the newly included area. The amendment process, as cited above, applies in two circumstances; when either the refinements or regulatory measures result in specific Metro Plan amendments being initiated. In this case, the refinement plan would clearly amend the Metro Plan jurisdictional boundary. In summary, the proposed expansion of Eugene's GoalS planning area is inconsistent with the Metro Plan because (1) it causes the Metro Plan and the Lane County Rural Comprehensive Plan to overlap and the boundaries to no longer coincide; and (2) it proposes a Plan boundary change for purposes of Goal 8 planning by the City of Eugene without following metro plan procedures for amending the metro plan. 3