My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 1: Key Urban Services/Jurisdictional Authority
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2009
>
CC Agenda - 03/03/03 Joint Elected Officials
>
Item 1: Key Urban Services/Jurisdictional Authority
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 12:16:06 PM
Creation date
2/27/2009 8:57:16 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
3/3/2009
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
ATTACHMENT C <br />“Little Look” Focus Group Summary of Key Ideas Regarding the Metro Plan <br /> <br />The following are the key ideas that emerged from the “Little Look” Metro Plan focus <br />group survey conducted with the Lane County, Springfield and Eugene elected officials in <br />2007. These areas of agreement have relevancy for the JEO Work Group as they move <br />forward: <br /> <br />? <br />It is important to continue to meet collaboratively and to have productive <br /> <br />conversations about land use planning issues. <br />? <br />Jurisdictions must focus on the benefits of collaborative land use planning, not just <br /> <br />the burdens. <br />? <br />There are benefits for the region by providing some collaborative opportunities to <br /> <br />explore the complexities of land use planning. <br />? <br />A collaborative review should support citizens, elected officials and the regional <br /> <br />needs. <br /> <br />? <br />The principle of collaboration that is central to the Metro Plan is still desirable in <br /> <br />most areas. <br />? <br />The Metro Plan is a long-range policy document that provides a framework for more <br /> <br />detailed refinement plans. <br />? <br />The Metro Plan should be reviewed collaboratively, as parts of it seem outdated or <br /> <br />too restrictive. <br />? <br />The Metro Plan is less relevant today and could warrant some further collaborative <br /> <br />review. <br />? <br />The Metro Plan could better meet the current and future needs in the areas of <br /> <br />housing, buildable lands and UGB’s. <br /> <br />? <br />A balanced, fair, coordinated and comprehensive land use planning system is <br /> <br />desirable. <br />? <br />Collaborative planning and dialogue can improve trust, communication and develop <br /> <br />stronger relationships. <br />? <br />Eugene and Springfield are the logical providers of services accommodating urban <br /> <br />levels of development within the UGB. <br />? <br />Decisions regarding land use planning should be based on knowledge and clear <br /> <br />information. <br />? <br />State and local governments must continue to balance the common good and local <br /> <br />needs. <br />? <br />All stakeholders should be able to have healthy discussions together, even when there <br /> <br />are differing opinions. <br />? <br />Citizen involvement is vital to the land use process. <br /> <br />? <br />Land use planning and economic planning should go hand in hand. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />LCOG: L:\CITY COUNTY PLANNING\METRO\LITTLE LOOK\LITTLE LOOK BULLETS #2 EDITED.DOC Last Saved: February 24, 2009 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.