My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 2A - Minutes Approval
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2004
>
CCAgenda-06/14/04Mtg
>
Item 2A - Minutes Approval
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 12:23:21 PM
Creation date
6/10/2004 3:20:18 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
6/14/2004
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
35
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
perhaps a streamlined minor Metro Plan amendment process might be needed. He said that staff did not <br />want Mr. Kloos' clients to be in the position of seeking a Metro Plan amendment in such cases. <br /> <br />Ms. Fitch requested a staff response to Ms. Cuellar's testimony regarding the statutory requirement for a <br />20-year land supply, and if the requirement existed, why it was not being fulfilled. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey recalled the Eugene council's discussion about the switching land inside and outside of the <br />UGB to accommodate a new City park and asked how that topic related to the discussion at hand. Mr. <br />Yeiter said the area under discussion was currently in the urban reserves and did not meet the current <br />State rules for those reserves. He had considered making a recommendation to the council to retain the <br />reserve, but the State priorities for where the reserve could be expanded were very specific. The top <br />priority was for reserves adopted prior to the rule, which Eugene's did not meet. The State also stipulated <br />that such expansion would not occur on prime agricultural land, which some of the land in question was. <br />He said he would do additional research to determine what could be accomplished inside of periodic <br />review. <br /> <br />Ms. Fitch asked what goals took priority. She suggested the lack of a 20-year land supply would mean <br />the community was out-of-compliance with State laws. Ms. Heinkel said the community was required to <br />have a 20-year land supply at the time of periodic review, or during a legislative review of the UGB. She <br />said that the three jurisdictions had completed the Residential Lands Study as part of periodic review. <br />She said the urban reserves were not related to the supply of land inside the UGB because of their <br />location and because they were designed to accommodate land needs beyond the 20-year horizon. <br /> <br />Mr. Dwyer determined from Ms. Heinkel that through the periodic review process, the three jurisdictions <br />will have completed the metropolitan portion of the National Resources Study. She indicated that <br />jurisdiction-specific work remained to be completed, and that effort was underway. <br /> <br />Responding to a question from Ms. Taylor, Ms. Heinkel indicated a written response regarding the <br />testimony on the Willamette Greenway Study would be provided to all the elected officials. <br /> <br /> Ms. Morrison, seconded by Mr. Dwyer, moved third reading of the <br /> ordinance. The motion passed unanimously. <br /> <br />The meeting adjourned at 8:01 p.m. <br /> <br /> (Recorded by Kimberly Young) <br /> <br />MINUTES--Joint Elected Officials February 10, 2004 Page <br />10 <br /> Lane County, Eugene, and Springfield <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.