Item 2A - Minutes Approval - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

process at the recommendation of legal counsel. A new word changes were made to Exhibit B that were informally agreed to by those commissions. Ms. Heinkel called the elected officials' attention to Exhibits A (Metro Plan Housekeeping Revisions, Other Text Amendments), Exhibit B (Metropolitan Natural Resources Study), and Exhibit C (Metro Plan Diagram Changes), which reflected the changes being proposed. She identified those work tasks that would be the subject of the public hearing, and noted that Lane County would hold a public hearing immediately after on its riparian regulations. Ms. Wiederhold provided further detail regarding Exhibit B. She described the various elements of the Natural Resources Study and noted the associated subtasks. She summarized the key amendments proposed to Chapter III-C of the Metro Plan. Mr. Yeiter provided further detail on the revisions to the Metro Plan Diagram. He noted that the LCOG RLID system provided the mapping before the elected officials, and allowed the development of a more detailed diagram. He briefly noted changes being proposed to the diagram, including the removal of the urban reserves. Mr. Metzer briefly reviewed revisions being proposed to the Springfield side of the Metro Plan Diagram, reporting that change were being proposed to reflect actual and future uses. Ms. Heinkel called attention to new replacement page II-G-l, distributed to the elected officials. She emphasized the diagram was transitioning to a parcel-specific map. Ms. Heinkel said the purpose of the meeting was for the elected officials to hear public testimony on the plan text and diagram amendments. She said that following the hearing, staff would respond to the public testimony. The three elected bodies would take separate action, with tentative action set for the Eugene council on March 10; the Springfield council on March 15; and the Lane County board on March 16. She said that, following action by the elected officials, the completed work tasks would be submitted to the Department of Land Conservation and Development for acknowledgement. Ms. Heinkel anticipated the region would continue metropolitan planning efforts that met the needs of the three jurisdictions. Mayor Torrey called for comments and questions. Mr. Kelly commended the reorganization of the document. He requested that the Eugene council be provided with copies of the Eugene Planning Commission's minutes reflecting its discussion on the topics before the elected officials prior to the work session at which the council would take action. Responding to a question fi.om Mr. Kelly about the tense used in the findings associated with the new Environmental Resource Element ("Lane County, Springfield, and Eugene jointly completed the Goal 5 requirements for the area between the UGB and the plan boundary"), Ms. Wiederhold explained that the text was written as though the elected officials had acted. When and if the officials adopted the findings, that statement would be a fact. Responding to a question fi.om Mr. Kelly about the two Willamette Greenway policies proposed for deletion, Ms. Heinkel explained that both policies speak to the implementation of State Goal 15, and they were replaced by a new Finding 11 that spoke to how that implementation would be accomplished. MINUTES--Joint Elected Officials February 10, 2004 Page 2 Lane County, Eugene, and Springfield