Item 2A - Minutes Approval - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Springfield had declined to involve itself in Eugene's 6th/7th widening project, the Lane County board had inserted itself in the ambulance district issue faced by Eugene and used its veto power to affect events. He thought the fact one jurisdiction could veto a major project in another jurisdiction was a serious problem. Mr. Moe pointed out that Eugene-Springfield was the only Oregon community with such a planning pact and advocated for each city to move forward with its own general plan to recognize the uniqueness of each community. James Seaberry, 3294 Stark Street, Eugene, did not understand the prohibition on special districts now included in the plan. He invited the elected officials to contact him so he could share his thoughts with them. Rob Handy, 455-1/2 River Road, Eugene, spoke of his concerns regarding development pressures in the Willamette Greenway, and asked the elected officials to complete the Willamette Greenway Study to demonstrate the community's concern about the river. He said the plan was otherwise inconsistent with Goal 15. Mark Rabinowitz, 28549 Suthem Lane, Eugene, supported the removal of the urban reserves from the Metro Plan Diagram. However, he objected that the plan appeared to be a lot of polices without any follow-through. As an example, he cited policies related to conservation and what he considered a contrary decision to construct the West Eugene Park. He said the parkway should be canceled as it was his opinion the projections about the number of cars it would carry were exaggerated. Mr. Rabinowitz shared his personal philosophy about the use of petroleum products with the elected officials, which he believed represented sufficient reason to revise the plan to prepare for a time when petroleum products were more expensive. John Louch, 715 West 4t~ Avenue, Eugene, representing Eugene School District 4J. He supported the removal of the Public Lands designation for surplus property in Santa Clara owned by the school district. He said the district was attempting to rezone the property in advance of marketing it. The property was currently zoned Public Lands/Neighborhood Commercial. It was adjacent to neighborhood commercial uses. Mr. Louch noted the staff suggestion the designation would revert to low-density residential if designated, and asked that the property be redesignated for commercial use instead. He pointed out that the current diagram was from the 1982 plan, and it showed an undefined amount of commercial property along River Road. He believed that was a sensible conclusion given the exposure of the property to the intersection of River Road and Hunsaker Lane. He said that more commercial land, rather than less, would provide the district with greater flexibility and maximize the revenue from the property's sale. Jim Spickerman, 975 Oak Street, Suite 800, represented School District 4J. He echoed Mr. Louch's request for the Santa Clara property owned by the school district as well as for other district-owned properties. He suggested the elected officials could make the adjustment at this time, and recommended it rely on the adopted 1982 Metro Plan Diagram. Steve Ward, 84434 Pheasant Lane, Pleasant Hill, expressed concern about the removal of the urban reserves and questioned the adequacy of the developable land remaining in the community. He said the removal of the reserves would make it more difficult for him to annex the property he owned in that area. He believed the value of his land would be diminished as a result. Mr. Ward concurred with the written submission of the Lane County Homebuilders Association. He said the land available for development should be increased. MINUTES--Joint Elected Officials February 10, 2004 Page 7 Lane County, Eugene, and Springfield