Ordinance No. 20437 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ATTACHMENT 5 The proposed countywide population forecasts from the small cities are included In Exhibit A' to the ordinance which includes separate forecasts for the dies of Eugene and Springfield. This exhibit reflects the recommendation of the Lane County Planning Commission. Findings addressing the relevant criteria are Included in Exhibftno' and Include documentation reflecting the methodology and information supporting the forecasts presented by the small cities. Alternatively, there is an Exhibit 'K and SO that provides the methodology and findings for the PSU population forecasts that have been included in the small city PAPA record by action of the Board of Commissioners In May 2009. Previous drafts of the PSU forecasts were provided to the LCPC and give the Board additional evidence for consideration. In addition, the Board requested analysis and preparation of appropriate forecasts for the Eugene- SpdngWd urban area to reflect allocation of forecasted population east and west of interstate 6(1-5). These forecasts are included In the Exhibit W attached to this memorandum. F. Alternatives/Options Option J. Approve the Ordinance as presented. Dton 2 Revise the Ordinance as directed by the Board and retum for approval of the revised Ordinance on a data certain set by the Board. An alternative Exhibli'A' that reflects the PSU population forecast Is provided for the Board's consideration. op tion 3. Db not approve the Ordinance and deny the application. Innate a Post Acknowledgernent Plan Amendment for consideration of the PSU population forecast as 2. i . stand alone amendment and schedule hearings for that alternative forecast to be considered. IV. TIMINGAMPLEMEFITATiON The PSU contracted study has been ongoing since the Board actor In August 2008. The cities subrrrftied the application in June 2008 and need a decision by the Board In order to proceed with long range planning activities that depend on population forecasts. V. RECOMNiENIDATION The Lana County Planning Commission hold a work session on January 6, 2009. Public hearings were held on two dates, January B, 2009 and March 3, 2009. Commission deliberations were held on March 17, 2009. The Planning Commission recommendation of approval to the Board was'not unanimous, it was a'6.2 vote. There was extensive discussion regarding the eptiorib foj�fl coordinated population forecast for the entire county and all twelve urban areas. Soma planning commissioners considered forwafd'ng a'no optniW recommendation that would urge the Board to look closely at the numbers the cigrs are providing, consider the reasonablerese standard In thie OAR, and consider the Safe Harbor option provided by state low. The planning ccmmissioriars also noted It Ie important to understand that the dedsiori Has with the Board, despite any CiWs desires to have approval of the numbers they have put forth.and it was Important to move forward to be in compliance with applicable state laws requiring the coordinated forecast it is ultimately the Lane County - Ctt5mm No. PA 1=1 in The MaW brAman *Mm L.aiu Courtly Mimi C=p're5e WwPhn (RCP)7o 6tdudeACoardi WW PUP w na rLacarpieta eachumanmaawcumtnaCMM .NO AdWftsage AnaSewrOMdes.. GOMM Papa e ATTACHMENT 5`4e.