Item 1: TransPlan and Metro Plan Amendments

Home Browse Search

Mr. Carroll closed the public hearing for the City of Eugene. He asked if there was a reason to keep the record open. Mr. Mott saw no legal reason to keep the record open if commissioners needed no additional informa- tion. Mr. Mott addressed the concerns raised by Mr. Farthing. Question: What happened if the cities of Eugene and Springfield did not complete the requirement for H.B. 3337? Answer: Ms. Jerome responded the statute did not specific a remedy so it would be the standard remedy under the law, which staff believed would be for someone to file a writ in Circuit Court to make the cities comply. She added that everyone was on track to complete the work and staff had every reason to believe both jurisdictions would comply with H.B. 3337 within the timeframe. Question: What did the term “urban transition area” mean? Answer:Existing Proposed Plan Text Referring to the handout entitled , Mr. Mott explained staff was “recommending the tables included in the handout with figures for each of the years be- tween 2030 and 2035 to facilitate the completion of these projects without need to make addition- al amendments to the Metro Plan text”, as noted on the handout. He noted the term Metro Urban Area was used on the handout rather than Urban Transition Area. Metro Urban Area referred to the area between a land area between the city limits and the UGB. PSU had developed popula- tion figures for the Metro Urban Areas. Staff was proposing that the term Urban Transition Area be replaced with the term Metro Urban Area. Mr. Howe explained that there was a TransPlan RTP requirement that would be off by five years. Thus, the contract with PSU covered an additional five years. Question: What did “In the event that either city needs to provide a forecast for a planning period that begins after 2010, that city shall determine the 20 year forecast by adding 20 percent of the 2030- 2035 total population increment for each year beyond 2030” refer to? Answer: Mr. Mott explained the 20 percent solution referred to in the text “In the event that ei- ther city needs to provide a forecast for a planning period that begins after 2010, that city shall determine the 20 year forecast by adding 20 percent of the 2030-2035 total population increment for each year beyond 2030” referred to the mathematical formula representing five years, and al- locating 20 percent to each of the years. Although PSU would have addressed the mathematics differently, the 20 percent solution proposed by staff was reasonable. Question: What caused the change in the Metro Plan population figure of 286,000? Answer: Mr. Mott said the 286,000 figure did go away. That population forecast was used dur- ing periodic review in 1995 for a 20 year plan. The planning horizon was changing beyond 2015, and new projections were being used. Question: Related to Goal 14 findings. MINUTES—Joint Planning Commissions— September 1, 2009 Page 6 City of Eugene, City of Springfield, Lane County