My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 2: Metro Plan Work Plan Report
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2010
>
CC Agenda - 06/17/10 Joint Elected Officials
>
Item 2: Metro Plan Work Plan Report
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/11/2010 2:23:11 PM
Creation date
6/11/2010 1:03:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
6/17/2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
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
<br />JEO <br />OINT LECTED FFICIALS <br />AIS <br />GENDA TEM UMMARY <br /> <br /> <br />Metro Plan Work Plan Report <br /> <br /> <br />Meeting Date: June 17, 2010 Agenda Item Number: 2 <br /> Contact: Greg Mott, Lisa Gardner, Kent Howe <br /> <br /> <br />BACKGROUND <br /> <br />On June 1, 2009 the Joint Elected Officials (JEO) directed staff from Eugene, Springfield and <br />Lane County to develop a Metro Plan work plan, including timeline, cost estimates and <br />implications for specific changes to the Metro Plan as recommended by the JEO subcommittee. <br />The JEO recommendation stated that changes to the Metro Plan should address: <br /> <br /> <br />a.Overarching policies that identify and address regional issues. <br /> <br />b.Policies that allow for individual refinement plans for Eugene and Springfield to address <br />jurisdiction-specific issues. <br /> <br />c.Adjustments to the Metro Plan boundary and text to address jurisdictional specific issues <br />arising in the urbanizable areas and the area outside the urban growth boundary. <br /> <br />d.A dispute resolution process that reflects the changes described in a-c. <br /> <br />ISSUE STATEMENT <br /> <br />Springfield, Lane County and Eugene are about 80% complete with conceptual/draft language <br />proposals amending the Metro Plan and addressing the JEO recommendations listed above. As <br />the HB 3337 and JEO recommendations work has progressed, it has become apparent (as noted <br />by DLCD testimony in the record of the Springfield-Lane County planning commission hearing) <br />that additional Metro Plan text conforming language amendments will be necessary in order to <br />comprehensively address the changes brought about by separate urban growth boundaries for <br />each city. Evaluation of the extent of potential conforming language amendments has revealed a <br />third layer of necessary Metro Plan amendments: housekeeping edits prompted by previous <br />legislation (i.e.. abolishment of the Lane County Local Government Boundary Commission). <br />Staff is working to coordinate this work, which includes: <br /> <br />? <br /> <br />Clarifying the implications of the overlap of JEO recommendations, HB 3337 <br />conforming language and housekeeping edits; <br />? <br /> <br />Determining timing of adoption of the HB 3337 amendments by the two cities and co- <br />adoption by the county, JEO recommendation-related amendments by all three <br />jurisdictions; and review and adoption of the housekeeping edits. <br /> <br />Staff intends to provide an overall plan that addresses these issues to the JEO at their September <br />30, 2010, meeting. <br /> <br /> <br />Page 1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.