EXHIBITS Page 184 <br />Mr. Goodwin stated that actions of the Lane County and Springfield planning commissions in 2011 <br />and 2013 established a Springfield UGB; that UGB was consistent with the adopted 2004 Metro Plan <br />Diagram and subsequent amendments. He said the issue raised by Mr. Kloos was a matter for Eugene <br />and Lane County as the property was not within the City of Springfield. <br />In response to a question from Mr. Peterson, Ms. King said that even though the proposed Metro Plan <br />Diagram was accurate for Springfield staff recommended continuing with the existing 2004 version of <br />the Metro Plan Diagram to avoid confusion or multiple diagrams. <br />Mr. James determined there was no one else wishing to testify. <br />Mr. Kirschenmann, seconded by Mr. Moe, moved to close the public hearing <br />and record for the Springfield Planning Commission. The motion passed <br />unanimously, 5:0. <br />Mr. Duncan, seconded by Mr. Jaworski, moved to close the public hearing <br />and the record for the Eugene Planning Commission. The motion passed <br />unanimously, 5:0. <br />Mr. Hledik, seconded by Mr. Conrad, moved to close the public hearing and <br />the record for the Lane County Planning Commission. The motion passed <br />unanimously, 8:0. <br />Mr. James observed that amending Chapter IV of the Metro Plan last year was a difficult and <br />challenging process. He supported the current proposal and commended the efforts of staff. <br />Mr. James, Mr. Sisson and Mr. Randall determined that members of all three planning commissions <br />were in agreement to conduct joint rather than separate deliberations. <br />Mr. Hledik commended staff for its management of the process. He felt that the findings were <br />complete, accurate, comprehensive and thorough. <br />Mr. Kirschenmann complimented the staffs work and concurred with its recommendations. <br />Mr. James determined there were no further comments or questions from Springfield Planning <br />Commission members and called for a motion. <br />Mr. Nelson, seconded by Mr. Moe, moved to recommend to the Springfield <br />City Council approval of the amendments to the Eugene-Springfield <br />Metropolitan Area General Plan allowing for the adoption of the city-specific <br />comprehensive plans and policies, with the following conditions: Metro Plan <br />Diagram and Metro Plan Boundary were to be left out (Attachment 4, pages <br />1-2 and Attachment 5, pages 1-2). The motion passed unanimously, 5:0. <br />Mr. Randall determined there were no further comments or questions from Eugene Planning <br />Commission members and called for a motion. <br />Laurel Ridge Record (Z 15-5) Page 747 <br />