Laserfiche WebLink
<br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Mr. Johnson added that Mr. Moyer has been a good citizen and has provided <br />support to the economy and public of Eugene. He stressed that the City of <br />Eugene has a strong commitment to existing industries and that the proposed <br />rezoning would be proper application of City policy. He also stated that the <br />rezoning would present a clear direction to industries relocating into Eugene. <br /> <br />In response to a question, Mr. Croteau stated that the Moyer property was zoned <br />M-3 prior to the rezoning to 1-2. He stated that the property was realigned to <br />industrial districts several years ago and that the theater operation was <br />established in 1969 with a drive-in theater. He added that these uses were <br />allowable in an industrial district. In response to another question, he stated <br />that a supermarket or drugstore would be allowed in an 1-2 district in an <br />industrial park. In regard to property inventories, Mr. Croteau stated that <br />only vacant properties were added to the inventories. <br /> <br />In response to a question regarding other rezonings in the area, Ms. Jones <br />stated that the R.A. Chambers and the JB2 properties had been rezoned to the <br />east of the Moyer property. She said staff had looked at the strip of com- <br />mercial land along West 11th Avenue and the discussion had been to limit the <br />depth of the commerci~ strip to one tax lot. Mr. Croteau added that any use <br />that was lawful in the 1-2 or 1-3 zoning districts could continue. He stated <br />that some non-industrial uses had been ~moved after the rezoning and some <br />commercial uses that are auxiliary to industrial uses in industrial parks were <br />allowed--convenience stores, banks, barb~r shops, restaurants, and engineer/ <br />architect offices. <br /> <br />Mr. Barkman stated that he saw a distinction between one tax lot deep which <br />defines the limit of strip commercial and a commercial node, stating that the <br />Fred Meyer property was more than one tax lot deep. Mr. Thwing added that the <br />commercial properties east of Seneca Road were developed despite opposition of <br />the industrial property owners. In response to a question on the consequences <br />and the impact on Seneca Road of placing 11+ acres into retail use like the Fred <br />Meyer property, Mr. Croteau said that staff was recommending site review pro- <br />cedures to address that issue. He said that Seneca Road had recently been <br />improved, with improved signalization on Seneca and at the western extention of <br />the Fred Meyer property. He said staff feels that Seneca Road could handle <br />either commercial or industrial traffic. <br /> <br />Mr. Obie stated that he saw the issue as one of land use rather than economic <br />development. He said the present business could still expand without the <br />proposed rezoning. He said that everyone agreed that a boundary must be set for <br />the commercial node but thus far the boundary had not been set. Mr. Obie felt <br />that the boundary might be better drawn to the south of the existing theaters. <br />He added that he thought that the property near 7th Avenue is appropriate for <br />industrial use. He said the City must be reponsible on how the issue is <br />handled. He did not want to see 7th Avenue become like West 11th Avenue. <br />He commented that the request would increase commercial use in the area by 3.5 <br />acres, a size comparable to the Fred Meyer property and the market areas at 29th <br />Avenue and Willamette Street and 40th Avenue and Donald Street. He said the <br />City has added commercial zoning on West 11th Avenue, yet it is now time to be <br />responsible for protecting industrial development in West Eugene. <br /> <br />MINUTES--City Council/Planning Commission <br /> <br />January 18, 1984 <br /> <br />Page 3 <br />