01/12/1976 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

... that letters also"l1ave been received from interested neighborhood residents. Further, Council has received copy of the planning department response to Ms. Engelmann dated December 17, 1975, which states that the staff is not recom- m"eng,i,ng review of the zoning of the 40th and Donald area at ~is point. M:;;:;; &:ngelmann explained that she represents ci ti zens of the south hills area 'wli'o a.te objecting to location of the proposed Bi-Mart store in the Edgewood Shop- pirigCenter on the grounds that the shopping center should be C-l and not C-2. A Bi~Mart store would not be permitted in a C-l district. In addition, the code indicates neighborhood centers should have only neighborhood type retail stores, not; ,a Bi-Mart type that would bring customers from a large area. George Dawson, 190 East 47th Avenue, client of Ms. Engelmann, referred to his letter dated Dece~r 19 distributed to the Council outlining the arguments of the residents of the area, stating their position on rezoning, and calling for interim suspension of building pertnits. It is their belief, he said, that the center clearly is a neighborhood commercial center, that its size and character indicate it is not intended for ot:~er use though Mr. Saul of the planning depart- ment indicates it is the city's feeling that a Bi-Mart could b-e located there. Mr. Dawson added that a Bi-Mart store quite likley would increase traffic and pollution and, in addition, may decrease use of that area by south Eugene residents. From a safety standpoint, he said, it seemes unwise because of schools in the immediate area. Furthermore, Mr. Dawson felt amendment to the 1990 Plan should be considered rather than amendment on a case-by-case basis. Therefore, he suggested the matter be set for public hearing and building permit issuance suspended pending a decision. Linda Finlay, area resident, stated that the impact of the Bi-Mart store on the Edgewood neighborhood would be substantial. She raised questions about whether local people would be hired and also whether convenient parking would be provided. . She added th?,it about 1000 sig1?atures had been obtained from area. residents who 'were opposed to location of the store in the Center. Mr. Saul, planner, explained the issue is whether the Bi-Mart store or a similar store conforms to the 1990 Plan and the Plan's treatment of the Edgewood area as neighborhood commercial. The 1990 Plan was' adopted in 1972, he said, and the basic zoning ordinance provisions, still relied upon, were adopted in 1968 before the various commercial categories were adopted. He said it is difficult to look at the land use element of the General Plan and translate it into a particular type~of zoning, calling for one particular type of store. The other question being raised, Mr. Saul added, is whether the city wishes to wtihhold building permits and whether it wishes to initiate rezoning of the center in question. He said staff advice:"would be to retain present zoning for now and not to withhold building per- mits for this particular location. Planning feels there are remedies available' ahd that the appropriate position would be to rezone only if ordered by the court. Jim Spickerman, city prosecutor, explained that the question is whether the Council should give direction on building permits and zone changes, or whether t~ Council should let the Edgewood residents file a law suit. He added that t~e interpretations given by Ms. Engelmann and Mr. Saul would not be clear issues. Ma'i:Jager said that if the Council directs the city to withheld building permits in the area it would be subject to suit because, on the face, Bi-Mart location in the Center meets code requirements. Too, it would take the Planning Commission several months to work its way through the rezoning process. Councilman Murray wondered if one issue, then, is that the 1990 Plan does not clarify whether C-2 is or is not neighborhood commercial. Mr. Saul said he could hot really respond to that because the Plan does not talk about a specific zone but rather cites general divisions of commercial areas. The point being made by staff, he said, is that there,is a very arguable case as to whether a type of store SUCh as Bi-Mart can be cons~dered for neighborhood commercial use or com- 1/12/76- 2 4- .. . .