04/23/1980 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e 1966. The zone is contrary to the plan designation of the Willamette- long Tom Plan. In June 1979, the County Planning Commission looked at special light industrial zoning at the board's request. The City was concerned and communicated with the County. August 15, 1979, the City Council approved a report to the Lane County Board of Commissioners expressing their concern. On April 2, 1980, the board approved changing the designation in the area to special industrial designa- tion. That designation becomes effective upon the adoption of zoning to implement the intent of that approval. Mr. Chenkin reviewed the concerns and objections. He said staff does not think that there is a need for such industrial zoning in that subarea. If there is a need for this kind of industrial development in the metropolitan area, it should be met inside the urban growth boundary. The City has recently designated several light industrial sites. All industrial sites have been over allocated. Staff feels the context of this should be resolved in the update of the Metropolitan Plan process. That concern has been expressed to the board. The 1,800 acres is outside any urban growth boundary. That could be a violation of Goal 14 of the LCDC Rules. It prescribes criteria for drawing urban growth boundaries and designations that should have urban use within the boundaries. Staff feels there is a violation of LCDC Goal 11. Key urban services are not available to the 1,800 acres (also, contrary to the 1990 Plan). It is against the Metropolitan Plan Update. It is a violation of Goals 2 and 3, agricultural goals. If council approves, staff will carry these concerns to the Land Use Board of Appeals. Mr. Chenkin referred to the letter from Harold Rutherford asking the City to proceed slowly as well as the Mayor's reply expressing some of the City's concerns, economic development strategies, and their offer to work with the Lane County Board of Commissioners on the update process. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. lieuallen, to appeal lane County's decision regarding the Industrial Triangle to the Land Use Board of Appeals. Motion carried unanimously. B. Drake land Partition Approval (memo distributed)--Mr. Chenkin reviewed the memorandum. This parcel is the last partition of four. It is five acres. The concerns are that the partition is for a small-scale sheep operation that could be carried on by a rental agreement or a lease rather than irrevocable partition. It will encourage non-rural development. It is an AV zone. It can be used for non-agricultural if airport-related. There is no minimum level of urban services (Goals 11 and 14). There is no conceptual plan for these partitions. In light of the Metropolian Plan Update and the planning near the Airport, the long-term effects on the Airport would be deleterious. He recommended an appeal. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Liueallen, to appeal Lane County's decision regarding the Drake land partition approval to the land Use Board of Appeals. Motion carried unanimously. e e 4/23/80--3