06/22/1987 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

arbi trary. He said the property is unique and the size should not be limited in the proposal. He said the property owners did not suggest that the entire e 700 acres be included in the urban growth boundary. Ms. Schue said the council has received much new information recently about industrial land. The counci 1 learned the inventory is less usable than intended because of an excess of special light industrial land. Consequently, the community should review the industrial land inventory and adjust it during the Metro Plan Update. She said Springfield officials have indicated that opportunities for industrial development should be balanced between Eugene and Springfield and they requested that the proposed amendment be considered during the Metro Plan Update. Although the Awbrey-Meadowview site owners are aggressive, good at marketing, and care about their investment, that is no reason for considering the amendment before the Metro Plan Update when all the industrial inventory will be reviewed. Mr. Miller said the community's efforts to recruit certain kinds of industries have not been very successful. He said about 40 percent of the people in the community are underemployed and industries that will pay good wages should be recruited. Those kinds of industries require sites the community does not have. He said industries that will spoil the envi ronment should not be recruited. He said processes take time and consideration of the proposed amendment should proceed. Ms. Wooten said she discussed the change in needs for special light industrial sites and heavy industrial sites with Ms. Dietmeyer. Ms. Wooten said she looks forward to reconsidering the industrial lands within the urban growth boundary during the Metro Plan Update. She said there is a need for the kind e of jobs that heavy industries create. She said the Metro Plan Update begins July 1 and she would like to evaluate the Awbrey-Meadowview property with other industrial properties within the urban growth boundary before the community IIleapfrogs" to provide services to industrial sites. She said she supports the Metropolitan Partnership. She also supports a holistic approach in considering expansion of the urban growth boundary. Mr. Bennett said he agrees with Mr. Rutan. Mr. Bennett said the Awbrey- Meadowview site is unique and much information has been provided to councilors about it. He said the railroad access to the site is important. He said he is interested in how the Awbrey-Meadowview site is marketed and how it competes with other industrial sites in the community. He supports considering the amendment separate from the Metro Pl an Update. He said changes in the existing inventory and the marketability of sites are important but other sites do not have access to two railroads. He said an analysis of existing industrial sites should be separate from consideration of expanding the urban growth boundary to include the Awbrey/Meadowview site. He said he is not sure how much the urban growth boundary should be expanded but what can be justified to the Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) should be considered. Mr. Holmer said he expected the Metro Plan to be updated two-and-a-half years after its acknowledgment. However, the Mid-Period Review was done then and the Alternative Industrial Growth Areas Study was undertaken. The study e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 22, 1987 Page 6