Laserfiche WebLink
<br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Mr. Wood said even the Eugene Planning Commission, which had by a split <br />vote supported the amendment, realized that demonstrated need for the <br />redesignation could not be proven. He cited a Planning Commission letter <br />of findings dated November 24, 1987, "An analysis of the Metro <br />Partnership data shows that only one firm wanting more than 40 acres with <br />rail access chose not to come here because of site availability. That <br />firm would not fit under the special heavy industrial description in any <br />case. There is no evidence that rail access was a critical location <br />criterion for any heavy manufacturing firms locating in this region in <br />the last five years. The desire to provide a variety of industrial sites <br />is given as a primary justification for expanding onto agricultural <br />soils. Obviously no specific industries are in mind, since the ones we <br />have targeted or are cited as growth industries in the west don't fit <br />under the special heavy industrial designation." <br /> <br />Mr. Wood said the concept of speculative demand as a basis for land-use <br />allocation was contrary to the requirements of Statewide Goals 2 and 14, <br />requiring planning decisions to be based on facts, including trends in <br />population, rates, and kinds of development of industrial lands within <br />the metropolitan area urban growth boundary and the nature of demand for <br />commercial and industrial lands statewide. Unfortunately under the <br />current amendment process, Mr. Wood said, all economic and non-economic <br />factors were not being seriously considered. He said objective proof of <br />need must be presented for sound plan revision, and that objective <br />evidence did not exist. <br /> <br />Mr. Wood said Eugene was preparing a feasibility study to analyze <br />development potential of the area around the airport, and it would be <br />premature to alter the Awbrey-Meadowview status until that study was <br />completed. Furthermore, he said, Eugene faced an imminent cut of $2.5 <br />million from the General Fund budget, and in view of that reality, it <br />would be completely unwarranted to invest between $5 million and $10 <br />million in the extension of urban services and road improvements to the <br />Awbrey-Meadowview site at taxpayer expense. IIHow in good faith, can <br />those in charge of the City's purse seriously contemplate investing vast <br />sums north of town when in the past few years, millions have been sunk <br />into the Willow Creek industrial area with little result?" he asked. Mr. <br />Wood said citizens had every right to be alarmed over the prospect of the <br />City spending millions of dollars to provide key urban services to the <br />site "to help generate healthy profit for the owners of the parcel..' He <br />said it appeared the City was caving in to political pressure exerted by <br />one man, Stub Stewart. He asked who ruled in Eugene--the law and the <br />citizens, or money? <br /> <br />Mr. Wood said claims that Eugene needed more parcels zoned for heavy <br />industry were based on flimsy evidence and only thinly veiled a <br />politically motivated favor for Mr. Stewart and other owners of the <br />property. He said the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area should not <br />abandon the comprehensive plan poliCies that emphasized attracting <br />non-polluting, light industrial development. He said an adequate supply <br />of industrial land already existed in the metro area for all kinds of <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council <br /> <br />February 8, 1988 <br /> <br />Page 7 <br />