02/14/1979 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e Bob Bolton, 811 Lariat Drive, expressed curiosity as to the City's findings that this particular application could be precedent-setting action. He noted approval had been given to a privately-owned baseball park which included construction of bleachers in closer proximity to the airport. He felt the real issue is the wording of the AV zoning and what types of industry qualify along the airport road. Secondly, he noted the Airport Commission, to his knowledge, had never considered what property is involved in the airport expansion. Harold Rutherford spoke as a private citizen and not a Lane County Commissioner. He asked if the city airport were City owned and within the city limits. Stan Long, City Attorney's office, said because of State law and Charter provisions, the airport is treated as an area over which extraterritorial powers were exerted by the city. Mr. Rutherford continued that the Council should be addressing these problems through the Constitution. The City has policies, and if it wants to control this piece of property, then it should pay for that property and compensate the property owner. He felt the City was taking away the right of the individual regarding this particular property, and that policy could extend to others in the area. If the City wants to control it, then the City should take over the property, maintain it, and pay taxes on it. Mr. Delay reiterated the City's position was to try to clarify the existing plans, policies, and zoning now in place, and not to encourage any new policies. Mr. Rutherford suggested the City's approach was a subterfuge by using a zoning policy as a way to accomplish means other than under due processes of the con- stitution. e Ray Bond, Rt. 1, Box 706, spoke for ,E. O. Drake, who owns the particular property in question. If the City wishes to control the property, then it should buy the property from Mr. Drake and compensate him for it. Mr. Bond felt the first impr'ession of persons arriving at Eugene through the airport is important, and described the first half-mile as he perceived peoples' first impressions. He felt this office building would be a definite asset. He noted the valuable agricultural land in the area. Richard Stokes, Jr., 2947 Tomahawk Lane, did not believe the Council had an adequate definition of the long-range plans for land in the airport vicinity, nor how a conditional use permit is in conflict with those plans. Gerald Attig, 2101 West 10th, noted his clients who owned 150 acres in the area were very concerned about this issue. Ray Fechtel, 72 West Broadway, represen- ted owners of 92 acres in the area. They oppose any policy change in the present zoning that might limit uses that could be made of their property. Dave Van Fossen, 2300 Oakmont Way, represented Bonney, Bennett, & Peters. He felt adequate notice had not been given to the public or property owners of this meeting regarding a possible zone change and said these are requirements neces- sitated for zoning meetings. He questioned the Council about how much time they had spent reading the Airport Master Plan, the 1990 Plan Update in its relation- ship to the airport, and studying the 1990 Plan Appendix A detailing uses in AV zoning. He distributed to Council page 35 of the 19~0 Plan as it exists today with Appendix A and definition of the AV Zoning District. He said the total e 2/14179--5 87