Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> ~.._--- <br /> 2) whether approval of the appeal would have an adverse impact on adjacent, <br /> e residentially zoned property. Section 8.800 defines practical difficulty as <br /> follows: "A practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship may result <br /> from the size, shape, or dimensions of a site or the locations of existing <br /> structures thereon, from geographic, topographic, or other physical conditions <br /> on the site or in the immediate vicinity, or from population densities, street <br /> locations, or traffic conditions in the immediate vicinity." Pac ifi c Cascade <br /> Corporation believes there is a legitimate practical difficulty since there is a <br /> substantial grove of trees located on the west portion of the site and the City <br /> has previously determined that tree preservation is important in the site <br /> review process. The corporation studied many site designs in developing this <br /> shopping center on this property. The current site design allows maximum <br /> preservation of existing vegetation by the creation of a U-shaped building <br /> configuration with the main tree masts located centrally between the buildings. <br /> This was the only configuration that provided sufficient parking adjacent to <br /> each business and still allowed preservation of a significant amount of vegeta- <br /> tion on the site. Preservation of the trees has resulted in the building being <br /> oriented with the rear or side building walls facing the exterior property <br /> boundary. If secondary identity signs are not permitted on rear or side walls, <br /> it will be impossible for people traveling on Beltline or Delta to identify the <br /> businesses in the Delta Oaks Shopping Center. The only access to the Delta Oaks <br /> Shopping Center is provided by Green Acres Road, but most customers will arrive <br /> by means of either Delta Highway or Beltline Road. This would make it extremely <br /> difficult if not, impossible for the public to identify the major stores within <br /> this shopping center. The corporation believes that the difficulty stems from <br /> the existing physical conditions on the site and is magnified by street locations <br /> in the immediate vicinity. Mr. Saul stated that the corporation believes the <br /> e council should consider the fact that the proposed Jafco Store is located <br /> immediately east of Delta Highway, south of Greenacres Road. The area south of <br /> this interchange is residentially zoned but since it is part of the gravel pond <br /> owned by Lane County it would never be developed for residential use. Therefore, <br /> no secondary wall sign would have an adverse impact upon that area. The Handyman <br /> Store located immediately south of Greenacres Road is the closest to residential- <br /> ly zoned property, being approximately 950 feet away. It is, however, screened <br /> by existing trees from the residentially zoned property to the south. The GI <br /> Joe's Store would be separated from residentially zoned property by approximately <br /> 400 feet but the effect of secondary wall signing for this structure is mitigated <br /> or eliminated since: the proposed sign would be a deep blue color restricting <br /> glare and color transmission. The GI Joe's Store sign is located north of the <br /> eastern portion of the Delta-Beltline interchange, is illuminated with overhead <br /> high-intensity lights and has a far greater illumination than what would be <br /> produced by secondary wall signing. Mr. Saul further stated that Pacific <br /> Cascade Corporation is willing to limit the size of these secondary wall signs <br /> to one-half the maximum area permitted, or to lesser amounts if the council <br /> deems that necessary. <br /> Don Cole, Cal Young Neighborhood Association, said that they have no adverse <br /> objectlon to this secondary signing. This would meet the criteria of the City <br /> Code and the relief is necessary and reasonable. They would accept any necessary <br /> size limitations but this is a question of identity as noted in Eugene Code <br /> 8.625. He distributed photos of the site to the councilors. <br /> e <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 13, 1981 Page 8 <br />