Contusion, controversy continue
on Valley River Center rezoning
By ANN BECKER
Of the Emerald
Confusion and controversy raged Thursday
night in City Council chambers, as the council and
city planners listened to arguments concerning a
proposed expansion of Valley River Center.
Valley River wants 21 acres west of the shopping
center (and lying north of the Willamette River) to
be rezoned for commercial use, so that a new
Montgomery Ward store can be added.
Downtown merchants, various civic groups and
city planners have opposed this rezoning, saying,
among other things, that it transfers one more store
out of the downtown area to Valley River. This, they
claim, is contrary to the city’s long range planning
study, the 1990 Plan.
This rezoning question is considerably com
plicated by the fact that both planners and council
are trying to evaluate the case using brand-new
criteria.
The Fasano decision, made by the Oregon
Supreme Court last spring, lays down new rules
concerning zoning changes.
It changes the city council’s role from a
legislative to a more judicial role.
According to the Fasano decision, the group
desiring a change in zoning must come before the
council and prove with facts 1) that the zone change
would fit into the long-range planning for the
community, 2) that the change would satisfy a
public need and 3) that the property in question is
better than any other property available that is
already zoned for that purpose.
This is what the advocates of the Valley River
expansion attempted to do Thursday for the third
time in five months.
vemon Cleaves, attorney for Valley River,
presented most of their arguments. He said the
proposed expansion of the shopping center is not
contrary to the 1990 Plan. He said that while some
people in the community feared that the downtown
area is being “transported parcel by parcel to the
shopping center” this fear is not applicable to the
situation. “The Montgomery Ward store in down
town Eugene will close,” he said, regardless of the
counceil’s decision. 1990 plan provided for other
properties in the city to be developed, not just the
downtown area. “You can’t pick one area and say
that it overrides the others.” he said, adding that to
say the development of Valley River couldn’t
continue was wrong, since the council had already
"committed themselves” by allowing the initial
shopping center to be built.
Gleaves also said that the land along the
riverbank would be preserved as the 1990 plan
advised and that Valley River would dedicate a bike
path there.
Cleaves said that the present transportation
situation would not be drastically affected. He said
that Valley River has consistently supported Lane
Mass Transit and has cooperated with them “in
every way possible.”
Gleaves concluded saying that Valley Rivers
case is logical since it directly abuts the present
shopping center. “This is not land scattering, and
certainly not speculation,” he said. He claimed that
the city council can’t deny Valley River’s request
because of the parking situation, because of the
recent approval of large free parking areas
downtown. “That wouldn’t be a consistent ap
plication,” he said. He admitted that the core area
is vital to Eugene, but said that “zoning must meet
regional as well as city needs.”
“This is not a downtown versus Valley River
fight,” Cleaves said. “Both areas can survive and
continue to compete.”
John Burgess, regional real estate manager for
Montgomery Ward, urged the council to “weigh the
long range value of their decision.” He said trying
to force Wards to stay downtown was “involuntary
servitude” and that the rezoning had “nothing to do
with whether Wards is in the downtown area or
not.” Relocation downtown is impossible, he
claimed, because of the high cost of property, the
high cost of construction and the sales volume
projection. He said that mass transit can’t be relied
upon and that at least a two story parking structure
was needed, which would be too expensive.
Brian Obie, head of the Lane County Planning
Commission, said he was not speaking for the
commission, but said that he felt the proposal was
not in conflict with the 1990 Plan. Developing Valley
River without allowing further expansion would be
“leading the applicant down the primrose path”
since Valley River is supposed to be a regional
shopping center.
Wards’ move, he said, is based on “economic
reality...core development can’t be forced—it can
only be nurtured and encouraged. It is our
responsibility to develop alternate areas, too,” he
said.
Van Herbert said the only reason the rezoning
was needed was to allow for additional parking.
Fourteen acres of land still exist near Valley River,
which are zoned for commercial use, and he said
these are adequate for the building being planned,
plus some parking. Instead, he claimed, there will
be “acres of asphalt” which he termed “exorbitant,
wasteful use of land.”
He concluded saying, that in his opinion the
rezoning was in direct conflict to the 1990 Plan.
Annabelle Hitzhopper, president of the League
of Women Voters, said they oppose the further
expansion in the good pasture Road area until
“some decisions are made.” They feel the rezoning
would adversely affect core and transportation
problems. She said that the 1990 plan was a plan for
development up to 1990, but that the area doesn’t
need to be developed right now.
Following the public comments on the issue, the
planning commission staff gave their report on the
situation.
They said that the zone change wilt have
“substantial” effects on the future of Eugene. They
admitted that in the 1990 plan the land had
originally been designated as future commercial
land, but said that this area was designated in case
of great population increases within the next 15
year. He said that it is true that alternate areas
have been planned for, but stressed that the
downtown area must remain the central area.
The meeting was adjourned at this point to be
continued tonight at 7 30 in the council chambers,
where the rest of the staff report will be given, a
rebuttal made and the case decided.
R-G ad policy challenged by rug dealer
A Eugene Register-Guard
advertising policy that has been
on the books for close to 50 years
has a San Francisco businessman
pulling his hair out.
George Barkhordarian sells
Persian rugs. His operation
entails advertising rug auctions
in West Coast cities and then
journeying to those cities to sell
his product. Barkhordarian is
upset because the Register
Guard will not accept his ad
vertisement. Ross Johnson,
Register-Guard advertising
director, says that it has been the
paper’s policy since the late
1920’s not to accept “advertising
of a retail nature originating
from outside of our trade and our
ciruculation areas.” The purpose
of the policy, Johnson says, is “to
try and help the economic picture
in our area; which is basically
Lane County.”
Johnson says the Register
Guard turns down $25 thousand to
$30 thousand a year worth of
outside advertisement.
Barkhordarian, a 1966
University graduate, claims the
reason for his being denied ad
vertisement is quite different.
Victor Barkhordarian, George’s
brother and partner in business,
says that Jim Frazer, a Register
Guard advertising department
employee, called him last week
and said that the advertising
request was turned down because
of “pressure from above.”
Barkhordarian says Frazer told
him Meier and Frank and one
other department store in the
Eugene area (which Frazer did
not name) had expressed
displeasure with the outside
competition.
Frazer told the Emerald
Thursday that Barkhordarian’s
statement was not true and that
Johnson would be the man who
would answer any oiner
questions.
George Barkhordarian further
questioned the statement that the
Register-Guard has had the
policy on its books since the
1920’s. According to Barkhor
darian, the paper ran their ad in
May of this year.
Barkhordarian says he doesn’t
need the ad to auction rugs in
Eugene. “It’s the whole principle
behind it. They (the Register
Guard) are killing commerce.
They are allowing a monopoly on
the rug business.” Barkhor
darian says he will probably take
the Register-Guard to court if
they continue to refuse his ads.
s. The possibility of a court cas<
doesn’t really bother Johnson. He
says all 48 continental U.S. State
Supreme Courts have tried cases
similar to this one, and in each
case the newspaper has won
aesthetics begin with trees RECYCLE
8 DON'S CHEVRON SERVICE
297 E. 13th St.—Phone 686-3679
EUGENE, OREGON 97
Applications are now being accepted
for the salaried position
as ASSISTANT DIRECTOR of
SEARCH
(work-study personnel eligible)
Applications are available in 334 EMU (x4377)
LAST DATE TO APPLY IS OCT. 5 (Friday)
RAIN TREE
1978 Main Springfield
Happy Hour Everyday
4:30 - 6:30
Free Free
Pool Popcorn
3 - 6 Pretzels
TH€ UNII/dRSITY
FILM SoCKTY
presents
My Night at Maud’s
FRIDAY, OCTOBER 5
7 & 9 p.m., 150 Science
Admission $1 and
SUNDAY, OCTOBER 7
8 p.m. University Theater
Admission $1 or
Film Society membership
675 e. B'tf’
eupene creaor
Sf>eC^S
Sandwiches .. -
Lucy's ^2h0, ^q5^es
i£e cream 3^3-oqh <q