A land-use lawyer working for an unidentified client that has the long-dormant semiconductor plant "under contract" wants confirmation that a data center or other technology uses fit current zoning rules — a sign the site could be headed for redevelopment.
This story was updated to include a statement from attorney Bill Kloos.
An unidentified client that has Eugene’s former Hynix campus under contract has asked the city to confirm that a data center and several other uses are permitted under the property’s zoning.
Land-use attorney Bill Kloos filed a zone verification request July 14 to confirm whether a data center, manufacturing, research and development, warehousing, and office uses are allowed on the 1.2 million-square-foot factory, which sits on 200 acres in west Eugene.
The property used to be a Hynix semiconductor plant, the region’s biggest factory, which closed in 2008 and laid off 1,400 workers.
The empty plant has sold multiple times since. In 2015, chipmaker Avago paid $21 million to buy the property and announced plans to reopen it, with the city providing several years of tax exemptions to spur the project.
But the company abandoned its plans, and glassmaker Corning bought it for $13.4 million at a real estate auction. Corning never did anything with the plant, and sold it in 2020 to Stratacache, an Ohio-based digital sign company.
Since buying the property, Stratacache’s operations on the site have gone dormant. The private company appears to be in financial distress. It has recently sold off some of its properties, laid off workers and liquidated subsidiaries, according to news reports.
In the July 14 zone verification request, Kloos — who has represented prominent businesses in Lane County land-use matters — wrote that he is working with a client who has the former Hynix campus “under contract.”
That client wants to “redevelop, reuse, and market the property for one or more uses” permitted in E-1 Campus Employment zoning, the filing states. But the client itself is not named.
Those uses could include a data center, manufacturing, and research and development.
The document defines data center as “a facility used primarily for the operation of computer servers, network equipment, data storage systems, telecommunications/fiber infrastructure, cloud-computing infrastructure, artificial intelligence or high-performance computing infrastructure, and related information technology systems used to store, process, manage, transmit, exchange, and secure digital information.”
Stratacache did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Kloos’ request doesn’t propose any specific development. Instead, it asks Eugene planners to confirm that data centers and the several other technology-related uses are already permitted under the zoning, in the case of a future redevelopment proposal.
E-1 zoning is “designed for firms that will help achieve economic diversification objectives” and that typically have a large number of employees per acre, according to Eugene city code.
“The activities of such firms do not generate offensive external impacts and usually do not tolerate substantial noise, pollution, or vibration from surrounding uses,” the code states.
The city has not yet responded to Kloos’ request.
Lindsay Selser, the communications and engagement manager for Eugene’s Planning and Development department, told Lookout Eugene-Springfield on Monday, July 20, that the city isn’t under any deadline to issue a decision on his request, but staff try to respond in a “timely manner.”
“However, the complexity of a Zone Verification and whether any additional information is needed can result in the process taking longer in some circumstances,” Selser wrote.
Kloos’ letter is the first zone verification request that “makes the claim that a data center, as defined in the letter, is a permitted use” in E-1 zoning, she said.
Kloos argues the redevelopment should fall under E-1 zone’s category for “information technology services” use in his request.
The city declined to comment on whether Stratacache intends to sell the property, Selser saying it “can’t speak to” the owner’s intent.
In response to questions from Lookout, Kloos declined to identify his client or the “nature or terms of any potential transaction” involving the property on Friday, July 24.
“I am not authorized to provide additional information regarding prospective users or development plans beyond what is stated in the public filing,” Kloos wrote.
Application Materials (1)Download
Lookout correspondent Ashli Blow contributed reporting.