Item 5 - PH on Laurel Hill Plan - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

commercial use. He remarked that the neighborhood was not arguing that the property was suitable for residential use, as clearly it was not, but rather that designation as commercial was not appropriate until other commercial properties had been developed and there was an additional public need for commercial use. He said the neighborhood was not certain of the status of the policy prohibiting siting of residential structures beneath power lines and hope there was also be an opportunity to respond to that issue when the status was clarified. Mr. Belcher noted that the Laurel Hill Refinement Plan made reference to the importance of future access to the floating node for tourists and residents of other areas. He suggested that the neighborhood might want the record to remain open for a period of time to allow a response to the issue of a proposed hotel on the property. Mr. Wostmann said that the neighborhood was asking for the record to remain open until it had an opportunity to review and respond to the additional materials and the applicant's testimony, specifically the anticipated mix of intended uses in the commercial node to serve both tourists and neighborhood residents. Mr. Belcher asked if the neighborhood would want the node to remain the same size if the subject property became a part of it and therefore some other parcel removed. Mr. Wostmann replied that the neighborhood executive committee, during its discussion of the materials it had received, came to the conclusion that if the applicant had included a request to rezone some of their other property in the commercial zone to residential, thereby leaving the total acreage in the commercial node the same, there would probably have been no opposition to the application. Mr. Rusch expressed concern with how to demonstrate the public need and asked Mr. Wostmann to MINUTES -Eugene Planning Commission September 14, 2004 Page 8 Public Hearing IV-98:.