Item 1: Ordinance on Oregon West Management

Home Browse Search

in the area in which he lived. He felt the applicant's proposed development would add health to the area and the application should be approved. Michael Chalmers, 4005 Shenstone Drive, supported the applicant's position. He noted that on the top of page 30 in Attachment A it had been suggested that the site could be publicly owned and a green space. This had caused him concern as he did not wish to bring his children to play in a place adjacent to such a heavily trafficked road. He said a park would also require some onsite parking and he believed parking "would eat up" area fTom a park. He hoped that a larger site near Madison Middle School would be utilized for park land. Greg Herbert, 2005 Law Lane, supported the commercial zone change for the Santa Clara school site. He said he represented a client that was seeking a commercial site in the River Road/North Eugene area. He thought his client would make "positive" use of the proposed development. He noted that he had grown up in the River Road area. Curt Mem, 3561 Merryvale, spoke in favor of Oregon West Management's application for zoning changes to the old Santa Clara school site. He averred that the applicant's plans met many of the City of Eugene's goals for infill and redevelopment. He felt the application addressed both the commercial and residential needs of the area. He believed the development would add needed commercial development and would also put less pressure on the commercial sprawl, which would help preserve existing farm lands to the north. Clayton Walker, 1225 Lawrence Street, asked the commissioners to consider the demand for commercial properties and the lack of supply. He understood that the 20~year old study was the "law of the land" but he felt that anyone who drove around would understand that there were very few commercial properties left to develop in the area. He said the subject property was surrounded by commercial uses. He thought the dimensions and size of the property as well as its depth and configllration supported its use fur commercial purposes. He underscored that good commercial sites were significant for three qualities: visibility, access, and proximity to market. He supported the application for the Santa Clara school site as it had an three of those qualities. Daniel Cooper gave testimony unrelated to the plan anlendmcnts and zoning change. Mr. Duncan called for testimony from interested people who were neither proponents nor opponents. Seeing none, he called for testimony in opposition to the item before the Planning Commission. Ellen Hyman, 3863 Dorchester Lane, wanted a "true" community center. She \vas not "that opposed" to the proposal but she wanted the commercial property to be restricted to C-l and not C-2. She feared that allowing it to be zolled C~2 would bring "big box" stores. She felt the area had enough larger developments. She opined that the recent development of a large grocery store had not panned out to be as it had been proposed, but had become a big box store. She said the loss of the school had been hard on the community. She averred that the developers were not thinking of what was impOltant to area residents. Kate Perle, 4740 Wendover Street, disagreed that the area was a commercial area. She believed that it was predominantly a residential area. She said there were policies in the River Road/Santa Clara Facilities Plan that specifically discouraged commercial rezoning along River Road. She MfNUTES-Eugene Planning Commission Public Hearing October 18,2007 Page 5