AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY <br />September 6, 2016 <br />To: Eugene Planning Commission <br />From: Erik Berg-Johansen, Assistant Planner, Eugene Planning Division <br />Subject: Appeal of Hearings Official Decision: Towneplace Suites (WG 16-1; SR 16-1; ARB 16-3) <br />ACTION REQUESTED <br />The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on an appeal of three land use applications for a <br />hotel (Willamette Greenway Permit, Site Review and Adjustment Review applications) that were <br />recently denied by the Hearings Official. <br />BACKGROUND <br />In January of 2016, the applicant submitted three land use applications for a new hotel near Valley <br />River Center. The proposed hotel is four stories tall and includes 101 guest rooms. The applications <br />include a Site Review, Willamette Greenway Permit and an Adjustment Review. The subject property is <br />vacant, and is located south of Valley River Way, north of the Willamette River, and west of the I-105 <br />freeway/Delta Highway. The subject property is also immediately east of Valley River Inn. The property <br />is zoned C-2/WR/SR Community Commercial with Water Resources Conservation and Site Review <br />overlays. A portion of the site is within the Willamette River Greenway. A vicinity map is included as <br />Attachment A. and a reduced version of the site plan is included as Attachment B. <br />Staff recommended approval of the requests to the Hearings Official based on compliance with the <br />applicable approval criteria. The initial public hearing was held on June 8, 2016. At the hearing, an <br />attorney representing Valley River Inn (VRI) provided oral and written testimony in opposition to the <br />proposal'. The attorney's letter, which is included in the record as Hearing Exhibit #1, asserts that staff <br />erred in their analysis of ten approval criteria and a Willakenzie Area Plan policy. At the request of the <br />applicant, the record was held open to allow for the submittal of additional evidence and testimony. <br />Following the close of the "final argument" period, the Hearings Official agreed with VRI that the <br />applicant included new evidence in their final argument. Since submitting new evidence during the <br />final argument period is prohibited, the Hearings Official granted VRI an additional seven days to <br />respond to the applicant's final argument. VRI agreed with this approach, and submitted additional <br />argument in response to the applicant's final argument. VRI's final response was submitted on July 21, <br />2016 and is included in the record for reference. <br />Following close of the public record, the Hearings Official's decision was issued on August 5, 2016, and <br />concluded that the proposal does not comply with the following criteria: EC 9.8440(5)(k), EC 9.2170(5) <br />and EC 7.280 regarding street trees, EC 9.8440(5)(k) and EC 9.6792 regarding storm water quality, and <br />1 No written testimony was submitted by Valley River Inn up until the time of the public hearing. No other written or <br />oral testimony was received from any other parties besides the applicant. <br />Page 1 <br />PC Agenda - Page 1 <br />