My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
23_10_17 Bacth2 Testimony
>
OnTrack
>
MA
>
2023
>
MA 23-5
>
23_10_17 Bacth2 Testimony
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/17/2023 12:31:17 PM
Creation date
10/17/2023 12:22:35 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
MA
File Year
23
File Sequence Number
5
Application Name
River Road-Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan
Document Type
Public Testimony
Document_Date
10/17/2023
External View
Yes
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
708
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
DECISION OF THE HEARINGS OFFICIAL <br />FOR THE CITY OF EUGENE, OREGON <br />Conditional Use Permit and Site Review <br />Application File Name: <br />U Haul (CU 16-1; SR 16-2) <br />Applicant's Request: <br />Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Site Review (SR) approval for outdoor display and <br />rental of large trucks associated with new U-Haul self-storage facility. <br />Subject Property/Location: <br />Tax Lot 1000 of Assessor's Map 17-04-02-13; Located just east of River Road at 150 <br />Oroyan Avenue; Approximately 4.62 acres <br />Applicant: <br />Kyle Marvin, U-Haul <br />Lead City Staff: <br />Erik Berg-Johansen, Assistant Planner, (541) 682-5437 <br />Summary of the Public Hearing <br />The Hearings Official held a public hearing on this application on May 11, 2016. The Hearings <br />Official stated he had no conflicts of interests and had no ex parte communications to disclose. <br />No person objected to the Hearings Official conducting the hearing. <br />Planner Erik Berg-Johansen provided an overview of the staff report and explained the nature of <br />the proposal. Staff recommended approval of the application with conditions. <br />The applicant gave a brief history of the property and the proposed changes in use. He agreed <br />with the findings of the staff report and the conditions of approval with one exception. That <br />exception was to the staff recommendation for an 8' fence to replace the existing fence separating <br />the parking lot from adjacent properties. In support of this position, the applicant made three <br />arguments: <br />The EC does not provide authority to condition approval on the installation of a 8' fence. <br />The applicant argues that EC 9.6205 L-7 contains all the potential requirements for <br />landscaping and there is no provision in that section for fences in the manner staff <br />proposes. <br />Hearings Official Decision (CU 16-1; SR 16-2) <br />227
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.