HomeMy WebLinkAboutPublic TestimonyBAKER Linda S
From:
Paul Conte <paul.t.conte@gmail.com>
Sent:
Tuesday, September 7, 2021 3:51 PM
To:
MCKERROW Mike J
Subject:
Comments re ARA 21-14 and TIA 21-2
[EXTERNAL Q]
Hey Mike,
Please add me to the "Interested Parties" list for these two applications.
I'm not sure, but it appears the 300' range was just from tax lot 19100, and should have been from tax lot
18400, as well.
Also, the first notice didn't even appear to show a "star" on tax lot 18400 or include the proposal for a 5-unit
apartment, even though that's also part of the TIA application.
Finally, only FOUR, not FIVE, dwellings would be allowed on tax lot 18400 because that lot is within the
scope of the LCDC order restricting the City to enforce the MDR density maximum of 28.56 du/na. Per EC
9.2751(1)(c)3., the fractional number (approx. 4.8552) would be rounded down.
There are a number of other items where the application fails to meet the required approval criteria, which
I'll detail in subsequent comments.
Please give me a call so I can discuss further.
Thank you,
Paul Conte
541.344.2552
Earth Advantage Accreditations:
* Sustainable Homes Professional
* Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Specialist
BAKER Linda S
From: Eve Weinberg <evejweinberg@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 5, 2021 7:36 AM
To: MCKERROW Mike J
Subject: oppose a drive thru coffee on polk and 7th
[EXTERNAL Q]
I live on polk and 14th and I do not want a drive through coffee here.
It will increase traffic and not increase neighborhood activity. It will be for commuters going THROUGH the
neighborhood, I want this neighborhood to evolve to a walkable neighbor-friendly social place where I can walk with my
family to get a meal or coffee or play or shop.
I love the idea of a commercial space there, but not a drive through.
Eve
UX:.https://work.evewweinberg.com
/
Front End Experiments: https://code.eveiweinberg.com/
314-749-0575
BAKER Linda S
From:
JJNeu <jjneusies2@gmail.com>
Sent:
Monday, September 6, 2021 8:22 PM
To:
SYRETT Claire M; SEMPLE Emily
Cc:
*Eugene Mayor, City Council, and City Manager; MCKERROW Mike J; James Neu
Subject:
Proposed 7-11 @ Polk and W. 7th
[EXTERNAL Q]
Councilors Syrett and Semple,
it has come to my attention through the Jefferson Westside Neighbors Association that there is a proposal for another
gas station by 7-11 corporation at the old Wells Fargo site on Polk and W. 7th. It appears the application consists of a 7-
11 convenience store, fuel pumps, and a drive through coffee shop.
There are several troubling aspects to this proposed project. First and foremost is why the City of Eugene needs another
fossil fuel filling station especially in a neighborhood that has five gas stations within 1/4 mile. ( Blair and 6th, Jefferson
and 7th, and three others nearby). Secondly and most questionable is the need for a fossil fuel outlet when the City of
Eugene has made a commitment to reduce carbon emissions through phasing out fossil fuel consumption in its Climate
Action Plan. The permitting of this project certainly is not in alignment with the city Climate Recovery Ordinance. The
city should be permitting EV charging stations, not fossil fuel outlets.
There are several traffic issues associated with this project that could infringe EMX travel efficiency from insufficient
distancing for the facility itself and the drive through coffee kiosk that would back up onto the 7th St. roadway. This
proposal should at the least require a traffic impact analysis.
It is curious that after the many years to get the EMX bus system approved, implemented, operating, and promoting
public transit involvement, the city would permit a fossil fuel filling station that may indeed impede the operation of
such a carbon saving mode of transportation such as a public transit bus. Transportation was the number one
contributor to Eugene's GHG emissions detailed in the city CAP so why would the city even consider permitting a fossil
fuel pumping station be erected in the city limits? Are we making a commitment to reducing our carbon footprint or is
that just rhetoric?
I urge you to investigate this proposed project and recommend to the City Manager to deny this projects approval on
the basis that it conflicts with the city council's adoption of the Climate Action Plan and does not align with the Climate
Recovery Ordinance. I also urge you to propose a ban on permitting new fossil fuel filling stations in the City of Eugene
based on the facts of the previous sentence. Thank you for your time and service.
Jim Neu
Ward 7
Sent from my iPad
BAKER Linda S
From: Alice Parman <parman.alice@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, September 3, 2021 4:39 PM
To: MCKERROW Mike J
Subject: Proposed 7-11 at 7th and Polk
[EXTERNAL Q]
Dear Mr. McKerrow,
As a homeowner just minutes from the proposed site of a new 7-11, 1 strongly object to the fact that I did not receive a
notice of the Proposed Land Use Action. We've all been wondering what would be the fate of the Wells Fargo building,
and I'm sure you are aware that there are already 7-11s at 6th and Blair and 7th and Jefferson. And that there is a very
popular coffee drive-through stand at 7th and Taylor.
The Cornbread Cafe, just across from the Wells Fargo bank building, is a great example of the type of locally owned
business that would enhance our mixed use neighborhood. Plaza Latina is another good example, along with Evergreen,
the Thai restaurant at 7th and Blair, and the cluster of locally-owned businesses around 8th and Blair. What we don't
need is a another corporate-owned convenience store.
A planning department worth its salt doesn't just cave to the first comer or the highest bidder. I don't know what a
"minor adjustment review" entails, but as a longtime resident of this vibrant, diverse, and well-established
neighborhood I urge you and your colleagues to think more strategically about the future. How about using that site
for more supported low-income housing, for example? I believe our neighborhood would be supportive, as witness the
new housing at 13th and Tyler, and efforts under way toward supported low-income housing at 13th and Chambers.
Sincerely,
Alice Parman
836 Taylor Street, Eugene 97402
541-342-3464
BAKER Linda S
From: Jay Moseley <tojmoseley@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 4, 2021 12:39 PM
To: MCKERROW Mike J
Subject: Proposed 7-11 Drive Through
[EXTERNAL Q]
I'm writing to oppose this very ill advised project. I can see only chaos, back-ups on 7th, and unsafe conditions.
Specifically, I would argue that the requirements are not met:
1. Requirement: 50-foot internal vehicle stacking area required by EC 9.6703 Driveways and Internal
Circulation. All driveways shall have a minimum 50-foot internal vehicle stacking area. Applicant
states: "The site plan proposes approximately 35 feet from the back of the sidewalk on W 7th Avenue to the
center of the near on-site drive aisle."
2.Reguirement: Line up or 50-foot offset for access connection standard on Polk Street. Applicant
states "The project proposes spacing of approximately 10 feet from the Cornbread Cafe loading/waste area
driveway to the near edge of the alley connection on Polk Street.
3. Requirement: 200-foot Major Arterial access connection spacing on W. 7th Ave. Applicant states "The
site plan will have approximately 93 feet from the proposed driveway on W 7th Avenue to the existing
driveway to the Stay Woke parking lot to the west."
4. Requirement: Access within 250-foot influence area on W. 7th Ave. Applicant states "The proposed
access on W 7th Avenue will be approximately 158 feet from the center of the W 7th Avenue/Polk Street
intersection to the near edge of the driveway."
The applicant does not meet any of the above requirements and it seems obvious that this failure will result
in a dangerous situation for..... what? A cup of coffee? Bag of chips? Please deny this application.
Thanks you,
Jay Moseley
1190 W. 12th Ave.
BAKER Linda S
From: Holly Cabell <hollycabell@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, September 3, 2021 5:27 PM
To: MCKERROW Mike J
Cc: Jefferson Westside Neighbors
Subject: Proposed 7-11 w/ drive thru coffee at Polk and W. 7th at the former Wells Fargo site
[EXTERNAL Q]
I live at 1092 W 8th Ave, Eugene, OR 97402, 3 blocks from this site and often use that intersection to go north as it has a
stop light. The traffic to the Dutch Brothers drive in coffee at W. 11th and Chambers often interferes with traffic as the
customers get to be so many they can't just quickly turn in. Polk St. is narrow. I think that 7-11 coffee is probably not as
popular as Dutch Brothers but before you approve this use please be sure there is adequate space to line up cars. This
means the coffee dispensing should be at the west of the current parking lot.
An additional concern is that many people will be trying to turn left crossing southbound traffic to get into the
alley. This will cause delays in traffic to this heavily-used intersection.
Thank you for considering my concerns.
Holly Cabell
1092 W 8th Ave.
Eugene, OR 97402
541-521-6845 (cell)
i
BAKER Linda S
From: Terry Robertson <tlr78787@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 4, 2021 2:58 PM
To: MCKERROW Mike J
Subject: Proposed Business at Polk and 7th
[EXTERNAL Q]
It is my understanding that a business has proposed taking over the site of the previous Well Fargo on the corner of Polk
and 7th. In an attempt to make this happen, there are requests for exemptions for 3 different items of city building
codes placed on commercial building sites. (EC 7.420(2)(a)(1); EC 9. 6703(3)(a); and EC 7.420(2)(b) These codes consider
the impact of a business on the surrounding area in terms of traffic, etc. The very fact that the variances requested are
substantially less than the standards set by the City should alert everyone to unsuitability of this business for this site.
Additionally, there is an EMX bus stop right there which will further exacerbate traffic problems if these changes are
allowed. We don't need another convenience store or gas station in this area. There are more just a few blocks away.
Please do not allow this to go forward.
Terry L. Robertson
843 1/2 Almaden St.
Eugene, OR 97402
541-653-9011 Home
BAKER Linda S
From: Matt Purvis <matt@purvismanagement.com>
Sent: Monday, September 6, 2021 9:37 PM
To: MCKERROW Mike J
Subject: RE: 7-11 at Polk & W 7th!
[EXTERNAL Q]
Thanks Mike,
Space is at a premium. And that lot has huge potential. I recognize that developers drive this process, but if
spot like that, with easy access to public transportation, won't be used for low-income housing, where will it
go?
Matt
From: MCKERROW Mike J <MMcKerrow@eugene-or.gov>
Sent: Monday, September 6, 20217:05 PM
To: Matt Purvis <matt@purvismanagement.com>
Subject: RE: 7-11 at Polk & W 7th!
Matt,
Thank you for submitting these comments. They will be reviewed by staff prior to reviewing the application to
determine if the applicant has met all applicable approval criteria. I will add you to the Interested Parties List
for this project per your request.
Mike McKerrow
Land Use Analyst
Building and Permit Services
99 West 10th Avenue
Eugene OR 97401
Phone 541.682.5288
From: Matt Purvis <matt@purvismanagement.com>
Sent: Friday, September 3, 20215:26 PM
To: MCKERROW Mike J <MMcKerrow@eugene-or.gov>
Subject: 7-11 at Polk & W 7th!
Mike,
We are firmly opposed to a 7-11 located at the former Wells Fargo building at Polk & West 7tn
That intersection is very busy. Additional, stop and go traffic at a gas station with an active
coffee drive through on Polk is a really bad idea. There is no shortage of gas stations on 7t" and
6t" Avenues (or coffee throughout the neighborhood) and, as you know, an active 7-11 is
located just a few blocks further east, also on 7t" Avenue!
We did not receive the mailing that the City sent to residents even closer to the proposed
location, but we are only two blocks removed.
In the future, please include our home address for topics involving this proposal.
Thank you,
Matt Purvis
Cathy Flynn
1391 W Broadway
541-556-0990
z
BAKER Linda S
From: Paul Conte <paul.t.conte@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 7, 2021 5:51 PM
To: MCKERROW Mike J
Cc: SEMPLE Emily
Subject: Re: Comments re ARA 21-14 and TIA 21-2 (follow-up_
[EXTERNAL Q]
For the record in ARA 21-14 and TIA 21-2 (MAJ Eugene Polk Street)
Mike,
Thank you for taking the time to discuss this combined application. Here's a recap and follow-up request.
Please let me know if I have any misunderstandings about our discussion or the facts.
I understand that the applicant advised you in a phone call that they were not going to pursue the five-unit
apartment that was included in their ARA and TIA applications. Your understanding is that meant the
applicant was withdrawing all proposed development of tax lot 18400 from their applications.
You were going to check to see if the City has received a written request to revise the application, as I've
described.
If such a written request has been received, please post it and/or provide me a copy. If such a
written request has not been received, please advise if and when the City receives a request and post it
and/or provide me a copy.
I believe the City must provide an accurate notice, and that all application materials must be available to
the public prior to sending the notice and starting the clock on the comment period. Any request to
effectively amend the application in a substantial way requires that the public have access to the "final,"
complete and accurate application, including amendments, for the entirety of the comment period.
Otherwise, that would constitute a procedural error that could result in denial by the Hearings Official or
remand.
I believe in this case, removing an entire tax lot and the proposed phased development of apartments from
the application requires that a revised TIA be submitted that is based on the substantially altered "future
conditions." City staff do not have the prerogative to make a summary decision for whatever reason staff
might think is sufficient that this would not warrant requiring a TIA application that accurately reflects
the actual development proposal no less and no more. I pointed out that the City had already been
remanded for a similar, ad hoc misjudgement. Here is the relevant excerpt from the LUBA decision for the
2012-39 appeal:
"We generally agree with petitioner that the parties to a land use proceeding have the right to review
and respond to any formal changes in the application that occurs during the proceedings below,
including the opportunity to submit responsive testimony and, potentially, new evidence, regarding
whether given the nature of the change the remaining elements of the application continue to comply
with applicable approval criteria. If such a change in the application occurs late in the proceedings,
the local government may be required to re-open the record to allow other parties a reasonable
opportunity to submit responsive testimony and evidence. See Baker v. City of Garibaldi, 49 Or LUBA
437, 446 (2005) (where the applicant submits a revised planned unit development plan the day before
the appeal hearing, the city is obligated to allow the parties an opportunity to review and respond to
the revision). Failure to provide such an opportunity can be procedural error and a basis for remand, if
the petitioner demonstrates that the procedural error prejudiced his substantial rights. ORS
197.835(9)(a)(B).
* * *
"It is not clear to us what kind of evidence responding to the withdrawal could be presented that
would have a bearing on whether the vacation of West 12th Avenue is in the public interest, but we
cannot say that no such evidence exists. We conclude that the city committed procedural error in
accepting a revised application without providing a reasonable opportunity for parties to submit
responsive evidence, and that petitioner has adequately demonstrated that the city's procedural error
prejudiced his substantial rights.
The third assignment of error is sustained."
The City staff likewise cannot say that the applicant's request to alter their TIA application which the City
may not even have noticed or made available to the public is immaterial.
The applicant must submit a revised application, which the City must then notice and have available to the
public. The deadline for submitting comments must then be calculated based on the date of this notice.
Purely as a matter of transparency, I let you know that I would appeal if the City approved the application
without having provided the necessary notice and ensured that the public had available for review and
comment a TIA that accurately reflects the actual development proposal.
I also pointed out that the applicant had explicitly documented their intent to get TIA approval for a multi-
phase development. The applicant should be aware that either under the current process; or in the future,
if an owner of the property submitted a subsequent, separate application for a multi-unit apartment on
lot 18400, the removal of this "phase" could be construed as improperly excluding the impact of the
apartments from an altered TIA application.
I appealed this exact circumstance in LUBA No. 2012-68, but I requested the appeal be dismissed before it
was decided as part of a negotiated settlement with Capstone. The issue was never adjudicated and remains
an open question, potentially also subject to appeal.
Sincerely,
Paul Conte
1461 W. 10th Ave.
Eugene, OR 97402
Earth Advantage Accreditations:
* Sustainable Homes Professional
* Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Specialist
On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 3:50 PM Paul Conte <paul.t.conteCgmail.com> wrote:
Hey Mike,
Please add me to the "Interested Parties" list for these two applications.
I'm not sure, but it appears the 300' range was just from tax lot 19100, and should have been from tax lot
18400, as well.
Also, the first notice didn't even appear to show a "star" on tax lot 18400 or include the proposal for a 5-
unit apartment, even though that's also part of the TIA application.
Finally, only FOUR, not FIVE, dwellings would be allowed on tax lot 18400 because that lot is within the
scope of the LCDC order restricting the City to enforce the MDR density maximum of 28.56 du/na. Per EC
9.2751(1)(c)3., the fractional number (approx. 4.8552) would be rounded down.
There are a number of other items where the application fails to meet the required approval criteria,
which I'll detail in subsequent comments.
Please give me a call so I can discuss further.
Thank you,
Paul Conte
541.344.2552
Earth Advantage Accreditations:
* Sustainable Homes Professional
* Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Specialist
BAKER Linda S
From:
Matt Purvis <matt@purvismanagement.com>
Sent:
Friday, September 3, 2021 5:26 PM
To:
MCKERROW Mike J
Subject:
7-11 at Polk & W 7th!
[EXTERNAL Q]
Mike,
We are firmly opposed to a 7-11 located at the former Wells Fargo building at Polk & West 7tn
That intersection is very busy. Additional, stop and go traffic at a gas station with an active
coffee drive through on Polk is a really bad idea. There is no shortage of gas stations on 7th and
6th Avenues (or coffee throughout the neighborhood) and, as you know, an active 7-11 is
located just a few blocks further east, also on 7th Avenue!
We did not receive the mailing that the City sent to residents even closer to the proposed
location, but we are only two blocks removed.
In the future, please include our home address for topics involving this proposal.
Thank you,
Matt Purvis
Cathy Flynn
1391 W Broadway
541-556-0990
BAKER Linda S
From:
Susan Connolly <susanmconnolly@yahoo.com>
Sent:
Saturday, September 4, 2021 6:09 PM
To:
MCKERROW Mike J
Subject:
7th & Polk 7-11
[EXTERNAL Q]
Good Day.
We are JWS neighbors and are concerned about the purposed 7-11. It seems a poor choice as either ingress or egress
must come onto Polk Street -'which is awkward and will tie up traffic-- already a problem. Polk is a major route used
often by our neighbors.
Look at the traffic mess created by the Dutch Brothers drive-through on West 11th at Chambers Street.
Usually there is a line of cars in the outside south-bound lane of Chambers. These cars are lined up in the south-bound
lanes to get into the Dutch Bros drive-through. This "waiting lane" blocks all west bound turns onto
W. 11th. Bad!!
If you are able to keep the backed up traffic off Polk Street, somehow, the best way to allow this construction is to put
retail on the bottom and a few floors of family-wage apartments above.
We need housing, on major roads and buslines!! Not more convenience stores. I counted four such stoes within a few
blocks of this site!
Thank you
Susan M. Connolly
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
i
BAKER Linda S
From: Alice Parman <parman.alice@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 4, 2021 12:24 PM
To: MCKERROW Mike J
Subject: 7th and Polk proposal
[EXTERNAL Q]
To Mike McKerrow:
In addition to the quality of life and strategic issues mentioned in my earlier letter, I would like to address specific
concerns about proposed code changes that would make it possible to put a gas station at 7th and Polk. EC
7.420(2)(a)(1) requires 250' driveway spacing from the center line of Polk; the proposal calls for spacing of 158'. This is
an already backed up intersection and this will not allow for sufficient space from the traffic signal and will add to
already congested traffic in this area. EC 9.6703(3)(a) requires a 50' stacking area from the sidewalk to the nearest
pump. The proposal requires 35'. This could lead to possible backups out into the street, further impacting traffic,
including EMX vehicles. EC 7.420(2)(b) requires 200' driveway spacing from the existing driveway in the Stay Woke
parking lot. The proposal calls for 93, less than half is what is required. I think it would be dangerous and irresponsible
to allow these changes to be made, along one of Eugene's busiest arterials.
As a neighborhood resident (I live two blocks from 7th and Polk) I often cross the street (walking or on my bike) there, at
the only traffic light with pedestrian walk signs between Chambers and Blair. Pedestrian traffic is busy there because of
the EMX station, and many cyclists cross there en route to/from the Whiteaker and the riverfront.
I expect and trust that a city planner will be responsible and responsive to ordinary citizens as well as to business
interests. Please bear in mind the numbers of families and elderly folks (many without cars) who live in our densely
populated neighborhood. And be strategic about nurturing and protecting alternatives to fossil-fuel driven transport.
Sincerely,
Alice Parman
836 Taylor Street
Eugene, OR 97402
541-342-3464
BAKER Linda S
From: Joni Dawning <dawning@efn.org>
Sent: Monday, September 6, 2021 2:53 PM
To: MCKERROW Mike J
Subject: 7th and Polk
[EXTERNAL 0]
Mr. McKerrow,
I request that the application submitted to develop a gas station and 7-11 market at 7th and Polk be denied. As a
resident homeowner in the Westside-Jefferson Neighborhood for 28 years, I am well aware of the risks already endured
by pedestrians and bicyclists attempting to cross the intersection during peak traffic hours.
I appreciate that our city planners have attempted to address and prevent these safety issues with specific requirements
(EC 9.6703,EC 7.420(2)(e), EC 7.420(2)(b), EC 7.420(2)(a)1) that the submitted application does not meet.
Please do not allow these functional zoning requirements to be circumvented.
Thank you,
Joni Dawning
936 Taylor
BAKER Linda S
From: G K <yuswearing@yahoo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 1, 2021 8:29 PM
To: MCKERROW Mike J
Subject: 7/11
[EXTERNAL 0]
Hello Mr Mckerrow,
My name is George Keim. I live a block away from the location of the proposed 7-Eleven.
I am opposed to having a gas station at this site, and I will try to explain why.
Traffic issues
The intersection at 7th/Polk is already a terrible traffic situation. It is significantly worse since the bus line moved from
8th Ave to 7th Ave.
There is far more foot traffic at this intersection than was ever acceptable. The bicycle traffic is unregulated and poses
severe threats to motorists Please consider the large volume of vehicle and pedestrian traffic to a)the international
market, b) the LaMota dispensary, c) the wildly popular Cornbread cafe, none of which have adequate parking, as can be
evidenced by the costumers of those places lining up parked on Polk street even south of 8th Ave.
1- eastbound
When a vehicle is on 7th, it is nerve wracking to turn right from 7th onto Polk, because of the bus, bus stop, pedestrian
traffic in all directions, narrow lanes, and also the bicycle traffic, that does not have adequate lanes or signals. It is even
worse if you are riding a bike!
2- southbound
If a vehicle is headed south on Polk, there is no bike lane, so bike by the curb, car headed south is halfway into the left-
turn lane, and the vehicles that want to turn get backed up near to 6th. Headed south has to wait for the southbound
bike to get through the intersection as there isn't room to pass, the left turning traffic has to wait for north bound bikes,
northbound pedestrians, and northbound vehicles.
3-northbound
Anyone can describe this busy, congested travesty. This is terrible. There are times that this is so bad, it creates
confusion and backup to 8th Ave. Often times there are so many cars parked on Polk, that only one or two cars can be in
the right-turn lane. There's no bike lane, creating even more issues. If there are 3 cars waiting to turn right, but have to
wait for a pedestrian or a bike, there isn't enough time for traffic to clear before the signal changes. And with the bus
and bus stop obstructing the view of oncoming traffic, no one can turn right on red.
4- there's an alleyway that is used by local traffic and garbage trucks that often disrupts the flow of traffic. This has been
greatly improved since the Bank closed, but will undoubtedly be a bigger issue if a new gas station opens here.
5-emergency vehicles and potential for car accidents If this location is used to build a gas station, and that increases the
congestion at this intersection, the potential for more accidents is immense, but the danger of an accident here, hinders
the ability of emergency vehicles to travel safely and efficiently, in and around the Jefferson Westside neighborhood,
and the access to downtown, and to local hospitals.
Environmental concerns
The residents of our neighborhood do not want or need another corporation to come in here and I'll give you a short list
of reasons- 1-construction traffic 2-construction noise 3-construction dirt and dust 4-assuming this will be similar to the
7-elevens close to here (7th/Jefferson and hwy99/Roosevelt) the lights! We love our neighborhood and our
environment. The light pollution is unacceptable!
5-we already have a gas station on 7th, just 2 blocks away from this location 6-we don't want big gulp cups rolling
around in our streets and yards! This is a major issue! Please go see for yourself the garbage and filth at the 7/11 on
7th/Jefferson!
7- Our neighborhood has been just fine without a corporate eyesore for a very long time. Why change it? Do they
provide good jobs?
8- Is 7/11 good for our community? Are they selling local, environmentally friendly products? We all got non-recyclable
plastic coupons in the mail to tempt us into visiting the other new 7/11, so we know they plan on filling our mailboxes
with more garbage. Or should we call it propaganda? Or bribes?
9- a gas Station 2 blocks from a gas station, and a coffee shop with a drive through, next door, literally, to a drive
through coffee shop?! Can we please consider the impact of a giant corporate suck? Please keep Eugene a local friendly
environment! This is the type of thing that kills small town USA! I don't want this in my city, let alone in my
neighborhood!
10-what impact does a gas station have on the environment? What if there's a fuel tank leak? Does the city require
seismic testing or earthquake proof containers? What happens to our homes and home values if there is a leak, or a
spill?
11-Sustainably- with the evolution of electric vehicles and the demand for clean energy, what happens to this facility in
2025? 2030? 2040?
12-why here? Why now? Recent construction of new gas stations is surprisingly quick. Who is benefiting? Two at
99/Roosevelt, one at 6th/Garfield, and now proposing one at 7th/Polk?
With cars being more fuel efficient than ever before, what is the real reason for new/additional gas stations? We don't
want one in our neighborhood. We have families and children and pets, and school bus stops, and would prefer not to
add another supplier of disposable convenience for drug addiction and homelessness.
Honestly this feels like a foregone conclusion, the corporate giant is coming. The best we can do now is limit its impact
on our neighborhood and make them pay to improve our community by improving roads and traffic signals.
My name is George Keim.
I live at 810 Polk St, Eugene OR 97402.
1 live with my wife and daughter.
We have lived at this address for 11 years.
I will be talking to my neighbors about this.
I hope you hear from them.
Also, I expect the deadline to be pushed back, and new flyers mailed to the residents of Ward 1, so that we can all email
you at a valid address, that was not on the first flyer.
Thanks
z
BAKER Linda S
From: Dave Hicks <dave@efn.org>
Sent: Monday, September 6, 2021 1:18 PM
To: MCKERROW Mike J
Subject: Comments on the MAJ development at 710 Polk St.
Attachments: Supplemental Materials.pdf
[EXTERNAL Q]
Mr. McKerrow,
As a long time resident of this neighborhood I must state my opposition to the proposed development, as currently
designed, of a 7-11 and an additional coffee shop with drive through a the corner of 7th and Polk. As noted by the
applicant in their "Supplemental Materials" document (see https://pdd.eugene-
or.gov/LandUse/SearchApplicationDocuments?file=ARA-21-0014 and https://pdd.eugene-
or.gov/LandUse/DocumentDetails?file=ARA-21-0014&id=3125607 ) the application does not meet 4 code requirements
1. REQUIREMENT: Provide a 50-foot internal vehicle stacking area required by EC 9.6703 Driveways and Internal
Circulation; (3)(a) All driveways shall have a minimum 50-foot internal vehicle stacking area. Applicants propose a 35
foot vehicle stacking area.
Coment: Applicants are requesting 35'. 35' is only room for 2 average length cars. The current coffee stand at the
corner of Taylor and 7th often has queues of 4-8 cars. Along with applicants requested adjustments to requirements 3
and 4, only allowing 35' will lead to backups out into the street, further impacting traffic and presenting dangerous
driving conditions on already crowded 7th.
2. REQUIREMENT: Align opposite or provide 50-foot offset for access connection standard on Polk Street. EC
7.420(2)(e) Access Connections to Arterial and Major Collector Streets.
Coment: Applicants are proposing a 10 foot offset from the exit on Polk alley to the Cornbread Cafe driveway on the
east side of Polk. Polk street between 8th and 6th is a heavily used pedestrian and bicycle route as it is the only traffic
signal for crossing 6th and 7th for 4 blocks to the west and 6 blocks to the east. Applicants proposal will add a
dangerous element for pedestrians and bicyclists on the sidewalk or street.
3. REQUIREMENT: Provide a 200-foot Major Arterial access connection spacing on W. 7th Ave. EC 7.420(2)(b) Access
connections shall be spaced based on the street classification as set out in the chart below [i.e., 200 feet].
Coment: Applicants are requesting 93'. Depending on what business(es) occupy the lot at the corner of Taylor and 7th
and with applicants requested adjustments to requirements 1 and 4, only allowing 93' will lead to yet more
congestion and confusion, further impacting traffic and presenting dangerous driving conditions on already crowded
7th.
4. REQUIREMENT: Provide an access connection outside of the 250-foot influence area on W. 7th Ave. EC 7.420(2)(a)1
Comment: The applicant proposes a 158' spacing instead of 250' from the intersection at Polk and 7th. Per the
applicants own analysis, "The proposed RIRO driveway is regularly blocked by queues from signal at Polk Street... Per
the May 2021 TIA queues are projected to spill back past Taylor St."
This is an already backed up intersection and this will not allow for sufficient space from the traffic signal and will add
to already congested traffic in this area.
In light of these considerations, I respectfully request that you DENY the applicants adjustments to code requirements.
Thank you,
Dave Hicks
936 Taylor St.
Eugene, OR 97402
Phone: 541-517-5146