Residents of the neighborhood where the arena is set to be built will try to persuade a city hearings official tonight that they should get more say in the development process.
The residents, who are members of the Fairmount Neighborhood Association, contend that the University should need a conditional use permit in order to proceed with construction of the arena.
A conditional use permit allows the public to negotiate with the University so that neighbors can have more say in how the project impacts the community, such as the number of parking spaces the site must have, the number of events it can host and how traffic flows to and from the arena.
As it stands now, the University doesn’t need a conditional use permit because City Planning Director Lisa Gardner ruled that the arena development should be classified as a “University or College Use” under city land use law rather than “Arena, Indoor” use.
Arenas are required to have a conditional use permit in order to be built, but University buildings do not.

A public hearing will take place tonight at 5 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, located at 7th Avenue and Pearl Street. The hearings official, Anne Corcoran Briggs, has 15 days to make a ruling, which can be appealed to the state Land Use Board of Appeals.
The neighbors argue that the spirit of the “University or College” distinction, which is listed in the “Education, Cultural, Religious, Social and Fraternal” section of Eugene City Land Use laws, is clearly meant for classrooms and other educational buildings, not a 12,500-seat basketball arena.
“If it’s an educational use you would perhaps defer to the University or College use designation,” said Jeff Nelson, former co-chair of the Fairmount Neighborhood Association. “But this is not an educational use facility.”
Indoor arenas are categorized under “Entertainment and Recreation” uses.
A 2003 study of potential arena sites assumed that the arena development would be classified as an “Arena, Indoor,” according to the 78-page study by International Facilities Group, LLC.
But a city planning staff interpretation letter issued April 28 sides with the city’s interpretation that the arena should be classified as a “University or College” use.
“The City’s interpretation looks to the common make-up of university and college campuses and allows for the applicant to inform the City as to what uses fit within the particular entity’s mission,” the letter says. “Generally speaking, staff finds it inappropriate for the City to determine whether or not a particular project is within a university’s mission.”
But the neighbors argue that there should be a clearer distinction about what constitutes what a “University or College” use is within city land use laws.
“It’s kind of a hornet’s nest because according to the planning director’s decision there are no lines drawn in the code about what a University or College use is,” Nelson said. “We disagree with that.”

Rezoning the bakery

In 2004, the Fairmount neighbors faced a similar dispute over land use laws regarding the arena’s future site.
At that time, the owners of the Williams’ Bakery requested that the city remove a site review overlay, which, like a conditional use permit, would have allowed the neighbors more say in what happens to the property.
The neighbors lost that debate, but city planner Alissa Hansen told Nelson that if the University planned to build an arena it would likely need a conditional use permit, said Nelson, who was co-chair of the Fairmount Neighborhood Association at the time.
Hansen said she didn’t recall making such a statement, and that her work rezoning the bakery had nothing to do with the conditional use permit.
[email protected]