As part of its approval of a PUD, the City must find that "[t]he PUD will provide adequate <br />screening from surrounding properties including, but not limited to, anticipated building <br />locations, bulk, and height." EC 9.8320(3). The Hearings Official determined that the site plan <br />submitted as proposed by the applicant was insufficient to screen the proposed development <br />from the view of those individuals using the park and bike path to the east. However, the <br />Hearings Official determined that, with a condition of approval requiring some screening, the <br />application could be approved. He imposed the following condition of approval (Condition <br />#15): <br />"Prior to final PUD approval, the applicant shall revise the final site plan and landscaping <br />plan compliant with EC 9.6200 to provide landscape screening along the eastern <br />property boundary * * <br />On appeal, the Planning Commission determined that the landscape screening along the <br />eastern property boundary was not necessary ("Additional landscape screening is not required <br />along the eastern property boundary." Revised Condition #15). LUBA disagreed with the <br />Planning Commission and determined that the applicable approval criterion, EC 9.8320(3), <br />requires the applicant to provide landscaping to screen the proposed development from <br />adjacent lands; "it is not concerned with the views the PUD will have of adjacent lands." LUBA <br />held that the Planning Commission's decision to leave the eastern boundary open to the park <br />failed to screen the PUD from view from the park, as required by EC 9.8320(3). <br />NEXT STEPS <br />Following the public hearing, the Planning Commission will need to determine how to proceed <br />with resolution of the landscape screening issue, including whether or not to reopen the record <br />to new evidence on that sole issue. <br />Staff's recommendation is to resolve the landscape screening issue by modifying the Hearings <br />Official's original condition of approval to provide more specificity about the required <br />landscaping in accordance with the standards at EC 9.6200. The City's legal counsel will also be <br />available to provide guidance on the available options leading up to our deliberations meeting <br />which is scheduled for August 17, 2015. <br />ATTACHMENTS <br />1. Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing <br />2. Original Appeal Statement <br />3. Hearings Official Decision <br />4. Planning Commission Final Order <br />5. LUBA Decision <br />6. Court of Appeals Decision <br />7. LUBA Final Order and Opinion on Remand <br />The full record that was before the Planning Commission in its consideration of the original <br />appeal is being provided to commissioners separately, and will also be made publicly available <br />3 <br />PC Agenda - Page 3 <br />