Applicant Final Argument - Laserfiche WebLink

Eugene Hearing Official November 23, 2015 Page 3 The operative term "street" is defined in the code. EC 9.0050: Street. An improved or unimproved public or private way, other than an alley, that is created to provide ingress or egress for vehicular traffic to one or more lots or parcels, excluding a private way that is created to provide ingress or egress to land in conjunction with the use of land for forestry, mining, or agricultural purposes. A "street" includes the land between right-of-way lines within the ingress/egress easement areas serving multiple residential lots but excluding "flagpole" portions of flag lots. [Emphasis added] Applying the code definition, West Amazon is a "street" in both directions from the subject property. The right of way continues to the north, on city owned right of way, and connects to the balance of the city street system, even though the right of way to the north is not yet improved beyond the city barrier a few hundred yards to the north of this site. If the Staff or others contend that the city barrier to the north and the unimproved character of the right of way beyond the barrier negate its being a "street" in the meaning of the code, that position reflects reading into the code some language that is not there. This project also meets the code requirement that the street "disperse" traffic in more than one direction. Here traffic can go north or south from the entrance to the site. Traffic can continue at least 1000 feet to the city barrier on the roads. The code is silent about how far traffic needs to be able to go in each direction in order to be "dispersed." "Disperse" is not defined in the code. That calls for turning to the dictionary. The Supreme Court favors Webster's Third New Int'1 Dictionary. Osborn v. PSRB, 325 Or 135, 146, 934 P2d 391 (1997). The Webster's definition for "disperse" is: "[T]o cause to break up and go in different ways: send or drive into different places." Being able to travel out of the project and north on West Amazon meets this definition. The definition does not say one has to be able to disperse and get to a specific distance from the site (say a mile) or to a specific location (say Springfield). The Hearing Official should find that this project is consistent with 19 Lot Rule as written. There is nothing in the legislative history that would conflict with applying the standard consistent with the dictionary definition. This provision was adopted in the 2001 makeover of the zoning code, which was litigated in the Home Builders case. As explained at the hearing, the record of that appeal is over 17,000 pages and spans several years. We have submitted relevant legislative history in two previously filed Exhibits. Exhibit D is pages from May 1999 deliberations of the Planning Commission. Exhibit B is pages from the November 1999 and February 2001 deliberations. Exhibit D includes draft PUD provisions dated April 30, 1999. Bates 7873. At this juncture, there was only a single track for PUD review; there were not discrete tracks being considered for Needed Housing and General tracks. The Staff recommendation at this time was to not carry over the 19-lot rule from the old code. Staff explained at Bates 7880: