Hearings Official Decision - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Kloos also argued that for similar reasons the application could not be denied for failure to comply with EC 9.8325(3) which required a buffer area between the proposed development and surrounding properties. He asserted that the plain language of the standard does not allow fences within the buffer or access roads to cross the buffer area. As a result, he stated that the standard could not be applied to a PUD proposal. Two neutral parties testified. Mr. Richard Zeller, similar to his written comments, questioned whether the applicant adequately studied runoff potential since the related assessment was done during the dry months of the year. He also asserted that the 19 lot rule had the purpose of addressing fire danger for areas that did not have more than one ingress or egress route. Similarly, Mr. Larry Levinson argued that the 19 lot rule was a guard against the danger of wildfire. He also raised concerns about the need to pump sewage from the proposed home uphill to the line in West Amazon road. Mr. Ross Williamson testified in opposition to the application. He made the following arguments: The application must be denied because under EC 9.8325(1) the project does not meet the state definition of "needed housing." In particular, he argued that neither the applicant, nor the staff had determined that the single family homes proposed met the definition for housing at "particular price ranges or rent levels." Further, he argued that the city's recent Envision Eugene document states that no additional land for housing is necessary. b. The applicant can proceed under the discretionary PUD provisions because the project does not provide "needed housing." The fact that other PUD applications on nearby properties have been denied (Deerbrook) is not relevant to the current application. c. The proposal violates EC 9.8325(5) regarding development on slopes over 20% because the applicant's map shows areas within the development envelope that exceed 20%. The staff's opinion that Vivian Way can be excluded from consideration under the city's street connectivity standards (for topographic reasons) is not supported by substantial evidence in the record. The 19 lot rule implements a fire safety function. He provided information on a recent wildfire event at the intersection of West Amazon (Owl Rd.) and Fox Hollow Road that temporarily trapped residents on West Amazon. f. The adjustment requests are unnecessary and provide a means for the applicant to avoid various street connectivity standards. He argued that Mr. Kloos's interpretation of the buffer requirement in EC 9.8325(3) is absurd and need not be applied so strictly. The Hearing Official invited staff to respond to issues raised during public testimony. In response to the Hearings Official's question, staff responded that the subject property could be developed through partition, or multiple partition, rather than just the PUD process as Mr. Kloos asserted. Staff also explained that the city's Buildable Lands Inventory ("BLI") included an assessment of "needed housing" as required by ORS 197.307 and Statewide Planning Goal 10. The BLI identified housing types for the Hearings Official Decision (PDT 15-1/ ARA 15-13)