LAW OFFICE OF BILL KLOOS, PC <br />OREGON LAND USE LAW <br />May 17, 2004 <br />Ms. Susan Muir, Planning Director <br />Eugene Planning and Development <br />Atrium Building <br />99 West 10th Ave. <br />Eugene, OR 97401 <br />Re: Request for Interpretation of EC 9.8325(3) <br />Dear Ms. Muir: <br />576 OLIVE STREET, SUITE 300 <br />EUGENE, OR 97401 <br />PO BOX 11906 <br />EUGENE, OR 97440 <br />TEL (541) 343-8596 <br />FAX (541) 343-8702 <br />E-MAIL BILLXLOOS@LANDUSEOREGON.COM <br />Please accept this letter and accompanying fee as a request for a Director's Interpretation under <br />EC 9.0040. This request if filed on behalf of Walter Custom Homes. The code section in <br />question is 9.8325(3). <br />EC 9.8325(3) is a Tentative Planned Unit Development Approval Criteria for applications being <br />processed under "Needed Housing" track. The approval standards requires: <br />"The PUD provides a buffer area between the proposed development and <br />surroundingproperties by providing at least a 30 foot wide landscape area along <br />the perimeter of the PUD according to EC 9.6210(7), " <br />The reference to EC 9,6210(7) is the "Massed Landscape Standard (L-7)" in the code's list of <br />"Description of Landscape Standards," <br />The interpretive question is as follows: My client would like to confirm that the standard above <br />allows streets, as defined in the code, and fences to be located in 30-foot wide landscape area <br />along the perimeter of the PUD. <br />Our expectation is that the answer to the question above will be affirmative. Initially, any <br />standard that is to be applied to a Needed Housing application must be clear and objective. ORS <br />197.307(6). Furthermore, it must be clear and objective on the face of the ordinance, ORS <br />227.173(2). Whether a standard is clear and objective, and thus able to be applied, is something <br />that can be determined in the context of a specific application. See Home Builders Assn. of Zane <br />County v. City of Eugene, 41 Or LUBA 370, 422-23 (2002), Generally, if determining the <br />meaning of the provision or whether it applies requires the exercise of judgment, then the term is <br />not clear and objective and, we believe, may not be applied. <br />