Public Comment (8) - Laserfiche WebLink

APP-3 As required bythe Eugene Code, the appeals are based on the record and limited to the assignments of error contained in the appeal statements submitted. As described below in Section III, Preliminary Issues, the PC resolves a. number of procedural and evidentiary issues raised by the parties. In Section IV, Appeal Issues, the PC includes findings and conclusions with regard to each appeal issue raised by the parties which ultimately lead the PC to its final local decision in this matter to reverse the HO's decision. As reversed on appeal, and further discussed below, the PC's Final Order approves the tentative PUD application for Deerbrook PUD (PDT 12-1), with conditions and revised findings. For clarity, the PC notes that tentative PUD approval is only granted for development of the western portion of the subject site. This approval excludes the development proposed on the eastern portion of the site as shown on the applicant's original 75-lot plans. For purposes of this Final Order, when referring below to the required removal of proposed development on the "eastern portion" of the site, the PC means the development shown on Tax Lot 101 of Assessor's Map 18-03-20-21, including Canyon Drive, Starwood Loop, Lots 50 through 75, and all related utilities and infrastructure. ii. RECORD BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION The record before the Planning Commission consists of all the items listed in the attached Index of Planning Commission Record, which were physically before, and not rejected by, the PC prior to its final decision. EC 9.7655(2) limits the nature of evidence that the PC can consider on appeal as follows: "The record from the proceeding of the Hearings Official or Historic Review Board shall be forwarded to the appeal review authority. No new evidence pertaining to the appeal issues shall be accepted." Pursuant to this section, the PC cannot accept any new evidence, and there is no process for an exception to this rule. As addressed below in Section III, Preliminary Issues, a number of items submitted by the parties are specifically rejected by the PC as inadmissible new evidence. As such, these items are not included in the record or referenced in the attached index, nor are they considered by the PC in reaching a decision on these appeals. The PC's decision on the appeals is otherwise based upon consideration of all other relevant evidence and argument within the record to date. Ill. PRELIMINARY ISSUES Preliminary issues are those raised by the appellants that are procedural or evidentiary in nature. The PC resolves these issues below. SEN Request that the PC Dismiss the HBA from Deerbrook Appeal Relevant Code Text: EC 9.7655(1)(d) specifies that "[a]ny person who submitted written comments in regard to the original application" may appeal a Hearings Official's decision. On October 5, 2012: The SEN submitted a request that the PC "dismiss" the HBA from the Deerbrook Appeal. The SEN assert that: 1) The HBA's written comments to the HO were prepared before the applicant formally submitted its application to the City and, therefore, must not have been "in regard to the Final Order- Deerbrook PUD (PDT 12-1) December 17, 2012 Page 2 5