My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Public Comments Received at Hearing
>
OnTrack
>
CU
>
2002
>
CU 02-4
>
Public Comments Received at Hearing
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/6/2017 2:41:35 PM
Creation date
8/26/2016 9:30:35 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
CU
File Year
2
File Sequence Number
4
Application Name
CATHEDRAL PARK
Document Type
Public Comments
Document_Date
8/26/2016
External View
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
50
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
LAW OFFICE OF BILL KLOOS PC <br />OREGON LAND USE LAW <br />375 W. 4TH AVENUE, SUITE 204 <br />EUGENE. OR 97401 <br />TEL: 541343.8596 <br />WEB: WWW.LANDUSEOPEGON.COM <br />BILL KLOOS <br />BILLKLOOS a LANDUSEOREGON.COM <br />August 23, 2016 <br />Eugene Planning Commission <br />Atrium Building <br />99 West 10th Ave. <br />Eugene, OR 97401 <br />Re: Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law; CU 02-4 <br />Dear Planning Commission Members: <br />As you know, the applicant in the above referenced matter (CU 02-4) has filed an appeal of the <br />Hearing Official's decision approving a 172 unit controlled income and rent conditional use <br />permit. The applicant did so because the Hearing Official failed to make a finding and decision <br />(and adopt the applicant's proposed condition of approval) addressing what standards and criteria <br />would apply to development approved under the CIR CUP. This uncertainty combined with the <br />City Attorney's stated position that the City will apply all subsequently adopted standards and <br />criteria which do not result in a denial of the approved use will effectively kill the approval of <br />affordable housing granted by the Hearing Official. <br />As discussed in the Applicant's appeal statement and prior submissions, the City Attorney's <br />position and Hearing Official's failure to decide the matter was in error and the applicant has <br />asked the Planning Commission to correct those mistakes on appeal. In order to do so, EC 9.716 <br />requires the Planning Commission to issue an order with findings and conclusions. Specifically, <br />it requires the Planning Commission to "make findings of fact as to why the hearing official's <br />findings were in error." To assist the Planning Commission in fulfilling its obligations under EC <br />9.716, I have prepared the attached final order to be adopted by the Planning Commission. <br />Sincerely, <br />Ea ~e&" <br />Bill Kloos <br />Cc: Client <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.