Eugene Planning Director <br />March 3, 2017 <br />Page 5 <br />consistent through amendments to the application or the imposition of reasonable <br />conditions of approval. [1999 c.838 §4; 2015 c.374 §3]" [emphasis added] <br />The 2016 amendment requires the City to approve the application if it is consistent with the plan <br />and code. More importantly, it now affords the applicant the right to suggest conditions needed <br />to make the proposal consistent with the plan and code. The applicant intends to invoke this <br />right. <br />3. The applicant invokes its right to amend the application if that is needed to make the <br />application consistent with the plan and code. <br />The statute quoted above also guarantees the applicant the right to amend the application prior to <br />a final decision in order to make the proposal consistent with the plan and code. And it allows <br />extending the decision deadline in ORS 227.178 to accomplish this. This language would appear <br />to allow the applicant to make the amendment even after the initial decision of the Hearing <br />Official, if that amendment would resolve the bases for denial by the Hearing Official. <br />Sincerely, <br />Fa ~Qow <br />Bill Kloos <br />Encl. <br />