proposedCHPUD,wecontendthatitwoulddolittleornothingtopreventagriculturallandfrom <br />beingdevelopedforhousingbeyondtheUGB.WithintheUGB,theneedforincreaseddensity <br />bymeansofinfilliscogentstrategy;yet,thenetcontributionfromtheproposedCHPUDwould <br />beminimal. <br />Applicationstates(p.32of67):“Thereisalsotherealitythatittakestimetobuildahomeas <br />wellascompleteaPUD.Thepropertywillnotbedevelopedallatonceandtreesrequiredto <br />beremovedtoconstructinfrastructureandbuildingswillberemovedovertime. <br />Applicationhereacknowledgesthatbynotproposingafull,planneddevelopmentandApplicant <br />notintendingtoconstructhousing,thefullbuild-outoftheproposedCHPUDwouldtakeyears. <br />TenyearswasoneinformalestimategivenbyApplicant’srepresentativesattheirsecond <br />presentationtotheneighborhoodGeneralMeeting(11/9/16).Becauseone-by-one,independent <br />constructionactivitiesforeachdwellingwillspreadovermanyyears,therewillbeno <br />efficienciesofscaleandconservationofenergyandresources. <br />Consequently,theultimateeffectoftheproposedCHPUDonincreasinginfilldensitywithinthe <br />UGBwouldbenegligibleovertime.TheApplicationdoesnotprovideanyevidenceoranalysis <br />ofsuchobviousquestionsas:HowwouldapprovalofthisproposedPUDrelievethepressureto <br />extendtheUGB?WoulddenialofthisproposedCHPUDforcetheexpansionoftheUGB?How <br />wouldapprovalofthisproposedCHPUDpreventanyplanneddevelopmentforabout30high- <br />end,customhomeson13orsoacreslocatedbeyondtheUGBonworkingagriculturalland?The <br />sitesarenotequivalent.Thesehypotheticalsrevealtheproblematic,unanswerableaspectof <br />tryingtocorrelatetheeffectofanysingularinfillproposalwithitsimpactontheinsideor <br />outsideoftheUGB.Thereisno“clearandobjective”metricinthiscaseoftheproposed <br />CHPUD.Judgmentsanddecisionsmustbalancequalitativestandardsandvalues. <br />Regardinghigherdensity,wemustnotethatapplicanthasmodifiedthenumberofunits,lots,and <br />lotboundariesthroughouttheapplicationprocess,suchthatitseemstobeamovingtarget. <br />ConsideringtheSupplementalMaterials(postedNovember28,2017)modifyingtherevised <br />application(August,22,2017),Applicationnowisintendedtostate: <br />“Thereare6existingunitsonthedevelopmentsitecurrently.Theadditionof28-32more <br />unitsforatotalof34-38unitsintheCapitalHillPUDprojectareawouldincreasethenet <br />densityfrom.46unitsperacreto2.6-2.9unitsperacre(where5unitsperacreareallowed)” <br />(p.20revised). <br />Butthesenumbersmaynowbeinaccurate,giventhedemandfromEugeneCodeCompliance <br />Services(1/23/18,SeeCodeComplianceLetter,AttachmentG)toreturnthenon-conforming <br />andcode-violatingmulti-unitbuilding,currentlyoccupiedonsite,toitsoriginalsinglefamily <br />dwelling.Thevariationinnumberofadditionalunitsnowresultsfromthefactthattwonewlots <br />havetheoptionforeitheroneunit,ortwoorthreesinglefamilyattachedunits.Thismulti-unit <br />proposedoptionisaminimaltokenfortherequired PurposeofPlannedUnitDevelopment, <br />EC9.8300(1)(c)for“Avarietyofdwellingtypesthathelpmeettheneedsofallincome <br />groupsinthecommunity.”Thisoptiondoesnotguaranteea“range”or“variety,”as <br />8 <br /> <br />