Applicationclaims(p.14of67andthroughout)\[Seebelow EC9.8320(1)PolicyA.17,Policy <br />A.20\]. <br />Applicationcannotguaranteethatanyunitwouldbeotherthansingle-familydetached <br />construction.Thistwo-lotoptionrepresents6%oftotalproposed34taxlots.Ifbothwerebuilt <br />withthreeunits,theywouldrepresent16%ofthemaximumproposedandexisting38units.The <br />factthattheApplicationproposesasmallerdensityperacrethanallowedshouldnotbetakenas <br />agenerousconcessionbyaself-sacrificingapplicant.Rather,itisimportanttonotethatalarge <br />portion(perhapsonethird)ofthetotalacreageisnotbuildableduetosteepslopes,landslide <br />vulnerability,andlimitedaccesswithinthesite\[Seealsoourdiscussionandrecalculationoflot <br />densitiesunder EC9.8320(10)(k)\]. <br />Consequently,theApplicationshouldbedeniedbecauseitdoesnotprovidesufficient <br />evidencetoconformtotherequirementsofCriterionEC9.8320(1)PolicyA.10forhigher <br />densitythatwouldimproveefficiencyofusingexistinginfrastructureandwouldconserve <br />resourcelandsoutsidetheUGB. <br />PolicyA.11Generallylocatehigherdensityresidentialdevelopmentsnear <br />employmentorcommercialservices,inproximitytomajortransportation <br />systemsorwithtransportationefficientnodes. <br />Applicationstates(p.20of67):“Thisadditionofresidentialbuildingswilllocateagreater <br />numberofpeopleclosertothecommercialservices,employmentservices,andmajor <br />transportationsystems.” <br />TheApplication’sstatementdoesn’tmakesenseasworded:“closerto”what,fromwhat,in <br />contrasttowhatotheroptions?ThePolicystates:“near”and“proximity.”Forexample,there <br />hasbeenahugeconstructionboomofmulti-unitdevelopmentsresultinginhigherdensityinthe <br />areasimmediatelyadjacenttotheUniversityofOregoncampusandFranklinBlvd. <br />transportationnodes.WhattheApplicationerroneouslyallegesisthattheproposedCHPUD,ata <br />minimumdistanceofaboutoneandone-halfmiles,wouldbeaccessibleandconvenientfor <br />residentstoaccesstransportation,employment,andservices.Thisallegationcannotbe <br />substantiated.WhattheApplicationpresentsasevidenceismerelythemileagetoadestination <br />fromtheborder(noteventhecenter)oftheproposedCHPUD.Thisissimilartowhat <br />Applicationpresentedunder EC9.8300(1)(b)\[Seebelowunder EC9.8320(10)(k)\]. <br />Itcanbeassumedwithahighlevelofconfidencethatresidentsineverydwellingwithinthe <br />proposedCHPUDwouldpossessatleastone,and,morelikely,twovehicles,orevenmore,upto <br />thenumberoflicenseddriverswhowillbecommutingtowork,school,orotherlocations. <br />Applicationthensimplylistsdestinationsthatareclaimedtobe“incloseproximity”tothe <br />proposedPUD.Theyrangefromonetothreemilesandincludecommercial,employment, <br />educational,andrecreationlocations.But“majortransportationsystems”arenotconvenientor <br />easilyaccessible.Whilethemileagemaybeaccurate,whattheApplicationignoresarethe <br />geographicalelevations.Thedeterminingfactorforautomobileusebytheresidentsofthe <br />proposedCHPUDisnotjustdistancebutgeography–thesteepterrain. <br />9 <br /> <br />