inthesectiononthe SouthHillsStudy,andin EC9.8320(4),theApplicationhasfailedto <br />protecttheviewshedabove901',failedtoprovideadequatescreeningfromtheRibbonTrail,and <br />failedingeneraltoprovideanadequateTreePreservationPlan.Theapplicationrelieson <br />proposedCCRstomeettheCity’scoderequirements,butdoesnotincludesufficientdetailson <br />theproposedCCR’stoallowaproperreviewoftheapplication’scompliancewiththeapplicable <br />codes. <br />(3)DevelopmentStandards-SpecificRecommendations <br />(g)Thatplannedunitdevelopmentreviewshallbebaseduponarecognition <br />ofbothpublicandprivateinterest.Inareasofsignificantconflict(e.g. <br />locatingdevelopmentinahighlyvisibleareaasopposedtoalessvisiblearea <br />orinanareaofsignificantvegetationasopposedtoarelativelyopenarea) <br />whichcouldberesolvedthroughalternatedevelopmentplan,primacyshall <br />begiventothepublicinterestinanydeterminations. <br />Thereisasignificantconflictbetweenthedeveloper’sprivateinterestinincreasingthereturnon <br />aninvestmentpropertywiththepublic’sinterestinprovidinggoodstewardshipoftheland,the <br />water,andthecommunity.TheEugeneCodeprovidesthatintheeventofsuchaconflict <br />“primacyshallbegiventothepublicinterest”especiallywhentheconflictcouldberesolved <br />through“useofanalternativedevelopmentplan” <br />TheapplicationhasnotmettherequirementsofEC9.9590insupportoftheSouthHills <br />StudyStandard.ItfailstomeettherequirementsofEC9.9630andshouldbedenied. <br />33 <br /> <br />