GIOELLO Nick R <br />From: Hugh Paterson III <sil.linguist@gmail.com> <br />Sent: Monday, March 12, 2018 4:16 PM <br />To: GIOELLO Nick R <br />Subject: Capital Hill PUD Testimony <br />Nick, <br />I hope it is not too late to add something to to official record for the testimony on the capital hill PUD hearing. <br />1 gave oral testimony about the relevance of OR SB 1051. <br />In essence I said that I do not see that the current plan actually took into account the additional and state <br />mandated changes to the Eugene City Code. <br />In thoughtful reflection I thought it might be clearer if I mailed my concerns. <br />SB 1051 requires significant adjustment to the Eugene City land use code, and must be implemented by July 1 <br />2018. For a very thorough brief of what sections of Eugene City Code need to be updated I refer you to Bill <br />Kloos's memo.to the Eugene planning commission for the march 6th meeting (pg. 21-39). https://www.eufzene- <br />or.gov/AgendaCenter/Vie,,,vFile/Agenda/ 03062018-869 <br />Section 6 of SB 1051 requires that every place where a house can be built on Rl, must allow for a second UN- <br />attached ADU. This means that every parcel on Capital hill can essentially have a duplex on it, and some lots <br />can have more... that may not be the kind of buildings that the PUD planers anticipate buyers are going to build, <br />but it is important as we consider what the true population density of the area under consideration is and then <br />the applicability of the commissioned safety analysis, and utility requirements. <br />What I am saying is that Eugene city code can not legally stop ADUs from being build on these lots, as Zoned <br />R-1, and therefore the possible housing density - even with a reduced lot count from what is allowable under R- <br />1 is not accurately reported in the PUD proposal, nor is it reflected in the safety and traffic analysis, nor water <br />consumption/waste water estimations. <br />It is my hope that the city perform due diligence in actually considering the proposal under the required changes <br />pursuant to SB 1051. <br />I want a better Eugene for today and tomorrow. I would hate for our children to bear a tax burden for in <br />adequate/inappropriate planning now. <br />all the best, <br />Thank you for your service to our community <br />- Hugh Paterson III <br />