BROWN Daren M <br />From:Kathleen Masterson <kcmasterson@gmail.com> <br />Sent:Wednesday, March 21, 2018 8:22 AM <br />To:GIOELLO Nick R <br />Subject:Please enter into the record and confirm receipt. <br />Schirmer Cross Sections PUD Site.pdf <br />Attachments: <br />March 20, 2018 <br />To: City of Eugene Hearings Official, c/o Nick Gioello, Associate Planner <br />From: Kathleen Masterson, Member, CHPUD Joint Neighborhood Response Committee <br />Re: Capitol Hill PUD Tentative Plan Application (PDT 17-1) <br />Dear Hearings Official: <br />This is additional testimony regarding the Criteria as listed below: <br />EC 9.8320 (2): The PUD is consistent with applicable adopted refinement plan policies. <br />Ridgeline Park Section: <br />Regarding ensuring preservation of those areas most visibly a part of the entire community, the staff report <br />focuses only on the undeveloped tracts of land on the eastern ridge of the property, stating that the view from <br />the Ribbon Trail will be preserved. No mention is made of the impact on the view of the ridgeline from Eugene, <br />which will impact a much larger portion of the population of the area. The Applicant's representative utilized <br />the three slides (submitted as attachments to this letter) during her presentation to the hearings official. Her own <br />visuals clearly show that the PUD site lies at the ridgeline, is currently heavily forested, and that the loss of the <br />trees above 901' would be visible from downtown Eugene and the Laurel Hill Valley. The presence of off-site <br />mature trees is unlikely to hide this loss. <br />Development Standards: <br />The South Hills Study acknowledged that in some areas the highest elevations have shallow slopes. Still, it <br />advised that the highest elevations of above 901' be preserved from intensive development due to the significant <br />visual impact for the citizens both in downtown Eugene and the Laurel Hill Valley. The staff report twists itself <br />into knots in order to accommodate this proposed PUD. Actually, the “preservation areas” are listed as such <br />because the slopes are so steep and prone to landslide that they are for all practical purposes unbuildable. The <br />“clustering” of potential building sites closer to the top of the ridgeline just represents putting as many home <br />sites as possible on the site. The recommendation of the South Hills Study that intensive development be <br />clustered in the lowest elevations in order to preserve open space in the highest elevations should not be <br />precluded. <br />Regarding the requirement that developments be reviewed to encourage clustering of open space elements, the <br />report states "Staff notes that the proposal also includes a preservation area along the northeast boundary of <br />the subject property which abuts the established public open space of Hendricks Park.” It is unclear from the <br />site plans where this preservation area lies, as the lots directly abut Hendricks Park on the north, and are not <br />separated by a preserved area. Are they speaking of Tract A? <br />1 <br /> <br />