Sean T. Malone <br />Attorney at Law <br />259 E. Fifth Ave., Tel. (303) 859-0403 <br />Suite 200-C Fax (650) 471-7366 <br />Eugene, OR 97401 seanmalone8@hotmail.com <br />March 21, 2018 <br />Via Email and First Class Mail <br />Eugene Hearings Official <br />c/o Eugene Planning and Development <br />th <br />99 W. 10 Ave <br />Eugene, OR 97401 <br />nick.r.gioello@ci.eugene.or.us <br />Re: FNA/LHVC Post-Hearing Testimony and 5, 2018 <br />letter for the Capitol Hill Tentative PUD Plan Application, PDT 17-001, Map <br />18030431 <br />Please accept this letter on behalf of the Joint Fairmount Neighborhood Association and <br />Laurel Hill Valley Citizens for the Capitol Hill Tentative PUD plan application. <br />I. The applicants needed housing arguments in its March 5, 2018, letter are mistaken <br />The applicant alleges that, despite applying under the General or discretionary track <br />standards, the application should only be subject to clear and objective standards. To get to this <br />conclusion, the applicant makes several errors, as outlined below. <br />First, the 2017 amendments to the needed housing statute are not pertinent to the question <br />before the hearings official, so the Hearings Official can be disregard the applicants discussion <br />of the 2017 amendments. <br />Second, the Corvallis Enforcement Order is inapposite because in that case the applicant <br />had no alternative that did not include the discretionary Planned Development overlay zone. The <br />applicant in Corvallis did not have an option to pursue its proposal under only clear and objective <br />standards. Here, the applicant retains that option. The fact that pursuing approval under clear <br />and objective criteria may result in fewer buildable lots or even a denial does not nullify the <br />General or discretionary track. The applicant here can modify the application to satisfy clear and <br />objective criteria, apply under a different procedure, or have the application denied. See Home <br />, ___ OR LUBA ___ (LUBA No. 2001-059 Feb. 28, 2002). The <br />applicant is not entitled to approval under the clear and objective standards, just the opportunity <br />to satisfy those standards. <br />1 <br /> <br />