My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
3rd Open Record Period: Applicant’s final rebuttal (4-6-18)
>
OnTrack
>
PDT
>
2017
>
PDT 17-1
>
3rd Open Record Period: Applicant’s final rebuttal (4-6-18)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/9/2018 3:49:29 PM
Creation date
4/9/2018 3:49:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
PDT
File Year
17
File Sequence Number
1
Application Name
CAPITAL HILL PUD
Document Type
Public Comments
Document_Date
4/6/2018
External View
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Eugene Hearing Official <br />April 6, 2018 <br />Page 13 <br /> <br />Opponents also referenced two other Metro Plan policies in addition to those addressed by the <br />staff and the applicant -- Policies E.2 and J.8. <br /> <br />Environmental Design Policy E.2 says: <br /> <br />Natural vegetation, natural water features, and drainage-ways shall be protected <br />and retained to the maximum extent practical. Landscaping shall be utilized to <br />enhance those natural features. This policy does not preclude increasing their <br />conveyance capacity in an environmentally responsible manner. <br /> <br />Energy Policy J.8 says: <br /> <br />Commercial, residential, and recreational land uses shall be integrated to the <br />greatest extent possible, balanced with all planning policies to reduce travel <br />distances, optimize reuse of waste heat, and optimize potential on-site energy <br />generation. <br /> <br />Neither of these policies is clear and objective; furthermore, each is implemented through more <br />detailed code language. <br /> <br />EC 9.8320(2) The PUD is consistent with applicable adopted refinement plan policies. <br /> <br /> <br />Staff Report at 7. <br /> <br />South Hills Study (1974) <br /> <br />1. The SHS is not a source of standards for this property because the City has not shown that the <br />plan was ever applied to the property by a governing body having planning authority for the site <br />OTHER PRELIMINARY MATTERS -- SOUTH <br />at the time. See discussion above of <br />HILLS STUDY APPLICABILITY. <br /> <br />2. The SHS does not contain policies that are clear and objective, and therefore they may not be <br />OTHER PRELIMINARY MATTERS -- NEEDED <br />applied. See discussion above of <br />HOUSING STATUTE. <br />For a discussion of specific SHS policies and why they are not clear <br />and objective, see our March 5 Spreadsheet of Standards submitted herewith. Please also see our <br />summary of the law relating to clear and objective standards in our March 5 Hearing Letter. <br /> <br />3. The SHS also contains policies that are not directly applicable as standards because they are <br />not stated in mandatory terms, or they are correctly viewed as directives to the City to adopt <br />policy rather than directed at applications, or they are implemented through the existing code <br />standards rather than being directly applicable in quasi-judicial contexts. Please see our March 5 <br />Spreadsheet of Standards that addresses each policy. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.