Appeal Materials (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Eugene Hearing Official March 5, 2018 Page 4 The LCDC Order was premised upon the status of the property as being on the BLI. The Commission expressly avoided determining whether the statute was triggered for all residential land, rather than just land on the BLI. See LCDC Order at 7 fn 6. The legislature resolved the question left open by the LCDC. With the amendment to ORS 197.307(4) quoted above, the entitlements under the Needed Housing Statute expressly apply to development of housing whether or not it is in the BLI. 3. The City may only apply discretionary standards if the applicant has the right to proceed under clear and objective standards. ORS 197.307(6). The statute allows the City to apply discretionary standards only if "[t]he applicant retains the option of proceeding" under clear and objective standards. ORS 197.307(6)(a). Applied to this situation, the City may only apply discretionary standards in its review of this PUD application if the owner also has the right to proceed under clear and objective standards. 4. The application demonstrates that the applicant can't get approval of a PUD under the city Needed Housing standards in EC 9.8325. My March 3 letter explains why no development can be approved on this site if it is reviewed under the clear and objective Needed Housing standards in EC 9.8325. The hilltop character of the site means that the more level area on top of the site can't be reached without violating the 20% slope grading limitation that comes with the Needed Housing standards. See Needed Housing PUD review standards at EC 9.8325(5). ("There shall be no proposed grading on portions of the development site that meet or exceed 20% slope.") 5. The defenses stated in the Staff Report to the applicant's right to only clear and objective standards in this review are contrary to the law. This application was filed under the discretionary General standards track in EC 9.8320 because, as explained in the original application, no PUD housing development is allowed on this site under the clear and objective Needed Housing standards track in EC 9.8325. The applicant requests, in conjunction with this decision, a determination that no PUD can be approved for this site under the Needed Housing track because the standards in EC 9.8325 prohibit any housing development. That determination is necessary to support the relief the applicant requests here the applicant's entitlement under the Needed Housing Statute, which is its right to proceed to development under clear and objective standards. The only way to get an approval under clear and objective standards is to apply under the General standards and invoke ORS 197.307(6)(a), which prohibits the City from applying any standards that are not clear and objective. The City poses several defenses to this approach APP B - HEARING LTTR 3.5.2018