Applicant's Final Written Argument <br />Lombard Apartments <br />July 23, 2018 <br />Page 11 of 12 <br />crystal clear that ORS 197.307(4) applies to all housing - not just housing in the BLI. The <br />Applicant does not agree that the subject property was not entitled to clear and objective <br />standards prior to the applicability of SB 1051. State law does not categorically exempt Goal <br />15 land from the BLI. It creates a presumption and then leaves the final policy choice to the <br />city. <br />The full text of OAR 660-08-0005(2) is: <br />(2) `Buildable Land" means residentially designated land within the urban <br />growth boundary, including both vacant and developed land likely to be <br />redeveloped, that is suitable, available and necessag for residential uses. <br />Publicly owned land isgenerally not considered available for residential uses. <br />Land is generally considered "suitable and available" unless it.- <br />(a) Is severely constrained by natural hazards as determined under Statewide <br />Planning Goal 7; <br />(b) Is subject to natural resource protection measures determined under <br />Statewide Planning Goals S, 6, 15, 16, 17 or 18; <br />(c) Has slopes of 25 percent orgreater; <br />(d) Is within the 100 year flood plain; or <br />(e) Cannot be provided with public facilities. <br />Eugene has made policy choices in preparing its BLI that depart from the presumptions <br />in the definition. For example, it has affirmatively included in its BLI land up to 30% slope, <br />thus including land between 25% and 30% slope that the definition would presume to <br />exclude. See Residential Land Study at Part I page 5 and fn 6, Exhibit A-2 to <br />Ordinance 20585. <br />Similarly, Eugene's BLI includes land in the Greenway in the BLI. The subject <br />property is an example. The subject property appears as buildable land on the BLI Maps. See <br />Residential Land Study at Figure 5, Map Tile 19 of 42, Exhibit A-2 to Ordinance 20585. <br />Could the City have exempted all land in the Greenway from the BLI if it had wanted <br />to? Yes, certainly. That would have been allowed under the definition of "Buildable Land" in <br />the OAR. Could the City have left all or some of the Greenway land in the BLI? Yes, that, <br />too, is allowed under the definition of "Buildable Land." Eugene made the policy choice to <br />include some Greenway acreage in the residential BLI, including the subject property. <br />nc;i:,.ISP z)n- i ,-i- C'Neer Q%.101 <br />cr^ .cnI :ndLl-1C% :xm <br />