I <br />Opinion by Bassham. <br />2 NATURE OF THE DECISION <br />3 In these consolidated appeals, the applicant and opponents appeal a <br />4 hearings official's tentative approval of a 36-unit planned unit development <br />5 (PUD). <br />6 BRIEFING <br />7 In LUBA No. 2018-074, the petitioners are the applicants Tom Dryer and <br />8 Cynthia Dreyer (the Dreyers). In LUBA No. 2018-080, the petitioners are three <br />9 <br />organizations: <br />Fairmount Neighborhood Association, Laurel <br />Hill Valley <br />10 <br />Citizens, and <br />the Joint Response Committee of the Fairmont <br />Neighborhood <br />11 Association and the Laurel Hill Valley Citizens. We refer to the petitioners in <br />12 LUBA No. 2018-080 as the Neighbors. The Dreyers have intervened on the <br />13 side of the city in LUBA No. 2018-080. The Neighbors have intervened on the <br />14 side of the city in LUBA No. 2018-074. <br />15 The Dreyers filed a combined petition for review (in their capacity as <br />16 petitioners in LUBA No. 2018-074) and cross-petition for review (in their <br />17 capacity as intervenors in LUBA No. 2018-080). The Neighbors filed a petition <br />18 for review in their appeal. Both the Dreyers and the Neighbors also filed <br />19 response briefs in their respective capacities as intervenors-respondents. The <br />20 city filed a single response brief responding to both appeals. <br />21 The Dreyers filed a reply brief to address new matters raised in the city's <br />22 response brief. The Neighbors filed a reply brief to address new matters raised <br />Page 3 <br />