I approval process that complies with ORS 197.307(4). The City of Eugene has <br />2 adopted such a two-track system for needed housing applications. For each <br />3 type of development application that involves needed housing, the Eugene Code <br />4 (EC) 9.8325 provides for a "general" approval process that includes some <br />5 discretionary or unclear or subjective standards, and a "needed housing" <br />6 approval process that includes only clear and objective standards. See Home <br />7 Builders v. City of Eugene, 41 Or LUBA 370 (2002) (discussing the city's two- <br />8 track system). The PUD "needed housing" track is set out in EC 9.8325. The <br />9 PUD discretionary "general" track is set out in EC 9.8320. One of the general <br />10 track PUD approval standards requires a finding that the PUD is consistent with <br />11 applicable adopted refinement plan policies. EC 9.8320(2). <br />12 The Dreyers applied for PUD approval under the general track at EC <br />13 9.8320. However, the Dreyers submitted a memorandum arguing that, due to <br />14 elevations and steep slopes on the subject property, little or no new <br />15 development is possible on the property under the clear and objective PUD <br />16 standards in the "needed housing" track at EC 9.8325, which forced the Dreyers <br />17 to apply under the EC 9.8320 general track in order to gain approval.2 The <br />2 The most limiting EC 9.8325 standards, the Dreyers argued, are (1) a <br />prohibition on grading of slopes 20 percent or steeper at EC 9.8325(5), and (2) <br />a prohibition on creating any new lots above 900 feet in elevation, at <br />9.8325(12)(a). The Dryers submitted a diagram, found at App 149 to their <br />petition for review and Record 285, illustrating their argument that these <br />standards in combination would allow little or no new residential development <br />Page 6 <br />