Decision - Laserfiche WebLink

those arguments apply to. In the present case, most of the opponents' arguments are difficult if not impossible to relate to any specific approval criteria. Nonetheless, I will do my best to respond to opponents' arguments. Kate Perle and Tim Foelker, who are part of the Santa Clara Community Organization, while generally in favor of the proposed development, would prefer that there not be a fence along the northern boundary of the currently proposed development.' They would prefer not to have a fence because they believe it would separate the transit station from the surrounding area. I do not see that this implicates any of the applicable approval criteria.' Furthermore, the applicant explained that the proposed fence is designed to separate the area proposed for development from the area designated for future development. As the site plans demonstrates there are anticipated connections between the area currently proposed for development and the remainder of the site. The applicant also stated that the fence would likely be removed upon development of the remainder of the property. In any event, the proposed fence does not provide a basis to deny the application. Craig Marshall (Marshall) lives across Green Lane from the proposed transit station. Initially, Marshall is concerned about mosquitos intensifying in the drainage proposed to be located along Green Lane. Although Marshall does not explain what if any approval criterion this applies to, the applicant explained that the drainage area is an infiltration system that would not result in standing water that would lead to increased mosquitos. Marshall also argues that he does want the proposed connector road to be located near his house. While I can understand why Marshall would prefer not to have the proposed connector street located near his house, Marshall does not cite any approval criterion that the proposed connector street would violate. Eugene Code (EC) 7.420 provides the approval criteria for access connections, and the staff report thoroughly explains why those criteria are satisfied. Marshall does not identify, let alone challenge those findings. I agree with the staff report that the proposed connector street meets all applicable approval criteria. 1 The proposed fence would run through the middle of the property, separating the southern portion that is proposed for development from the northern portion which would be developed at a later date. 2 Although the community organization cites provisions from the Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan, I do not see how those provisions pertain to the proposed fence. To be fair, it is not clear that the community organization is citing those provisions in regards to the proposed fence. Hearings Official Decision (PDT 19-1/ARA 19-1) 3