Response: Conservation areas and commonly owned areas that exceed the maximum allowed lot <br />size were approved for the site under the original East Ridge Village PUD (PDF 02-2). The <br />modification included in this application will modify the boundaries of the areas and place <br />them in their own lots. Therefore, the conservation area lots shown on the plan will <br />exceed the maximum lot standard but will remain consistent with the designation and <br />configuration of these area approved for the PUD. Further, the conservation area lots will <br />preserve trees and existing natural features of the site as allowed for in subsection S(d), <br />and the private street will provide access consistent with the approved PUD and <br />consistent with the provisions in this section. <br />(6) Unless approved through a planned unit development process, in any 1 <br />subdivision there shall be a maximum of 25% duplex lots, 15% triplex lots, <br />and 10% fourplex lots. At least 50% of the lots must be for one-family detached <br />dwellings or rowhouses. Fractions are reduced to the next lowest number. <br />Response: All the planned residential lots in this cluster subdivision are planned for one-family <br />attached row houses and are being reviewed under a planned development modification <br />process. This standard is met. <br />(7) In R-1, interior lots shall not have frontage on two non-intersecting streets <br />unless approved through the cluster subdivision or planned unit development <br />process where alternative proposals were evaluated, and there is no feasible <br />alternative to the creation of double frontage lots. <br />Response: The double frontage lots included in this application are being approved through a <br />planned unit development modification and a concurrent cluster subdivision application. <br />As previously discussed, EC 9.2761(3)(b) requires that rowhouse lots have frontage on a <br />street and alley access to parking areas. Per City feedback at the pre-application <br />conference, the alley access is being provided with a private street that is designed to City <br />standards for alleys. The configuration is substantially similar to the layout approved <br />under PDF 02-2, which featured a 14-unit condominium building with frontage on <br />Brackenfern Road and access provided from the rear. Therefore, the layout substantially <br />conforms to the approved PUD layout as modified by this application. This standard is <br />met. <br />(8) Duplex Division Lots. Duplex division lots shall comply with other duplex <br />division provisions. (See EC 9.2777 Duplex Division Lot Standards.) <br />Response: This project does not involve duplex division lots. This standard does not apply. <br />(9) Lot width and lot frontage minimums in R-2, R-3 and R-4 can be reduced to <br />20 feet as part of an approved site review plan, planned unit development, or <br />cluster subdivision. Unless otherwise approved through a planned unit <br />development or cluster subdivision, at no point, for the entire extent of the lot, <br />shall the side lot lines be less than 20 feet apart. <br />Response: The project site is not designated R-2, R-3, or R-4. This standard does not apply. <br />(10) Alley Access Only Lots/Parcels can be created only through an approved <br />cluster subdivision in the R-1 zone or an approved planned unit development <br />in any zone. <br />Response: The City informed the Applicant at the pre-application conference that a private street is <br />required to provide access to these lots. The private street is configured to be consistent <br />,~/►L7 East Highlands Lot 46 - City of Eugene November 2021 <br />PUD Modification, Cluster Subdivision, Property Line Adjustment and Page 8 <br />Slope Easement Vacation <br />