Appeal Final Order - Laserfiche WebLink

With the proposed adjustments to standards, conditions, and findings above the applicant’s proposal complies with EC 9.8175(9). It is noted that additional standards may apply at the time of a development permit as specific details of the applicant’s proposal become more refined in anticipation of a building permit submittal. At the time of building permit, the applicant will need to demonstrate compliance with additional, applicable development standards. Based on the available information, conditions, and findings above, the applicant’s request for a Historic Alteration and Adjustment Review is approved. IV. OTHER ISSUES RAISED BY TESTIMONY Some of the testimony received was not clearly directed towards the approval criteria or factors on which the Board’s decision must be based. However, as the testimony was received into the record, it has been summarized and discussed below. In addition to statements that related to approval criteria and factors, testimony from Baker received March 17, 2022 raises questions about how the record was provided to Board members, states that there have not been demolitions of National Register resources in Eugene, and provides discussion around Statewide Planning Goal 5. City staff placed additional information in response to these items below into the record. Baker also references ORS 197.772, states that Section 106 review has not occurred, and references OAR 358.653. These sections are also noted by other pieces of testimony and while not relevant to the approval criteria or factors at hand are discussed. To the questions about how the record has been made available to Board members, digital copies of the record materials were provided to each board member, and staff made thumb drives and printed materials available for pick-up and/or delivery to Board members upon request. These efforts have resulted in the entire record being placed in front of the Board as required by the Eugene Code and State law. To the assertion that historic demolitions have not occurred in Eugene, staff placed the Planning Director’s decision which approved the demolition of a National Register building in Eugene. While not directly relevant to the approval criteria or the current application, it is noted to correct a fact. Baker states that the Eugene Land Use code lacks a specific Historic Preservation element under Goal 5, concluding that the controlling document is the Lane County Metropolitan Plan. It is assumed that the plan Baker is calling the “Lane County Metropolitan Plan” is the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan), of which some policies are applicable to the applicant’s request and have been discussed in the context of factors for approval. To the assertion that the Eugene Land Use code lacks a Historic Preservation element, the Eugene Code does include both process and land use application types that are directly applicable to historic properties. The code sections related to historic resources begin at EC 9.8150 and include application types for Historic Landmark Designation, Historic Landmark – Removal of Designation, Historic Property Demolition, Historic Property Alterations, and Historic Property Moving. Attachment A