requiring a site plan revision to remove references to middle housing above 901-foot <br />elevations and a note on the plan for no development above 901-foot elevation (page 10 <br />of the August 14, 2024 Kloos letter). <br />• Kloos argument regarding Randy Lane and the demand for public road improvements is <br />responsive to the City’s Memorandum and the revised Public Works Referral Comments <br />requiring Randy Lane as a public street and the addition of two new conditions of approval <br />requiring the design and construction of Randy Lane as a public street and the dedication <br />of a 40-foot right-of-way (pages 4 and 5 of Kloos letter). <br />• Kloos argument that the entire site is a Goal 5 resource and its inclusion on the Scenic Sites <br />Working Paper, is responsive to the City’s Memorandum and the discussion about the <br />entire site as a Goal 5 resource because of its inclusion on the April 12, 1978, Scenic Sites <br />Working Paper (pages 8 and 9, page 11 of Kloos letter). <br />• Kloos argument regarding a proposal to combine Lots 37 and 38 in response to the lack of <br />access for Lot 38 and the inclusion of Exhibit H titled Site Plan Combining Lots 37 and 38 by <br />Schirmer Consulting, is responsive to the City’s Memorandum and the revised Public Works <br />Referral Comments and condition of approval requiring that Lot 38 have frontage on a <br />public street or having access to a public street over a private street or proposed private <br />access easement (page 5 of Kloos letter). <br />• Kloos argument regarding a request for an exception to connectivity between the two ends <br />of Randy Lane due to steep topography, is responsive to the City’s Memorandum and the <br />revised Public Works Referral Comments regarding street connectivity and condition of <br />approval requiring the applicant submit updated materials that an exception is warranted <br />or submit for Adjustment review (page 4 of Kloos letter). <br />• Kloos Argument about Stormwater planning for Middle Housing buildout and a request for <br />a condition of approval requiring on-site detention for any lots that are developed with <br />Middle Housing, and the inclusion of Exhibit I titled Storm Water Memo – KPFF <br />Engineering, is responsive to various submitted pieces of testimony 1 regarding stormwater <br />runoff from individually owned and developed lots. <br /> <br />The Planning Commission finds that the evidence rejected by the Hearings Official was responsive <br />to testimony submitted during the first open record period and should have been considered by <br />the Hearings Official. The Planning Commission therefore reverses the portion of the Hearings <br />Official’s decision rejecting the evidence submitted by the applicant during the second open <br />record period. <br /> <br />ORS 197.522 <br />As the Hearings Official explained (see Hearings Official’s Decision, page 4): <br /> <br />ORS 197.522 requires local governments to approve needed housing applications that <br />are consistent with, or can be made consistent with, through reasonable conditions of <br />approval, the comprehensive plan and applicable land use regulations, and to deny <br />1 See submitted testimony (7-10-24 Smith, Larry) referencing a recommended condition of approval for individual <br />lot owners to treat impervious surface flows from their lots. See submitted testimony (7-10-24 Laule, Kim) <br />questioning how individual property owners will provide water retention and maintenance on their own properties. <br />Also see submitted testimony (7-27-24 Lawrence, Grace) citing EC 9.6790(2) and 9.6793(3)(a) concern with individual <br />lot owners building and maintaining water detention systems. <br />Planning Commission Agenda 01/28/2025 Page 15 of 42