June 19, 2017 <br />Nicholas Gioello <br />City of Eugene <br />Planning and Development <br />99 W 10th Avenue <br />Eugene, OR 97401 <br />RE: Capital Hill PUD <br />PDT 17-1 <br />Nick: <br />Thank you again for your thorough review of the project. The following are the responses to the <br />Completeness Review items. The City items are in regular typeface and our responses are in italics. <br />PLANNING <br />General Comments <br />• Staff notes that on the City application page, the box was checked for Planned Unit Development <br />Approval Criteria - General (EC 9.8320). Also, the narrative addresses the criteria of EC 9.8320, <br />therefor the application will be assessed by staff under the General Criteria and not under <br />Needed Housing. <br />The applicant intended to apply under the needed housing track, but the code allows no <br />development on this site under that track. Therefore, the applicant is forced to apply under the <br />General track. Because no development is allowed under the Needed Housing track, state law <br />prohibits the city from applying any discretionary standards to this application even though it is <br />filed under the General track. See ORS 197.307(6). See also fuller discussion of this issue in <br />attached letter from the Law Office of Bill Kloos PC. <br />• Since a significant amount of the site is to be preserved via individual lot owners as well as tract A <br />by the neighborhood association, a copy of the draft CC&R's should be submitted in order to <br />review preservation measures. <br />See Tree Preservation Plan for preservation measures for these areas. <br />It is premature to be preparing covenants and restrictions. These should implement final <br />conditions imposed on the approval, if any. <br />Written Statement <br />1. Detailed written statement that describers the proposed use of the property and how the proposed <br />planned unit development satisfies all applicable approval criteria (Section 9.8300 - 9.8310 and <br />9.8320 or 9.8325 of the Eugene Code). <br />Please review the attached Exhibit A to Resolution No. 2295, which is the Purpose Statements <br />and Recommendations of the South Hills Study. The Resolution has a statement in it that says <br />"the policies adopted by this resolution are applicable to the area identified in the study as being <br />south of 18th Avenue, above an elevation of 500 feet". Accordingly, we treat the Purpose <br />Statements and Recommendations as additional criteria for this type of application. Therefore, <br />please revise page 23 of your narrative to address all the Policies and Recommendations of the <br />South Hills Study. <br />See revised written statement to include all policies and recommendations. <br />• Beginning of page 36 regarding EC 9.6815 Street Connectivity, you discuss that "no <br />right of way exists in Hendricks Park, but Capital Drive creates a connection in that <br />direction, should there be a need in the future". Is it possible to connect to other City <br />streets through Hendricks Park? This concept should be discussed with appropriate <br />Parks and Open Space staff, in order to investigate the opportunity for alternative PO <br />access to the site either now or in the future. + LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS + <br />375 West 4th, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 SCHIRMER <br />PLANNERS + LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS + ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS Phone: 541.686.4540 Fax: 541.686.4577 <br />www.schirmersatre.com = <br />