Item 5 - PH on Laurel Hill Plan - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

LAW OFFICE OF BILL KLOOS, PC 576 OLIVE STREET, SUITE 300 OREGON LAND USE LAW EUGENE, OR 97401 PO BOX 11906 EUGENE, OR 97440 TEL (541) 343-2674 FAX (541) 343-8702 E-MAIL DANTERRELL@LANDUSEOREGON,COM September 14, 2004 Eugene Planning Commission CityofEugene R[C~I~[D IM PUlltIC HEAIII Ia 777 Pearl Street 0hi;-. ~~0P,2k [~ i go0~ Eugene, OR 97401 Re: Staff Report for RA 04-1 and Z 04-4 Dear Planning Commissioners: This letter responds to staff and public comments contained in the agenda packet for the September 14, 2004, public hearing for the applications RA 04-1, Laurel Hill Refinement Plan Amendment, and Z 04-4, Furtick/Larson Zone Change. As an opening point, the applicants note that the staff report correctly explains that the negative impacts of the subject property, which include electrical services and highway proximity, render the site unsuitable for dwellings. See Staff Report, page 9 of 13. Attached to this letter are photographs recently taken of the subject property. The underbrush has recently been cleared, so these images present a better picture of the site than do the images submitted with the application. In the site photographs, the only buildable area is centered where the clump of trees are located between the two sets of power lines that nm across the property. These images give you a much better understanding of the constraints that exist on the site, and why the subject property is unsuitable for residential uses. While there are several concerns expressed in the staff report and public comments, they all focus on four key issues I will address below. Those issues are: the plan designation for the subject property; approval criterion EC 9.842(2); Laurel Hill Policy number 5; and transportation impacts. Plan Designation for the Subject Property Planning Staff's comments regarding our Second Supplement to Application Materials misses the key point of those materials. Staff explains that their position is that, because the updated Metro Plan Diagram, recently adopted by the City Council, is not in effect, the City Council's decision has no relevance to these proceedings. We agree that the updated Metro Plan Diagram is not in effect. However, the interpretations made by the Planning Commission and the City Council during the development process for that diagram do not need to be acknowledged and stand on their own merits. Staff repeatedly IV-Ii