Item B: Ordinance Concerning Goal 5 Natural Resources Study

Home Browse Search

LAW OFFICE OF BILL KLOOS, PC OREGON LAND USE LAW 576 OLIVE STREET, SUITE 300 EUGENE, OR 97401 PO BOX 11906 EUGENE, OR 97440 TEL (541) 343-0323 FAX (541) 343-8702 E-MAIL KIMODEA@LANDUSEOREGON.COM September 26, 200S Eugene City Council c/o Neil Bjorkland Eugene Planning Department Atrium Building 99 W. 10th Ave. Eugene, OR 97401 . RECEIVED SEP 2 6 2005 CITY OF EUGENE PLA.NNING DEPARTMENT RE: Resthaven Cemetery/Goal S Inventory Dear City Council: Please accept the following as an appearance by Tim Wiper and Resthaven Cemetery on behalf of Map 18-03-18, tax lot 300 and Map 18-03-04-43, tax lot 2100. Testimony was submitted in writing on behalf of the above named property owners in a letter dated May 23, 200S. Attachments were included as part of that letter. City staff and the Planning Commission failed to address issues raised. The above identified property has been placed in Goal S ESEE analysis group 16. The cemetery contains features that were included on the City's adopted GoalS inventory as Upland Wildlife Habitat and Riparian Corridor. Neither site belongs on the inventory or warrants protection because the sites are subject to an approved Conditional Use Permit Master Plan (CU 9S-2) and are therefore functionally "developed." SW Site. The City's inventory includes a drainage feature that runs across the subject property's southwest comer. The feature is identified on Goal S Map 16B as containing significant Upland Wildlife Habitat specifically designated E37 E-3. City staff and the Planning Commission are recommending limiting conflicting uses, categorizing the resource as a Category C stream, imposing a 40 foot setback and imposing the IWR overlay zone on the subject property. Staffs ESEE conclusions and recommendations, adopted by the planning commission, are unsupported. Staffs analysis and the planning commission's decision fail to address the fact that a predominant portion of site E37 E-3 is subject to an approved Conditional Use Permit (Master Plan) (CU-9S-2). The Master Plan governs development adjacent to the ditch and approves cemetery plots over most of the area proposed for regulation. Furthermore, the Master Plan requires the entire subject property to be fenced, limiting the use of the feature by wildlife. The result is that this area is effectively "developed" and any proposed regulation will be trumped by the Master Plan. Based on this information, the existence of approved development makes this site a "relatively lower quality site" and a proper ESEE analysis would recommend "allowing" c/~ft~