HE-16 <br />doubling traffic flow. In the middle of the lane, there is two units that have a number of visitors in a 24 <br />hours period, which required the DEA, Law enforcement, Comcast, and emergency vehicles to visit <br />frequently. OMC has not encouraged property owners to attend RRCO meetings. RRCO should be <br />hearing more from the neighbors on how we feel about OMC. Communication has decreased overtime <br />with David and Joan due to the gargantuan size of this co-housing. The square footage costs will be <br />over $200 per foot. NOT REASONABLE for this neighborhood. Most of the members drive to their <br />meetings and gatherings, which creates strangled roads on either side of Oakleigh Meadow. Also, <br />OMC wants to support the community, and then hire LOCAL CONTRACTORS. <br />We are asking you to hear property owners and renters on how we feel about Oakleigh <br />Meadows. We all have a voice and need to be heard. We did not know of so many changes until the <br />project became so large. Oakleigh Meadow members know how we feel, however they didn’t share that <br />with the RRCO. We as neighbors tried to compromise with David and Joan from the beginning. We all <br />tried to be reasonable with their goals. Only one sign has been posted which is standing just outside <br />the opening to Oakleigh Meadows to inform people about the hearing. The other two signs went up <br />after Becky was informed that the city was not in compliance. WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO A NEW <br />TH <br />HEARING DATE FROM THE TIME THE SECOND SIGN WAS PLACED, SEPT. 6. <br />There are many children that live on Oakleigh Lane which is a huge concern to families that at <br />least 29 more cars on Oakleigh Lane will increase accidents to our environment. Listed below are more <br />concerns to Oakleigh Cohousing Project. Planning Unit Development ON Oakleigh Lane <br />TRAFFIC, ACCESS, AND ENVIRONMENT <br />9.8310(6) Impediments to emergency response, slope failure, and soil erosion. It is 220ft. from the fire <br />turnaround to E10 unit. This distance could mean jeopardize a medical situation. Water mains are <br />designed to meet Oregon Fire Codes with EWEB. Water lines will not support this size of construction. <br />OMC talks about filling in, too much can have an impact on erosion. <br />9.8310(12) shall have minimal off site impacts. Storm water runoff must be to code 9.8310(9) Storm <br />water runoff, with slope and erosion. How will the C0-housing support this? PUD EXEMPTS SOLAR, YET <br />NOT GREENHOUSE. <br />DENSITY AND PHASING <br />9.8310/9.8320(4) #2 Density per acre (DPA), what about the guest house…Are they are over the DPA? <br />That is considered a unit, so it is a total of 29. It is really adding up to 27 units on 1.9 acres. Local condos <br />range from $103K to $130K, largely cost difference to $203-$220K in the OMC project. There is no <br />easement on the West side. Avoid unnecessary disruption or removal of attractive natural features & <br />vegetation. OMC will need to removal most of the tress; EC 6.320 <br />ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES/URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY <br />9.9630 Significant visual impact. Example: Back of 28 ft. Condos, etc. Shading my property. <br /> <br />