make it tall enough to significantly alter the appearance of a massive condominium? How will the <br />current owners of these condos even feel about having a road less than 1 foot from their back porch? I <br />question who will even want to purchase these units along Oakleigh. <br />The following are formal references to how the proposed development does not meet Eugene City Code. <br />Eugene City Code 9.8320 (13)compatible <br />The proposed development shall be reasonably <br /> <br />and harmonious with adjacent and nearby land uses <br />My children and the other children on the street currently spend hours riding bikes, skateboarding, <br />playing basketball and street hockey, and just being kids, on our very narrow, low traffic, dead end street. <br />We walk nearly daily to the nearby commercial businesses along River Road. The addition of 168 vehicle <br />trips per day (as estimated by the Eugene Public Works report) will negatively impact the current uses of <br />the nearby land, and the massive increase in traffic will not be reasonably compatible or harmonious <br />with the way it is currently used. It will also increase the risk of serious accidents on the lane. I and my <br />neighbors, will no longer feel safe letting our children continue their current activities, let alone feel safe <br />with our children walking and riding bikes to their schools. <br />In addition, OMC has never in any of their documentation, presented what this project will look like from <br />the east bordering city property. This property is in the flood plain and is owned by the City of Eugene as <br />park land. In order to be elevated above the 100 year floodplain the buildings will need 3 to 4 feet of <br />fill. This will make the building height about 35 feet above the surrounding public land and there is little <br />room to provide full sized trees to screen. Will there be large retaining walls or rip rap, since the <br />buildings are proposed to be within 5 feet of the public land? (which should not be receiving any fill). <br />From the public land it will feel like the buildings will tower over the public land and feel like OMC will be <br />watching over the people using it. No fences or screening are currently proposed on the east side of the <br />proposed development. <br />Currently, many citizens all along River Road use the adjoining city property to walk their dogs, sit and <br />enjoy the sun in the summer, or pick some filberts in the orchard. With the way the site plan is designed <br />with the buildings facing this grassy area and no screening, it creates the illusion that the city property <br />belongs to the OMC development. OMC has already made my children and the neighbor's child feel that <br />they are no longer welcome riding their bikes on the bumps and jumps in the tree lined area along the <br />river path. I don’t think any neighboring citizens will feel like they are welcome to use this city property <br />once it is developed, thus creating a negative impact to the current uses of this nearby land. I know I <br />already don’t feel welcome walking across this portion of city property anymore, and neither do my <br />children. <br />This is not compatible nor harmonious with adjacent land uses. <br />Eugene City Code 9.8320 (3)adequate screening from surrounding <br />The PUD will provide <br /> <br />properties including, <br />but not limited to, anticipated building locations, bulk, and height. <br />The large City-owned cottonwoods do not screen the open public land immediately adjacent to OMC <br />property, which is suggested in OMC's PDT application. Those trees should not be considered adequate <br /> <br />