PUTICHA <br />A <br />Thursday, December. 5, 2013 <br />Eugene City Planning Commission <br />Re; Oakleigh Meadow Co-Housing PUD application <br />Dear Planning Commission <br />This letter is as strong support for the proposed co-housing project being proposed for by the Oakleigh <br />Meadow Community. I have followed this project for a number of years and offer the following <br />comments. I believe that I can offer these comments as a long term resident of Eugene and a proven <br />expert in urban design, land use planning and single family and multifamily housing design. I have <br />practiced architecture for the past 50 years in Eugene and throughout the U.S. and have taught <br />Architectural Design at the University of Oregon for 52 years. <br />Having watched the progress of this project's development, I can say the planning, programming and <br />design by those active in the process have learned from this long and tedious internal design process. A <br />process that has required the participants to seek consensus, explore and understand a slightly <br />different lifestyle. They have come away with a special understanding and regard for each other, the <br />surrounding neighbors and the land. This is a sustainable project because all involved have had a part <br />in making it together, it is theirs and they will protect it. They have made a working and sharing <br />"urban sub community" connected and within a part of a larger community. They have focused on <br />how "sub communities" are important and what a resource they offer to themselves and to the larger <br />community. <br />have reviewed the 21 page Appeal Statement that appeals the hearing officer and planning staff <br />approvals and find most of the items noted on the first 14 pages, as errors address the opinions of the <br />inadequacies of the Public's Way and not the developers designs nor internal site layout, The <br />referenced design and engineering standards refer to the Street and public infrastructure. If the street, <br />sidewalks turnaround, etc. are under designed then that is a neighborhood or public's issue to resolve. <br />There are no infrastructure concerns in the way the developer has addressed the roadways, sidewalks, <br />etc. for the developed site. . <br />To apply these ROW standards for changes as a result of a now to be developed site especially one that <br />is proposed for the zoned density is a serious precedent. Subdivisions that are required to dedicate <br />ROW for streets that will become part of the community's property is different than a private <br />development that has it's own internal access and roadway networks. It is the community's <br />responsibility to improve the public ROW that would serve a new development if it is proven to be <br />inadequate. <br />The 6th through the 9th "Assignment of Error" are strictly value judgments on the part of the River <br />Road Community Organization. They deal with clustering, compatibility, screening and solar setback. <br />The PUD ordinance requires a design/planning/engineering/landscape team of professionals to design <br />and engineer a development. The concept for this requirement being that if these professional were <br />retained there would be some creditability assigned and given to their expertise and skills as to how <br />they might address, comply and find less prescribed solutions to the project elements. The developers <br />have complied with this requirement and the retained professionals should be given the credibility they <br />have been trained to provide. <br />The developers have used the PUD process as it is intended and should be encouraged. <br />The proposed number of units is within the prescriptive land use density' for low density housing. It <br />certainly satisfies the intent of the PUD ordinances, which was adopted to encourage and allow for <br />imaginative land uses and site configurations beyond prescriptive ordinances. This proposed <br />development from an urban design standpoint is certainly much better than a string of houses all with <br />POTICHA ARCHITECTS Studio 1820 Kona Street T 541.686.9466 <br />Otto P. Poticha, FAIA, NCARS Eugene, Oregon 97403 .:.F 541.686.9371 <br />Email: op@poticha.net <br />255 <br />