7-28-15 Trautman Public Comment (04)

it, etc.), the applicant has failed to provide substantial evidence that their destruction of the meadow- Greenway habitat will not have significant effects on wildlife such as beavers, owls, osprey and bald eagles, to name a few of the species observed within the proposed meadow site. The proposal also fails to provide evidence that it complies with tree preservation standards since the development calls for the removal of large cedars, and stands of hemlocks and firs contrary to code. It is also important to note that the applicant/property owners already cut down dozens of healthy trees in stands prior to applying to the city for PUD approval, even advertising to come cut down your own cedar Christmas tree-thus further evading lawful land use standards 6. The PUD application fails to comply with Willamette- Greenway Permit Standards (WG 13-001) The Applicant is proposing to develop within the Willamette Greenway (WG). The requested permit must be denied as inconsistent with EC 9.8800,1C 10-322.15, Statewide Planning Goal 15, the Lower River Road Concept Plan (2009), and River Road/Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan. Thus, because "no development permit shall be issued by the city prior to approval of the Willamette River Greenway permit, the PUD application must be denied as well. EC 9.8805. The Willamette River Greenway was originally established by the 1967 Oregon Legislature as a grant program for land acquisition to State Parks along the Willamette River from Eugene through Portland. The Greenway evolved from a state parks and recreation program in 1970 to a natural corridor program in 1972. Goals for the state program are to protect, conserve, restore, enhance and maintain the ecological, natural, scenic, historical, agricultural, economic, cultural and recreational qualities and resources along the Willamette River. Additional demands are being placed on the Willamette River and Greenway resources as Oregon's population grows; particularly in the Eugene/Springfield area, and for this reason it is imperative to ensure that WG goals are being met and to identify opportunities for IMPROVING the Greenway, not further eroding it with dense development, impervious surfaces, multiple large building footprints,, particularly such development directly adjacent to city park land that could be acquired for resource/habitat improvement or logical expansion of city park/open space land. The WG is only as strong as the protections the City affords it by protecting the few remaining undeveloped parcels (like this one) adjacent to open space and conservation areas that have been deemed invaluable to City residents and recreation users. The land between the river and the subject property is owned by the City and functions as an undeveloped natural resource area that contains Water Resource (Goal 5) conservation areas. Water Resource conservation area needs greater than typi.cal protection, and development this dense and intense should not be permitted in areas like this which contain floodplain, Greenway WR conservation areas. At a minimum, the area functions as a public park, an extension of the riverpath system, and the connector to the public filbert orchard and Rasor Park As currently proposed, the public will not feel comfortable using the open space public land directly adjacent to the condos because of the way the development is proposed-where the applicant plans to use the public land to function like the condo owners' own private yard with no screening or demarcation of the separation between public and private property. Millions of dollars and volunteer hours have been spent over the last several years attempting to improve habitat along this corridor via tree-planting, ivy removal, etc. Many cities in the metro area located along the Willamette River have renewed their commitment and effort to improve access and recreation 804