OMC also is not "opening the door" to fixture development in the Greenway--that door is already wide open, <br />and fixture development <br />will undoubtedly occur. The City of Eugene did buy many parcels along the river's edge in the 1970s to <br />stablish the Greenway <br />park system. But despite having some bond Rinds available today, the City has shown no interest in purchasing <br />additional <br />private parcels to expand Greenway parks in our stretch of the river. Even if the City did have interest, there are <br />other nearby lots <br />that are closer to the river and of higher habitat value--including a remnant Oregon white oak grove--that would <br />arguably be a better <br />use of limited public fiends. For flow, it seems that most or all privately-owned parcels in the Greenway are <br />likely to remain in private <br />ownership and subject to development. (At least one publicly-owned Greenway parcel is also slated for higher <br />density affordable housing.) <br />I certainly applaud Oakleigh neighbors in scrutinizing this development proposal. If they identify aspects of the <br />OMC plans that fail to meet. <br />zoning and code requirements--including setbacks, solar access, or the Greenway ordinance, etc.--those issues <br />need to be raised and <br />addressed by the Hearings Official and city planners as conditions on any development permit. <br />But don't kid yourself. Whether or not this development is built, something else likely will be, at this site and on <br />other lots even closer <br />to the river. Existing zoning, codes, and rules certainly allow it. Also note that many other parcels within the <br />Greenway in our area are <br />)ned for even higher density development or re-development. Unless Greenway standards are tightened <br />significantly, and zoning changes <br />and special area plans put in place, we can expect higher density development to continue in our Greenway. <br />This particular development proposal actually has quite a few redeeming qualities that help offset the negatives <br />of development in the Greenway. <br />Founding members of the planning group have deep ties -to the local neighborhood, and thoughtful ideas about - <br />how to improve its fimction. <br />They also have a passion and longstanding commitment to environmental restoration of the Greenway. These <br />values are reflected in <br />many aspects of their proposal. They are planning their cohousing to have a small physical and ecological <br />"footprint" relative to the <br />number of people who will live there. They aim to attract residents who want to drive less and take advantage of <br />the nearby alternative <br />transportation options, especially the river bike path. Public access to the river will be maintained at both <br />Oakleigh and McClure Lanes. They <br />are striving to create a diverse, participatory, and family-oriented community that also contributes to the <br />stability of the larger surrounding <br />neighborhood. The people who are designing the housing will also live there--they have a vested interest in <br />creating a quality place <br />to live. They are paying attention to details such as using locally native plants.and trees in their landscaping, and <br />architectural details and <br />)rnis that reflect the historic local vernacular. <br />To be honest, I struggle to see how higher density infill housing can be truly "compatible" with our existing low <br />density neighborhood or the <br />9.15 <br />