EC 9.0500 pages 15 and 16 titled "Evidence" from the EC code. Evidence, Facts, documents; <br />data or other information offered to demonstrate compliance or noncompliance with the standards <br />believed by the proponent to be relevant to the decision. <br />Noncompliant standards: <br />• Evident - EC 9.00201(f) The proposed Condominium project does not fit the Character of <br />the existing neighborhoods. Evidence stated on Page 1 of this document. <br />• Fact - EC 9.00201(f) Livability of the individual neighborhood will forever be significantly be <br />changed if this development is approved in the mass size. <br />Data - EC 9.0020 1(h) Subject to the Eugene Code's data, focus on relieving pressure on city's <br />most congested roadways and intersections, etc. <br />• Documents demonstrating noncompliant standards - This entire letter is based on <br />documents written under the Eugene Code. I believe these codes sited are showing the project <br />is not in compliance of the City's written standards. <br />We (the Neighbors) have asked for and participated in Mediation with OMC to help bring down the <br />current size of the proposed 29 units. <br />What started as a small neighborhood community development has now morphed into a large, <br />overpriced development with a Nevada City, California developer telling our current neighbors <br />and the original idea folks of OMC not to discuss this project with any of us. How neighborly is <br />that. <br />I hope for the sake of the OMC folks that are invested in this start up that they are able to get <br />their money's worth. <br />Futher more regarding code criteria <br />EC 9.0020 1(f) "Tree Preservation", page. 38 of the Eugene Code - Protect ion of an existing <br />tree from damage or stress such that the tee is likely to survive and continue to grow normally in a healthy <br />condition, through measures that avoid or minimise damage to branches, canopy, stunk and roots of the <br />tee. Such measures may include, but are not limited to, installation of tree protective fencing, mulching, <br />and watering of roots, supervision of work by an arborist, installation of aeration or drainage system, root <br />pruning or use of non-desituctive exaction techniques. <br />• The proposed Oakleigh Meadow Cohousing project discusses trees on their tax lots. The <br />Grove of Cedar Trees on the North East side of the property being discussed actually belong <br />to the tag lot T200, they are not in OMC's tax lot, how will that large of a development go in <br />and not, damage, stress, not damage the canopies, hunks or roots and to guarantee the health <br />condition.of these trees through dense construction. <br />98-2 <br />