My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7-28-15 Trautman Public Comment (06)
>
OnTrack
>
PDT
>
2013
>
PDT 13-1
>
7-28-15 Trautman Public Comment (06)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/27/2017 4:32:34 PM
Creation date
7/28/2015 2:42:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
PDT
File Year
13
File Sequence Number
1
Application Name
OAKLEIGH COHOUSING
Document Type
Public Comments
Document_Date
7/28/2015
External View
Yes
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
300
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Download electronic document
View images
View plain text
PH-47 <br />OMC wants to support the community, then hire LOCAL CONTRACTORS. <br />We are asking you to hear property owners and renters on how we feel about Oakleigh <br />Meadows. We all have a voice and need to be heard. We did not know of so many changes until the <br />project became so large'. Oakleigh Meadow members know how we feel, however they didn't-share that <br />with the RRCO. We as neighbors tried to compromisewith David and Joan from the beginning. We all <br />tried to be 'reasonable with their goals. Only one sign has been posted which is standing just outside <br />the opening to Oakleigh Meadows to inform people about the hearing. The other two signs went up <br />after Becky was informed that the city was not in compliance. WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO A NEW. <br />HEARING DATE FROM THE TIME THE SECOND SIGN WAS PLACED, SEPT. 6TH <br />There are many children that live on Oakleigh Lane which is a huge concern to families that at <br />least 29 more cars on Oakleigh Lane will increase accidents to our environment. Listed below are more <br />concerns to Oakleigh Cohousing Project. Planning Unit Development ON Oakleigh Lane <br />TRAFFIC. ACCESS. AND ENVIRONMENT <br />9.8310(6) Impediments to emergency response, slope failure, and soil erosion. It is 220ft. from the fire <br />turnaround to E10 unit. This distance could mean jeopardize a medical situation. Water mains are <br />designed to meet Oregon Fire Codes with EWEB. Water lines will not support this size of construction. <br />OMC talks about filling in, too much can have an impact on erosion. <br />9.8310(12) Shall have minimal off site impacts. Storm water runoff must be to code 9.8310(9)-Storm <br />water runoff, with slope and erosion. How will the CO-housing support this? PUD EXEMPTS SOLAR, YET <br />NOT GREENHOUSE. <br />DENSITY AND PHASING <br />9.8310/9.8320(4) #2 Density per acre (DPA), what about the guest house ...Are they are over the DPA? <br />That is considered a unit, so it isa total of 29. It is really adding up to 27 units on 1.9'acres. Local condos <br />range from $103K to $130K, largely cost difference to $203-$220K in the OMC project. There is no <br />easement on the West side. Avoid unnecessary disruption or removal of attractive natural features & <br />vegetation. OMC will need to removal most of the tress; EC 6.320 <br />ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES/URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY <br />9.9630 Significant visual impact. Example: Back of 28f t. Condos, etc. Shading my property. <br />COMPATIBILITY/ZONING kl w/ PUD Overlap <br />9.8320(13) Reasonable compatible and harmonious with adjacent and nearby land uses. Provide <br />adequate urban services and. streets. Ex: sidewalks maintance: utilities and tree roots under sidewalks. <br />9.2751(7) Special Development Standards for Table 9.2750 <br />Thank you for your time, Anne Love 133 Oakleigh Lane. <br />1306 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.