houses, as their owners grab a cup of coffee or sit down to eat for an hour or two. We currently <br />don't live in that kind of neighborhood. Imagine not being able to park in front of your own <br />house, because someone grabbing a meal is parked there. The only cars in front of our houses <br />now are people we know - people in our own neighborhood - a visitor or relative. I fully expect <br />crime will certainly be increased due to people from outside the neighborhood made suddenly <br />aware of new homes and people to exploit through burglary or worse. Please don't do that to <br />us! Don't make this a potential avenue of increased crime. See R- 9.8650-G(1)(2) <br />Developers say they will need to add underground parking in order to have *nearly* enough <br />parking space. They are not even providing enough parking for the needs their structure will <br />require. I fully expect the parking in front of our houses to be compromised by outsiders trying <br />to buy pizza or a bagel at their proposed restaurants. And these are businesses we do not need. <br />We already have a good bakery and several restaurants. Additionally, underground parking is a <br />terrible idea, given seismology of the area and the fact that they're proposing to build in a <br />wetland. <br />What developers are proposing is not zoned for this neighborhood. It is at a time like this that we hope <br />our city officials will protect us from predatory developers, and say no to zoning and traffic exceptions. <br />This is a case of developers trying to take advantage of what appears to them a good opportunity to <br />make a lot of money for themselves, while ignoring the needs of the people who currently live in the <br />area. And so far, city bureaucracy seems to be facilitating. It is time for the city to stop this development <br />and refuse to allow zoning changes or exceptions. <br />Southeast neighbors don't want this, and it should not be forced upon us. If developers scale this project <br />back to a reasonable density, in keeping with the size and character of the neighborhood, a smaller <br />project *might* be do-able. The size of such a project should be in keeping with the current density. I <br />could see building 5-6 small homes in that area (with minimal yard space), as was done near Amazon <br />Park. But a dense apartment complex would ruin a child-friendly neighborhood, with more traffic that <br />can threaten young lives. See R-9.8650-A <br />It seems to me that the thrust behind this project is solely profiteering. It would only be there to feed <br />the schemes and line the pockets of those who live elsewhere. The City of Eugene should protect, not <br />exploit us - and it should not allow developers to exploit us either. The City of Eugene should be asking <br />us what we want, not colluding with developers to create projects that benefit only the developers. <br />Please do not approve any further work on this development. We, in the neighborhood, did nothing to <br />deserve our quiet environment to be disrupted by a profiteer. We did nothing to call such a project into <br />our lives. We strongly object to others using our neighborhood to enrich their own wealth, while taking <br />no responsibility for the effects on our lives and our community values. <br />When city officials scratch their heads and wonder why voters do not automatically approve higher <br />taxes for new city hall and other city projects, perhaps they should consider that people whose <br />neighborhoods and personal serenity are threatened by wanton city-rubberstamped development such <br />