My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Public Comments submitted at hearings official hearing (NRC 1)
>
OnTrack
>
PDT
>
2017
>
PDT 17-1
>
Public Comments submitted at hearings official hearing (NRC 1)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/12/2018 10:39:26 AM
Creation date
3/12/2018 10:38:33 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
PDT
File Year
17
File Sequence Number
1
Application Name
CAPITAL HILL PUD
Document Type
Public Comments submitted at hearings official hearing
Document_Date
3/7/2018
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.
/
334
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).
View images
View plain text
“Lots5,6,8and9fronta20’foot\[sic\]accesseasement(12-footpavingwidth)\[sic\]that <br />alsoconnectstoCapitalDrive.Lots16and17connecttoCupolaDriveviaa20’access <br />easementand12feetofpavingwidth.Finally,lots18and19connecttoCapitalDriveviaa <br />20’accesseasementwith12feetofpavingwidth.”(Emphasisadded.) <br />TheCommitteeinitiallypointsoutthattheaboveparagraphstatesthattheaccesseasement <br />servingLot5,6,8and9is20feetwidewitha12footpavingwidth.However,the1/19/18L2.0 <br />showsthatthiseasementis28feetwidewitha20footpavingwidth.Whichisit? <br />Onceagain,theCommitteefindsittotallyunacceptablethatsomany“disconnects”are <br />containedinthe8/22/17Applicationandallofthesupportingdocumentation.Wereiterateour <br />opinionthattheApplicantandhisConsultantowethecommunityamorethoughtfulprofessional <br />product. <br />“Amoreelegantsolutionthanaflaglot,providingaccesseasementsensureslandisused <br />moreefficiently,whichpromotescompatibleinfillandclusteringofunits,whilealso <br />protectingexistingnaturalresources.Ifeachlothadtohave50feetoffrontageonCupola <br />Drive,theapplicantwouldbeforcedtoeitherextendorwidenthestreetinawaythatis <br />detrimentaltosignificanttreesandvegetationorloseasignificantnumberoflots,whichis <br />countertoEugene’seffortstoincreasehousingsupplyandprovideadiversehousingmix.” <br />(Emphasisadded.) <br />TheCommitteeunderscoresitspositionthatwhatEugeneneedsisnotmorelotsforthesakeof <br />lots.Eugeneneedsmorehousingforthe“middle”oftheeconomicsector.Also,asdiscussed <br />severaltimesherein,theproposedprojectdoesnotrepresenttheopportunityfora“diverse <br />housingmix.”Theproposedprojectwillonlycontainhigh-endsingle-familydetached <br />residences.Finally,“losingasignificantnumberoflots”isactuallycountertotheApplicant’s <br />desiretoachievesubstantialprofitabilityfromtheproposedproject.BeingcountertoEugene’s <br />effortshavenothingtodowithit. <br />“MaintainingCupolaDriveand CapitalHill\[sic\]asdesigned,asopposedtowideningor <br />extendingthemtoensurefrontage,alsoensuresthatawalkableenvironmentthatfeelssafe <br />forusersofallagesispresentforcurrentandfutureresidentsofthearea.Ratherthan <br />simplyhavingfrontageforfrontage’ssake,thedesignofthisPUDseekstomeettheintentof <br />theresidentialzoneandPUDcriteriathroughcreativelypreservingnaturalresources,while <br />alsoprovidingsuitableandcompatibleinfill.”(Emphasisadded.) <br />Onceagain,“CapitalHill”(Drive?)(Street?).SuchastreetdoesnotexistinEugene.Towhat <br />streetistheApplicationreferring? <br />TheApplication’sabovestatementthatanarrowerstreet“ensuresthatawalkableenvironment <br />thatfeelssafeforusersofallagesispresent”isblatantlyfalse.Anarrowerstreetmay“feel” <br />safer(cozier?morequaint?)but,undoubtedly,awiderstreetthatprovidesbettervisibilitywill <br />alwaysbethetruly“safer”choice. <br />154 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.