1st Open Record Period: Public Testimony (3-19-18 to 3-21-18)

The staff report states (p. 31) "Nearby facilities include" and just lists how close commercial centers, Laurelwood and the LTD stop at 19th and Agate are, saying they are accessible by bike. No attempt is made to explain how bicycle transportation to these sites is safe, given the significant difference in elevation between these“nearby facilities” and the PUD, along with the many blind curves that must be navigated. The report includes as Attachment F a memorandum from Scott Gillespie PE, who concludes that Spring Blvd. and Capital Drive are adequate to serve the proposed development. He states that there is "no evidence to suggest the existing roadways are unsafe or incapable of serving the development site." As someone who has lived on Spring Boulevard near the intersection with Fairmount, adjacent to the first two blind curves on that route, this statement is difficult to believe. I have witnessed numerous close calls over the years, as drivers attempting to pass a bicyclist heading up the hill swerves into the opposite traffic lane at the blind curve. My husband and I have rendered first aid to two bicyclists who narrowly missed more significant injury as cars sped by. EC 9.8320 (6) Slope Failure: See the Review of Branch Engineering's Geotechnical Investigation by Gunnar Schlieder, Ph.D. CEG. This review shows that the site is not geotechnically suitable for the proposed development, and will adversely impact the proposed site, the Ribbon Trail and the Laurel Hill Valley. Emergency Response: While the Fire Marshal recommended “No Parking” signs on both sides of existing roads leading to the PUD site would greatly improve the ability of the fire department and emergency responders to respond quickly, this is not the only problem. As demonstrated by Response Committee and acknowledged by City of Eugene Public Works, the access roads to the site have a paving width of 18'. A fire truck has mirror to mirror width of 10 feet. The Response Committee demonstrated that two large vehicles are unable to pass each other (Fire Truck backing down the hill in order to allow Sanipac truck to pass). It is important to remember that this incident occurred on Spring Boulevard, where there is no parking on either side of the street. Access to timely emergency response remains limited by narrow streets having numerous blind EC 9.6815 curves, and a single access point. While the requirement for a secondary emergency access under was waived due to the steep slopes involved, lack of a true secondary access is a significant risk to public health and safety. EC 9.8320 (7) Provision of water and electric services: EWEB has indicated that there is sufficient water to supply the site but that the infrastructure is inadequate, requiring a new water distribution system. As written in the code, this criterion is met only by the Applicant demonstrating future availability in certain ways. This demonstration must be present in the record, which according to the recommended condition of approval #9 must be in the form of cash, bond payment or irrevocable letter of credit. A roadway review presented by Scott Gillespie PE dated 12/8/17 (Staff Report Attachment F) discusses the condition of the existing roads. He correctly states that the development site is primarily accessed via Spring Blvd and Capital Drive. He also correctly states that Cresta de Ruta provides another route to Capital but is not the most direct route. It is important to recognize that both of these routes must go through the 5-way intersection; the Cresta de Ruta route is just more circuitous. He then states that there are a number of connections to the primary route. The only reasonable routes are via thth Fairmount to Spring to Capital Drive. Three of the six listed connections (East 27 to Spring, East 27 to thnd Woodlawn via Central & 26, and Agate to Columbia via 22) require vehicles to travel on Woodlawn or a 3