Ɏ <br />Ɏ <br />As for the particular ways in which the proposed development is a poor match for the site: <br />Ɏ <br /> <br />1.The development proposes to use Fir Lane and Lombard Lane as a secondary access route. <br />Traffic by this route is already problematic with current traffic accessing the neighborhood and <br />the parking lot for Jacobs Park. Even with the recent addition of the sidewalk on Fir Lane, the <br />lane sees a lot of use by pedestrians and bikes in the roadway. The additional traffic on these <br />streets would add to these existing hazards. If the development were to proceed, it would be <br />absolutely essential to install bollards to prohibit access to the apartments via Lombard Lane to <br />any other than emergency vehicles. <br /> <br />2.Even with bollards installed, dense development on this lot will add traffic just north of the <br />intersection of Fir and River Road. My housemate who commutes to work by bicycle already <br />finds it difficult to safely turn from westbound Fir onto southbound River Road. Though the <br />posted limit is 35, much of the traffic already goes by much faster, and the existing crosswalk <br />lights are, he says, ignored by some motorists. I believe a traffic analysis would be required for <br />a development of 100 or more units. It seems obvious to me that one ought to be undertaken for <br />this proposed development given that all of the traffic impact would impinge on River Road as <br />the only means of access, even though the proposal is for only 94 units. I think such a study <br />would call for a stoplight. <br /> <br />3.It seems wasteful to pave quality soils and build new fencing so close to the Greenway. The <br />Greenway is both a transportation hub and a park, and surely it's possible for development to <br />maintain some visual appeal adjacent to the path. Why not make good use of the existing soils <br />for drainage and flood control? <br /> <br />4.The proposed development is in a flood plain, isn't it? I don't see signs of sensitivity to this <br />hazard in the posted plan. <br />ŸȌɎ <br /> <br />The proposed development is unimaginative! <br />Ɏ <br />That last concern is one that may be beyond the bounds of what Planning & Development is equipped <br />to address in this matter, but I want to state it for the record. I wish that in Eugene we more often <br />considered mixed-use developments in housing. It seems to me that the only mixed-use development <br />takes place downtown, with apartments or condominiums above shops. However, the Greenway seems <br />like an ideal place to try some such development away from downtown, creating some small housing- <br />adjacent retail spaces that would be a good match to bicycle traffic. I'd like to see housing, commerce, <br />Ɏ <br />and employment being developed in concert, rather than as distinct points that require travel by car. <br />Ɏ <br />Eugene in general and my neighborhood in particular have the prospect for continuing to get better and <br />better. Government at various levels has indicated a desire for creative and context-sensitive design for <br />Ɏ <br />urban development. Let's live up to that! <br />Ɏ <br />Ɏ <br />Sincerely, <br />Ɏ <br />Ɏ <br />Ɏ <br />Ɏ <br />Bruce Holland Rogers <br />Ɏ <br />1485 E Briarcliff Lane <br />Ɏ <br /> <br />