From:Sabin Brabb <br />To:GIOELLO Nick R <br />Subject:Opposition to PUD 24-001 and ST 24-003 Land Development Applications <br />Date:Wednesday, July 3, 2024 12:17:46 PM <br />You don't often get email from brabbsabin@gmail.com. Learn why this is important <br />[EXTERNAL ] <br />Dear Mr. Gioello, <br />I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed land development plans under <br />applications PUD 24-001 and ST 24-003. As a resident of Eugene, I am deeply concerned that <br />these applications fail to meet several critical Eugene building codes, which could have <br />significant negative impacts on our community and environment. <br />Preservation of Natural Resources (EC 9.8300(1)(d)) The proposed development does not <br />create a sustainable environment that includes the preservation of existing natural resources. <br />The developer's claim that the Goal 5 Inventory applies to the entire 15-acre land, thereby <br />exempting them from Tree Preservation rules (EC 9.6880-EC 9.6885), is inaccurate. Only <br />Lots 30-35 have a Goal 5 Inventory item. The rest of the land should adhere to the Tree <br />Preservation codes to protect our invaluable 150-300 year old Willamette native oaks, which <br />play a crucial role in preventing erosion, supporting wildlife, and providing a natural wildfire <br />barrier. <br />Connectivity and Emergency Access (EC 9.6815) The current street design does not safely <br />and efficiently accommodate emergency vehicles, nor does it provide adequate access to parks <br />and protect water-related resources and wildlife corridors. The developer’s request for an <br />exception to the secondary access requirement for fire and emergency medical vehicles (EC <br />9.6815(2)(d)) is unacceptable. Alternatives to the current design, such as using existing access <br />entrances, must be considered to ensure safety and compliance with city codes. <br />Protection of Natural Areas (EC 9.8330) The developer plans to alter the site before <br />receiving Final PUD approval, in violation of EC 9.8330. Additionally, their proposal to <br />reroute storm water without final approval and without a clear plan to minimize impact on the <br />Goal 5 Inventory stream (EC 9.4930(3)(J)) is deeply concerning. The environmental impact on <br />this Category C stream needs thorough evaluation and clear mitigation strategies before any <br />approval. <br />Traffic Impact Although there is no specific code addressing traffic within the Clear & <br />Objective standards, the potential increase in traffic from 38 lots, each potentially housing <br />multiple units, is substantial. Previous traffic studies and informal counts show significant <br />increases in traffic, which have led to accidents, near misses, and other safety issues. The <br />developer's claim that the development would only result in 38 peak hour trips is misleading <br />and ignores the likely reality of more dense housing scenarios which could result in the <br />addition of over three hundred more cars to the neighborhood. <br />In conclusion, the proposed development under applications PUD 24-001 and ST 24-003 does <br />not comply with several key Eugene building codes and presents significant risks to our <br />community’s safety, natural environment, and overall quality of life. I urge you to reject these <br />applications and require the developer to submit a plan that fully complies with all relevant