My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Public Testimony Through 02-20-2026
>
OnTrack
>
PDF
>
2025
>
PDF 25-01
>
Public Testimony Through 02-20-2026
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/2/2026 4:06:26 PM
Creation date
3/2/2026 4:06:04 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
PDF
File Year
25
File Sequence Number
1
Application Name
Braewood Hills 3rd Addition
Document Type
Public Testimony
Document_Date
2/23/2026
External View
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
65
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
From:Sara Fagan (US) <br />To:GIOELLO Nick R <br />Subject:Application numbers PDF 25-01 & SDR 25-02 <br />Date:Tuesday, February 17, 2026 8:47:06 PM <br />You don't often get email from sara.l.fagan@pwc.com. Learn why this is important <br />[EXTERNAL ] <br />Hi Nick, <br />I am writing to you with some concerns about the application numbers referenced in the <br />subject line of this email (PDF 25-01 & SDR 25-02). Specifically, I wanted to raise <br />concerns about the Private Joint Use Access and Utility Easement and Maintenance <br />agreement ("the JAM") that was included in the application that was submitted on <br />January 21, 2026. Based on my read of the applicable city code, the Final Planned Unit <br />Development Proposal violates Section 9.8365 of the Eugene Code, specifically the <br />section titled "Final Planned Unit Development Approval Criteria", which specifically <br />requires the Final PUD plan to conform with the approved tentative PUD Plan and all <br />conditions attached to the plan. <br />I have multiple safety concerns with the newly submitted plan, which centers around the <br />shared driveways ("Joint Access Easements") that will lead to Tambour Way and <br />Tambour Court. The JAM says that there are multiple lots (between two and five) that will <br />share a single driveway. My concerns are as follows: <br />Depending on whether a single family home or a multi-unit housing development is <br />placed on the lot, there could be anywhere from 4 to 10+ cars parked in a single <br />driveway, with many cars using the same access way. <br />Within the JAM, it designates certain homeowners within each driveway cluster to <br />maintain the driveway in good condition, as well as maintaining any utilities shared <br />by the benefitted owners in good condition. How will homeowners with absolutely <br />no training be expected to manage those responsibilities? What does this <br />responsibility mean for the ability of these lots to be sold? What if no one <br />purchases these properties? Who will be responsible for the upkeep? <br />The JAM and site maps indicate that the shared driveways will be either 14 feet <br />wide or "variable width." What does variable width mean? That does not set a clear <br />standard. In addition, 14 feet wide is not wide enough for two larger vehicles, such <br />as two SUVs or two trucks, to pass one another. <br />My overall concern for this proposal is that having shared driveways be maintained and <br />monitored by busy homeowners (with no city oversight) is clearly a recipe for disaster. <br />This entire development could easily fall into disrepair if these access areas aren't
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.