Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPublic Comment Submitted During First Open Record PeriodO'DONNELL Heather From: RMMilks@aol.com Sent: Monday, October 12, 2015 2:45 Pik To: O'DONNELL Heather M Subject: Re: Communications with Juan Carlos In a message dated 10/7/2015 1:59:39 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Heather.M.0Donnell@ci.eugene.or.us writes: Hello Mr. Milks, I've been in an out of meetings today (and yesterday) so I haven't been able to look back into your request as quickly as I would have liked. The original email I sent to Mr. Valle is attached. He is also on an email list (which you are on too) that I've been sending out with updates of on the Rest-Haven application process (e.g. when the hearing is, when the materials will be on-line, etc). That email is blind copied to the email addresses, so the emails are not visible when they are printed out. I also emailed him the day of the hearing. Regarding the zoning, we found two ordinances related to annexing the property, Ordinance 14723 was signed in Feb 1967 and Ordinance 14632 was signed December 1966. We have not had time to review the legal description to see how much of the land was annexed under each ordinance but they are the annexations associated with this site's map and tax lot numbers. These ordinances are attached. There was no additional staff report or exhibits attached to these ordinances so we don't have any additional information on them. A copy of our zoning map from 1965 (after the annexations) which is also attached, shows the site as within the city limits and zoned as PL public land and RA Rural Suburban. In about 2000/2001, the City took a legislative action to rezone any RA Rural Suburban zoned land to R-1 Low Density Residential. This was a city-wide rezone, not specific to Rest-Haven only. A 1955 map is also included for your reference. If these documents are difficult to read, 1 can leave hard copies o them for you at our reception counter. Best, Heather From: RMMilks@ao8.com [mailto:RMMilks@aol.com] Seat- Tuesday, October 06, 2015 2:55 PM Tom O'DONNELL Heather M <Feather.M.CDonnell@ci.eugene.or.us> Subject- Communications with Juan Carlos Heather: During our telephone conversation yesterday, you mentioned that you contacted Juan Carlos Valle (SHNA Board Chair) and informed him of the Planning Commission's and City Council's Public Hearings concerning the Rest Haven issue. Would it be possible for you to e-mail me the written notification and/or e-mails sent to Mr. Valle notifying him of the Public Hearings mentioned above. Thank you in advance. Best Regards, Bob Robert Milks 0'-- '---LL Heather M From: O'DONNELL Heather M Sent: Monday, June 22, 2015 3:23 PM To: VALLE Juan Carlos (SMTP) Subject: Rest-Haven Metro Plan Re-designation & Zone Change Request Hello Mr. Valle, I understand from Heather Sielicki that the South West Hills Neighborhood Association is the neighborhood association tracking the Rest-Haven re-designation & rezoning application. i Just wanted to check-in and see if there are any questions about this application. I sent out the email below in hopes that it would clarify any confusion that there might be given that the property was originally included in (but later withdrawn from) the Envision Eugene Residential Re- designation proposal package from last year. Please let me know if you have any questions or want to discuss this application. Thank you, Heather Fromm O'DONNELL Heather M Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 4:27 PM To. O'DONNELL Heather M Subject: Rest-Haven Metro Plan Re-designation & Zone Change Request Hello, I am writing you since you were on the interested individuals emails list regarding the re-designation and zone change for the Rest-Haven property that the city was proposing in 2014. As you may know, this property was removed from the package of sites proposed by the city for re-designation/rezone at the property's owners request. Since then, the property owner has filed their own similar application to change the Metro Plan land use designation and zoning of the property. We are now reviewing the property owner's application. A public hearing on the request has been scheduled for July 14th, 2015 and the hearing notice is at this link http://pdd.eugene- or.gov/LandUse/DocumentDetails?file=MA-15-0001&id=1260989 . The full set of application materials are at this link http://pdd.eugene-or.gov/LandUse/SearchApplicationDocuments?file=MA-15-0001 . I hope this clarifies the previous application process from the new application process now in progress and under review, but please let me know if there are questions about this. Best, Heather 541 ~3?-5485 _ 1 g°ra -I U'aat°jer ®7 From: Sent: To. Subject: Attachments: Heather: RMMilks@aol.com Monday, October 12, 2015 2:38 PM O'DONNELL Heather M Submittal of Written Testimony Rest Haven Written Testimony to City Council.doc Please see the attachment to this e-mail. This is my written testimony to the City Council. In a separate e-mail I am requesting that you put your e-mails to Juan Carlos in the public record. Best Regards, Bob Robert Milks Written Statement to the Eugene City Council Submitted urine the Extended Period for Public Comment for Consideration of an Ordinance fora Metro Plan Amendment and Zone Chance for the Kest Haven Memorial Park Site Robert R. Milks 388 Kellwood Drive Eugene, Oregon 97405 Chairman of the Board of the Treehouse PUD Homeowners Association Treehouse PUD Homeowners Association Liaison to the Southwest Mills Neighborhood Association Honorable City Council: I ask you to please consider the following information in your deliberations of an ordinance for a Metro Plan amendment and zone change for the Rest Haven Memorial Park site (MA 15-1 and Z 15-1). Please note: the term "Applicant" used below refers to the property owner of Rest Haven Memorial Park and his representatives. The Applicant has not met the requirement is not consistent) of Goal 1 of the State Planning Goals as adopted by the Land Conservation and Development Commission. Goal 1 states: "Goal 1 - Citizen Involvement. To develop a citizen involvement program that insures the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process". As stated in EC 9.7735: (Metro Plan Amendments - Criteria for Approval), "The following criteria shall be applied by the city council in approving or denying a Metro Plan amendment application: (1) the proposed amendment is consistent with the relevant Statewide Planning Goals;". I wish to emphasize that part of EC 9.7735 which states "criteria shall be applied by the city council in approving or denying a Metro Plan amendment application:". With respect to the Applicant's application, in IV. Criteria for Approval, Goal 1 - Citizen Involvement, the Applicant states: "The strategy to amend the comprehensive plan diagram and re-designate the subject property to a different future land use type emerged from the Envision Eugene process, the city's plan to establish a new Eugene-only urban growth boundary and accommodate the next 20 years of growth in the community. As noted in that process, re-designation of excess land to allow for low density residential housing will help the city accommodate more of its 20-year need for low density housing within the current UGB. Such re-designations were identified in the Envision density housing within the current UGB. Such re-designations were identified in the Envision Eugene process as one of several strategies to reduce UGE expansion for low density residential purposes. These Envision Eugene strategies developed out of an extensive public involvement process, including two years of meetings with a 70-plus person community resource group, questionnaires, open houses, and community forums." It is apparent in the above statement that the Applicant is relying heavily on the Envision Eugene process to indicate there has been an abundance of citizen involvement to support the Applicant's application with respect to Statewide Planning Goal 1. However, in the Applicant's application in I. Land Use eguest, the Applicant states: "While the applicant ultimately pulled out of the Envision Eugene process, in large part because of an unacceptably low vehicle trip cap the ordinance would have imposed in order to avoid the detailed analysis required to demonstrate compliance with Goal 12, the property owner recognizes the soundness of the Envision Eugene reasoning." B1 admitting that the Applicant pulled out oft the Envision Eugene process, there is no support (evidence) for citizen involvement, through Envision Eugene, in the Applicant°s application fora Metro Planamendment and zone change for the Rest avers Memorial Park site with respect to meeting the requirements Statewide Planning Goal 1. As stated in "Ordinance with Exhibits" in the public record (document date 9/11/2015): "The City of Eugene land use code implements Statewide Planning Goal 1 by requiring that notice of the proposed amendment be given and public hearings be held prior to adoption. Consideration of the amendment begins with a City of Eugene Planning Commission public hearing on July 14, 2015. The applicant also held a neighborhood meeting which was noticed to the affected neighborhood organization and property owners and residents within 300 feet of the subject property, per EC 9.7007". In the statement above, the City clearly considers a neighborhood meeting neighborhood/Applicant Meeting) to be one of the require eats for satisfying Statewide Planning Goal 1 in land use issues in the city of Eugene. EC 907007 applies to Neighborhood/Applicant Meetings. EC 9.7007(4) states: "If the subject property is located within the boundaries of a city-recognized neighborhood association, the applicant must contact the applicable neighborhood association by registered or certified mail, proposing three possible dates and times for the meeting. The neighborhood association should reply to the applicant within 14 days and specify on which of the proposed three suggested dates the meeting should be held". Therefore, if the Applicant cannot produce a valid receipt for a registered or certified ailing to the Southeast Neighbors and cannot produce documentation of a discussion about when the meeting as to be held, the Applicant was not in compliance with C 9®7007(4). EC 9.7007(5)(a)(b)2 states: "The Applicant shall mail notice of the meeting a) at least 14 days and no more than 28 days prior to the meeting b) to any city-recognized neighborhood associations whose boundaries are within 300 feet of the subject property". In the period of time before the first Rest Haven Neighborhood/Applicant meeting, the boundary of Crest Drive Citizens Association, a city recognized neighborhood association, was across West 39th Ave from Rest Haven, i.e., within 300 feet of Rest Haven. In reviewing the notification list of mailings, I could not find a mailing to the Crest Drive Citizens Association. 'T'herefore, if the Applicant cannot produce documentation that Crest Drive Citizens Association was not notified about the Neighborhood/Applicant meeting, the Applicant was not in compliance with EC 9.707(5)(a)(b)2. The first Rest Haven Neighborhood/Applicant meeting was held on January 14, 2015. I attended that meeting. At that meeting, attendees were informed by Carol Schirmer there had been an error in the mailing of meeting notifications, so another Neighborhood/Applicant meeting would have to be held. This has been confirmed in a letter from Gabe Flock to Carol Schirmer in the public record (Application Completeness Review; document date 2-17-15). In Mr. Flock's letter, he states: "Based on email correspondence with at least one of the neighbors, you acknowledged there was an error with the mailing labels for the required neighborhood/applicant notice, and are planning to hold another meeting with proper notice. As part of a complete application, you will need to provide evidence and should also discuss compliance with requirements of EC 9.7007 in your written statement". Because the first best Haven meeting held on January 14, 2015, was not a bona fide Neighborhood/Applicant meeting, the Applicant should not have submitted an application for a Metro Flan amendment and zone change for Rest Haven. As stated in EC 9.7007(2): "Prior to the submittal of an application listed in subsection (1) above, the applicant shall host a meeting for the surrounding property owners". With complete disregard o C 9.7007(2), the Applicant submitted his application o January 16, 2015. Based on EC 9.7007 (2), the Applicant's application, the only one submitted, is not valid. The Applicant held a Neighborhood/Applicant meeting on February 18, 2015. In spite of the letter from Gabe Flock to Carol Schirmer (see above) where Mr. Flock states: " As part of a complete application, you will need to provide evidence and should also discuss compliance with requirements of EC 9.7007 in your written statement", the Applicant appears to not have complied with EC 9.7007(4) and EC 9.7007(5)(a)(b)2 once again. With respect to the Neighborhood/Applicant meeting on February 18, 2015, did the Applicant comply with appropriate Eugene Codes? Consistent with the content of Mr. Flock's statement (see above): If the Applicant cannot produce a valid receipt for a registered or certified ailing to the Southeast Neighbors and cannot produce documentation of a discussion about when the Neighborhood/Applicant meeting was to be held, the Applicant was not in compliance with EC 9.7007(4). If the Applicant cannot produce documentation that Crest Drive Citizens Association was not notified about the Neighborhood/Applicant meeting, the Applicant was not in compliance with EC 9.7007(5)(a)(b)2. As stated in "Ordinance with Exhibits" in the public record (document date 9/11/2015): "The City of Eugene land use code implements Statewide Planning (foal 1 by requiring that notice of the proposed amendment be given and public hearings be held prior to adoption. Consideration of the amendment begins with a City of Eugene Planning Commission public hearing on July 14, 2015. The applicant also held a neighborhood meeting which was noticed to the affected neighborhood organization and property owners and residents within 300 feet of the subject property, per EC 9.7007". Before addressing the statement above, it is important to point out that the affected Neighborhood Association with respect to the Rest Haven on June 9, 2015, was the Southwest Hills Neighborhood Association. Coincidentally, on June 9, 2015, the City gave final approval for Crest Drive Citizens Association's name to be changed to the South Nest Hills Neighborhood Association. The boundaries of the Southwest Hills Neighborhood Association included the Rest Haven Site. Based on the statement above, on June 9, 2015, or shortly thereafter, the City mistakenly sent referrals concerning the pending application to the Southeast Neighbors unaware that the affected Neighborhood Association was actually the Southwest Hills Neighborhood Association. Based on the statement above, on June 12, 2015, notice of the Planning Commission public hearing was mistakenly mailed to the Southeast Neighbors unaware that the affected Neighborhood Association was actually the Southwest Hills Neighborhood Association. On or shortly before June 22, 2015, the City became aware that the Southwest Hills Neighborhood Association was the affected Neighborhood Association. On June 22, 2015, Heather O'Donnell sent several e-mails to Juan Carlos Valle, Southwest Hills Neighborhood Association Board chairman, alerting him of the Planning Commission's public hearing on July 14, 2015. This notification was given twenty-two days prior to the public hearing. According to EC 9.7415(2)(d): "At least 30 days before the planning commission public hearing, written notice of the hearing and nature of the request shall be mailed to all of the following: (d) The neighborhood group and community organizations officially recognized by the city council that includes the area of the subject property". Based on fact, the City did not comply with C 9.7415(2)(d) with respect to notification given to the affected Neighborhood Association of the Planning Commission's public hearing. At the Planning Co fission's public hearing on July 14, 2015, and at the end of public testimony, a member of the Planning Commission asked if any Neighborhood Associations were present and, if so, did they wish to provide testimony. It was very telling that no response to these questions was heard from those attending the hearing. In order to effectively communicate information to Association residents/citizens that leads to citizen involvement in land use issues (Statewide Planning Goal 1), it is necessary for the City to provide relevant information to affected Neighborhood Associations so that Association residents can be properly informed and, thus enable citizens to participate in the land use issue. In the e-mail Heather O'Donnell sent Juan Carlos Valle, Southwest Hills Neighborhood Association Board chairman, on June 22, 2015, Heather O'Donnell states: "I sent out the email below in hopes that it would clarify any confusion that there might be given that the property was originally included in (but later withdrawn from) the Envision Eugene Residential Re-designation proposal package from last year". I want to emphasize the word "confusion" in this statement. The e-mail referred to in the above statement was sent out on or shortly after June 12, 2015, which was the same day as notice of the Planning Commission public hearing was mailed to the applicant, owners and occupants of property within 500 feet of the subject property and the Southeast Neighbors. It is likely many affected residents were also confused about this situation at the time of the Neighborhood/Applicant meetings held earlier this year, and it is unlikely that Mrs. O'Donnell's e-mail effectively reduced or eliminated any confusion prior to the Planning Commission's public hearing on July 14, 2015. I am requesting Heather O'Donnell to put the e-mails sent to Juan Carlos Valle in the public record. I addition, the Applicant's application as not properly submitted and is incomplete based on Eugene Planning ivision°s (see letter from Gabe flock to Carol Schirmer above) requirement that evidence showing compliance of EC 9.7007 must be submitted it the Metro Planamendment application. Finally, I hope the Eugene City Council will not condone the practice of not complying with City of Eugene land use codes or refusing to enforce City of Eugene land use codes by their action in this matter. Should you approve the Applicant's Metro Planamendment application, the Eugene City Council will be condoning the practice of not complying with City of Eugene land use codes and not enforcing City of Eugene land use codes. Respectfully Submitted, Robert R. Milks -IFLL ea''aer B Eron m Joanne Alba <starphiletoo@icloud.com> Sent; Monday, October 12, 2015 1:11 PM To: O'DONNELL Heather M Subject: Rest Haven Zone change and land use planning Dear Ms. Odonnell, I am writing about my concerns for the submitted change in land use and zone planning by Rest Haven Cemetery. As a resident in the neighborhood of Rest Haven for the past 14 1/2 years I am concerned that the addition of more housing in an already high density residential area would only create a negative impact on the quality of living in the South Eugene hills. My biggest concern lies with the increase of traffic activity in an area that already is experiencing traffic challenges. 1. The Willamette Street corridor is a main artery from South Eugene to Downtown and outlying areas of Eugene. At various times of the day from early morning to evening, I have witnessed people driving Willamette Street as if it is a highway - not taking note or concern for people crossing from East to West or West to East on the streets. Just the other morning running with my dog I literally had to jump back onto the sidewalk to avoid getting hit by a driver who was speeding and not concerned with slowing down when seeing someone attempting to cross the street. 2. 1 live at the 'T' where Deertrail and Monroe meet. People use our roads as a thoroughfare from South Eugene to West Eugene. The traffic volume has steadily increased over the 14 years I have lived here. People use excessive speed in using our streets as a pass through. We have had deer killed at the base of our driveway, left to die and left for us to take care. On two occasions we have had cars hit our mailbox, knocking it over and then leaving without notifying or taking responsibility for their action. The last time was almost 2 years ago when it snowed. The person's car was coming down the Monroe hill (probably too fast) and slammed into our mailbox, leaving their vehicle blocking the entrance to our driveway. They left their car and didn't return. They didn't walk up to our door and inform us, they didn't leave a note. The car sat at the entrance to our driveway for 3 days until we called the police to have it towed. (We kept thinking that surely they would come back and get their car). We were not able to leave our house other than being on foot. 3. The City has circumvented our area when looking at paving improvements for the roads and have not sufficiently maintained our roads for the amount of traffic that we experience. These areas include 36th, 38th, 39th, Monroe and DeerTrail. While recently the city made an attempt to 'patch' torn up pieces of the road on 36th as well as on Monroe they did a sloppy and less than professional job. 4. With more homes and an increase in population in the area, I am concerned that the people who live here would be compromised in our safety should we experience a disaster such as a fire in these South Hills. It is already a concern. These are my main concerns as to why I strongly oppose granting Rest Haven Cemetery and the Wiper family being granted re-zoning and land use to build housing. Over the years my property taxes have only increased and yet I still schose to live in this neighborhood for its' beauty, natural feel and close proximity to work, yet I still can feel like I live away from the city. Thank you for taking my concern into consideration. Sincerely, Joanne Alba 3902 Monroe Street. 1 11, Heather From: dick ingrain <idesign@peak.org> Seat: Monday, October 12, 2015 10:42 ISM Tom O'DONNELL Heather M Subject: Rest Haven testimony To the Eugene City Council Re: In opposition to the proposed Zoning and Land Use changes for Rest Haven Standing on top of Mount Baldy, just east of Dillard Road, one scans out to the south and west, to Spencer's Butte and to the South Hills of Eugene..... beautiful, Doug Fir Forests prevail. Then, suddenly, shockingly the eye stumbles on a huge hole in the forest, a giant wound in the landscape. It is the southern 45- 50 of the Rest Haven property. Surely, this was not what the crafters of the South Hills study and its pertaining policies intended. Please do not allow the Zoning and Land Use changes. Keep the South Hills, the South Hills. Robyn Ingram 4370 Willamette Street Eugene, 97405 541-345-4764 'D _ a, . -1 From: sands842@corncast.net Seat. Thursday, October 08, 2015 10:42 AM To; O`DONNELL Heather M Subject; Resthaven Cemetary Cassandra Timmins 549 Montara Way Eugene, Oregon 97405 541-342-2486 sandi842'>a comcast.net October 8, 2015 Heather O'Donnell City Planning Eugene, Oregon Re: Zone change Dear Ms O'Donnell, I have been advised that the City Council is planning to approve a zone change allowing apartments on the vacant cemetery land on Willamette. I have lived on Brookside for nearly twenty years and am very familiar with the traffic flow. Increasing the population by allowing apartments will destroy the livability of the area, and also property values. Even now the drive time to get to town has increased considerably but adding the apartments will double the time. It will also cause many to cut over to Hillard, driving through neighborhoods and past an elementary school. Speeding and accidents will become a major problem. I understand the city's need for more housing but addressing the lack of adequate roads to accommodate the increase of people should be the first concern Sincerely, Cassandra Timmins ' N1 ELL Heather From- dick ingrain <idesign@peak.org> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 11:07 AM To: O`DONNELL Heather M Subject- Please post this testimony re MA 15-00001 Robyn Ingram 50 year resident of Eugene 23+ year neighbor of "Wiper's Woods" Daily walker of that land 4370 Willamette Street Eugene, Oregon 97405 541-345-4764 Sept. 29, 2015 To The Eugene City Council Re: Rest Haven request for Land Use Designation and Zoning Changes I support the testimonies of Robert Wilkes, Michelle and all the articulate neighbors who are in opposition to this proposed Land Use Designation change and re-zoning request. We, all of us who live in Eugene, in the South Hills, in Oregon, came to here, and to this neighborhood because we love the Northwest. We love the hills. We love the trees. They offered us the quality of life we sought, and they continue to gives us the life we love. Altering the zoning, and thereby the overall intention of what the South Hills were intended to be, is a bit like saying, well lets just change this little corner of our Constitution.... it won't matter much. So much of the "undeveloped" (talk to Mother Nature about that!) part of the Wiper property has been damaged and impacted to date, it is quite tragic. But imagine the impact of 250 houses (Low density: 50 acres @ 5 houses/acre) and their potential 500 vehicles traveling Willamette Street and our neighborhood roads, a couple of times each day! Imagine the amount of water EWEB will have to source, and then pump up hill and then down to supply all those houses And imagine.... having taken down all the trees, which provide us with oxygen, water retention, shade and cooling all those residences will require air-conditioning!.... because the trees can no longer provide the shade, which is really the most sustainable and comfortable form of air conditioning, anyway. And in the absence of trees to retain soil moisture, the aquifer will continue to disappear (EWEB's ongoing draining of it will exacerbate that) And then, imagine the amount of C02 producing coal, gas and oil burning facilities that will be required to generate the power to run those air conditioners! Further imagine all the extra C02 those 500 cars, twice a day, will be emitting as they travel out to the South end of town. C02, which will be both trapped in our end of the valley and further contribute to our current global warming crisis. Zoning, land use designation change and residential development are not the way to go, in this situation. Maintenance of the property as Park and Open Space is the thing to do. Join that, with a reforestation project, in conjunction with the 4J School District's environmental studies program, and we'd have made a contribution to solving our global warming crisis rather than making it worse. A couple of facts worth noting: Rest Haven has never paid property taxes on its land, only on the improvements and business holdings of the current cemetery operation (buildings etc.), due to its consideration, by the powers that be, that it IS open to the public.....it is a Park and Open Space. The rest of us, who own "unimproved" lots, with trees and wild life, DO pay property taxes. Further, Rest Haven has never been regulated by any of the State's Forestry Practices rules, nor those of the City regarding care and provisions for clear cuts, tree removal on un-built lots etc. It has lived in a comfortable no man's land, regulatory wise. In that regard the most tragic circumstance that has arisen on this land, due to absence of regulation, ignorance or intent, is the ongoing killing of the trees in the copses and buffer zones that were decreed by the currently existing conditional use permit. Well over 100 trees in those areas have been destroyed in the past several years, and now, more and more are dying, nearly weekly, due to their weakened state and this severe drought. The climate is changing. Rapidly. We need to find new ways forward. Our previous cultural M.O. of "taking paradise and putting up a parking lot" never really worked, but at this critical juncture, it really, really doesn't work! Thank you, and please be of brave mind and thorough consideration in this most -vital matter. Robyn Ingram O'DONNELL Heather Heather, Thank you for the extended opportunity to comment on the Rest Haven Metro Plan amendments. As we were out of town during the initial comment period, we herewith submit our full testimony for Council's deliberation. From: O'DONNELL Heather M [maiito:Heather.M.ODonnell@ci.eugene.or.us] Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 11:57 AM To: O'DONNELL Heather M Subject: Rest-Haven Update on Metro Plan designation & Zone Change Request (MA 15-1 & Z 15-1) Hello, I am writing you because you have been participating in the property owner's current request that is under review to change the land use designation and zone of the Rest-Haven property to Low Density Residential (city files MA 15-1 & Z 15-1), or because you were on my interested persons email list from 2013-2014 when the city was proposing to change the property's land use designation and zone. In the interest of keeping folks up to date on the status of the current request, I wanted to let you know that at the City Council's hearing last night on the property owner's request, the City Council extended the time in which additional testimony/comment can be submitted into the record for their consideration. The deadlines for submitting additional testimony are: By 5 pm on Monday October 12, 2015- deadline for anyone to submit new testimony/comments. By 5 pm on Monday October 19, 2015- deadline for anyone to submit a rebuttal to any of the new testimony/comments that were submitted between Tuesday Sept 22 and Monday Oct 12. By 5 pm on Monday October 26, 2015- deadline for only the applicant to submit a final rebuttal. This is for the applicant only as required by state law. Additionally, because of extending the period for public comment, the City Council will not be deliberating or taking action on the requested changes on October 12 as previously scheduled. Deliberations/action are now tentatively scheduled for November 9` but this is still tentative at this time. Please let me know if you have any questions. Best, Heather From: O'DONNELL Heather M Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 4:27 PM To: O`DONNBLL Heather M Subject; Rest-Haven Metro Plan Re-designation & Zone Change Request Hello, I am writing you since you were on the interested individuals emails list regarding the re-designation and zone change for the Rest-Haven property that the city was proposing in 2014. As you may know, this property was removed from the package of sites proposed by the city for re-designation/rezone at the property's owners request. Since then, the property owner has filed their own similar application to change the Metro Plan land use designation and zoning of the property. We are now reviewing the property owner's application. A public hearing on the request has been scheduled for July 14t", 2015 and the hearing notice is at this link http•//pdd eugene-or gov/LandUseZDocumentDetails?file=MA-15-0001&id=1260989 . The full set of application materials are at this link http://pdd eugene-or gov/LandUse/-SearchApplicationDocuments?file=MA-15-0001 . I hope this clarifies the previous application process from the new application process now in progress and under review, but please let me know if there are questions about this. Best, Heather 2 Judith David and r 28 September 2015 Honorable Mayor and Councilors of Eugene c/o Heather O'Donnell 99 West Tenth Avenue Eugene,. OR 97401 RE: Rest Haven Metro Plan Amendment and Zone Change (MA 15-1; Z 15-1) Honorable Mayor and Councilors, Thank you for extending the opportunity to comment on the subject of this hearing. We were out of town during the original comment period. While we have become accustomed to the southern 45 acres of Rest Haven Cemetery being open space - and we are grateful to the property owner for allowing public access to it as such - we recognize that it is private property that has been improperly designated at no fault of the property owner. Thus, we do not oppose the Metro Plan Amendment application to align the designation and zoning of Rest Haven to Low Density Residential and R1, respectively, subject to City's approval of the application and responses to its Completeness Review. That said, however, whenever it is appropriate in the steps leading towards development of this property, we respectfully request that you consider the environmental effects of its development on neighboring properties along the east and north side of Brae Burn Drive that sit at the bottom of the slope that comprises the western- and southern-most edges of Rest Haven, as regards stormwater runoff, erosion, and wind throw. While there is currently imposed a 75-foot buffer between Rest Haven and neighboring properties mandated in the cemetery's existing Conditional Use Permit, we would like to see this buffer redrawn based on the topography of the land rather than an arbitrary linear distance. The U.S.G.S. Topo map shown below depicts the geography of the landscape and the gradient between Rest Haven and adjacent properties. Each contour represents a 20-foot gradient. The dark brown line through Rest Haven is the 700-foot contour. Brae Burn Drive circumscribes Rest Haven's western and southern boundaries. Observe the steep gradient coming off the720-foot ridge along the western edge and 700-foot ridge - lowering to 640-feet - along the southern edge of Rest Haven (drawn-in red line), that drops down to the back yards of neighboring properties below on Brae Burn Drive. The gradient presents a 40 to 80-foot drop in elevation as you move south on Brae Burn along the redesignation area (drawn-in blue line). This slope is currently forested, which largely protects neighboring properties from stormwater runoff, erosion, and wind-throw that would otherwise have a damaging effect on these properties, and provides a haven for the wildlife that inhabit it. The 75-foot buffer designated in the cemetery's existing Conditional Use Permit is arbitrary and doesn't reflect the depth of the geography that more appropriately describes the affected area. We, therefore, respectfully request that whenever it is appropriate in the steps leading towards development of this property that the buffer be restated in terms of its geography - specifically along the ridge line (720- and 700-640-foot contours) as shown below - instead of an arbitrary distance - and further, that this buffer be not only restricted from development, but also restricted from deforestation to continue its environmental protection of neighboring homes. 4125 Brae Burn Drive Eugene, OR 97405.2037 541.683.0904 david_berg@comcastnet Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully submitted, Pxvi~ T. vm i h, e-r 2