Public Testimony (in Support) - Laserfiche WebLink

March 5, 2018 Virginia Gustafson-Lucker, Eugene Hearing Official c/o Nick Gioello, Associate Planner Planning Division City of Eugene 99 West 10th Avenue Eugene, Oregon 97401 RE: Capital Hill PUD (PDT 17-1) Dear. Ms. Gustafson-Lucker: You will likely hear from many people that the Capital Hill PUD is too dense, produces too much traffic, and removes too many trees. At between 2.4-2.8 units an acre, the development is well below the 5-unit per acre limit imposed by the South Hills Plan. The applicants initiated two traffic studies in response to neighborhoods concerns and provide greater safety and circulation through improving Capital Drive and building a new road. The applicants are also preserving a third of the site's vegetation and trees, particularly in the area near the Ribbon Trail. Although opponents will argue otherwise, this development is sensitively designed and is consistent with adopted goals and policies, particularly the Envision Eugene pillars. Consequently, the South Hills Plan density recommendations include three purpose statements, one of which describes the recommendations are intended to "insure adequate provision for development to accommodate anticipated growth." When the South Hills Plan was adopted in 1974, roughly 93,000 people lived in Eugene. Since then, the population has increased to 167,780 residents - a reality the South Hills Plan anticipated. It's an increase we can't ignore, although there are those in our community who have tried their best to do so. It is certainly the more personally convenient choice. But it is also the choice that harms our community the most. Simply put, we have a housing crisis. Since 2010, we have only built roughly 1,700 new single family homes. The lack of missing middle and secondary dwelling units is even worse. To put this crisis into perspective, almost 11,500 new residents have moved to Eugene since 2010. With such a limited supply of existing housing and a lack of new housing being built, it is no surprise our overall vacancy rate often falls between five and six percent. As a community, we are obligated to provide community solutions to community problems. This means supporting housing in our neighborhoods, particularly in light of our housing crisis. Opponents of this project will dismiss this claim by stating that these homes will be priced beyond what most Eugene residents can afford. It is common for those against housing developments to justify excluding others from their neighborhood by stating the project is too expensive, would work better elsewhere, or isn't the right fit. Sometimes these claims bear merit - a high-density apartment complex would not be an appropriately-scaled development for this site. But the applicants do not propose that type of development. Instead, they propose a development that will look similar and be priced the same as other homes in the neighborhood.