Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Dec. 12)2006 <br />To: rrerri Harding I Eugene Planning Complission <br />From : Robert Passaro <br />Re: Written testimony for Metro Plan amendments regarding "Area 15" <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />Before allowing and encouraging more density in the so-called "Area 15:' I hope the city <br />and its planners will consider that Eugene does not seem to have adequate infrastructure _ <br />particularly sewers - in many parts of this older neighborhood. I bring this up because I <br />live here and have recently become tangled in a dispute with a neighbor who wants to <br />simply build a garage in his backyard but can't because he would be disturbing a so- <br />called "community sewer line." (I am sure you are familiar with community sewer lines. <br />Ifnot, the wastewater folks at Public Works can fill you in on this problem.) <br /> <br />A glance at a lot map ofthis neighborhood shows that my situation is not unique. There <br />are dozens of lots di'vorc.ed from the alle)'s::::- \-vhere the city se,wer Inains run. Most of <br />these are probably on some kind of community sewer line -- that is, a Hne shared by <br />several homes. Even if they are on a separate line, their pipe has to cross other people's <br />property before reaching the cit~ymain. This seelllsparticuJarly pervasi've along 17th, <br />\vhere I li\Te. I'm sure there are some official. easements, but in many c,ases these are so <br />old that there are not. Now, even if Mr. Nystrom's decision regarding allowable density <br />in this neighborhood would not create more "community sewer" disputes than pop up <br />no\\'",- thought it fiB)' --youhave to suspect it \vQuld create more acrimonious ones. <br /> <br />Let's imagine, for a second,. that I want to build a four... ornve-unit apartment house on <br />my lot. I'm now on a community sewer line that crosses tvvoother lots before it can <br />connect to the city se\ver. I'm going to h.ave to ask my neig.hbors (or an easement to cross <br />\-\lith a ne\l'lline? And they are going to have to build their o\vn nc\vlines,perbaps, since <br />tJle old one \vilI be disturbed and-lose its "existing/nonconforming" statl.ls?Wh.at do you <br />SlIppose \1vouldbe the response of those neighbors (\vho are probably none to happy to <br />see and apartment house gOlllg up. next door an)'\va:y)? They aregoing.to tell me to HOO <br />tonelI.H Or sa)' I want to build apartments on a lot tllat has a. community se\ver line <br />crossing it. I have to try to get t.he folks upstream to install new lines because I "vant to <br />dig up the existing one to build my apartl11ents? I.\\Tould expect the same response. <br /> <br />It's probably ttnre.alistic for the city to make the kind of large investlnentneeded for a <br />wholesale upgrade of the se\vers in this part of town -- thougll, perhaps it should..So if <br />,this pl.lSn for density. goes ahead., r~ III tllillking that sevver upgrades likel)' will come <br />piecenleal, lot by lot, project by proje.ct. <br /> <br />In reading tIle deeisionb)lMr. Nystrom (forgive me. if I have this \vrong,but I found this <br />docllnlcnt largely illc,omprehensible), some req'llests for changes vvoldd require a'~site <br />re'vievv" or a ~~blocl{ plan." I checked the city code sections regarding sit.e revie,,'s and <br />while the I see that such issues as "tree preservation" and building "glare" are addressed, <br />I still 8111 not clear vvhether an assessment of the sevver lilleandotllcr infrastructure \vould <br />be required. One \vottld hope so, but \;vho knows? Eve~ ifit does, there is 110thil1g I c,an <br /> <br />III - 3 5 <br />