|Re: Eugene Cohousing||<– Date –> <– Thread –>|
|From: Kathryn McCamant (kmccamantcohousing-solutions.com)|
|Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2018 09:52:26 -0700 (PDT)|
I would not be so quick to jump to conclusions. It is hard to compromise with people who are unwilling to compromise and see reason. The project fit within the existing zoning and density for the property. Fewer homes would have significantly raised the prices and priced most of the community members out. The fact that Oakleigh Meadow Cohousing has won these repeated appeals, and that the City has repeatedly re-approved the project should tell you something about the nature of the opposition. While the delay has been hard for the community, it was still the least expensive option for them. Once it's built, I have no doubt that the community will be a great asset to the neighborhood. This type of useless neighborhood opposition, and the American resistance to any reasonable density (afterall, we are just talking 2-story townhomes with plenty of room for gardens) within established cities is only adds to keeping housing prices high and cities car dependent. I hope the larger cohousing community will support those communities that run into unreasonable neighbors..... unfortunately, this kind of unreasonable fear has killed or lessened many a good project. Katie -- Kathryn McCamant, President CoHousing Solutions Nevada City, CA 95959 www.cohousing-solutions.com On 8/1/18, 4:54 AM, "Cohousing-L on behalf of T G" <cohousing-l-bounces+kmccamant=cohousing-solutions.com [at] cohousing.org on behalf of triciamill9 [at] gmail.com> wrote: I have been following this project for quite some time in the news, and it appears that the main concern from the neighbors is that the only access to the development is an extremely narrow, undersized, and unimproved dead end road. The neighbors didn't feel the City should be approving a project that will bring the traffic of 28 additional homes without the road meeting current safety standards, such as sidewalks and a sufficient road width. It looks like the neighbors were supportive of the development when it was originally proposed but then it grew in size and that concerned them. It is unfortunate that the cohousing group and the neighbors could not have compromised on the number of homes. There are several successful smaller cohousing developments, so it doesn't seem to make sense to me that a compromise would not have been better than continuous appeals (very expensive and time consuming, not to mention the loss of members!!). I started looking elsewhere after watching this go on for 5 years in the news but have been curious to see how it ended up playing out. _________________________________________________________________ Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at: http://l.cohousing.org/info
- Re: Eugene Cohousing T G, July 31 2018
- Re: Eugene Cohousing Gmail Lynn, August 1 2018
- Re: Eugene Cohousing T G, August 1 2018
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.