05/24/1982 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

II-B. Code Amendment Reducing the Minimum Lot Size in Residential from 6,000 to 4,500 Square Feet (CA 82-1) (memo, background ordinance, distributed) Recommended approval by Planning Commission April 13, 1982 Districts information, e Vote--6:0 Mayor Keller returned to the meeting and resumed chairing. Mr. Gleason introduced Gary Chenkin, Planning Department. Mr. Chenkin said that the Planning Commission had voted unanimously to recommend this ordinance to the council. He noted that information regarding the proposed code amendment had been sent to all neighborhood groups and to a number of special interest groups in the community. He said that about two years ago the council had referred the question of reduction of the minimum lot size to the Planning Commission. Mr. Chenkin said that there are many reasons why it can be said the time has arrived to seriously consider the smaller lot size option for home ownership, including the following: 1) Assist in realizing the advantages of compact growth; 2) Metro Plan Housing Element policies including: a) Ensure regulations to encourage a variety of densities (#6); b) Modify regulations that add unnecessarily to housing costs (#10) ; c) Encourage increased density at various locations through code modifications (#23); 3) There is no consistent analogy between the present 6,000 square foot minimum requirement and quality; 4) Decreasing house- hold size with less need for large houses and lots; 5) Increasing housing costs, some of which are generated by land costs; 6) The larger lot option would still be available; 7) Cluster housing (smaller actual lots) is already allowed in PUD's and cluster subdivisions; and 8) The smaller lot option would provide for single-family home individual ownership, but without common area maintenance cost, home owners' association obligations, and the like. e Mr. Chenkin said that the Planning Commission had asked for an analysis of the impact of the proposed change. He said that staff had researched this and found that there are currently about 430 vacant parcels in the City of between 9,000 and 12,000 square feet, which would be divisible into two lots under the proposed ordinance. He noted that most of these lots were located in the Bethel and Willakenzie neighborhoods. Mr. Chenkin said that Active Bethel Citizens had expressed concern with the increased demand for parkland that would be caused by the code amendment. That group felt that people living on small lots would need parkland for recreation. They were concerned with placing this increased demand for parks on an area already underserved by parks. Mr. Chenkin noted that the council had received two letters on this subject. He said that ABC was dealing with this concern through the Parks Master Plan Update process. Mr. Chenkin noted that the ordinance before the council contained a number of related amendments, in addition to the amendment calling for reduced minimum lot size. He said that many were primarily housekeeping matters, for example, correcting or deleting obsolete definitions. He said that these amendments also dealt with technical points related to the reduction to 4,500 sq. ft. minimum lot size, including provisions for flexibility in setback and coverage require- ments. The amendments would also allow duplexes, triplexes, and four-plexes on smaller parcels and would allow cluster subdivisions without the current maximum density of six units per acre and four-acre maximum overall size limit. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 24, 1982 Page 7