Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Page I of2 <br /> <br />HARDING Terri L <br /> <br />From: Nancy Nichols [nancyn@efn.org] <br />Sent: Monday 1 November 20, 2006 11 :32 AM <br />To: HARDING Terri L <br />Subject: PubHcComment <br /> <br />November 20, 2006 <br /> <br />Re: M~A. 06-5, RA 06-3, CA 06-- 1 <br /> <br />To: Eugen~ Cit~y Planning Conlmissioners <br /> <br />If Eugene is to have any hope of increasing ov'erall density and reducing sprawl, some of tIle <br />Jefferson/Far Vlest area currently designated as Mediuln Density Residential should. be retain.ed as <br />Medium Density Residential. tI'his can be done in a way that does not risk degrading t.he livabilit)l of a <br />stablc\vell maintained do\vntovvn neigh.borhood. If lots facing 13th, 18th, Jefferson and Oli'vecontinue <br />as mcditlm dellsity residential, additional density could be obtained \vithout compromising the character <br />of the neighborhood. Tl1ese streets have bus service, have SOIne Inultifamily d.e'velopment alread~y and <br />are thehest option for increase in density o'ver time. You tnight also consider" adding Lincoln as there is <br />existing n1ultifamily and cOlnlnercial development on I.'incoln . <br /> <br />It also seems reasonable to allo,\' for lot splits that create slnalllots suitable for sitlg1e homes evcf)!yvhere <br />in this neighborllood. I O\VTI a honle at.S66 W 17th on a lot that. is 42 feet \'vide by 60 feet. deep. This size <br />lot is adequate for the 1000 sq. ft.. honle there and shotlld be allo\ved. While the home is currently <br />rented~ I bought it with the tll0Ught that it is likely to be my filIal home. It is a block from a bus stol) and <br />is \vithin \valking distance of shopping, doctors, and the library. I 'understand that SOIne neighbors feel <br />Medium Density Zoning is ruining the character of the neig11borhood. Hovvever son1e increase ill density <br />should be allowed if Eugene is to meet overa.ll planning goals for eompact development. l~he city of <br />Eugene can encourage more. affordable housing and some increase in density by allowing the creation of <br />small. lots rather than by zoning for devrelopment of nll1ltifatnily d\veHings. l"he neigI1borIlood character <br />could be Inaintained \vith design restrictions on these sma.lllots and on the streets \\lhere Inedium density <br />is allo\ved. <br /> <br />Perllaps neither existing Medium Dellsity Residential nor l.;o\v I)ensity Residential zoning fits this area. <br />Could there be a ne\v category that incorporate.s the possibility for sn1all lotswith.Ollly one single family <br />honle allowed per lot? Cotdd ac,cessof)' unit regulations be cllanged so that peOl)le can create either <br />attached or detached ones to fit tlleir falUil)' situation, even on smaller lots? Could t.he Lo\v Density <br />I~esidential Zone lle modified to allo\v slnaller lots and flexibility in creating a.ccessory Ullits in all areas <br />zoned t~O\V DC11Sity? <br /> <br />'T~hank )!()u for your consideration of nlY conlrnents. <br /> <br />Sincerely, <br /> <br />11/20/2006 <br />