CC Minutes - 06/16/08 Work Session/Public Hearing

Home Browse Search

comment, and no opportunity for the City Council or its designees to attach conditions that would make a development blend into the surrounding property. Additionally, the proposal before the council was reasonable. He had read the code and talked with planners in eight jurisdictions in the Willamette Valley and Bend, and noted that no one allowed 120-foot buildings in their highest density residential zone as a matter of right, and few allowed that under any circumstance. The average building height allowed under clear and objective standards would be less than 60 feet. The proposal was similar to what other cities in the region used to deal with the edge effect where height density bumped up against lower density. Each of the cities was bound by the same State law mandates as Eugene, in terms of UGBs, density, reducing vehicle miles, and clear and objective housing standards, but had found more graceful ways to deal with the edge effect. The proposal before the council would accomplish that and he urged the council to pass the building height transition amendment. thth Bill Spurling, 1958 Potter Street, held up a graphic of his neighborhood, including 19 Avenue and 20 Avenue at Potter Street. He supported the proposed code amendments but asserted 12-story buildings adjacent to single family homes was not acceptable. The modified MCA was a step in the right direction. Mike Russo, 1975 Potter Street, had undertaken a study to determine the answer to three questions: thth 1) how many residents lived in the eight blocks between 18 and 19 Avenues, and Agate and Hilyard th Streets, and a ninth block of R-4 to the south of 19 Avenue; 2) how many residents could be expected under current zoning, and 3) how many residents could be expected under MICAP proposal number five. The data was collected by walking the neighborhood, talking with building managers and residents, and counting names on mail boxes. He learned that the area was quite densely populated, with about 1,600 current residents. Under full build-out with current zoning, and using numbers from the Home Builders Association (HBA) he estimated over 10,000 people could reside in the area, which was more than the number of people who resided in Cottage Grove or Florence, and was extreme. Under MICAP proposal number five, 7,000 people could reside in the area. MICAP represented a measured approach that would result in a win/win situation. Time was of the essence in adopting the proposal. th Marsha Shankman, 893 East 20 Avenue, said she was on the board of the South University Neighbor- hood Association (SUNA). She was speaking in support of the MICAP amendments, particularly amended MICAP Amendment 5 related to the step-down in building heights. Her family had lived in a late 1920’s house for 22 years, which was one of three historic homes built at that time. Little had changed until last th summer when plans to build a seven-story student apartment complex at the corner of 19 Avenue and Alder Street were revealed. At that time she learned that the zoning jumped precipitously from R-1, single th family to R-3, and across 19 Avenue to R-4. She, along with a large group of concerned neighbors, had been actively involved in efforts to address incompatibility of the zoning in the neighborhood. She thanked the City Council for directing SUNA representatives to work through the MICAP amendments. Nowhere in City documents - including City codes, the Metro Plan, and the Growth Management Polices (GMPs) - was density valued over livability. Reading from City code 9.5500 on multiple family standards, she said the standards were met “to ensure that new multiple family development enhances the character of Eugene’s neighborhoods…to ensure the increased density that resulted from such development makes a positive contribution to the areas in which these developments are built…to ensure that the design of multiple family developments provides for sensitive transition to nearby, less intensive development…to provide physical environment that contributes to and enhances the quality of life.” She urged the City Council to establish a more sensitive transition and height limit by passing the amended MICAP Amend- ment 5. MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 16, 2008 Page 5 Work Session