Laserfiche WebLink
Residential Density <br />Fi~~ <br />14. Housing costs are increasing more rapidly than household income. With risin land and <br />. g <br />housing costs, the market has been and will continue to look at densi as a wa to kee <br />tY Y p <br />housing costs down. <br />15. Recently approved subdivisions are achieving lot sizes on flat land avera in 7 400 <br />g g <br />square feet in Eugene and 7,800 square feet in Springfield. Comparing the net densi ~ of <br />tY <br />all Eugene-Springfield Metro single family-detached units ~n 1986 and 1994 indicates <br />that in 1986 the net density was 4.12 units per acre which equates to a 10,573 s uare foot <br />.. q <br />lot while ~n 1994, the net density was 4.15 units per acre or a 10,410 s care foot lvt. <br />q <br />These trends indicate that development inlow-density is achieving assumed densi <br />tY <br />expectations. <br />16. Although single-family detached lot sizes are decreasing, the Metro Plan tar eted <br />., g <br />residential densities for all new development are not being achieved at this time. The <br />Metro Plan assumes a net density of 8.57 units per acre mote: translation from 6 units er <br />z p <br />gross acre }for new development over the planning period. For new dwelling units <br />constructed during 1956 to 1994, the net density was 7.05 units per acre based on the <br />Lane County Geographic Information System ~GIS}, The estimated average overall <br />residential net density for all residential development has climbed from 5.69 units er <br />. p <br />acre in 1986 to 5.81 units per acre in 1994. <br />17. Both Springfield and Eugene have adopted smaller minimum lot size re uirements to <br />. . q <br />allow increased density inlow-density residentially designated areas. Even so, densi in <br />tY <br />low-density residentially designated areas does not routinely achieve the higher ran e of <br />. g <br />low-density zoning near 10 unitslgross acre} due to the current market and the area <br />requirements for other site improvements such as streets. <br />18. Gffering incentives ~e.g., reduced parking requirements, tax abatements} for increased <br />density has not been completely successful in this metro area. In areas where some <br />increase in density is proposed, there can be neighborhood opposition. <br />Policies <br />A.9 Establish density ranges in local zoning and development regulations that are consistent <br />with the broad density categories of this plan, <br />1Density {Net): The number of dwelling units per each acre of land, excluding areas devoted to dedicated streets, neighborhood <br />parks, sidewalks, and other public facilities. <br />Density (Gross}:The number of dwelling units per each acre of land, including areas devoted to dedicated stxeets, nei hborhoad <br />g <br />parks, sidewalks, and other public facilities. <br />