Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Page 1 of 1 <br /> <br />LOWE Allen 0 <br /> <br />From: John Hammer Ophammer@nu~world.com] <br />Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 20053:27 PM <br />To: TAYLOR Dennis M <br />Cc: LOWE Allen D <br />Subject: SC Chambers Special Area <br /> <br />Mr. DeImis M. Taylor <br />Eugene City Manager <br /> <br />Re: SC Chambers Special Area <br />Zone Code Amendments and Overlay Zone <br /> <br />I am a life long resident of Eugene and have owned commercial property in the Chambers Special Area <br />for over 20 years. Presently I own six parcels of commercial property in the SC C-2 Area. <br /> <br />Upon receipt of the October 28th notice of the Monday, November 14th public hearing, I scheduled a <br />meeting with Gabe Flock on Friday, November 4th, 2005. This was for the first time to see and review <br />Development Standards applicable to the SC/C-2 sub area in Section 3, Paragraph 4, Items A and B. <br /> <br />The Section 3, Paragraph 4, Item B height limitation is short sighted and not appropriate considering the <br />goal of nodal development is to encourage mixed use and greater density in the nodal overlay. <br />Implementing a twenty foot height limitation and a fifty foot set-back restriction to accessory building <br />diminishes the nodal objective. Current height specifications for R-2 zoned areas are a thirty-five feet <br />and those zoned R-3 can go to fifty feet. When the two differently zoned parcels are directly next to <br />each other, height limitations would prevent density in mixed use conmlercial buildings. <br /> <br />I can appreciate the height limitation when a SC/C-2Iot is next to a SC/R-l, but let SCIC-2 have the <br />same height standard of SCIR-2 and SCIR-3. <br /> <br />This nodal area is comprised of many small lots. With the height limitation and a fifty foot set-back, a <br />number of parcels would have reduced potential. The owners would have diminished development <br />prospects compared to when they had purchased their property. <br /> <br />I ask you to review and reconsider that the twenty foot height limitation and fifty foot set-back apply <br />only when SCIC-2 and SCIR-I zoned lots adjoin. <br /> <br />Please respond with your thoughts prior to November 12, 2005 and include this as a public comment. <br /> <br />Respectfully, <br /> <br />John Hammer <br /> <br />11/912005 <br />