Item 1: Ordinances on Infill Compatibility Standards Code Amendments

Home Browse Search

November 6, 2009 Mayor Piercy and City Councilors: I have been a member of the Infill Compatibility Standards (ICS) Single-Dwelling, Multi- Dwelling and Parking Implementation teams. In addition I am a resident of South University and have been working with the South University Neighborhood Planning Group (SUNPG) on building height and parking recommendations. Please take my comments into consideration when reviewing the ICS proposals. Building Height Of all the proposals presented the Planning Commission recommended option B, which would th allow 90-foot buildings along the north half block of East 18 Avenue in South University. From a neighborhood perspective this is the absolute worst alternative. The Planning Commission apparently ignored the facts and testimony that made it clear that buildings of 65 feet or less could easily meet density goals and provide developers with significant flexibility. th ICS originally recommended buildings should be no higher than 50 feet in the block between 18 thth and 19. A compromise was reached designating 65 feet for the half block south of 18. The ICS team never recommended 90 feet. The Planning Commission also recommended an exception for lots of 10,000 square feet or more. This was never in the ICS proposal. An exception such as this needs to be accompanied by specific design standards affecting things like lot coverage. These types of design standards do not exist in Eugene code. I ask that the City Council return to the facts and evidence and honor the effort put in by ICS team members and pass code changes that allow a maximum of 65 foot buildings in South and West University. There should be no exceptions for large lots. Parking I fully support the ICS parking proposal presented to the City Council and recommend they pass it without changes. However, do not include the option for shared cars proposed by staff and the Planning Commission. The shared car concept is new and has not been shown to reduce student car ownership. Although car sharing is a worthy idea, it would be premature to reduce parking standards for multi-family dwellings at this time. More study and experience is needed before any car sharing code is adopted. Reducing the number of on-site parking spaces is forever. If a shared car contract lapses, renting additional spaces or reducing the number of bedrooms rented may not be possible or viable. City building code should not be changed for unproven concepts.