My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 7: Action: Ordinance on Infill Compatibility Standards Code Amendments
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2009
>
CC Agenda - 12/14/09 - City Council Meeting and Meeting of the Eugene Urban Renewal Agency
>
Item 7: Action: Ordinance on Infill Compatibility Standards Code Amendments
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 12:55:10 PM
Creation date
12/11/2009 10:55:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
12/14/2009
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
439
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
From:Gordon Anslow <br />To:HARDING Terri L; <br />ICS Parking and Building Height Record <br />Subject: <br />Wednesday, November 18, 2009 10:48:30 AM <br />Date: <br />Attachments:ICS followup testimony 11-17-09.doc <br />Terri, <br />I would like to add this to the record on them thar topics. <br />Thank you, <br />Gordon <br />11/17/09 <br />Attn: Mayor and City Council <br />Re: ICS Parking and Building Height <br />Folks, <br /> Thank you for conducting the Public Hearing on these subjects. <br />Please allow me to add several comments to the record, related to my <br />testimony, and in response to Council comments after the hearing was <br />closed. <br />Parking <br />: In order to limit comments during the Hearing to two <br />minutes, I concentrated on the problems associated with changing the <br />multifamily parking calculation from the current one-per-unit to the proposal <br />based on bedroom count. Bedrooms are not defined elsewhere in the <br />Zoning Ordinance, and thus the proposal includes a definition. While this <br />definition was improved so it would not count every living and dining room <br />as a bedroom, it is still vague, and the reference to representations of <br />bedrooms in advertising and financing documents is going down a road we <br />neither need to nor should want to go down. <br /> During ICS Multi-D meetings I suggested basing parking <br />requirements on square footage of units. The argument against was that <br />developers would just cram a whole lot of little bedrooms into a fixed area, <br />thus thwarting the intent. Trust me, the marketplace will not allow this: such <br />units would go unrented, or would rent to a smaller number of people, who <br />might use several bedrooms for themselves. As a practical matter, a <br />footage based standard as is used for every other use in Eugene is perfectly <br />reasonable, and dirt simple. For example, you might do as follows (listing <br />footage then required parking spaces): 850sf/1 space; 1100sf/1.5 space; <br />1350 2 spaces; with an additional .5 space added for each additional 250 <br />square feet. In this example, 850 is analogous to a 2 bedroom student unit, <br />1100 to a 3 bedroom, etc.. In that addition of a bedroom also includes <br />space for a closet, additional hall or stair area, and often additional <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.