The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05-05-21 Public Comment - K. Filipovich - Comment on Ordinance 2070From:Karen Filipovich To:Agenda Subject:Comment on Ordinance 2070 Date:Wednesday, May 5, 2021 2:37:22 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear City Commissioners: I am writing to comment on the proposed changes in draft Ordinance 2070. 1. Increase allowable height by 1.5’ per story in most zoning districts Where is the evidence this is a problem? Seeing information about which zoningdistricts have significant variance requests due to the current height restrictions would be a helpful guide to whether changes are needed. Since the UDC was updated in 2018with several upward changes in height, I'm surprised to see this on here with a change in practices justification, since building practices have not changed much in the last 3years. If you see a significant variance request problem in a specific zoning district, that would be appropriate to change, but use a scalpel, not a sword. Anecdotally, R-3 projects rarely appear reach the current height restriction, so raisingheight is not needed. In the bigger picture, R districts height changes need to be considered carefully, since neighborhoods have not fully absorbed the height changesput in place in 2018. 2. Allow an additional story in R-O and B-2 zoning districts. Maximum allowable heights will depend on the steepness of the roof (50’ with a roof pitch of less than 3:12 and 60’ with a roof pitch of 3:12 or greater). Please wait on this one until your affordable housing consultant is done with the currentstudy. Using additional stories as an incentive is a way to get affordable housing into higher density buildings. What is being proposed here gives away height without usingit as a bargaining chip to get the affordable housing we desperately need. 3.Simplify and increase usability of UDC by reducing the number of “roof pitch categories” from 4 categories down to 2 AND by re-locating setback regulations for commercial zones from Article 3 of the UDC to Article 5. This appears fine. It would be nice to see more information on the number/type of requests in the public information. Thanks for your consideration. Sincerely, Karen Filipovich 426 N Grand Ave.