Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the R1 Height Change topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners probe whether raising R1 height to 35 feet will produce more homes or just bigger houses
Summary
Commissioners questioned staff about a proposed increase to the R1 maximum building height (30 to 35 ft) and the existing 7‑ft pitched‑roof bonus, asking for evidence that the change would increase unit counts rather than only interior space; staff said the proposal aligns with the state model code and that further analysis and community input will follow.
At the May 26 Eugene Planning Commission meeting, commissioners spent substantial time pressing staff for evidence that increasing the allowable building height in R1 zones from 30 to 35 feet would meaningfully increase the number of housing units rather than simply adding interior volume to units.
Elena Domingo and other planners explained the proposal would raise the base R1 height to 35 feet, which staff said would "allow for a full third floor of living space." Commissioners pointed out that, depending on roof pitch and floor‑to‑floor dimensions, an additional five feet might not translate into extra units. Commissioner Remy said he remained unconvinced that taller roofs automatically yield more units and suggested the Commission seek documentation from builders and precedent cities showing the practical effect on unit counts and project economics.
Public comment echoed neighborhood concerns about specific projects. Greg Bryant, representing the South University Neighborhood Association, criticized a local development at 22nd and Alder as "predatory development" that increased height and lot coverage, blocked sunlight and reduced permeable surfaces; he urged the Commission not to adopt a 35‑foot limit or to retain a 7‑foot roof bonus that could further increase overall height.
Background: Staff said increasing the R1 height aligns Eugene with the state's model housing code used to support House Bill 2138 compliance and with practices in peer Oregon cities such as Springfield and Salem. The transcript records that the planning commission previously recommended a 35‑foot base height in earlier deliberations while the council settled on 30 feet plus a pitched‑roof bonus; the current proposal raises the base to 35 feet and leaves the existing roof bonus in place unless the Commission recommends otherwise.
Commissioners requested more data and monitoring: several asked staff to collect examples or cost/design studies from other jurisdictions and to report back on actual outcomes where 35 feet has been implemented. Commissioner Isacson and others suggested tracking permit outcomes over time (e.g., number of projects that use a full third story vs. those that only increase interior ceiling heights) before making permanent, citywide changes. Staff confirmed draft code language is available and that the public hearing is set for June 23, with deliberations in July.
The matter remains under study; commissioners and staff emphasized public input and empirical evidence will inform any final recommendation to city council.
