Residential Unified Development Ordinance (RUDO)

The Master Plan defines single family as single detached homes, auxiliary dwelling units (ADU– think “mother-in-law” space) and SOME DUPLEXES in SOME AREAS.

City personnel chose to define the “Some Areas of Duplexes” as Single-Family Residential Zones A & B, now named Residential Neighborhood. Single-Family Residential Zones C & D, now named Residential Estate, would exclude duplexes.

See the  Master Plan Single & Mixed Residential definition document

City personnel chose to offer a “conservation” opportunity for RN if it the property is at least 5 acres. Developers could build up to 35% of the housing units as duplex, triplex, quadplex and/or townhouses. In return, 15% or 20% of the total area would be allocated to “green space”; a portion of wetlands qualify as green space.   See the RUDO Single Family document linked above. For RE, the conservation option is limited to clustering of single family homes.

Multiple times, throughout the 119-page Master Plan, Single Family is defined as noted in paragraph two above. See the Master Plan Single & Mixed Residential definition document linked above. The City’s decision to expand from duplexes to multiplexes in Single-Family zone is based on one soft statement in the Master Plan: “Consider permitting duplexes and/or multiplex housing in some designated Single-Family zones.”

Some Residential Neighborhoods are zoned near 100 Year Flood Hazards.   Multiple times, the Master Plan states Environmental/Flood Hazard and Context-Sensitive areas need careful consideration. Overbuilding in proximity to flood hazard areas negatively affects the ecosystem.

See the  Flood Hazard map

Two examples from one neighborhood in Flood Hazard proximity:

1. City approves building a condo cluster; construction gets underway; heavy snow accumulates in February 2017. Temperatures warm; rains come. Homes as far away as 30 lots from the construction site experience flooding. One home was destroyed. Another home required 24 hr/day, for 14 consecutive day restoration via a 3rd party pumping and hauling water away. Considerable money was spent to retrofit that house with pump-and-drain system.
2. City approves another project in the same neighborhood. Pumps that function infrequently work feverously when raining; one basement had storm water accumulation (had not happened since the condo project). Storm water floods the street, even with light rain.

Bottom Line: Multiple times, the Master Plan states Environmental/Flood Hazard and Context-Sensitive areas need careful consideration. PLEASE heed these warnings. Ecosystems need to be respected and cared for.

The city chose to hire a Kansas City based, taxpayer funded consultant to assist with the UDO process. At the onset, that consultant presented several conservation options which do NOT entail intermixing housing types.   The Conservation Incentives document aligns with the consultant’s initial statements. RE single family areas have a recommended conservation option of clustering single-family homes, not introducing other housing types.

See the  Conservation Incentives document

The Master Plan created a new zone called Mixed Residential consisting of multiple housing types: townhomes, duplexes, and multifamily buildings (such as tri/quadplexes and townhouses). This is a different zone than Single-Family.

See the  Master Plan Future Land Map

as well as the  Master Plan Single & Mixed Residential definition

Dear Mayor Randall and Members of City Council,

[Step 1: Choose ONE Opening Paragraph]

Option A: I support having a RUDO. Rather than collapsing R1A & B into RN with duplexes with C&D to RE with no duplexes, I ask that single-family zones near flood hazards are designated RE to avoid overbuilding. The Master Plan calls out environmental concerns and need for care. If the city needs more diverse housing, it should be in the newly created Residential – Mixed zone.

Option B: I support having a RUDO. I am very concerned about overbuilding near flood hazards. I do NOT support having anything other than single-family and ADUs near Flood Hazards and other environmentally challenged areas.

Option C: I support having a RUDO. I do NOT support having triplexes, quadplexes or townhouses in Single-family zones. Multiplexes belong in Residential-Mixed zones. I ask the city to choose another method to incentivize conservation in RN, as is recommended for RE.

[Step 2: Choose 1 or 2 Questions to Pose]

Why did the city choose to arbitrarily determine where SOME Duplexes should be in Single Family by collapsing R1 A&B to have duplexes and collapsing C&D to be without duplexes? Shouldn’t the city use specific callouts in the Master Plan to determine where single family should have duplexes?

How many times must an area near a flood hazard have storm water issues before the city stops overbuilding?

The city specially created and added acreage to Mixed Residential through the Master Plan. Why would multiplexes be zoned elsewhere?

There are several other methods to incentivize a developer to conserve trees and green space. Why wasn’t one of those chosen for RN as it was for RE?

Since wetlands are already designated as unbuildable protected areas, why are they included in the “conservation” equation? Same with protected trees.

Could commercial activities be dressed as multiplexes and be built in “single-family”?

[Step 3: Copy this Closing and add your info]

Please listen to the concerned citizens of Portage. Many of us have been and/or will be negatively affected by the Planning Commission approved RUDO, specifically RN and conservation.

Thank you for your time and service,

[Your Name]
[Your Portage Street Address]