Link for City's Feedback form on ADU expansion proposal

[Pari Sabety]

Hi all--

Here's a link to the feedback form for the City's proposed expansion of the zoning code to allow accessory dwelling units in all residential districts without review and approval.   The comments area of the form is the only place you can register a concern about review and approval of these plans.  Please state your opinion!

https://us.openforms.com/Form/e980834a-c6e7-4ab7-9350-762244ec5378

[Clare Balombin]

Questions 3, 4, 6 are poorly worded. They suggest that the city will go ahead with permitting ADUs no matter what residents say.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "Walhalla Ravine" group.
To post to this group, send email to walhall...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to walhalla-ravi...@googlegroups.com
To read old messages, visit http://groups.google.com/group/walhalla-ravine/topics?hl=en
For more options, visit http://groups.google.com/group/walhalla-ravine?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Walhalla Ravine" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to walhalla-ravi...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/walhalla-ravine/753458ce-1ee9-429a-bd76-c1566f48d85fn%40googlegroups.com.

[Pari Sabety]

Probably true.  That’s why using the comments space to register concerns is important. 

Thanks for taking a look!  

Pari Sabety

3192 Morningside Drive

Columbus OH  43202

Cell: 614 579 8480

[Sarah D'Mello]

…poorly worded yet probably INTENTIONALLY worded that way because, yes, they ultimately plan to go ahead and do what they want, regardless of residents’ feedback…!

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/walhalla-ravine/CABJUpG1X640jAtuHqKawE%2BnkAfFcXgoMkxHDxzsgPEGbSeY7BQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Debbie Shaw]

I would really like to give my opinion on ADUs in a survey, but this one has so many problems I could really only answer the first Question!  It would probably be thrown out if I did that.  And the comment section is way too small to explain why I consider this an invalid, sometimes ambiguous, and purposely constructed survey to get it passed to allow ADUs in residential areas without any restrictions and without review or approval. 

I wish there was someone I could contact on the City Council or Zoning board and have them pull the survey and replace it with an objective and logical one but I know that would never happen!

Read on if you want to see particulars of why this is an invalid survey, IMHO.

My MAIN concern is all questions after the first one will have unintended consequences if you answer Do Not Support or Slightly Oppose any of them (except #7 & #9 more on those later). You would be opposing any limits on ADUs.  

All of the other questions, (if the city allows ADUs to be built), state restrictions on them and I for one would have to check Strongly Support because I would be supporting all of the restrictions IF THE OVERALL PROPOSAL is enacted. 

#2 limits height

#3 limits size

#4 & 5 limits number of ADU’s per lot 

#6 limits number of occupants

#8 requires them to be in the backyard

IF not enough people strongly oppose the expansion of the zoning code proposal to allow ADUs and it is not killed because of this survey or any other reason,  Question #7 is really bad  because it is so misleading with the wording having a double negative.

#7.  Do you support the proposal to not require off-street parking for ADUs? 

This question means the proposal, if passed as is, would allow people to build an ADU with no space for parking for the ADU occupants on their own property. Off-street parking means parking will be provided on your own property.  To Not require it means the occupants would most likely have to  park on the street - which we know is already hard on many Clintonville streets!

So If  I check Do Not Support or Slightly Oppose as an answer for #7, then I'm agreeing that off street parking will not be required.   The question you are answering is written as a negative already, so a double negative is a  positive.  Best example of them constructing a survey to get the answers they want, i.e. for ADUs to be allowed with no restrictions. 

#9.  Do you support the city regulating ADUs for the use of short term rentals?   Too ambiguous! 

This one could mean the city could regulate any ADU  ONLY FOR the use of short term rentals.  Which I would Strongly Oppose.