Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApproved Minutes - 2005-01-26Affordable Housing Task Force Meeting Notes January 26, 2005, 6:00-8:30 p.m. City Council Chambers, Lake Oswego City Hall Members in Attendance: Dan Vizzini, Diane Luther, Beckie Plaza, Paul Lyons, Rob Wagner, Brad Holland, Ardis Stevenson, Emogene Waggoner Staff in Attendance: Stephan Lashbrook, Donna Gouse Guests in Attendance: Jean McGuire, Old Town NA, Jeff Novak, Waluga NA, Erin O’Rourke-Meadors, Westlake, Cathy Shroyer, Lake Forest NA, Renee Carr, Foothills NA, Chris Schetky, Mt. Park NA, Ron Smith, Evergreen NA, Jim Bolland, First Addition NA, Joan Batten, Rosewood CPO, Ed Buchman, Lake Grove NA, Norma Heyser, FAN, Linda Brown, Blue Heron NA, Julie Bryan Mack, Forest Highlands NA, Charles B. Ormsby, Birdshill CPO, Rex Burkholder, Metro Council, Colleen Bennett, Sherry Finnigan, Lisa Volpel, Rosewood CPO, Ann Martin, Dr. Joe Eusterman, FAN, Priscilla Panichello, Glenmorrie NA, Jack Hoffman, City Council, Robert Liberty, Metro Council District 6, Debbie Gilbert, Lake Forest NA, John Pullen, Mt. Park, Robert Bolton, Glenmorrie NA, Stan Aschenbrenner, Jay Medley, Lake Grove, Constance Ewing, Matt Finnigan I. Welcome Task Force Chair Dan Vizzini opened the meeting and asked those in attendance to introduce themselves. He said the format of the meeting is open and that all participants should feel free to make comments. II. Neighborhood Perspectives on Affordable Housing Dan Vizzini introduced this portion of the meeting by stating that the Task Force so far has received information on the city’s housing stock from the tax roll database. The Task Force invited neighborhood association representatives to provide their perspectives on the affordable housing issues and demographics of their neighborhoods. Summary of Neighborhood Comments (organized by neighborhood) Note: The following comments do not represent the official positions of the neighborhood associations listed below. Evergreen • Mix of housing types—some housing types are not obvious. • Suggested the Task Force contact service providers to get more information from those serving special needs populations. 1 First Addition Neighborhood Association (FAN) • It was noted that the following numbers are a few years old: o Number of Single Family Dwellings (SFDs): 515 o Multi-family dwellings/duplexes: 215 o Commercial/institutional: 140 • Concerns about owner/renter balance. • It was suggested that the Task Force get information on the Morton Development at 5th & A as an example of affordable housing. • There are new units on the east side of 2nd, at B St. • There are a lot of tear-downs but some older places are being renovated. • Page 73 of the City Council goal setting document will be online January (it can be found at http://www.ci.oswego.or.us/council/Goals2004.htm). • The market for FAN houses goes all the way to Phoenix, AZ—developers are soliciting to buy in existing neighborhoods. Westlake MFD: 525 SFD: 516 • There is an aging population, but also a demographic mix. • Those living in apartments are primarily singles and couples. Old Town • It is the smallest neighborhood in LO. • It has a diverse population • 2:1 renters to owners. • There are a lot of replacements happening and concerns about tear-downs. • The apartments at Church and Durham may be threatened. • There was a question on what constitutes affordable housing. Lake Forest • It is considered an unincorporated area: 60% county, 40% city. • Old (1920s) big lots • Mostly SFDs—many rent for $800 to $1300/month, generally. • It is a diverse neighborhood, which is part of the appeal. • Not all of L.O. is high income. • Decisions need to be based on data and facts, not assumptions. 2 Added comments written at end of meeting: • Save existing modest/affordable housing stock. • Rezoning to R 7.5 upon annexation may work to encourage re-development and large expensive homes where there were affordable ones! Rosewood • 815 properties, mostly SFDs. • It is considered a more affordable area. Lake Grove • Predominately SFDs • Cost ranges from $210K to $1.2 million sales. • Large lots are in demand. • Most tear downs are small houses that are not maintained, without foundations. These “fall downs” are selling for $250K and up. • Land values are pushing against affordability. Blue Heron • Mostly owner-occupied homes. • The most expensive homes are at the lake front. • There are a few granny flats. • There are expensive waterfront houses. • Dry-rot problems are common. • There is new development on small lots. Houses sell for $700K and up, and are being bought by families. Lake Oswego School District • It is facing declining enrollments, other than Forest Hills Elementary. • Young families are selecting more affordable suburbs to live in. • 30% of school district staff live in the school district. Forest Highlands • In 1995, change began from affordable to big lots being divided up. • There are many new families; up until 8 years ago there was an older population. • There are concerns about taxes and sewer costs. • There is a lack of connector roads and paths. • Erosion concerns. • Mostly SFDs. • Annexation triggers higher density zoning. 3 Foothills • Big demand by young families—rentals are $800 to $1300 per month. • There are 112 owner-occupied condos, and the complex is 80% occupied. • There are more children on the school bus. • Oswego Point, rental apartments, was developed in response to demand for higher densities. • Most condos are not subject to FEMA flood standards. Palisades • There are 1500 households and 6,000 residents. • It is almost entirely SFDs. • Rentals range from $1100 to $1400 per month. • Most housing in the neighborhood was built in the last 25 years. • The least expensive homes sell for 225-250K. • There is a lack of hard data. Birdshill • 360 tax lots, mostly SFDs. • Homes were built in 3 time periods, starting in the 1920s. • Land values are far exceeding house values, especially homes built on “sweat equity.” Waluga • There are a lot of commercial conversions • SFDs near the center of the neighborhood, surrounded by MFDs and commercial development. • 20% of homes are rentals. • Housing stock is being bought by out of state speculators. • 4:1 MFD: SFD • Aging population and few children. • $350K town homes proposed adjacent to park. • There is a high absentee ownership, but they are investing in remodeling. Uplands • Mostly SFDs on 1/3 to ½ acres • Rapid price escalation, especially in land value. • 600 homes (SFR), 2 churches, 2 schools, 57 acre natural city park. • Six tear-downs in last year of livable homes $250-350K. 4 III. Discussion of Strategic Decisions Matrix The Matrix was developed after the August 11 meeting. There was a brainstorming session on the Matrix and the overall progress of the Task Force. The following is a summary of the comments: • Add to the Matrix: retention/preservation of affordable housing. • There were questions about the focus on five demographic categories (first time buyers, single parents, seniors, employees, special needs). • There were questions on how the Task Force’s recommendations will be implemented, city-wide vs. by neighborhood. • How are housing types defined? • Affordable housing needs go beyond the city. • Is the Matrix based on a mandate from the state government or Metro, or is it a city mandate? The answer is yes to all three. Metro has voluntary guidelines on affordable housing and the city’s Comprehensive Plan requires it. • To look only at structures of 5 units and above doesn’t accurately reflect the types of affordable housing. Conduct an inventory. • Metro’s housing distribution method? • Add community impacts, such as quality of life and cost. • Eliminate the unfeasible. • Quality of life task force addressed housing. • SDUs are a misnomer as they are usually accessory buildings. • Older accessory buildings are becoming home offices • Density requirements are taking away affordability, driving up land values. • Reconciling the issues of density, costs, availability. • Increased density requirements have not resulted in more affordability. • Local economic make some the proposls unfeasible—the community may need to redefine affordability due to land costs. • An example is that local employees should be able to live here. • It was emphasized that affordable rentals should be retained. Neighborhood Plans and Issues Pertaining to Secondary Dwelling Units (SDUs)— Comments from FAN and L.G. • Issues of owner occupancy • Size limits (800 sq ft) should be preserved. Without size limits, SFD zoning integrity is threatened. • There are opportunities for seniors to downsize, as they can move into a smaller unit on a property instead of selling. Ideas for creating more affordable housing: 5 • In-lieu fees for tear-downs. • Look at condo conversion restrictions. • Budget concerns (taxes, fees, SDCs) • Real estate transfer tax • Example of Santa Cruz—SDU standards • Other funding sources? • Research what other locations are doing • Work with groups, such as the League of Women Voters, which is lobbying for state statute to allow a real estate transfer tax. IV. Process/Recommendations It was agreed that it is too early to list priorities. The processes/recommendations discussed were: Recognize neighborhood differences. • Use as model the in-fill task force—neighborhood and zone focus. • Note impacts by lot size. • One size does not fit all. ¾ Quality of life ¾ Neighborhood plans ¾ In-fill Comment written by participant at end of meeting: Compare “product” with the above in writing so we can see differences. • “Compliance” may not be community goal. • Explain decisions—get beyond “charged” words. • Issue is lack of facts, quality inventory needed. • Next steps include looking for specific, successful programs, in other communities. • Delta--how do we get from here to there? • No political filtering • Need measurable outcomes. • No perfect data, but lots of sources (Census noted). The Task Force will be getting GIS housing stock data from the city. • Don’t get buried in non-critical data. • Include USB (Urban Service Boundary) lands. • Look into Measure 37 impacts. • There were questions about regulations pertaining to senior housing, regarding age limits. • Phase II—more study is needed. 6 • LONAC sends updates monthly, and can be used to provide information on the Task Force. • More community outreach and communication is needed, explain terms to the public. • Don’t produce another “wonkish” report which isn’t implemented—there needs to be an ongoing committee. • Don’t rush. This is an opportunity. More time will be needed to get to implementation. Stephan will be compiling an email list of all the neighborhood chairs for the purpose of sending information on the Task Force. Information will be sent to everyone at this meeting who provided an email address. In addition, those who want to get on the mailing list can send an email to Stephan Lashbrook at slashbrook@ci.oswego.or.us. V. Approval of Meeting Notes The approval of the meeting notes from December 16, 2004 was postponed because a copy of the notes was not available. The meeting adjourned at 8:25 p.m. The next Task Force meeting is scheduled for February 10 and will include a meeting with representatives of local churches who are involved with housing programs. 7