Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Item - 2024-09-09 - Number 07.1.2 - Exh G-1 Email from Krebs-C Planning Commission Public Testimony Sep 9 2024 8 September 2024 To: Lake Oswego Planning Commission From: Carolyn Krebs Lake Forest Neighborhood Association Board Member Former Member: Lake Grove Village Center Implementation Advisory Committee (representing Lake Forest Neighborhood) Participant during all phases of the Metro/Lake Grove Affordable Housing Project (El Nido, from Hacienda CDC) Regarding: LU 24-0024 Housing Production Strategies Public Testimony This testimony represents my views and is not official testimony for the Lake Forest Neighborhood Association. After reviewing the staff report, and after viewing several meetings of the Housing Production Strategy Task Force, I have several positions that I would like the Planning Commission to consider: Position 1: Specific strategies are not prescriptive in the sense of"must do"or"shall do" but rather strategies that"can" be undertaken. Page 27 of the staff report says: "The Housing Production Strategy identifies strategies and actions that the City of Lake Oswego and community partners can take to promote housing development that meets the needs of the community." I believe it is important to make this distinction. The community has the option of pursuing all or some of these strategies to meet the identified housing needs. Position 2: Code audit and amendments strategy considerations. I will address bullets 4-6 in this strategy. Open space requirements in high-density zones: The Metro/Lake Grove Affordable Housing project offers terrific amenities on-site that are specifically made possible because of the open space requirement. While this code requirement challenged the developer,they were able to create outdoor spaces that will enhance the livability of this new development for new residents in my neighborhood. The site plan reflects the community values that were provided to Metro by a diverse stakeholder group. The following figure is from Exhibit E-012, Open Space/Landscape Area Plan in LU 24-0026. The open space area allows for the preservation of 3 substantial trees to be enjoyed in a space that will also serve as a nature-based play area. Other open space areas are for a public plaza at the corner (which will include public art) and a private patio space for outdoor use by residents (including BBQ). Open Space requirements should not be reduced in high density areas where there will be housing. Gender LU 24-0024 EXHIBIT G-1/PAGE 1 OF 4 mainstreaming is an important consideration for higher density housing and the needs of care providers on site should not be removed from the code. • I— I TOTAL SITE AREA 48.231 SF A116 C]ACCESS EASEMENT -2.923 SF 80VF0 00. 1/1 MCATL� _ -NET DEVELOPABLE AREA 45.758 SF /19 11 `.* S l TANpAA0 7,Z 1 REQUIRED PROV85ED DIFFERENCE 1.1 - OPEN SPACE AREA 9.152 SF 8.277 SF •125 SF 104* • 4%. LANDSCAPE AREA 9.152 SF 9.3•18 SF A.. SG2J. LANDSCAPE CREDO 0SF SS SF _ 51; F)O LANDSCAPE AREA WI CREDOM 9.152 SF B, L SF •252 AI , © RLf COMBINED 18,304 SF 181 SF •377 SF \ ® 4 S\ ' SiANDAwe,TAE,5 OPEN SPACE AREA REQUIREMENT \ 20%OF NET DEVELOPABLE AREA•9.152 SF 5 !!!\```````\` LANDSCAPE AREA REQUIREMENT 1xtE57\��\"•``„\"`` Q� �, 20%OF NET DEVELOPABLE AREA•9.152 SF �t `\ LANDSCAPE AREA CREDOS _\ SUBSTANTIAL TREE PRESERVATION \� CREDIT=1:1 LANDSCAPE CREDIT SF 0- e All .—.. MAX.SUBSTANTALL u u - TREE PRESERVATION CREDIT ,-n, I NM SF 3=1.500 SF ,•ppr... - - • •• LANDSCAPE PARKING BULB CREDITS IDENTIFIED=53 SF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDING I • BOONES FERRY ROAD M AC I<E N Z I E. Hacienda CDC Development Review Open Space/Landscape Area Requirements Access Architecture D N.ARo,8,SV Hovsin3 Barriers to residential development within mixed-use districts: The City has already investigated and addressed this during the most recent update of the Comprehensive Plan (link: We Love Lake Oswego: Planning for People, Places and Prosperity) . LU 14-0019 Clear and Objective Housing standards was one result of this effort. Before embarking on a new initiative,this update should be analyzed to see if further efforts are truly warranted. The impact of neighborhood and design district overlays, restrictive siting standards,or other regulatory provisions: Many volunteer hours and collaborative processes between stakeholders (businesses, property owners, and residents) occurred before the Lake Grove Village Center Overlay was adopted. The same extensive volunteer efforts occurred for the development of neighborhood plans and overlays. The City staff anticipates "neighborhood resistance" and the need for"extensive community engagement"for this strategy. We have already seen major changes within single family zoning to incorporate middle housing. Before we fully understand how that will impact us,we are asked to revisit our neighborhood plans again. Let's hold off on this until we understand more about how middle housing affects neighborhoods. It is easy for individuals that have not had to work together with their neighbors to hypothesize away code requirements when they don't understand the history or fully consider the consequences. LU 24-0024 EXHIBIT G-1/PAGE 2 OF 4 Position 3: Clarify the City's current position/status on removing/reducing minimum parking requirements. On Dec 5, 2023, in a study session,the City Council unanimously favored repealing all parking mandates citywide as part of CFEC(Climate-Friendly and Equitable Community)work. Is this or is this not a "done deal"? If it was a decision, I can't begin to understand how this occurred without a public hearing. The staff report leads one to believe that the City"could consider removing parking mandates citywide." Yet, at the same time, citizens have been informed that there is no option but to remove parking mandates citywide and any planned public hearings are not substantively about the issue, but only approving code language that reflects the City Council's direction from Dec. 5th. Perhaps the Planning Commission can clarify this for the public at this time. Position 4: Remove from the "Rezone land" strategy any"rezoning lower-density areas to allow for higher-density housing"at any later phase. As stated previously,the changes in the lower-density zones for middle housing have already resulted in de facto "rezoning"for higher-density use. Proposed middle housing plans are already causing challenges for existing homeowners in my neighborhood. Perhaps the City should question protected classes of homeowners (those in established HOAs) and see if these properties can be made subject to rezoning for infill redevelopment since they aren't specifically affected now by the middle housing code. LU 24-0024 EXHIBIT G-1/PAGE 3 OF 4 Siquina, Cristina From: C KREBS <cmkrebsnw@msn.com> Sent: Sunday, September 8, 2024 7:33 PM To: PC Testimony Subject: Written testimony for LU 24-0024 Attachments: Planning Commission Public Testimony Sep 9 2024.docx CAUTION:This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. Dear Cristina Siquina Calderon, Attached is my written testimony for tomorrow's Planning Commission Meeting on LU 24-0024. Please let me know if that you have received it. Thank you in advance for entering it into the written record. Best regards, Carolyn Krebs Sent from Mail for Windows 1 LU 24-0024 EXHIBIT G-1/PAGE 4 OF 4