Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Street roots. (Portland, OR) 1998-current | View Entire Issue (Sept. 23, 2016)
Page 10 Commentary Street Roots • Sept. 23-29, 2016 The Residential Infill Project is good - and could be better Madeline Kovacs is the Program Coordinator for Portland for Everyone, a project of 1000 Friends of Oregon. Portland for Everyone focuses on those land use decisions that can support the provision of more affordable housing options for Portland residents. Madeline’s professional experience includes work in urban planning with the Portland Bureau of Planning & Sustainability, in small-scale community-oriented housing development with Orange Splot LLC, and over a decade in non-profit organizing with the youth climate movement. BY MADELINE KOVACS what’s allowed now in most residential areas, and scaling down maximum house sizes on smaller lots proportionally. ortland is growing, fast. Our city is ■ Measuring height from the lowest (as expected to add more than 120,000 new families by 2035 - both those born opposed to highest) point on a lot, and here and those just arriving. Through City ■ Increasing the distance between the front of the house and the sidewalk planning efforts, most of this growth will be ■ Limiting overall height of the house. channeled into our central city and ■ Stops the spread of McMansions (by commercial corridors, but people need reducing maximum allowed height and size) options in residential neighborhoods, too. ■ Prohibiting front-loading garages and Most of Portland’s residential land is changing parking requirements for narrow locked up in zones that only allow a single homes to make them fit in more with the home on each lot, yielding large and surrounding neighborhood. expensive new homes. However, nearly two- With these changes, the current proposal thirds of Portland’s households are now just creates disincentives for demolishing existing one or two people. People of all ages are looking for a variety of smaller homes - these houses because a builder can no longer profit from oversized houses. This may prove to be homes are more affordable, more resource especially successful in slowing “1:1 efficient, and fit household sizes better. replacements,” where a smaller, older house As a city, we have a choice to make: Will is replaced with a bigger, newer one. we be a city that continues to push its lower- In those neighborhoods within a quarter and middle-income residents out, or will we mile of established neighborhood business change our rules, to allow more choices and hubs and frequent transit corridors, the affordability in all our neighborhoods? Enter proposal also: the Residential Infill Project, or RIP, which ■ Allows conversion of existing homes into seeks to do just that. two or three units, incentivising the Recently, there has been confusion and structure’s preservation. heated public debate around the RIP, and the ■Allows two Accessory Dwelling Units changes that are being proposed in Portland’s residential neighborhoods. In fact, the project (ADUs) per house (instead of one allowed now), as long as the total size is still within was initiated largely in response to concerns the reduced total square footage allowed for a from neighborhoods, including the recent single house, per the new design rules. increase in demolitions, lack of affordable ■ Makes it easier for homeowners to add options, new narrow houses with front-loading an ADU or “granny flat” to their property, garages, and large “McMansions” out of scale whether for rental income, for their parents and character with existing neighborhoods. to age in place, or other family members and The Residential Infill Project addresses friends. these things - pretty well. Here is what the ■ Restores the ability to build discrete current proposal does in all neighborhoods: small-scale “middle” housing that Portland ■ Reduces the height and size of new has phased out (namely duplexes, homes and homes that are significantly triplexes,and cottage clusters). This helps remodeled by: further support mixed-income, walkable and ■ Capping square footage at less than half CONTRIBUTING COLUMNIST P transit-enabled neighborhoods. Portland for Everyone believes these changes are a great start, but we strongly encourage the city to go further in four distinct ways. These will provide diverse and more affordable housing options in all neighborhoods and will further discourage demolitions: 1) Outer neighborhoods shouldn’t miss a chance at better transit and walkability. Allow middle housing types in all Portland’s neighborhoods, not just those that are already well connected. We need to create the conditions for all Portland neighborhoods to have the duplexes, triplexes, internal divisions and ADUs that make transit and vibrant neighborhood retail districts viable. 2) Offer incentives for affordable housing that’s accessible to seniors and people with disabilities. The city is far behind its goals for affordable housing, and affordable housing is dramatically more effective when it’s part of more income-diverse neighborhoods. We should offer incentives like a bonus unit and/ or size exception if one of the homes is made permanently affordable and accessible. 3) Increase the flexibility of planning codes - in all neighborhoods - so that it’s easier to design around and preserve more existing homes and trees. We could also offer financial incentives for tree preservation. 4) Offer incentives for conversion and preservation of existing homes, and disincentivise demolitions by allowing internal conversions, two ADUs, “middle” and other housing strategies being proposed near transit in all neighborhoods. With these types of changes in the city code, we can anticipate that there will be more choices available to more Portlanders. For example, by allowing internal divisions of See INFILL, page 11 “The Residential Infill Project (RIP) will allow more opportunities for building smaller more affordable units like this small home in Woodlawn in single family zones without increasing threats to trees. The City’s revised RIP proposal, due out this Fall, should go further in by removing regulatory barriers to preserving more trees and providing a unit bonus for preserving large, healthy trees. PHOTO BY RYAN AUSTIN
