South Burlingame Neighborhood Association
Thursday, June 14, 2018
7:00 - 8:00 pm
Capitol Hill School Elementary School Auditorium
8401 SW 17th Ave, Portland, OR 97219
Join your neighbors and local businesses.
Please sign up ( on the top right button) if you want to be a member of SBNA.
Only members can vote at general assembly meetings.
Welcome, New Board Members!
The South Burlingame Neighborhood Association (SBNA) meets on the second Thursday of the month during the school year. Join SBNA and your neighbors on the first Tuesday in August for a National Night Out party in Burlingame Park. View the Southwest Neighborhoods Calendar to confirm scheduled meetings and events.
All meetings are open to the public. Everyone is welcome.
SBNA Emergency Meeting 5/14/2018, 4:30 pm, 1008 SW Carson St
This purpose of the meeting is to review and finish SBNA's RIPSAC comments because the oral testimony deadline is Tuesday, May 14th and the written testimony deadline is Friday, May 17th.
FYI: Talking points from Robin and Jim on residential infill
The Planning commission is holding hearings for Public input on widespread zoning changes which would affect most of the city of Portland and almost all of S. Burlingame.
Please testify by the Deadline of May 15th 5 pm at the hearing.
Written testimony deadline is Friday, May 17th 5 pm.
For information and to testify online: http://www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/infill
Public Hearings May 8th and May 15th – for in-person testimony
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR SOUTH BURLINGAME TESTIMONY
- Did you get the yellow rezoning notice? Most houses in South Burlingame would be in the overlay, that means duplexes plus an ADU would be allowed on every lot, and triplexes would be allowed on every corner. Off-street parking would not be required except for the primary house.
- It’s fine to tell how the proposal affects you personally, but try to relate it to the big picture. Avoid hand-wringing and table pounding.
- It is OK to say no to the ‘a’ overlay. Placing South Burlingame in the overlay is a gross abuse, and would turn our single-family zoning into defacto multifamily.
- Avoid anything that can be construed as NIMBYism.
- Size bonuses could be purchased by developers.
- Portland For Everyone wants to allow fourplexes and larger structures.
- Much of South Burlingame is composed of smaller, older homes, those most vulnerable to demolition.
- A good source of information is: www.unitedneighborhoodsforreform.blogspot.com
- Use the following talking points in your testimony – adapted from Neighborhoods for Reform analysis.
Below are some talking points to use in written testimony - Deadline for Testimony - May 15th 5 pm
The current Residential Infill Project (RIP) proposal is a disaster. What started as a project to minimize oversize infill and accommodate the needs of new and existing residents, has morphed into a free for all land grab, wrapped in the guise of affordability, which it will not create. What it will cause is widespread demolition and massive density increases in intact single-family residential neighborhoods. If the city goes along with this, it will be the end of what so many folks treasure in Portland. Gone, neighborhood character. Gone, green yards, trees and access to sunlight. Gone, preservation of historic homes.
Gone, areas of higher density, with a transition to quieter single-family neighborhoods.
And no, it will not create affordability.
The Buildable Land Inventory states there is sufficient land to meet Portland’s growing population for the next twenty years without changing zoning and allowable density.
The RIP violates the purpose of zoning: consistency, predictability, and transparency.
The RIP does not support major goals of the 2035 Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code.
Ø Allowing duplexes and triplexes in the Single Dwelling Zone makes large portions of these areas into de facto multifamily zones without going through the process of changing the zoning designation.
Ø This one-size-fits-all formula encourages demolitions of smaller houses ignores neighborhood character and historical context.
Ø Dispersed higher density is contrary to the Comprehensive Plan directive to focus density around centers and transportation hubs. Scattered density results in greater auto dependency and inefficient use of infrastructure.
Ø The RIP does little to encourage the development of smaller single-family houses, the most desired type of housing stock.
Ø The RIP does not encourage the development of new high amenity, walkable neighborhoods.
The RIP will not result in homes affordable to the vast majority of people.
Ø The most affordable house is the one already standing. RIP does nothing to encourage retention of existing relatively affordable homes.
Ø By pushing more density into to well-established, i.e., “complete neighborhoods,” which come with associated high land prices, developers will not build homes affordable to most people.
Ø The city needs to encourage the development of new, complete, amenity-rich neighborhoods and provide the needed infrastructure to assure this happens.
The gross overuse of overlays misses the intent of the missing middle housing concept.
Ø “Missing middle” housing is designed to transition between higher density and detached single-family housing. The housing options overlay does not make this transition; there are no adjoining single-family housing areas.
Ø Middle housing and higher density should be located around centers. The RIP does not do this.
Ø The RIP overlay promotes helter-skelter development with multi-units allowed randomly throughout areas of single-family homes.
The RIP will result in more displacement of renters and vulnerable homeowners.
Ø BPS planners acknowledge displacement of renters as a potential outcome of the up-zoning.
Ø More rental homes will be demolished under the RIP because builders profit from tearing down affordable rental homes and building bigger houses or multiple market-rate units.
The most affordable and “green” house is the one already standing; RIP does little to encourage retention of existing houses.
Ø Bonus units should only be allowed if the existing house is retained.
Ø The exterior of the existing house should remain reasonably intact.
Promoting ADUs is a positive but only if use is restricted to long-term renters
Ø The RIP further encourages ADU development by allowing more than one ADU on a property.
Ø ADU development is a positive for Portland but only if the ADU is used to help with the housing crisis, i.e., only if the ADU use is restricted to a full-time renter.
Ø Furthermore, taxpayers should only be subsidizing development of ADUs that are used for full-time rentals, not vacation rentals.
Other cities are doing far more than Portland to analyze the potential impacts of new infill activity.
Ø Tacoma, Washington has chosen to do a pilot program to promote residential infill development types and housing choice while ensuring that such development demonstrates high-quality building and site design that is responsive to and harmonious with neighborhood patterns. The pilot is intended to develop a body of successful, well-regarded examples of innovative residential infill in order to inform a future Council decision on development regulations and design standards for some or all of these infill housing types. Read the link for more information: http://cms.cityoftacoma.org/planning/Residential%20Infill%20Pilot%20Program/Tacoma%20Infill%20Pilot%20Program%20Handbook%20(Nov2016).pdf
Ø The City of Los Angeles put in place code to preserve the scale and character of its irreplaceable single-family neighborhoods. Read the link for more information:http://www.nomoremcmansionsinlosangeles.org/the-conclusion
We can accept many portions of the April 2018 RIP discussion draft proposal, including
Ø Reduced scale of houses provided that all habitable space be included in the FAR (floor area ratio).
Ø Reduced height limits
Ø Increased front setbacks
Ø Limiting the height of the first floor above grade
Ø Incentives for affordable housing. (However, we oppose allowing developers to purchase the right to build bigger homes by contributing to an in-lieu fund)
Ø Incentives for historic preservation, including flexibility for internal conversions of existing homes
Portland City Council approved (vote 5-0) SBNA's appeal on Macadam Ridge decision. Our thanks go out to the Mayor, the City Council and all who care about the livability, sustainability, and safety of SW Portland. Thank you.
Council Vote (7 minutes)
Council Discussion and vote (27 minutes)
SBNA Board Members 2017-2018
Officers of the Board
- President: Rob Lennox
- Vice President: Jim Carleton
- Secretary: Carol Porto
- Treasurer: Lynn Pearson
At-large Board Members
- John Holderness
- Jim Leno
- Sam Pearson
- Scott Richmond
- Shannon Hillerweb
- Julie Koenig
- Mike Andrews
Where We Are Located
The South Burlingame Neighborhood of Portland Oregon is located approximately 4 miles south of downtown Portland. It has an area of approximately 0.42 square miles and borders the Multnomah Hillsdale and South Portland Neighborhoods on the north; Riverview Abbey on the southeast; the Collins View, Marshall Park and Marquam Neighborhoods plus an Unclaimed Area where Riverview Cemetery is located on the south. Its geographic coordinates are 45.466 degrees North and 122.688 degrees West.
The boundaries are SW Barbur Boulevard, Miles Street, Brier Place, S½ Canby Street and its imaginary extension east to SW Taylors Ferry Road on the north and east; and on the south by SW Taylors Ferry Road and Spring Garden Road. Interstate 5 bisects a narrow portion of its northerly boundaries.
How to be Involved in Your Neighborhood
South Burlingame Neighborhood Association is involved in many events. Some neighbors like to organize events like picnics and block parties. Others prefer to work around environmental issues, where neighbors participate in park cleanups and stream restorations, while other neighborhoods are involved in land use issues, carefully monitoring livability concerns. All activities make a difference and there is bound to be something that appeals to everyone, find out how you can get involved. Please contact our Chair.