View Full Comment

Comment: I’ve reviewed the proposal and have several objections. The proposal of multi-family housing, while similar to those recently constructed on the South side of Baxter West of the church, would be incongruent with the existing developed land immediately to the West, North and East of the lots. The number of units proposed nearly triples the density of units in comparison to the properties immediately adjacent to these lots. I have concerns that this will dramatically increase the volume of traffic and place burden on infrastructure. Will there be an impact to water pressure, natural gas pressure, telecommunications speed, storm drainage, etc.? This location tends to receive higher than average winds and rainfall compared to lower elevations only a couple of blocks away. As a result, there are instances where the volume of water flowing down Snowball begins to overwhelm the street gutters. Occasionally the roadway begins to resemble a river. As it is currently, the lots in question are currently mostly turf and absorbing or slowing down the flow of water that has fallen further uphill. Should there be more hard surfaces ‘upstream’, I fear that there will be a likelihood that water will flow into several houses on the West side of Mac Street. The current plans add additional hard surfaces directly uphill. I also do not know how much additional water will be added from the water that falls on the roofs of the new buildings. The seven significant trees that are proposed to be removed have been of substantial size before we moved here nearly 20 years ago. As a designated Tree City USA participant, it should be concerning for the city to allow the removal of the significant trees. Setbacks abutting a street are important for safety, providing better sightlines for drivers. Reducing the setback as proposed could impose a safety risk, especially given the proposed increased population density. While the parking spot ratio proposed is 1.53 stalls per unit, I noticed that a large number of them appear to be identified for compact cars. Given the combination of units I would expect to have multiple cars, the likelihood of guests needing parking, the nature of some of the spaces being small or reserved for EV or for disabled parking, and the number of stalls that are likely too narrow, there likely is not enough parking. We experienced an overflow of parked vehicles in my immediate neighborhood after the development of the multi-family units to the West of the church. I have concerns that there will be a need for tenants and guests to find additional parking spaces. It is unclear what is intended by separating the northern portion of the property on its own parcel. It would appear that this would lead to a dead-ended road and an otherwise isolated lot. If we had the funds and given the opportunity, we would have loved to purchase the existing house and property as is. If these lots are limited to being developed for multi-family units, I think the city is misappropriating the space. The existing house has a direct view of Mount Hood, Mt. St. Helens, Mount Adams and Mount Jefferson. I presume that the houses currently sitting to the North and North East of the existing house have similar views, to include the multi-level house on the North East corner (1760 Barnes Ave per included map). This would be prime real estate for similar homes to be designed explicitly with these views in mind. Looking at the plans for the buildings, they do not appear to be taking advantage of their location or views. Sub-dividing the existing lots into single family lots no smaller than the lots in the sub-divisions immediately adjacent to the lots in question would likely alleviate most of my concerns. It would be feasible to develop around the significant trees without harming them, minimize the increased stress of infrastructure/utilities, minimize the increase in traffic and parking needs, as well as reduce the volume of hard surfaces and allowing more green space for rain. It would also allow the new development to better blend in with the areas immediately adjacent to the lots.