Big homes put squeeze on neighbors

Building of large houses stirs controversy citywide, but officials remain mum
By JESSIE KIRK, PAMPLIN MEDIA GROUP Issue date: Fri, Mar 17, 2006
The Tribune

For the last four years, Suzanne Van Fleet and her husband, Craig Marcussen, have lived in a home they enjoyed on Southwest Twombly Avenue, near Dosch Road in the Hillsdale area. In their backyard a white picket fence and leafy trees ensured their privacy.
But now, above those trees looms a 3,300-square-foot house being built on nearby Southwest Washouga Avenue.
“We had a lot of privacy because it was an empty lot,” Van Fleet said. “Now when you look out any window, all you see is this house.”
She said she knew a house would be built in the lot eventually but didn’t expect it to be so large.
The big house on the block is a common topic of discussion throughout the neighborhood. Some of the residents refer to the house as a “McMansion,” a term that implies a large generic home plopped down in any neighborhood. Others call it a hotel. One neighbor claims that it’s half the size of Timberline Lodge.
The message is clear — from eliminating privacy to eclipsing views, the neighbors say the house doesn’t fit in with the character of the neighborhood.
The home was built by Beacon Homes Northwest. It is listed at more than $1 million. Joelle Lewis of Re/Max, the real estate company selling the house, says demand for such homes is high.
“In our climate people tend to live inside their homes, and so they love the square footage,” she said.
Lewis said the house is high quality and will benefit the neighborhood by raising property values.
“As much as the neighbors like to complain about it not fitting in, it does tend to raise property values by at least 10 percent across the board,” she said.

Neighbors petition city

The issue is not isolated to Southwest Portland. Residents in other areas of the city are saying they don’t want to live next to a house three times the size of their own.
Last April, the members of the Mt. Tabor Neighborhood Association voted unanimously to formally request that the city, the Portland Planning Bureau and the Portland Planning Commission, which oversees the bureau, begin a process to prevent out-of-scale homes from being built in established residential areas of the city. The letter claimed that the houses were “grossly out of character with our neighborhood.”
According to the group’s land-use chairman, Dave Hilts, the city did not respond to the letter or the accompanying petition signed by about 50 neighbors. Hilts said he hoped the letter would get the city talking about changing the zoning codes, but so far nothing has come of it.
“They should either build out on a residential lot to the current maximum size or build out to maximum height, but not both,” he said. “There would be a trade-off.”
Plans for a denser, more compact Portland don’t look that good to some members of the Argay Neighborhood Association, either — at least when it comes to the 3200 block of Northeast 135th Avenue. At issue is a plan to subdivide a property there to include a second home toward the rear of the lot.
According to acting association Chairwoman Valerie Curry, some residents have concerns about losing their privacy and seeing property values decline. A number of neighbors also fear that where they once had views, they’ll soon only have a view of someone else’s bedroom, she added.

Residents hit boiling point

The controversy extends to nearby cities, too. For example, in Lake Oswego, housing size long has dominated public debate. Where land values in the built-out community now outstrip housing values, structures above the ground have become incidental and a target for bulldozers.
Though the city has one of the most stringent infill ordinances in the region, neighborhoods have stepped up to add particulars to those restrictions, shaping new housing to fit in with old, one district at a time. In some areas, building has outpaced the rules, and discord between neighbors has erupted.
In the town’s historic First Addition, where more than 10 percent of the original housing has been torn down, neighbors regularly spar over new construction, facing off at hearings over tree removal, for which the city’s strict tree protection ordinance offers a platform for debate. At the site of one home built last year, neighbors frustrated over its size made tongue-in-cheek calls to police about noise, stole tools and threw cigarette butts on the lawn.
On Oswego Lake, one home proposed to extend over the water prompted a public battle that lasted more than two years. The proposed home, which topped 12,000 square feet in some designs, became the subject of two state-level appeals and innumerable city hearings on tree removal. Opponents to construction held a garage sale that raised several thousand dollars for legal costs last summer. A final city hearing March 7 drew more than 100 people to testify, and police were asked to keep the peace.
After six months of negotiations, neighbors finally struck a deal with the home’s developer, Jeff Parker of West Linn. Parker agreed to reduce the size of one wing of the house and drop a defamation suit against some of the neighbors, in exchange for their withdrawing legal challenges to the house.

Infill is recurring topic

The issue of large houses towering over smaller homes is especially hot in Southwest, where many of the established neighborhoods comprise one-story ranch homes and craftsman bungalows on large lots. Again and again, Southwest residents have complained that the large houses don’t fit into the character of the neighborhood, obstruct their views and reduce their privacy.
A few years ago, signs appeared in the Corbett/Terwilliger/Lair Hill neighborhood saying, “No more Monstrosities.” For much of the past year, concerns about large infill houses have dominated the montly meetings of the Maplewood Neighborhood Assocation.
“Infill seems to be the No. 1 concern of the Maplewood neighborhood,” resident Kyle Lesko said. “Over half of our monthly meetings are spent discussing some aspect of infill since I’ve been attending.”

Trees have defenders

Among other things, the Maplewood residents complain that the homes and their driveways are bad for the environment.
“Developers seem to think that these mature trees get in the way of them building their enormous houses and would rather leave the minimum amount required by law,” Lesko said. “These trees add to the livability of the neighborhood, use water to decrease erosion and runoff, and provide habitat for animals.”
However, current city building rules allow large homes to be built in existing neighborhoods, said Matt Wickstrom, the city planner who approved the planning and zoning of the Washouga house. According to Wickstrom, the rules allow for new homes to be 30 feet tall and to sit 5 feet from neighboring homes on the side and rear, and 15 feet from the front.
If the Washouga house seems larger than what should be allowed, Wickstrom points to the fact that it resides on a slope. Because the house sits on a slanted grade, the city allows for an extra 10 feet from the lowest part of the structure, allowing the house to be up to 40 feet tall, Wickstrom said.
It isn’t just the size of the houses that people are complaining about, however. It is the sense that they don’t belong among the mix of ranch-style and craftsman houses that have been in the area for more than 40 or 50 years. Homes three times the size of neighboring homes darken lots and require the destruction of old trees, which help provide for drainage.
“It’s the typical McMansion,” Van Fleet said of the Twombly house. “It’s a house that takes up the entire lot, and that’s not how this neighborhood is.”
But according to Wickstrom, fitting in with the neighborhood is not a requirement of city codes.
“In this area there are no requirements in the zoning code for compatibility with adjacent development,” he said.
Jeff Eldredge, a representative from the Portland Bureau of Development Services, which inspects new homes, agreed that while many city agencies must approve the plans of new houses, it is rare that the neighboring houses are a point of consideration.
“Very seldom is the site looked at before the plan is approved,” he said.
And while the zoning codes say that developers should “work together to promote desirable residential areas by addressing aesthetically pleasing environments, safety, privacy, energy conservation and recreational opportunities,” according to Van Fleet, the city needs to take another look at zoning guidelines because the house built in her backyard is not aesthetically pleasing, nor does it promote privacy.
“I think the zoning laws are not restrictive enough in this area, and this is proof of it,” she said.

Density reduces sprawl

Density advocates say it is important to lure people closer to the central city, however, arguing that infill development uses the existing infrastructure, reduces sprawl and raises property values.
“Population density enables things most Portlanders value — mass transit, walkable clusters of local businesses and access to local town centers,” said Dan Eisenbeis of 1000 Friends of Oregon, an organization that promotes land-use planning. “Having a population base that can support local shops improves the neighborhood character.”
While not many say they enjoy living next to one of the large-scale homes, demand for them is high. Statistics show that home buyers are looking for more room these days. According to 1000 Friends of Oregon, the average home size in Portland has grown significantly in the last few decades. New single-family homes in the Portland region averaged about 1,500 square feet in the 1950s and 2,250 square feet in the 1990s.
At the same time, Eisenbeis said that infill developments should complement the character of an area.
“We should be striving for good design and development. A poor design element isn’t nice to live by,” he said.

Lee van der Voo of Pamplin Media Group contributed to this story.