Better infill design goal of proposed changes by Portland Planning

Designing infill housing projects that meet aesthetic and regulatory approval may get easier in 2006 if zoning code changes proposed as part of the Portland Planning Bureau's Infill Design Project go through.

We want to make good design easy to do, rather than what you have to jump through hoops to do, said Bill Cunningham, city planner and lead on the Infill Design Project.

The Infill Design Project's focus is on design solutions for multi-dwelling and row-house developments in low- and medium- density zones outside the central city - likely locations and building types for future infill.

Previous infill design projects, such as the continuing Living Smart: Big Ideas for Small Lots project spearheaded by the Bureau of Development Services, have largely been aimed at detached homes, duplexes and row houses.

The 19 proposed amendments combine to open options for pedestrian- friendly street fronts, rear parking, court-oriented and other layout alternatives, fewer impervious surfaces, flexible front setback requirements and added opportunities for community input.

Most of the code changes are conceived in terms of trying to facilitate good design rather than trying to prevent bad design, Cunningham said.

Tom Skaar, owner of Pacific Western Homes and part of the Infill Design Project's advisory group, said most of the proposed changes are voluntary options rather than mandatory changes. Most of the changes, he said, will not increase costs.

With very few exceptions, I don't think there will be things that will involve additional expense, he said.

Fronted parking and windowless front facades, two characteristics commonly cited by designers and community members alike as unappealing, get a fix with the proposed changes.

Required window coverage for street-facing facades would jump from the currently required 8 percent to 15 percent, and vehicle areas would be limited to 50 percent of the street frontage for multi-dwelling projects. Currently, there are no limits on street- fronted garages or parking areas for multi-family housing outside the central city.

Skaar said he wishes there were non-regulatory solutions, such as fiscal incentives or creative garage designs, to limit dominant parking. He also said that restricting fronted parking is an option that can lead to higher costs.

I'm not sure that outright prohibiting it is the way to go, he said.

Narrower driveways and reduced driveway setbacks would be permitted under the code changes to allow rear parking for smaller multi-dwelling sites, and code barriers to rear-accessed row houses would be reduced.

These are things that simply make it easier to get parking to the back, Cunningham said.

Proposed changes also focus on fitting infill projects into the existing community.

Several of the amendments would facilitate alternatives to towering infill, such as courtyard housing, by allowing common outdoor space on small infill lots and reduced side setbacks within detached house projects.

New provisions would allow for the creation of shared courts, meant for both automobile and pedestrian traffic, in higher-density residential lots.

Several changes also allow for new building in pedestrian districts or transit zones to continue the already-existing setback patterns of neighboring structures.

Hopefully we'll get a little bit better development and a little bit less neighborhood angst, Skaar said.

Should the code changes be adopted, the design project plans to release a design guide as well as 12 prototypes for medium-density housing configurations that will have already garnered approval from city agencies.

A criticism we've heard is the city is good at saying what they don't want, Cunningham said. We'd be removing some of the mystery from the code and providing examples of what you can get through.

Offering prototypes may lead to an influx of similarly designed projects, but Cunningham said expanding out of the current row house tendencies is worth potential similarities.

There is that issue about whether you'd end up with another kind of cookie-cutter approach, but row houses have kind of ended up as a cookie cutter, he said. I'd rather have eight standard options than one.

The Portland Planning Commission has scheduled a hearing on the code changes for Oct. 11. At the earliest, Cunningham said, the amendments would be before City Council in late January. In the best- case scenario, he said, changes could be effective and the design guide and prototypes released by next spring.

Prototypes from the Living Smart project, which launched last June with an architectural design competition, are still on the way, said project manager Anne Hill. The competition's practical steps, which include dealing with potential code issues and turning several competition designs into permit-ready plans, are under way.

The process is in the beginning stages, but Hill said she anticipates designs will be ready for builder use in 2006.

Copyright 2005 Dolan Media Newswires
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved.