eastmoreland neighborhood association news...eastmoreland neighborhood association news sring 17 w w...

E A S T M O R E L A N D N E I G H B O R H O O D A S S O C I A T I O N N E W S

S p r i n g 2 0 1 7

W W W . E A S T M O R E L A N D . O R G

PRINTING Provided BY

ENA Newsletter Committee

Meg MerrickEditor/Chair

Bob O’ConnorGraphic Design

newsletter@ eastmoreland.org

REED COLLEGE

In This IssueHist. Dist. News 1

President’s Letter 2

ENA Board Votes 4

Land Use News 12

4th July Parade 11

We Are HEART 14

Neighborhood Trees 16

Annual Plant Sale 17

Historic District News

continued on page 3

As early as July, Eastmoreland could become a national historic district. However, the results from the ENA sponsored poll/survey, with about 1/3 of the eligible owners opposed, indicates that the nom-ination is at risk. If most of us can’t agree that our future should not be left to the rule of speculative profits and faith in indiscriminate density, the nomination could fail. On the other hand, if we hope to preserve this special and historic place and guide change with neigh-borhood participation there is, in reality, no other option available. The historic district nomination has been extensively reviewed and validated both for quality and significance. Most importantly, it offers a unique opportunity to shape our future. Let’s embrace change that our neighborhood can help to shape.

What will change with historic district approval?

Demolition Protection. Properties designated “contributing” will be immediately protected by “demolition review” providing a high lev-el of demolition protection for 80% of structures in the district. Dem-olition is technically possible for extenuating circumstances including economic hardship. In Portland, demolition of National Register listed properties are difficult to justify and the process lengthy and expensive. For “non-contributing” properties, only the usual demoli-tion permit is required.

Demolition of 7556 SE 29th Ave in progress

Eastmoreland Neighborhood Association 2

Letter from the President

Dear Neighbors,

In February, two very important hearings were held and decisions made regarding the Eastmoreland Historic District (HD) nomination.

First, the Portland Landmarks Commission heard extensive pro and con testimony and without a single negative vote, agreed to support the Eastmoreland HD nomination. Secondly, the Statewide Advisory Commission on Historic Preservation, voted unanimously to advance the nomination, with minor revisions, to the National Parks Service. Again this was after much testimony for and against the HD.

At the latter event, the Commissioners strongly affirmed the historic nature of Eastmoreland , the quality of the nomination, and that our neighborhood is in danger of losing its historic appearance with current building trends.

In addition, at the Q & A event on March 22nd at Duniway, the two Portland City planners responsible for helping us develop and enforce design guidelines clearly stated their desire to be flexible and helpful in the historic review process and to try to lessen review fees. These are positions the Board strongly supports.

Similarly, the neighborhood HD supporters plan to be very flexible and reasonable in the design review guidelines developed in conjunction with the City if historic status is approved. The primary goal of the HD is to prevent demolitions and to preserve Eastmoreland as a predominately single family neighborhood by limiting infill with duplexes, triplexes, and other non-owner occupied housing. It is not to burden homeowners with regulation. As also stated at the March 22nd meeting, there have been no home demolitions in Ladd’s Addition and “maybe one” in Irvington since becoming Historic Districts.

Doom and gloom attributed to an HD is obviously overstated. While some of us may be subject to the review and fees associated with exterior home modifications, both the City and neighborhood supporters seem committed to minimizing this process. Eastmoreland will benefit long term as a Historic District. This is an “us” not a “my” issue.

It is not the desire of HD proponents to freeze Eastmoreland in time. We would like the neighborhood to evolve as it has in the last 100 years where most home modifications were done in the context, appearance, and feel of this historic neighborhood.

We are aware that many of you have sent notarized letters objecting to the HD. If for any reason you become less certain about that, you may rescind that letter by filling out the form letter that is on historicdistrict.eastmoreland.org. The letter to rescind must be notarized and some banks and UPS offer notary services. Once you have have completed the notarized letter of rescission you may mail it to: Tracy Zeller Oregon State Historic Preservation Office 725 Summer Street SE, Suite C Salem, Oregon 97301 Any letters sent after May 8, 2017 must be mailed directly to the National Park Service.

Respectfully;

Tom Hanson

3 Spring 2017 Newsletter

continued on page4

Exemption Period. Alterations and new construction will be free from historic de-sign review until district-appropriate guide-lines are developed and approved –likely late spring of 2018.

Guideline Development. As outlined by City staff at the March 22nd information ses-sion at Duniway (described below), the formu-lation of guidelines will be in partnership with neighborhood representatives, preservation experts, and City historic resource staff. In developing Eastmoreland specific guidelines, the goal is to provide certainty in how preservation standards are administered, flexibility in adapt-ing to changing technology such as solar panels and window insulation, and clear guidelines for new houses, remodels, and additions respecting the context and variety of styles.

For those who have not followed the process carefully since the Winter edition of the newslet-ter, here is a summary of events past and antici-pated:

January 26th: AECOM and ENA presented to the neighborhood the draft HD nomination. Both the full HD nomination document and a professionally recorded video of the presentation with extended Q and A are available from links on the home page of the HD Guiding Change website at http://historicdistrict.eastmoreland.org/.

January 27th: State DLCD Commission meeting voted to advance State Goal 5 regu-lation reform for historic properties. Changes require local governments to protect national historic resources with demolition review (Port-land standards will be unchanged), and require a public process before providing additional pro-tections such as design review to future historic districts.

January 7th: Historic Eastmoreland Achiev-ing Results Together (HEART), formed to provide an independent voice of support for the historic district nomination and to offer accu-rate information and facts about how the desig-nation will affect residents of Eastmoreland.

February 13th: Portland Landmarks Com-mission unanimously endorsed the significance of the nomination and suggested minor recom-mendations to strengthen the narrative and

check survey characterizations. Recommended approval to the SACHP (see below).

February 14th: Laurelhurst NA adopted a resolution to explore and pursue national histor-ic district recognition.

February 17th: State Advisory Committee on Historic Preservation (SACHP), in their tri-an-nual meeting, held hearings and commented individually on the high quality of the nomina-tion and the importance and uniqueness of the Eastmoreland district. The SACHP voted unan-imously in favor of forwarding the nomination with their recommendations to National Park Service (NPS) for final approval.

Proceedings were videotaped and are available from the State Historic Properties Office). http://www.oregon.gov/oprd/HCD/NATREG/Pages/Eastmoreland-Historic-District.aspx.

March 9th: SEUL presented the results of their tabulation of the ENA Board sponsored non-binding survey of eligible owner sentiment. The results indicated opponents and supporters closely divided with about a third of the surveys not submitted.

March 16th: ENA Board considered a propos-al to advance the HD nomination to the NPS. The Board carefully considered the prepared comments of the KEF nomination opposition as well as statements from the HEART nomination supporters. The survey results were considered in the context of numerous complaints about the misinformation and confusion seeded by the opposition especially during the 4-week survey consideration period. The motion to advance the nomination was approved.

Total=2,066

34% opposed

32% in favor 1% no opinion

33% no response


March 22th: KEF sponsored Q and A ses-sion open to homeowner questions to City staff about the historic district design review, Goal 5 reform, and the Residential Infill Project.

April 3rd: AECOM requests that all requested changes to the survey data be submitted. These include any requested re-characterizations of houses: contributing/non-contributing and other descriptive details about individual properties in the survey.

May 8th: Oregon SHPO requests that all requested changes finalizing the nomination as above be submitted.

May 15th: Oregon SHPO submits the Eastmo-reland Historic District to the “keeper” National Park Services for review.

Early July: National Park Service completes their review of the Eastmoreland nomination. Opportunities to submit objections or changes close. NPS renders a decision.

It may be difficult to appreciate all the un-seen work that your neighborhood association Board of Directors, its committees, and other volunteers provide to protect the qualities that attracted us to the neighborhood and will make this a great place for generations to come. Many thousands of volunteer hours and significant funds have been devoted to this project alone over the past 15 months. The historic district nomination is an effort that could be a legacy of foresight and vision appreciated here as in so many other preservation districts in towns and cities in the United States and around the world.

-Submitted by the Historic District Communica-tions Committee

In deliberations during January of 2016 and in negotiations with AECOM, the historic consultant, the ENA Board determined to have an incremental process and an exit strategy for each contingency of the historic district research and nomination process. Multiple ENA Board votes taken during the year authorized the contractual contingencies.

In February, the Portland Landmarks Commission provided unanimously support for the nomination as meeting criteria for historically significant resources deserving special pro-tection. Also in February, the State Advisory Commission for Historic Preservation, with endorsement from the State Historic Preservation Office, voted unanimously to advance the nomination to the National Parks Service. Commissioners said loud and clear that Eastmo-reland is historically significant, worthy of national historic status, clearly endangered and that the protections given as a national historic district were critical to protecting it.

During the summer of 2016, the Board considered and subsequently funded a nonbind-ing advisory survey/poll of property owners in the proposed historic district. A committee of opponents and proponents formulated the questions. The survey/poll instructions stated that the results were advisory.

The final contingency decision came on March 16th when the Board considered a motion to advance the HD nomination to the National Park Service for their review and decision. For this meeting both the proponents and opponents were invited to make 9-minute presen-tations. Afterward, each board member was asked to summarize considerations that influ-enced their vote. The results: 13 yes; 3 no; 3 abstained.

The editor asked HEART (an independent group supporting the HD) and KEF (opponents of the HD) to submit a 300-word summary of their presentations at the March 16th Board meeting for publication in this newsletter. Board Members were also asked to summarize their statements for the record and for this publication.

Board Votes To Proceed With The Historic District Nomination


Proponent Board Presentation Sum-mary: HEART Addresses the ENA by Derek Blum

On March 16th, I was given the opportunity to speak to the ENA Board in advance of their vote on the historic district. This is a summary of my speech

I’m an 11-year resident of Eastmoreland, was a member of the polling committee, and am a co-founder of the grassroots neighbor group, HEART.

The poll was a survey initiated by the Board to gather information from neighbors. People on both sides of the issue agree on one thing: the poll was confusing.

People were confused between the ENA poll and requests to send letters/objections to the State

Poll did not look official: sent as bulk mail; no self-addressed stamped envelope.

Mixed messages received: “No Action = A ‘YES’ Vote”.

Ultimately, the results were inconclusive and did not provide a clear verdict of the neighbor-hood’s view. It told us what we already knew: we are a neighborhood divided.

There are other factors the Board should take into consideration:

1. The City of Portland Historic Landmarks Commission and the State Advisory Com-mission on Historic Preservation support the nomination of Eastmoreland’s HD.

2. The Residential Infill Project was ap-proved by the City. The RIP is a de facto rezoning of Eastmoreland from single-fam-ily residential to multi-family and will encourage demolition.

3. Third, the Oregon LCDC rule changes to State Goal 5 means that if the HD nom-ination is approved, the City of Portland will have to work with Eastmoreland residents to develop neighborhood-specific guidelines.

4. Finally, demolitions will continue. 7556 SE 29th is nearly gone now. A national His-toric District designation is the only thing that will protect Eastmoreland from these demolitions.

In conclusion, the poll offered little new in-formation. The Board said that this survey was advisory in nature. The fairest way to proceed is to follow the nomination process as it’s been laid out by the National Park Service with the support of the State of Oregon.

Opposition Summary: March 16th Pre-sentation to the ENA Board

Editor’s note: Keep Eastmoreland Free (KEF) was invited to submit a 300-word summary of their March 16th presentation to the board for publication here. Unfortunately, KEF insisted on including commentary that was not presented to the board. KEF representatives have chosen to withdraw their contribution rather than remove content that was not presented to the board.

ENA Board Vote CommentsGeorge Bengtson, ENA Board Secretary: Yes

In the debate over the Historic District, little has been said about the welfare of our youngest neighbors – our children. I am a pediatrician, and my wife and I have raised four children here. Through that personal and professional lens, I offer a few points about where our neigh-borhood’s next generation would be without the Historic District, given that the HD is Eastmo-reland’s best defense against increased housing and population density.

With an increase in building density, Eastmo-reland’s children would experience a decrease in open green space, adversely affecting their phys-ical fitness and opportunities for outdoor play.

Increased population density would further tax the already overcrowded Duniway Elemen-tary School, adversely affecting the quality of our children’s education.

Increased population density would mean more cars, increasing the likelihood of our chil-dren being injured or killed via motor vehicle accidents, the leading killer of Oregon’s young people.

Finally, if our children see Eastmoreland’s historic homes being repeatedly ripped up by de-velopers for a quick dollar, their sense of safety


and stability is compromised. Yesterday, I found on my front porch a yellow construction-paper message from a young neighbor:

Please join me in supporting the Historic District. Our children will thank us with their fitness, education, safety and security.

Tom Hanson, ENA Board President: Yes

The results of the poll did not represent a mandate. The numbers were essentially a dead heat. Importantly, the historic district nomi-nation received strong endorsement from both the Portland Landmarks Commission and the Statewide Advisory Commission on Historic Preservation (SACHP), and the SACP voted unanimously to advance the nomination to the National Parks Service. The SACHP individ-ual members commented in detail on the very historic nature of Eastmoreland , the timeliness of the nomination, and the excellent content of Eastmoreland’s application.

Tom Hubka: Yes

I primarily support the Historic District nomination as our neighborhood’s last, best vehicle for slowing and stopping existing home demolition and replacement with oversized infill construction.

As a Professor of Architecture specializing in the history of housing, I also support the His-toric District as a way of acknowledging and attempting to maintain the overall quality and character of our neighborhood while still sup-porting contextually compatible change.

Carol Klingensmith: Yes

The first house my husband and I bought in Westmoreland would almost be an endangered species today. It was tiny; a little over 1000 square feet and in terrible shape. We were young, just starting out in our careers and ener-getic, so we remodeled it and turned it into one of the nicest houses on the block. Our story was the same for many of our neighbors; we were all busy fixing up our small houses, sharing labor and revitalizing our new neighborhood. It was

the perfect start for our new careers and soon, our two children.

Today those little houses in Westmoreland, Eastmoreland and in fact the entire inner east side are in danger due to the development pressures and often the predatory actions of developers who buy them, tear them down and build expensive houses that few young families can afford. The current epidemic of demolitions is being fueled by developers who don’t live in our neighborhoods but are enjoying huge prof-its by marketing the beauty, charm and care that are the fruits of the labor of the residents of these neighborhoods. As a 30 year resident of Portland, it saddens me to see young people being forced out of the housing market due to the rapidly shrinking affordable housing that demolitions are attacking. It angers me to see the disproportionate influence developers are wielding to turn our neighborhood into an inves-tor-owned profit vehicle. It alarms me to see the wasteful demolitions that not only destroy beau-tiful houses, but throw old growth timber and high quality building materials into the landfill, just so million dollar houses can be squeezed onto lots that now are devoid of trees and land-scaping. The human and environmental costs of this demolition epidemic should concern every neighbor who has lived here for a long time, or who has recently moved here because you love the idea of a neighborhood of diverse housing, gardens and a vibrant tree canopy.

As a board member, I would urge you to ask the question: whose vision of guidance for our neighborhood do you trust? The people who live and work in this neighborhood who look around and see that we like what we see in our well established neighborhood, or the vision of out-side developers and the Residential Infill Proj-ect, which seek to change our neighborhood in significant and irrevocable ways.

I remain strongly in favor of the protections the Historic District would afford us.

Kurt Krause: Yes

For years we lived in the San Francisco Bay island city of Alameda and loved it’s cohesive-ness. Not just the architecture but also the population was in harmony. We wanted to expe-rience a like environment when relocating back


to Portland, and Eastmoreland , for the past 13 years, has been as close as we could come. The harmony has been disrupted and the architec-ture could be next. The deceptions and tactics that have been used by the KEF most vocal members have betrayed their developer funding and goal of continued exploitation of what is unique about Eastmoreland. We heard from one of the State Advisory Commission on Historical Preservation members that the South Eugene failed attempt for a HD had left the area, 10 years later, bereft of anything but university dorms and none of the historical context that they had tried to save. The price in time and cost of more closely reviewed exterior alterations is a bargain when evaluated against creating an environment as grand a historical legacy as the one you found.

Teresa Langdon: Yes

“When you strip away the rhetoric, preserva-tion is simply having the good sense to hold on to things that are well designed, that link us with our past in a meaningful way, and that have plenty of good use left in them.” – Richard Moe

In Eastmoreland, developers are tearing down structurally sound, single family homes and replacing them with houses which can sell for up to double the price of the original house. This does not increase affordable housing in Portland. It is also an environmentally unsound practice, since old construction material is rare-ly recycled and new construction material relies on engineered wood, the production of which is dependent on chemicals, including formalde-hyde. (The Engineered Wood Association, Form No. J330A, www.apawood.org).

The Portland City Council is pushing forward with the Residential Infill Project. This would mean that, in Eastmoreland, a single family home on a 5000 sq. ft. lot could be replaced with a duplex with up to two accessory dwelling units, or, on a corner lot, a triplex. (www.port-landoregon.gov/bps/article/623773). This would radically change the character our neighbor-hood.

We are the caretakers of our old and historic neighborhood. We need to honor its history, not destroy it

Heidi Nickerson Levy: Yes

I have loved this neighborhood since the very first day I saw it over 20 years ago and, with good luck and good planning, we were finally able to purchase our home here 15 years ago. The neighborhood is so like the ones in which I grew up ~ beautiful homes on beautiful streets with beautiful trees. This is a special place ~ some (me) might even say “magical.”

We are not alone in the assessment of this place we love. Others know our neighborhood’s gracious homes of many sizes, our meandering streets, our incomparable tree canopy. They see our residents enjoying our sidewalks and green spaces for entertainment, play, and fitness. This, they think, this is what a vibrant neigh-borhood looks like. And yet, there are those who would destroy what many of us have spent a lifetime to achieve.

Though I am not an extensive traveler, one of the things I look for and enjoy is the archi-tecture of a place. It is the silent keeper of the history of a place. What would New Orleans be without the French Quarter, New York City without its brownstones, Minneapolis without Prospect Park? (We all know places like these all over our country and the globe.) These places are what they are because of their intact archi-tecture that tells their unique story of time and place.

That is why I voted to preserve Eastmoreland. Long may she stand.

Loren Lutzenhiser: Yes

“Demolition” sounds bad. Actually, it’s violent destruction—followed by long, ugly, physical assault and psychological trauma on families. Planners call this “infill”—a euphemism for industrial-scale construction in the midst of people trying to eat, sleep, study, play, and be healthy.

The impacts include carcinogenic diesel ex-haust from constant truck activity (often never shut off), snarled traffic, continuous and explo-sive noise, and a never-ending flow of suburban workers, managed from outside of Portland.

One builder told OPB “… [developers] … come into town and pick up those spare lots that are sitting underneath a structure.” You thought it was a home. Actually, it’s a building standing in the way of profit. And developers’ property


rights trump your rights to peace, safety and enjoyment of the neighborhood you thought you knew.

My neighbors east of 36th have experienced the majority these assaults, and government has been a chief enabler. Because historical-ly unused “lots of record” (dotted lines on plat maps) can be gamed despite zoning, it’s open season for lot splitting and destroying affordable housing. So there is always industrial activity nearby, and the threat of more is constant.

The historic district can’t stop this, but may slow its advance.

Robert McCullough: No

There are four important reasons to support the formation of an historic district in Eastmo-reland:

Historic districts are a potent deterrent to demolitions. Our two most similar historic districts have seen almost no demolitions in the past five years.

Hundreds of academic studies indicate that historic districts benefit community property values from 5% to 15%.

Current demolitions replace more affordable homes with homes 60% to 70% more expensive – freezing out younger families.

The poll was not statistically significant – the difference was less than one standard error – and was biased by opponents sending a mail-ing leading some neighbors to believe that not responding was equivalent to a yes vote.

However important are these rational argu-ments, the most compelling argument is that the gentrification of Eastmoreland involve removing trees and lawns in favor high priced McMansions. Opponents speak of losing prop-erty rights, but they overlook that without the historic district, we will lose our fundamental rights of living in a beautiful traditional neigh-borhood.

I voted no since I had said I would. One of the penalties of being an expert witness is that you have to tell the truth. However, I fervently support the project.

Meg Merrick, ENA Board Vice President: Yes

Since 2011, at the outset of the current esca-lation in demolition and lot splitting activity, on behalf of the ENA, I, and other neighborhood volunteers, have worked continuously to identi-fy, develop, and advocate for mechanisms that would ensure that the historic character of our neighborhood, that we love, would remain.

These mechanisms include the development of a statement of neighborhood values and goals (approved by the board, a proposed expansion of the Plan District to include voluntary design re-view for new construction, and an analysis that made it clear that our neighborhood was more in keeping with R7 zoning (minimum lot size of 4,200 SF) than R5 (minimum lots of 3,000 SF). While we were encouraged by the City’s SE liaisons to pursue both the Plan District and a downzoning to R7, the City ultimately dismissed those efforts in favor of its current density agenda (the RIP).

I voted “yes” for these reasons:1. A national historic district with its demoli-

tion review and denial and eventual design guidelines is the only tool available to save the historic character of our neighborhood. Once gone, it is gone forever.

2. Opponents have repeatedly claimed that that there is nothing historically signif-icant about Eastmoreland. In February, the Portland Landmarks Commission stated unanimously that Eastmoreland is an historic resource worthy of preserva-tion. More importantly, because it has the authority to determine whether a nomina-tion should proceed to the National Parks Service, the State Advisory Commission on Historic Preservation (SACHP) stat-ed, after reviewing the nomination and touring the neighborhood, that not only is Eastmoreland historically significant but it is endangered. The SACHP voted unan-imously to advance the nomination to the National Parks Service.

3. The poll was advisory only; it was one of many factors we were to consider. See-ing the aggressive misinformation that the opposition was disseminating, I was concerned about the poll’s validity from the outset. I never stated that I would follow


its results without considering other fac-tors; the results were inconclusive.

Rod Merrick: Yes

• The survey is advisory – one component of the Board structured incremental HD approval process predicated on neigh-borhood support in addition to Portland Landmarks Commission, State Advisory Commission on Historic Preservation, and Federal NPS approval.

• The opposition has mounted a robust cam-paign – but a campaign fed with a series of distorted narratives, attacks on Board competence, and efforts to confuse with promises of “better alternatives.”

• Opposition strategy has galvanized sup-porters to action. Numerous thoughtful letters were submitted pleading that the Board not terminate the process.

• Survey results are inconclusive with a third of the eligible owners’ views unre-corded.

• It is difficult to see the value in postpone-ment except to harden the lines of division in the neighborhood. Begun 11 months ago and expected to conclude in July, the HD process continues to provide a high level of public engagement and opportunities to consider the issues over an extended period.

• Advancing the nomination to reach ap-proval by the NPS will provide our neigh-borhood substantial protection from specu-lative demolitions and, equally important, a year or more to work together with the City to develop appropriate, reasonable, and predictable design review guidelines. These will protect our sense of community and sense of place by guiding change for future generations.

Tim Moore: Yes

I voted to continue pursuing the historic district because I have been increasingly dis-mayed by the actions of developers and the city, who are working together to tear down viable smaller homes to make a quick profit. Portland promotes a vision of itself as a city of the future, one that is a rich stew of vibrant and distinctive

neighborhoods, but city authorities are steadi-ly moving towards creating a thin gray soup instead.

This is not just about Eastmoreland. I be-lieve all of Portland’s neighborhoods have to work together to resist this attack on our com-mon future. We need to welcome neighborhood diversity and preserve neighborhood character. That character has developed over time and cannot be replaced when it is gone. We need to preserve open space and vegetation, especially large trees, while improving transportation in-frastructure and increasing the housing stock. This is not going to be easy but simply letting developers skim off the cream, without build-ing the kind of housing we need for the elderly, singles and younger families, is absolutely the wrong way to go. Catherine Mushel: No

I voted against forwarding the nomination because addressing the challenges particular to this moment in history will require great cooperative effort: climate change and popu-lation growth are enormously consequential. This moment is very different from the moment in 1988 when Ladd’s Addition was designated an historic district. To cooperate effectively, to govern ourselves effectively, I believe we need to share in the risks others are experiencing—demolitions, poor building practices, the loss of green space. I believe these difficult issues can best be faced from the ground, not of living in a park-like setting protected to a large degree because of a special neighborhood designation unavailable to most of this city, but rather from the ground of experiencing the effects of poli-cies as others do. Finally, I believe the benefits of the MAX line and the much-improved retail districts in Woodstock and Sellwood-Moreland are the result of increased population density. I am confident that the neighborhood’s sharing not only in the benefits, but also in the risks and the costs of changes to our city, will improve ev-eryone’s efforts to limit demolitions, limit build-ing scale, and build much-needed housing, while protecting tree canopy and green space.


Clark Nelson: Yes

I chose to vote yes because I believe there is sufficient evidence that opponents to the His-toric District engaged is significant efforts to suppress the yes vote. In addition to that, I truly feel that a Historic Designation is the last and best method to curb speculative demolition of historically significant homes in Eastmoreland

Kristiana Nelson: Abstained

I support the Historic District, and hope to see it succeed despite choosing to abstain from the board vote. I abstained because I recognize that in the melee over the HD, there are many ways our competing values overlap. Yet I did NOT vote to pull the nomination because I believe the advisory poll was a failure at gauging informed interest among Eastmoreland neighbors. The opposition acted in bad faith from the inception of the poling committee through its fraught exe-cution. The notorious postcard intentionally con-flating “votes” with “letters” during the critical polling period, and door-to-door canvassers tell-ing neighbors that they didn’t have to respond if they supported the HD, suppressed turnout among those who would have asked the ENA to move forward with the nomination. The ‘no’ response outweighed the ‘yes’ response by a very narrow margin, serving as a good indication of how few people would have needed to hear this message to effectively sway the results.

There are numerous reasons I support the HD. Primary among them: to prevent the sig-nificant environmental impact of rapidly accel-erated density, and to stop developers who are trying (here, and across the city) to impose new communities (for profit) where vibrant commu-nities already exist, with no consideration for infrastructure, schools, or social impact. The Historic nomination is the last chance we have to remain as stewards of our own community.

Bill Nichols: No

Personally, I favor the historic district and think it is the best solution to the continued razing of finely built old homes in an area of historic significance. The process to explore the historic district has been a correct use of the time and effort of the Board. I support duplexes or triplexes if they are done in context to the

neighborhood. I do not support replacing older homes with larger homes that fill the lot, are extremely expensive and are out of scale to the neighborhood.

However, the poll did not agree with my posi-tion. I have not seen convincing evidence that the poll misrepresented a significant number of those that voted or those that did not vote. Therefore I honored the results of the neighbor-hood poll and voted against the historic district.Over time if the historic district is the correct path, it will become obvious to all. Hopefully this will be before the unique characteristics of the neighborhood are irretrievably lost

Fred Nolke: Yes

I voted for the historic district because:1. Our first house in Oregon was in Ladd’s

Addition. We remodeled it with no undue requirements or costs. No Residential Infill Project, demolitions, or tri-plexes on every corner lot under Ladd’s Historic Dis-trict since then. Outside investor money has been limited to driving up prices of any house in Ladd’s that can commoditize people’s rent.

2. After a career spent defending Alaska’s National Wildlife Refuges against consti-tutional property rights developers, and with Malheur in the news, I was taken aback to hear similar sentiments from the back of the room at our first neighborhood meeting on historic district. The fraudu-lent Push Poll was the first real indicator to me that there were people willing to do desperate deceptive things to fight the his-toric district. Sadly, for Eastmoreland, we have had a real life illustration of the ONI principle that Boards cannot be bound by “neighborhood votes.”

I’m encouraged that way less than a majority of Eastmoreland’s 2,000 residents voted against the HD, in spite of desperate measures to the contrary.


Bud Oringdulph: Abstained

I abstained from voting for the approval or denial of continuing with the HD effort. I did so reluctantly for I am fully in favor of Eastmore-land a Historic District! My Logic for this vote was that as a member of the Polling Committee I had stated that “I would adhere to the vote of the neighborhood”. As the results turned out the majority of the voters were against the HD pro-gram. Given the efforts of KEF in confusing the voters and the number of neighbors who did not respond I am convinced that we did not “really” receive a clear consensus from Eastmoreland. Thus honoring my original pledge I abstained.

Alison Starkey: Abstained

I abstained from voting on the Historic Dis-trict for the simple reason that I factored in the results, as I saw them, of the recent Eastmo-reland neighborhood advisory poll. To me the poll was close yet not close enough to sway me to say “no” to pursuing the Historic District. Abstaining was the closest I could get to honor the many voices of Eastmoreland.

To be clear, I am a strong supporter of the Historic District and have volunteered over the years to help support its creation. I look at the challenges as not with neighbors, but with the city and developers that want to cash in on the history and beauty of many Portland neighbor-hoods. Eastmoreland is at the uncomfortable forefront of this trend.

We share our property line with 7556 SE 29th where recent demolition has taken away one of the key historic homes in Eastmoreland. In turn, I am daily reminded of the profiting of a developer who does not live in our community. He, along with other developers, is keenly aware of the high value of the place we call home and he has been given permission by way of current and proposed policies to liquidate our neighbor-hood assets for personal gain. It’s overdue that we too value our community as much, if not more, than developers. Yet, as things stand, the gate is open and the foxes are in the henhouse.

24st Annual Neighborhood 4th of

July Parade Join your friends and neighbors for this entertaining Eastmoreland

tradition

When: Tuesday, July 4th. 11AM

What to Wear: Be sure to decorate

bikes, trikes, scooters, strollers, your

kids, yourself and your dog in red,

white, and blue.

The parade starts at Duniway School, proceeds north on Reed College Place (RCP) to Claybourne, and then returns home via RCP southbound. After the parade, join us for free hot dogs (courtesy of Otto’s) and soft drinks and sparkling water (courtesy of New Seasons Market).


Residential Infill Project (RIP). The widely opposed project morphed into a more dra-conian set of prescriptions in the October 2016 version. Home builders’ lobbyists and Portland for Everyone/1000 Friends of Oregon lobbied hard and successfully for the elimination of the single-dwelling zone in most of the east side of Portland as evidenced in the RIP.

In the RIP, Eastmoreland is designated a “housing opportunity overlay zone” or HOOZ. This encourages triplexes on every corner, du-plexes or a house with two accessory dwelling units on every lot, and 6 or more cluster housing units on every lot of 10,000 SF or greater. For the HOOZ, residential units will share a lot and may be bought and sold independently as in other multi-unit zones. The ENA Board is on record supporting one auxiliary dwelling insep-arable from the primary residence to accommo-date addition housing options and additional density.

The RIP promotes the remodeling of existing houses into multifamily duplex and tri-plex structures. It does not explain why a developer would choose this process over a tear down to achieve more predictable and profitable results. HOOZ entitlements would allow the 1,200 prop-erties to be redeveloped into up to 4,575 residen-tial units in the area of the proposed Eastmore-land historic district.

The RIP with the HOOZ was approved with amendments on December 9, 2016. The proj-ect, now in implementation phase, will likely return for 2 months of public comment in Sep-tember-October of this year before adoption in 2018. City land use policies make it unmistak-ably clear that the only demolition protection for Portland’s single-dwelling neighborhoods will be for national historic districts. Although there are other benefits, this alone is sufficient reason to fight for historic district status for Eastmore-land.

The ENA Land Use Committee, allies on the RIPSAC, members of United Neighborhoods for Reform, preservationists, and neighborhood associations from around the city testified in opposition to the RIP: its bypassing of the Comprehensive Planning process, its fanciful promises, false assumptions, and failed econom-

ic analysis. There was one significant success from this effort. The RIP proposed that the Berkeley Addition and every other neighborhood platted with 25 foot wide lots, be rezoned to the R2.5. The City Council adopted an amendment in December that prohibits the 25 foot lots from being split in the R5 zone. Lobbyists are at work trying to reverse this decision.

The RIP is not consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan, not aligned with the original RIP objectives to reduce demolitions and meaningfully temper scale of housing and offers nothing to protect neighborhood charac-ter. Today, we have a shortage of housing, not a shortage of land, and not a shortage of land zoned for housing. Dislocation, destruction of viable housing, destruction of tree canopy, lack of public space, poorly regulated design of infill, and misplacement of density are now in the pipeline.

Demolitions. A website (portlandchronical.com) provides updates from around the city. The Facebook page (stopdemolishingportland) is dedicated to preserving affordable, historic and vintage housing stock. 7556 SE 29th Ave. is being demolished. 6319 SE 30th is under im-minent threat of a demolition and lot spit from Renaissance Homes.

Demolition Delay: A guide provides the best information available. (http://restoreoregon.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Portland-Demoli-tion-Guide1.pdf). With enough will and financ-ing it is possible to exercise a delay. The neigh-borhood association role is primarily to facilitate and provide technical assistance.

Eastmoreland Land Use News

6319 SE 30th


Covenants. The ENA sponsored covenant provides a simple and inexpensive way ($66) to protect your larger lot or corner property from being split. It is available on the ENA website: (http://www.eastmoreland.org/committees-2/land-use/ena-restrictive-covenant). Enforcement of the covenant is the individual and collective responsibility of the properties in the ENA boundary.

Wrap Up. The issues around land use are daunting and time consuming to track and understand. The feelings of displacement and

Last year the Eastmoreland Emergency Pre-paredness Committee launched an educational program aimed at teaching our neighbors how to prepare for a widespread emergency. Our neighborhood is resuming this program again this year and we are requesting volunteers from each block in Eastmoreland to host two evening “block parties”. These parties will be taught by a trained neighborhood emergency respond-er and will cover information on the types of disasters most likely to occur in Portland and how to prepare for these disasters for yourself, your family and as a block. The goal of these preparedness parties is for our neighborhood to achieve the most positive outcome possible when disaster strikes. It is a startling fact that if a widespread disaster were to occur, Portland’s emergency response system (police, fire and medical teams) would be overwhelmed. Most likely, during a disaster you will need to depend

on yourself and your neighbors. By hosting the two block parties you will learn how to be pre-pared for disaster, your neighbors’ skill sets and resources and establish or strengthen neighbor-hood ties.

We are ready to schedule these block parties once you contact us. Again, we will bring all the educational materials and instruct the pro-grams, you just need to invite your neighbors and open your home. Help us build a more resil-ient community! Please consider volunteering to be a host. For more information or to sign up as a host send us an email at [email protected]

Regular Emergency Preparedness Meetings are held at the Duniway School Library. All meetings are open to the public. Upcomings meetings are on Wednesday, April 19th and Wednesday, May 17th.

Eastmoreland Neighborhood Emergency Preparedness House Parties

the squeeze of rising house prices and rising rents in the City are disheartening. As time and space allow in this newsletter, we attempt to alert the reader to be informed and be fore-warned. We also hope that you will follow the links provided and let the ENA Board, elected officials, and the media hear your voice.

These issues shape your neighborhood and affect your property. Be informed!

by Rod Merrick, ENA Land Use Commit-tee Co-Chair

8113 SE 13th (Sellwood)503-708-9083

[email protected] www.KimsTKDportland.com

SPRING SPECIALS!— Family Rates Available —

Traditional Non-Contact Korean Martial Arts with classes for men, women & children!

“Come get your kicks with us!”

D E D I C A T E D T O : P R O G R E S S • P E A C E • L O V E

2307

12.0

308

Bee

SAVE THE DATE!

Eastmoreland Garage

Sale

June 24th & 25th


On New Year’s Eve, my neighbor, Manda Blum, asked me to join her and fellow neighbor, Bob Schlesinger, in forming a grassroots group of pro-Historic District neighbors. It took me about a nano-second to say yes. Our hope was to be a resource and support to neighbors that were either pro-HD or undecided. We knew we had to act quickly to spread our mission to the neighborhood.

We started the new year in the fast lane organizing our group, HEART (Historic East-moreland Achieving Results Together). We have been extremely thoughtful about our purpose, how we present ourselves, and what we wish to accomplish. We have no affiliation with, nor are we sanctioned by the Eastmoreland Neighbor-hood Association Board. We do not want to do

by Beth Warner

We Are Heart

battle with our fellow neighbors, we simply want to share ACCURATE information regarding Historic District designation with Eastmoreland residents

Since the first of January, we have had countless meetings, established a webpage, a Facebook page, a logo, lawn signs, held house parties, a large event, written letters, prepared testimony, etc. We have brought hundreds of people together in spreading the word about the

Historic District and our numbers grow daily. Over 240 Letters of Support for the Historic District have been submitted to the State His-toric Preservation Office. All of this has been accomplished in two short months.

Our mission statement is simple: To work with neighbors to preserve and protect the historic character of Eastmoreland today and for future


generations. We don’t want to tell our neighbors what they can and can’t do their homes. We don’t want them to incur more costs to make the changes they desire to their residence. But, we feel the City of Portland has pushed us to a point where the best remaining option is to become a Historic District on the National Reg-ister of Historic Places. The ENA has lobbied for over six years to change the zoning codes in Eastmoreland to stop demolitions and lot split-ting. None of these efforts has been successful. The last option to save our neighborhood was to nominate Eastmoreland for a listing on the National Register of Historic Places.

At the same time the nomination was being finalized, the Residential Infill Project was approved by the City Council in December allowing single-family zoning on the eastside of Portland to be overlayed to promote high den-sity, multi-family zoning in all neighborhoods. This is not the Eastmoreland we envision for ourselves and future generations. We purchased our homes in a single-family residential neigh-borhood, not a high density, multi-family zone. In addition, there is no infrastructure in place to support the new zoning. Our schools are already crowded. What are the plans to ensure there are teachers, classroom space and recre-ational space when the density increases? Since new housing does not mandate off-street park-ing, what are the plans for street safety when our streets are filled with cars, bikes, etc.? How is our tree canopy going to be protected?

Decisions affecting the future of Eastmoreland should not be made on the basis of a perceived faulty process and the personalities involved. They must be made on the FACTS and what those FACTS mean for the future of our won-derful neighborhood. We strive to answer your questions and concerns truthfully and accurate-ly. If we don’t know the answer to your question, we will reach out to our many resources to get it for you.

Sidewalk Safety & Liability Awareness

The sidewalks in the neighborhood are be-coming increasingly hazardous for pedestri-ans. Runners and pedestrians are frequently using the roadways especially at night to avoid danger.

The primary manifestation is sidewalk lift-ing or settlement creating trip hazards, local flooding, mud slicks, wet leaves, and icing in freezing conditions. The cause however is neglect.

City Code makes the owner of the abutting property responsible for maintaining the sidewalk. City Code 17.28.020

The City relies exclusively on user-report-ing as the inspection program is unfund-ed. Call 503-823-1711 or email [email protected]. Include images and the address in your report if possible.

Pedestrian accidents resulting from non-complying conditions are a liability for the responsible homeowner.

Please inspect your sidewalk and take necessary steps to maintain and repair for your neighbors’ safety and enjoyment. https://www.portlandoregon.gov/transportation/arti-cle/301362

If you share our concerns, please join us. We will welcome you and offer you many options to help Historic Eastmoreland Achieving Results Together. Want a lawn sign? Want to donate to HEART? Want to offer your services? Email us at [email protected].

Do you want more information about HEART? www.iHEARTeastmoreland.org. or visit our Facebook page: www.facebook.com/iHEART-eastmoreland.

Editor’s note: In prior issues of the newsletter, we invited Keep Eastmoreland Free (KEF) to submit articles. One was included in the sum-mer 2016 edition, but KEF declined to submit an article for the fall issue. HEART is a new orga-nization working on the historic district issue. In the same spirit, we asked them to submit an article or this issue.


Do You Know Your Neighborhood Trees?

Here is a riddle, presented by the Eastmore-land Tree Team, to help you get started:

My common name comes from a Native American who is credited with developing the Cherokee alphabet. I grow up to 250 feet tall, and some felled trees of my species have shown annual rings of up to 3,200 years of age. My leaves are evergreen, crowded, and overlapping. My thick bark protects me from fire, and heat is necessary to release seeds from my cones after a fire. Three well-known members of my spe-cies are found just outside the eastern original boundary of the Eastmoreland neighborhood. They were planted more than a hundred years ago for a girl’s 12th birthday. What am I?

Did you know that a free permit is required before planting, removing, or pruning street trees? Get information about planting, pruning, and replacing trees at

Portland Parks & Recreation Urban Forestry503-823-TREE (8733); call 24/7 for public tree

[email protected]

portlandoregon.gov/treesPermit info page: https://www.portlandoregon.

gov/trees/59507

Change your mind?If you have signed a letter of objection but

are now having second thoughts, it’s not too late to change your mind. You may rescind your letter of objection by filling out the form letter that is on historicdistrict.east-moreland.org. The letter to rescind must be notarized and some banks and UPS offer notary services. Once you have have com-pleted the notarized letter of rescission you may mail it to:

Tracy ZellerOregon State Historic Preservation Office725 Summer Street SE, Suite CSalem, Oregon 97301 Any letters sent after May 8, 2017 must

be mailed directly to the National Park Service. The National Park Service is in the process of moving its location and we do not yet know the address to send letters after the May 8th date. Please check historicdis-trict.eastmoreland.org for the address for the National Park Service after May 8th.


Annual Mother’s Day Plant SaleEastmoreland Garden Club Unit 1

When: Saturday, May 13th, 2017

Time: 10:00 AM to 2:00 PM

Where: The Eastmoreland Garden, 2425 SE Bybee Boulevard, across from the Eastmoreland Golf Course

If you have questions, please contact Alison Lopakka Joy 503 860 9402.

The Eastmoreland Garden Club Plant Sale offers a large variety of perennials, herbs, native plants, and organ-ic tomato starts. Kids can enjoy our free children’s garden-ing corner where they can pot up a special complimentary Morther’s Day gift while you browse our great plant selec-tions. Stop by this family friendly event and pick up some beautiful additions for your garden.

All net proceeds of this sale support local community gar-dens, horticultural education and food aid programs.


It’s spring! Time to go to the garden…It’s finally spring, and our wonderful Crystal Springs Rhododendron

Garden is coming alive! Named for W.S. Ladd’s Crystal Spring Farm, the garden was established in 1950 to be jointly managed by the Port-land Parks Department and the Portland Chapter of the American Rhododendron Society. It’s not only a place for viewing more than 2,000 species of rhododendrons, azaleas, and related plants but it is a test area for them. With its pond, the garden attracts a variety of water fowl and is a favorite of bird watchers, photographers, and small children. A pair of bald eagles currently resides in the garden. We are very fortu-nate to have such a magnificent place in our neighborhood! There is an admission charge of $4 from 10 AM to 6 PM, Wednesday to Sunday, and all other times are free.

A Hidden Gem in the Neighborhood


Committees: Communications Kristiana Nelson Crime David Aiken Diaster Response Jessica Kemmis Dog Show Steve Baker

Elm Inoculation Catherine Mushel Fourth of July Parade Steve Baker Garage Sale Amy Reiersgaard Garden Alison Starkey Land Use Rod Merrick & Clark Nelson

Neighborhood Cleanup Matt Morozovsky Newsletter Meg Merrick Transportation Fred Nolke Trees Catherine Mushel

2017 Eastmoreland Neighborhood AssociationBoard of Directors and Committees

Do you have questions of the ENA Board? Send a message to [email protected]. Someone will get right back to you.

Executive Committee Tom Hanson (President) Meg Merrick (Vice President) Robert McCullough (Treasurer) George Bengtson (Secretary)

Members Tom Hubka Carol Klingensmith Kurt Krause Theresa Langdon Heidi Levy Loren Lutzenhiser Rod Merrick

Tim Moore Catherine Mushel Clark Nelson Kristiana Nelson Bill Nichols Fred Nolke Bud Oringdulph Alison Starkey

1610 SE Bybee ‐ Portland OR 97202

A Family Friendly 5K Run/Walk

All proceeds benet the Windermere Founda�on, which funds local non‐prots

focusing on homelessness and poverty.

In 2016, Windermere Stellar was able to give $360,000 to 48 non‐prots, including Friends of the Children, Bridge Meadows, Project Lemonade, and the Community

Transi�onal School.

For addi�onal informa�on and registra�on, please visit:

www.runsignup.com/windermererunwalkstroll

Registra�on Deadline: April 21st at 1:00 a.m.

Sunday April 30, 2017

9:00 a.m.—11:00 a.m. SE 14th & Bybee

(Moreland Farmer’s Market Loca�on)

Eastmoreland Neighborhood AssociationP.O. Box 82520, Portland, OR 97282 NONPROFIT ORG.

U.S. POSTAGEPAID

PORTLAND, ORPERMIT NO. 333

Landscape Design, Installation, & Maintenance

Wish you could enjoy your garden after dark?Let us Light it up!

With State of the Art LED Outdoor Lighting

(503) 698-3732 www.mcquiggins.com

INSURED AND BONDED LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR, LCB LICENSE # 7235

eastmoreland neighborhood association news...eastmoreland neighborhood association news sring 17 w w...

Documents