Item 3: Ordinance Concerning Jefferson/Far West Plan Amendments

Home Browse Search

approval by the neighborhood group, indicating that residents and their neighborhood association should be assigned a pivotal role in deciding how their own neighborhood would develop over time. The example of a block plan included in the Refmement Plan Appendix provides an example of what the planning team envisioned - low-intensity development that includes carefully sited, small-scale apartments amongst single-family homes with extensive greenspace, for community orchards and gardens. In a recent conversation with one of the JWN co-chairs, Ms. Mary Bentsen who lives at 950 W. 16th Ave., who was one of the Jefferson residents on the JIFW planning team, confirmed this sense of modest increases in allowable density, on the scale of "granny cottage" additions. In her comments, Ms. Bentsen was quite adamant that currently allowed R-2 development, for example, the addition of a ~uplex or larger multi-family unit in the back of an existing house, was not intended or desired by the JIFW planning team. Subsequent statements by~ Jefferson Area Neighbors leaders and residents Block planning never materialized; and "site review", which has been ineffectually applied in the past, has not provided the kind of control over development the JIFW planning team intended. As a result, residents and the neighborhood association have found themselves in repeated battles to prevent development in the area that is inconsistent with the plan's intent and which degrades and destabilizes the neighborhood. Looking at the re:cord for some of the land use actions in theare,a pro'vides additional historical reference points for understanding how the JIFW planning team, the neighborhood association, and neighborhood residents meant for the plan to be applied. A good example oc,curred in late 1998'when numerous residents alld the neigh"borhood association ad,a,mantly opposed the "Iverson" R-2/SR zone change applic"ation (file Z 98-14). As part of this opposition, the cOlubined executive boards of the Jefferson,Area Neighbors and the \\Testside Neighborhood Qu,ality Project neighborhood associations submitted a letter on December 16, 1998 to the hearings official. The n,eighborhood leaders stated that "where and how to increase density within our neighborhoods is too important to be made on a parcel by parcel basis ... We are opposed to piecemeal increases in density ...." This statement ec,hoes the "Findings" of the J IF\\' Refinel11ent Plan that "Lot-by-Iotdevelopment in areas with standard single-family parcels is unworkable at higher densities." Even more specific. to th:e.Area 15 1101icy, the neigh,borhood leaders testified.: ~'the properties [sic] R-1 Low Density Residential. zone classification ... is in keeping with the Low to Medium Density designation in the adopted neighborhood refinement plan. ... It also is in keelJing 14Jith q. tile intent oj~the drafters q[the neighborhood refinement plarl." Thus, in their 1998 letter ,both neighborhood association boards make clear "R -1" zoning was considered consistent ",rith "lo\v- to m,ediulu density," and tllat Upzol1ing to R-2 ,vas not intended to be allowed on every site in Area 15 and was not meant to be permitted without more control than provided by site review, as site review was being used in this and pre\tiousR-2/SR upzonings. OIle of th,e signatories of the 1998 letter \vasMr. Jon Belcher \\rho had been all alternate 5