South Corvallis Area Plan
Martha Perkins
Dear City Council members, Mr. Mayor, City and County Planners, and Ms. City Recorder,
First, I’d like to ask the City Recorder to make this document part of the City Record. Thank you.
Next, I’d like to share my appreciation for the complexity of the work undertaken by the City and County planners. Equally important, I would like to name:
1. that Planners have missed their due diligence to address what Commissioner Tadepalli called out as the inequitable distribution of built space and congestion in various parts of town, and
2. the false narrative of “necessity” to change the zoning for South Crystal Lake Dr from RS6 to RS9, and
3. the negative impacts for the direct residents, area residents, and visitors with the plan to change zoning from RS6 to RS9 for the southern part of Crystal Lake Drive, and last,
4. the call for more creative planning solutions that are forward thinking for both climate and designing in community quality of life.
In this communication, I’m holding out a City-wide issue of unequal distribution of development burden and a very local, specific issue known well by the larger neighborhood in the area.
Note: I have done my due diligence by attending the City Planning Department November Open House at Lincoln School that introduced the South Corvallis Area Plan (SCAP), watched and made notes from the April 16 meeting of the City Planners and Planning commission, and I am actively learning how the process works in this city, my home of 15 years and future home of the next 25, if I’m lucky.
Also note: I clearly see the need for housing. It’s personal: my step daughter was on Section 8 housing when Oregon ranked as the 7th highest state in the nation of families sleeping in cars. The need is real and likely to increase.
1. As to the inequitable distribution of built space:
Development gets pushed into neighborhoods that are already lower income, as bravely noted by Commissioner Tadepalli in the April 16th meeting. Commissioner Tadepalli called out the stereotypes of people who live in apartments or affordable housing, and the lack of apartments and development in NW Corvallis. How many apartments will be slated to go in near, for example, Chip Ross Park neighborhood? Below are some key notes taken from the City web page and the April 16th meeting:
o At present, South Corvallis has recently had close to 500 units built or under development, while north of downtown has recently had 50 built. A factor 10 difference.
o The OR Housing Needs Analysis called for 8000 more housing units in Corvallis over 20 years, with 4100 needed in the short-term. The SCAP, as it stands, is poised to add 4400 more units in South Corvallis. However, there are two other areas in Corvallis with Development Plans. Dividing the remaining 3600 units evenly, each of the other two would get 1800 units. This results in greater population pressure in South Corvallis - more built space, more pavement, more traffic, while other more affluent areas keep their green spaces and lower traffic volumes. The plan as it stands is not just. That is not right. This is not equitable because it adds undue burdens of congestion, air pollution, and impervious surfaces to some and not others. It’s that simple.
o The City Council is the accountable party to oversee the equitable distribution of gain and burden in the City.
2. The argument that this area is close to town and should be zoned for higher density is a false argument.
o The City is expanding for miles south of area 10 with high density housing. Apparently, that far south you don’t need to be near the city center; so why plan to destroy an existing, established place and community? We need a bigger view of how to keep such areas, how to replicate such areas in planning.
o Further, the irony of widening the street to carry more car traffic, only to install cooling measures required by Climate Friendly and Equitable Communities work after tearing out scores of mature trees that already do that work is so misaligned it is dumfounding.
o This place is not “charming,” as Commissioners called it. It has real community value: it’s restorative, a value-add to citizens and visitors alike. The value comes through its intact, coherent parts. The relative slower pace, the quiet, the existing road design that actually enables neighbors to connect. The nature of this space provides immeasurable quality of life not experienced on wide, faster streets.
o The question is: how to plan this valuable space in, not plan this space out by degrading it. Some ideas are provided in Section 4 below. More research is warranted.
o The City Planning team could consider how to keep such a treasured space intact. The City should try to replicate this place, not ruin it. It will take nearly a century to grow trees equivalent to those along South Crystal Lake drive. That’s at least three generations.
o The Council should recognize that the area in question is an irreplaceable gem in the city. That is what your constituency thinks about this place.
3. Regarding the negative impacts for the direct residents, area residents, and visitors:
Ruinous to the community:
o The Plan to increase zoning on Crystal Lake Drive from RS6 to RS9 will disrupt existing community. This is NOT an underutilized field being discussed.
o The plan for RS9 zoning accelerates the neighborhood into large-scale development to raise funds to widen the road, not to support, sustain, or enhance the existing community connections.
o Widening the South End of Crystal Lake Drive would effectively bring the edge of the sidewalk to within feet of many neighbors’ front doors. That is a radical change I can easily imagine would drive out residents, leading to more development.
o There is available unbuilt space identified by the Planning Department in areas 7 and 13.
o Additionally, in the April 16th meeting with the Planning Commission, Matt Vogt noted that there is a surplus of general industrial land around the Urban Growth Boundary where housing can be built at MUR 12-20.
o Today we can safely walk across the street to a neighbor’s house to loan a tool or share a meal; in the future with increased traffic volume and speed, that will be unsafe. That kind of change does not build neighborhoods. The City will be valuing vehicular traffic over community interactions. There are alternatives.
o That this is a community integrated with the wider neighborhood as exemplified by:
§ The 80 people who, after one meeting, asked to be in a group addressing changes proposed by the SCAP.
§ The SouthTown email list with neighborly postings
§ The many farm stands that bring people together
§ New neighbors are welcomed
o Why radically alter a good thing when there is open, unoccupied land that can get higher density housing?
o There are alternatives to preserve the existing qualities of this community that is very much a product of the space as it is.
o This is a community like no other. Welcoming. Interconnected. And one that values the infrastructure that makes this possible.
Ruinous to the place. That’s the heart of the matter. We know the value because we are users of the space - the space supports the community that formed here.
o The Greater Crystal Lake Drive area is sought out for walking and biking precisely because it is NOT like other spaces in this area of town. That’s exactly why we want to preserve it.
o 6:1 - That’s the ratio, according to the City Planning Department, of comments in favor of keeping Crystal Lake Drive narrow/slow, treed, and friendly after the November 2024 Open House.
o Widening the road would increase traffic volume and speed, bringing increased exhaust, risk for higher speed collisions, and increase sound decibels making the neighborly conversations we now have less audible. The community can interact precisely because traffic is low, cars travel slowly, and one can easily cross the street to their neighbor’s house. Neighbors from farther away walk their strollers and pets, and at least one Planning Commissioner and the City Mayor choose to bike on this street. They have options, let's ask them why they choose this route.
o 80 Neighbors, in and beyond the unincorporated areas under consideration, asked to be part of a list to stay informed. It can hardly be said plainly enough for planners and Council: the larger community values this space as it is. Widen the street, lose the trees, and the existing place is no more. It’s that simple. We are not opposed to housing; we’re opposed to destroying this place.
o It’s a calming oasis. Everyone notices – locals and visitors. The pace, the trees, the relative quiet all calm people who pass through on foot, by bike or roller blades, or by car. This stretch feels different. Your shoulders drop and your breath relaxes.
o The narrow street on the south end of Crystal Lake Drive serves as a traffic calming design.
o The silent community members who make a palpable difference to this place are the scores of mature trees. Their shade provides cooling comfort in the summer. At least one tree on this street that would be killed is around 100 years old. People are in awe of it. What is the awe in a city where all the streets are the same?
o Everyone who passes through here experiences the psychological benefits of an oasis that transitions park land to the built space of the neighborhoods. Many, diverse people include this stretch of road to their walking and biking routes. Ask yourselves why when you plan to destroy it in the name of car traffic. There are other options.
4. The call for more creative, future forward design for true climate curbing measures.
More options exist that I have had time to research in a week’s time. I’d love the for the Planners to build their repertoire of options that truly support community design and climate-forward planning.
Some ideas:
o Use the existing SouthTown bus route as the neighborhood collector. It’s already built and, it is already in use!
o Create a Bike Boulevard along the south end of Crystal Lake Dr. It is basically already one. Bike Boulevards are used in neighborhoods where cars number under 2000 a day. Cyclists and walkers are prioritized, and cars drive at a reduced speed of 15mph. Appropriate signage is used on pavement and on signs. Avery Park has a 15mph road with speed bumps; this block could too. Portland has designated Bike Boulevard. This is a known concept already in use around the globe, and in our state.
o According to the World Resources Institute, which also cites Portland’s bike Boulevards, “the capital city of Ljubljana, Slovenia, which has been redesigning its city center to accommodate car-free zones and encourage pedestrians and cyclists. Since implementation began in 2007, there has been a steady increase in pedestrian and cyclist footfall, while carbon dioxide emissions have dropped by 70% and noise has dropped by an average 6 decibels.”
o Why are we doing the same ol’ same ol’ car-first design when we have options?
This is the kind of forward-thinking planning I’d like to see in Corvallis. Not more pavement, more noise, more cars, more pollution. We want to preserve community that is shaped by the place we occupy.
Thank you for your consideration to distribute the development burden equitably across the City, preserve a gem of a place that shapes community interactions, and for considering more climate forward designs that better align with the Climate Friendly and Equitable Communities mandates.
We’re watching.
Be well, Mart Perkins
SouthTown resident
Beeara Edmonds
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "South Corvallis" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to south-corvall...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/south-corvallis/CALM2sHOmmoWeJPRtJHoXgFfUf9zfQVA7rE98huXMZoXtR0chdA%40mail.gmail.com.
James Bombardier
Otmar Ebenhoech
First, I’d like to ask the City Recorder to make this document part of the City Record. Thank you.
Having watched the April 16, 2025 meeting of the Corvallis Planning Commission I have realized that representatives are neglecting to represent us.
What part of 6-1 comment ratio don’t you get?? I was not part of that 6. I guess the previously quiet masses, of which I am one, need to speak up. Will 10-1 be enough for you to engage your curiosity?
I bought properties here in the unincorporated area of Crystal Lake Dr intentionally. I want to live somewhere different and more directly community minded than the rest of Corvallis. Mart Perkins has said things much more eloquently than I can, and so here I state my support for all she said. Thank you Mart.
Additionally, let it be known that I, and I think many neighbors, are not against density, but we are against the tradition of car centric development. You want density? Let’s talk tiny houses and alternative structures with no car access. Let’s bypass the 100 to 1 land area penalty that the car requires and make a whole community walkable. That’s healthy density.
To a large extent the road determines the community, any change that changes the road should be well thought out.
Most of Corvallis is just another sad example of community destroying roads (such as CL Drive in front of COHO, our new “freeway for speeding") which may be a “standard” for the city, and probably is encouraged “required!" by obese American fire trucks, but these roads block the community we relish in our little unincorporated Crystal Lake bubble.
No doubt, Crystal Lake Drive can be much better and needs improvement. That said, improvement looks to me like a narrow road made primarily for humans, slower vehicle traffic and more integrative community. I’m no expert, but the examples in the EU are abundant for anyone who cares to look. If your design includes 2+ Ton masses moving at more than 20 mph in the living room of our front yards, then maybe it’s time to reevaluate what you think humans want.
As representatives dedicated to planning, I assume you are familiar with “A Pattern Language” by Christopher Alexander, Murray Silverstein, and Sara Ishikawa (1977). Our library has two copies, currently checked out. It’s worth buying if you don’t own it. Of course no plan is universal yet I suggest you review “A Pattern Language” as a guide to some values that are common in this special part of town. It’s a treasure of a book with a vision for healthy community infrastructure. I was not surprised to hear there are multiple copies owned by my neighbors.
Change is not easy, but pushing through the status quo will just get you more of the same messed up designs. Your duty is to the current and future residents of this town, not to “how we’ve always done it” nor excusively to some statewide plan that’s currently being promoted. If it’s requirements are nonsensical, then push back. It’s time to be creative and make life better. It’s time we question the systems that have created the current unhealthy sprawl and find new ways of development that increase thriving. It’s not necessary to continue dehumanized sprawl. Our Crystal lake bubble is a prime location to encourage alternative development, let’s not pave it over in bureaucracy.
In conclusion, I request you leave the zoning for area 10 unchanged until we can insure more human-centric traffic plans.
Respectfully,
Otmar Ebenhoech
2255/2265/2275 SE Crystal Lake Dr.
Corvallis, OR 97333
cafe.e...@gmail.com
Keenan Bloom
Dear City Council members, Mr. Mayor, City and County Planners, and Ms. City Recorder,
First, I’d like to ask the City Recorder to make this document part of the City Record. Thank you.
I want to express my deep appreciation for the immense effort involved in redesigning the zoning of Corvallis—beginning with South Corvallis. This is no small task. The scope alone is significant, and you will undoubtedly encounter resistance from various parts of the city. But more importantly, you are carrying the responsibility of envisioning the future of Corvallis—not just for the next 5 to 10 years, but for the next 50 to 100.
We live in a world that is changing more rapidly than most of us can fully grasp—through population growth, demographic shifts, economic uncertainty, and, most critically, climate change. Your challenge is not only to meet the state’s requirements but to think boldly about the long-term trajectory of the city we all love. I share these reflections to communicate my appreciation for your work and to invite a mindset rooted in future visioning—dreaming into what’s possible for Corvallis a century from now.
You are at the early stages of designing a city that can meet the demands of a radically different world. The decisions you make now—especially around zoning, transportation, and infrastructure—will shape what kind of future becomes possible. This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity.
Transportation and Zoning: A Crucial Relationship
While my primary concern touches on the transportation plan rather than zoning per se, the two are deeply intertwined. In fact, zoning should inform our transportation systems—not the other way around.
The current transportation plan was conceived before our environmental crisis reached its current urgency. At that time, expanding roads to accommodate cars made more sense. But today, we need a paradigm shift.
I believe that designating Crystal Lake Drive as a Collector Street and planning for its expansion southward is the wrong direction—for that road and for Corvallis. As Commissioner Laird recently noted, it is ten times more cost-effective to build transportation infrastructure for bicycles than for cars. Crystal Lake Drive is already functioning as a multi-use pathway. I believe we should officially embrace that reality, transforming it into a dedicated alternative transportation corridor—connecting newer developments south of Goodnight Avenue to the heart of South Town and to the bus system.
Heron View already serves as a continuation of this pathway. Let’s formalize these streets as local-traffic only and prioritize biking, walking, and public transit. A more robust network of bike infrastructure—especially one that connects Crystal Lake Drive to proposed areas 14, 15, 16, 19, 20, 21, and 22—would better serve the needs of our future. We should be creating systems that make it easier to bike and connect to our excellent bus system—not building infrastructure that encourages continued car use. We no longer have the luxury of designing around cars.
On Density and Mixed-Use in Areas 10 & 11
I also want to reflect on the proposed density increases in Areas 10 and 11. I absolutely understand and support the need for more housing in Corvallis. The data presented at the commissioner meeting suggests we need nearly 8,000 new housing units. Scenario 2 places 4,400 of those in South Corvallis alone.
From my understanding, South Corvallis is just one of six areas being rezoned in the city and within the urban growth boundary. Why is over 50% of our housing expansion centered in South Corvallis? If Areas 10 and 11 were reverted to their current zoning, what percentage of total housing needs would South Corvallis still be providing? My guess is: still nearly half. Isn't that enough? Are we not already pulling more than our own weight?
Furthermore, increasing density and assigning a Mixed-Use designation to Area 11 raises specific concerns. One of the main draws of Willamette Park is that it feels separate from the city. Introducing high-density development at its doorstep risks diminishing that unique character and appeal.
An Idea for Zoning Innovation
Lastly, I want to revisit a recurring theme from community feedback: the admiration for CoHo and its model of community-oriented housing. I understand that the intent behind changing the zoning of Crystal Lake Drive to RS-12 was to encourage the development of similar projects.
If that is the goal, might the city consider creating a new zoning designation specifically tailored for cottage clusters or courtyard-style housing—something that structurally supports the replication of community-oriented models like CoHo? Such a designation could offer reassurance that density increases will serve people, community, and sustainability rather than default to standard development practices.
Paired with removing the Collector designation from Crystal Lake Drive, scaling back proposed road widening, and officially recognizing the street as a multi-use transportation corridor, this kind of zoning could represent a powerful and forward-thinking vision for South Corvallis—and for the city as a whole.
Thank you again for your work, your vision, and your willingness to hear community input.
Keenan Bloom-Rafael
1163 SE Goodnight Ave
