· Eliminating off-street parking requirements
· Establishing density bonuses
· Employing inclusionary zoning
· Establishing development tax or value capture
· Using property tax abatements
· Increasing density near transit stops
The problem in Portland and across the country is that increasing density sparks conflict, even in neighborhoods such as the Pearl District where zoning codes allow for density bonuses. In 2014 a Nimby coalition, Preserve the Pearl, contested the construction of a 15-story tower that utilized a package of density bonuses. Drawing on the grievances of nearby residents whose views would be compromised, Preserve the Pearl was formed after the Pearl District Planning and Transportation Committee (PDPTC) approved the project.
The PDPTC’s determination rested on the fact the developers met the Pearl District Development Plan’s guidelines for density transfers and bonuses. In addition, nearby buildings were built to a similar height and bulk. “The Pearl District is designed to embrace dense urban development,” Patricia Gardner, the PDPTC chair, noted. Moreover, in a city with an urban growth boundary accommodating urbanism in the Pearl District is an essential tradeoff to suburban sprawl.
Preserve the Pearl challenged the decision before the City Council. The group claimed the proposed height increase was not “harmonious ‘as a whole,’ or ‘on balance’” with the existing code. The City Council ruled against them, and Preserve the Pearl took their grievance to the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals. Again the claim was denied, as it was ruled that the project met the Portland City Code. (Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals, Case #2015-046)
The action of Preserve the Pearl set a new tone for the Pearl District. Historically, the PDPTC worked with developers to shape buildings to conform to established guidelines. There were disagreements, but there was also a can-do, pioneering spirit. The developers were from Portland and the citizens overseeing the planning process realized the acknowledged desire on the part of all parties to create a vibrant urban neighborhood. After long and often spirited meetings, compromise and win-win solutions were usually found. Preserve the Pearl, however, upset this state of affairs.
The Pearl District is a maturing neighborhood, and it is not surprising that self-interest has come into conflict with communal ideals. Affluent people use money to buy privacy, which often puts them at odds with local governing bodies that want to accommodate a range of incomes and lifestyles. Moreover, if their privacy is diminished they are apt to contest government action that they see as imperiling their investment. This dynamic was in full view this August when a team of Pearl District citizens opposed the plans for the Framework, a 12-story building set to be the tallest wood structure in the United States.
The PDPTC had approved the project in February, but this failed to deter the chic, well-coiffed band from asking the committee to recant its vote. Given that the planning process holds to the constitutional directive of due process, the demand was a non sequitur. Yet the group’s entitled air seemed to inoculate them from the law of the land. The Committee Chair was more than gracious and gave them the floor. A half-hour diatribe ensued, which faulted the building’s aesthetics, height, and lack of structured parking. In the give and take with the committee, the parking issue clarified the citizens’ angst.
The Framework is sited next to a streetcar stop, a manifest item in the Obama Administration tool kit. The project meets a second Administration objective--not providing off street parking--that makes it financially feasible for the developer to allocate 5 floors for affordable housing. With easy access to transit in a neighborhood with a 98 walk score, the Framework is a text book case for supplying affordable housing, which Portland desperately needs. Thus, the rationale of the self-styled landed gentry (the root word of gentrification’s negative resonance) that waltzed into a meeting to squash a project approved months before was apparent. They wanted to prevent people of a lower income from living in their midst.
The PDPTC did not rescind its vote, and the contesting entourage was advised to take their case to the Portland Design Commission. This body also approved the plans for the Framework. Since then, the project has passed a series of tests that have drawn wide attention.
Lever Architecture, the firm that designed the Framework, won a national competition, the U.S. Tall Wood Building Prize, to construct a prototype structure using Cross-Laminated Timber (CLT). This new process enhances structural capacity by congealing timber under layers of fire-resistant board. Although high-rise CLT structures have been built in Australia, Europe, and Canada, The Framework will be the first in the United States. Lever Architecture used its $1.5 million prize money to determine the feasibility of using locally sourced Oregon timber and to see if a CLT structure could withstand fire. The Framework passed a major hurdle when CLT withstood a two-hour fire and did not lose structural integrity. At the same time, the Lever architects secured wood for the project from Oregon managed forests within 50 miles of Portland.
The Framework marks a new step in sustainability. Besides providing work force housing, it will utilize materials sourced and improved in the region and it will sequester more carbon than conventional buildings. The question, of course, is this enough to mitigate the self-interested desires of its neighbors.
The Framework's Sustainability Model |
In the Pearl District the beat goes on. New models of living draw investors, resistance, and praise. Given the human condition, it cannot be any other way. Fortunately, our republican system of government is designed for rational thought to trump passionate obstinacy. In this urban neighborhood, at least, it works more often than not.
No comments:
Post a Comment