Category Archives: Land Use & Transportation

By Spencer Parsons

Quick background

This past spring, I was part of a group of five neighborhood professionals – three architects, a designer / builder, and a land use attorney (me) – who collaborated on behalf of the Concordia Land Use & Transportation Committee (LUTC) to address neighborhood compatibility issues with the proposed Bighouse Development at the corner of NE 30th and Killingsworth Streets. These concerns arose from the drawings developer Brian Spencer of Ascend Holdings and builder Rick Porter of Union Corner Construction provided at the February LUTC Meeting. Mr. Spencer agreed to review any recommendations we might provide.

In early April, the LUTC submitted the “Bighouse Redesign Team’s” conscientiously researched and carefully considered design changes intended to dramatically improve the building’s integration into the long-standing character of this unique intersection at the heart of Concordia – without negatively impacting its functionality or the project’s overall economics.

Problems with the proposed design

The most obvious shortcoming of the planned 4-story, 30 unit apartment building is that the design is totally tonedeaf in relation to the surrounding quaint yet vibrant “mini” commercial node.

First, though the lot is zoned “Commercial Storefront,” it provides a bare minimum of ground floor business space, sacrificing most of this valuable commercial real estate in exchange for three residential units.

Who wants to live on the ground floor at such a busy intersection, with passing pedestrians, a constant stream of cars and busses, and ambient noise from nearby stores and restaurants at all hours? The blinds will be pulled on the first floor residences 24/7. Count on it.

Additionally, none of these units open on to the street, a fatal flaw for any design striving for a compatible character. The stated reason they must face inward, with a single shared outside entrance, is for “security” purposes, though many close-by residential and commercial units open to the sidewalk without a problem.

Compare the Rexall condo building, a few hundred feet south on 30th, where all ground-floor units face outward – some are residential, some commercial, and their use changes periodically as occupants change. Opening the Bighouse ground level units to the street would preserve future flexibility for commercial use. However, walling them off from the outside blocks the building from community integration, both literally and figuratively.

What the regulations say

Portland Zoning Code (PZC) 33.130 calls for new developments that “enhance the economic viability of the specific commercial district” and directs them to “preserve and enhance older commercial areas … compatible with the desired [storefront] character”. It explicitly intends accommodating and fostering “a full range of retail, service and business uses with a local and regional market area” and that all new buildings are “pedestrian-oriented” and built “with a storefront character.”

What we’ve asked for

While the Team determined the development, as proposed, does not progress the City’s vision for commercial use of this site, our list of suggested modest modifications sent by the LUTC to Mr. Spencer and Mr. Porter were prudently crafted to address the design shortcomings without going back to the proverbial drawing board.

The first and most significant item on our list requests conversion of the three ground-floor residential units to commercial use, or at least making them mixed use live/work spaces with separate entrances to the sidewalk.

We also asked that an acoustical engineer be engaged to mitigate Killingsworth’s heavy traffic sounds and noise from nearby businesses, both of which will negatively impact the first floor living experience.

Also recommended are several affordable improvements to the building façade to better link it with the neighborhood, including — but not limited to — delineating the building base, upgrading exterior cladding, adding cornices, improved exterior lighting, and integration of sunshades, awnings, and public art elements to enhance the exterior and deter vandalism. The Team’s complete report is posted under the “Bighouse sidebar” on the CNA website.

Where we are now

Unfortunately, the answer is not clear. Mr. Spencer agreed to respond to our requests in writing at a meeting last month between he, Mr. Porter, CNA Board Chair Isaac Quintero and myself that Concordia University’s CFO Denny Stoecklin facilitated. However, while we appreciate finding out on May 16 that his “design and construction teams have had discussions,” as of press-time we still have not received anything in writing addressing the recommended specifics, other than an email indicating “some of the façade, lighting and shadings enhancements are being considered.”

It is fair to say neither we, nor anyone at CNA, knows what, if any, changes might be incorporated into what is perhaps the most significant new Concordia development since the transformation of 33rd & Killingsworth. It may be time for others to begin asking …

Spencer Parsons is a land use attorney whose home and law office are both in the Concordia Neighborhood. Reach him via email  or call (971) 279-2018.

By Luke Griffin

Everyone in Concordia has had the opportunity to watch a house be torn down to make way for new houses, duplexes, and “skinnies,” for better and/or for worse. This is the continued chronicle of my personal experience.

The spaceship has landed

The finishing touches are now being put up or in. The outside, with the exception of the very limited yard area, is complete. Blinding white and a morose sleet grey were the colors chosen, and the workers who painted it repeatedly joked about the bland choice.

To highlight its faux-modern looks, gaudy outdoor lighting floods down from the roof line making the structure seem a cubist alien spaceship that landed mistakenly far from its square launch site.

One of the developers repeatedly leaves most of the lights on in the drapeless windows, apparently to act as a beacon for would-be buyers. Driving in his slick Land Rover, he often drives by at odd hours to revel in the cheesy magnificence of his bread box, undoubtedly giddy about future profit. And as I come down my street, any hint of my own home is blocked by these well-lit sheer cliff walls leaving my end of the street cut off from the rest of the neighborhood. It’s a stark reminder of the “new” Portland and its decidedly un-Portland values.

Excessive noise, sidewalk

Since the neighbors complained to the City about excessive off-hour construction noise two months ago, the noise issues continue. Power saws running after 8 p.m. split the evening silence, and cement trucks chug out their loads at 7 a.m. many mornings of the week, fostering more negative resentment for the project. The only silver lining has been that after a year of construction there is finally a sidewalk – great for the kids and less abled-bodied neighbors who have been forced onto the street all this time.

Final days

By early June, this two-headed monster will be on the market. The neighbors wonder who will move in. It certainly will not be working-class families, artists or displaced former residents. Each unit, with fake fireplaces and cement pad backyards, will sell for a half million dollars, excluding many buyers. Those who have the cash and appreciate this plastic grandeur of new Portland will likely not value green space, gardening, outdoor hanging out, or community interaction. They will be impressed by the chunky angles, the glaring sharpness, and the blinding lights.

Of course, if they are nice, the neighborhood will embrace them with little to no resentment, the long-time residents keeping the communal spirit alive.

As for the developers, they will have profited greatly on our neighborhood and given back almost nothing save for a two-year headache and an eyesore which will arrogantly stand forever as a gross representation of the selling out of our neighborhood, our city, our values and our quickly-dying culture that put the good of the community before personal profit.

This native N.E. Portlander now has a permanent reminder of his lost hometown right next door. Sadly, with thoughtful urban planning and reflected city regulations, it wouldn’t be this way.

Concerned? Here’s what to do

Contact Portland City Council, get involved with the neighborhood association, start a petition. The question is not if we change but how we change.

Luke Griffin is a native of Northeast Portland. A committed social and environmental activist, he has written for numerous publications, dedicated time fighting for civil rights in housing, served on the CNA board, and utilized world-bridging communication and management skills for the positive betterment of society. He is currently a freelance writer and is completing his Masters of Teaching at Concordia University. Reach Luke by emailing lukeg003@gmail.com.

By Luke Griffin

Everyone in Concordia has had the opportunity to watch a house be torn down to make way for new houses, duplexes, and “skinnies,” for better and/or for worse. This is the continued chronicle of my personal experience.

The project next door has been going on now for over a year and a half. Very little of it could be described as “good” for our street. Between the profit hungry, rude developers who threaten neighbors, to the out of place monstrosity now looming over the quaint surrounding houses, to the heartless city government with its intentional ineptness—aiding and abetting the project while sacrificing Concordia’s character so as to rake in more revenue—the process has been utterly depressing for this native of NE Portland. Such projects are not simply about demolitions and new construction but instead reflect who we are as a city and sadly, many of the Portland values that led us to love this place are being destroyed as quickly as the old homes.

Positive change

The only good part of this entry is that a new foreman now controls the job site. In an apparent “180” from all past experiences, he seem to actually care about the people impacted by this project. His first day on the job he apologetically came to my door to talk with me. It wasn’t a canned, corporate spiel but a real conversation. He said he was brought on to do the finishing work but would make sure to talk to us about anything from fences to tree lines. He seemed to truly be open to suggestions and indeed worked with me on the shared fence. He also made sure the job site was cleaned up, the outhouse was taken off my property, and the crews polite.

As much as I loathe the cheap monolith next door, he did not design the post modern, San Diego bread box nor did he decide to plant it smack dab in the middle of our quiet block. So how could I dislike him?

And it is exactly this sort of deference, along with an open dialogue with the neighborhood, that is needed to have progressive change in our town while protecting livability, history, and culture.

The finisher says he is like this because he lives in a similar neighborhood in SE and tries to imagine if this was happening next door to his family. Unfortunately, his attitude is rare and there are no regulations from the city to ensure those who care only about ballooning profits without connection to the community will be so thoughtful.

Graveling over paradise path

Like many blocks in Concordia, ours has an alley. It was a green corridor with some unkept places, but pretty with flowers, trees, and grass making it a little nature trail. But not anymore. The City decided the duplex must have off-street parking accessed from the alley; therefore, the entire length had to be leveled, graveled, and at the entry points, paved.

The developers did not want to pay for it and even ironically argued the neighbors wouldn’t like it.  The City inspector said he didn’t care. The alley was City property and they could do with it what they wanted. To the chagrin and detriment of just about everyone, the alley way is no longer green and in the summer the rocks will be piping hot. Because it is still a narrow, hard-to-access alley, we all expect the new owners to park on the street anyway.

Outraged? Here’s what to do

Contact Portland City Council, get involved with the neighborhood association, start a petition. The question is not if we change but how we change.

Luke Griffin is a native of Northeast Portland. A committed social and environmental activist, he has written for numerous publications, dedicated time fighting for civil rights in housing, served on the CNA board, and utilized world-bridging communication and management skills for the positive betterment of society. He is currently a freelance writer and is completing his Masters of Teaching at Concordia University. Reach Luke by emailing lukeg003@gmail.com.

By Luke Griffin

Everyone in Concordia has had the opportunity to watch a house be torn down to make way for new houses, duplexes, and skinnies, for better and/or for worse. This is the continued chronicle of my personal experience.

Unlike last year, this winter has been very Portland: rainy, dreary, and chilly. It seems it has rained every day since November. The rain is great though, especially after a year of drought, unless you have a poorly designed duplex next to you with no gutters. Then, you get a pounding waterfall cascading down onto your side yard, foot deep water the length of your house where your grass and flowers once lived, and a serious potential for dreaded basement flooding.

One morning during a deluge, I went outside to assess the damage. Because the building was poorly designed, the roof did not send water down the front, back and sides, off many peaks like normal houses in the area, but instead directed the waters into the center and then off to each side. Without gutters, there was a sheet of water pouring off and into my yard. Witnessing this, it was obvious there was a real chance of the water swamping my basement.

I had yet to complain to the developer about anything but thought he should do something now to keep my house from flooding. I called him and without any apology he told me they would do something sometime soon.  I explained he really needed todo something ASAP, but he dismissed my worry.And in many ways, why wouldn’t he? There is no city code mandating that developments have gutters, real flood control, or anything that would protect neighbors. If my house was flooded, it wasn’t his problem. There would be no fines or actions taken by the city according to officials. And, as the developer does not live in the neighborhood, he wouldn’t have to deal with meat all. Panicked, I tried one last time to get him todo something. He hung up on me.

I called the city inspector and was told there was nothing against the law, the city had inspected the site during the survey and would not return until final inspection. I was transferred to erosion control. They told me I could dump sand in my yard. Later that day workers had covered the swampy mess with hay. The rain continued.

The next month was continuously wet. Though no visual water seeped into my basement, the humidity got to 90%. I know: I can’t prove the cause, so said the City, but the conclusion isobvious to most. On top of this issue, one Sunday loud construction began at 8am, a violation of the noise ordinance. Numerous neighbors complained. The police finally showed up around noon but the work did not stop until about four.  At most, the developer received a $250 fine for the incident, a tiny drop in the bucket compared to the expected profits of over half a million dollars. The workers kept piling trash in front. They repeatedly blocked my driveway and rudely told me they’d eventually move.

And the City? Well, there wasn’t much they would do about any of it. With few regulations, minuscule fines for infractions, a maze of uncommunicative bureaucracies, and little motive to hinder the development boom, they were of no help, even if the lady at ONI was nice.  The City That Works…but for whom?

Five weeks of almost continuous rain after the yard flooding began, they finally put up gutters.

Luke Griffin was born and raised inNE Portland. He’s been a Concordia resident for the last four years, and is a former CNA board member. Luke works primarily in the legal field engaging in social justice in the areas of employment, housing and the environment.