Burnside One | 350' | 30 floors | Proposed

[downtownpdx]

And if the zoning prevents this from happening, why aren't they looking at one of the Goodman parcels a few blocks south?

[NMH]

I have a couple questions on this one:

• If the zoning prohibits a height increase, I'm assuming there is a longer and more formal process for making the change such as through the Central City Plan?
  
• If there is a low likelihood of the project getting built due to zoning/HLR, why would the developer spend the money to create the proposal? Did they not do their homework, are trying to spur a change, gain attention, or something else?

[pdxsg34]

Originally Posted by NMH

I have a couple questions on this one:

• If the zoning prohibits a height increase, I'm assuming there is a longer and more formal process for making the change such as through the Central City Plan?
  
• If there is a low likelihood of the project getting built due to zoning/HLR, why would the developer spend the money to create the proposal? Did they not do their homework, are trying to spur a change, gain attention, or something else?

And... How would this impact the Burnside Bridge replacement project and visa versa?
Since the homeless crisis is currently a "state emergency", would steps to alleviate that crisis, such as this project, be allowed to circumvent "normal" laws/zoning?

[maccoinnich]

Portland Business Journal story. The first part covers the same details as the DJC article, so I'll quote from the middle:

One immediate hurdle impedes the grand plan: City officials noted that district has height restrictions.

"The lot is in the Skidmore/Old Town Historic District, which generally caps buildings at 75 feet," or about six to seven stories, said Portland Housing Bureau spokesperson Gabriel Mathews. Ken Ray, spokesperson for the Bureau of Development Services, confirmed, "The site in Old Town (108 W. Burnside) has a maximum 75-foot height limit and the zoning code prohibits building anything taller."

In an interview on Monday, Sanchez said it made sense to go high and dense at that location.

"There was discussion of needing 120,000 units over the next 20 years," Sanchez said. "That equates to essentially building eight of these proposed projects a year." (That'd be just over 5,800 a year.)

On Wednesday, Sanchez acknowledged the height limits, saying project officials were aware of them but hoped the pre-application meeting with city officials would start a discussion about balancing the need for more housing with current land-use regulations.

...continues at the Portland Business Journal ($).

[uncommon.name]

Free on KGW:

30-story tower proposed in downtown Portland

Author: Jonathan Bach (Portland Business Journal)
Published: 5:02 PM PDT August 2, 2023

PORTLAND, Ore. — A developer is proposing a 30-story affordable housing tower on the Burnside Bridge's west side.

The developer, Curtis Rystadt, is still in the very early stages, so he doesn't have money squared away. And he's meeting with the city on Aug. 24 to discuss his plans further.

The tower, as planned, could exceed Old Town's height restrictions. But if Rystadt pulls it off, Burnside One would become one of Portland's largest affordable housing developments. The Louisa Flowers in Northeast Portland, with 240 affordable units, stands as the largest city-funded, single-building affordable housing development of recent decades, according to the Portland Housing Bureau...

Continue reading at KGW...

Obviously the height will likely kill this... but it would be awesome if this happens, even at a different location that supports the height. Not a bad looking tower either.

[urbanlife]

Originally Posted by uncommon.name

Free on KGW:


Continue reading at KGW...

Obviously the height will likely kill this... but it would be awesome if this happens, even at a different location that supports the height. Not a bad looking tower either.

I think this is more of a challenge to the height limit and show how absurd it really is in parts of our city center.

[sopdx]

Originally Posted by urbanlife

I think this is more of a challenge to the height limit and show how absurd it really is in parts of our city center.

especially considering the desperate need for affordable housing.

[urbanlife]

Originally Posted by sopdx

especially considering the desperate need for affordable housing.

That should be something that overrides height limits and FAR. The more affordable and low income housing units a building has, the more height boost is given.

[pdxsg34]

Originally Posted by sopdx

especially considering the desperate need for affordable housing.

Regardless of viability, I greatly appreciate the boldness of the proposal. Zoning and height restrictions in areas of the city (like all major metros) are important and should be maintained to *some degree, but specific to Portland's situation, I believe this proposal rightfully puts the right argument in front of the historic/design's commission. Do we care more about "preserving" the "character" of Old Town, or do we want to make it a viable, affordable place to live that can benefit off the existing transportation opportunities.

I like height limits in NW and some other areas, but with the plethora of Goodman parking lots and myriad of issues in Old Town, I feel it's an appropriate time to challenge the city: "OK, you need affordable housing, here it is, front and center, you going to say no?" Given the existing "homeless emergency", "housing crisis", "affordable crisis", I'd love to hear the justification these commissions have by dismissing this opportunity for the sake of Old Town's "fortitude of character", "inadequate meshing" or whatever else excuse they use to maintain the status quo. JMO.

[downtownpdx]

Look at cities like Boston where the very old and new live closely side by side, I think it's great. We're not preserving some gorgeous neighborhood whose livability would be threatened by a shiny high rise. If anything, the 100 year old buildings would be enhanced by the stark modern contrast. I agree with previous comments, it's time for Portland to show how serious it really is about livability and affordability. And couldn't hurt to have media attention on the city rewriting the rules again to tackle some modern urban problems.

[Delaney]

While this idea is admirable to spur discussion, I am curious if it is anything beyond a PR stunt. The block shows multiple ownerships, including the Salvation Army, and that block also appears slated for stairs/ramps in right-of-way work for the Burnside Bridge replacement which may involve some imminent domain. I can't think of a more constrained and complex site for such an ambitious proposal.

[DMH]

Originally Posted by Delaney

While this idea is admirable to spur discussion, I am curious if it is anything beyond a PR stunt. The block shows multiple ownerships, including the Salvation Army, and that block also appears slated for stairs/ramps in right-of-way work for the Burnside Bridge replacement which may involve some imminent domain. I can't think of a more constrained and complex site for such an ambitious proposal.

I too am skeptical about the intentions of the developer and the validity of the proposal. The height limits in the historic district are clear, the lack of success in going higher on other such proposals is documented, and the real challenges of developing at that spot as the Burnside Bridge replacement proceeds still in design, make me doubt the seriousness of the proposal.

Why not propose this building at SW 3rd & Oak where Tokio Hotel was once proposing a similarly tall building?

[eric cantona]

Originally Posted by Delaney

While this idea is admirable to spur discussion, I am curious if it is anything beyond a PR stunt. The block shows multiple ownerships, including the Salvation Army, and that block also appears slated for stairs/ramps in right-of-way work for the Burnside Bridge replacement which may involve some imminent domain. I can't think of a more constrained and complex site for such an ambitious proposal.

No way this happens before the completion of the Burnside replacement project (construction is slated to go through 2030). That said, I think it's high time there was a challenge to Historic Landmarks Commission's stranglehold on anything being built close to code height maximums. I appreciate the charter of protecting historic legacy, but their approach is pretty draconian.

[Delaney]

Does anyone know if the listed developer "Curtis Rystadt" is the same person that comes up on google as a World Series of Poker player from Portland? I'm willing to gamble they are one in the same.

[maccoinnich]

Developer pushes 30-story affordable housing tower despite city code restrictions



The developer proposing a 30-story affordable housing tower in Portland isn't pulling is request for a meeting with the city Bureau of Development Services to discuss the project.

The Portland Bureau of Development Services last week asked Curtis Rystadt, whose proposed Burnside One tower is too tall for the district's zoning restrictions, to pull his request for an expensive pre-application meeting, as the Business Journal first reported.

The meeting with city officials costs more than $7,000 and is used to hash out details before development starts in earnest. But because Rystadt’s proposal is too tall for the 75-foot (six to seven stories) height limit for the Old Town parcel at 108 W. Burnside St., senior planner Matt Wickstrom had advised him to go to the Bureau of Planning and Sustainability instead because that bureau deals with code changes.

Wickstrom contacted Rystadt again in a Tuesday evening email.

“I left you a voice mail last week requesting that you cancel the Pre-Application Conference scheduled for 8/24/23 at 8:30am because the height is prohibited at the site and to be in touch with the Central City team at the Bureau of Planning and Sustainability,” Wickstrom wrote. “Could you please respond to this email requesting to cancel the pre-app so I can get it off reviewers' calendars?”

Rystadt didn’t budge on the meeting, sending his reply to Wickstrom and a Business Journal reporter.

“I spoke with Troy (Doss of BPS) I will (be) inviting local journalists also to the meeting. When I first spoke with the city I was encouraged to look passed the height limits,” Rystadt wrote. “Our city is in a crisis for affordable housing. I will invite City council also the Mayor. Either we look to solve this crisis or we need new leadership.”

...continues at the Portland Business Journal.

[sopdx]

I'm thinking he really wants to make a point.

$7K for a meeting? Cut back on the pastries.

[eric cantona]

I can't quite see what Rystadt is trying to accomplish here. A pre-app is not going to give him the soundbites he's apparently desiring. Furthermore, there are many potential sites in the City that could accommodate the same number of units. Going up against zoning, code, and a historic district limitations seems foolish.

[Socinus]

Originally Posted by sopdx

I'm thinking he really wants to make a point.

$7K for a meeting? Cut back on the pastries.

I work in a different field, but I do calculate out costs for meetings to explain to folks the importance of using email unless discussion is necessary. For a one hour meeting with my full leadership team, no prep involved, it costs about $800 in salary and fringe alone. If my staff have to do prep work, including materials and research, it is easily 3-4 times that per hour of meeting. I would expect a pre-app conference requires a significant amount of prep work by the staff to ensure that they have all pertinent answers for questions that could come up.

[zilfondel]

Originally Posted by Socinus

I work in a different field, but I do calculate out costs for meetings to explain to folks the importance of using email unless discussion is necessary. For a one hour meeting with my full leadership team, no prep involved, it costs about $800 in salary and fringe alone. If my staff have to do prep work, including materials and research, it is easily 3-4 times that per hour of meeting. I would expect a pre-app conference requires a significant amount of prep work by the staff to ensure that they have all pertinent answers for questions that could come up.

For a pre-app conference like this, you were talking about six or seven staff members reviewing the proposal and writing reports, in addition to hosting a 1 hour meeting where they report all their findings to the applicant.

[pdxsg34]

Pre-Application Conference Notice