Burnside Bridgehead Project News

[sowat]

Originally Posted by Delaney

The theatre Brad is talking about was supposed to go closer to the Hawthorne Bridge by Works Partnership and developed at least in part by Randy Rapaport. Not sure if they are working a deal to try to move it to the bridgehead or what...

theatre design/concept:
http://www.worksarchitecture.net/html/project6_0.html

[NewUrbanist]

Originally Posted by Delaney

Well since the issue of the LUBA appeal for the River District URA is mentioned...whose fault is this? Did PDC not see this coming? Did they not see that many Old Town projects were going to become pawns in the crazy satellite district idea? I know City Council played a role in the David Douglass debacle, but PDC is supposed to temper those expectations, not promise the moon and then let Rome burn and chalk it up to market conditions. My point is they should stick to doing the projects that they do well as you mention. The big picture, big headline projects are what they are addicted to and are why they keep falling flat.

There are two LUBA appeals in play... one for the satellite district that includes the David Douglas school district, and the second is the extension of the River District and the increased bonding capacity. The school district project was a pet project by Leonard (see: http://www.portlandtribune.com/news/...4680047013300).

Due to the 2007 passing of Measure 26-92, the mayor and the four city commissioner's now have control over the PDC's budget. Leonard wanted the school district expansion and it happened just as the PDC was extending the boundaries of the River District URA to include necessary projects in the Downtown Waterfront URA. The DTWFURA had a lack of money, and all of the Old Town projects (Resource Access Center, University Place, Uwajimaya, Grove hotel redevelopment, etc) needed public subsidy to move forward. They were not the main project managers, just gap financiers on the projects. With the funding in question now, these projects and some big ones in the River District (Centennial Mills, post acquisition development of the Post office site) can't move forward with a 100% guarantee that the money will be there after this appeal. All of the projects are on hold and are waiting until LUBA makes a decision.

The PDC legal department has been some pretty smart moves and has really reached out to this group, but they are not budging. It will be interesting to see how this shapes up.

For more info on Measure 26-92: (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m..._/ai_n19066874)

[westsider]

Originally Posted by Delaney
The theatre Brad is talking about was supposed to go closer to the Hawthorne Bridge by Works Partnership and developed at least in part by Randy Rapaport. Not sure if they are working a deal to try to move it to the bridgehead or what...

theatre design/concept:
http://www.worksarchitecture.net/html/project6_0.html

What the hell, are we all Canucks now? It's spelled THEATER.

[65MAX]

Either spelling is correct. But theatre is the elitist version of theater.

[crow]

the grassroots that Beam brought to the Burnside proposal was unprecedented, and as such put PDC and the city (Mayor) in a corner it had never found itself in. If Beam would have been chosen, it would have been by public leverage rather than what was best for the city or the development. The reality is after the choice of the devleoper the look and program would have changed, been challenged, and ultimately would have been through six different public process' before inked. Instead the decision was almost middle of the road. Opus would have made disneyland out of the project, and Beam did not have the stripes to pull it off - all the backing and tenant agreements were nothing more than alliances. They did not have any MOU or financial backing - it was a poker game, and the reality is that if PDC or the city wanted something developed, they should NOT have made it into a design competition and instead chose a team or developer for simplicity that could execute. leave the personal part, the subjective, the design, the parts and pieces to the process. PDC and the process failed this one. now we have fenced in dirt - yippee - how urban and forward thinking.

[CouvScott]

Business Journal - by Wendy Culverwell Business Journal staff writer

The Portland Development Commission is taking a mulligan on a $260 million effort to redevelop four high-profile acres on the east side of the Burnside Bridge.

This month, the city’s redevelopment agency will sign an agreement with Beam Development, the feisty Central Eastside developer it spurned in April 2005 when it selected Opus Northwest for the Burnside Bridgehead project.

PDC and Beam expect to sign a memorandum of understanding by the end of February, said Kia Selley, the PDC’s senior project manager for the Burnside Bridgehead.

The agreement comes one year after Opus Northwest exited the picture with the PDC’s blessing, citing a soured economy and its failure to land an anchor tenant. The group had planned an ambition $260 million development that would have included offices, stores and condominiums on a five-block site at the corner of Northeast Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and Burnside.

[NewUrbanist]

Originally Posted by crow

the grassroots that Beam brought to the Burnside proposal was unprecedented, and as such put PDC and the city (Mayor) in a corner it had never found itself in. If Beam would have been chosen, it would have been by public leverage rather than what was best for the city or the development. The reality is after the choice of the devleoper the look and program would have changed, been challenged, and ultimately would have been through six different public process' before inked. Instead the decision was almost middle of the road. Opus would have made disneyland out of the project, and Beam did not have the stripes to pull it off - all the backing and tenant agreements were nothing more than alliances. They did not have any MOU or financial backing - it was a poker game, and the reality is that if PDC or the city wanted something developed, they should NOT have made it into a design competition and instead chose a team or developer for simplicity that could execute. leave the personal part, the subjective, the design, the parts and pieces to the process. PDC and the process failed this one. now we have fenced in dirt - yippee - how urban and forward thinking.

The city clamored for an open process. It was a change in focus for the PDC. They tried it, but with this complex project, the change in the market, and the difficulties of dealing with the neighborhoods; this project had a lot to deal with...

The new proposal is smaller in scale, will take just as long to figure out, and may or may not work. Either way, we have now have a glut of condos on the market without the extra 4 towers that the Burnside Bridgehead would have brought to market.

Give the PDC a break. They are not magicians that wave a magic wand and poof, development takes root, but rather are closer to gap financiers. Think of them less as a construction team ready to get the ground shaking (old urban renewal), but as a bank who strategically funnels small amounts of money to small and big businesses (economic development agency) to get projects started.

[urbanlife]

It is good to see Beam finally getting their chance at a project they won. I think what is really needed, especially with the shape of the economy, is a developer that can do something outside of their comfort zone to make this project work.

PDC chose the comfortable developer and when the market became uncomfortable for the developer, they backed out because they couldnt handle the change. I have a feeling Beam has a better understanding of this because they are a company that is built off of a Portland mindset and have a stronger personal connection to what makes this city work.

[NewUrbanist]

Originally Posted by urbanlife

It is good to see Beam finally getting their chance at a project they won. I think what is really needed, especially with the shape of the economy, is a developer that can do something outside of their comfort zone to make this project work.

PDC chose the comfortable developer and when the market became uncomfortable for the developer, they backed out because they couldnt handle the change. I have a feeling Beam has a better understanding of this because they are a company that is built off of a Portland mindset and have a stronger personal connection to what makes this city work.

Malsin hasn't built a new large format building, but rather, and I believe this is his strength, is rehabilitation/ reuse of existing structures. I think it will be interesting to see how this arrangement turns out. Hopefully, for his sake, he can take on this large, high visibility, and doesn't over extend himself. I would love to see something happen here in the next 2-4 years.

[CouvScott]

Long-planned East Burnside and Couch Street couplet project would cost $22 million
By Jim Redden

The Portland Tribune, Mar 16, 2009


The City Council is scheduled to consider the first of its local economic stimulus projects on Wednesday.

The project is the construction phase of the East Burnside and Couch Street couplet. It will cost approximately $22 million to create two one-way streets out of portions of Burnside and Couch between Northeast Third and 14th avenues.

The goal is to reduce congestion and encourage redevelopment, including the dormant Burnside Bridgehead project at the east end of the Burnside Bridge.

The work is also intended be coordinated with the construction of the eastside loop of the Portland Streetcar line.

“This is the first major stimulus project to come before the council,” said Mayor Sam Adams, who has championed the project in recent years as the elected head of the Bureau of Transportation. “Other major projects should begin coming to council soon.”

The project was one of 84 infrastructure projects included in the Portland Job Creation and Business Stimulus Package unveiled by the council on Jan. 13. It was intended to create nearly 5,000 jobs within a year at a cost of $503 million.

All of the projects had previously been included in five-year capital construction budgets of such large city agencies as the transportation bureau, Bureau of Water and Bureau of Environmental Services. The council decided to begin the projects sooner — all within a year — to create jobs in the worsening economy.

“The good jobs these projects provide will serve the immediate needs of our economy and generations of Portlanders,” Commissioner Randy Leonard said at the time.

A number of small projects in the package that did not require council approval have already begun, including minor street paving ones.

The East Burnside and Couch Street couplet project is the first of many that are large and complicated enough to require council approval, however.

Realigning two major streets
All of the major projects were temporarily put on hold when Congress and the Oregon Legislature began working on their economic stimulus packages. According to Adams, if federal or state funds became available for any of the projects in the city package, the council would use the local funds on other projects.

It is unclear which — if any — of the projects in the city package now qualify for federal or state funds. Because Congress and the Oregon Legislature only recently passed their packages, those details are still being worked out by various agencies handling the funds.

Once it was determined the East Burnside and Couch Street couplet project did not qualify for any federal or state funds, the decision was made to move ahead on it.

The council is scheduled to consider two ordinances on Wednesday. One would authorize the Portland Development Commission to spend $4.9 million on the project during the next two years. The other ordinance would authorize construction of the project.

The rest of money will come from the transportation bureau.

Construction is scheduled to last into the summer of 2010. When it is completed, Burnside and Couch streets will be realigned into a one-way couplet system between Third and 14th. Burnside will consist of three lanes of eastbound traffic, while Couch will include two lanes of westbound traffic.

In addition to rebuilding the roadways, new sidewalks will be added along both streets and new traffic signals will be added at major intersections.

The work will be integrated into the Burnside Bridgehead redevelopment project, which is intended to remake more than four blocks of property bordered by Northeast Second Avenue on the west, Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard on the east, Burnside on the south and Northeast Davis on the north.

The realignment is intended to help residents, visitors and delivery vehicles more easily enter and leave the finished project. As designed, Couch intersects one of the blocks on the way back to Burnside.

Developer Brad Malsin, who is in charge of the redevelopment, thinks the design could be improved, but is not far enough along in his planning to know what would work best. Adams agrees and said that portion of Couch might be changed at a later date.

[Okstate]

I'm surprised this couplet might be done by summer 2010. I'm all about it. Burnside (the monster as we know it) will be downsized to mini-monster status.

[JordanL]

I'm confused by the wording... they're talking about turning West Burnside into a couplet, right? Because East Burnside doesn't get nearly enough traffic to warrant a couplet...

[nobody]

The project is the construction phase of the East Burnside and Couch Street couplet. It will cost approximately $22 million to create two one-way streets out of portions of Burnside and Couch between Northeast Third and 14th avenues.

Pretty clear wording.

[JordanL]

Originally Posted by nobody

The project is the construction phase of the East Burnside and Couch Street couplet. It will cost approximately $22 million to create two one-way streets out of portions of Burnside and Couch between Northeast Third and 14th avenues.

Pretty clear wording.

Uhg... sorry...



Not that I don't think improvement in the area is worthy, but... why not turn west couch and burnside into couplets as well? Seems like you'd see a LOT more benefit per dollar from that...

[65MAX]

West Burnside and Couch are also going to become couplets, but after the eastside is completed.

There were a few (and I mean VERY FEW) NIMBYs in the Brewery Blocks who threw a hissy fit over the westside proposal and succeeded in huffing and puffing long enough to delay it somewhat. But they were eventually overwhelmed and massively outnumbered by supporters of the couplet.

Also, there is just as much traffic on E Burnside as there is on W Burnside. The major benefit of the couplet on the eastside, besides better circulation, is a much improved Burnside/Sandy/12th intersection. Untangling that nightmare will be worth every penny.

[JordanL]

Originally Posted by 65MAX

West Burnside and Couch are also going to become couplets, but after the eastside is completed.

There were a few (and I mean VERY FEW) NIMBYs in the Brewery Blocks who threw a hissy fit over the westside proposal and succeeded in huffing and puffing long enough to delay it somewhat. But they were eventually overwhelmed and massively outnumbered by supporters of the couplet.

Also, there is just as much traffic on E Burnside as there is on W Burnside. The major benefit of the couplet on the eastside, besides better circulation, is a much improved Burnside/Sandy/12th intersection. Untangling that nightmare will be worth every penny.

Really?

Wow... I missed that. Is it in a proposal somewhere in this thread? Do they ahve a design for that intersection figured out?

[bvpcvm]

^ there's tons of info about it at the city's website, transportation dept

[NJD]

^^

Because East Burnside doesn't get nearly enough traffic to warrant a couplet...

Are you serious? Have you ever driven on East Burnside during rush hour, or tried to navigate the Sandy/Burnside/12th intersection by bike, foot or car?

^
west/east projects website: http://www.portlandonline.com/transp...ex.cfm?c=46448

[urbanlife]

Originally Posted by 65MAX

West Burnside and Couch are also going to become couplets, but after the eastside is completed.

There were a few (and I mean VERY FEW) NIMBYs in the Brewery Blocks who threw a hissy fit over the westside proposal and succeeded in huffing and puffing long enough to delay it somewhat. But they were eventually overwhelmed and massively outnumbered by supporters of the couplet.

Also, there is just as much traffic on E Burnside as there is on W Burnside. The major benefit of the couplet on the eastside, besides better circulation, is a much improved Burnside/Sandy/12th intersection. Untangling that nightmare will be worth every penny.

I wouldnt consider myself a NIMBY, I just think turning NE Couch, one of our few extremely pedestrian friendly streets into a main and very busy road is going to be a huge mistake.

I am all for the couplet on the east side because it makes sense, but I think on the west side it is going to turn out to be a huge mistake for the city. Sure Burnside will technically have less cars on it that way, but at what cost? I would rather see them just run a streetcar up and down NW Couch and call it good.

[brandonpdx]

The couplet on NW Couch is a bad idea. NW Couch has become one of our best pedestrian streets in town. Have you seen all of the cars that go west on Burnside!? That will be a lot of cars going down Couch making it unpedestrian friendly. Take a walk down NW Glisan and you'll get an idea of what Couch will turn into...not good