Comments on: Historic building inventory effort gets funding /news/2010/04/12/historic-building-inventory-effort-gets-funding/ Building and Construction News in Portland, Oregon and the Pacific Northwest Tue, 01 Oct 2013 19:59:00 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.6.6 By: sherman /news/2010/04/12/historic-building-inventory-effort-gets-funding/#comment-19401 Thu, 15 Apr 2010 01:11:47 +0000 /?p=51606#comment-19401 There are seven contributing structures in the Old Town Historic District that were not a part of Chinese history. You seem to think that being on the inventory is the same as being a registered protected landmark. This inventory has no teeth. PDC wrote the district nomination for Old Town the time to complain was when PDC created the district. PDC owns the Dirty Duck I think the issue was more that a public entity was being a poor role model.

The inventory should include materials. There are many unreinforced masonry apartment buildings from the early 1900s in Alphabet District that are selling for half a million a unit. The issue was that the Dirty Duck was used by a leather bar-use should not determine structural value. I’d rather be standing next to Dirty Duck in a earthquake than the Tudor Arms on Couch for example.

I thought the SHPO grant was given yearly, where will the staff budget come from now? The 1984 inventory was volunteers.

]]> By: Old Town /news/2010/04/12/historic-building-inventory-effort-gets-funding/#comment-19289 Tue, 13 Apr 2010 19:16:11 +0000 /?p=51606#comment-19289 The fear is that instead of using this inventory as an overall city planning tool – it will become a defensive and oppositional tool for the Historic Landmarks Commission to deny development. Their opposition to the Dirty Duck demolition is an example of an irrational stance despite the benefits to Old Town.

A question might be what is to be included in the data base? Another – will it be more than just a location? And – will it incorporate the extant unreinforced masonry data base?

]]>