91视频

When Carole Lower bought her home at 3535 N.E. 45th Ave. in 1964, she never thought to ask about the zoning for either her property or the surrounding block. It was a residential neighborhood, and it was hard to imagine it could ever be anything else.

Lower, 75, has seen her fair share of changes in the past half century, but nothing like the four-story wall that construction crews soon will begin building a stone’s throw from her backyard, at 4425 N.E. Fremont St. She is one of many area residents who are struggling to come to grips with the 50-unit multifamily project.

鈥淚’ve lived in this neighborhood since I was four years old,鈥� Lower said. 鈥淐hange is difficult for older people to accept, but I think I could accept the change if it was not for (the developer’s) basic attitude of, 鈥榃ell folks, get over it. This is the future; you just have to deal with it.’ 鈥�

Less than two months after a neighborhood petition to the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals brought construction of a multifamily project on Southeast Division Street to a halt, Beaumont-Wilshire Neighbors for Responsible Growth is planning to appeal this one on Northeast Fremont Street. And while neighbors attest that their voices are being ignored, others contend that such grassroots campaigns are setting a damaging precedent.

Demolition has begun on the site; its permit is 鈥渦nder inspection,鈥� according to the Bureau of Development Services website. Neighbors have voiced their opposition to the project’s lack of both parking and retail on the ground floor. On April 17, BWNRG filed with LUBA notice of its intent to appeal the project’s permit, but hasn’t offered details on why specifically.

Wally Remmers of Everett Custom Homes and his son Victor are developing the 50-unit project, which is called Beaumont Village.

Lower said Remmers has not been receptive to residents’ concerns, but she acknowledged that he reduced the number of units from 65 units. The developer has since added a commercial element but has resisted parking, according to the neighborhood website.

That’s because it’s not financially feasible, Remmers said. As a mid-block site, the development would be best served by underground parking, which is cost-prohibitive. But even if he were to provide at-grade parking, it would eliminate the retail space neighbors sought originally. He thinks that will be an unintended consequence of the new minimum parking requirements that city commissioners adopted earlier this month.

鈥淲ith the new code, I think you’ll see people going back to not doing retail and doing parking garages,鈥� Remmers said.

In February, LUBA revoked a building permit for an 81-unit apartment project on Southeast Division Street, because of an appeal made by Richmond Neighbors for Responsible Growth. The project’s developer was Dennis Sackhoff, who is Wally Remmers’ business partner at Beaverton-based Arbor Custom Homes. Sackhoff’s project sat idle for more than a month before he could reapply for a new permit.

Margaret Davis, another neighborhood representative, said she is concerned about not only parking, but also pedestrian safety and traffic congestion. Davis believes that part of the problem stems from old zoning codes that allow for new, high-density apartments that don’t mesh with infrastructure systems built long ago 鈥� such as narrow, two-lane streets that are becoming major thoroughfares, but aren’t wide enough to allow for, say, a bus and a fire truck.

鈥淚t just seems like there is no transition between this ultra urban thing and infrastructure that doesn’t support it,鈥� Davis said. 鈥淲e have had some assurances from the city that, 鈥榊es, we see the problems,’ (and) 鈥榊es, they’re being fixed with the comp plan.’ But there was a feeling that we had to do something more immediately. What’s in place is kind of a joke.鈥�

To try and massage the urban barrier between Beaumont Village and the rest of the neighborhood, residents asked Remmers to reduce the building’s height to three stories. But that’s also not feasible, Remmers said, because the price he paid for the property was based on its zoning and development potential (four stories of multifamily).

Remmers said he’s willing to work with neighbors, and has placed a call to their attorney, Ty Wyman of Dunn Carney Allen Higgins & Tongue LLP, to set up a meeting to discuss the issues. Remmers finds the situation frustrating 鈥� his team worked for more than six months and spent more than $600,000 preparing the building permit application.

鈥淲e went through the process of everything being checked, and rechecked, and rechecked again to make sure everything complied with zoning,鈥� he said. 鈥淭here were no discretionary decisions whatsoever.鈥�

Brian Owendoff, a senior vice president at Capacity Commercial, also voiced concern. He’s been involved in Portland apartment construction totaling more than $100 million, and thinks the practice of revoking a building permit after issuance by the city will make lenders hesitant to issue construction loans because of heightened entitlement risks.

He said that while many projects benefit from neighborhood input, the developer is the only stakeholder with multimillion-dollar risk on the line (in Remmers’ case, it’s approximately $5 million). Owendoff said that neighbors need to realize that not every recommendation makes sense, or is financially feasible. Changing the rules mid-construction is kind of like 鈥淟ucy pulling away the football just as Charlie Brown goes to kick a field goal,鈥� he said.

For Beaumont Village, the city must file the building permit with LUBA by May 1. The petitioners then will have 21 days to file their brief. Davis declined to share the details of the petition until it had been filed with LUBA. Construction may continue during the duration of LUBA’s proceeding.

Beaumont Village will be market rate, but the units will be smaller to make them more affordable. Remmers believes his project is getting a lot of flak simply because it’s the first sizable apartment complex to join the neighborhood. More are expected.

鈥淒evelopment has impact,鈥� Remmers said. 鈥淣obody ever wants it in their backyard. The comments we get are: 鈥榃e want affordable housing, but this isn’t the place to do it.’ 鈥� 鈥淭here is need for that, and this is an expensive neighborhood 鈥� There are a lot of people that want to live there that can’t afford to live there right now.鈥�

聽(Editor’s note: This story has been updated to reflect a correction in the spelling of Carole Lower’s name and to include comments by Wally Remmers, one of the developers of the project.)