91ÊÓƵ

Welcome back to the recurring chronicle of two of Portland’s fastest changing neighborhoods, the South Waterfront and the Central Eastside.

Past columns have touched on the construction and naming of the soaring Tilikum Crossing that connects these two neighborhoods, and the regulatory framework that the city of Portland has put in place to create conditions that support active, beneficial redevelopment of these areas.

Today let’s discuss one of the most significant challenges facing these neighborhoods: the public infrastructure needed to support the growth associated with fast-paced, private redevelopment.

The public sector has made extraordinary investments in transit infrastructure in both the Central Eastside and South Waterfront. Both are served by streetcar and bus, have extensive riverfront pathway systems for pedestrian and cyclists, and will be served by light rail when the MAX orange line begins operating in 2015. Also in play is the aerial tram that bridges Oregon Health & Science University’s growing Schnitzer campus in the South Waterfront with the established Marquam Hill campus.

The investment in transportation infrastructure has been significant and is integral to accessing and traveling through these parts of the city. However, ongoing development will drive the need for additional infrastructure investment in both areas. This is particularly true for the Central Eastside.

The number of residential development projects planned in the district has increased significantly. Historically, it has been an industry-centric district with fewer than 1,000 residents. Now there are over 1,650 units in the development pipeline (figures courtesy of the Central Eastside Industrial Council Land Use Committee).

Not all of these projects may be built, but this glut of apartments is working its way through the city’s design review and entitlement process – and those that do get built will likely be finished within two years. Even assuming the most conservative occupancy levels, this will more than double the number of residents in the Central Eastside.

This change in demographics will mean various clashes of residents with existing warehouse and manufacturing operations in the neighborhood. But nowhere is the potential for conflict greater than in the competition for limited on-street parking.

If you’ve traipsed through the Central Eastside, it is not uncommon to see curb space being utilized for loading and unloading of trucks associated with an adjacent warehouse. These uses have the potential to be directly in conflict with future residents searching for on-street parking. With on-street parking already at a premium, and the planned residential projects not required to provide parking for all tenants, there remains a high probability of the Central Eastside seeing increased competition for on-street parking that has been associated with multifamily residential development throughout Portland.

Anticipating the problem, the city has worked with local business interests to implement a permit system for on-street parking. While effective to a point, permitting does not create new parking spaces, and if demand for on-street parking continues to grow beyond the already outstripped supply, the problem will persist.

To address the issue, there will need to be a solution that creates additional off-street parking, either in a structure that could be prohibitively expensive, or surface parking not favored by the City and likely not the economically most advantageous use of limited amounts of vacant land in the Central Eastside’s thriving development market.

This leaves the fundamental question of who carries the burden of the impending parking shortage. If nothing additional is done, the local businesses and future residents will share the burden as they compete to use the same spaces for potentially incompatible purposes.

If the city were to step in and require additional parking to be constructed in association with residential development, it would shift the burden to property owners through increased project costs to build additional on-site parking. This would have the dual effect of reducing the amount of apartments being built, and increasing the amount of auto-oriented facilities supporting the apartments that are built – and neither of those results are consistent with the city’s efforts to promote high-density residential development in the city center and reduce the amount of auto trips associated with such development.

The good news is that the Central Eastside is a step ahead on this issue because the ample transit options in the area provide alternatives for residential commuting. That will likely mean fewer cars. But even with this advantage, the sheer numbers of new residents coming to the neighborhood will exacerbate the competition for on-street parking – a limited commodity.

The infrastructure needs in the South Waterfront are even more extensive. Development of the OHSU Schnitzer campus and the Zidell property will require extension of the street grid through them as well as improved capacity on the limited streets that access the South Waterfront. I will address that issue next time.

Damien Hall focuses on land use and real estate law as an attorney at Ball Janik LLP. Contact him at 503-944-6138 or [email protected].