91视频

Pearl District residents unhappy about plans for the Fremont Apartments project, between Northwest Naito Parkway and the Willamette River, took their complaints before the Portland City Council on Wednesday.

TVA Architects‘ design, with several modifications, received the Portland Design Commission‘s approval in December with a 3-1 vote. But the Pearl District Neighborhood Association (PDNA) appealed that decision, and got its opportunity to present initial arguments.

The hearing will continue at 10:15 a.m. March 7, when the City Council will have three options: deny the appeal and uphold the Design Commission’s decision to approve the proposal, deny the appeal and approve a revised proposal or grant the appeal and deny the proposal.

The main point of contention is the proposed height 鈥� the building would top out at 175 feet, exceeding the maximum allowed height of 100 feet. This requested modification met approval because the lower floors of the building extend out, which design commissioners found allowed for a better view of the Fremont Bridge than alternatives.

鈥淭his project does set, if approved, a very dangerous precedent for riverfront development in this area, which will wipe out the view of the Fremont Bridge,鈥� said PDNA’s attorney Jeff Kleinman, who prepared the appeal. 鈥淭here will be no further argument against such development if it is approved.鈥�

As designed, the proposed structure at 1650 N.W. Naito Parkway would be 17 stories and include 306,000 square feet. It would have 275 residential units above 6,600 square feet of ground-floor retail and restaurant space. A parking garage would have 152 spaces.

The proposal also calls for a 60-foot-wide pedestrian plaza on the north side, and reconstruction of the greenway trail on the site. Currently, the parcel is serving as a surface parking lot.

鈥淭he Design Commission found that the proposal supports the river and greenway trail, has a massing concept that takes the view of the Fremont Bridge into account, incorporates a similar scale and massing as other developments in the North Pearl, and incorporates balconies, large areas of glazing, active ground-floor spaces and large plaza which reflect the North Pearl context in orient towards the river,鈥� senior city planner Ben Nielsen said.

The appeal contends 13 design guidelines are not being met, and challenges six of the seven modifications. The PDNA’s appeal states it wasn’t mandatory for the Design Commission to approve any of the requested modifications.

鈥淏asically what we’re talking about in a nutshell is a project that might work elsewhere on a city block removed from the river,鈥� Kleinman said, adding that the height and massing are inappropriate for the site. 鈥淭he application depends upon several modifications, none of which can be justified.鈥�

The appeal isn’t the first hurdle for the project’s developer, Dallas-based Lincoln Property Company. In November, the Design Commission heard from neighboring residents unhappy that the building would block views of the bridge.

Patrick Gilligan, Lincoln Property Company executive vice president, said at the hearing the company owns about 50 buildings in Portland.

鈥淲e’re very committed to Portland and making the city a better place as much as we can through our projects,鈥� he said.

The proposal has an inappropriate massing concept that doesn’t reflect the identity of the Pearl District neighborhood, according to Peter Gramlich, owner of Gramlich Design and Planning and an instructor at Portland Community College.

鈥淭his proposal violates the most basic principle of design: first, do no harm to your surroundings,鈥� he said. 鈥淚t detracts from the character of the waterfront area rather than reinforcing it. It seals the Willamette River greenway off from the neighborhood and the public as a whole, effectively seizing it for private benefit.鈥�

The proposed building, Gramlich said, would not complement existing ones in the neighborhood.

鈥淭he case of the Fremont Apartments represents a crucial decision point for Portland,鈥� said George Galster, professor of planning at Wayne State University.

Galster argued that the modifications approved by the Design Commission do not meet city design standards, such as increasing access to sunlight along the greenway, facilitating access along the riverfront, creating opportunities for views of the river, and ensuring bonus height granted to sites next to the Fremont Bridge not affect views of the bridge.

鈥淭he Design Commission essentially approved modifications that allow the Fremont Apartments to be taller and fatter than are permitted by code,鈥� he said. 鈥淭his development will set in motion a long-term development pattern that will be the poison pill for the Pearl.鈥�

Dozens of people, mostly Pearl District residents, testified at the hearing. Many said the view of Fremont Bridge from Fields Park is iconic and would suffer from construction of the proposed building. Others agreed with attorney Kleinman’s slippery slope argument.

鈥淚 love our views, our mountains, our bridges, our waterway,鈥� said Jeanie Coates, who said she has lived in the Pearl District for four years. 鈥淚 want to call upon you to look for what is right for the city of Portland. Use your vision. Use your power. Let’s get this project redirected.鈥�

Tim Wybenga of TVA Architects said there is no protected view of Fremont Bridge from Fields Park, but the company recognizes the view is important to residents.

鈥淭his is an important part of Portland, so from the beginning we said, 鈥楲et’s see what we can do from a good neighbor standpoint from day one of this project,’鈥� he said.

Architects studied the mass of the building to take the view of the bridge into consideration in the design, Wybenga said. TVA Architects staffers have met with the PDNA several times throughout the design process, he added.

鈥淲e’ve spent a lot of time on this with the neighbors, and we did so not as a requirement but because we wanted the neighbors to be on board and we wanted to get that input,鈥� he said.

As a result, architects redesigned the public plaza and greenway portion of the site to encourage use of the riverfront, Wybenga said. Trees on the site in its current condition block views and access to the river, he said, adding the proposed L-shape of the building steps down toward the river.

鈥淭his tower belongs in the Pearl,鈥� he said regarding testimony that the proposed building doesn’t complement the neighborhood. 鈥淢ost towers in the Pearl are substantially larger than this.鈥�

Following testimony, the council agreed to leave the record open for 14 days before it votes. The record for new evidence is open to both the architect and the appellant until Feb. 28 and rebuttals to new testimony is open until March 6.