91视频

The saga of the Buck-Prager Building, in Portland’s Alphabet Historic District, continued to drag Monday, as the Historic Landmarks Commission delayed until next month a decision whether to approve plans for a 148-unit affordable housing development.

Following a hearing lasting longer than three hours, the record will be held open for the next seven days to allow additional public testimony. Previously, three design advice meetings took place for the project, which is being developed by Northwest Housing Alternatives on a half-block parcel at 1727 N.W. Hoyt St.

As designed, the project would feature construction of a new five-story building with 100 workforce housing units, a renovation of the existing three-story Buck-Prager Building to provide 18 senior housing units and increase seismic strength, and construction of a four-story addition to the Buck-Prager Building to provide 30 more senior housing units. All 148 apartments would be affordable for people making 60 percent of area median income.

The century-old existing building was at the center of Monday’s discussion.

鈥淧rimary to this project is to save the Buck-Prager,鈥� lead designer Michelle Black of Carleton Hart Architecture told the commission. 鈥淲e really tried hard to leave the exterior in place and bring back items that have been lost over time.鈥�

Earlier design advice reviews brought about a host of changes to the original design in order that the new buildings blend in well with the surrounding neighborhood. But from the beginning a significant portion of the neighborhood has expressed opposition to a project that would be much larger than adjacent single-family homes, some of them also designated as historic resources.

At the same time, Black said, Northwest Portland has long featured the most diverse mix of residential housing in the city, such as five- or six-story apartment buildings amid single-family homes.

鈥淭he proximity of tall buildings next to small is really something that is intrinsic to this district,鈥� she said. 鈥淚t’s found throughout the district.鈥�

Bureau of Development Services staff issued in an Aug. 17 memo a recommendation of conditional approval for the project. Conditions included making both faces of patio doors on the south addition operable, adding fiber cement detailing on north building window recesses and maximizing the number of trees along Irving Street.

Also, city planner Grace Jeffreys noted Monday that non-standard landscaping and irrigation improvements to the right-of-way for the north building still require Portland Bureau of Transportation approval.

Public testimony both for and against the project was ample Monday.

鈥淭he last iteration of the proposal that we just walked through is beautiful,鈥� said Madeline Kovacs, the coordinator of Portland for Everyone, which advocates for land use policies that support affordable housing. 鈥淭he Alphabet District does not call for matching details, and many changes have also been made, as we all just saw.鈥�

Kovacs and others also noted that Portland’s affordable housing crisis makes approval of projects like this imperative.

鈥淭he size and scale of the proposed buildings have been a central issue,鈥� said Sarah Stevenson of Innovative Housing Inc., which owns more than 1,400 apartments in Oregon and Washington. 鈥淏ut as a developer, I have to say that the scale of a development is often crucial to its development. Carleton Hart has been very creative while respecting and preserving this historic asset.鈥�

Others were more blunt.

鈥淭his body has been blocking developing on this site since 2014, which is repugnant to me,鈥� Southeast Portland resident Alan Kessler said. 鈥淭here are thousands sleeping on the street at night when there could be homes here. The idea that this body, after three design reviews would say, well, French doors versus sliding doors, the pettiness of that is just incredible to me.鈥�

Project opponents almost universally spoke about the scope and massing and how the complex would come to dominate its immediate surroundings.

鈥淓ven if it were to meet criteria to a certain extent,鈥� said Mark Hales, who owns an investment property on Northwest Hoyt Street, 鈥渉ow many six- and seven-story buildings need to be put up in what is now an existing parking lot? What is the overall long-term view of that effect? I think it drastically changes the entire composition of the entire Alphabet District.鈥�

Others warned that the affordable housing component could fly out the window if project finances fail to pencil out in the future.

鈥淗ousing affordability, first of all, is not an approval criteria; it’s aspirational,鈥� said Dan Anderson, who lives two blocks away from the project site. 鈥淭he subsidies required to deliver that outcome are not in place today. Prior applications have seen this declined by the state of Oregon. You’re being sold vaporware. You’re being set up for a bait and switch.鈥�

Commissioners discussed the project briefly; some expressed support and others remained ambiguous.

鈥淲hile I’d like to see the expression on the north side of the north building, that notch, be a little bit bigger, for me it’s sufficient and I’m willing to put my support behind what’s proposed in terms of the bulk and height,鈥� Vice Chairwoman Kristen Minor said. 鈥淭hat’s also said in recognition that the project is doing a significant good thing for the neighborhood by renovating the Buck-Prager Building. For me, this is going to be a good addition to the neighborhood.鈥�

Chairman Kirk Ranzetta and Commissioner Matthew Roman also expressed support for the proposal, while Commissioner Ernestina Fuenmayor and Commissioner Annie Mahoney remained unconvinced.

鈥淭he massing is still pretty big, pretty aggressive,鈥� Fuenmayor said. 鈥淏ut maybe now the south addition looks a little more compatible as a whole. I have a mixed feeling about this.鈥�

The Historic Landmarks Commission will revisit the project Sept. 24. At that time, any new testimony will be reviewed. There will not be any further staff or applicant presentations, however, and the next meeting will largely be confined to deliberation by the commission and potentially a vote.