North Macadam

North Macadam District
Urban Renewal Advisory Committee Meeting
February 20, 2003
8:30 a.m. – 10:00 a.m.
Portland Development Commission

Members Present: Barbara Walker (Acting Chair), Glenn Taylor, Will White, Nicole Peterson, Jerry Ward, Lois Davis, Pasquale Pascuzzi

1. Welcome & Opening Comments
Mrs. Walker welcomed everyone to the meeting. Chairperson Rick Saito was out of town and unable to attend the meeting.

2. Review & Approval of November 21, 2002 Meeting Minutes
Mrs. Walker asked for Committee comments and questions on the meeting minutes and hearing none, the Committee approved the minutes.

3. General District Updates

Status of Development Agreement Negotiations

Cheryl Twete indicated that the negotiation between PDC and North Macadam Investors, LLC (NMI) and Oregon Health and Sciences University (OHSU) was progressing. The revised, expected completion date for the development agreement is March 2003 or potentially later. The development agreement involves a large, complex, multi-phased project now called the “New Macadam” project. She indicated that negotiations were going well with the project, but that it was not yet completed and ready for review and discussion by the URAC. She will give an update at the March 2003 meeting.

Will White asked about the affordable housing provisions in the development and indicated the advocates interests in ensuring that the City-wide housing policy is implemented in North Macadam. He indicated that he believes the development program has changed since Homer Williams made a presentation in June 2002 to the URAC where he indicated that the project would follow the River District Housing implementation model of having the new development profile match the income profile of the city as a whole. He is also concerned about the Region’s ability to achieve its commitment to develop 17,000 units between 2003 and 2017. He asked where these units will be developed. Much of the affordable stock has been developed on the eastside of Portland and we need opportunities outside this area. In Downtown there is a recognized agenda to address the need for mid-market housing. He believes that North Macadam is a good location for affordable housing in that we have the opportunity to control the income mix in this area of large scale new development. He does not believe that the district should be developed as a high-end community. Rather, the goals of the urban renewal plan call for a balanced community that enables people of all incomes to live there. He indicated that implementation of the City-wide housing policy would lead to an affordable housing goal of 2,175 units (as requested by the Housing and Community Development Commission in their 1/9/03 letter to City Council).

Ms. Twete indicated that until the development agreement was completed in its entirety that she was not able to respond directly to Mr. White’s questions about the details of the affordable housing requirements. She indicated, however, that the development agreement did include affordable housing provisions, and that the Commission’s charge was to implement the recently adopted South Waterfront Plan for the district, which calls for 788 affordable housing units. Ms. Twete indicated that the development agreement would address approximately half of those units.

FY 03-04 Budget and Funding Strategy

At the March meeting, staff will present the draft Commission budget for the North Macadam Urban Renewal Area. It will be presented to the Commission on March 19, 2003 . The URAC will have opportunity for comment at its March meeting. The North Macadam budget will support project activities to complete the RiverPlace project and to implement the anticipated development agreement between NMI and OHSU, consistent with the Commission’s “Readiness to Proceed” Strategy in North Macadam.

Ms. Twete also indicated that a key piece of the work involving the development agreement is a multi-source funding strategy to address the phase one infrastructure needs of the district, which exceed the projected amount of tax increment to be available. Federal, state, City, local improvement districts (LIDs) and other local resources are likely to be included in the funding strategy. She expressed that she was well aware of the URAC’s interest in seeing this information and will provide it as it becomes available.

Public Information Materials

Ms. Twete indicated that PDC staff and the Bureau of Planning were currently preparing new and updated public information materials for the district. When the materials are completed, they will be presented to the URAC. The purpose of the materials is to update the information available for general public inquiries, development and business information requests and a range of other parties that regularly contact PDC with requests for information on the district, including property ownerships, development plans, funding availability, district vision, etc.

Ms. Twete distributed a copy of two new graphics, including an updated North Macadam Urban Renewal Area map and a South Waterfront District/North Macadam Urban Renewal Area map which depicts the newly adopted land-use plan for the district.

4. Greenway Design Coordination Plan

Janet Bebb, Bureau of Parks, provided an update on the greenway master planning process, which has been renamed the Greenway Development Plan. She indicated that the process involves three phases. First, project goals will be developed as part of the River Renaissance effort under the leadership of the Bureau of Planning. These goals will be submitted to City Council on March 12, 2003 for approval. The second phase involves the actual creation of the Greenway Development Plan, which will serve as a conceptual blueprint for future greenway development. It will be developed by the Bureau of Portland Parks and Recreation working with a multi-disciplinary consultant team. After City Council approval of the project goals, Parks will issue a Request for Proposal for the consultant team, anticipated for distribution in late March 2003. The project budget for the consulting team is approximately $300,000. The Greenway Development Plan will give property owners another option for greenway design on their individual properties, in addition to the current greenway code standards. Clearly, the City’s goal is to create a holistic and integrated greenway project, working in partnership with the property owners, neighborhood representatives and stakeholders. The third phase, which will run concurrently with phase two, will create an Implementation Strategy which addresses partnerships, funding strategies, ownership, operations and maintenance funding and tools for achieving the overall City goal of an average 150’ wide greenway.

5. Aerial Tram Design Competition

Matt Brown, Portland Office of Transportation, gave an update on the design competition process for the tram, which is being sponsored by Portland Aerial Transport Inc. (PATI). Since he last discussed this project with the URAC, the design process has moved at a rapid pace. In early January, four design firms were selected as finalists to participate in the competition. The four firms are:

Angelil/Grahma/Pfenninger/Scholl	Zurich/Los Angeles
SHoP	New York
UN Studio	Amsterdam
Guy Nordenson and Associations	New York

Each firm will present tram design concepts, including design approaches for the terminus areas on Marquam Hill and in North Macadam. One of the goals of the design competition is to raise the level of overall design in Portland and to that end, each of the four finalist firms will also be participating in a lecture series, co-sponsored by PATI and the Portland Chapter of the American Institute of Architects. These lectures are being held on Monday evenings, February 17 – March 10, 2003. Attendance has been extremely high at these lectures and Mr. Brown recommended that those interested in attending, arrive early.

The goal of the competition is to select the firm best qualified for designing the tram and working with the community in Portland. The competition will not select an actual tram design. The firms will submit their project concepts on March 17, 2003 and an independent jury will hear presentations by the four firms on March 24, 2003. Following the presentations by the teams, the jury will recommend a design team to the PATI Board, and the winning firm will be announced on March 26, 2003. A unique aspect of this project is the use of an Open Jury process, meaning that the public can participate in the design team presentations of their projects to the Jury on March 24th.

Mr. Brown will continue to keep the URAC updated on the tram design process after the competition is completed, and the project moves forward into actual design and engineering later this spring. A Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) is being established to provide for a direct forum for community discussion of the project and to provide input to PATI and the design competition process.

Several questions were asked regarding the Corbett Terwilliger Lair Hill Neighborhood’s (CTLH) concerns and opposition of the tram project. Mr. Brown explained that the design teams have been directed to address the neighborhood concerns as part of the design process and the CAC is an integral part of establishing an effective working relationship with community stakeholders. The CTLH Board passed a resolution that outlined the neighborhood’s approach to the project, with the neighborhood choosing to work with the City and PATI on the design of the tram and related neighborhood improvements rather than continue legal challenges to the project.

Mr. Ward indicated that the CTLH Board was still in opposition to the tram and that it had many concerns that were yet to be fully addressed, including how the tram would be financed, height issues and neighborhood transportation impacts, as have been raised through the South Portland Circulation Study (SPCS) for the past several years.

Mrs. Walker indicated that as a PATI board member, she wants to foster good will between the PATI Board and the CTLH Neighborhood. She said that the PATI board did not want to exacerbate transportation problems in the neighborhood through the redevelopment of North Macadam. She knows that there are trust issues between CTLH and PATI and welcomes clear and direct communication through this design competition process. Mr. Ward responded that he believed the main issue was not trust, but about addressing real transportation issues that are not being addressed today. The CTLH Board is very concerned that redevelopment in North Macadam will exacerbate transportation problems impacting the neighborhood today.

Mr. Brown indicated that the transportation problems of the CTLH neighborhood today are largely regional transportation problems that require regional solutions. He stated that PDOT is willing and interested in working with CTLH in identifying solutions to these issues. He suggested that the proposed streetcar and south corridor light rail projects will be solutions to the broader regional issues. He also said that he believed the City is well aware of the CTLH issues, and is giving thought to these concerns and trying to figuring out appropriate and implementable solutions.

Mr. Ward stated that state law requires that infrastructure be in place prior to development, but that does not appear to be the case in North Macadam from his perspective.

Ms. Twete explained that the current development planning for North Macadam included a strong transit component, in order to provide transit services as early as possible to serve this emerging district and potentially relieve some of the regional pressures.

7. Closing Comments

Ms. Walker asked if there were any closing comments and hearing none, adjourned the meeting.

---

for PDC's News & Information E-Mail Lists
Archive of sent E-Mails
Unsubscribe from our E-Mail Lists