165 Washington Ave | Northern Burner Supply Redevelopment | Portland

Back when USM was proposing the elimination of the "short-cut street" connecting Bedford and Deering, the PPH had an article on this. In the comments section, one response was an angry one, one livid that his (am assuming an older male) routine of getting home would be different, or somehow more difficult. It was a knee-jerk and selfish reaction, not thinking or taking the time to consider the bigger and better picture--more space for USM to grow to meet public educational needs for a thriving city. The residents in this area of Washington Ave. and the new Roux campus must calm down and force a serious attempt to understand how lifestyles have changed. It's not only about you. Not doing so simply makes you appear like a buffoon along with slowing down the process.
 
Cosakita18 said:
Bad news....it seems like there's a cohort of NIMBY neighbors that are organizing a referendum to try to stop the zoning changes for 165 Washington and by extension trying to freeze the whole ReCode zoning process. They've been out collecting signatures
Click to expand...
They were out in full force at the last PB meeting - lots of literal "I have a right to my view" comments (according to the city they don't, legally). Amusingly, supporters of the project were directly calling them out for the "view" comments. Jonathan handled himself commendably during the whole thing.
 
I would probably guess it's from residents in the odd colonial multi-housing building behind, their views looking south. But the irony here is that the condos behind that Redfern built, the one with the woonerf, might get partially obscured sunsets for a few owners. But then it's how to define "partial" and "substantive" and "degree and quality of overall diminishment" here.
 
Redfern said:
Just found out some people think this project would be built on the Mount Joy Orchard. Which is entirely untrue. I'm at a loss as to how to combat some of the more outrageous assumptions like this. ~ C
Click to expand...
Catherine - People are, and certainly can be, unequivocally stupid. They rely on hearsay or cherry-pick the little gobbets of information they barely paid attention to.

They've simply heard "Washington" and "Orchard" and "Effect" ... along with hearing about some of the early misinformation. Bear in mind this kind of human fallibility is out of your control.

The best you can do is continue to point people toward the Burner Supply building as a redevelopment and toward any PPH articles or City Documents and Meetings. If there is anything you can further specify on your own website or provide links outward toward PPH articles etc that could help. Otherwise carry on and continue to be a good partner to the city and hope the stupid catch up.
 
Catherine have you considered putting together a basic informational website for the project? Something you can point people to that maybe has a few renderings and a FAQ. We live in a world now where a certain amount of misinformation is inevitable, but creating your own reference site could be a good step in eliminating some of it. For instance the developers of the bayside properties put this together: https://www.baysidemdp.com/

You could buy 165washington.com and do something similar.
 
"Citizens in Support of the Eastern Promenade" (Not sure if that's an official name or not) has been collecting signatures trying to get a 45 ft height restriction put in place for this portion of Washington Ave. including the Northern Burner parcel. They've been out in force collecting signatures and using misleading information to get people to sign. Telling people that this project would involve destroying the orchard and that the building's shadows would extend all the way to the community garden (which is ABOVE the highest point of the proposed building)
 
Redfern said:
Working on it. ~ C
Click to expand...

Redfern said:
the orchard as an asset not a liability
Click to expand...

Redfern said:
Working on it. ~ C
Click to expand...
Make the orchard a prominent feature in your presentations and make it an asset instead of a liability. Clearly show seasonal shadow lines. If I recall, shadows would only be cast on the orchard by the building in the winter. Fun fact ... that is a GOOD thing. Winter sunlight can often cause damage to the young bark of trees on very cold days. It can cause the bark to split and possibly kill the tree.
 
Application has been filed.
1732044876226.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top