Portland, ME - New Construction Continued

Yeah, that would work better in my opinion, Todd, but as you said, the Old Port kind of serves that already. The Maine Mall really sucked a lot of retail potential out of Portland that used to be located right downtown. Since then, Portland has had to redefine itself. It has. now that it has, if it tries to reclaim a retail presence as well (nationally speaking) then it would leave a large portion of South Portland in failure, with little opportunity for anything else. I say treat the Mall as an expanded portion of Portland and leave it be. Let that be our retail base, because even if bringing more national chains to portland would improve the downtown it would damage the region. Regions are important too. Portland should focus on housing and cultural hotspots, with some national chains thrown in for the convenience of residents, but I don't think it should become a regional hub for national chains again. That function, as I said, moved to the Mall long ago. Portland needs more arts, it needs more office workers and professionals, it needs more of an emphasis on education and civic improvements, and it needs more emphasis on overall design. The city is second to none in northern new england for scenic location and it fails to capitalize on this to the best of its ability. We need more efficient transit, more jobs, more houses, more unique and interesting shops to keep tourist dollars and our national reputation bubbling. Community "branding" is important, and Portland has achieved this well I think.
 
I agree Patrick....national chains leave us without originality. I believe that new development should be geared towards housing, and retail needs to be local. The buy local brand could be capitalized on.
Portland does need more transit....a light rail would be awesome...I believe the only transit in the works is a maine commuter rail, not something central to the city of Portland...but a light rail or something of that kind, which serves the greater Portland area would be a great assett,(and wishful thinking im sure) this would bring way more business to local establishments....
housing for sure...that is why such developments like supermarkets, are great, but would be better if they more mixed use...with housing built up, and retail on the bottom....but in thsi economy...i guess you cant get everything...lol
 
All very insightful, Todd. The buy local thing can get carried away because the whole point is that we should be keeping dollars in the pockets of Mainers and not sending 80 cents of every dollar out of state to corporate headquarters in another part of the country...but people have got to be kidding themselves if they think the whole dollar stays here either way. Business owners of local retail shop out at the mall, too, so all it really does is postpone the dollar leaving. What we really need to do to keep money in Maine is attract more business. That way, even if dollars are spent at national chains and most of the money flows out of state, it will be more likely to return in the form of purchased services from the professional sector. Until this happens your guess is as good as mine as to how much money really stays in Portland. Not to mention, you don't have to live IN portland to own a business there, so for all we know the money could be going to another town. That said, however, your point about local retail is a good one because it makes the market less susceptible to market shocks at the national level.

I think I disagree with you, though, on your point about mixed use development in a down economy. I say "think" because I am by no means an expert, but having studied economics a bit, I would personally tend to think that in a down economy it is better to (a) maximize the development potential of each parcel (because land prices, although not more expensive, are nonetheless less affordable) and (b) hedge your bets aka don't put all of your eggs in one basket or tie your economic success to the fate of one industry or economic sector. I don't know why more projects like this don't take shape, but I can only assume it is because of the city codes which dictate the form and function of developments. Professionally, this is something I am immensely interested in changing, toward a more urbanist model, and for anyone else interested, a good book to consider is "A legal guide to urban and sustainable development" for planners and developers.
 
Are u planning on working for the planning department...because you would be a great assett for the city...
 
Also, Todd, another thing you said--regional/local light rail or other mass transit--is right on the money, too. However, to allow this, we need density. Density can be achieved even without the tons of people living in places like greater Boston and NYC, see European villages for example, but it is in many cases illegal to build at the levels necessary for mass transit. If Portland was destroyed in another fire or just flattened by wind or something, it would probably be impossible to rebuild it to what it currently is. Zoning wouldn't allow it. The same is true for just about any city. This needs to be changed as a mechanism for directly impacting the urban environment of Portland (or anywhere), because all the fantastic designs in the world mean nothing in a legal and regulatory context in which they cannot take shape. I am ranting now.
 
Banning chains was the dumbest thing, the biggest waste of time the council ever did. Only thing it stopped was The Keg Steakhouse from opening up on Fore St and that was actually a pretty big loss, they would have hired a lot of people.

What I hate most about here is how it's a "liberal" city but it's only liberal in ways it wants to be. There are dudes in thongs licking whip cream off each other at Styxx a couple doors down but we can't have Hooters cause it's disrespectful to women and they are going to get raped by horny men outside when they leave. If you think I'm joking, I guess you didn't watch the council meeting during that time. Hooters are in every metro area in the country and they wear far more clothing than the girls at the Stadium when they had the little ref outfits.

We need a few chains intown. Love of god, you can't go buy a regular t-shirt or pair of jeans anywhere. How can you encourage people to live and shop downtown when they are forced to go to the mall to get certain things? I don't need a 180 dollar pair of jeans and a ceramic lobster lamp for 300 bucks. At least put a Gap intown like they have in Portsmouth. Give people a reason to shop intown who never would and maybe they'll see something in a local store after and buy it. So so so so so so stupid trying to force businesses from coming here.
 
I agree, there should be a few chains in town, for necessities, but I don't think Portland should become a regional hub of national retailers like South Portland is and like it used to be because of the economic vulnerability this creates. A GAP on Congress street would be nice.
 
grittys457 said:
We need a few chains intown. Love of god, you can't go buy a regular t-shirt or pair of jeans anywhere. How can you encourage people to live and shop downtown when they are forced to go to the mall to get certain things? I don't need a 180 dollar pair of jeans and a ceramic lobster lamp for 300 bucks. At least put a Gap intown like they have in Portsmouth. Give people a reason to shop intown who never would and maybe they'll see something in a local store after and buy it. So so so so so so stupid trying to force businesses from coming here.
Click to expand...


Haha, I've said pretty much that same statement before about needing jeans. I do shop at Material Objects and Find a lot but in order to get clothing that is new and is less than $180 I do need to trek out to the mall. Also, I put in bold your quote about how having chains downtown can boost local business too, that's a great point that I haven't heard before. I see the basic reasoning behind not allowing 'chains' in Portland, but we already have McDonalds, Burger King, RiteAid, Walgreens, Whole Foods, Trader Joe's, Starbucks, Dunkin Donuts, Ri-Ra's, etc, etc. Clearly it is a selective process. Does anyone know exactly where the codes pertaining to chains are in the city code? I was digging around chapter 14 but haven't found it yet (it opens in a PDF where I can't search the text, grr).
 
I don't think there is a ban on formula restaurants or chains at the moment. They tried it, there was a huge protest, and then they tabled the idea and reconsidered it. I believe they lifted the ban. I could be wrong. The reason there aren't certain stores intown now is because I think most stores kind of realize an unspoken rule that says they won't be allowed to operate in town. I don't know. A Gap, etc., this would be nice. Burlington VT has stores downtown at an intown mall, including Old Navy and a Gap etc. and people still like the town and still shop out at the suburban mall.
 
Todd said:
Are u planning on working for the planning department...because you would be a great assett for the city...
Click to expand...

I just noticed this question. I would love to be a Portland planner or elected official of the City. One step at a time though. When it is the right time I will pursue it.
 
edit - here it is Corey. you can search it, too. Just type "formula"
 
BAYSIDE VILLAGE IN DEFAULT, RISK OF FORECLOSURE LOOMS
portland-press-herald_3074836.jpg


and, in better news,
"FEMA backs off Portland Harbor high-risk zoning"

However, the end of the Maine State Pier will be included in the high risk classification, and the implications for redevelopment on that site of this are as of yet unclear.
 
^The Concept of Bayside was always a good one. Still, it was a disaster from day one. The units were FAR too expensive for A) What you get and B) The target demographic. Why would I pay $500-600 for a small bedroom in a larger unit with complete strangers when I could get a larger bedroom in a real 2 bedroom apartment just as close to campus for about $300-400. You can rent a whole 1 Bedroom on Park Ave. for $600-700!. Bayside Student Housing makes very little financial sense.

Not to mention, for a "new" building it's a mess. One friend I had who did live there (left before the end of his contract) showed me around the place. It was a dump. That's likely just as much (if not more) the fault of the tenants, but enforcing proper care could have gone a long way. The problem is that if they terminated the contract of messy tenants, no one would be available to take the place and Bayside loses the money. I don't know the numbers but I'm quite sure they never filled the place. I still get emails for "discounted" rates every month or so.

Off-campus student housing is a great idea that's been successful in many other areas, but Bayside was a flop from the start. I don't know how feasible it would have been, but cutting the rents to the $300-400 range probably would have helped significantly.
 
You are right. In retrospect, the idea isn't great. However, the project started construction in '07, which means it was probably conceived in the '05-'06 era, which was, here as well as nationally, the height of the real estate bubble. Projects that seem foolish today made perfect sense then. This was before the collapse, the global credit crunch, and the ensuing recession. Projects couldn't be built fast enough to meet demand. Bayside in particular was booming with proposals as I'm sure we all remember. Perhaps if some more activity in this neighborhood had gotten off the ground, the place would have become more high profile and desirable. But, instead, in its first few years the place remained largely industrial. Wrong timing. The developer's bet that the neighborhood would take off proved wrong. Partially his fault, partially the economy's fault, and partially the result of some very indecisive city council members. That said, however, today...the place seems like a complete blunder. Who would want to live there and commute to USM (which isn't even in the neighborhood) or to the Art School or SMCC, which also aren't in the vicinity. At that point, the structure becomes about as desirable as ANY other apartment building, or indeed house, in the city or surrounding area. The space can be re-used, but it will entail substantial demo of the inside. I don't think it will be good for offices, though, because it is unlikely to attract a major tenant in a building that on its face looks residential, and especially in THIS economy and market environment. Also, they bill the place as easily accessible from the highway, but the highway doesn't even have an on ramp for several blocks. Its just as convenient as the courthouse is, if not LESS.
 
This new entrance is coming together. It would be pretty cool to have those accent lights all around the building.

portlandmainesummer2010.jpg


Still nothing down on this end of town.

portlandmainesummer2010.jpg


Deering Street

portlandmainesummer2010.jpg
 
Last edited:
Thanks for posting, Corey. We can only look at these as opportunities for the future.

In more exciting news about town, here are some renderings of Oak Street efficiency units in the Arts District. Other efficiency units in Portland include Unity Village and Logan Place, amongst others.

27951_622073532560_6903714_36880667_6115595_n.jpg

27951_622073562500_6903714_36880668_7199902_n.jpg

27951_622073567490_6903714_36880669_4751266_n.jpg

27951_622073577470_6903714_36880670_6762647_n.jpg

27951_622073582460_6903714_36880671_7471913_n.jpg

and then a new one of the Pierce Atwood plans
27951_622073587450_6903714_36880672_5059563_n.jpg
 
^ I give both of these projects my seal of approval.

Hey Patrick, the city website was recently updated with several board & committee vacancies. I recall you recently joined the Parks commission. It says there are two openings, do you know if there are currently 2 empty seats or if a couple of people are just stepping down? I was looking at the past meeting minutes and I may have an interest in it someday in the future.
 
Hey Corey --

I am not sure. The Parks Commission is sort of an odd thing in that I have not really yet been able to participate in much of the discussion. The first meeting I attended I almost fell asleep at because it was a bunch of related organizations talking. The second meeting was the Green Space gathering at which I was put on the spot in front of a few dozen people to state my name and interests in the park system (when in fact not even all of the commission members know who I am) and the third meeting I missed because I was studying for finals. The next meeting is tomorrow. I encourage you to apply. You may also have interest in the CDBG advisory committee. That's the Community Development Block Grant program committee, in case you didn't already know, and much of the funding is allocated on a discretionary basis to Portland applicants to improve the community. It largely replaced urban renewal. Portland is an entitlement community so it gets about 2 million to distribute every year, no matter what.

Also, the Board of zoning appeals might be of interest to some people on here. It is a quasi judicial position.

Speaking of zoning, if anyone would be interested in working toward reformatting the City code to be less of a use based map and more of a form based regulation, please let me know as I am currently working with a few others to organize this. If you don't know about form based codes, just google them. They would prevent hideous structures with large parking lots downtown if done right.
 
from a news story on the new owners of the PPH
One of MaineToday Media?s first strategies was to sell The Portland Press Herald?s historic, downtown office building and former printing plant. The sale of 390 and 385 Congress St. allowed MaineToday Media to pay down loans used to buy the assets of The Seattle Times and reduce bank debt. The new owner, John Cacoulidis, plans to begin gutting the interior of the newspaper building this summer for new office, and possibly, residential space.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top