A reader sent me an article from the Sunday Oregonian (B-8) titled, "Do Portland planners have tower envy?" This is an insightful look at how high density in the form of high rise apartment or condo towers are not all that the planners and developers promised. The authors say "the fad for high-rise 'starchitecture,' embraced by cities such as Dubai, Shanghai and Houston, has left those and other cities with unhappy results," but Portland intends to do things differently.
The claims that high-rises are more sustainable and offer greater urban density do not match the research. The lack of human scale, the residents' lack of social interaction, the poor conditions for families with children, all add up to reduced livability. The buildings "demonstrate that tall buildings are a problematic typology and hardly a utopian vision of the future. So why do some Portland planners and developers seem so determined to impose their vision on the city?"
The comparison between high-rises in Portland and mid-rises in Lake Oswego are relative to scale. Big buildings in the big city, smaller buildings in a small town, but the same concerns. Once built, the buildings will stand as a reminder of a "horrible mistake" in an attempt to be "trendy and modern".
Is this what citizens want?
The comparison of "mid rises" in L.O. to high rises in Portland may not be valid.
ReplyDeleteWhat is important though is that L.O. Comp Plan and code allow for a 60 foot height limit. That is how larger buildings get proposed - they are allowed and are legal. The Comp Plan under development now not only allows this same height limit as I understand it but would allow higher density in local neighborhoods. If you do not want density, now is the time to speak up and get it out of the Comp Plan (which guides zoning). Don't blame the developer who proposes it, blame your government that allows it!
Don't blame the developer who proposes it, blame your government that allows it!
ReplyDeleteI agree! The angry Evergreen Neighborhood members opposing the Wizer block development could have used that lesson along with some manners as they tore into their invited developer guest last night at the local neighborhood meeting. Some also accused the Chairman of conflict of interest for meeting with the developer. ??? Apparently they had no knowledge of the past meetings held with developers that resulted in a large scale reduction of the Lady of the Lake school, redesign of the proposed 12 unit condos on 6th between Evergreen and 1st and a McMansion redesign on Ellis.
As mentioned in this blog we need to fight the comp plan and try to get council support to keep our downtown from becoming a Vancouver or Huntington Beach. It seems like it's a done deal since no one on the council has opposed the scale or density so far but we need to let them how we feel one way or another. This project will be their legacy.
Thanks for a chance to vent! :)
Anon - great point and one I hope to come back to often - the developers are following our city code, so it is the code that must be changed. And before that, the Comp Plan. The Comp Plan is nothing but land mines waiting to blow on us. Coupled with the Code Streamlining project that seeks to eliminate barriers to mixed use development, we stand to lose a lot. We have precious little time to speak up on the Comp Plan as I have noted in earlier posts. One thing you can spread to friends is to write the city council spelling out which goals, policies and action items they would like to see eliminated or changed. The document is so big and confusing, I suggest getting a group to split it up and each take a section. If one tries to tackle the whole thing, it is too daunting and they will quit.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your feedback - let' do our best and cross our fingers. And prepare to get involved when the codes are written.
Gerald - I should have added your name to my comments also. It starts with the Como Plan and then the codes. Lobby the council - they are our voice. Thanks for your comments,
ReplyDelete