SAC#2 summary final...David Lorati, School Specialty Supply Skip Newberry, Technology Assoc. of...

SE Quadrant Plan Stakeholder Advisory Committee Meeting #3

January 16, 2014 5:30 – 8:00 P.M.

Multnomah County Offices 501 SE Hawthorne, Room 315

Agenda 5:00 – 5:30 Pre-meeting dinner served

5:30 – 5:40 Welcome and Announcements

Introductions Overview of Agenda ACTION: Approval of Meeting Summary

Debbie Kitchin Eryn Kehe

5:40 – 5:50 Urban Land Institute Rose Fellowship Update Geraldene Moyle

5:50 – 6:15 Industrial Land Background Presentation and Clarifying Questions (25 min)

Policy Context: Industrial Sanctuary and current and proposed policy

Role of Central Eastside Forecast Land Demand and Capacity

Stephanie Beckman

Tyler Bump

6:15 – 6:50 Big Picture Questions: Small Group Discussion (35 min)

Discussion (25 min) and Report out (10 min)

Are there particular uses that are desirable and should be encouraged to locate in the district?

- State why each use should be encouraged. - If you disagree, state why it is not desirable here. - Discuss possible solutions to address concerns.

Eryn KeheAll

6:50 – 7:00 Break

7:00 - 7:50 Subareas: Small Group Discussion (50 min) Introduction to Subareas (5 min)

Discussion (35 min) and Report out (10 min)

Talk about each of the four subareas:

- List desired characteristics of each subarea.

- List uses to allow / encourage and why.

- Discuss concerns. Are there ways to address these?

Troy DossEryn Kehe

All

7:50 – 7:55 Public Comment Eryn Kehe

7:55 – 8:00 Closing Remarks and Meeting Evaluations

Eryn Kehe

8:00 Adjourn

Upcoming meetings:

SAC Meeting #4: Thurs, Feburary 6, 2014, 5:30 – 8:00 p.m. (dinner served at 5:00 p.m.)

SAC Meeting #5: Thurs, March 6, 2014, 5:30 – 8 p.m. (dinner served at 5:00 p.m.) Location to be determined.

Southeast Quadrant Plan: Stakeholder Advisory Committee and Public Involvement Schedule

Project Phase Meeting or Event Date Meeting or Event Topics

SAC Meeting 1 Nov 20 2013 SAC Orientation and Project Introduction Phase 1 INITIATE PUBLIC PROCESS SAC Meeting 2 Dec 12 2013

Existing Conditions & Identification of key Issues (Economic, Land use, Transportation)

SAC Meeting 3 Jan 16 2014 Land Use (Industrial Lands, Mix of Uses, Subareas)

Online Survey Jan/Feb 2014

Public input on district issues & opportunities

SAC Meeting 4 Feb 6 2014 Land Use (continued); Transportation

SAC Meeting 5 Mar 6 2014 River, Open Space, Green Systems

SAC Building Tours Mar / April 2014

Tour different building types to learn how they are used by industrial and employment uses

Phase 2 ISSUE IDENTIFICATION AND ANALYSIS

SAC Meeting 6 April 3 2014 Continued issue discussion Set scenarios to explore in Phase 3

Charrette/Workshop April 2014 Implementation Scenarios and Strategies

SAC Meeting 7 May 2014 Review Outcomes from Charrette

SAC Meeting 8 June 2014 Present Preliminary Analysis to SAC

Open House July 2014 Present Analysis to Public

Phase 3 SCENARIOS DEVELOPMENT

SAC Meeting 9 July 2014 Review Alternatives

SAC Meeting 10 September 2014

Draft Policies and Implementation Strategies

Open House September 2014

Present Draft Policies and Implementation Strategies

SAC Meeting 11 October 2014

Present Refined Plan

Phase 4 PLAN DEVELOPMENT

SAC Meeting 12 November 2014

Present Further Refined Plan

Public Draft Plan December 2014

Public SAC Recommended Plan

Design and Landmarks Commissions

January 2015

Brief each commission regarding direction of SE Quadrant Plan

PSC February 2015

PSC Public Hearing

Phase 5 PUBLIC REVIEW & PLAN ADOPTION

City Council March 2015 Council Public Hearings/Adopt Plan

Updated 1/9/14

SE Quadrant Plan – Meeting Summary Stakeholder Advisory Committee Meeting #2 December 12, 2013 5:30 – 8:00 p.m. Multnomah County Offices 501 SE Hawthorne, Room 315

SAC Members in attendance Bruce Burns, Burns Brothers Paul Carlson, OMSI Farhad Ghafarzade, Green Drop Garage Bob Hanks, PCC Climb Center Don Hanson, Planning and Sustainability Commission Deek Heykamp, Next Adventure Lillian Karabaic, Pedestrian Advisory Committee Debbie Kitchin, Central Eastside Industrial Council Lori Livingston, Transfer Online David Lorati, School Specialty Supply Skip Newberry, Technology Assoc. of Oregon Jonathan Malsin, Beam Development Rick Michaelson, Bosco‐Milligan Foundation Bo Nevue (alternate), Nevue Ngan Associates Susan Pearce, Hosford‐Abernethy Neigh. Dev. Valeria Ramirez, Portland Opera Steve Russell, Kerns Neighborhood Association Shawn Small, Ruckus Composites Romeo Sosa, VOZ Workers Rights Peter Stark, Central Eastside Industrial Council Michael Tevis, Intrinsic Ventures Travis Williams, Willamette Riverkeeper Daniel Yates, Portland Spirit SAC Members not in attendance Leah Greenwood, REACH Community Development Bill Hart, Carleton Hart Architects Stacy Johnson, Brooklyn Action Corps Susan Lindsay, Buckman Neighborhood Assoc. Juliana Lukasik, @Large Films

David Nemarnik, Pacific Coast Fruit Carrie Strickland, Works Partnership Project/Staff members present Mayor Charlie Hales, Mayor’s Office Jackie Dingfelder, Mayor’s Office Susan Anderson, BPS Joe Zehnder, BPS Sallie Edmunds, BPS Troy Doss, BPS Stephanie Beckman, BPS Debbie Bischoff, BPS Tyler Bump, BPS Darwin Moosavi, BPS Art Pearce, PBOT Grant Morehead, PBOT Lisa Abuaf, PDC Geraldene Moyle, PDC Eryn Deeming Kehe, JLA Public Involvement Sam Beresky, JLA Public Involvement Members of the public Ryuta Sometaya Don MacGuyer Jeff McDonald Linda Nettekoven Eric Hesse Kevin Kearns Jim Howell

SE Quadrant Plan SAC Meeting #2 Summary

2

Welcome and Opening Remarks Co‐Chair Don Hanson welcomed the committee and led introductions. Facilitator Eryn Deeming Kehe

reminded the group to raise their name tents if they would like to speak and to simply wave if they are

having trouble hearing. She reminded the group that it is a large committee and requested that

members do their best to speak loud and clear enough for everyone to hear. Eryn mentioned that some

members of the group had requested email addresses of committee members. She distributed a list

giving Planning staff permission to share email addresses.

Meeting Summary Approval Meeting #1 Summary was approved with all green votes and one abstention.

Committee Charter Approval Eryn reminded the group that two minor changes to the Committee Charter were made (included in the

meeting packet). The meeting charter was approved unanimously. The Charter begins on page 10 of the

meeting packet, download the meeting packet here:

http://www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/article/472756

Announcements Central Reach Plan – Debbie Bischoff from the Bureau of Planning and Sustainability gave the group a

brief update about the Willamette River Central Reach Working Group. She said the process recently

hosted a two‐day workshop that over 70 people attended, including representatives from area

businesses, river organizations, residents, and some members of the Stakeholder Advisory Committee.

She thanked those who participated. She mentioned that there was an integrated discussion about the

Willamette River and the team received a lot of great ideas. There is a lot of untapped potential for the

Central Reach area and there are many organizations and businesses that want to be part of the change.

She said that the Willamette River currently has an identity problem. At the workshop, attendees

discussed ways to activate the riverfront, bringing a sense of place. There was a discussion of clustering

activities near Tom McCall Waterfront Park, OMSI, and near the Oregon Convention Center/Rose

Quarter areas.

Debbie will share the summary report from the workshop with this committee when it is complete. She

will also return to the committee with more information for their March meeting.

Welcome from Mayor Hales – Mayor Hales thanked the committee for their work on the process and

volunteer commitment. He said that the Central Eastside Industrial District is a fascinating place that is

at a pivotal juncture in history. The combination of employment growth, transportation investments,

development, and the potential to collaborate with the OHSU Life Science Center all add up to a lot of

potential for the Central Eastside. This process can take advantage of that energy. He also let the group

know that Portland was selected as a Daniel Rose Planning Challenge city through the Urban Land

Institute. Elite planners from around the U.S. will descend on Portland for three days in February to

advise and challenge us by looking at the possibilities in the Central Eastside. He also mentioned that the


3

SE Quadrant is a critical plan to update for several reasons. He said that about 3/4ths of all job growth in

the state of Oregon happened in Portland and that growth needs to be planned for.

Discussion with Committee Members:

• Will the Urban Land Institute project be integrated into this process? Yes, a team of 6 people will

meet here for three days. There is discussion of creating a focus group with some of the

Stakeholder Advisory Committee to better integrate the team with the process. At the end of

the Urban Land Institute project, an open house will be held to showcase big ideas from the

group. In addition they will give Portland “assignments” to pursue. Mayor Hales mentioned that

previous participating cities (Memphis, Louisville) saw great success through the project.

• Portland has a reputation for having great land‐use planning but has virtually no river‐use

planning. It was suggested that a member of the Urban Land Institute team have knowledge of

successful river‐use planning. It was mentioned that river‐use code needs to be addressed and

that we need to plan for development, access, and recreational opportunities. It was also

mentioned that it is virtually impossible to have a marine terminal in the central reach of the

Willamette River.

• Is the Urban Land Institute work being completed in conjunction with the efforts in the export

sector being completed with the Brookings Institute? Yes. The work will include planning staff,

transportation staff, and PDC staff and will work in conjunction with the comprehensive plan

and our economic strategy.

Meeting Introduction

Troy Doss reviewed the next parts of agenda and gave a brief overview of what would be presented. He

mentioned that the project team will look at the Central Eastside differently than other districts. The

district already has strong direction so it will be a matter of fine‐tuning the plan rather than an overhaul.

The team will analyze historic issues, the role of housing, zoning, and urban design over the course of

the project. The agenda for the evening includes presentations and discussion on key topics for this

process: Economic Development, Land Use & Zoning, and Transportation.

Existing Conditions & Issues: Economic Development, Land Use & Zoning

Tyler Bump and Troy Doss gave a presentation that covered Economic Development, Land Use & Zoning.

Their presentation can be found on pages 70‐101 of the meeting packet.

Discussion with the Committee:

• Where applicable, how does a development receive floor area and height bonuses? There are

about nine features for which bonuses are given. Most are currently not used. Many reflect old

values. • Is the river actually accessible south of OMSI? Yes, but there is about 20 feet of riprap. Ross

Island Sand and Gravel has about 300 feet of riverfront property south of the Portland Spirit.


4

• The City will analyze different types of uses, different densities, etc. The economic advantages of

this district should be analyzed, in a big picture, as opposed to only analyzing land use for this

district. • The OMSI station area is meant to be an employment transit‐oriented development area, it

represents an opportunity to explore TOD without residential. There will be light rail, bus,

streetcar, heavy rail, and possibly river transit in the area. OMSI has also expressed a need to

activate the area for safety, especially at night. A vibrant, 24/7 environment is needed; housing

has a place in the process and can help create a permanent presence in the area. There is also a

need for river access. A few members expressed a need for a balanced approach. • Some reservations were expressed about any large‐format housing near OMSI as it will

marginalize some of the industrial district. More retail and housing will put pressure on the

industrial area. Development needs to be complimentary not transformational. • There is a desire for people to live near the water, from an economic standpoint if we create

opportunities for engagement with the waterfront, development will happen. • Does the industrial sanctuary designation still make sense? If light industry jobs are replaced,

will they be replaced with higher paying jobs? • ¼ mile radius from light rail stops should allow housing. We know that people will not walk long

distances to transit. In order to utilize the investment in public transit, housing should be

allowed close to stops. Very little of the industrial land will be lost if housing is allowed within ¼

mile of stations. • Parking issues should be addressed but in a way that attracts complimentary uses. Parking lots

are usually only full for part of the day, complimentary uses should fill available parking 24 hours

a day. • What is an industrial office? Who are the industrial users in the area? Emerging trends in

industry? What we are dealing with needs to be better defined. • The Employment Opportunity Subarea overlay was an experimental approach – what has been

the evaluation of that? • The Central Eastside has an inter‐dependent relationship with the rest of the city because of its

proximity. The proximity fosters engineering/development talent. • In Portland, there is no shortage of acres for housing or office but there is a shortage of

industrial lands. • The greatest opportunity for change is in the Southern Triangle but the large blocks are also

important for industrial uses. Balance the needs and look forward when making decisions. • Efforts should be made to create more blue‐collar jobs. Nearby residents should be taken care

of before trying to attract more populations with master’s degrees. PCC would like to expand

their footprint in the district and offer needed workforce training. • PCC also sees the benefit of some housing in the area. • Complimentary uses for industrial areas also include nightclubs and other venues. These uses

bring activity in the evening and, like industrial, aren’t compatible with housing.


5

• It might be useful to separate out different areas of the district. It could prove useful to talk

about topics in relation to the industrial sanctuary area of the district (as opposed to discussing

the district as a whole). • Where are employees coming from? Are they close by or far away? Would they be impacted if

some of the industry moved? • The area is a jewel, it is unique to Portland but the committee needs to think long‐term. What

industrial areas need to be kept? What areas should allow housing? • Tech companies are investing in places where there is a mix of jobs. Spaces that allow for

commercial, manufacturing, and other uses together are a great for tech companies because of

the potential relationships.

Transportation

Grant Morehead gave a presentation that covered Transportation in the Central Eastside. His

presentation can be found on pages 102‐116 of the meeting packet.

Discussion:

• There is a need to address the Central City Parking Plan. Currently there are surface parking lots

that will be developed as residential without parking. Many new residents will park on the

street. The surface parking lots will be lost and there will be an increase in demand for on‐street

parking taking away parking from employees and customers. • Has the City explored utilizing couplets to improve traffic flow in the central eastside? Yes,

couplets can improve traffic flow but it will have to be looked at district‐wide. There is a

potential to have some targeted couplets. • Perhaps Transportation System Development Charges could be used for structured parking.

o What SDCs can be spent on is dictated by the state. Not sure they could be spent on

structured parking, but other tools can be explored. • Car elevators are needed as a temporary fix. • There will be good pedestrian access around the new MAX stops but then the pedestrian

network will stop beyond that. In addition, many connectivity issues in the district today are due

to temporary construction projects. • Pedestrian accessibility needs to be improved district‐wide, particularly east‐west access. • Why is Stark backed up? Sometimes it is not easy to get out of the district. • Employees can be encouraged to bike with showers and secure bike parking, but shared bike

facilities are missing in the district. o The City prioritizes bike corrals on bike boulevards not in a district.

• There are not many short‐term parking spots in the district and all of the long‐term parking is

full. • There are many parking poachers that park and jump on transit to downtown. The parking

poachers are beginning to move east into the residential neighborhoods.


6

Public Comment

Jim Howell mentioned that Union Pacific needs to be represented on the Stakeholder Advisory

Committee. So far, the group has only referred to the railroad as a barrier. Jim would like to present an

idea for a bike/rail expressway at the next meeting.

Closing remarks and meeting evaluations Meeting evaluations were passed out and committee members were encouraged to fill them out before

leaving.

This committee’s next meeting is January 16, from 5:30‐8:00, Multnomah County Offices, 501 SE

Hawthorne, Room 315. Dinner will be available at 5:00 p.m. After the January meeting, SAC meetings

will take place on the first Thursday of the month.

The Central Eastside Transportation and Parking Advisory Committee meetings are open to the public

and are held on the 4th Wednesday of the month from 4:00‐5:00 p.m. at the RiverEast Commerce

Center.

Meeting was adjourned.


7

Meeting evaluation results summary

How appropriate was the pace of the meeting?

Much too slow (‐2) Slow (‐1) Just right (0) Fast (1) Much too fast (2)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○

AVERAGE SCORE: 0 (Just Right)

How would you rate the quality of presentations?

Very Poor (‐2) Poor (‐1) Average (0) Good (1) Excellent (2)

○ ○ ○ ○ X ○

AVERAGE SCORE: 1.32 (Good)

How useful was the content of discussion?

Very Poor (‐2) Poor (‐1) Average (0) Good (1) Excellent (2)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○

AVERAGE SCORE: 1.18 (Good)

What aspects(s) of the meeting were most useful?

Most common responses included: group discussion, presentations

What aspect(s) of the meeting were least useful?

Most common responses included: repetitive comments/same people talking

X

X

SE Quadrant Plan

Bulletin #1: Background on Industrial Sanctuary Policy

Contents: 1. Introduction

2. What is the Industrial Sanctuary Policy?

3. Current Central Eastside Policy

4. How the Industrial Sanctuary Policy is Implemented

5. New Ideas about the Industrial Sanctuary Policy

6. Issues to Consider for a New Central Eastside Policy Direction

A. Job Growth

B. Business Mix

C. Compatibility with Existing Industrial Businesses

D. Existing Capacity for Mixed-Use Development

7. Attachments:

A. Central Eastside Zoning Map

B. Central Eastside Zoning Summary (Breakdown by land area; Allowed uses)

C. Industrial and Office Use Category Descriptions (Portland Zoning Code)

1. Introduction The following bulletin provides background on the existing and proposed policies, including the city-wide industrial sanctuary policy and Central City policy specific to the Central Eastside, how they have been implemented, and updates to policy proposed by the Central City 2035 Concept Plan and Comprehensive Plan Update. The bulletin then presents some factors for the SE Quadrant Stakeholder Advisory Committee members to consider while forming new policy for the Central Eastside. Lastly, attachments are included to provide zoning information relevant to the discussion.

2. What is the Industrial Sanctuary Policy? In 1980, the City of Portland adopted a new Comprehensive Plan for the city. This plan provided guidance for land use, transportation, public infrastructure and environmental stewardship, among other issues. One of the more unique moves of the plan was to adopt a policy establishing industrial sanctuaries, which states:

Comprehensive Plan Policy 2.14, Industrial Sanctuaries. Provide industrial sanctuaries. Encourage the growth of industrial activities in the city by preserving industrial land primarily for manufacturing purposes.

Although the policy specifically calls out the manufacturing sector, the impact of the industrial sanctuary policy (ISP) extended beyond this sector and industrial areas in general. This is because the protections extend to other industrial sectors allowed by right in industrially zoned areas and the basis for the provisions was to protect not only these uses within industrial areas, but also to encourage non-industrial uses to locate in commercial

January 9, 2014 1

SE Quadrant Plan Bulletin #1: Background on Industrial Sanctuary Policy

districts where public investment had or was being spent to support their growth, especially in the Central City Plan District.

The ISP was based on the following nine assumptions:

1. The City of Portland is interested in encouraging industrial development to achieve a broad range of employment opportunities, a stable tax base, and efficient provision of public facilities and services.

2. Portland competes with outlying suburbs and other regions for industrial development.

3. The City of Portland is interested in protecting its substantial investments in public facilities and services. These investments include commercial district improvements.

4. The City of Portland regulates land uses through its acknowledged Comprehensive Plan and related implementation tools, including the Zoning Code.

5. Speculative pressure for commercial development in established and developing industrial areas can cause problems for industrial retention, relocation, and attraction through escalating land values, extra demands on public facilities, and land-use conflicts.

6. The City’s historic and important role in fostering incubator industries is frustrated by this commercial encroachment.

7. Commercial development should be encouraged to locate in established commercial districts and strips.

8. New commercial activities should only be allowed to locate in an industrial area if those activities need to be there and do not cause problems for that area’s industrial firms.

9. The City has a finite amount of industrial land. Loss of industrial land means loss of an irreplaceable resource for economic growth.

3. Current Central Eastside Policy (1988 Central City Plan) The goal of preserving industrial activity in the Central Eastside was reinforced in the 1988 Central City Plan.

Central City Plan Policy 20: Preserve the Central Eastside as an industrial sanctuary while improving freeway access and expanding the area devoted to the Eastbank Esplanade. Further: A. Encourage the formation of incubator industries in the district. B. Reinforce the district’s role as a distribution center. C. Allow mixed use developments, which include housing, in areas committed to nonindustrial development. D. Preserve buildings which are of historic and/or architectural significance. E. Develop Union and Grand Avenues as the principal north-south connection and commercial spine in the district for transit and pedestrians. F. Continue implementation of the Central Eastside Economic Development Policy

These policy statements call for the preservation of the industrial activity in the Central Eastside, while recognizing the unique role and characteristics of the district. For example, the district’s older, multi-story industrial buildings lend themselves well to small industrial incubator businesses. In addition, its central location works well for specialized distribution

January 9, 2014 2


functions. This policy also recognizes that parts of the district are committed to non-industrial uses, including housing. 4. How the Industrial Sanctuary Policy is Implemented? The city implements the industrial sanctuary policy by segregating industrial uses from nonindustrial uses, primarily through the Zoning Map and regulations that limit the number and scale of nonindustrial land uses allowed within industrial districts. The ISP is implemented by three industrial zones including two General Industrial zones (IG1 and IG2) and the Heavy Industrial zone (IH). These zones are described by the Zoning Code as follows:

General Industrial: The zones provide areas where most industrial uses may locate, while other uses are restricted to prevent potential conflicts and to preserve land for industry. The development standards for each zone are intended to allow new development which is similar in character to existing development. The intent is to provide viable and attractive industrial areas.

Heavy Industrial: The zone provides areas where all kinds of industries may locate including those not desirable in other zones due to their objectionable impacts or appearance. The development standards are the minimum necessary to assure safe, functional, efficient, and environmentally sound development.

In the Central Eastside the policy is implemented today through the application of the IG1 zone over approximately 248 acres of land and IH zone over 19 acres of land.

However, it should be noted that approximately 73 acres of the IG1 zoned land has been designated for additional flexibility, as follows:

14 acres have a Comprehensive Plan designation of EG (General Employment) which is an industrial focused zone that allows some office and retail uses by right.

11 acres has a Comprehensive Plan designation of EX (Central Employment) that allows a broad mix of uses including housing, office, retail and industrial by right.

48 acres were placed within the Employment Opportunity Subarea (EOS) in 2006. The EOS allows for slightly more office and retail by right than is typically allowed in the IG1 zone and also allows for 60,000 sq. ft. of the newer industrial office classification by right.

See Attachments A and B for a map of existing zoning and a breakdown of zoning and allowed uses in the Central Eastside.

5. New Ideas about the Industrial Sanctuary Policy The Central City 2035 Concept Plan and proposed update to Portland’s Comprehensive Plan both contain amendments to the ISP as it pertains to the city as a whole and specifically for Central City industrial areas (Central Eastside and Lower Albina Districts). The CC2035 Concept Plan adopted by resolution by the Portland City Council in October 2012 states:

Policy 5, Next Generation of Industrial/Employment Sanctuaries. Preserve and provide for the long-term success of Central City industrial districts, while supporting their evolution into places with a broader mix of businesses with higher employment densities.

Similarly, the proposed draft of the updated Comprehensive Plan contains new policy language addressing Central City industrial districts that states:

January 9, 2014 3


Policy 3.38 Central City industrial districts. Protect and strive for the long-term success of Central City industrial districts, while supporting their evolution into places with a broad mix of businesses with high employment densities.

The draft Comprehensive Plan also contains the following proposed policies intended to provide direction regarding industrial districts:

Policy 3.31 Transit in industrial districts: Maintain employment-focused land uses at transit station areas in industrial districts.

Policy 3.32 Industrial districts. Protect Portland’s industrial districts for industrial business retention, growth, and traded sector competitiveness as a West Coast trade and freight hub, a regional center of diverse manufacturing, and a widely accessible base of family-wage jobs.

Policy 3.33 Industrial sanctuaries. Maintain industrial sanctuaries primarily for manufacturing and distribution use.

Policy 3.41 Industrial land intensification. Promote public investments and business climate enhancements that encourage industrial reinvestment and increase land efficiency for industrial output.

These proposed policies continue the city’s approach of protecting industrial sanctuaries for industrial land uses, while recognizing that Central City industrial districts may play a different role than other industrial districts in the city. In particular, these policies highlight opportunities to support a broader mix of employment uses and higher employment densities in these close-in industrial areas. The SE Quadrant Plan will provide more specific direction on how this should apply in the Central Eastside. 6. Issues to Consider for a New Central Eastside Policy Direction

The SE Quadrant Plan will need to consider if the Central Eastside is evolving into a different kind of industrial/employment district. If so, the plan will need to establish an appropriate policy direction to address this shift, as well as the implementation tools needed to support the desired long-term direction for the Central Eastside. A number of factors will need to be considered as new policy is established, some of which are described below.

A. Job Growth

Over the last decade, the Central Eastside has experienced exceptional job growth. It is currently home to over 17,000 jobs and has outpaced other employment districts in terms of recent job growth.

The Industrial Sanctuary Policy has contributed to this success by limiting development pressure and thereby keeping land costs and rents down. This has provided a stable environment for industrial businesses to invest in their operations, as well as low-cost “incubator” space for small and start-up businesses.

The Employment Opportunity Subarea (EOS) provisions, adopted in 2006, have also contributed to the recent job growth. The EOS provides additional flexibility for “industrial office” and retail uses to locate in the western portion of the district. Between 2006 and 2011, 700 net new jobs were added in the EOS overlay and a 5% annual employment growth rate. This resulted in a 95% increase in the number of knowledge based and design jobs (i.e. creative services, software, etc) within the EOS area.

Forecasts indicate there is demand for an additional 9,000 jobs to locate within the Central Eastside from 2010 to 2035. However, under current policies and zoning tools there is not enough development capacity to accommodate this job growth. This makes it important to

January 9, 2014 4


preserve land for employment uses and find ways to encourage higher employment densities on land that is available.

B. Business Mix

For long-term success, it will be important to retain a healthy mix of businesses within the district that compliment and serve each other.

Discussions with businesses across all sectors indicate that the vitality of their own business is dependent upon their proximity to suppliers and other supportive businesses in the district. This symbiotic relationship between businesses has been noted as a significant advantage of being located in the district.

Current trends and forecasts suggest a long-term shift to a greater mix of employment uses in the Central Eastside. Due to the district’s smaller parcel and block sizes and constrained transportation system, the district has become less competitive for some large businesses in the manufacturing and warehouse and distribution sectors. However, the district is increasingly attractive to smaller businesses in these and other business sectors who need less space, affordable lease rates, and a centralized location.

The area has also seen significant demand from businesses seeking creative office space that are attracted to the urban industrial character of the district as well as the growing number and diversity of amenities located there. These businesses, which tend to be in high-tech or creative service industries such as architecture, engineering and graphic or industrial design, generally appear to be compatible with more traditional industrial businesses, however they may bring impacts such as increased parking demand and higher lease rates.

C. Compatibility with Existing Industrial Businesses

Industrial zones in the City of Portland prohibit or limit other uses to encourage industrial retention and growth and to avoid conflicts with other uses (residential, retail and office). When considering greater flexibility for a variety of land uses to locate within industrial areas, it is important to potential compatibility issues including:

External impacts of industrial businesses. Industrial uses can have impacts such as noise, odors, vibrations and freight traffic that make them undesirable neighbors for other uses. Where industrial and non-industrial uses operate in close proximity, the potential for complaints about these impacts and pressure to convert to non-industrial uses increases. This can be an issue for uses on adjacent sites, as well as for uses operating in the same building.

Cost increases and retention of existing businesses. Non-industrial uses are typically able and willing to pay higher rents than traditional industrial businesses. This could drive up costs in the district as a whole, making it difficult for industrial businesses to stay in the district. Recent trends indicate that cost increases are already occurring, with industrial office lease rates in the Central Eastside comparable to those in Class A office space in the Downtown commercial core.

Transportation conflicts. Greater employment densities and potential new housing and retail development would put pressure on the transportation system. Freight access and loading can be complicated by increased traffic congestion and more pedestrian and bicycle activity. In addition, new uses and development would put pressure on an already limited parking supply in the district.

January 9, 2014 5


January 9, 2014 6

D. Existing Capacity for Mixed Use Development

The Central Eastside currently has a number of mixed use corridors (MLK/Grand, Burnside, and Morrison) where a wide variety of uses are allowed including residential, retail and office. To date, there has been limited development within these areas, however they have significant development capacity and there are a number of new mixed use projects in the pipeline.

In addition, other areas of the Central City, such as South Waterfront and the Lloyd District, continue to have significant capacity for mixed use development and the City has made major public investments in these areas to encourage that type of development to occur.

Attachments:

A: Central Eastside Zoning Map

B: Central Eastside Zoning Summary (Breakdown by land area; Allowed uses)

C: Industrial and Office Use Category Descriptions (Portland Zoning Code)


January 9, 2014 7

Attachment A: Central Eastside Zoning Map


Attachment B: Central Eastside Zoning Summary The Central Eastside Subdistrict contains Industrial Zones (IG1 and IH), Employment Zones (EG1, EG2, EX) and a small amount of residential zoning. The tables below show the amount of land in each zoning category and summarize use allowances in the predominate zones.

Central Eastside Zoning – Breakdown by Land Area

Zone Central

Eastside Acres % of Central

Eastside Central City

Acres % of zone in Central City

General Employment 1 (EG1) 7.4 1.9% 9.3 79.8% General Employment 2 (EG2) 13.7 3.6% 13.7 100.2% Central Employment (EX) 85.1 22.2% 229.3 37.1% General Industrial 1 (IG1) 247.9 64.8% 335.9 73.8%

Employment Opportunity Subarea – (IG1)

48.4 19.5% of

current IG1 --- ---

Comp Plan Designation-(EG) 13.6

5.4% of current IG1

--- ---

Comp Plan Designation-(EX) 10.8

4.3% of current IG1

--- ---

Heavy Industrial (IH) 18.5 4.8% 41.6 44.5% Open Space (OS) 5.1 1.3% 66.2 7.7% Residential 1,000 (R1) 3.7 1.0% 11.0 33.6% Central Residential (RX) 1.1 0.3% 102.8 1.1% Total 382.5 100.00%

Summary of Allowed Uses in Central Eastside Industrial Zones Employment Zones Use Category IH IG1 IG1 in EOS EG1 & EG2 EX

Industrial Allowed, except waste-related is conditional use

Allowed, except rail yards and waste related

Industrial Office

60,000 SF allowed per site

Traditional Office


1:1 FAR allowed per site

Allowed

Retail

4 Office or Retail uses allowed per site, up to 3,000 SF per use

1 Office or Retail use allowed per site, up to 3,000 SF


60,000 SF or 1:1 FAR allowed per site

Allowed

Residential Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed

Conditional use

Allowed

Notes: 1) Most zones allow additional office or retail uses or square footage through a conditional use review, up to a defined limit depending on the zone. 2) There are higher allowances for office and retail uses in Historic Landmarks.

January 9, 2014 8


January 9, 2014 9

Attachment C: Industrial and Office Use Category Descriptions The Portland Zoning Code classifies land uses and activities into use categories based on common functional, product, or physical characteristics. The use designation determines where that particular use can be located, based on the uses allowed in the zone. Common land use categories are industrial, office, retail sales and service, and institutional. Characteristics taken into consideration when making a use determination include both the activities that take place and the potential impacts of the use. Factors considered include:

the type and amount of activity the type of customers how goods or services are sold or delivered certain site and use factors, such as building arrangement, hours of operation, and

number of vehicle trips Excerpts from the Portland Zoning Code are provided below for the primary industrial use categories relevant to the Central Eastside, including wholesale sales, warehouse and freight movement, manufacturing and production, and industrial service. Railroad yards and waste-related uses are also industrial uses, but have been omitted for brevity. The descriptions for traditional office and industrial office are also provided below.

Industrial Use Categories (Portland Zoning Code, 33.920.300 - .350)

Characteristics Examples

Wholesale Sales

Wholesale Sales firms are involved in the sale, lease, or rent of products primarily intended for industrial, institutional, or commercial businesses. The uses emphasize on-site sales or order taking and often include display areas. Businesses may or may not be open to the general public, but sales to the general public are limited as a result of the way in which the firm operates. Products may be picked up on site or delivered to the customer. Exception: Firms that engage primarily in sales to the general public are classified as Retail Sales And Service.

Sale or rental of machinery, equipment, heavy trucks, building materials, special trade tools, welding supplies, machine parts, electrical supplies, janitorial supplies, restaurant equipment, and store fixtures; mail order houses; and wholesalers of food, clothing, auto parts, building hardware, and office supplies.

Warehouse and Freight Movement

Warehouse And Freight Movement firms are involved in the storage, or movement of goods for themselves or other firms. Goods are generally delivered to other firms or the final consumer, except for some will-call pickups. There is little on-site sales activity with the customer present. Exception: Miniwarehouses are classified as Self-Service Storage uses.

Separate warehouses used by retail stores such as furniture and appliance stores; household moving and general freight storage; cold storage plants, including frozen food lockers; storage of weapons and ammunition; major wholesale distribution centers; truck, marine, or air freight terminals; bus barns and light rail barns; parcel services; major post offices; grain terminals; and the stockpiling of sand, gravel, or other aggregate materials.


Industrial Use Categories (Portland Zoning Code, 33.920.300 - .350)


Manufacturing and Production

Manufacturing And Production firms are involved in the manufacturing, processing, fabrication, packaging, or assembly of goods. Natural, man-made, raw, secondary, or partially completed materials may be used. Products may be finished or semi-finished and are generally made for the wholesale market, for transfer to other plants, or to order for firms or consumers. Goods are generally not displayed or sold on site, but if so, they are a subordinate part of sales. Relatively few customers come to the manufacturing site.

Exception: Manufacturing of goods to be sold primarily on-site and to the general public are classified as Retail Sales And Service.

Processing of food and related products; catering establishments; breweries, distilleries, and wineries; slaughter houses, and meat packing; feed lots and animal dipping; weaving or production of textiles or apparel; lumber mills, pulp and paper mills, and other wood products manufacturing; woodworking, including cabinet makers; production of chemical, rubber, leather, clay, bone, plastic, stone, or glass materials or products; movie production facilities; recording studios; ship and barge building; concrete batching and asphalt mixing; production or fabrication of metals or metal products including enameling and galvanizing; manufacture or assembly of machinery, equipment, instruments, including musical instruments, vehicles, appliances, precision items, and other electrical items; production of artwork and toys; sign making; production of prefabricated structures, including manufactured dwellings; and Utility Scale Energy production.

Industrial Service

Industrial Service firms are engaged in the repair or servicing of industrial, business or consumer machinery, equipment, products or by-products. Firms that service consumer goods do so by mainly providing centralized services for separate retail outlets. Contractors and building maintenance services and similar uses perform services off-site. Few customers, especially the general public, come to the site.

Exception: Contractors and others who perform services off-site are included in the Office category, if equipment and materials are not stored at the site, and fabrication, or similar work is not carried on at the site.

Welding shops; machine shops; tool repair; electric motor repair; repair of scientific or professional instruments; sales, repair, storage, salvage or wrecking of heavy machinery, metal, and building materials; towing and vehicle storage; auto and truck salvage and wrecking; heavy truck servicing and repair; tire retreading or recapping; truck stops; building, heating, plumbing or electrical contractors; trade schools where industrial vehicles and equipment, including heavy trucks, are operated; printing, publishing and lithography; exterminators; recycling operations; janitorial and building maintenance services; fuel oil distributors; solid fuel yards; research and development laboratories; drydocks and the repair or dismantling of ships and barges; laundry, dry-cleaning, and carpet cleaning plants; and photofinishing laboratories.

January 9, 2014 10


January 9, 2014 11

Office Use Categories (Portland Zoning Code, 33.920.240)


Office Uses in General

Office uses are characterized by activities conducted in an office setting that focus on the provision of goods and services, usually by professionals. Exception: Offices that are part of and are located with a firm in another category are considered accessory to the firm's primary activity. Headquarters offices, when in conjunction with or adjacent to a primary use in another category, are considered part of the other category.

Traditional Office

Traditional Office uses are characterized by activities that generally focus on business, government, professional, medical, or financial services.

Professional services such as lawyers or accountants; financial businesses such as lenders, brokerage houses, bank headquarters, or real estate agents; sales offices; government offices and public utility offices; medical and dental clinics, and blood collection facilities.

Industrial Office (Note: The Industrial Office use category applies only within the Employment Opportunity Subarea of the Central Eastside) Industrial Office uses are characterized by activities that, while conducted in an office-like setting, are more compatible with industrial activities, businesses, and districts. Their operations are less service-oriented than Traditional Office uses and focus on the development, testing, production, processing, packaging, or assembly of goods and products, which may include digital products such as internet home pages, media content, designs and specifications, computer software, advertising materials, and others. They primarily provide products to other businesses. They do not require customers or clients to visit the site; any such visits are infrequent and incidental.

Software and internet content development and publishing; computer systems design and programming; graphic and industrial design; engineers; architects; telecommunication service providers; data processing; television, video, radio, and internet studios and broadcasting; scientific and technical services; and medical and dental labs.

621 SW ALDER AVENUE, SUITE 605, PORTLAND, OR 97205 503/295-7832 503/295-1107 (FAX)

ANALYSIS OF MARKET AND ECONOMIC CONDITIONS

PORTLAND’S CLOSE-IN EASTSIDE

Prepared For:

THE PORTLAND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JANUARY 9, 2014

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Recovery Steady Growth

Counter-cyclicalContinued Losses

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

------------

---

- - - - - - - - 

---

--

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

40.0%

2.0% 2.0%%

14.2%

•

•

•

•

•

Inner SE Station Areas Concept Plan

Central City 2035: Southeast Quadrant Plan

Acknowledgements

Thanks to the many property owners, community groups, individuals, businesses and public agencies who participated in the process, and whose input contributed to this plan.

Project Staff

Portland Bureau of Planning and Sustainability Susan Anderson, Director Joe Zehnder, Chief Planner Deborah Stein, Principal Planner Sallie Edmunds, Planning Manager Steve Iwata, Planning Manager (through 6/13) Troy Doss, Senior Planner, project manager Stephanie Beckman, Senior Planner, project manager Debbie Bischoff, Senior Planner Shannon Buono, Senior Planner (through 6/13) Tyler Bump, City Planner II Diane Hale, Associate Planner Lora Lillard, Urban Designer II Marc Asnis, Community Service Aide Kathryn Hartinger, Community Service Aide Darwin Moosavi, Community Service Aide

Portland Bureau of Transportation Art Pearce, Senior Project Manager Grant Morehead, City Planner II

Portland Development Commission Geraldene Moyle, Senior Project Manager

Consultant Team Leads David Hyman, DECA Architecture Alan Hart, VIA Architecture Chris Blakney, Johnson Economics Chris Yake, Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Assoc. Eryn Deeming-Kehe, JLA Public Involvement

For More Information

Visit the project websites: SE Quadrant Plan – www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/cc2035/sequadrant Brooklyn Station Areas – www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/brooklynstationareas

Contact Staff: OMSI – Clinton Stations and SE Quadrant Plan Troy Doss – [email protected] or (503) 823-5857 Stephanie Beckman – [email protected] or (503) 823-6042

Rhine – Holgate Stations Diane Hale – [email protected] or (503) 823-2281

The Bureau of Planning and Sustainability is committed to providing equal access to information and hearings. If you need special accommodation, please call 503-823-7700, the City’s TTY at 503-823-6868, or the Oregon Relay Service at 1-800-735-2900.

http://www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/cc2035/sequadrant�

http://www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/brooklynstationareas�

mailto:[email protected]�



Table of Contents

I. Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………1 Project Overview Planning Process Next Steps

Get Involved

II. Issues and Opportunities…………………………………………………………………………………………………4Corridor-wideOMSI-Clinton Station AreasRhine-Holgate Station Areas

III. Charrette Outcomes……………………………………………………………………………………………………….7Land Use ConceptsTransportation Concepts

IV. Preliminary Land Use Concepts……………………………………………………………………………………23OMSI-Clinton Station AreasRhine-Holgate Station Areas

IV. Next Steps………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………34

Inner SE Station Areas Concept Plan Report

December 2013 1

I. Introduction Project Overview The Inner Southeast Station Area planning process provides detailed planning for the four close-in southeast light rail station areas at OMSI, Clinton, Rhine and Holgate on the new Portland-Milwaukie light rail alignment (PMLR). The primary study area is a ¼ mile around each station, with additional consideration for the area within a ½ mile radius for context.

The project is led by the Portland Bureau of Planning and Sustainability with assistance from other City bureaus and local, regional and state agencies and organizations. The City’s involvement is funded through a combination of general fund, urban renewal sources and a Metro CET grant. The Inner SE Station Area Planning process began to explore ways to leverage new investment in the Central Eastside Industrial District and Brooklyn Neighborhood with an emphasis on employment transit-oriented development (ETOD). Typically, station area planning processes


December 2013 2

have focused on developing housing and retail near light rail stations — an approach that may not be appropriate in these predominantly industrial station areas. Instead, this process seeks to create a new model — one that increases density of employment uses near the light rail stations in a way that encourages investment in the area and boosts transit ridership, while also complementing adjacent residential neighborhoods. Planning for the station areas is occurring in two stages. Initial work took place during the summer of 2013 to engage the community about their vision for the station areas and develop preliminary ideas and concepts about land use mix, development character and infrastructure needs. This report summarizes the input from this initial stage of work. The concepts presented in this report will be further explored and refined in separate, coordinated tracks. The OMSI and Clinton station areas are located within the SE Quadrant Plan area of the Central City. Detailed planning for this area is currently underway as part of the Central City 2035 project (CC2035), a long-range planning effort in the Central City to guide development and investment through the coming decades. Preliminary concepts for the Rhine and Holgate stations will be further refined through the Brooklyn Station Areas Project and incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan Update. Planning Process The Inner SE Station Areas project kicked off in summer 2013 with outreach and conceptual work. The process was guided by a Station Area Working Group, an open-membership group of interested parties and key community members. Staff conducted extensive outreach to ensure that interested community members knew about the project and the multiple opportunities for input. The Working Group met three times between June and September 2013 to consider the existing conditions within the study area, provide input on area issues and opportunities, and review draft concepts for urban design, land use and transportation ideas. Staff also hosted community walks at the start of the project, where community members shared their knowledge of the station areas and discussed issues, opportunities and constraints, which provided valuable background for the subsequent concept development process. A key public event for the Inner SE Station Areas process was a charrette that took place August 20-22, 2013. During the three-day event, more than 80 attendees representing area businesses, neighborhoods, institutions and other interests worked with staff and consultants to generate ideas about the future character of the four new light rail station areas. The charrette included two public work sessions, where the project team and consultants worked with the community to develop corridor-wide concepts and explore ideas for each of the four station areas. The preliminary results of the work sessions were presented at an open house on August 22, where participants viewed drawings and offered feedback, and at a Working Group meeting in mid-September. Feedback from those meetings led to additional staff refinements to the concepts, which are presented in this summary report.


December 2013 3

Throughout the process staff presented to formal community groups, including the Central Eastside Industrial Council and Brooklyn Action Corps, and met with a variety of individuals, property and business owners, area institutions and partner agencies. Staff also maintained a project website with news and announcement, event listings and meeting handouts and minutes. Project updates and key announcements were sent to interested parties throughout the process and distributed through community information networks. The community engagement approach for this project has aimed to be inclusive and welcoming to a wide range of interested and potentially affected individuals and organizations. However, so far, some demographic groups and interests have been underrepresented in the process, including renters, employees, older adults, youth and communities of color. Staff will continue to look for ways to improve outreach efforts to welcome participation of additional voices in the refinement efforts in the SE Quadrant Plan and Brooklyn Station Area processes. Next Steps Concepts for the OMSI and Clinton stations will be folded into the SE Quadrant Plan, which kicks off in November 2013. The SE Quadrant Plan process is expected to finish up in early 2015 with detailed recommendations for the SE Quadrant of the Central City. Concepts for the Rhine and Holgate stations will be refined throughout the winter of 2013/2014. The recommendations for the Brooklyn station areas will be folded into the Comprehensive Plan Update process in the spring of 2014. Get Involved You can get involved in the station area refinement process or tell us what you think in any of the following ways:

Sign up to receive email news and event announcements about refinements for the OMSI-Clinton stations (SE Quadrant Plan) and/or the Rhine –Holgate stations (Brooklyn Station Areas Plan)

Visit the project websites: o SE Quadrant Plan – www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/cc2035/sequadrant o Brooklyn Station Areas – www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/brooklynstationareas

Contact the project team with questions or to provide feedback (see inside cover for contact info)




December 2013 4

II. Issues and Opportunities At the beginning of this planning process staff conducted a detailed existing conditions analysis to establish baseline information and provide context for the community discussion around identifying issues and opportunities and evaluating potential conceptual solutions. Please see Appendices A and B, OMSI/Clinton Station Area Profiles and Rhine/Holgate Station Areas Profiles, for the detailed analysis. This section summarizes the station area issues and opportunities to consider moving forward. These have been informed with community input at several public events hosted by City staff, as well as feedback heard at other meetings with community groups and individuals. For a more detailed summary of the feedback for area issues and opportunities, please see the Inner SE Station Area Planning – Issues and Opportunities Summary Report. Corridor Wide Issues and Opportunities Employment/Industrial Character: There is a desire to increase employment densities in

the area, leveraging the potential of light rail to grow new jobs. However, there are concerns about impacting existing industrial businesses by introducing new incompatible uses, impacting freight mobility or other industrial operations and increased lease rates for various industrial tenants.

Connections: There is a common desire to establish better connections and reduce barriers for cyclists and pedestrians at each station area. Specifically, better connections to the river, additional north/south connections, improved access on arterials and improved freight mobility are desires for the four station areas.

Pedestrian Environment: There is a desire for more vegetation and street trees, greater pedestrian and bicycle access, and a more flexible mix of uses to create a more active street-level environment.

Parking: Limited parking has been an issue at all station areas, which could become a greater concern if denser development or large attractions are added.

Noise: Noise is an issue at the station areas due to the presence of rail, freight, the freeway and industrial uses.

Safety: Safety, graffiti and homelessness have been an issue at the proposed station

areas. Creating more active uses and getting more eyes on the street may help with these problems.

Willamette River: Increasing public access to the Willamette River, encouraging river-related development and recreation, and improving watershed health is desired to celebrate this Central City amenity.


December 2013 5

OMSI-Clinton Issues and Opportunities

Big Ideas: The large redevelopment parcels and riverfront location around the OMSI

station are seen as a major opportunity to enhance the area and create a high density regional destination focused on the river. Many “big ideas” were proposed, including support for new and existing cultural district attractions and strengthening the connection to research institutions on the westside’s “Innovation Quadrant”. Under any scenario, there a strong desire for development to relate to the river and provide for greater connections to and amenities along the river.

Connections: With its multimodal connections to the new light rail bridge, the OMSI station has the potential to become a transit and bike hub. However, there continue to be connectivity issues especially for pedestrians and conflicts with freight traffic.

Transitions: The Clinton Station area serves as a transition from the industrial area to more mixed-use and traditional residential areas. There is a desire to create an active and safe station to serve the adjacent residential neighborhoods, as well as the employment area. Increasing the mix of uses, density and creating gathering spaces are potential ways to increase activity and anchor the station as a destination. Improved access to the station area, particularly from Powell and adjacent neighborhoods will be critical for its success.

Incubator District: There is a history of small businesses around the Clinton Station. There is a desire to support this character, particularly in existing buildings, and to encourage the area to grow as an “incubator district”, with new industries and creative jobs augmenting the existing businesses.


December 2013 6

Rhine-Holgate Issues and Opportunities

Residential Neighborhoods: There are concerns about impacts to the existing single family residential areas, including increased traffic and parking constraints on local streets, redevelopment pressures eroding the historic character of the area and air and light issues related to greater density. Traffic calming measures, parking programs and focusing change on the edges of the residential areas could address these concerns.

Neighborhood-Serving Uses: There is a desire for Milwaukie Avenue to be enhanced as a neighborhood main street. Extending the existing commercial zoning south of Center St to Holgate could help encourage neighborhood serving uses and enliven the area. Other locations to consider for redevelopment and infill with additional neighborhood-serving uses include parts of Holgate and around the station areas.

Employment: There is a desire to increase job densities on industrial and employment zoned sites around the Brooklyn rail yard. Intensification on the TriMet, PGE and Fred Meyer sites could increase employment opportunities.

Mixed Use Redevelopment: The area south of Holgate could be explored for higher-density mixed use redevelopment. Currently, there is a wide mix of uses and some vacant parcels.

Brooklyn Yard: The rail yard is important for our region’s economy, but neighbors are concerned about noise and truck traffic associated with the rail yard and desire more east-west connections across this large barrier.

Green Buffer: Extensive reconstruction of 17th street provides an opportunity for new vegetation to act as a buffer between residential and industrial uses and enhance the street-level experience.

Safety and Connections: There is a need for improved safety and connections, particularly to area schools, new light rail stations and the river. SE Holgate and Powell are noted as a major barriers to pedestrian and bicycle travel in the area.


December 2013 7

III. Charrette Outcomes The following section presents a series of land use and transportation concepts developed at the Inner Southeast Station Areas Charrette held August 20 – 22, 2013. These diagrams provide an overview of where the greatest degree of change is likely to occur at a corridor-wide scale, how redevelopment activities at the OMSI-Clinton stations and Rhine-Holgate stations could occur, including a focus on each individual station, followed by transportation-related concepts for the station areas. It should be noted that these diagrams are not intended to present a preferred alternative but rather capture a range of concepts charrette participants offered for consideration.

Degree of Change Diagram This diagram highlights the main areas of influence of the new light rail stations and illustrates areas where change is desired and/or expected in response to the new light rail. Areas with more change include the immediate area around the OMSI and Clinton stations and south of the Holgate station where there are significant redevelopment opportunities. Areas identified for less change include Milwaukie Avenue and properties along SE 17th.


December 2013 8

Common Themes Diagram The following common themes emerged from the charrette:

Focus on the River: The Willamette River is a major asset that should influence what uses located along the shore and how they are designed and oriented to the river. In-water uses that promote maritime commercial, educational and recreational experiences are also desirable. Public access to, along and in the river are necessary via a combination of new access points, green connections, an interconnected trail system, and riverfront gathering places. Habitat for fish and wildlife can be improved by removing unnecessary riprap and in-water structures, and planting vegetation on the riverbank.

Better Connections: There is a need to overcome the substantial transportation barriers to and from the station areas, such as access from and across Powell Blvd, over the freight rail lines, to the river and to area schools.

Employment Center: The area should continue to function as an employment center, but with allowances that increase the types of businesses and other uses that can locate in the area and provide for more vibrant station areas.

Retain Character: The historic industrial character should be maintained and enhanced by encouraging the rehabilitation of historic buildings that can be reused for industrial office or small incubator businesses.


December 2013 9

OMSI-Clinton Station Areas Summary Diagrams

The diagram below illustrates some of the major concepts explored for the combined OMSI-Clinton station areas. These stations were generally identified as places where significant change should be encouraged in the form of higher employment densities, new visitor attractions, or in a greater mix of uses including institutional, recreational, commercial, and in some cases residential.

OMSI Station: The OMSI Station was noted as being the most “regional” station of the four due to it presence on the river, adjacency to OMSI as well as being a major multimodal transportation hub for bus, light rail, streetcar, bike and pedestrian trails, and presence of a major boat dock. The station was also described as a potential “vibrant waterfront district” with a strong connection to the river, the westside of the Central City and a place with a focus on sustainability.

Clinton Station: The Clinton Station was identified as a more local SE Portland destination where new development and a greater mix of uses could benefit and serve as a transition between adjacent residential neighborhoods (Hosford-Abernathy and Brooklyn) and industrial districts (Central Eastside and Brooklyn Rail Yard).


December 2013 10

OMSI Station: Specific suggestions for the OMSI station included: Improve connections to and through station area between inner Southeast neighborhoods

and visitor attractions and waterfront. This would include an enhanced streetscape on SE Division and potentially other streets. Promote station area as regional attractor. Continue to encourage expansion of existing visitor oriented attractions and services as well

as potential introduction of new attractions. These could include: o Expanded OMSI facilities o Enhanced presence by Portland Opera o Expanded Oregon Rail Heritage Foundation facilities o New home for Oregon Maritime Museum

Additional retail amenities to serve visitors, clustered near the station and perhaps adjacent to the river.


December 2013 11

River-related Concepts at OMSI Enhance views of the river. Create publically accessible open

space and improve access to the river. Improve station area and

associated land uses to encourage public use and enjoyment of the Willamette River, such as: - Formalized boarding facility for

Portland Spirit. - Regional high speed ferry /

local water taxi terminal. - New permanent home for

Portland Boat House. - New boat fueling station at

Staff Jennings (Sellwood Bridge).

Improve habitat for fish and wildlife by removing unnecessary riprap and in-water structures, and planting vegetation on the riverbank.


December 2013 12

Clinton Station: Specific suggestions for the Clinton Station included: Ensure that redevelopment of station area includes a mix of land uses that make the station

area safe and attractive to use in evenings and weekends as well as uses that support adjacent neighborhoods and people within immediate station area. Consider incorporating a mix of public amenities and services at the station that could

include: o Inner Southeast Community Center. o Satellite campuses for local universities and/or colleges. o Potential relocation or consolidation of Fire Bureau facilities.

Create a retail main street feel along the west side of the station area to better link the Milwaukie main street area in Brooklyn and SE 12th Avenue and Division retail intersection. Improve access between the station and the neighborhoods to the north, including

restoration of pedestrian overpass.


December 2013 13

Clinton station cont. Consider ways to increase the density of land uses north of the station. Improve connections between the station area and adjacent streets and neighborhoods,

including but not limited to: o Auto access onto and off of Powell. o Potential developments sites along Woodward Street and the NW Natural site

In the areas south of Division: o Maintain primarily as industrial employment center. o Do not allow housing or additional retail uses (except along Powell and SE

12th). o Improve access into and out of subarea from Powell. o Tame impacts on (especially SE Woodward Street) associated with intersection

of Highway 99 and 26.


December 2013 14

Rhine and Holgate Station Areas Diagrams

The diagram below presents a summary of the concepts that were explored for the Rhine and Holgate station areas during the charrette. These stations were viewed as being more local or neighborhood serving destinations where a low to moderate amount of change should be expected. These stations were viewed as having the potential to leverage more intense employment on adjacent existing employment and industrial lands as well higher density retail and residential uses along Milwaukie, Powell, and Holgate. However, improved connections to and from the stations to the north, south, and especially east and west were noted as a major desire by charrette participants.


December 2013 15

Milwaukie Avenue Charrette participants noted that the new stations could leverage addition interest in developing retail, commercial, and residential uses along Milwaukie between Holgate and Powell. The following input was provided for Milwaukie Avenue: Enhance Milwaukie Avenue as Brooklyn’s Main Street. Improve pedestrian environment and safety at crossings. Make strong pedestrian and connections between Milwaukie Ave and Rhine-Holgate stations. Extend commercial mixed-use zoning on Milwaukie between SE Center and SE Holgate. Consider new parking strategies to prevent “spill over” parking into neighborhood.


December 2013 16

West of 17th Specific suggestions for the areas along the west side of 17th Avenue included: Maintain a scale of development that is consistent with the residential neighborhood to the

west (2-3 stories in height). Consider screening strategies, such as setbacks and landscaping, to ensure privacy between

existing residential uses along SE 16th Avenue and new development along SE 17th Avenue. Allow limited retail uses near new stations along SE 17th Avenue. Pursue opportunities to place pocket-parks along SE 17th Avenue that could include but not

be limited to community gardens, dog parks and active recreation (bocce ball). Consider new parking strategies to prevent “spill over” parking into neighborhood.

Brooklyn Yard North Specific suggestions for the industrially zoned area east of 17th Avenue included:

Maintain primarily as industrial employment center.

Do not allow housing or additional retail uses.

Promote stronger pedestrian and bicycle connects through area that link to Rhine Station.

Enhance aesthetic and pedestrian character along SE 17th Avenue, especially along the eastern side of street.

Promote new office development within surface parking lots at Fred Meyer site.

Draft Inner SE Station Areas Concept Plan Report

December 2013 18

Holgate Station South

Specific suggestions for the area called Holgate Station South included:

Improve pedestrian and bicycle safety along SE Holgate.

Allow flexibility for more commercial uses on Holgate.

Along north side of Holgate, ensure new development is consistent in scale/height with adjacent residential land uses (2-3 stories).

South of Holgate allow denser development and maybe taller buildings.


December 2013 19

Transportation Concepts Potential transportation projects that would address issues related to the areas around the four inner SE station areas are displayed on the maps on the following pages. Many of these projects were identified as part of the Station Area Working Group meetings and design charrette. However, there are several older ideas that have been incorporated into this process. For example, greater permeability for bicycles and pedestrians across Powell has been a long-standing desire for residents of Brooklyn. Improving access to the Willamette River from residential areas east of McLoughlin has been explored since the 1970s. Other concepts, such as a 9th Avenue bikeway and pedestrian access on the Streetcar viaduct connecting MLK and OMSI, are newer but were noted as clear priorities by stakeholders. These concepts will be explored further through several ongoing processes to evaluate feasibility and priorities. The SE Quadrant Plan will include the OMSI and Clinton Station areas. The Rhine and Holgate station areas will be further analyzed as part of the Brooklyn Station Areas process. PBOT staff will continue to work with TriMet to potentially incorporate the replacement of the Gideon St overpass into the Portland-Milwaukie light rail project, and will work with ODOT to improve access from and across Powell. Other ideas, such as new street connections near the Fire Bureau and Northwest Natural sites, will likely remain concepts until a specific development proposal is put forth by property owners.


December 2013 20

OMSI - Clinton Transportation Projects


Map ID # Project Name Description

1 Streetcar Loop Bridge Pedestrian facility

Would add pedestrian facility to streetcar viaduct from MLK to OMSI

2 Regional Ferry Service Establish water-based commuter passenger

service between Portland/Vancouver/Lake Oswego/Oregon City

3

SE Division Pl Streetscape Extend SE Division Street Streetscape Improvements onto SE Division Place between 8th and SE 4th and on SE 4th from Division to Caruthers

4 Taggart Street Streetscape New street connection

5 SE Woodward Streetscape Plan and implement streetscape

improvements on SE Woodward from Milwaukie to McLoughlin

6 Powell Streetscape Implement recommendations from Inner

Powell Blvd Streetscape Plan

7 8th/9th and Powell Traffic Signal New traffic signal

7 8th/9th and Woodward signal New traffic signal

7 Milwaukie/Woodward signal New intersection from 17th connection

8 9th/Powell bike crossing replacement Replace existing overcrossing

9 17th Ave to Milwaukie Connection New street connection from 17th to Milwaukie,

either through the existing Gideon street connection or to Woodward

10 Gideon Pedestrian Bridge replacement Replace existing UPRR overcrossing (to be

removed as part of PMLR and not scheduled to be replaced)

11 13th Avenue and Powell Traffic Signal New traffic signal

December 2013 21


December 2013 22

Rhine – Holgate Transportation Projects

Map ID Project Name Description

6 Powell Streetscape Implement recommendations from Inner Powell Blvd Streetscape Plan

7 8th/9th and Powell signal New traffic signal

7 8th/9th and Woodward signal New traffic signal

7 Milwaukie/Woodward signal New intersection from 17th connection

11 13th Avenue/Powell signal New traffic signal

12 US 26/99E interchange Improved/direct connections between regional facilities

13 9th Avenue Bikeway Create Neighborhood Greenway on SE 9th

14 Milwaukie Ave Streetscape Plan and implement streetscape improvements to SE Milwaukie Ave between SE Woodward and SE Holgate

15 Lafayette Pedestrian Bridge access connections

Signage and wayfinding

16 Center Street Pedestrian Bridge Overcrossing of Brooklyn Yard

17 Holgate Street Reconfiguration Improve bike/ped environment on Holgate

18 Springwater Corridor Access Provide bike/ped connection from Brooklyn to Springwater corridor

19 Reedway Bridge Increase connections to light rail stations


December 2013 23

IV. Preliminary Land Use Concepts This section contains preliminary land use concepts developed by staff after the charrette, based on feedback at the Working Group meeting on September 18, 2013 and other community feedback received over the summer 2013. These do not represent a staff recommendation or preferred direction – they reflect public input about the future development character of these areas. These concepts show land use bubbles that reflect the predominant land use that would be allowed and/or encouraged under that scenario.

OMSI-Clinton Concepts Concept 1: Mixed Use and Employment Emphasis (p.26) Concept 2: Employment Emphasis (p. 28)

Rhine Holgate Concepts Concept 1: Mixed Use and Industrial Office (p. 30) Concept 2: Mixed Use and Industrial (p. 32)

The concepts are not meant to be mutually exclusive. Any final concept developed is likely to include some elements from each option and will be further shaped by additional input and analysis during the subsequent processes – the SE Quadrant Plan and the Brooklyn Station Areas project. These two processes will be coordinated to ensure that the overall vision for the corridor is represented in the individual station area concepts.

The following predominant uses are shown on the maps: Employment (High-Density): High – density office development with buildings 5 stories or higher and FAR of no less than 3:1. Employment/Light Industrial/Recreation (Low-Density): A mix of low-density employment (office), light industrial, and recreational (pocket parks and open space areas) uses. Buildings would be compatible in height with the adjacent residential development but with greater building coverage. Employment/Light Industrial/Recreation/Residential (Low-Density): A mix of low-density employment (office), light industrial, recreational (pocket parks and open space areas), and residential land uses. Buildings would be compatible in height with the adjacent residential development but with greater building coverage.


December 2013 24

Industrial (No Change): Remains mix of industrial uses with no changes to zoning or entitlements considered. Industrial Office (Medium-Density): Medium-density industrial office and light industrial uses. Office development would likely be no more than 5 stories tall with floor area ratios in the area of 3:1. Industrial Office (High-Density): High-density industrial office and light industrial uses. Office development would likely be no more than 10 stories tall with floor area ratios in the area of 6:1. Mixed-Use (High-Density): A mix of high-density uses including office, residential, institutional, commercial and industrial land uses. Buildings would likely be no more than 5 stories tall with floor area ratios in the area of 3:1. Mixed-Use Commercial Corridor (High-Density): A mix of high-density (development between 4-6 stories) retail, office, and residential uses serving adjacent neighborhoods as well as other Southeast Portland neighborhoods.


December 2013 25

Mixed-Use Commercial Corridor (Medium-Density): A mix of medium-density (development no taller than 3-4 stories) retail, office, and residential uses serving adjacent neighborhoods as well as other Southeast Portland neighborhoods. Mixed-Use Commercial Main Street (Medium-Density): A mix of medium-density retail, office, and residential uses that together with streetscape improvements would establish a local neighborhood main street character. Buildings height and coverage allowances would be similar to those on existing commercially zoned section of Milwaukie (45’ maximum height, maximum FAR 3:1). Office/Limited Retail (High-Density): High-density office development with limited ground floor retail. Office development would likely be no more than 10 stories tall with floor area ratios in the area of 6:1. Work/Live (Low Density): Ground floor employment with the ability to place a small studio or small apartment on the upper floor that the owner or tenant of the workspace could live. Buildings would be compatible in height with the adjacent residential development but with greater building coverage.


December 2013 26

OMSI-Clinton Station Areas Concept #1: Mixed Use/Employment Emphasis

Mixed Use (High-Density) Employment (High-Density)


December 2013 27

Concept #1: Mixed Use and Employment Emphasis This concept envisions the transition of the properties immediately adjacent to the OMSI and Clinton stations from an industrial/employment focus to a higher density mixed use focus that includes institutional, office, retail, and residential land uses. The areas just north and south of the OMSI station area would be focused on office development, and the industrially developed area between the two stations (the area between SE Division and Powell) would shift to a high density industrial office focus. The area around the Clinton station would transition to higher density mixed use development.

It should be noted that these areas are currently zoned for heavy industrial and light industrial purposes. The concept of moving to a more flexible zoning pattern in this area could support increased ridership on the Portland-Milwaukie MAX and Portland Streetcar as well as a significant increase in employment densities beyond that possible under current zoning.

On the other hand, significant policy and land use considerations would need to be addressed with the rezoning of any industrial lands: Industrial Land Supply: As part of the new Comprehensive Plan, the City must demonstrate

to the State of Oregon that there is adequate long-term land supply for economic development and job growth. The Economic Opportunities Analysis (EOA) prepared for the Comprehensive Plan indicates there is a shortage of capacity in the Central Eastside to accommodate expected growth, making it important to preserve land for employment uses. Given this, can the impact of losing some of the city’s industrial land supply be mitigated within the City of Portland and how?

Supporting Infrastructure: Can the existing public infrastructure in the area (water, sewer, roads and highways, parks, etc.) support this level of growth? If not what new infrastructure is necessary, is there a cost benefit in providing this infrastructure and how will these improvements be funded?

Land Use Compatibility: What are the impacts associated with introducing nonindustrial land uses in these areas and how might these impacts be mitigated? A primary concern would be the potential of displacing existing industrial businesses due to complaints, conflicts, and land values associated with allowing mixed use development, especially residential development. Further transportation issues associated with traffic congestion, impacts to freight mobility, and parking would also need to be addressed.

Industrial Office (High-Density)


December 2013 28

Concept #2: Employment Emphasis

Office/Limited Retail (High-Density) Work/Live (Low Density)


December 2013 29

Concept #2: Employment Emphasis This concept envisions the transition of the properties immediately adjacent to the OMSI station from an industrial/employment focus to a higher density office focus that includes institutional use and limited retail, but no residential uses. The areas just south of the station would remain focused on industrial land uses, whereas the areas just north of the station, and between the OMSI and Clinton stations, would have a low-density industrial office focus.

The Clinton station area south of the rail alignment would transition from an industrial/ employment focus to a higher density office focus that also allows institutional use, limited retail, but no residential development. However, north of the rail alignment the focus would shift from exclusively industrial/employment to allow some live/work uses where residential units could be placed above work space so long as the units created are used primarily by building owners and tenants.

As with the first preliminary concept for the OMSI-Clinton station areas, a shift from a focus primarily centered on industrial/employment has the ability to better support increased ridership on the Portland-Milwaukie Max and Portland Streetcar as well as a significant increase in employment densities beyond that possible under current zoning. However, such a move raises the same considerations as the first concept for industrial land supply, infrastructure and land use compatibility: Industrial Land Supply: As part of the new Comprehensive Plan, the City must demonstrate

to the State of Oregon that there is adequate long-term land supply for economic development and job growth. The Economic Opportunities Analysis (EOA) prepared for the Comprehensive Plan indicates there is a shortage of capacity in the Central Eastside to accommodate expected growth, making it important to preserve land for employment uses. Given this, can the impact of losing some of the city’s industrial land supply be mitigated within the City of Portland and how?


Land Use Compatibility: What are the impacts associated with introducing non-industrial land uses in these areas and how might these impacts be mitigated? A primary concern would be the potential of displacing existing industrial businesses due to complaints, conflicts, and land values associated with allowing mixed use development, especially residential development. Transportation issues associated with traffic congestion, impacts to freight mobility and parking would also need to be addressed.

Industrial Office (Medium-Density) Industrial (No Change)


December 2013 30

Rhine - Holgate Station Areas Concept #1: Mixed Use and Industrial Office Emphasis

Mixed-Use Commercial Main Street (Medium-Density)

Industrial Office (Medium-Density)


December 2013 31

Concept #1: Mixed Use and Industrial Office Emphasis This concept envisions subtle land use shifts that collectively support the Rhine and Holgate stations by allowing for medium density industrial office uses on properties located east of SE 17th Avenue, expanding commercial main street / mixed-use zoning allowances along Milwaukie between SE Center and Holgate Blvd, and promoting higher density commercial mixed-use development along Powell Boulevard. The concept also envisions the narrow line of properties on the west side of SE 17th (between the new LRT alignment and residential development) shifting from a primary focus of industrial employment to a mix of those uses as well as residential and recreational uses. Lastly, the concept envisions promoting high density mixed-use development in the area south of SE Holgate between SE 17th and McLoughlin Boulevard, part of which is designated as Prime Industrial Land.

This concept promotes changes that would support transit ridership and increase the density of employment and residential and commercial land uses along the main streets that frame the Brooklyn neighborhood while avoiding impacts to the residentially developed portions of the neighborhood. However, because this concept suggests higher density industrial employment on the lands east of SE 17th and conversion of a small area of Prime Industrial Land south of Holgate, there are issues regarding industrial lands supply, similar to what is noted in the OMSI-Clinton concepts sections.

Issues that would need to be considered with this concept include: Land Use Compatibility: What are the impacts associated with introducing nonindustrial

land uses in this area and how might these impacts be mitigated? A primary concern in this area would be impacts to industrial uses around the Brooklyn Rail Yard, increased traffic congestion, impacts to freight mobility and parking.


Prime Industrial Land south of Holgate (shown with hatching)

Mixed Use (High-Density)


December 2013 32

Concept #2: Mixed Use and Industrial Emphasis

Mixed Use Commercial Corridor (Med-Density)

Employment/Light Industrial/Recreational/ Residential (Low-Density)


December 2013 33

Concept #2: Mixed Use and Industrial Emphasis Much like the first concept for the Rhine / Station areas, this concept envisions subtle land use shifts that collectively support increased ridership as well as employment, residential, and commercial densities at the station areas. However, this alternative differs from the first as no land shifts are considered for the industrial zoned areas surrounding the Brooklyn Rail Yard, or the industrially zoned parcels west of SE 17th south of Holgate Blvd. Further, the narrow line of properties the west of SE 17th (between the new LRT alignment and residential development) would be used for a mix of employment, light industry and recreational uses, but not housing.

Consistent with the first concept, this one promotes changes that could support transit ridership and increase the density of employment, residential and commercial land uses along the main streets that frame the Brooklyn neighborhood, while avoiding impacts to the residentially developed portions of the neighborhood. However, unlike the first concept for these stations this one proposes no changes to the industrially zoned parcels in the area. Issues that would need to be considered with this concept include: Land Use Compatibility: What are the impacts associated with introducing non-industrial

land uses in this area and how might these impacts be mitigated? A primary concern in this area would be impacts to industrial uses around the Brooklyn Rail Yard, increased traffic congestion, impacts to freight mobility and parking.


Mixed-Use Commercial Main Street Industrial (No Change) (Medium-Density)


December 2013 34

V. Next Steps The preliminary concepts and ideas in this report help start the conversation about the four inner SE stations on the Portland-Milwaukie Light Rail line. The concepts will be further refined in subsequent processes: the SE Quadrant Plan project will refine concepts for the OMSI and Clinton stations, and the Brooklyn Station Areas project will refine concepts for the Rhine and Holgate stations.

Several outstanding issues remain for the station areas and will need to be further explored during these subsequent processes:

OMSI and Clinton Station Areas What type of destination is desired and/or feasible at the OMSI station? Main ideas

include: o Eastside cultural and entertainment district o Center of innovation and employment building on the connection to the westside’s

“Innovation Quadrant” Should residential uses and services such as a hotel and retail be allowed around the OMSI

and Clinton stations, and if so, to what extent? How can redevelopment of the OMSI station area further activate public use, enjoyment

and appreciation of the Willamette River by capitalizing on existing educational and boating components, and how can riverfront redevelopment be a catalyst for improving fish and wildlife habitat?

Should changes be made to industrially zoned lands, and if so, how can those changes be mitigated in the context of an industrial lands shortfall.

What are the priorities for transportation and other infrastructure investments to support new development?

Rhine – Holgate Station Areas What is the appropriate scale of new development along key corridors (17th, Milwaukie,

Powell)? What is the appropriate scale and mix of uses south of Holgate, between Milwaukie Ave

and 17th St? Should changes be made to industrially zoned lands, and if so, how can those changes be

mitigated in the context of an industrial lands shortfall? What are the priorities for transportation and other infrastructure investments to support

new development?

Get Involved You can get involved in the station area refinement process or tell us what you think in any of the following ways:

Sign up to receive email news and event announcements about refinements for the OMSI-Clinton stations (SE Quadrant Plan project) and/or the Rhine –Holgate stations (Brooklyn Station Areas project)

Visit the project websites: o SE Quadrant Plan – www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/cc2035/sequadrant o Brooklyn Station Areas – www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/brooklynstationareas

Contact the project team with questions or to provide feedback (see inside cover for contact info)



Date post:	08-May-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	2 times
Download:	0 times

SAC#2 summary final...David Lorati, School Specialty Supply Skip Newberry, Technology Assoc. of...

Documents