Read the entire article here on the Oregonian website

Schools office could be towers
Development - Joe Weston has eyes on the school district's North Portland building
By STEPHEN BEAVEN and FRED LEESON
The Oregonian
Thursday, January 26, 2006

A Portland developer wants to buy the Portland Public Schools headquarters as part of his effort to redevelop a wide swath of North Portland near the Willamette River.

An architect and a planning consultant working for developer Joe Weston are scheduled to meet with school district officials this week for preliminary talks about the future of the Blanchard Education Service Center, 501 North Dixon St., according to Peter Finley Fry, Weston's consultant.

Kerry Hampton, property development manager for the district, said Wednesday that he'll meet with Fry, adding that the district has begun investigating whether it could streamline some operations or locate them elsewhere.

"We've started discussing what our options are," Hampton said. "We haven't made any decisions."

Weston, who could not be reached Wednesday, wants to build a condominium tower 380 feet tall or higher on property he owns at North Broadway and Interstate Avenue, Fry said. He'd also like to build similar housing at the nearby Blanchard site.

Weston is a key investor in Hoyt Street Properties, the largest landowner in the Pearl District. His Weston Investment Co. owns and manages thousands of apartment units.

Last year, Weston sent a letter to Portland Superintendent Vicki Phillips in which he said he would buy the Blanchard site for cash. He did not mention a price, and Fry said it's too early discuss specifics.

Built in 1979, the Blanchard building houses the district's administrators, warehouse, central kitchen and maintenance operations. The 365,000-square-foot building covers just over 11 acres.

In 2002, former Superintendent Jim Scherzinger rejected a $50 million offer for the property, calling the deal too risky. The developer wanted the district to lease back the property at a cost of $90 million over 20 years.

At one point, the site was ranked high by proponents of major league baseball as a potential location for a stadium.

In December 2004, Phillips recommended that the district wait to sell the building and pursue a broader redevelopment plan with the city.

The tower under discussion on Weston's property would be narrow in design and could include up to 200 condos, Fry said, adding that building it would require a zoning change.

Ultimately, Fry thinks the area could support 10 residential towers, including as many as six on the Blanchard site.

Mayor Tom Potter says he's eager to see development in the area, but he said last year that projects would have to be compatible with local neighborhoods. He ruled out big-box retailers.

The Weston property is in the Eliot neighborhood. Mike Warwick, the land-use committee chairman for the Eliot Neighborhood Association, said that initially the idea of buildings more than 300 feet tall "was kind of a shock."

But he added that high-rise housing could be welcome in Eliot, depending on the design. "We have a neighborhood with a big area but not many people," Warwick said. "We'd like to get more people here and have more home-ownership opportunities."

Decades ago, Eliot and nearby areas were relatively dense central-city residential neighborhoods. But the area lost large portions of housing to developments such as Memorial Coliseum, hospital and business expansions, and the Interstate-5 freeway.

Many Eliot residents spoke out loudly against the potential for a baseball stadium. Warwick said he considered housing development as "absolutely" preferable to a baseball stadium.

Staff writers Ryan Frank, Paige Parker, Dylan Rivera and Erin Hoover-Barnett contributed to this story.

Stephen Beaven: 503-294-7663; stevebeaven@news.oregonian.com

quote:

The tower under discussion on Weston's property would be narrow in design and could include up to 200 condos, Fry said, adding that building it would require a zoning change.

Ultimately, Fry thinks the area could support 10 residential towers, including as many as six on the Blanchard site.

Mayor Tom Potter says he's eager to see development in the area, but he said last year that projects would have to be compatible with local neighborhoods. He ruled out big-box retailers.

The official reason the city gave for not permitting a big box retailer was due to the increase in traffic congestion for the area.
The first of ten towers would contain 200 units. That would make Home Depot traffic look tame by comparison. Think real hard Mr. Mayor,real hard....

I still consider the Blanchard site to be a distant 2nd to the Post Office site. I'm not going to sweat the loss of the site.

quote:

Originally posted by CEDAR MILL MADNESS:
I still consider the Blanchard site to be a distant 2nd to the Post Office site. I'm not going to sweat the loss of the site.

Hey, has there been any new research done yet on the Memorial Colesium sight?

[/QUOTE] That would make Home Depot traffic look tame by comparison.QUOTE]

That's not true. First, you would not be able to fit 10 towers on that site while leaving enough room for the subsequent park and open space -not to mention the Neighboorhood Associations probable rejection of any Huge and "local character deprived" monstrostity of a design. Second, even if these towers utilized mixed-use with shops and restaurants on the bottom floors, you are not looking at the type of traffic flow you would see at a Walmart or a Home Depot. Those types of developments work on people driving in, and then driving out with what they bought - no walking or visiting other stores in the area. Simply get in, get out. A mixed-use development focues on people getting out of their car, walking around and interacting with other people who are also out of their cars. And, since it would be located in the downtown area and close to public transportation/amenities/etc, the use of cars by the residents living there would be less than a typical development. Think Pearl District traffic, not HWY 26.

I also share CMM's view of the Blanchard Site being a distant 2nd to the Post Office. I would actually really like to see a mixed-use development on the Blanchard site to spur the growth of the Eastside. It needs more high(er) density residential.

The mixed-use concept also relies on many residents who don't even own cars shopping downstairs from where they live... something Portland has advanced for a few years now.

quote:

Originally posted by Roy:

quote:

Originally posted by CEDAR MILL MADNESS:
I still consider the Blanchard site to be a distant 2nd to the Post Office site. I'm not going to sweat the loss of the site.

Hey, has there been any new research done yet on the Memorial Colesium sight?

I take it back. Blanchard is a distant 3rd. I would suggest the Post Office site as the clear winner and (if space permits) the Coliseum site as the 2nd.

This is awesome news! Hopefully they can get the height variant and build the higher density towers that will help create the Northern Gateway to the Central City. I just hope they build pubs on the first two floors of all the towers, then eight floors of offices, and then the condos on top. Then the stadium at Memorial Coliseum will have even more life around it.

What is the exact footprint in acres of the Memorial Coliseum? Since I will use MAX to get to the ballpark, where it is doesn't matter to me personnally. But, getting people in and out of NW Portland who use MAX or cars will be bad.

The one MAX line over the Burnside Bridge will not handle the east side requirements. Without direct access to freeway on and off ramps, you can expect gridlock for one hour after each game. Alot of people will need to walk from SW Portland and for the Eastside.

And will the Pearl District neighborhood want a MLB Stadium? Has anyone asked them? Do we have any poll data on the three final locations?

Is Weston interested in MLB ownership or local part owner? It doesn't sound like he is. But has anyone asked him the question?

BB