Thursday, September 29, 2016

City Closes Loophole On Demolition of Historic Properties

PORTLAND TRIBUNE FILE PHOTO - Preservationists helped negotiate a 120-day delay for the Ancient The Order of the United Workmen building at Southwest Second and Taylor earlier this year, but the building is still set to be demolished.
A step in the direction of preservation was taken on Aug. 31, 2016 when a 14-year-old loophole that allowed the demolition of buildings on the Historic Resource Inventory was closed by the Bureau of Development Services. New guidelines require a 120-day delay before demolition or building permits are issued for any of the 2,745 ranked buildings in the Inventory.

Many preservationists understand the need for growth, but are hopeful of more appreciation of local history by state and local government.

“We have to navigate a path of accommodating growth but without completely losing the character of this place and all of the things that make Portland Portland in the process,” Moretti says.

Once snooze-worthy topics — buildings and city code — are becoming increasingly popular as Portland makes changes big and small in the wake of gentrification and urban renewal.
But a small change in code back in 2002 forming a legal loophole has caused irreparable harm, says Meg Hanson, an activist who’s planning a class action lawsuit.
The harm? Demolition of historic buildings when they possibly should have been afforded a 120-day demolition delay period.
The Bureau of Development services finally closed the 14-year-old loophole on Aug. 31 in a service update, now requiring a 120-day delay before demolition or building permits are issued for any of the 2,745 ranked buildings on the Historic Resource Inventory.
The inventory, created in 1984, is used by the Portland Historic Landmarks Commission to evaluate applications for landmark designations.
Under city rules, a 120-day demolition delay was the only “protection” a building had by being being listed on the Historic Resource Inventory. But that became pointless when the loophole was created in 2002 enabling a property owner to delist and receive a demolition permit in the same day.
The inventory emerged from obscurity when high-profile buildings, such as the Hotel Albion and the Ancient Order of United Workmen Temple, were yanked off the inventory and slated for demolition.
The increasing rate at which this scenario was happening caused alarm to members of the historic preservation community, who wondered where the delay time had gone.
The historic preservation advocacy group Restore Oregon had been urging the city to change its practices since 2013, even threatening to take the city to court over the removal of the Workmen Temple from the inventory.
The threat didn’t come to fruition; Restore Oregon Executive Director Peggy Moretti says the organization fares better working with the city than against it.
Sudden change and state law
Regardless of repeated requests from organizations and activists, the bureau maintains it decided to evaluate its practices and make changes to align with state law, ORS 197.772, after the Oregon Supreme Court ruling issued on Aug. 4 in the case of Lake Oswego Preservation Society vs. City of Lake Oswego, in which the owner of a property — the Carman House — was barred from removing its historical designation.
“Upon further review, we decided we needed to be more consistent,” with ORS 197.772, says Ross Caron, public information officer for the Bureau of Development Services.
Before the ruling, the city asserted it was not violating state law because listing on the Historic Resource Inventory, ranked or not, did not amount to an “official” historic designation.
Restore Oregon says the city was misinterpreting state law.
Meg Hanson and her group, Close the Loophole Coalition, believe the city was violating the law by not offering the 120-day delay protection, which is outlined in the state’s “Goal 5” rules, a set of goals for protection of natural resoures, historic areas and open spaces.

Hanson believes that the loophole may have been created intentionally when the city was under pressure by the city auditor to create a faster permit-issuing process.

Even though the city has decided to comply, Hanson says a lawsuit is just the next step — “a natural progression” after all that has happened.
Hanson, a local assistant architect and engineer, became invested and created Close the Loophole Coalition when a developer planned to demolish 3334 S.E. Belmont, a 127-year-old building that many rallied to preserve earlier this year.
She has done extensive research on what she believes is the illegal issuance of demolition permits since the loophole’s creation in 2002.
A look at the city’s previous code on HRI properties back in 1996 was clear: Ordinance said inventoried properties may be delisted at the end of the demolition delay period, which complied with Goal 5 rules at the time.
In June 2002, this code was removed, and another was added that stated a resource listed on the inventory would be removed if the owner sends a written request on the date the office receives it. Mention of the delay period was erased.
Hanson believes that the loophole may have been created intentionally when the city was under pressure by the city auditor to create a faster permit-issuing process.
Repercussions of such a goal, according to Hanson and other advocates, are demolitions of buildings that could have been considered for protections by The National Register of Historic Places, while contributing to the erasure of the city’s “character.”


See a map of all Historic Resource Inventory properties on line at:

Read the complete article:

Interesting in investing in Portland? Please contact me:
Karen Schaaf ACP, GRI
RE/MAX equity group
Lackman Commercial Group
Licensed in Oregon

No comments:

Post a Comment