 |
||||||||
 |
||||||||
 |
FEATURE ARTICLES | |
Memo Calendar | Memo Pad | Business Memos | Loaves & Fishes | Letters | Home |
| Tonkin, Hazelwood square off at 122nd hearing LEE PERLMAN THE MID-COUNTY MEMO The Ron Tonkin auto dealership and the Hazelwood Neighborhood Association both agree that car dealerships belong on 122nd Avenue. They also agree the avenue should be a safe and pleasant place to walk. With that in common, they were still very much at odds at a Portland Planning Commission hearing on the 122nd Avenue Study last month. The study, begun a year ago, was initiated to resolve a paradox. City regulations, in accord with Metro regional goals, call for high-density, pedestrian-oriented residential and retail development within a quarter-mile of a light rail station such as the one at the intersection of 122nd Avenue and East Burnside Street. These regulations do not fit well with the usual design of car dealerships, which have become the dominant use on the avenue. Ron Tonkin tried unsuccessfully to change the code through last year’s Gateway Rezoning Project. This study addresses the issue directly. Under project manager Barry Manning, the study considered several approaches ranging from strict adherence to the status quo to essentially abandoning development goals in favor of letting the dealership have its way. The proposed compromise calls for holding the line, at least for new dealerships, within three designated “nodes” within a block of Northeast Glisan, East Burnside and Southeast Stark streets, while relaxing the rules for the area between these points. Specifically: • Within the nodes, buildings must be within 10 feet of property lines, and vehicle parking and maneuvering is not allowed in this area. Outside the nodes, the maximum setback would be 20 feet, and vehicle storage would be permitted there behind appropriate landscaping. • Within the nodes, outdoor storage and display of vehicles, or any other merchandise, is prohibited in any new development. Outside the nodes, this rule would be relaxed. In both areas, at least 50 percent of the property frontage facing 122nd Avenue would have to be taken up by a building. The minimum floor area ratio, a measure of density, for this building would be one to one. If the lot were 10,000 square feet, the building would have to have 10,000 square feet of floor area, almost certainly requiring a multi-story structure. Within the nodes, as is the case today, dealerships that do not conform to these rules could stay and operate indefinitely, but newcomers would not be allowed. Existing operations could change or expand their buildings if the changes brought them closer to compliance with the code. However, if they wished to totally demolish a structure and build new, the new building would have to adhere to the code. Representatives of Ron Tonkin and Hazelwood said they could accept the recommendations, with changes. Tonkin wants the required building frontages to be reduced to 30 percent, and the minimum floor area ratio, or FAR, reduced to .4 to one. Hazelwood wants the required building frontage increased to 70 percent, and the size of the nodes at Northeast Glisan and Southeast Stark streets increased. Brad Tonkin testified that his father started the family business in 1960. He served on the TriMet board and was “very much a proponent of light rail.” MAX and dealerships are “a good marriage,” and not necessarily in conflict, he said. Creating a pedestrian-friendly street is “as important to us as it is to the neighborhood,” he said. However, he added, the zoning regulations introduced in 1996 “make it impossible for us to expand,” and have put a barrier in the way of “$10 million worth of investments we’d like to make.” He continued, “Imagine getting a flyer in the mail that says, ‘Your home the way it is now is the way it has to be,’” and that planners have plans for the area that do not include you. The plans and development regulations “are well-intentioned, but haven’t turned out well,” Tonkin said. Demographics depicting the population of the area “are going the wrong way. High density is not bringing the type of citizen we’d like to see.” Attorney David Peterson, representing Tonkin, said, “Either lower the FAR or allow existing developed properties to redevelop to full code standards.” He said that a one to one FAR, or a building occupying 50 percent of the frontage, would result in “a pretty darn big building.” Consultant Peter Finley Fry said Tonkin “totally intends to increase the density of development on their property,” but “minimum FARs don’t work.” He added, “We have no problem keeping storage areas away from the street, but display areas have to be visible.” Barbara Harrison presented Hazelwood’s position. The neighborhood group wants the avenue to “serve our community better than it does now,” and not become “another 82nd Avenue,” she said. Specifically, the street should be “more attractive, better used, supportive of new business and more pedestrian friendly,” she said. “Now, when you walk there, you take your life in your hands. “We’re concerned about the number of car dealerships within a few blocks,” she continued. “We understand that they’re there, that they’re an important part of the community.” Nonetheless, she called for the required building frontage to be increased to 70 percent. She also asked that the Glisan and Stark nodes be increased to 300 feet in all directions. At the moment, she said, they cover only part of the Hanson property, the Multnomah County Sheriff’s Office at Northeast 122nd Avenue and Glisan Street slated for eventual sale. “We perceive that much of the focus of this study is on the dealerships,” she said. “We urge consideration for other types of businesses.” >>continued |
 |
 |
 |
MEMO Advertising | MEMO Archives | MEMO Web Neighbors | MEMO Staff | Home