“One Forced Demolition Is One Too Many”
The purpose of this website is to inform the public. We encourage individuals to do their own due-diligence.
UPDATE: Hardesty has directed Portland Fire & Rescue to pause enforcing the placarding requirement which is set to begin taking effect on March 1. [Read more]
"No one is interested in putting our residents at risk, but we need to look at ways to better support businesses and non-profits in seismically upgrading their buildings. A placard is a band-aid for a much larger problem. Until we have better support in place, especially in the form of funding assistance for these projects, I want placarding enforcement on hold for businesses and non-profit organizations," Hardesty said in a statement released Thursday.
The City of Portland claims that only building owners care about a mandate that will cause:
Tenant Displacements
Increased Rent
Demolitions
Loss of Historical Buildings
These buildings are the cornerstones of Portland's Main Streets. They make up the character of our neighborhoods. The loss of these historic place-makers will forever change the physical and cultural landscape of our city.
There are 1,640 URM buildings identified. These include commercial, multi-family, church, theaters, schools, and non-profit buildings. The city has also prioritized adding all soft-story and non-ductile concrete buildings if this passes. That will demolish more of Portland's old and historic buildings.
This mandate will trigger the need for buildings to be emptied an estimated 12 months. The proposed policy has no plan in place for displacement of residents and small businesses.
1,800 of 7,000 residential units are public-financed affordable housing.
Thousands of small businesses
Displaced residents and businesses may face higher rents.
What if building owners cannot afford it?
The last known enforcement proposed:
Annual fines: $6K, 12K, 24K, 1% RMV (Step 1 - 4)
Placarding
Occupancy permit can be revoked
Demolition
City Council - Budget Work Session
The community is listening!
The only viable financing solution that has been proposed thus far is SB 311, which would give URM owners a 15 year partial abatement on their property taxes, but this would scarcely cover the cost.
Unless a better solution is found soon a sizeable chunk of old Portland will be gone 50 years from now – either by quake or by the wrecking ball.
To check out the full article by click here
Thank you to all who testified at the June 13th Council Meeting and gave compelling testimonies.
We are proud to stand together in this fight to preserve the very heart of our communities, our churches of worship, our meeting places, our community centers, our start-ups, our music venues, our restaurants/pubs and our “Main Streets.” This is an assault on the very soul of Portland.
(Time Stamp: 3:03:27)
Uploaded by eGov PDX on 2018-06-13.
Top-heavy seismic retrofit program may crush small owners
by: Allan Classen, NW Examiner Editor & Publisher
The city’s seismic upgrade program is losing steam as it nears the finish line: a City Council hearing May 10 on proposed mandates on owners of unreinforced masonry buildings.
The URM Seismic Retrofit Project Policy Committee, a stakeholder advisory group administered by the Portland Bureau of Emergency Management, issued a “consensus” report last November, but now members of that body say there never was a universal acceptance of its recommendations.
To read the full article, CLICK HERE
My View: Unreinforced masonry - What price safety?
by: Stan Penkin, Portland Tribune, OpEd,
January 30, 2018
Mandating that owners retrofit their buildings at unaffordable costs without provisions for adequate and reliable sources of funding can only lead to forcible building sales, demolition of Portland's character and important structures, and the displacement of businesses and residents.
Discussions about mandating retrofits for 1,640 unreinforced masonry buildings in Portland raises concerns about the direction in which the proposed policy appears to be moving.
While we agree with an attempt to make our unreinforced masonry buildings safer, we cannot support the burden placed on private property owners and the businesses and residents that reside in those buildings.
Mandating that owners retrofit their buildings at unaffordable costs without provisions for adequate and reliable sources of funding can only lead to forcible building sales, demolition of Portland's character and important structures, and the displacement of businesses and residents.
To read the full article, CLICK HERE
Pippa Arend loves her historic landmark apartment building on Northwest 23rd Avenue and wants to spend the rest of her life there. But if the city adopts proposed seismic upgrade requirements, she fears the building will have to be demolished.
CRASH COURSE
by: Allan Classen, NW Examiner Editor & Publisher
Old brick buildings may not hold up to city’s seismic upgrade program
Portland’s 1,731 unreinforced masonry buildings may be coming down in the foreseeable future. The culprit probably won’t be the dreaded magnitude 9.0 earthquake but rather a seismic retrofit program designed to prepare for it.
No neighborhood has more of these old brick buildings than the Northwest District, and Old Town Chinatown is not far behind. Their 254 URM buildings give these areas much of their architectural character and charm. For now, at least.
Proposed mandates on building owners are expected to go to the City Council by the end of March.
Cost predictions for compliance range from substantial to staggering, and many close to the issue predict that owners will be driven to sell at discounted prices to developers, who will find it far more profitable to replace rather than save the buildings. “Building owners who rely on their buildings for their income and retirement are going to lose that livelihood,” said Steve Rose.
As CEO of Bristol Equities, a company at 2078 NW Everett St. that owns 37 apartment buildings, Rose doesn’t put himself in that category. But he has talked to many people who own a single building, the typical pattern among Portland’s URM properties, and their situations are bleak.
To read the full article, CLICK HERE
Fairness Demands that Mandatory Seismic Upgrades Be Tied to Financial Aid
by: Peggy Moretti
With proposed upgrade deadlines, will we see demolition of historic buildings on a massive scale?
Many historic buildings across Oregon – schools, theaters, churches, apartments, and commercial storefronts up and down our Main Streets – were constructed of unreinforced masonry. Known as URMs, they were built in an era when the threat of a major earthquake in the Northwest was unknown and the primary safety concern was fire. The vast majority have not been seismically upgraded.
Seismic retrofitting for URMs is mandated in earthquake-prone cities from San Francisco to Tokyo. In Oregon, it is not – but that may change. The Portland City Council will soon consider a recommendation from a Seismic Advisory Committee to enact a set of mandatory seismic upgrade standards and deadlines. The standards are tiered based on the use of the building, and the deadlines range from 10 to 20 years. Other cities in the Cascadia Subduction Zone (roughly the western third of the state) may follow suit. Seattle is also poised to mandate retrofitting.
To read the full article, CLICK HERE
READ ARTICLES
"Portland ends requirement to publicly label buildings seismically unsafe"
"City of Portland may scrap ordinance requiring earthquake warning on buildings"
"Second stab at seismic retrofit program draws familiar criticisms"
“Federal Judge blocks masonry building warning signs”
“Federal Judge Halts Enforcement of Portland’s Requirement to Post Signs in Buildings That Could Crumble in an Earthquake”
“Judge temporarily blocks required earthquake warning signs”
“Judge appears skeptical of Portland’s earthquake warning sign ordinance”
“Closing arguments made in URM warning sign lawsuit”
“Judge appears skeptical of Portland’s earthquake warning sign ordinance”
“Federal judge says city violated URM restraining order”
“Judge delays Portland earthquake warning ordinance”
“Letters: Masonry rules disaster for building owners”
“Lawsuit threatened against older building warning signs in portland”
“Portland's earthquake warning ordinance spurs lawsuit by owners of brick buildings”
“Brick building owners sue city over earthquake signs”
“Owners of old masonry bildings sue Mayor Wheeler, Commissioner Saltzman”
“New Alignments Push Back Against URM Policies”
“City Council majority now against building warning placards”
“McMenamins says Crystal Ballroom is earthquake-safe, challenges city’s database”
“Hardesty, Wheeler clash on building warning signs”
“NAACP links earthquake signs in Oregon to white supremacy”
“What is all this about URMs and what can I do to help?”
“Opposition grows on Warnings”
“Building owners threaten to sue city over vote to label buildings as unsafe during an earthquake”
“Lawsuit threatened against older building warning signs”
Portland Tribune
[Read more]
“SE Updates"
“Mayor hands off URM program”
“Portland NAACP Speaks on the City Council Resolution on Unreinforced Masonry Buildings”
“City stumbles over first step of seismic program”
“Bricks, Mortars
and Memories
OpEd August 2018”
“Compromise on seismic program turns sour after gavel falls”
“Portland ponders seismic upgrade mandate; building-owners fear financial burden”
“Councilors eye code change for portland buildings likely to collapse in big earthquake”
“Portland plans for unreinforced masonry earthquake threat”
“Portland pushes to retrofit brick buildings for earthquakes”
“When the 'Big One' hits, Portland faces mass casualties, widespread destruction: Study”
“Top-heavy seismic retrofit program may crush small owners”
“Steve Duin: The harder they fall”
“Earthquakes not as scary as affordability”
“Seismic mandates built on ethically vacuous foundation”
“Portland bureaus with all good intentions often become enamored of their own proposed mandates without considering the full impact or unintended consequences”
“The big one will certainly be very bad. Our actions beforehand could be worse.”
“...Individuals owning historic buildings will be the least able to handle this requirement...”
“Unless a better solution is found soon a sizeable chunk of old Portland will be gone 50 years from now – either by quake or by the wrecking ball.”
“This new city policy could cost you all your local merchants...AND your neighborhood!”
“Fairness Demands that Mandatory Seismic Upgrades Be Tied to Financial Aid”
“In rental buildings, costs may ultimately be borne partly or mostly by tenants in the form of higher rents.”
Source: July 2017 Policy Report (Page 29)
CITY-WIDE COST ESTIMATE:
$1.4 BILLION
$4.6 Billion According to Engineer [Source]
“NAACP links earthquake signs in Oregon to white supremacy”
Rogers Media [Source]
“NAACP Coalition Rallies Against Portland Ordinance That Labels Earthquake-Unsafe Buildings”
Portland Mercury [Source]
“Building owners protest city seismic mandates”
KGW [Source]
“Portland NAACP, others rally, demanding city rescind earthquake warning sign ordinance”
Oregon Live [Source]
“Portland music venues plans protest over forced placarding of URMs”
KPTV [Source]
“Music venues in 'danger of closure' over seismic upgrades”
KOIN6 [Source]
“NAACP, music venues protest city's earthquake sign rules”
Pamplin Media [Source]