pearl district blog...
February 29,2008
Analysis puts Sten proposal in doubt
by shooterMore importantly, if we have a substantial and growing number of families who already live in the River District URA why does the City Council believe it is necessary to change the rules to build a school elsewhere? The need already exists within the URA. Shouldn't the needs of the legal URA be met before the City goes down a questionable path that is likely to be undone after years of legal challenges? Think of how much time and money would be wasted.
The idea of a satellite district opens a huge can of worms. If it happens then other areas will say "why not us". How does the City Council intend to differentiate who becomes a satellite and who doesn't?
These questions don't seem to concern Mr. Sten, he will be out of office before any of this happens.
From the Portland Tribune:
Damn the torpedoes — full speed ahead.
City Commissioner Erik Sten will continue pushing his idea to help build a new school on Portland’s hardscrabble outer east side using urban renewal funds from the Pearl District — despite a memo from the city attorney’s office that raises questions about the legality of such a transfer.
“We’re just going to go for it,” he says. “This is a chance to solve a seemingly intractable problem.”
Stripped to its essentials, Sten’s plan is to siphon off $19 million of property tax revenue generated by the gleaming towers of the Pearl District and use it to help finance a new elementary school and community center in the working-class David Douglas School District, which owns a building site in outer Southeast Portland but has no money for construction.
To accomplish this, Sten wants to redraw the boundaries of the River District Urban Renewal Area, which encompasses the Pearl, adding a 15-acre “satellite district” in deep Southeast Portland between Powell Butte and Happy Valley, unconnected from its parent district by so much as a cartographer’s cherry stem.
The idea might not survive a court challenge, however, according to a legal analysis by City Attorney Linda Meng. Concerns raised by Meng in a Feb. 14 memo include:
Read the full story here...OMG. Go North of Lovejoy. It's true, many developed blocks in the neighborhood now have gold stars in the Urban Renewal photo album, but there are still 30 or so blocks North of Lovejoy that are nothing more than contaminated heaps of soil.
Urban renewal has obviously been successful in the Pearl, but it's not over yet. This URA won't be a success until the work is complete. It seems that Sten is trying to penalize the area BECAUSE urban renewal has been successful.
Very disappointing.
pearl district
Board Meetings
6pm, 2nd Thursday of each month
Pacific Northwest College of Art
1241 NW Johnson St.
Committee Meetings
Planning
1st & 3rd Tuesdays
Transportation Sub-Committee
Livability
3rd Thursday of every month
6pm, Umpqua Bank
Last Tuesday of every month
6pm, Umpqua Bank






"I have not been able to find anything in the definition of blight that would encompass a piece of bare land that is suitable for development except for the financial condition of its owner."
Who said attorneys don't have a sense of humor?