City Council Tentatively Approves Demolition Permit for Historic Kiernan Building

The Portland City Council approved a tentative demolition permit for Chinatown’s historic Kiernan Building—better known by some as the now-defunct Gail’s Dirty Duck Tavern—at a February 3 council meeting. Commissioner Fritz was the lone dissenting vote.

The vote was part of the City’s Type IV Land Use Procedure, a quasi-judicial procedure adopted in 2004 as part of the Historic Resources Code Amendments to the Portland Historic Resources Zoning Regulations. This is the first time a historic building demolition permit has reached the Council voting level in the six years since the procedure was adopted.

The Kiernan Building, which sits on the corner of NW 3rd and Glisan within the nationally registered New Chinatown/Japantown Historic District, was originally built in 1916 by the Portland-based Mac Naughton and Raymond Architecture Firm. The building is listed as one of seven contributing structures, while the other 27 structures within the district are considered primary. Although the building is significant due to its history as Western Tool and Dye Works, a recording studio for Greg Sage and home of the Dirty Duck Tavern, it has no linkage to the Asian heritage that the district is based around.

The Kiernan Building with Blanchet House in the background

For the past 12 years, the Kiernan Building’s neighbor, the Blanchet House—a Catholic based nonprofit with the mission of feeding, clothing and offering shelter and aide to those in need—has been looking at ways to expand its operation to better meet the needs of those it helps. After exploring several different options, the Portland Development Commission, which owns the Kiernan Building property, proposed the idea of the Blanchet House building a new facility on the Kiernan Building property while PDC would take over the Blanchet House’s current building on the corner of NW 4th and Glisan.

“A significant amount of tax dollars have been used in trying to relocate the Blanchet House over the years, and we are now down to our final option,” said Joe Pinzone, a principal with the Portland-based SERA Architects, the firm hired by the Blanchet House. “The cost of renovation this building doesn’t make sense economically, and the Blanchet House needs more space to function properly.”

The proposed plan would be for the Blanchet House to tear down the one-story Kiernan Building and build a new three-to-four story LEED Certified eco-friendly building. The nonprofit will receive $2 million in funding from PDC and will likely qualify for tax credits due to the sustainable features of the building. In order for the permit to actually be issued, representatives of the Blanchet House must submit the design plans to the Council for approval.

The proposed new Blanchet House. Courtesy of SERA Architects.

The Council voted in favor of the demolition permit even after hearing a staff recommendation to not do so by Tim Heron, a historic review specialist with Portland Bureau of Developmental Services.

“We are in no way negating the great social contribution that the Blanchet House provides to this city,” said Heron. “But we are concerned that the approval of this demolition would set precedent for future cases of property owners wanting to demolish historic buildings.”

Commissioner Randy Leonard then reminded Heron that it really doesn’t set precedent because of the quasi-judicial nature of the demolition process. The council votes on each demolition permit on a case-by-case basis.

Heron also pointed out that BDS doesn’t believe this project falls into the main principals on the City’s Comprehensive Plan, the Central City Plan or the Old Town/Chinatown Visioning Plan. He cited the limited economic development benefits of the project, a major aspect of all three plans.

Commissioner Fish noted that affordable housing and urban diversity were also part of all three of those plans.

Once Heron was done with his report, the demolition permit applicants and 14 supporters of the project had their turn to speak.

The applicants focused primarily on the social benefits of the organization and the economic restraints of preserving opposed to building new. They also argued that the Kiernan Building shouldn’t have been part of the historic district in the first place.

The building was originally added to the district because it was believed it met two of the needed criteria: historic relevance and architectural value. Supporters argued that neither of these criteria are actually met.

One of the most convincing arguments came from Old Town Chinatown Neighborhood Association member, Stephen Ying, who confirmed that the building has absolutely no ties to the Asian heritage of the district. He also reminded the Council that the project had the support of not only the neighborhood association, but also a majority of the area’s stakeholders in general.

From an economic feasibility standpoint, Blanchet House’ representatives argued that the cost of renovating the building would be too high for a building that wouldn’t be big enough anyways. The building would have to receive a $400,000 seismic upgrade; a cost that the representatives feel is too high to stomach.

The four opponents were then given time to speak. They argued that the issuance of this demolition permit was likely to start a demolition domino effect.

“The guidelines for demolition are just too broad,” said Tanya March, a historic preservation specialist at Portland State University. “Under these guidelines it could be argued that any historic structure should be torn down, even the current Blanchet House building.”

March continued, “I’m scared that ruling in favor of this demolition makes an argument that only expensive historic buildings are worth being preserved.”

Heron echoed March’s point by comparing this district to a painting.

“The value of a painting decreases significantly even if only the least important part of it is destroyed,” he said. “Even though this is only a secondary contributing structure, the district as a whole will lose value if it’s demolished.”

The applicants rebutted by noting that they have held 13 public meetings on the issue over the past two years, yet the majority of people who oppose the project haven’t took notice until the past few months.

“This project has been going on for ten years, and it’s humorous that people haven’t started expressing their concerns until the past few weeks,” said Dan Petrusich, a board member for the Blanchet House. “This project has been well publicized since it started.”

In the end, the Council voted to tentatively approve the demolition permit. The three supporting Council members were persuaded by the applicant’s commitment to the area, and the urban diversity the charity offers, yet had concerns about the economic benefits of the program.

“I choose to support the higher and better use argument on my decision,” said Commissioner Saltzman. “This discussion has made me more aware of the district and why it should be preserved, but the physical attributes of this specific building don’t rise as something to be preserved.”

The lone dissenting voter, Commissioner Frtiz, offered her explanation, “I truly appreciate the services provided by the Blanchet House,” she said. “But I support the current staff recommendation because we need to take full advantage of our dwindling stock of historic places.”

Although the demolition permit was tentatively approved, the applicants must present the plans for the new building to the Council before the demolition can actually take place. The Council will hear a revised staff recommendation and discuss the project further at 10 a.m. on February 24.

For more information on the Blanchet House, please visit: http://www.blanchethouse.org.