COURTESY / BENCHMARK REAL ESTATE
Tom Landry
Updated: July 29, 2024
Commentary: Portland's 'ReCode' zoning overhaul is a good start, but needs to go further
By Tom Landry, Benchmark Real Estate
After years of work, a document that will mark the course of Portland's future for the next 50 years is set to become law. And you likely haven’t heard about it.
Land use might not sound sexy, or even interesting, but it is the very underpinning of our community.
Questions and consequences
Will we have enough housing of all types to support all income levels? Will local businesses have locations to set up shop, expand, and grow? Will more of us be able to open our doors and walk to the salons, shops, bars, breweries, boutiques, parks, and playgrounds we love? Will Maine’s largest city allow more density and height and embrace the responsibility to protect our farms and fields from suburban sprawl? How we answer these questions, now and part of ReCode, will determine our city’s future and that of the state. The time is now!
More is needed
I commend and congratulate current and past city staff including Nell Donaldson, Kevin Kraft, Christine Grimando, and Jeff Levine on their work. However, we need to be much more ambitious. Right now, in this summer of ReCode, the ball is on our court, yours and mine as residents of Portland. The city wants to hear from you this summer, and I encourage you to learn more and let your voice be heard. Change is hard. But change is needed in both policy and community mindset. The primary way to address both the housing crisis and to protect our rural lands, is to build more in urban areas.
The current proposal is a terrific start and meets the moment in many ways. That said, it falls short as a forward-thinking roadmap to manage growth in a rapidly evolving city.
Over the last decade, Portland has felt the impact of in-immigration and re-urbanization. Coupled with increases in inclusionary housing requirements, rent control, anti-development/developer sentiments, a complicated and costly permitting process, large swaths of the city deemed historic, higher cost to borrow and build, and antiquated zoning, we find ourselves in a housing crisis of epic proportions.
To solve this, we must look for ways to immediately and dramatically increase housing supply, of all types and at all levels, to meet the demand of today and tomorrow. To do this, we must up-zone urban areas and transportation corridors and simplify and streamline the permitting process. The suggestions below come from a place of deep understanding and experience as a local developer, real estate agent, and student of land use and zoning.
More height and density should be allowed along all major corridors and neighborhood centers.
By some estimates, as much as 90% of Portland’s landmass and 70% of the peninsula isn’t zoned for multi-family or mixed use. Areas like East Bayside — where we now find coffee shops, breweries and shops — are zoned for light industrial use and don’t allow for residential uses. Off peninsula there are hundreds of acres zoned for industrial uses that lay fallow.
My proposal opens vast tracts of vacant and underutilized land that lays in waiting for industrial users that may never come. Beyond this, the idea that we must keep commercial and light industry away from residential areas is antiquated. This separation was valid, justified and prudent 50 to100 years ago, but not in this time of quieter and cleaner industry. Besides, we are not in a warehouse or industrial space crisis. We are in a housing crisis. So, let's open this land to development.
Proposal is too restrictive
The proposed RN5 (formerly R6) is too restrictive. For context, this zone is in the most populated part of the peninsula and was intended to be the area where most of the residential real estate development and housing would be. In the last decade, what can be built in R6 was modified and made more restrictive. Beyond this, the majority of R6 was placed under historic preservation. This eliminated the ability to demolish neglected 1-, 2- and 3-families and replace them with larger buildings. It also added a level of complexity, expense, delays and oversight.
Those seeking to build in these areas today, even on a vacant lot, must navigate the historic preservation board, which can take up to six months and cost developers tens of thousands of dollars. In fact, the current R6 is so limiting that many of the historic homes we all love could not be constructed today. The proposed RN5 down zones these urban residential areas and needs to be edited.
Suggested edits to RN5 (formerly R6):
- Reduce side setbacks to 10’ total with 2’ required on one side and 8’ on the other. This allows for a buffer on one side and a drive aisle on the other. This is the rhythm/layout of most of the current neighborhoods.
- Reduce rear setback to 5 feet.
- Allow 80% lot coverage that would include the primary structure and outbuildings and eliminate any reference to maximum building lengths.
- Allow structures to be built to 60 feet. The current allowed height is 45 feet. This will allow for four stories and offset efforts underway to adjust/lower how we determine average grade. This also increases the likelihood of occupants in spaces with greater volume and those high ceilings we all love.
- Allow 10 feet for roof "appurtenances," such as rooftop gardens. The current and proposed zoning does not address this and it’s a big miss. Past changes eliminated the ability to create activated, livable roofs with amenities like rooftop gardens with elevator and stairwell access.
- Re-zone and sell city owned land for mixed use development. The city owns two golf courses and many parcels that would be ideal for residential and mixed-use development. Identify parcels to sell and put out a request for proposal, award the sale based on the establishment of a mixed-use development with a variety of residential living options and price points. For larger parcels (like these golf courses) award based on the developer who proposes the establishment of a new complete community with parks, playgrounds, trails, housing (rental and for-sale), retail space and more.
- Further develop the Portland technology park. Located off Rand Road, this 26-acre site was intended to lure businesses in the state's growing life sciences industry. To date, only one of the seven sites has closed with two others under contract. Clearly this site, which has been underutilized over the last 13 years, should be put to its highest and best use. Let’s turn this into a mixed-use development of housing, office, warehouse and so on. This would be the perfect place for people to live, work and play.
- Simplify and streamline permitting. From historic and planning board approvals to permit in hand, this process needs to be simplified and streamlined.
- Establish pre-approved development types. These would bypass public meetings, both historic and planning board approvals, and receive a building permit upon planning staff approval.
Most Recent
Most Recent
0 Comments