Image / Zoom screen capture
Portland District 4 City Councilor Andrew Zarro, middle row, second from left, Monday night explains his request that the council reconsider its vote against a Munjoy Hill Historic Distrct.
Updated: February 23, 2021
Portland City Council will reconsider Munjoy Hill historic district
Photo / Maureen Milliken
The Portland City Council will reconsider its vote denying approval of a historic district on Munjoy Hill.
By Maureen Milliken
The Portland City Council narrowly agreed Monday to reconsider the creation of a historic district for Munjoy Hill, a proposal the council rejected Feb. 1.
District 4 Councilor Andrew Zarro, who had voted against the district, asked for the reconsideration at the council meeting Monday night, saying he felt he didn't have enough information to make the "extremely difficult" decision. He also urged the city and council to push for more consideration of equity — economic, racial, environmental — at the onset of such proposals.
The council voted 5-4 Monday to reconsider the Munjoy Hill historic district vote at an April 5 meeting; the vote margin was the same that the historic district had failed by.
Zarro, who was elected in November and seated in December, said he would have preferred putting off the Feb. 1 vote so he could gather more information about the proposal, but he realized there was "no appetite" for another delay to the vote, which had already been postponed once by the board.
He was inclined to favor it "but there were too many questions left unanswered." After the vote, "I spent the night awake, wondering if I'd made the right decision."
He's submitted several questions to city staff, and hopes to get answers to by April 5 include those regarding economic, cost of living and racial equity impacts of the district on the neighborhood.
He also wants the city to explore creating a fund that would help residents in historic district "contributing" properties pay for non-cosmetic changes. Contributing property is considered historic, and there are requirements regarding changes that are visible from the street.
Voting in favor of reconsideration were Zarro; Mayor Kate Snyder; Mark Dion, District 5; Belinda Ray, District 1, which includes Mumjoy Hill; and Spencer Thibodeau, District 2. Opposed to reconsidering the vote were Pious Ali, at-large; April Fournier, at-large; Nicholas Mavodones, District 2; and Tae Chong, District 3.
Ray encouraged other members of the board to submit questions as well, "whether it changes your vote or not."
Snyder said she expects more information to be available to councilors by their April 5 vote.
Councilors who voted against the reconsideration indicated they felt the district should be laid to rest. Fournier said there are a lot of people in the city with needs and in crisis. "We're using city resources to to get information on something we've already voted against," she said, when there are other priorities the resources could better be used for.
Chong said that councilors who want additional information on something should do their own research, with much of the information Zarro is looking for available through the U.S. Census and other data collection sites. There's also "a great swath of experts" on the board who can add their expertise. "Some of the onus is on us," he said.
A push for more equity
Zarro's move to reconsider came with two proposals, neither of which were part of Monday's vote.
The first is that the city resolve to do an economic impact analysis of all of its historic districts — the Munjoy Hill district would bring the number to 12.
"It is important that we recognize the historic step forward toward understanding the impacts of historic district designation in our city," Zarro said. "It's also important that we take the time. If we're going to do this, let's do it well and give adequate time to securing funding, finding consultants with expertise in this field, outlining metrics and engaging our communities.
"If there's one thing that I hope we learn from the Feb. 1 vote, is that if we try to rush a vote through the council without the due diligence, we'll find ourselves with a less than favorable outcome," he said.
He also proposed that the district ordinance be strengthened and historic preservation commission, planning board and city council polices overall be updated, to "include a lens of equity — economic, racial and environmental — at the onset of exploring new districts."
He said that if that update had existed for the Munjoy Hill proposal, it would have been approved. "As many of the concerns mentioned would have been systematically addressed from the origin of the proposal."
"We must invest not just in the places we care about, but in the people that live there, too," Zarro said.
Equity, affordability concerns on both sides
Councilors on both sides of the Feb. 1 vote said they are concerned about maintaining affordable housing and diversity in the neighborhood, and that at the heart of their vote was affordability and lack of access to housing for the city's working class, many of whom are Black and Brown immigrants.
Councilors opposed to the district, including Zarro, said they didn't have enough information on the economic impact to vulnerable communities and on affordable housing.
The one-time working-class neighborhood and immigrant enclave is now the city's most expensive place to live, with average rents at $1,482, city staff said in February. The historic district proposal grew out of concern about development in the neighborhood at the eastern end of Portland's peninsula, as the two- and three-story clapboard multifamily buildings that line the streets gave way to the wrecking ball and modern condominium buildings.
The Munjoy Hill Historic District would include 376 out of 427 properties on 64 acres in the neighborhood as contributing. Overall, the district would represent 49% of Munjoy Hill’s building stock, most of which is residential.
The historic district was approved by the Portland Historic Preservation Commission in November 2019, and by the Planning Board in August, in a 4-3 vote where members had many of the same concerns the council has. The board's vote came after several years of debate, zoning changes, a tear-down moratorium and a zoning overlay district in 2018 that slowed construction.
At the Feb. 1 meeting, 41 members of the public spoke before the council took its vote, the majority in favor. Like the council itself, those on both sides cited lack of affordable housing in the city, as well as policies and development trends that stymie diversity. Many of those opposed also said they didn't want more rules about how they could renovate their property.
Most Recent
Most Recent
0 Comments