Portland development has slowed ALOT

[Rob Nob]

Originally Posted by AdamUrbanist

This is great. I'd like to see a similar process happen with building code. A commission that pokes at everything that has accreeted over the last 150 years with the understanding that things need to be rebalanced in favor of more housing.

I can't imagine a city would open itself up to the liability of compromising building code and the health, safety, and welfare of it's citizens.

Other than maybe energy efficiency, is there something specific in the building code you would change that wouldn't add risk over the long term?

[maccoinnich]

Originally Posted by AdamUrbanist

This is great. I'd like to see a similar process happen with building code. A commission that pokes at everything that has accreeted over the last 150 years with the understanding that things need to be rebalanced in favor of more housing.

Originally Posted by Rob Nob

I can't imagine a city would open itself up to the liability of compromising building code and the health, safety, and welfare of it's citizens.

Other than maybe energy efficiency, is there something specific in the building code you would change that wouldn't add risk over the long term?

The building code doesn't always have to get more restrictive; for example allowances for mass timber have become a lot more flexible over the last couple code cycles. The current code allows mass timber of up to 18 stories and 270', which was impossible except by exceedingly complicated and expensive appeals under previous editions of the code. Right now buildings of up to 12 stories and 180' can only expose 20% of the wood ceiling; in the next code cycle that will go to 100%.

One example of a reform that's currently being studied in Oregon, Washington and California (via bills passed in each legislature this year) is allowing a single stair to serve residential buildings of up to 6 stories in certain circumstances, as is standard in Europe and currently allowed in the City of Seattle.

[pdxsg34]

In the past 3 months, Early Assistance intakes have included 798 new units. Of these units, 3 projects, Centennial Mills (277 units), Pop Blocks Phase 2 (171 units) and SW Barber in Ash Creek (96 units), make up 68% of these new proposed units. That leaves only 254 proposed units in various other projects, across the entire city, over the span of 3 months.

708 proposed units in various projects have sat in approved for 4+ months, and 345 units (Riverplace), 337 units (Mac Block), 290 units (N Argyle), 125 units (SW Market/Goose Hollow), 119 units (SE 22nd & Ankeny), 109 units (N Maryland/Bryant), 108 units (Jolly Roger), and 65 units (Arcoa/Josephine) have not had permit activity in 5+ months. That totals 2,206 units that have sat ready, or almost ready, idle for months.

Vox recently hosted a podcast titled "America's most successful downtown", which focused on Salt Lake City's success in building new housing and avoiding the "downtown doom loop". It's an interesting listen, and what stood out to me was the fact that the city of SLC actually listened to developers regarding tweaks and changes to their permitting system and cut the permit issue times by over 60%. While we have seen some changes and new ideas recently, we must find ways to make it easier and more affordable to build. Granted, there are a ton of different factors at play, but sheesh.. The gap between stalled out existing proposed projects and incoming proposals is getting bigger and bigger.

EDIT: I should add that, since June, 3 (THREE!) projects have moved to construction (SE Division & 30th - 11 units, SE Division & 32nd - 11 units, and NE Alberta & 25th - 29 units). That's 51 units, in a city comprised of ~650,000 people, moving ahead in construction in the past 3 months. Only 1 (ONE!) project has moved to the Under Review phase, an application at that, with 14 units.

To be fair, a number of projects are approaching completion or recently completed, including 25 N Fargo (100 units), Zeal Lofts (215 units), Pop Blocks Phase 1 (219 units), 3000 Powell (206 units), 1010 SE Ash (104 units), Alberta Alive (52 units), Freewell (192 units), Slabtown Savier North/South (364 units), Koz on Killingsworth (154 units), Tiller Terrace (203 units), Koti Apartments (200 units), 5050 Interstate (64 units), SW Gibbs (27 units), 550 MLK (132 units), Minnesota Places (72 units), N Flint (134 units), NW 19th/Pettygrove (126 units), Modera Woodstock (194 units), Atomic Orchard (49 units), Alder9 (159 units). Those projects total 2,966 units coming on line by EOY.

[sopdx]

Please clarify those numbers a bit for me. I know the permitting process in Portland is a mess however, it appears that the vast amount of units not being constructed are not due to permitting but rather other factors - economic, etc...

[pdxsg34]

Originally Posted by sopdx

Please clarify those numbers a bit for me. I know the permitting process in Portland is a mess however, it appears that the vast amount of units not being constructed are not due to permitting but rather other factors - economic, etc...

What numbers would you like clarified? They are based on the permits applied for via PMaps for each project. The totals are not complete by any means, as I listed what I felt were "larger" projects, rather than include all other smaller infill projects.

I'm not making an argument that permits are the reason for delays/cancellations/stalls, but felt the Vox podcast brought up good points that pertain to Portland's situation. Permitting may be one, as I originally noted, of many many reasons projects are slowing (construction costs, financing, economic climate, demand, etc.). I guess the point I'm making is A) we have a good number of projects coming on line, based on units, B), a significant amount of projects in permitting are either stalling out or being cancelled, and C) the number of incoming projects is drastically low compared to prior years.

[sopdx]

Originally Posted by pdxsg34

What numbers would you like clarified? They are based on the permits applied for via PMaps for each project. The totals are not complete by any means, as I listed what I felt were "larger" projects, rather than include all other smaller infill projects.

I'm not making an argument that permits are the reason for delays/cancellations/stalls, but felt the Vox podcast brought up good points that pertain to Portland's situation. Permitting may be one, as I originally noted, of many many reasons projects are slowing (construction costs, financing, economic climate, demand, etc.). I guess the point I'm making is A) we have a good number of projects coming on line, based on units, B), a significant amount of projects in permitting are either stalling out or being cancelled, and C) the number of incoming projects is drastically low compared to prior years.

Definitely, thanks.

Not sure if you remember several months ago there was some cell phone data published by the University of Toronto that had Portland next to last in downtown recovery. It was discovered that they used a tiny segment of downtown for the data - Burnside to Broadway. There is cell phone information referenced in the Vox article from the University of Toronto also, however Portland is much higher on the list than previously - it's not great - but better. Even higher than Seattle. Not sure if they redefined their perimeters

[uncommon.name]

Portland should allow denser multi-family buildings through Inner Eastside, housing groups say
Letter urges creation of denser housing through inner Eastside in preparation for need through 2045

Anna Del Savio Oct 18, 2023

More than 20 local organizations, including Home Forward, Multnomah County’s housing authority, signed onto a letter urging Portland officials to expand dense multifamily zoning.

The groups are calling on the city “to rezone the Inner Eastside of Portland to enable the creation of abundant housing and services in this area, which boasts access to transit, jobs, schools and community amenities.”

The letter was written by Portland: Neighbors Welcome, a tenant and housing advocacy group, and signed by a range of housing, cyclist, pedestrian and environmental protection groups like Hacienda and Oregon Environmental Council.

Specifically, the groups want to “rezone the entire Inner Eastside, not just the busiest streets, to allow mixed-use buildings up to six stories and small neighborhood commercial spaces throughout residential neighborhoods.”..

Read more at the Portland Tribune...

[pdxsg34]

Bureau of Development Services Will Lay Off 15% of Its Employees by Year’s End

In a Nov. 8 Zoom call, the city’s Bureau of Development Services told staff that by the end of the year it would lay off a total of 72 employees, 15% of its workforce.

The bureau is in financial crisis due to fewer permits being requested and therefore less revenue from fees charged by the city to process those permits.

On Wednesday’s Zoom call, the outgoing director of the bureau, Rebecca Esau, said that 56 employees would be notified the week after Thanksgiving that they’ll be out of a job. Last month, the bureau announced it would lay off seven employees, but warned more were certain to come.

Continues at WWeek...

[uncommon.name]

Originally Posted by pdxsg34

Bureau of Development Services Will Lay Off 15% of Its Employees by Year’s End






Continues at WWeek...

That featured picture though...

[colossalorder]

Portland Planning Commission approves code changes proposal ... and yes that picture is awesome.
https://djcoregon.com/news/2023/11/1...nges-proposal/

[jb111120]

I have a list of projects under construction in Portland that I put together. I'm sure it's incomplete and imperfect, but just to confirm what previous posters have said--seems like we have a decent number of projects u/c right now, but there might be a pretty severe dry spell after this batch. By my count there's at least 4000 units u/c.

[pdxsg34]

Over the past 3 months (since 10/1), the following Land Use apps have been posted (early assistance development):

3606 NE MLK - 5 stories, 32 affordable units
1808 NE 12th Ave - 4 stories, 4 condo units
10450 SW Barber Blvd - 5 stories, 96 units
3745 SE Division - 3 stories, 19 units
5249 NE Mason - 9 unit cottage cluster
4744 N Lombard - 45 units
5344 SE 115th - 8 fourplexes, 32 units
8653 N Edison - 40 units
3850 NE MLK - 19 units
11529 SE Division - 3 stories, 22 units

Over the span of 3 months, that's 318 new units proposed in early assistance across the entire city. Average is 106 proposed units/month. And of these units, the SW Barber project makes up 30.1% of these new units. For a city with a current (est) population of ~641,000 people (2021), the 318 units support 0.000496% of our (est) current population. It's bleak as sh* out there for new housing development.

Edit: I should add that none of these proposals are located in downtown proper, old town, the central eastside, along N interstate, goose hollow, or northwest.... where density should be a primary objective.

[CorbinWarrick]

Originally Posted by pdxsg34

Over the past 3 months (since 10/1), the following Land Use apps have been posted (early assistance development):

3606 NE MLK - 5 stories, 32 affordable units
1808 NE 12th Ave - 4 stories, 4 condo units
10450 SW Barber Blvd - 5 stories, 96 units
3745 SE Division - 3 stories, 19 units
5249 NE Mason - 9 unit cottage cluster
4744 N Lombard - 45 units
5344 SE 115th - 8 fourplexes, 32 units
8653 N Edison - 40 units
3850 NE MLK - 19 units
11529 SE Division - 3 stories, 22 units

Over the span of 3 months, that's 318 new units proposed in early assistance across the entire city. Average is 106 proposed units/month. And of these units, the SW Barber project makes up 30.1% of these new units. For a city with a current (est) population of ~641,000 people (2021), the 318 units support 0.000496% of our (est) current population. It's bleak as sh* out there for new housing development.

Edit: I should add that none of these proposals are located in downtown proper, old town, the central eastside, along N interstate, goose hollow, or northwest.... where density should be a primary objective.

Damn that’s crazy what is going on?

[subterranean]

Portland Bureau of Development Services cuts dozens of jobs due to downturn in construction industry

The Bureau of Development Services cut 72 jobs because they are making less money than usual from permitting fees. The department is almost entirely self-funded.

Source: https://www.kgw.com/amp/article/news...4-729d1dd92993

[PhillyPDX]

Originally Posted by subterranean

Source: https://www.kgw.com/amp/article/news...4-729d1dd92993

72 people is only 15% of the office? BDS has almost 500 people? Talk about my assumption being way off for how big that office is, I would have guessed maybe 100 people total.

I wonder, does BDS have the ear of local developers/construction companies? Such that they would realize there is no expected jump in development coming in the near term? Would be dumb to do this move now, after years of slowing development, if they expect development to be on the upswing going forward.

[cityscapes]

Originally Posted by PhillyPDX

72 people is only 15% of the office? BDS has almost 500 people? Talk about my assumption being way off for how big that office is, I would have guessed maybe 100 people total.

I wonder, does BDS have the ear of local developers/construction companies? Such that they would realize there is no expected jump in development coming in the near term? Would be dumb to do this move now, after years of slowing development, if they expect development to be on the upswing going forward.

I’ve worked for a couple large development review departments around the country and they’re always fee funded. The 900k population city had about the same amount of staff in BDS equivalent department. I’m now working for a jurisdiction with 230k people has nearly 300 staff. I’ve never worked in a position high enough to have details on how they do budget forecasting for the entire department but I can offer the following background. Typically we can only make decision based on the data we have which is why you often see the hiring ramp up lag the development uptick during a boom because you need the fees and budget to justify the hiring.

Also in addition to the planners and building plan reviewers there are always a lot of admin staff, code enforcement typically is large, there are separate staff who do mechanical, electrical, and plumbing review, you have all the inspectors who are going from site to site daily and things most people don’t think about like AC units, kitchen renovations, and those magnetic badge locks in office buildings all require permits reviewed by multiple people + processing by a permit tech so it does take a lot of people to review the things that come through the department. New construction single family or multi family / commercial are usually not the most common review type in any bureau because the alterations, additions, MEP, and sign permits are the bulk of the permits processed in a given year.

[subterranean]

Accurate. Land Use & Transportation at Wash. County is like 1/4 of all county employees (the other largest dept is HHS). Development side is probably 150 people and also 100% fee funded, and it’s been a major problem through the boom bust cycles. The board just approved a huge increase to fees, which I believe doubled everything, and an automatic inflation adjustment. Fee based positions include all current planning, development assistance, plans examiners, GIS, survey, building permit and building inspector staff. Then you have the management, admin and financial folks, most of which are also fee funded positions.

[aquaticko]

Originally Posted by subterranean

Accurate. Land Use & Transportation at Wash. County is like 1/4 of all county employees (the other largest dept is HHS). Development side is probably 150 people and also 100% fee funded, and it’s been a major problem through the boom bust cycles. The board just approved a huge increase to fees, which I believe doubled everything, and an automatic inflation adjustment. Fee based positions include all current planning, development assistance, plans examiners, GIS, survey, building permit and building inspector staff. Then you have the management, admin and financial folks, most of which are also fee funded positions.

This seems dumb. Pending a city's development agency's funds to economic cycles is a great way to test the waters of just how punitive development fees can be before, even during boom times, they start to discourage development.

I have no problem at all with ensuring developers contribute to a city's finances, and inflation-adjusting figures is just good sense, but having the timing/size of a contribution up-tick just as a developer's ready to build something seems awfully counterproductive.

[subterranean]

When people aren’t willing to pay for the government they need through taxes, you get a fee-base system. If only you knew how painful those cycles are, not only to the county in terms of laying people off and then finally getting staffed up just in time for another crash, but also to development itself. Governments in this area are having a hard enough time filling vacancies with qualified staff.

Developers beg for more staff at development forums. The increased fees were to fund baseline operations and brought the County into closer parity with other jurisdictions. It is tiny compared to the overall budget of most developments and the fees are still low for one-off jobs for homeowners. The biggest fees are System Development Charges, which except for TDT aren’t even going to the County, but service districts.

[PhillyPDX]

Originally Posted by subterranean

When people aren’t willing to pay for the government they need through taxes, you get a fee-base system. If only you knew how painful those cycles are, not only to the county in terms of laying people off and then finally getting staffed up just in time for another crash, but also to development itself. Governments in this area are having a hard enough time filling vacancies with qualified staff.

Developers beg for more staff at development forums. The increased fees were to fund baseline operations and brought the County into closer parity with other jurisdictions. It is tiny compared to the overall budget of most developments and the fees are still low for one-off jobs for homeowners. The biggest fees are System Development Charges, which except for TDT aren’t even going to the County, but service districts.

Yes, "Developers beg for more staff at development forums" is something I was wondering about. Seems to be we need more staff already, and then when fee based structure dries up, we lose staff instead of just providing a faster development process. So IF development picks up soon, BDS won't be near ready enough. I'm hoping (at least for BDS sake), they only let people go after hearing that developers are not planning on a pickup anytime soon. Of course, that would not be a good sign overall for development picking up anytime soon.