Protect the Diversity of the Hill & Stop Historical Designation
12 Comments
R
Robert Hall
7 years ago
Featured
I think there should be Historic Districts on Munjoy Hill to protect and renovate the housing stock rather then put up those ugly boxy modern condos. It is an insult and disrespects the neighborhood.
T
Tica Douglas
7 years ago
We want and need a historic district to protect Munjoy Hill from the reckless development that has been changing our neighborhood so dramatically.
A
Anonymous
7 years ago
Featured
I am opposed to a historic district. I have owned my home on the Hill for the past 27 years and did not see much progress or improvements until 2015. We still have a large number of residence in need of total rebuilds. Adding the requirements associated with a historic district will make it more difficult to accomplish the necessary improvements needed to meet the needs of our community.
A
Anonymous
7 years ago
Featured
I do not want a historic district. I welcome the improvements and updating that have occurred in the last few years.
N
Ned Chester
7 years ago
Featured
I strongly support the Historical Designation for Munjoy Hill for all of the reasons listed by Ms. Snyder, Ms. Koch and Mr. Westrom. I moved to Munjoy Hill 40 years ago to live in a neighborhood rich with history and a varied streetscape of buildings built by and for working class people. Our successors will never share this experience unless we work hard to preserve it. An HIstorical Designation will be a key part of the preservation process.
E
enoch wenstrom
7 years ago
To clarify.. I typed a quarter of a million when in fact they are closer to 3/4 of a million.
E
enoch wenstrom
7 years ago
I want a historic district. I have lived on the hill for 25+ years and I agree at one time there were a lot of houses in disrepair. But now there are very few and renovation is always an option. If we as a community continue down the path from 2015 and continue to tear down old houses rebuilding with massive ugly boxes, what will be left in 20 years? Certainly not affordable apartments or condos as what is being built now generally costs a quarter of a million dollars for a 2 bedroom living space. I don't see Historic preservation on the Hill as it has been layed out as anything that will hinder well meaning property owners. I agree it could be viewed as hindering a greedy developer, greedy property owner looking to cash in and a demo worker. I would challenge anyone to prove or even come up with an example of how these new 3/4 million condos are promoting livability, diversity and working workforce in Portland. Instead, I see them as creating gentrification which is NOT what historic districts traditionally create.
E
erna koch
7 years ago
Featured
I absolutely want the protection of a Historic District. The Hill is being overrun by hideous big box condo buildings built by profit-seeking outsiders. I prefer living in neighborhoods that are not dominated by summer residents in condos. It breaks my heart, as a long term resident.
Many people have mistaken ideas about what it means to own a property in a Historic District. In case of most Hill property owners, it would not be a burden, could quite possibly increase our property value, and protect us from the kind of permanent change/damage we DON'T want.
I
Isabella Brandt
7 years ago
I want to see Munjoy Hill have Historic Districts.
K
Karen Snyder
7 years ago
Featured
I do want a Historic District on Munjoy Hill. Why? It will hold your neighbors to the same standard as your property such that if there is a zoning change.. like 2015, developers won't be allowed to easily build oversized box condo buildings like they did before moratorium. Portland's Historic District does also the following: 1) You don't have to do anything to your building if you don't want to, 2) Like kind replacements are allowed.. vinyl is final, 3) Paint colors are NOT regulated, 4) Alternations & additions are allowed in Historic Districts, 5) Only the street facing part of buildings is subject to review, 6) All changes within interior is not subject to Historic District. 7) Repairs in Historic Districts are not necessarily more expensive, etc.
I think there should be Historic Districts on Munjoy Hill to protect and renovate the housing stock rather then put up those ugly boxy modern condos. It is an insult and disrespects the neighborhood.
We want and need a historic district to protect Munjoy Hill from the reckless development that has been changing our neighborhood so dramatically.
I am opposed to a historic district. I have owned my home on the Hill for the past 27 years and did not see much progress or improvements until 2015. We still have a large number of residence in need of total rebuilds. Adding the requirements associated with a historic district will make it more difficult to accomplish the necessary improvements needed to meet the needs of our community.
I do not want a historic district. I welcome the improvements and updating that have occurred in the last few years.
I strongly support the Historical Designation for Munjoy Hill for all of the reasons listed by Ms. Snyder, Ms. Koch and Mr. Westrom. I moved to Munjoy Hill 40 years ago to live in a neighborhood rich with history and a varied streetscape of buildings built by and for working class people. Our successors will never share this experience unless we work hard to preserve it. An HIstorical Designation will be a key part of the preservation process.
To clarify.. I typed a quarter of a million when in fact they are closer to 3/4 of a million.
I want a historic district. I have lived on the hill for 25+ years and I agree at one time there were a lot of houses in disrepair. But now there are very few and renovation is always an option. If we as a community continue down the path from 2015 and continue to tear down old houses rebuilding with massive ugly boxes, what will be left in 20 years? Certainly not affordable apartments or condos as what is being built now generally costs a quarter of a million dollars for a 2 bedroom living space. I don't see Historic preservation on the Hill as it has been layed out as anything that will hinder well meaning property owners. I agree it could be viewed as hindering a greedy developer, greedy property owner looking to cash in and a demo worker. I would challenge anyone to prove or even come up with an example of how these new 3/4 million condos are promoting livability, diversity and working workforce in Portland. Instead, I see them as creating gentrification which is NOT what historic districts traditionally create.
I absolutely want the protection of a Historic District. The Hill is being overrun by hideous big box condo buildings built by profit-seeking outsiders. I prefer living in neighborhoods that are not dominated by summer residents in condos. It breaks my heart, as a long term resident. Many people have mistaken ideas about what it means to own a property in a Historic District. In case of most Hill property owners, it would not be a burden, could quite possibly increase our property value, and protect us from the kind of permanent change/damage we DON'T want.
I want to see Munjoy Hill have Historic Districts.
I do want a Historic District on Munjoy Hill. Why? It will hold your neighbors to the same standard as your property such that if there is a zoning change.. like 2015, developers won't be allowed to easily build oversized box condo buildings like they did before moratorium. Portland's Historic District does also the following: 1) You don't have to do anything to your building if you don't want to, 2) Like kind replacements are allowed.. vinyl is final, 3) Paint colors are NOT regulated, 4) Alternations & additions are allowed in Historic Districts, 5) Only the street facing part of buildings is subject to review, 6) All changes within interior is not subject to Historic District. 7) Repairs in Historic Districts are not necessarily more expensive, etc.
I don't want a historic district on Munjoy Hill.
I don't want a historic district