South Waterfront News - Page 135

MarkDaMan · #**2681** Posted **Feb 27, 2019, 5:34 PM**

Statement from Zidell as reported by the Portland Business Journal (subscription required)

Quote:

ZRZ provided the statement from Zidell, which follows here:

"Last summer, we mutually agreed with the City to terminate the existing development agreement for Zidell Yards. At that time, we stated we were willing to re-engage with the City to continue negotiations if we felt a deal could be made. We re-entered negotiations late last year to see if we could come to an agreement. Unfortunately, given the development requirements placed upon us by the City, we could not come to a financially feasible agreement that would still allow us to attract investors in a competitive market.

"There were many factors that made making a deal difficult, including the City’s interpretation of the Inclusionary Housing policy. We support the goals of that policy, but the policy itself remains a work in progress. Many developers have had difficulty meeting the demands of the policy and development has slowed dramatically as a result. We feel it’s virtually certain the policy will change in the future, but the City wanted us to guarantee that all our development projects, even those that won’t start for many years, complied with the policy as it stands today. If the policy changes, that would put us at a market disadvantage against other projects seeking financing at the same future date. Because of this risk and other factors, we could not move forward with development.

"We appreciate the hard work the City and Prosper Portland have put into this, and we appreciate the support we have received from throughout the community for our vision for Zidell Yards.

"We will continue to work on our vision, recognizing that this project is our mission and legacy and could be transformative for the City. At this point, we’re looking at all options, but today we have no path forward."

MarkDaMan · #**2682** Posted **Aug 20, 2019, 11:42 PM**

From the Business Tribune: https://pamplinmedia.com/but/239-news/43...eater-talk-raises-noise-traffic-concerns

Quote:

South Waterfront amphitheater talk raises noise, traffic concerns
Stephanie Basalyga Monday, August 12, 2019
OHSU requests venue proposer Live Nation assess possible noise impacts on nearby Rood Pavilion

A major events promoter has selected Portland's South Waterfront as the location of choice for a temporary amphitheater, but not everyone is convinced the plan is a good idea.

Live Nation, which is looking to build a 10,000-seat amphitheater on land owned by the Zidell family, met with the heads of various city of Portland bureaus late last month to receive input related to the proposed project.

Live Nation holds nearly 30,000 events around the world each year and also currently operates 50 amphitheaters. The company had been watching Portland and waiting for the right opportunity, according to Matt Prieshoff, chief strategy officer with Live Nation.

"We looked for quite some time in the city of Portland for … the right space, the right size," he added.

The amphitheater Live Nation wants to build would be in place for seven years, the length of time the event promoter has agreed to lease the land from the Zidell family, who owns the property. The company is working on the outdoor venue project with two Portland-based firms, Hacker Architects and O'Brien & Co.

...(continues)

MarkDaMan · #**2683** Posted **Aug 22, 2019, 2:28 AM**

From KGW: https://www.kgw.com/article/money/busine...283-9d945349-932f-41e5-9ab9-c950b0d0d4b8

Quote:

10,000-seat Live Nation amphitheater proposed in Portland's South Waterfront
Live Nation is eyeing Zidell Yards as a possible site for a new concert venue. The site is currently being used as a parking lot.
Author: Morgan Romero
Published: 7:07 PM PDT August 21, 2019
Updated: 7:11 PM PDT August 21, 2019

PORTLAND, Ore. — Portland's South Waterfront has grown a lot over the years. Now, an entertainment company thinks the area is ready for a 10,000-seat amphitheater.

National events promoter and venue operator Live Nation is eyeing one of the last undeveloped - or not re-developed - plots in that area for an outdoor venue.

It was once an early 1900s warship scrapyard and successful operation. All around Zidell Yards, you can see modern development, condos and Oregon Health Science & University (OHSU) buildings.

Generations later, the land between Tilikum Crossing and the Ross Island Bridge is still in the hands of the Zidell family. The site is currently being used as a parking lot and has seen popular events there over the years.

Hacker Architects proposed site plan for amphitheater between Ross Island Bridge and Tilikum Crossing.
Hacker Architects

...(continues)

Derek · #**2684** Posted **Aug 22, 2019, 5:21 AM**

I’m all for it if they were to at least build out the waterfront path.....doesn’t look like that’s going to be the case.

maccoinnich · #**2685** Posted **Sep 12, 2019, 7:55 PM**

Posting Notice for the Live Nation South Waterfront venue.

Derek · #**2686** Posted **Sep 12, 2019, 7:59 PM**

“We have a site with a beautiful backdrop of Mt. Hood and the Tillikum Bridge....lets make sure everybody’s backs are towards it!”

2oh1 · #**2687** Posted **Sep 12, 2019, 9:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek

“We have a site with a beautiful backdrop of Mt. Hood and the Tillikum Bridge....lets make sure everybody’s backs are towards it!”

To be fair, it looks like they're trying to direct sound toward the river instead of straight into the neighborhood, though they'll be adding a lot of noise to the neighborhood no matter what.

PdX Farr · #**2688** Posted **Sep 12, 2019, 10:46 PM**

Still think this would be a much better option for a baseball stadium with a small footprint like Oracle (att) park in SF.

urbanlife · #**2689** Posted **Sep 13, 2019, 5:31 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by PdX Farr

Still think this would be a much better option for a baseball stadium with a small footprint like Oracle (att) park in SF.

If you knock down the 3030 Building, a baseball stadium could fit there, though parking would be a challenge. Parking would probably have to be off site locations and heavily relying on the transit that already runs through that area (not a bad thing to have happen.)

subterranean · #**2690** Posted **Sep 13, 2019, 6:08 AM**

South waterfront is a mess without a baseball stadium, could you imagine what it would be like with one? Absolutely gridlock.

eric cantona · #**2691** Posted **Sep 13, 2019, 4:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by subterranean

South waterfront is a mess without a baseball stadium, could you imagine what it would be like with one? Absolutely gridlock.

word.

Derek · #**2692** Posted **Sep 13, 2019, 5:24 PM**

I live down here and I’d much rather see a ballpark built there than this stupid thing (and I was originally all for it when it was first announced).

maccoinnich · #**2693** Posted **Sep 27, 2019, 1:06 AM**

Live Nation at Zidell Yards DAR #1 Drawings [88 MB] and Memo.

RED_PDXer · #**2694** Posted **Sep 27, 2019, 6:29 PM**

I think this will be a fantastic interim use! Lots of activation of the space and hopefully a lot of folks will take advantage of transit here. I'm glad they aren't adding any car parking. TriMet can store an extra train set at Union Station and another near SE Clinton station to provide additional service before and after events in each direction, if it's needed, or simply run a couple extra trains for the hours before and after.

Derek · #**2695** Posted **Sep 27, 2019, 8:07 PM**

It’s a terrible waste of space in an extraordinary valuable location. And we could be stuck with it for 7 or more years? It’s gonna be a no from me dawg.

pdxsg34 · #**2696** Posted **Sep 27, 2019, 9:18 PM**

I agree its a bummer we don't get to see Zidell yards being developed in the near term, and the Zidells were fairly explicit about the IH rules being a key factor in their decision to abandon recently. I hope the city continues to work toward an IH plan that's reasonable for a development like this, so well see. That said, I'll take this over an empty lot any day.

RED_PDXer · #**2697** Posted **Sep 28, 2019, 1:35 PM**

It's incredibly optimistic to think that Zidell holdings will be redeveloped with much of anything permanent within 7 years if this interim use isn't built. We're likely heading into an economic downturn or at least a construction slowdown. This won't slow down anything on its own and it'll result in more people taking advantage of all the transit serving this area. It will take years to re-start negotiations with the City, and re-plan the site for whatever makes financial sense in several years time. There's also an incredible amount of development already planned for the area - 1000+ residential units near SW Bancroft, 2,500 residential units in Riverplace, and up to 2 million square feet at OMSI master plan.

NOPO · #**2698** Posted **Sep 30, 2019, 11:32 PM**

I find the argument made by the owners of Zidell property to be weak sauce about why they quit on the project. It’s just conservative, big money speech saying that regulations are bad. This project could have gone forward if they just worked with the city.

Malix · #**2699** Posted **Oct 2, 2019, 10:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by NOPO

I find the argument made by the owners of Zidell property to be weak sauce about why they quit on the project. It’s just conservative, big money speech saying that regulations are bad. This project could have gone forward if they just worked with the city.

This is not about big money speeches, or regulations it is about the lack of a public private partnership. Guess who collects and garners the property taxes? Not the developer, the city. So the issue is should the developer (Private sector) have to pay the freight on laying infrastructure, making roads etc etc. That is a heavy burden for any project especially today when regular projects caught within their own property line cannot pencil. Maybe if the private sector builds the public facilities then they can become their own district and collect the tax revenue.? Would that make them a PUD? The play here is the timing...i think it all comes down to the public sector making an investment and wants certainty from the Private sector on the return using a TIF model.

NOPO · #**2700** Posted **Oct 2, 2019, 11:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malix

This is not about big money speeches, or regulations it is about the lack of a public private partnership. Guess who collects and garners the property taxes? Not the developer, the city. So the issue is should the developer (Private sector) have to pay the freight on laying infrastructure, making roads etc etc. That is a heavy burden for any project especially today when regular projects caught within their own property line cannot pencil. Maybe if the private sector builds the public facilities then they can become their own district and collect the tax revenue.? Would that make them a PUD? The play here is the timing...i think it all comes down to the public sector making an investment and wants certainty from the Private sector on the return using a TIF model.

It’s frustrating they couldn’t get a partnership to work in any case. I’m not sure I yet feel that this didn’t have something to do with big money making a stand, but I see what you are saying.