A group of Portland residents launched a campaign Wednesday to oppose a ballot question that they contend could halt development in the city but that supporters argue is needed to protect scenic views.
Question 2 on the city’s November ballot was initiated by citizens in an attempt to stop the planned redevelopment of the historic Portland Co. complex located on the city’s eastern waterfront. But the referendum, which is being spearheaded by a group called Save the Soul of Portland, also would create a process for protecting additional “scenic viewpoints” in the city through rezoning and would require would-be developers to comply with additional restrictions.
On Wednesday, a group called Portland’s Future announced their own campaign to defeat Question 2, which they argued has implications far more sweeping than the future of the Portland Co. complex. Leaders of Portland Future warned that the referendum would stymie development and sustainable growth across the city.
“This ordinance could pit residents against residents and neighborhood against neighborhood for decades to come,” Jess Knox, co-chair of Portland’s Future PAC, said during a press conference in the West Bayside neighborhood. “In an effort to stop one project, the proponents of Question 2 are irresponsibly willing to put at risk every new idea, every new innovation and new project proposed for this great city. The smallest of things like someone adding a flagpole, a new porch on their house or new landscaping on a property can be challenged.”
With the emergence of Portland’s Future PAC, city residents are likely to have two hotly contested ballot campaigns headed into November. Another referendum question is proposing a $15-an-hour minimum wage in the city.
Question 2 on the ballot will shape the fate of one of the most prized properties on the Portland waterfront.
A company called CPB2 LLC purchased the 10-acre Portland Co. site located at 58 Fore Street in 2013. On June 2, the Portland City Council voted 7-2 to approve a redevelopment plan of the site that includes residential buildings, offices and a marketplace often described as similar to Boston’s Faneuil Hall. While the developers have said they plan to preserve some of the most historic buildings in the complex and will improve public access to the waterfront, they have said less-historic buildings or dilapidated structures would be replaced.
Although CPB2 has yet to release detailed plans for the redevelopment, the concept proposal quickly encountered backlash from neighborhood residents concerned about losing their view of Portland Harbor.
If passed by voters, the referendum would designate the area of the eastern waterfront from Fore Street to Casco Bay and between Waterville Street and Atlantic Street as the city’s first “scenic viewpoint protection zone.” The ordinance would restrict building heights on the property to protect views from Fore Street and Munjoy Hill. But it would also create a 13-person task force to identify other scenic vistas worth preserving, and make recommendations to the City Council and Planning Board on them. New viewpoints could be added by the task force, by a property owner, or by any 20 residents who petition the city.
“We believe this referendum will strike a reasonable balance between the interests of residents and those of developers,” Anne Rand, spokeswoman for Save the Soul of Portland, said last month after submitting petition signatures for the ballot question. “As it is, we believe the city and Planning Board have gone too far in favor of developers. We are not trying to halt the development. But we believe reasonable adjustments should be made on a small part of the site so that we continue to protect this treasured view that is part of what makes Portland special.”
Members of Portland’s Future PAC countered Wednesday that the referendum’s backers are attempting to upend the city’s planning and development review process – and putting economic development at risk – just to preserve their own water views. They predicted that the referendum, if passed, would allow almost anyone in the city tie up any development projects in red tape.
“Portland has a great tradition of citizen involvement in development decisions,” said Lisa Whited, co-chair of Portland’s Future. “Public hearings are packed. The process is thorough and long. And everyone who wants to participate gets a chance to contribute.”
David Farmer, spokesman for Portland’s Future, said the political action committee has had discussions with the owners and planned developers of the Portland Co. site but that they are not among the leaders of the organization. The group planned to file their paperwork with the city on Wednesday and that fundraising will begin in earnest afterward.
“Absolutely we all support the Portland Co. proposal: It is visionary and good for the waterfront,” said Farmer, a veteran consultant and senior staffer on statewide and local political campaigns.
The opponents said the Question 2 referendum could have been used to block such waterfront projects as the Portland Fish Exchange, the Gulf of Maine Research Institute and the Eimskip cargo facility if it had been in place at the time of those development projects.
Kevin Miller can be reached at 791-6312 or at:
Twitter: KevinMillerPPH
Send questions/comments to the editors.
Success. Please wait for the page to reload. If the page does not reload within 5 seconds, please refresh the page.
Enter your email and password to access comments.
Hi, to comment on stories you must . This profile is in addition to your subscription and website login.
Already have a commenting profile? .
Invalid username/password.
Please check your email to confirm and complete your registration.
Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or login first for digital access. Here’s why.
Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.