February 19, 2005
Revised Burnside Bridgehead Proposals Released
New Submissions Are Final Proposals Before Selection
Friday was the deadline for the three developers vying for the Burnside Bridgehead project to submit their revised proposals to the Portland Development Commission. They have already been posted to the PDC website.
We haven't yet had the chance to take some real time to study them, but rather than keep the fun to ourselves, we thought it made sense to post something letting our readers know that the new plans are now available.
Some very preliminary thoughts now, subject to change as we get the chance to wade through the details.
Gerding/Edlen submitted the skimpiest of the revision documents and in our early skimming it comes across rather pro forma. The rumor a while back that they had dropped out of the running may not be true, but their involvement and attention over the past month or two doesn't suggest to us that they are doing more than going through the motions.
Beam's revised proposal includes responses to the "pros and cons" list produced by the evaluation committee, and direct comparisons (challenges?) to the original Opus proposal -- perhaps an indication that Beam now sees Opus as the biggest potential threat to them, as it were. They frame their new submission less as a revised proposal than as an extended explanation of their original proposal, under the premise that they were most of the way "there" right from the beginning anyway.
Opus submitted a revised proposal which likely will receive most of the new attention, since they have clearly done the most to try to catch-up to the early lead of the Beam proposal. Given the merely rote involvement of Gerding/Edlen and the general consistency of Beam, the new Opus proposal is the one which we are going to have to study the closest.
Although we will say up front that we find it a little suspect that they go out of their way expressly to tout their charitable giving, something that was mentioned to us in a wide-ranging off-the-record conversation we had with them, and which was characterized as something they don't use to promote themselves. That doesn't have any bearing on whatever their new proposal may be like, but it does add another element to the strange vibe many people have gotten from Opus since the first public presentation.
All of that said, we will be working our way through the new proposals this weekend, and will return to the subject as we come to a fuller understanding of them, or as other media outlets weigh in.
As per the new timeline for this project, these proposals are now considered final, and are what the Commission, the evaluation committee, and the public will be dealing with from here on out.
Comments (7)
Jack Peek on 19 Feb 2005
BIX: Please list the developers that are bidding this project and then list how many are on Randy Leonard's "friends of Randy's" money list.
Why no comment on the current issue of the SW WATER FRONT DEAL? There seems to be a "conflict of interest to a SMALL degree.
Better yet, post the list period! it's all over the net!
The One True b!X on 19 Feb 2005
Hey Jack, why don't you go start a blog and talk about South Waterfront all you want?
It's just me here Jack. One guy, trying to keep up with and write about the various aspects of Portland that interest him. Some things don't interest me, and some things interest me but don't ever manage to make it onto the site.
That's how this works.
So rather than constantly yell at people for not blogging the way you want them to go f*cking blog yourself and then you can always be satisfied.
Bob R. on 19 Feb 2005
B!x -
You are quite correct, but you may have missed a historical moment here. It's easy to miss, but this may be the first instance in the history of the Internet where Jack has said "please".
- Bob R.
Jack Peek on 20 Feb 2005
Gee, take a pill!
Its just too bad your never going to get that Pulitzer by missing the really interesting story of Randy leonard and his votes on city projects.
Why don't you do, as you suggested I DO!
Shame on you and your adversion to free speech from me, it was a please deal, not an order.
The One True b!X on 21 Feb 2005
You realize Jack, that your schtick about people opposing your right to free speech doesn't fly here because everyone knows damned well that I've never done anything to restrict it.
Your poor oppressed martyr routine is laughable.
William on 21 Feb 2005
Really, Jack, why DON'T you start your own blog? You've got strong opinions about a lot of things and you like to share them. Maybe YOU can go win the Pulitzer since you seem to have the scoop on Randy.
Eli on 10 Mar 2005
Whats up with the Burnside proposel? Anyone knows?