Skip to Main Content View Text-Only

The City of Portland, Oregon

Planning and Sustainability

Innovation. Collaboration. Practical Solutions.

Phone: 503-823-7700

Curbside Hotline: 503-823-7202

1900 SW 4th Ave, Suite 7100, Portland, OR 97201

More Contact Info

Portion of Laurelhurst Neighborhood Nominated for National Register Historic District Status

Listing would bring demolition review to approximately 1300 residential buildings

On August 13, 2018, the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) notified the City of Portland that a portion of the Laurelhurst neighborhood has been nominated for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. An information session will be held on August 30 to provide property owners and the interested public with information about the listing process.

Gates, a historical Laurelhurst marker

Entrance to the Laurelhurst neighborhood showing a distinctive Laurelhurst gate and the 1911 Marquam House. Image courtesy Addam Goard.

The federal nomination was commissioned by the Laurelhurst Neighborhood Association. The nominated area is approximately 392 acres in size, is generally zoned R5 for single-dwelling residential use, and does not include sites along Sandy Boulevard zoned for higher density development. The nomination will be considered by the Portland Historic Landmarks Commission, State Advisory Committee on Historic Preservation, and National Park Service before a listing decision is made.

The National Register is the nation’s official list of buildings, structures, sites, objects, and districts significant in American history, architecture, and/or archaeology. Although the City of Portland is only advisory to the federal listing process, locally-enforced demolition regulations apply automatically when a resource is listed in the National Register.

Listing Process

The National Register listing process begins with the filing of a nomination and ends with a decision by the National Park Service.

The Portland Historic Landmarks Commission will review the Laurelhurst Historic District nomination at their regular meeting on Monday, October 8, 2018. The Commission’s recommendation is not a final decision, as the City of Portland’s role is advisory to the National Park Service process. The meeting is an opportunity to learn more about the proposed historic district and to provide comments to the Commission. The October 8 meeting will take place at 1900 SW 4th Avenue, Room 2500A, beginning at 1:30 p.m.

Following the City of Portland’s advisory review of the nomination, the State Advisory Committee on Historic Preservation (SACHP) will hold a formal meeting to consider the nomination on Friday, October 19, 2018. This meeting will take place at the Laurelhurst Club, 3721 SE Ankeny Street, beginning at 2 p.m. Testimony on the merits of the National Register nomination will be accepted at the October 19 meeting.

Following the SACHP meeting, the nomination may be forwarded to the National Park Service for further review and a final decision. At any point in the listing process, private owners with fee-simple absolute title to real property within the nominated district may object to the listing by submitting a notarized statement of objection to the State Historic Preservation Office. The proposed district will not be listed if a majority of the owners object.

Map of proposed Laurelhurst Historic District

Map of the proposed Laurelhurst Historic District. If listed in the National Register, ‘contributing’ buildings would be subject to demolition and relocation review.

Consequences of Listing

In Oregon, resources listed in the National Register are subject to demolition and relocation protections and are eligible to participate in certain local, state, and federal incentive programs. Oregon Administrative Rule 660-023-0200 provides the demolition and relocation protections for National Register resources in Oregon. These protections are enforced locally by the Bureau of Development Services.

Listing in the National Register will not subject a Laurelhurst Historic District to Historic Resource Review. Historic Resource Review, sometimes called historic design review, is a land use review that is required for some alteration, addition, and new construction projects affecting historic landmarks and districts. Historic Resource Review was automatically applied to National Register resources listed before Jan. 27, 2017. Due to recent changes in the State Administrative Rule, a separate local adoption process is required before Historic Resource Review can be applied to resources listed in the National Register after Jan. 27, 2017. There is no timeline for when—or if—Historic Resource Review would be proposed for a Laurelhurst Historic District.

Ariel photo of Laurelhurst circa 1961

1961 aerial of a portion of the Laurelhurst neighborhood. City of Portland photo, A2014-003.863.

Additional Information

An information session will be held on Thursday, Aug. 30, 2018, from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. at the All Saints Parish, 3847 NE Glisan Street. Representatives from the State Historic Preservation Office and City of Portland will be on hand to provide an overview of the National Register listing process, describe the regulations that apply to National Register resources, and answer questions from attendees.

Copies of the nomination, a project timeline, objection letter templates, and additional information on the proposed historic district can be found on the State Historic Preservation Office’s webpage.

Public feedback incorporated into historic resources code concepts

Summary of public feedback being incorporated into Historic Resources Code Project proposals; public draft of zoning code proposals to be released in October

Initiated in late 2017, the Historic Resources Code Project (HRCP) is a zoning code project that will make changes to how the City of Portland identifies, designates, and protects historic resources. To better align the City’s historic preservation programs with other community goals, the HRCP will analyze deficiencies in Portland’s existing programs and propose zoning code changes addressing the procedures, thresholds, and incentives that apply to inventoried and designated historic resources.

In drafting these changes to existing zoning code, the HRCP will incorporate national best practices, feedback from Bureau of Planning and Sustainability and Bureau of Development Services staff, and concepts proposed by community members. An initial open comment period spanned November 2017 through February 2018. Collected public comments, which are summarized below, have informed the development of an initial Discussion Draft of zoning code proposals. The Discussion Draft will be released for public review in October 2018.

Public Meeting at Library A Historic Resources Code Project Roundtable. Image Courtesy Addam Goard.


Overview of Outreach

During the initial concept development period, the public were afforded a variety of opportunities to provide project feedback. Four community roundtables and two informal drop-in sessions were held on weeknights in various locations around Portland, with the intention of making these events accessible to a wide range of community members in different geographical areas. An online survey was made available for the entire comment period, and paper versions of the same were supplied at all project events. The public were also invited to connect with project staff directly by emailing concepts to

Opportunities to comment were advertised through several channels. The HRCP website posted notice of each community roundtable and provided access to the online survey. Roundtables were further advertised on the Historic Resources Program Instagram account, @portland1984, one week prior to each event. Project updates, including the survey link, were distributed by email to the project mailing list of over 680 addresses. HRCP notices were also featured in Bureau of Planning and Sustainability and Bureau of Development Services e-newsletters.

Public Engagement and Comments Received

During the three-month open public comment period, 440 Portlanders submitted 3,442 unique comments through online and paper survey forms. Survey questions, while organized by theme, were largely open-ended to allow for broad feedback during this exploratory phase. City staff transcribed all handwritten forms and reviewed each online submission, extracting potential concepts for consideration and refinement by the project team. Five individuals and two organizations sent comments directly to the Historic Resources Program; these were similarly reviewed by City staff.

Also during the open comment period, about 200 participants attended the four community roundtables and two drop-in sessions. These events provided an opportunity for group discussion and direct interaction with the project team. A summary of each community roundtable, including a transcript of all staff notes and participant comments, can be found on the HRCP blog.

Key Issues Raised in Public Comments

Through survey responses, emailed concepts, and direct interaction at roundtable and drop-in events, staff collected several thousand public comments during the concept development period. Comments addressed a range of topics, but many were focused on the Historic Resource Inventory, cultural resources, housing density and affordability, historic district designations, Historic Resource Review, and demolition protections for designated landmarks and districts. 

Historic Resource Inventory

The second Historic Resources Code Project roundtable, “New Tools for Inventorying and Adapting Historic Resources,” and several survey questions addressed the utility and content of a citywide Historic Resource Inventory. Many commenters asserted that a publicly-accessible inventory would be a useful research tool for academics, homeowners, and City staff alike. Others expressed concern with the inventory process, primarily around the topic of owner consent. When asked whether owner consent should be required for listing a property in an informational inventory of historic resources, 58% of online survey respondents answered “no,” 35 percent answered “yes,” and 7 percent were unsure. Specific comments related to the inventory listing process included:

  • No, owner consent should not be required for listing. Historic buildings are a community and city-wide resource and asset, not just [an asset to] the current owners.
  • No, owner notification would be nice, but owner consent should not be required. Significance does not depend on the current owner's views regarding preservation.
  • Yes, unless there are no adverse economic or damaging effects on an owner.
  • Owners should have the opportunity to consent prior to the listing in some capacity.
  • Depends on if listing it limits how an owner can use the property.

Cultural Significance and Historic Resources

In both survey and roundtable responses, the public expressed a strong interest in better identifying and protecting resources with cultural and social significance. Some commenters suggested the creation of new designation types, such as cultural or thematic districts, in which regulations are carefully tailored to address only the social or cultural attributes of the resource. Specific comments included:

  • Protecting culturally, if not architecturally, significant neighborhoods can be designated a public good and standards developed to determine eligibility.
  • Ethnic and cultural resources might be deemed historic because of their use + the accompanying stories.
  • Include cultural and ethnic criteria for conservation designation.
  • Cultural resources could be protected via cultural districts.
  • We should identify similar ethnic and cultural designations and find ways to promote and lee rare communities, even if they have already been destroyed.  For example, legacy African American communities in Portland could be celebrated by identifying locations of key buildings (even if the originals have been destroyed).

An 1884 duplex in the Eliot Conservation District

An 1884 duplex in the Eliot Conservation District

Density and Affordability

Several commenters expressed concern about real and/or perceived conflicts between historic designation and housing affordability and opportunity. Some proposed disallowing future historic districts. Others suggested ways to reconcile the conflict, such as by facilitating and incentivizing internal conversions and reducing parking requirements in historic districts, especially where resources are near a transit corridor. Specific comments included:

  • Designation of historic landmarks and districts should not restrict the creation of new housing (ADUs, internal subdivisions, and at least a review of demolition and replacement).
  • Demolition and design protections should be loosened to allow Portland to accommodate our housing needs. 
  • Allow for more ADU/internal divisions of historic single family homes.
  • Get rid of parking requirements.
  • Designate only individual properties, not districts. For instance, in a "district" such as Laurelhurst, it may suit to pick out a few significant buildings, which are not within a 1/2 mile radius of a light-rail station, so that more housing can be constructed in that radius without harming designated resources.

Commercial buildings in the Woodlawn District

Commercial buildings in the locally-designated Woodlawn Conservation District

Historic District Designations

Historic district designation proved to be a divisive issue among commenters. All historic districts created in Portland since 1993 have been designated at the federal level as National Register Historic Districts; the HRCP intends to create and/or refine local alternatives to the National Register. Many commenters showed interest in local historic district designations that may be more flexible in terms of listing criteria and associated protections. Other respondents proposed disallowing district designation at the local level, limiting the number of properties included in potential districts, and/or prohibiting the designation of districts near transit. Still others were supportive of existing district listings and protections, responding that district designation is the most effective tool to protect the integrity of historic neighborhoods. Additionally, many commenters felt that a local district designation should be supported by property owners through an affirmative process where each property owner may cast a vote for the designation. Specific comments included:

  • Another way to lend legitimacy to historic preservation efforts is to place legal limits on their density: no more than X structures per square mile.
  • No districts should be formed in areas near high-quality transit service, such as frequent service bus lines or Light Rail. In these close-to-transit locations, individual Landmarks can be considered, but not a District.
  • Resources in a group such as a district or neighborhood are more significant that individual ones. There should be special attention payed to mixed use or commercial preservation as it plays heavily into profitability of a commercial zone by defining and preserving a City's character.
  • Change historic designation for neighborhoods to require affirmative vote of impacted homeowners.
  • Not all needs to be saved but I believe it is important to protect what has been designated and add key neighborhoods to capture the flavor.

Historic Resource Review

Many commenters held conflicting opinions about the relevance and effectiveness of Historic Resource Review; while some believed that existing protections are too restrictive, others felt that they may be too lax. Some suggested that district-specific guidelines might be the most effective way to preserve the historic character of a designated area. Of the many suggested regulations and exemptions concerning alterations to historic resources, numerous commenters expressed a desire to exempt solar panels and seismic straps from Historic Resource Review. Others requested greater flexibility for window replacement and alterations and additions not visible from the public right-of-way. Specific comments included:

  • Discretionary design standards particular to each district should apply to historic districts. Design standards could be less restrictive for conservation districts.
  • The city should develop clear, easy-to-understand design guidelines.  It may make sense to develop district-specific guidelines.    
  • I think there should be more flexibility with solar panels for one.  They are not permanent to the house and could be removed.
  • We recommend that installation of these brackets for seismic tie-down purposes be exempt for all structures subject to HRR, provided that the individual brackets must be less than 0.5 square feet each.
  • Alterations that still maintain basic character of the house should be exempt. Changing windows, roof, additions to back of house or second story could be exempt.

Demolition Protections

The demolition of Portland’s historic resources was of concern to many commenters. In roundtable events and through survey responses, many members of the public expressed a fear that existing demolition protections are allowing for widespread loss of resources. These commenters frequently advocated for increased demolition delay periods and/or expanded demolition review programs. Others felt that the existing demolition protections are unnecessarily restrictive and asked that demolition review be relaxed. Specific comments included:

  • Demolitions should be a last resort and only acceptable where there are clear and provable issues of safety.
  • Strengthen the demolition review process for all historic buildings, but especially historic and conservation landmarks, and extend the review period.
  • Demolition delays are nothing. They do not prevent demolitions, as we've seen repeatedly.
  • There should be demo prohibitions on certain highly significant resources. Then there should be long demo delays for other resources....6 months to a year.
  • I disagree with the use of demolition and design protections. They are being used to mark off certain neighborhoods from the issues faced by the city as a whole.

Historic building on N. Russel St. in Portland

The Smithson & McKay Brothers Block, a Historic Landmark in North Portland.

Additional Issues

While these six key issues represent the majority of collected commentary, they do not fully express the diversity of feedback gathered by HRCP staff. For instance, several commenters suggested that the City institute a plaque program or design walking tours to familiarize the public with Portland’s historic resources. Many others expressed interest in the National Register of Historic Places designation process and the State of Oregon’s Goal 5 land use protections that apply to National Register listings. These comments will be considered by staff, acknowledging that the Portland Zoning Code cannot nullify or amend State or Federal regulations pertaining to National Register resources.

To provide a complete record of material received during this initial open comment period, all paper forms, online forms, and emails from organizations and individuals (personal information redacted) have been compiled and are available as PDF files for public review.

Next Steps

BPS and BDS staff began refining concepts collected during the open comment period in March 2018. Staff will internally review draft zoning code proposals in late August and early September 2018. A public Discussion Draft of the zoning code will be released in October 2018.

Following the release of the Discussion Draft, the public will be invited to provide comment through a second series of stakeholder roundtables. These events will be announced on the HRCP webpage, with reminders sent to the Historic Resources Program email list. An online survey with questions targeted to specific concepts will be featured on the project website when the Discussion Draft is released. Feedback received on the Discussion Draft will then be considered by staff, with a revised Proposed Draft Zoning Code released in the winter.

The public will then be invited to submit formal testimony on the Proposed Draft to the Planning and Sustainability Commission, in writing or in person at one or more public hearings. After reviewing public testimony, the Planning and Sustainability Commission may amend the Proposed Draft before making a recommendation to Portland City Council. City Council will hold an additional public hearing(s) to take formal testimony on this Recommended Draft. It is expected that City Council will vote to adopt the final zoning code changes in mid-2019.

BPS commissions report on updating the citywide Historic Resource Inventory

Consultant report provides background and actionable recommendations for updating Portland’s 34-year-old HRI

In the early 1980s, the City of Portland advanced an ambitious project to survey thousands of potential historic resources across the city. After four years of professional and volunteer effort, in 1984 approximately 5,000 documented properties were adopted onto the resulting Historic Resource Inventory (HRI), a catalog of Portland’s most important architectural, cultural, and historic places. Listing on the HRI honored the significance of certain historic resources and prioritized them for possible future landmark designation.

At the time of its completion in 1984, the HRI was celebrated as a forward-thinking planning tool that documented the places that were most historically significant to Portlanders at the time. However, with the passing of time the inventory has become less geographically comprehensive and representative of the city’s different communities than it once was. Specifically, the annexation of East Portland (little of which was within the city boundary in the early 1980s), advances in national best practice, and a lack of regular additions to the inventory have diminished the HRI’s utility for research and planning. A newly released report provides the City with direction for how to overcome these shortcomings and expand the HRI in the years ahead.

State policy changes and report recommendations provide framework for future inventory work

In response to requests from the Portland Historic Landmarks Commission to update the HRI, BPS recently engaged in several State policy initiatives to pave the way for future inventory work. Among them, in 2016 the Oregon Supreme Court clarified the role of owner consent in landmark designation, and, in 2017, the Land Conservation and Development Commission amended administrative rules to clarify processes for updating historic resource inventories. In light of these changes, BPS engaged a consultant team to study local, regional, and national best practices in survey and inventory and make recommendations for updating Portland’s HRI.

Photo of the Horsehoe House  Report cover

The 1984 HRI documented 5,000 resources, including this 1890 charmer in the Woodlawn Conservation District. A new report provides recommendations for how the City can advance an update to the HRI in the years ahead.

The consultant team’s report offers 14 distinct recommendations for arriving at a more comprehensive, equitable, and useful citywide inventory of significant historic resources. The report, which is available for download as a PDF, will be presented to the Historic Landmarks Commission on March 12, 2018. BPS staff have begun early implementation of several of the report’s recommendations.

Early implementation of recommendations focuses on digital webmap, social media, zoning code

In 2017, student interns Caity Ewers and Lauren Everett digitized the City’s paper historic resource records, reconciled changes that have occurred since the 1984 survey was conducted, and integrated the resultant data into a historic resources webmap. Following the digitization effort, BPS created the Instagram account @Portland1984 to share stories behind some of the more interesting HRI resources. These efforts improved the utility of the City’s previously-outdated historic resources database and strengthened the foundation for future survey, inventory, and webmap projects.


One of the report’s 14 recommendations is to develop an enhanced database and mapping application for historic resources. A historic resources webmap was developed in 2017 to provide access to existing records while a more functional mapping application is being developed by BPS.

In addition to digitizing existing records, in late 2017 BPS launched the Historic Resources Code Project (HRCP) to improve the City’s inventory, designation, and protection programs for historic resources. Most relevant to Portland’s aging HRI, the project will incorporate recent changes in State administrative rules and codify a process for adopting newly-surveyed properties onto the HRI, changes which are recommended by report authors.

Although BPS has begun implementation of several report recommendations, advancing on-the-ground survey of historic resources will require the City to secure new sources of funding. Towards that end, BPS has applied for a State Historic Preservation Office grant and is requesting that City Council support a one-time budget add package to conduct pilot survey and inventory work in 2018 and 2019.

BPS looks forward to working with the Historic Landmarks Commission, City Council, and the broader community to advance the recommendations provided by report authors to create a more inclusive, diverse, and accessible HRI in the years ahead.

Portlanders gather to discuss designation options for Historic Resources Code Project

Participants discussed options for designating and protecting local historic and conservation districts at the last of four initial project roundtables.

On Feb. 6, 2018, the City of Portland Bureau of Planning and Sustainability held its fourth public roundtable for the Historic Resources Code Project (HRCP). The last of the HRCP’s initial input sessions, this event asked participants to develop and consider options for local historic district designation. Although no local historic or conservation district has been created in Portland since the early 1990s, new guidance from the State now allows cities to develop local alternatives to National Register designation.

Approximately 40 Portlanders gathered at the North Portland Library to discuss options for the designation process and regulatory framework that might characterize a new program for local historic resource designation. Conversations revealed an interest in community-initiated nominations, designation by an affirmative majority vote of property owners, and district-specific design guidelines or standards. A summary of the event, including participants’ transcribed comments, is now available.

North Portland Library

The venue for the Feb. 6 roundtable was the North Portland Library, a 1912 building built in the Jacobethan style. The library was identified in the 1984 Historic Resources Inventory as an architecturally significant building.

Concepts collected at the HRCP’s first four roundtables will inform planning staff in their development of zoning code language for the inventory, designation, and protection of historic resources. While all concept development roundtables have now been completed, comments will continue to be accepted until Tuesday, Feb. 20, 2018, after which time City staff will begin formulating code concepts. If you were unable to attend a public roundtable or would like to contribute further, please consider completing the project’s online survey. Interested persons are also invited to join the historic resources program email list for regular project updates, including opportunities to provide comment on the discussion draft zoning code when it is released in the spring.

February 6 event

Approximately 40 Portlanders attended the fourth Historic Resources Code Project roundtable. Image courtesy Addam Goard. 

Historic Resources Code Project holds third public roundtable

Participants discussed all aspects of the designation and protection of National Register historic districts, including demolitions, new construction and consistency with community values.

On Wednesday, Jan. 24,2018, the City of Portland Bureau of Planning and Sustainability held a third community roundtable for the Historic Resources Code Project (HRCP) at Taborspace, an event venue in the 1910 Mt. Tabor Presbyterian Church. Approximately 60 participants gathered to discuss Portland’s approach to protecting National Register historic districts, detailing perceived successes and failures of current processes related to designation and regulation. Conversations reflected the diverse interests of event attendees and resulted in varied, thoughtful feedback to staff are included in a summary of the events, including participants’ transcribed comments.

Recommendations and insights collected at the Jan. 24 roundtable will form a foundation for the fourth and final HRCP initial input session, scheduled for Tuesday, Feb. 6, 2018, at the North Portland Library. This roundtable will explore local designation as an alternative to National Register historic district designation and as a tool that may better serve some of Portland’s historic resources. If you are unable to attend the event, please consider submitting your comments via the project’s online survey.

For more information about the HRCP, visit the project website or contact project manager Brandon Spencer-Hartle at Interested parties are also invited to join the historic resources program email list for project updates, including information about future roundtables.

Approximately 60 Portlanders shared feedback on “what’s working and what’s not in Portland’s historic districts” at the Jan. 24 roundtable. Image courtesy Addam Goard. 

Participants provided feedback on a variety of historic district issues, including management of alterations and additions