Central Eastside News

[maccoinnich]

Revised drawings [PDF - 12MB] and Staff Report for 1122 SE Ankeny.

[65MAX]

Originally Posted by maccoinnich

Revised drawings [PDF - 12MB] and Staff Report for 1122 SE Ankeny.

Glad they did away with the drive-thru/parking on this. That never really made sense to me.

[hat]

Originally Posted by 65MAX

Glad they did away with the drive-thru/parking on this. That never really made sense to me.

This keeps my dream of a car-limited Ankeny greenway alive. Hoping for some diverters here some fine day.

[maccoinnich]

[maccoinnich]

[BrG]

Originally Posted by eric cantona

I have a conflicted view of Cavanaugh's work.

on one hand he's breaking the rules and producing forward thinking, design rich places using fairly pedestrian materials. box +1 and the zipper are great examples of this.

another view is that he's using super low budget materials that limit financial risk and relying on his ability to tap into a "hip" vibe to lower development costs and make a higher margin. the Burnside rocket epitomizes this approach, as does the dumbbell, in my opinion.

I think his body of work generally falls in the former category, but he walks a fine line on all of the them dropping into the latter category. I do think that nearly all of his projects will age very poorly either because of the quality of materials used or that the "cool" factor will likely wane, or both.

This is generally how I feel too. Nice post. The zipper is pretty cool because of the reasons you stated. I 'get' what he's doing, for sure. I guess this site (of all the sites hes been a developer of) commands some serious attention. It will without a doubt, be a landmark. Whether it will really be made to last is a question.

[maccoinnich]

A Pre-Application Conference has been scheduled by TVA Architects for a project at 820 SE Alder St:

New multi-family residential development with ground floor retail and underground parking garage. 6 stories (67′ tall) with a combo of studio, 1 and 2 bedroom living units.

A project at 306 SE 8th Ave has been submitted for Type III Design Review by SERA Architects:

Demo existing building, new development of 7 story 120 unit residential apartment building with ground floor retail and underground parking. 2 modifications , bike parking width &size of parking stalls.

A building permit was issued to Works Progress Architecture for the Jupiter Hotel Expansion:

Construct new 6 story mixed use building, includes event space and restaurant, floors 3-6 are hotel rooms, no parking. Site work and stormwater management included.

[hat]

From the Portland Architecture site conversation on the 2035 plan mentioning the "elephant in the room":

"The thing is, even if we expend a lot of these efforts looking at that area without the Marquam Bridge or the east bank of I-5, we have no power or ability," Doss explained. "It’s a state-owned facility funded by the federal government. Without those two partners wanting to take care of it we can't do anything. They think it’s just cute [to remove this highway infrastructure]. Unless we come up with $15 billion to do it on our own, we’re kind of stuck with what we’ve got. On the flipside, without the eastbank freeway we probably wouldn’t see the same things going on in the Central Eastside. It would have been seen as Pearl East. And there are people out there who would love to push that agenda. For us, it has allowed for a tremendous amount of economic development growth in that district."

$15 billion to remove the freeway?! Perhaps he was being facetious?

[pdxtraveler]

Originally Posted by hat

From the Portland Architecture site conversation on the 2035 plan mentioning the "elephant in the room":


$15 billion to remove the freeway?! Perhaps he was being facetious?

I haven't seen the $15B pricetag, that I remember. But that would be, I am pretty sure, not removing but buring I-5 starting on the west side of the Willamette and surfacing around the Rose Quarter.

[Mr. Walch]

Originally Posted by pdxtraveler

I haven't seen the $15B pricetag, that I remember. But that would be, I am pretty sure, not removing but buring I-5 starting on the west side of the Willamette and surfacing around the Rose Quarter.

The 2 mile tunnel for highway 99 is Seattle is somewhere around $3 billion, but it is 2 lanes in either direction (I think). Burying I-5 in Portland would be a lot more involved including either replacing the Marquam bridge or tunneling under the river.

[innovativethinking]

Burying I-5 will never ever ever ever ever ever happen in our lifetime period.

The amount of planning and work that would take would be beyond anything this city has ever done. We can't even plan for a new I-5 bridge to Vancouver this would be 100 times more complex

[ORNative]

Its not the planning or the ability. Its the money. The interstate bridge was not replaced because WA State refused to put up its share. After all planning and design was complete Oregon and the Feds put up their share of the dollars but WA said no and put its transportation money into some other project it deemed more worthy. Hwy 99 Tunnel perhaps?

[hat]

Originally Posted by innovativethinking

Burying I-5 will never ever ever ever ever ever happen in our lifetime period.

The amount of planning and work that would take would be beyond anything this city has ever done. We can't even plan for a new I-5 bridge to Vancouver this would be 100 times more complex

I think the city/state should consider researching the removal of that section of I-5 between I-84 and the Marquam without including an underground version. With a few modifications of the current I5, I84, and Hwy 26 ramps, people may simply adjust (as with almost every other highway removal in city centers).

[petcarpdx]

Originally Posted by hat

I think the city/state should consider researching the removal of that section of I-5 between I-84 and the Marquam without including an underground version. With a few modifications of the current I5, I84, and Hwy 26 ramps, people may simply adjust (as with almost every other highway removal in city centers).

I am a huge fan of road diets and urban design that doesn't revolve around cars, but even I think this might be a little too much without improving/adding road infrastructure elsewhere. Do you have an example of a similar highway removal project? It seems to me like 405 (presumably renamed as 5) would turn into a perpetual parking lot.

To be clear though, I want you to be right. Urban centers should waste as little space on highways as possible.

[AdamUrbanist]

Vancouver is a city the same size as Portland and it has no urban freeways. So there's no reason to think that Portland couldn't meet regional travel demand without I5. If that means 405 becomes a parking lot then there are two solutions: demand management programs like a congestion charge or parking fees and upgrades to other transportation routes and modes. If removing I5 allows the inner east side to become a dense urban neighborhood then more people will be living close to employment rather than spread out on the edge of the region where they have to commute in.

[AdamUrbanist]

Also the conversation will be forced eventually because so much of the I5 infrastructure has a limited lifespan. Sooner or later maintenance issues will mandate that it's essentially rebuilt. At that point you have three options: rebuild it as it is, bury it underground, or remove it. I imagine the city will vehemently oppose option 1 and option 2 will be prohibitively expensive so that leaves option 3. It may take a long time for people to come around to that reality, but I think removing the freeway will eventually become inevitable.

[hat]

Originally Posted by AdamUrbanist

Also the conversation will be forced eventually because so much of the I5 infrastructure has a limited lifespan. Sooner or later maintenance issues will mandate that it's essentially rebuilt. At that point you have three options: rebuild it as it is, bury it underground, or remove it. I imagine the city will vehemently oppose option 1 and option 2 will be prohibitively expensive so that leaves option 3. It may take a long time for people to come around to that reality, but I think removing the freeway will eventually become inevitable.

Exactly my point. Basing our decision for one of these 3 options on data rather than conjecture would be my second point.

Here's is the 2015 evaluation of bridges in Oregon according to ODOT. The Marquam (built in '66) is designated Highway 1 on their chart. They report its condition as fair on page 50. As an aside the MLK/Grand ramps over I-85 were built in 1908. Crazy.

[BrG]

Originally Posted by hat

$15 billion to remove the freeway?! Perhaps he was being facetious?

That's not even Boston's 'Big Dig' money (Something like $25 Billion) and that started years and years ago (inflation since).

[2oh1]

Originally Posted by BrG

That's not even Boston's 'Big Dig' money (Something like $25 Billion) and that started years and years ago (inflation since).

To be fair, Boston is a significantly larger city & I'd assume they'd have more money to work with. I do hope we get to bury I-5 someday though. The Marquam bridge is a time bomb. My fear is that the timing will be bad, meaning, we'll be forced to spend stupid amounts of money to repair it as-is, similar to how we're going to spend over a quarter of a billion dollars to repair (not replace!) the horrendous Portland Building.

[babs]

Originally Posted by AdamUrbanist

Vancouver is a city the same size as Portland and it has no urban freeways. So there's no reason to think that Portland couldn't meet regional travel demand without I5. If that means 405 becomes a parking lot then there are two solutions: demand management programs like a congestion charge or parking fees and upgrades to other transportation routes and modes. If removing I5 allows the inner east side to become a dense urban neighborhood then more people will be living close to employment rather than spread out on the edge of the region where they have to commute in.

People keep saying this but it's a bit misleading. The Port Mann bridge was the widest freeway bridge in the world at 10 lanes when it opened a few years ago. Also there are plenty of freeways that go around downtown Vancouver. And with their location, there is little need for traffic to go through Vancouver up north. They are literally the very NW tip of regional traffic.

Having said this, you could do away with I-5 but you have to be realistic. It would involved widening I-205 to handle the additional traffic flow. 405 should also be widen with a lane in each direction. It's a fair question to ask. Would it be cheaper and better to add capacity to other freeways or would it make more sense to put I-5 in a tunnel. I think it's worth studying the issue.