Byline (1400 NE Multnomah) | 75' | 6 floors | Dead

[58rhodes]

Originally Posted by 2oh1

I wonder what kind of monkey wrench this throws into the mix. I'd love to see them move the theaters into the old Nordstrom space.

I think we can assume it will be maybe close to 3 years before we have to deal with this um er ah building

[maccoinnich]

Originally Posted by 2oh1

innovativethinking & 58rhodes: EXACTLY.

I don't understand how anyone could equate complaining about this horrible industrial park design to not wanting apartments built here. Yes, please do build 1,000 apartments on this site! But they have the equivalent of six city blocks to work with. Six blocks worth of the same hospital style facade?

I'd feel differently if the reason they were going as cheap as possible was because these were going to be affordable housing. I'd still be disappointed, and I'd still think they could (and should) do better... but at least there would be a reason for going cheap.

Take away the bike and the stripe of red paint, and you're looking at a hospital in the suburbs.



Of course I'd love to see a tower here, but even if it's going to be mid rise buildings, can't they break it up?!?! I'm blown away that on this forum of all places, six blocks of the same building is design to cheer about.

As I said above, the design of the facade hasn't even begun. What's shown at the moment is pretty much just a massing study. You are reading way too much into the images.

[cityscapes]

Originally Posted by maccoinnich

As I said above, the design of the facade hasn't even begun. What's shown at the moment is pretty much just a massing study. You are reading way too much into the images.

You're right which is why for now I think the discussion should revolve around the massing. With that, one has to realize that if they push forward with this concept it would likely create a super block long monotonous facade even if they do a good job with the facade design itself.

Back to the massing. I don't find these zig-zag designs to be conducive to being nice public spaces. I know Ørestad in Copenhagen is far from finished but having visited 8 House I don't think the building creates a pleasant environment for those walking through or around it despite it being pretty to see from above or from a distance.


http://www.dac.dk/en/dac-life/danish...hagen/8tallet/
This photo is from when it was under construction, and when I visited it was complete. You can cross through the middle but it creates this dark windy corridor that bright paint and access to the public spaces created but the inside of the 8 shape can't redeem. Then walking around it was monotonous and it felt like a chore to get back to the other side where there was pedestrian access to the nearest Metro station.

I feel like Holst is drawing their inspiration heavily from this project and for a blank slate neighborhood like this in Copenhagen it might work in the future when more is built around it but I feel like this site should be broken up bit more even if they don't completely revive the 200 x 200 block form.

If they want to use examples from Europe that would suit this site so badly which it seems like they do based on the case studies included in the drawings they could look to Ijburg in Amsterdam which has many blocks of similar shape to this site where the buildings create a more inviting pedestrian environment with better flow through the site. They even abut light rail just like in Portland so there are more similarities to work with.

[2oh1]

Originally Posted by maccoinnich

As I said above, the design of the facade hasn't even begun. What's shown at the moment is pretty much just a massing study. You are reading way too much into the images.

They have six whole city blocks worth of a singular design as a starting point. That's awful.

[Mr. Walch]

While no firm should be given a pass, Holst is probably the finest architecture firm in Portland. As Mies said, " God is in the details" and Holst has a long track record of taking simple masses and elevating them to things of beauty through careful use of materials and attention to detail. I would be scared as shit of this design if it was done by one of the many firms churning out poorly crafted building throughout the city. But when I look back at Holst's work it is hard to find a project that is not one of the best new buildings in Portland. Their new project on Williams blows my mind every time I go by and Bud Clark Commons is one of my favorite in the city. I really like what GBD has done in the past and what that are proposing in the Lloyd District, but I am also excited to see a firm try something new. Maybe it will fail, but let's mix it up and experiment with some different models. Maybe we will be surprised and the design discussion and what we think is possible in Portland will be expanded.

[Abide]

Interesting that they have the idea to stretch the buildings over the road. I could foresee a lot of people sleeping on the sidewalk under the cover those buildings would provide.

[maccoinnich]

Originally Posted by 2oh1

They have six whole city blocks worth of a singular design as a starting point. That's awful.

I don't know how many different ways I can phrase this, but the drawings don't yet show any design for what the elevations will look like. It's basically a massing study at this point.

[urbanlife]

Originally Posted by Mr. Walch

While no firm should be given a pass, Holst is probably the finest architecture firm in Portland. As Mies said, " God is in the details" and Holst has a long track record of taking simple masses and elevating them to things of beauty through careful use of materials and attention to detail. I would be scared as shit of this design if it was done by one of the many firms churning out poorly crafted building throughout the city. But when I look back at Holst's work it is hard to find a project that is not one of the best new buildings in Portland. Their new project on Williams blows my mind every time I go by and Bud Clark Commons is one of my favorite in the city. I really like what GBD has done in the past and what that are proposing in the Lloyd District, but I am also excited to see a firm try something new. Maybe it will fail, but let's mix it up and experiment with some different models. Maybe we will be surprised and the design discussion and what we think is possible in Portland will be expanded.

In the past, I have been one to be very critical of Holst for being too trend following and lacking quality with their details of their designs while only seeming to be concerned with the overall image. But over the years they have really matured as a firm and are really starting to put out some memorial architecture, so I am confident in them putting together a striking design with this project.

[2oh1]

Originally Posted by maccoinnich

I don't know how many different ways I can phrase this, but the drawings don't yet show any design for what the elevations will look like. It's basically a massing study at this point.

It's two identical buildings on a four block superblock plus another identical building on another 2 block superblock. If that had been proposed anywhere else in the city, people would be booing.

Cityscapes said it best:

Originally Posted by cityscapes

one has to realize that if they push forward with this concept it would likely create a super block long monotonous facade even if they do a good job with the facade design itself.

[maccoinnich]

How do you know all three are going to be identical?

[58rhodes]

Originally Posted by maccoinnich

How do you know all three are going to be identical?

we dont really know anything yet other than maybe some apts could be built here

[2oh1]

Originally Posted by maccoinnich

How do you know all three are going to be identical?

You're right. If only there were some drawings to suggest what they're thinking of building there, even if they only represent a starting point. I'm sorry. I don't mean to be so snarky, but you seem to be on attack mode all of a sudden. I only know what they show, and their drawings show modern barracks. Potentially neat looking barracks, but barracks nonetheless. Or perhaps a hospital in the burbs on a tight lot. I realize they're not showing the massing, but they do show a single two block long mid rise building that then snakes through the middle of the superblock to cram in even more apartments rather than going tall anywhere within a six block canvas.

These drawings go out of their way to suggest they'll be the same - but even if each building will be completely unique... they're on superblocks. That means anyone who sees them from the street will be facing two straight blocks of one single design. They've got such a large blank slate to work with. I don't know why they've chosen to start from a position of monotony. It's a shame since they've got such an amazing chunk of land to work with. Six whole city blocks. They could create a mini urban village. Instead... S shaped barracks.

[maccoinnich]

Do you see the difference between this image of Block 136...



...and this image?



The first image is taken from the Design Advice packet Mithun submitted when they were trying to get buy off from the Commission for the general concept of a low rise building on 13th and a high rise building on 12th, with a courtyard in between them. The fact that they are sketched both buildings with same generic tofu style wasn't intended to indicate that they would have the same architectural expression. That's the stage the Lloyd District project is at the moment.

By the time they submitted for Design Review, 7 months later, Mithun had done a lot of work on resolving what the two buildings would look like. I would expect we'll see the same from Holst over the course of the year.

I'm pretty confident we're not going to a project with 6 blocks of a completely monotonous and uniform facade. If Holst do wind up submitting a Design Review packet with that shown I'll buy you dinner at a restaurant of your choosing.

[2oh1]

Originally Posted by maccoinnich

Do you see the difference between this image of Block 136...



...and this image?

I love the buildings you just posted - but take the mid rise building in that image and stretch it two city blocks long. Then put another two block long mid rise behind it and put another two block long mid rise across the street from the first two on another two block superblock.

Your image shows a low rise and a high rise on a small Portland block, but we're talking about a pair of mid rises stretching across and snaking through a four block superblock, plus another two block long mid rise building on a two block superblock.

Again, let's use the image you just posted, but ignore the high rise and only look at the mid rise.



You're talking about one block, but look at the diversity across six blocks, because that's what we're talking about here. Six whole city blocks.

[eric cantona]

Originally Posted by maccoinnich

Do you see the difference between this image of Block 136...

...and this image?

The first image is taken from the Design Advice packet Mithun submitted when they were trying to get buy off from the Commission for the general concept of a low rise building on 13th and a high rise building on 12th, with a courtyard in between them. The fact that they are sketched both buildings with same generic tofu style wasn't intended to indicate that they would have the same architectural expression. That's the stage the Lloyd District project is at the moment.

By the time they submitted for Design Review, 7 months later, Mithun had done a lot of work on resolving what the two buildings would look like. I would expect we'll see the same from Holst over the course of the year.

I'm pretty confident we're not going to a project with 6 blocks of a completely monotonous and uniform facade. If Holst do wind up submitting a Design Review packet with that shown I'll buy you dinner at a restaurant of your choosing.

while I understand the point you're making here, and don't want to get all frothy-mouthed over this, but I seem to recall that Holst had produced several massing studies that they whittled down to two until landing on this one. I think it's important to note that they had pretty varied building configurations, some of which included towers. so, while just being a massing study it still is part of the design process and will very much inform what the final outcome will be.

I agree that Holst should be trusted to produce something that will work here, but that doesn't necessarily mean they get a pass from criticism on this forum. I'm not at all sold that the current massing will create a place that I'd be interested in residing in. I am willing to let the process unfold before offering too much criticism, though.

I will add one, rather cynical, comment: the 6 story configuration will be much less expensive to build than a grouping of towers like Hassalo and Oregon Sq. I'd be curious to see a massing study of this site with similar buildings for 700 units instead of nearly 1,000. my fear is that what we're seeing now represents profit over livability.

[58rhodes]

the massing is very unappealing to me I know im not supposed to have an opinion

[maccoinnich]

Originally Posted by eric cantona

while I understand the point you're making here, and don't want to get all frothy-mouthed over this, but I seem to recall that Holst had produced several massing studies that they whittled down to two until landing on this one. I think it's important to note that they had pretty varied building configurations, some of which included towers. so, while just being a massing study it still is part of the design process and will very much inform what the final outcome will be.

I understand that where they've got to represents a step in the design process. My comments above are mostly in reaction to what I see as people reading the images as if they're finished designs. However, I've made my point, so I'll let it rest and give my thoughts on the massing / layout.

The diagonal axis makes sense as a way to divide this superblock in a way that it wouldn't make sense on other sites. If they divided the site along the traditional 200' x 200' grid it wouldn't provide much additional permeability, given that the vacated NE 14th Ave and Hassalo St don't continue in any direction. (In clockwise order they're blocked by the mall, NE 16th Drive, the MAX tracks and Holladay Park.) By providing the diagonal route they are responding to a desire line between the Sullivan's Gulch neighborhood and the Lloyd Center MAX Station (and indeed even the future Oregon Square).

This does create a very long elevation, and I'll admit that there is the potential for this to feel unrelenting if handled poorly. I'm not necessarily giving Holst a "pass", but I also can't think of any firm in town that I would trust more to be able to resolve this. I actually think the bigger problem they're setting themselves up for is how to deal with the spaces under the buildings where they bridge over the pedestrian / vehicular access. Even disregarding Abide's very valid point about it being an attractive area for people to sleep under, spaces under buildings can be difficult to make into attractive areas. I've seen it done well, but I've seen it done poorly much more often.

I also think it's unfortunate that they seem to be dealing with parking on a building-by-building basis. A major advantage of having a superblock / multi-block site is that a very efficient parking layout can be achieved underground, albeit with the high costs involved with excavation. GBD have done this very well at Hassalo on 8th, the Brewery Blocks and Oregon Square. If the parking was all below grade this project would be able to achieve some deeper retail floorplates facing NE Multnomah or NE 13th, although there may not be the market demand for that.

[maccoinnich]

Memo [PDF] to the Design Commission.

[soleri]

I attended the first Design Review meeting this afternoon on this project. Holst gave an excellent presentation of the concept, knitting together Lloyd with Sullivan's Gulch while enhancing "porosity' of the area's various set pieces. They envision Hassalo crossing from Holladay Park, intersecting the key diagonal promenade at a point they call the "urban grove" and then meeting on the east end a public plaza. They do this with the "sky bridges" that permit a seamless flow of buildings and corridors. The key feature, however, is the diagonal that links the neighborhood to the Max line.

The design commissioners were quite respectful and even complimentary, but their skepticism was clear. They talked about the diagonal's elevation of 500 feet simply required more breathing room, either breaks in the facade or greater building heights. They talked, too, about the need for greater public spaces than the 5+1 construction would allow. The chairman, in particular, stressed the need for more building height. One commissioner, Tad Savinar, spoke how the promenade required pedestrian "goals", as in a great work of sculpture.

The developer was at the meeting and agreed enthusiastically with the art idea but said the project's economics necessitated the 5+1 buildings and that Lloyd District didn't meet the criteria for Type One construction. The chairman noted wryly that this wasn't an issue for AAT developments.

My sense coming away from this meeting was that Holst will be tested to come up with a plan that somehow satisfies both masters here: construction cheap enough to justify the developer's investment and dazzling enough to overcome the skepticism of the Design Review Commission. I suspect they'll find a way to keep 5+1 buildings but possibly reduce the density to create a more open feel. Right now, commissioners are not convinced that you can shoehorn in 980 apartments into that superblock without sacrificing a decent public space inside.

[maccoinnich]

Thanks for the summary, Soleri. I'll be interested to listen to it myself.

Originally Posted by soleri

One commissioner, Tad Savinar, spoke how the promenade required pedestrian "goals", as in a great work of sculpture.

Tad Savinar makes the suggestion of incorporating sculpture for pretty much every single project.