The Strand | Complete - Page 3

Dougall5505 · #41 Posted **Aug 13, 2006, 10:03 PM**

yah i tried to get a picture of that i am still trying to figure out what the thinkg is at the bottom right of the last picture a fountains maybe?

tworivers · #42 Posted **Aug 13, 2006, 10:47 PM**

Here's a couple more from the ride with a slightly wider context.

(Benson off to the right)

Dougall5505 · #43 Posted **Aug 13, 2006, 11:26 PM**

MORE!!!

the water reflected on the glass

Dougall5505 · #44 Posted **Aug 13, 2006, 11:29 PM**

More (last one)

pdxf · #45 Posted **Aug 24, 2006, 4:27 AM**

Good looking project. I really like the mix of urban/nature together on the waterfront and I'm looking forward to seeing a new place to eat near the waterfront. Unfortunately, since we can only currently develop the western bank of the river, all of these great places are in shadow during dinner. It would be nice to get some sun while I eat, but I'll take what I can get I guess.

crow · #46 Posted **Aug 24, 2006, 2:52 PM**

nice location, but as much as i want to love this project - it looks cheap!

pdxf · #47 Posted **Aug 24, 2006, 3:03 PM**

I agree crow, I think several of the newer projects look really cheap, especially the benson and civic towers. I think it's the spandrel panels that really give it the cheap look to me.

MarkDaMan · #48 Posted **Aug 24, 2006, 3:40 PM**

I feel ya crow! The finishing product isn't nearly the Vegas 'Mirage' styled glass that initial renderings made me believe I was to expect.

brandonpdx · #49 Posted **Aug 24, 2006, 6:11 PM**

yes, I would agree: these spandrel panels really cheapen up the look of these buildings that I thought would look great from their renderings. I noticed the Metropolitan is putting up these spandrel panels. I thought this building was going to look nice; now I'm not so sure.

pdxstreetcar · #50 Posted **Aug 24, 2006, 6:49 PM**

i agree too, i was really appalled when i saw the civic about a week ago... thought it looked terrible thats why i was wondering about how well it is selling. i also had high hopes for the benson tower until i saw the spandrel panel facade go up.

zilfondel · #51 Posted **Aug 25, 2006, 3:33 AM**

Can we say 'Value engineering?'

I bet they weren't even in the original design - but got dummed down for budgetary reasons. This is why modernism rules in large building design: the simpler the design, the more likely the finished product will actually look like the original design.

tworivers · #52 Posted **Oct 3, 2006, 12:45 AM**

Strand pictures from last Friday.

I can't decide how I feel about this project. I still feel, particularly when I'm accross the river or on the Hawthorne, that one of the towers should have been taller to provide a counterpoint to the Marquam and to downtown.

Also, the almost-finished product doesn't seem to live up to the renderings all that well, as discussed earlier on this thread. Right now I'm having trouble imagining the restaurant ending up looking nearly as epic and flashy as it does here. \/ \/

I hope the next block they do over there is 30+ stories. Is the rfp out yet?

Dougall5505 · #53 Posted **Oct 3, 2006, 1:16 AM**

nice pics i dig the curve on the tallest building I wish all three buildings had something that set itself apart from each other.
on parcel 8 I heard proposals are being taken and cleanup of the contamination onsite will begin soon.

MOPIdaho · #54 Posted **Oct 3, 2006, 3:10 AM**

Its nice that a little city has sprung up in this beach front resort.

River Rat · #55 Posted **Oct 3, 2006, 1:04 PM**

150 feet tall is the limit in Riverplace. You can't beat the location on this one.

CouvScott · #56 Posted **Oct 3, 2006, 1:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by tworivers

I hope the next block they do over there is 30+ stories. Is the rfp out yet?

The RFP is out for the site cleanup/abatement (Parcel 8 I believe it was called)

cab · #57 Posted **Oct 3, 2006, 2:41 PM**

I think these 3 buildings came out great. Compare these new ones to its neighbors. Nothing else needs to be said. THe height is perfect for this location, the glass makes them fit in with the water location and they are really going to add to the pedestrian environment with all the nooks and pedestrian paths throughout them.

BrG · #58 Posted **Oct 3, 2006, 5:55 PM**

What I know:

The buildings are as tall as the zoning code allows there, and the spandrel panels were introduced due in large part to meet a fairly conservative energy code.

Alternatives to spandrel and clear glass are: less spandrel and a larger amount of vision glass, but it gets progressively darker or more mirrored. Eew.

IMO: Also, the restaurant is gonna be cool.

MarkDaMan · #59 Posted **Oct 3, 2006, 7:12 PM**

^I didn't think they maximized the height potential. I remember in it's early stages that this was going to be some sort of Hotel/Office/Condo project and there was a lot of flak from the condo owners up a few blocks that their views would be disrupted, so the project, first two tallers towers, became three squattier towers. I could be wrong, but that is what I remember.

I go back and forth on this almost finished project, sometimes I like it, sometimes it looks cheap. I guess after people move in and the area opens up, the area will be greatly improved. Hell, I'd love to get that Riverplace boardwalk area alive. Mucho undervalued IMO.

zilfondel · #60 Posted **Oct 4, 2006, 7:22 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by tworivers

I hope the next block they do over there is 30+ stories. Is the rfp out yet?

Well, hope so - they have about 3 more acres in this little area to build out on. Two are adjacent to the substation.