HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Pacific West > Portland > Portland Suburbs and the State of Oregon


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #101  
Old Posted Dec 10, 2014, 11:54 PM
PDXDENSITY PDXDENSITY is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland
Posts: 619
Quote:
Originally Posted by bvpcvm View Post
These guys proposed something five or more years ago and it was just as silly then. In fact, IIRC it was worse; there was some sort of underground people mover that went as far as the mall - I mean, come on, that's never happening. And it didn't. I'll bet this won't either.

That said, even if it does, it just seems like so much urbanwashing - a disingenuous attempt to appeal to the urban aesthetic, but with a suburban heart pumping underneath. Like Bridgeport Village.
Which is why it can be redirected into an aesthetic that actually makes sense if these people are serious... I mean, the Boston transit line (?) is absurd in the rendering. But it could be something that isn't an eyesore if the parking is scaled WAY back and housing is actually affordable and marketed as a town center for the MAX connection... Otherwise, this is pretty bad, yes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #102  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2014, 9:36 PM
NMH NMH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Milwaukie
Posts: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by bvpcvm View Post
These guys proposed something five or more years ago and it was just as silly then. In fact, IIRC it was worse; there was some sort of underground people mover that went as far as the mall - I mean, come on, that's never happening. And it didn't. I'll bet this won't either.

That said, even if it does, it just seems like so much urbanwashing - a disingenuous attempt to appeal to the urban aesthetic, but with a suburban heart pumping underneath. Like Bridgeport Village.
I remember something along those lines back when they first started developing the former Top o Scott golf course in ~2002 where most of this land sits. I've unfortunately even heard the phrase thrown around that this could be like a new Bridgeport Village. From what I remember from back then was that the original owner/developer of the land didn't have enough funding or ran out of money so only the par 3 golf course and a few houses were built instead of the entire development when they started.

As it sits now for what has been built to date within the eagle landing development, there is a neighborhood of ~80 homes that are fairly dense in their placement. More of a SE Portland spacing than your typical suburb spacing. There are also seven condo buildings with recent proposals for two more to be built. There is also about ~80 town homes that are built with another ~90 more to go to build out the area those are in. This also does not count the numerous apartments not connected with the eagle landing area that are nearby.

Depending on how much residential they put in with this new proposal, I think there is the potential for success if they continue with the dense theme established so far in the area.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #103  
Old Posted Dec 15, 2014, 8:08 PM
maccoinnich maccoinnich is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Portland
Posts: 7,389
Quote:
Council to consider public parking agreement with Wizer developer



Lake Oswego will pay $1 a year to sublease 135 public parking spaces from developer Patrick Kessi’s Evergreen Group when the Wizer Block development is complete, according to an agreement likely to be approved by the City Council on Tuesday.

Forty-eight of those spaces will be dedicated to use by the project’s retail tenants – 28 for customers and employees from 8 a.m.-5 p.m. Monday through Friday, and 20 three-hour spots for use by only customers during the same hours. All 48 spaces will be available to the general public at night and on weekends with a three-hour limit, the agreement says.

The garage will be open from 7 a.m. to 11 p.m. Sunday through Thursday and on legal holidays, and 7 a.m. to midnight on Fridays and Saturdays.

Parking in the Wizer Block will be free unless paid parking becomes the norm in downtown. If that happens, the city and Evergreen Group will establish a parking fee for the public spaces and split the revenues and expenses. The city will be responsible for enforcing time limits on the public spaces; Evergreen will pay for and necessary towing.
...continues at the Portland Tribune.
__________________
"Maybe to an architect, they might look suspicious, but to me, they just look like rocks"

www.twitter.com/maccoinnich
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #104  
Old Posted Jan 12, 2015, 9:50 PM
maccoinnich maccoinnich is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Portland
Posts: 7,389
Quote:
Wizer block: Move to stop big Lake Oswego development still alive



Opponents of a proposed 290,000-square-foot complex in downtown Lake Oswego are moving forward with their appeal before the state Land Use Board of Appeals.

The three groups opposed to the development — Save Our Village, the Evergreen Neighborhood Association and LO 138 LLC, a group representing Lakeview Village just across from the proposed project — have 21 days from Jan. 21 to file a joint opening brief with the board. The groups are shooting to file that brief around Feb. 2.

After that filing, there will be 21 days for response and then seven days to file a joint reply brief should any issues arise that were not addressed in the opening brief. The case will likely then be argued before LUBA in early March.
...continues at the Portland Business Journal.
__________________
"Maybe to an architect, they might look suspicious, but to me, they just look like rocks"

www.twitter.com/maccoinnich
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #105  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2015, 2:44 AM
maccoinnich maccoinnich is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Portland
Posts: 7,389
This should be entertaining:

Quote:
Lake Oswego wants input on downtown North Anchor properties



Lake Oswego officials want to hear the community's thoughts on the redevelopment of a city-owned property in downtown.

The North Anchor site, located near B Avenue and First Street, was once planned to become a new library alongside a mixed-use housing development. But voters in 2012 rejected a $14 million bond measure that would have helped pay for the project.

The city has vowed to move forward with the project without the library component. Redevelopment of the property was identified one of the city's priorities for the coming year.


...continues at the Oregonian.
__________________
"Maybe to an architect, they might look suspicious, but to me, they just look like rocks"

www.twitter.com/maccoinnich
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #106  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2015, 4:05 AM
Abide's Avatar
Abide Abide is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 388
Indeed. Can't wait to see what happens to this idea. I'm wondering what Lake Oswegans actually WANT to see in their downtown. Perhaps cover 70% of the lot in surface parking and the remaining 30% a single story building with a fake stone veneer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #107  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2015, 6:27 AM
RED_PDXer RED_PDXer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 793
Throw in a faux classical work of art in the middle of said parking lot and we're done.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #108  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2015, 4:30 PM
eric cantona's Avatar
eric cantona eric cantona is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 670
Quote:
Originally Posted by RED_PDXer View Post
Throw in a faux classical work of art in the middle of said parking lot and we're done.
don't forget flowers. lots and lots of flowers!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #109  
Old Posted Mar 12, 2015, 3:38 AM
bvpcvm bvpcvm is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Portland
Posts: 2,788
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #110  
Old Posted Mar 12, 2015, 4:51 AM
urbanlife's Avatar
urbanlife urbanlife is offline
A before E
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
Posts: 11,752
Why exactly did Damascus want to incorporate again?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #111  
Old Posted Mar 12, 2015, 4:49 PM
65MAX's Avatar
65MAX 65MAX is offline
Karma Police
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: People's Republic of Portland
Posts: 2,138
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife View Post
Why exactly did Damascus want to incorporate again?
They thought by incorporating, that would allow them to just say no to every development proposal that came along. They were wrong. They wanted to remain a rural outback with minimal development. Fortunately, now that they've usurped any kind of responsibility to grow their city, and they now want to dis-incorporate, the planning tasks will now fall back to Metro and Clackamas County. The county overall may have its share of nut jobs, but it's generally pro-development. And it'll be the kind of development that Damascus didn't want. I know Happy Valley would LOVE to annex those prime development sites along Hwy 212 and Foster.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #112  
Old Posted Mar 12, 2015, 5:50 PM
PDXDENSITY PDXDENSITY is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland
Posts: 619
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife View Post
Why exactly did Damascus want to incorporate again?
Trojan horse conservatism. They think that by continually acting like petulant children they can make local government appear more and more ineffective. It unfortunately works when it comes to whom they are pandering to.

I expect this to culminate in a more region-wide discussion about the "failures" of planning, while all the center-right and right wing nut jobs in the area salivate at the fodder to disrupt government. They won't even care that it's obstructionism; they'll just use circular logic.

It's the republican congress mentality in a microcosm.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #113  
Old Posted Mar 20, 2015, 4:58 PM
maccoinnich maccoinnich is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Portland
Posts: 7,389
Quote:
LUBA weighs appeal against Lake Oswego's Wizer Block



A classroom at the University of Oregon's Knight Law Center provided a unique setting this week for the latest chapter in the controversy over redevelopment of the Wizer Block in downtown Lake Oswego.

Three groups opposed to the proposed mixed-use development squared off Wednesday in Eugene with lawyers for the developer and the City of Lake Oswego in a hearing before the state Land Use Board of Appeals. (LUBA typically holds oral arguments in front of law school students several times a year.)

Save Our Village, the Evergreen Neighborhood Association and LO 138 LLC, which represents Lake View Village, argued that the City Council was wrong when it voted in September to allow a 290,000-square-foot development at the corner of First Street and A Avenue. The city's Development Review Commission had rejected the proposal in August.

Attorneys for the petitioners told LUBA board members Michael Holstun and Tod Bassham that the council’s decision was inconsistent with the “context, purpose and policy of the city to maintain village character”; that the council had declined to consider “village character,” instead approving alternative design standards to argue the proposed design was appropriate; and that the set of criteria the council had used would hypothetically allow them to even approve a big-box development on the site.
...continues at the Portland Tribune.
__________________
"Maybe to an architect, they might look suspicious, but to me, they just look like rocks"

www.twitter.com/maccoinnich
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #114  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2015, 6:35 PM
eric cantona's Avatar
eric cantona eric cantona is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 670
some awesome talent is going to be battling to decide who gets to design the riverwalk at Willamette Falls:
"The Willamette Falls Legacy Project has selected three finalists to design a public riverwalk in downtown Oregon City. The design teams come locally but also from Seattle, San Francisco, New York and Vancouver, B.C. Listed alphabetically by prime consultant, the selected finalists are: James Corner, Field Operations (New York) with Place Studio (Portland) and Miller Hull (Seattle); Mayer/Reed (Portland) with Snøhetta(San Francisco) and Dialog (Vancouver, B.C.; and Walker Macy (Portland) with Thomas Balsley Associates (New York)."
entire article here: http://www.bizjournals.com/portland/...illamette.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #115  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2015, 8:05 PM
maccoinnich maccoinnich is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Portland
Posts: 7,389
Well that's an unexpectedly impressive list.
__________________
"Maybe to an architect, they might look suspicious, but to me, they just look like rocks"

www.twitter.com/maccoinnich
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #116  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2015, 10:55 PM
eric cantona's Avatar
eric cantona eric cantona is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 670
Quote:
Originally Posted by maccoinnich View Post
Well that's an unexpectedly impressive list.
it gets better. I found the notice to the proposers from Metro. this is the list of the fourteen firm they received they received proposals from:
  • Mayer/Reed
  • Walker Macy & Thomas Balsley Assoc.
  • James Corner Field Operations
  • Allied Works architecture Inc.
  • W Architecture and Landscape Arch., LLC
  • Civitas
  • Daoust Lestage + Ankrom Moisan
  • OLIN
  • Hargreaves Associates
  • Tom Leader Studio
  • wHy
  • HKS Inc
  • Studio Gang Architects
  • Ellumus LLC

there's some big names on that list, and a few I know nothing about. pretty impressive, though, to get that high level of interest for a project in Oregon City.

Last edited by eric cantona; Mar 23, 2015 at 11:10 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #117  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2015, 9:42 PM
zilfondel zilfondel is offline
Submarine de Nucléar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Missouri
Posts: 4,477
So... you guys ever hear about this???

Oregon Museum of Popular Culture
Feasibility Study for downtown Milwaukie

https://www.mthoodterritory.com/Scri...07_31_2014.pdf

by Ora Architects in Seattle:
http://orarchitects.com/index.php/po...culpture-park/


^ img from the architects' website
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #118  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2015, 5:10 AM
urbanlife's Avatar
urbanlife urbanlife is offline
A before E
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
Posts: 11,752
That is awesome, I have not heard a thing about this, so I have no idea if it is serious or not. I was thinking a small museum of some sort would be a great addition to downtown Milwaukie for the growth it will probably see once the MAX line opens and the area becomes more attractive to people. Plus it also helps that the city council in Milwaukie is much more pro development than the past council was.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #119  
Old Posted Apr 16, 2015, 7:02 PM
maccoinnich maccoinnich is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Portland
Posts: 7,389
Quote:
After approval, what's next for Lake Oswego's $93M Wizer development



Carol Radich is not entirely surprised that the state Land Use Board of Appeals sided with the Lake Oswego City Council and developer Patrick Kessi on a proposed development in the heart of downtown.

As vice chair of the Evergreen Neighborhood Association, one of three groups that filed an appeal with LUBA contesting the city council’s approval of the mixed-use project, Radich said she was disappointed in the decision, but not surprised.

“In my own mind, I gave it about a 50-50 chance,” she said, “so I’m not surpised, but I was hopeful that there would be something different.”
...continues at the Portland Business Journal.
__________________
"Maybe to an architect, they might look suspicious, but to me, they just look like rocks"

www.twitter.com/maccoinnich
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #120  
Old Posted Apr 24, 2015, 4:32 PM
Rob Nob Rob Nob is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 242
Full LUBA decision:
http://www.oregon.gov/LUBA/docs/Opin...4-15/14092.pdf

And my favorite excerpt:
"We agree that the city council’s interpretation easily qualifies as a plausible interpretation of the Community Development Code and that petitioners’ proffered interpretation to the contrary is inconsistent with the Community Development Code text"
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Pacific West > Portland > Portland Suburbs and the State of Oregon
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:14 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.