Portland Infill | Northwest Portland

[zilfondel]

Originally Posted by Okstate

Mexican food oriented...? Do tell

Does that mean it faces south? Like a solar building...?

[Okstate]

^ This guy

[tworivers]

It's official:

HUB is opening a second pub on Williams.

[tworivers]

We're not alone, those of use opposed to the Couch and 6th proposal:

www.portlandarchitecture.com/

Guest Post: Redevelopments threaten vintage eastside buildings on Burnside & Couch

BY VAL BALLESTREM

Two recent development proposals along Portland’s East Burnside-Couch couplet, would spell the demise of a trio of interesting-if-not-designated-historic vintage buildings. The first proposal is for a 5-story 66,000 square foot mixed-use building at the northwest corner of NE 6th and Couch. The new building would extend the full block from Couch to Davis - on a lot that includes two early 20th century apartment buildings. The Davis half of the property has been empty for several years. With few remaining older buildings in this area, the project raises a couple of questions.

Where’s the creativity here, Portland? Why not figure out a way to integrate the older structures into the new development? If you retain (and rehabilitate) the two apartments facing Couch, the new construction could be focused on the vacant portion of the block along Davis. Such a design would preserve some of what remains of the historic character in this much modified part of town, while also allowing for a new building. It would also conserve the energy embodied in the two existing structures, preventing construction and demolition waste. Who knows? It might even render the apartments more affordable than new construction alone would allow. It would be a win for everyone and would be wonderfully sustainable.

Rather than pursue a creative solution, the developer, (as we see in the City’s public notices to date), appears to be pre-empting opposition to the new building by touting all of the "green" features it will have and noting how the existing buildings will be deconstructed. This argument has been used repeatedly in Portland in recent years - but it leaves out other factors that are as (or more) important.

Just because a building is deconstructed or building materials are recycled does not mean the material will all be re-used. It takes energy to turn recycled materials into something else. Meanwhile, energy is consumed in the deconstruction and recycling processes - energy that could just as easily be applied to the renovation of the existing buildings. In a nutshell, regardless of all the "green" bells and whistles a project such as this may include, it still means the consumption of untold tons of materials for new construction. As the National Trust for Historic Preservation states, "We can't build our way out of climate change."

Beyond energy consumption and the environment, we should also remember that many people consider the existing apartments their home. Is it really the most socially sustainable option to force the relocation of dozens of residents or is gentrification (as in “out with the old and in with the new”) a force at work here? Hopefully the developer will consider alternatives to this project other than the complete removal of the existing buildings.

The second project has gotten a bit more publicity of late. The owner of the Galaxy Restaurant at Ninth and East Burnside plans to demolish the existing building, replacing it with another single story restaurant. Again this raises a couple of interesting questions.

First of all, why demolish the restaurant only to replace it with another restaurant? Unless there are irreversible structural issues, it is a huge waste to demolish a building only to replace it with something that serves the exact same purpose and will do nothing to add housing density or other social benefits to the community. As with the project on Couch, this demolition would be a waste of resources and energy.

Secondly, it appears that the Galaxy building was once home to Portland's first Denny's Restaurant, opening in June 1963. Modeled after the prototype Southern California Denny's (founded in 1953), the building was used to promote franchise possibilities in Portland for the restaurant chain. The "check mark" design is one of those trademark patterns from the era of "Googie" architecture. Not far away at NE Grand and Hassalo, is another early Portland Denny's. If Oregonian employment ads are correct, that location opened within a year after the Burnside location. Is something like Portland's first Denny’s worthy of preservation? What about other buildings from the 1960s?

In response to the proposal to replace the Galaxy, the Bosco-Milligan Foundation/Architectural Heritage Center (BMF) recently submitted a letter to the BDS, noting how the project would not meet several aspects of the Central City and Central Eastside Design Guidelines. You can read the letter here.

The design for the proposed Trio Club/Galaxy demolition was recently approved. Design reviewed projects of this size ($1,865.600 or less), are subject to "Type II Design Review," meaning the designs are reviewed by BDS staff and a decision is then made. Any appeals of the decision go before the Portland Design Commission. An appeal costs $250, but that fee is waived for recognized neighborhood associations (in this case the Kerns Neighborhood).

Another issue with this particular proposal is the lack of consideration given to including housing in the new design. One would think that this location is just the sort of place where the City, County, and Metro would like to see more housing density. Adding it in a location such as 9th and East Burnside, would take some pressure off of nearby single family residential neighborhoods - including some of the eastside's oldest neighborhoods that currently have few if any protections against redevelopment.

The Galaxy demolition/Trio redevelopment provides yet another example of Portland's collective inability to halt needless demolitions of functional buildings - whether historic or not. The City’s code language of "no designation - no protection" hampers our ability to protect any but the most architecturally significant buildings. Owners of such buildings must then be willing to spend $3,000 in application fees to receive few benefits. While we should expect that "designated" buildings have some level of protection, we should also acknowledge that a formal historic landmark designation is not appropriate for every building in the city.

In the 21st century, with dwindling natural resources and the ongoing environmental impacts of building material waste, isn't there a way we can prevent needless demolition and make better use of what we already have? There must be a way that we can conserve and reuse existing buildings, without them needing the “designated historic” mantle.

Val Ballestrem is the education manager for the Bosco-Milligan Foundation/Architectural Heritage Center.

The Galaxy proposal looks truly horrid:

[bvpcvm]

Proposed 5 story apartment building at MLK and Monroe

Proposed 4-6 story apartment building (over parking) at E 12th and Burnside (4 stories on Ankeny side, 6 stories facing Burnside)
(another link with color drawing)

[bvpcvm]

NW 20th and Burnside Fred Meyer renovation

The latest issue of the NW Examiner has an article about an upcoming major re-do of the Burnside Freddy's. They're going to tear down the building where Blockbuster used to be and build a two-story addition to the rest of the store facing Burnside. They get points because they're actually going to reduce the amount of parking (they're leaving the lot across the street as-is, but the underground parking will be reduced) and they're increasing the number of bike racks. On the downside, the design - which is still in its early stages - is a total suburban cliche: little towers with hats on each corner. Why are those damn hats so popular?? If they're going to tear down half of the building and start over, they could easily add apartments on top, but the article doesn't mention anything like that. According to some inside info I have, about ten years ago, before the last remodel, they looked at just tearing the whole thing down and building a new store with apartments on top, so it's something they've considered in the past. Maybe next time.

Also, in the Examiner, apparently Merritt Paulson's renovation of the stadium is somewhat contingent - it turns out - on expanding *parking* options in Goose Hollow, and he's pushing (I guess, I just skimmed the article) for a parking garage to be build on the corner of 18th and Salmon (where the Allegro was supposed to be).

[downtownpdx]

Originally Posted by bvpcvm

NW 20th and Burnside Fred Meyer renovation

The latest issue of the NW Examiner has an article about an upcoming major re-do of the Burnside Freddy's. They're going to tear down the building where Blockbuster used to be and build a two-story addition to the rest of the store facing Burnside. They get points because they're actually going to reduce the amount of parking (they're leaving the lot across the street as-is, but the underground parking will be reduced) and they're increasing the number of bike racks. On the downside, the design - which is still in its early stages - is a total suburban cliche: little towers with hats on each corner. Why are those damn hats so popular?? If they're going to tear down half of the building and start over, they could easily add apartments on top, but the article doesn't mention anything like that. According to some inside info I have, about ten years ago, before the last remodel, they looked at just tearing the whole thing down and building a new store with apartments on top, so it's something they've considered in the past. Maybe next time.

Also, in the Examiner, apparently Merritt Paulson's renovation of the stadium is somewhat contingent - it turns out - on expanding *parking* options in Goose Hollow, and he's pushing (I guess, I just skimmed the article) for a parking garage to be build on the corner of 18th and Salmon (where the Allegro was supposed to be).

Yeah they need to re-work that design ... I hate those frosted-glass corner entrances with nothing active actually happening. But this is great news -- I'll take just about anything over the parking garage and ugly building we have now. And they plan to extend the width of the Burnside sidewalk along the storefront from the current 8 feet to about 15 feet, with trees, benches, etc. Apartments on top would be nice.

Across the street, (also mentioned in this edition of The Examiner), the long-vancant apartments above the Kingston Bar (on that triangle-shaped block between Burnside & Morrison @ 20th) will be converted to 6 townhouse apts. I'm so glad to see this happen -- I've always thought this was such a neat looking building and wondered why nobody tried to redevelop it. The exterior will remain intact (the building is from 1911).

[2oh1]

Hang on. I assume they're going to tear down where the HOLLYWOOD VIDEO used to be, not Blockbuster. Blockbuster was across the street, on the other side of Burnside. I think there's a Kinkos where the Blockbuster used to be...?

Originally Posted by downtownpdx

Across the street, (also mentioned in this edition of The Examiner), the long-vancant apartments above the Kingston Bar (on that triangle-shaped block between Burnside & Morrison @ 20th) will be converted to 6 townhouse apts. I'm so glad to see this happen -- I've always thought this was such a neat looking building and wondered why nobody tried to redevelop it. The exterior will remain intact (the building is from 1911).

YES! Those really are neat! I suppose the challenge will be to make them quiet, with Burnside right there. I always thought they were neat too - especially the one at the end. What a fun view that place must have, with windows on three sides not to mention being pointed straight to the west with a view of the traffic on Burnside. Fun!

[urbanlife]

Originally Posted by downtownpdx

Across the street, (also mentioned in this edition of The Examiner), the long-vancant apartments above the Kingston Bar (on that triangle-shaped block between Burnside & Morrison @ 20th) will be converted to 6 townhouse apts. I'm so glad to see this happen -- I've always thought this was such a neat looking building and wondered why nobody tried to redevelop it. The exterior will remain intact (the building is from 1911).

I never realized the apartments above the Kingston Bar were vacant, I just figured they were cheap, crappy apartments. How long have they been vacant? It is definitely good news that those upper floors will be put to better use...though good soundproof windows will be a worthwhile investment.

[tworivers]

Hope they stick to the green exterior in the renderings...

First net-zero apartment building fills up quickly
POSTED: Thursday, April 7, 2011 at 02:23 PM PT
BY: Angela Webber, DJC

In Portland, green buildings can be attractive – especially if the price is right.

Apartment tenants are in the process of moving into ecoFLATS, a Siteworks Design | Build mixed-use building at 3935 N. Williams Ave. The $3.2 million project could become the nation’s first net-zero apartment building, according to the project leader. That will depend on how energy is used in the building’s two retail spaces and 18 apartments, which are all leased, and much sooner than projected.

“Almost without exception, the people who contacted us about living in ecoFLATS wanted to live there because it was green, and they cared about that,” said Susan Stratton, president of NBS Multifamily Management.

The secret, according to project mastermind Jean-Pierre Veillet, is to offer sustainable living at an affordable price. No bells and whistles are necessary, he said.

“A lot of developers still make a fatal error in their design, in terms of what people want for finishes,” Veillet said. “Here, they aren’t stainless steel appliances; they’re Energy Star appliances. Instead of ceramic sinks, we have IKEA sinks.”

Also, the units’ light fixtures and curtains were designed by students at the Pacific Northwest College of Art.

To keep lease rates down for the building, which has a $200,000 solar array on its roof, Veillet said his team performed a lot of vetting on each decision in regard to affordability and energy efficiency.

Tenants pay approximately $1,000 for a 594-square-foot, one-bedroom apartment or $1,550 for a 770-square-foot, two-bedroom apartment, Stratton said.

Floor plans in ecoFLATS apartments are open to provide better circulation for energy efficiency. Entrances to the units are on the outside of the building: The absence of interior corridors means less area to light, cool and heat, Veillet said. Even with these energy-efficiency measures, net-zero status will depend on the tenants.

Each apartment’s energy usage will be monitored on a screen in the building’s lobby. Veillet also plans to encourage energy conservation by offering incentives – such as a coffee shop discount – to residents.

“It’s a challenge, but it’s a good challenge,” said Sean McGuirk, an ecoFLATS resident. He worked with Veillet on a green building project for Nau, where McGuirk works in marketing. When Veillet started working on ecoFLATS, he offered McGuirk a chance to get involved and become an on-site manager.

“Sean is helping to create community,” Veillet said. McGuirk will help foster what Veillet calls the “social aspect” of net-zero energy.

McGuirk predicts that the sustainability-minded residents of ecoFLATS will “all about” achieving net-zero energy usage. However, there are no provisions written into tenants’ leases about energy consumption, Stratton said.

Veillet said he may consider taking on another green apartment project, but not until ecoFLATS wraps up. Apartments are completed, but some parts of the project are still in progress. The ground-floor retail units, which will be occupied by a tattoo shop and Hopworks Urban Brewery, are still being finished. A community garden space will be created, and the energy monitoring system still needs to be set up.

“We didn’t expect to need it until absorption was complete, and we didn’t expect that to happen within 30 days. The bank told us it would take a year,” Veillet said.

Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design gold certification is being pursued for ecoFLATS. The quick success of the project is drawing attention: Veillet said he is giving tours of the facility once or twice a week to developers, researchers or government officials. His hope is that the project could be duplicated on a larger scale.

[Okstate]

Update: The Safeway is and has been closed for a little while now.

[bvpcvm]

Can light rail make good on development hype?

by Angela Webber
Published: May 2nd, 2011




Lazar Bodunov, a steel stud framer with Union Construction LLC, works at the site of the Killingsworth Station development in Northeast Portland on April 15. The long-delayed project is an example of transit-oriented development along the Interstate MAX line. (Photo by Sam Tenney/DJC)

In 2009, the then-President of the Lents Neighborhood Association told the Daily Journal of Commerce that he expected light rail to bring to his neighborhood the type of development that an urban renewal district had failed to bring for a long time.

Two years later, current Lents Neighborhood Association President Nick Christenson says that that the existence of a MAX station hasn’t made a change in the slow pace of development in Lents—and he doesn’t expect it to.

“Until we have some more available commercial spots in the town center… I don’t see what good light rail could do yet,” Christenson says.

As for whether light rail will make a different in the future, “…the long term answer is it’s too early to tell,” he adds.

Light rail is coming to a whole new set of neighborhoods with the Portland-Milwaukie light-rail project that starts construction this summer. As redevelopment plans and expectations are drafted for that project, the view along the city’s other light-rail lines raises questions of when exactly that development will happen.

Proposed projects along the planned Portland-Milwaukie light-rail line are many: the Portland Development Commission is working with the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry on plans for a new building and a parking structure, Oregon Health & Science University is expanding near the site of a new light-rail stop, and the new Clinton Station was identified in a PDC briefing as a “central gathering place that spurs new transit-oriented development.”

The city of Milwaukie has projects in the works in anticipation of the Portland-Milwaukie light rail opening in 2015, says Community Development Director Kenny Asher. He said city wants to have at least one mixed-use project open and ready for use when the first train takes off. This project has a much faster timeline than usual development along light rail-lines.

The vision for a half-acre site adjacent to the downtown Milwaukie light-rail station is a “modern-day interpretation of a train station,” Asher says. The building will sit on property that TriMet acquired as a staging area for the project, and might include shared office space, a coffee shop and the first bike shop in the city’s downtown, Asher says.



This rendering shows a possible design for the Clinton Street station on the upcoming Portland-Milwaukie light-rail line. The Portland Development Commission has identified Clinton Station as a project that will spur new transit-oriented development. (Rendering courtesy of Trimet)

Milwaukie also has plans for a new bike-pedestrian bridge over an existing lake that would connect a neighborhood to downtown and the light rail station. That project is an example of the city’s “looking to the (light rail) project to do things that we would have wanted to do anyway,” Asher says.

For a light-rail development “success story,” PDC spokesman Shawn Uhlman points to the Killingsworth Station mixed-use project, a four-story building near the Interstate MAX line that will include 56 condominium units and 9,000 square feet of retail space.

“If you look at it as a project, it’s a success from a number of fronts. The neighborhood identified it as a priority. It’s very much in line with what you’d like to see in terms of transit-oriented development,” Uhlman says.

But Killingsworth station was a long time coming—it was announced in 2005, and just broke ground late last year after funding difficulties and a change in developers and design.

“The issue, frankly, was funding,” Uhlman says, pointing out the global economic crisis that came in the middle of the project timeline. “This is in no way indicative of a normal project.”

Projects along the Portland-Milwaukie light-rail line have projected shorter timelines.

“The first OHSU is slated to start next year and we hope to see a few additional projects come together before fall 2015,” says Jillian Detweiler, TriMet Property Development Manager.

TriMet’s long-term plan is the creation of an “Innovation Quadrant,” with light rail connecting OHSU, Portland State University, OMSI and Portland Community College boosting development, Detweiler says. “The goal is to create 30,000 new jobs in the next 25 years,”

Back in Lents, no big on-the-ground redevelopment projects have taken shape since MAX came to town. But light rail has inspired one very tangible success—the Ramona Street Fair, Christenson says.

“Light rail is a great asset,” Christenson says. “The first time we [had the Ramona Street Fair] was specifically because of the light rail opening. We put it right next to the transit station. People can come out and hop off MAX and come visit our street festival.”

http://djcoregon.com/news/2011/05/02...opment-hype-2/

[65MAX]

Originally Posted by bvpcvm

This rendering shows a possible design for the Clinton Street station on the upcoming Portland-Milwaukie light-rail line. The Portland Development Commission has identified Clinton Station as a project that will spur new transit-oriented development. (Rendering courtesy of Trimet)

Really? Huh.... 'cuz it looks just like a photo of a station on the Green line.

More quality reporting from DJC. I'm glad I didn't subscribe to their premium content website.

[bvpcvm]

According to the NW Examiner (see page 23), a new apt building is proposed at 2234 NW Lovejoy. This is the empty lot on the south side of Lovejoy near the streetcar stop:

"CE John is planning a 94-unit apartment building on a
long-vacant lot at 2234 NW Lovejoy St. The company
also plans to remodel the exterior of the Rose’s
building at Northwest 23rd and Kearney."

[bvpcvm]

Also, the NW farmer's market is moving to a parking lot at 19th and Everett because of the upcoming construction of the new apt building(s) at 23rd and Savier. Here's the latest design review stuff on that one.

And, just to wrap things up, it looks like there's still momentum on the new apt building at 20th and Pettygrove - they're actively applying for various pre-construction permits.

[twofiftyfive]

Originally Posted by bvpcvm

According to the NW Examiner (see page 23), a new apt building is proposed at 2234 NW Lovejoy. This is the empty lot on the south side of Lovejoy near the streetcar stop:

"CE John is planning a 94-unit apartment building on a
long-vacant lot at 2234 NW Lovejoy St. The company
also plans to remodel the exterior of the Rose’s
building at Northwest 23rd and Kearney."

Check out the article on p.20. The NIMBYs in that neighborhood are amazing. They oppose construction of a small apartment building that fits in very well with its neighbors (and has no parking!) because it might encourage developers to replace dilapidated houses with new construction! Fortunately, I would think the neighborhood association doesn't have a leg to stand on in this case.

[CouvScott]

Originally Posted by bvpcvm

And, just to wrap things up, it looks like there's still momentum on the new apt building at 20th and Pettygrove - they're actively applying for various pre-construction permits.

I can confirm that this is under construction. Just drove past it on my way back to the office.

[philopdx]

Here's 20th and Pettygrove from today, May 7th, 2011:

[Northeast79]

Originally Posted by cab

So these firms are sluts. Do they wake up feeling guilty about these projects?

Ok, maybe I'll try to jump in at the architect's defense.

I doubt he feels guilty. But, he may wake up thinking of ideas on how to make it better. If he is serious about design, he wants to do something meaningful.

However, a bunch of people asking for balconies and parks is nothing but hilarious to him. They have no idea what zoning restrictions, budgetary constraints, or other factors are at play.

The right side of the building (in the rendering) doesn't bother me actually. It would be more respectful to the theater if the whole building was more modern and playful. Rather than some context-less, meaning-less attempt at fake historic architecture.

[65MAX]

I don't think the "style" of the building is the issue. Nobody's calling for a replication of the ornate facade. It's the massing of the building in relation to the theater that is the problem. The theater should have a minimum setback so the landmark marquee remains unobstructed.