The Rodney (1430 NW Glisan) | 174' | 16 floors | Completed - Page 3

zilfondel · #41 Posted **Apr 6, 2016, 2:38 PM**

There doesn't seem to be any design context for the yellow, so I would chuck it.

maccoinnich · #42 Posted **May 23, 2016, 7:14 PM**

Project has been submitted for Design Review:

Quote:

PROPOSAL IS FOR A 16 STORY HIGH RISE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT.

maccoinnich · #43 Posted **Jun 18, 2016, 6:07 PM**

(x-post from the Affordable Housing Thread). On City Council agenda for next week:

Quote:

713 Approve application under the Multiple-Unit Limited Tax Exemption Program for 14th and Glisan located at 1402-1430 NW Glisan St (Ordinance introduced by Commissioner Saltzman)

48 of the project's 240 units will be affordable to people earning under 80% area MFI, in return for a property tax break.

cailes · #44 Posted **Jun 20, 2016, 2:51 AM**

80%... interesting.

maccoinnich · #45 Posted **Jul 22, 2016, 4:00 AM**

Quote:

Ankrom Moisan Architects: Stepping it up to fit in

It's a mix between historic proportioning and modern technique, one of the hardest challenges of building something new in an old, but up-and-coming location.

The design applications for a half-block development along Glisan and 14th Avenue in the Pearl District were recently completed.

Ankrom Moisan Architects' designs show a 16-story mixed-use building with 230 residential units for a half-block site along Glisan Street near the I-405 entrance. It’s across from the Touché restaurant, and includes plans for the current surface lot in that block, which Ankrom Moisan has ideas to transform into a parklet for the neighborhood.

Following two design advice requests in January and March, the project will be in for permit in the fall, with construction slated to being February 2017 and project completion for Autumn 2018. It will go to the city’s Design Commission for its first review on Aug. 18.

...continues at the Business Tribune.

maccoinnich · #46 Posted **Aug 6, 2016, 12:31 AM**

Notice of a Public Hearing

Tykendo · #47 Posted **Aug 6, 2016, 5:27 PM**

I like this design. Like the cap. Nicer than the usual bland mechanical box.

tworivers · #48 Posted **Aug 6, 2016, 9:52 PM**

I like this one too. Kudos to Ankrom and also the Design Commission (or BDS staff, whoever answers design advice requests) for pushing them in the right direction. Looking forward to seeing shovels in the ground...and saying goodbye to that parking lot.

maccoinnich · #49 Posted **Aug 19, 2016, 4:20 AM**

Drawings [PDF - 106MB] and Staff Report, which recommends approval.

DMH · #50 Posted **Aug 20, 2016, 9:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by maccoinnich

Drawings [PDF - 106MB] and Staff Report, which recommends approval.

The Design Review process really helped this to become a much better building proposal. Earlier designs were half-baked and unresolved.

Tykendo · #51 Posted **Aug 20, 2016, 10:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DMH

The Design Review process really helped this to become a much better building proposal. Earlier designs were half-baked and unresolved.

I agree on some of the reviews. but they took away the top that gave the design some coolness. Now the box on top lacks any pizazz at all. It's just another bland box. Sad. Now the question is, if this size of project can get that amount of scrutiny, why the heck hasn't those ugly designs of the Convention Center Hotel, and the courthouse achieved the same change results? Change of final design that is.

Tykendo · #52 Posted **Aug 20, 2016, 10:35 PM**

It's like when a woman wears ballet flats instead of heels with an evening dress, practical sure, but just not quite as sexy. PDX seems to do that a lot.

RainDog · #53 Posted **Aug 21, 2016, 2:02 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tykendo

I agree on some of the reviews. but they took away the top that gave the design some coolness. Now the box on top lacks any pizazz at all. It's just another bland box.

I couldn't disagree with you more. The top felt lazy, obtuse and almost suburban. The building now has a simple elegance much more fitting for its location.

But I also find flats more sexy than high heels. So I will admit that beauty is subjective.

Tykendo · #54 Posted **Aug 21, 2016, 4:18 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by RainDog

I couldn't disagree with you more. The top felt lazy, obtuse and almost suburban. The building now has a simple elegance much more fitting for its location.

But I also find flats more sexy than high heels. So I will admit that beauty is subjective.

So true. We agree to disagree on those likes.

maccoinnich · #55 Posted **Aug 26, 2016, 1:24 AM**

Project was approved today.

maccoinnich · #56 Posted **Aug 27, 2016, 9:59 PM**

maccoinnich · #57 Posted **Sep 12, 2016, 10:30 PM**

Final Findings and Decision by the Design Commission

maccoinnich · #58 Posted **Feb 14, 2017, 1:29 AM**

Notice of a Type II Proposal for the parklet (across the street, but being developed as part of this project).

Rob Nob · #59 Posted **Mar 24, 2017, 12:02 AM**

Demo of the 1980's tilt up concrete strip mall started without protest from the Historic Resources groups. I guess it wont be contributing historically for a few more years? You can see the 70's "No Parking" signs on the back of the 10 Barrel building.

DMH · #60 Posted **Mar 24, 2017, 3:53 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob Nob

Demo of the 1980's tilt up concrete strip mall started without protest from the Historic Resources groups. I guess it wont be contributing historically for a few more years? You can see the 70's "No Parking" signs on the back of the 10 Barrel building.

Maybe you were thinking that this site is within the NW 13th Avenue Historic District, but it is not. Furthermore if it were, the existing strip mall building would not qualify as a contributing structure within that historic warehouse district.