HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Pacific West > Portland > Downtown & City of Portland

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #421  
Old Posted Jun 23, 2009, 2:59 AM
urbanlife's Avatar
urbanlife urbanlife is offline
A before E
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
Posts: 10,999
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric cantona View Post
spot on. Leonard's drama queen routine is starting to wear thin, IMO.

baseball at the MC is a non-starter for a few reasons:
  1. my understanding is that it is not large enough to accommodate MLB. any site that cannot do that (including Lents) should NEVER be considered. i don't care how remote the possibility is, if there's any chance of attracting an MLB team here then it is simply good planning to be prepared for that, and not building a stadium that could be rendered useless later.
  2. as a forward looking city, tearing down a usable structure for a baseball stadium is the opposite of sustainable.
  3. architectural legacy is important.
  4. regardless of your view of the aesthetic appeal of the MC, it remains a useful counterpoint to the larger and flashier (and uglier...) RG. yes, it can pay for the necessary upgrades if marketed properly. and no, it will not compete with the RG.

i've mentioned it before elsewhere: there is land adjacent to PIR that is owned by the City and the County, has great freeway access, a MAX stop already there, and is large enough for a MLB size stadium AND parking. on top of that parking could be shared with the racetrack. this land is currently grass, and is used for parking at larger events at the track. the Interstate Ave. URA borders it, and could possibly be enlarged to cover the site.

my guess is that there are more sites like this around the metro area, and in Portland. the City's due dilligence on the baseball portion of the whole deal is abysmal. always reactionary (see Leonard comment above) and usually wrong.
exactly, I have always found that the PPS site was the best site for a AAA park that would also have the option of becoming a MLB park in the future. If we are going to spend money on a new ballpark, wouldnt we want that money to be spent in a way that it can be used as an investment for something bigger later rather?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #422  
Old Posted Jun 23, 2009, 12:55 PM
scottyboi's Avatar
scottyboi scottyboi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 60
Just for the sake of argument...wouldn't tearing down PPS to build a stadium also be seen as unsustainable...it's still usable. I'm constantly amazed that people go on and on about how razing MC is hypocrisy for a city that touts sustainability...then they turn around and say "we could always get rid of the pps building". Either it's bad or it's not...you can't have it both ways depending on the aesthetic value you place on a building.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #423  
Old Posted Jun 23, 2009, 2:50 PM
pdxhome pdxhome is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 40
The PPS (Blanchard) site and buildings are currently bigger than PPS needs according to a PPS spokesperson during the Oregon Stadium Campaign in 2003-2005. They have desired a smaller property to operate from. It's not very "sustainable" to pay for heating/cooling maintenence on a facility that is under-utilized (much like the MC).

Here is a thought:

Use Lents URD money to build PPS a new office and ops facility in Lents.
Then use Interstate URD Money to build a AAA ballpark at Blanchard Property.

The Blazers would likely fight this scenario to the bitter end since they are targeting Interstate URD money for the "live" district idea.

Could be a win-win for the Beavers and Lents...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #424  
Old Posted Jun 23, 2009, 3:13 PM
scottyboi's Avatar
scottyboi scottyboi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 60
I guess that's just the thing...the MC must be horribly inefficient when it comes to climate control...all that single-pane glass...it must get horribly hot in summer and leak like a sieve in the winter...I'd hate to see the heating/cooling bills for such a building. It's ironic how for a period of time we forgot that having natural ventilation to a degree is desirable in a building. The main point I was making was that people can't say demolishing one aging, inefficient building is sustainable, but doing the same thing across the street isn't...the argument doesn't hold water. I'm not a fan of the PPS building or the MC, I wouldn't mind seeing them both replaced with something different...but demolishing PPS while crying "sustainability" seems silly.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #425  
Old Posted Jun 23, 2009, 6:43 PM
NewUrbanist NewUrbanist is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by pdxhome View Post
The PPS (Blanchard) site and buildings are currently bigger than PPS needs according to a PPS spokesperson during the Oregon Stadium Campaign in 2003-2005. They have desired a smaller property to operate from. It's not very "sustainable" to pay for heating/cooling maintenence on a facility that is under-utilized (much like the MC).


Here is a thought:

Use Lents URD money to build PPS a new office and ops facility in Lents.
Then use Interstate URD Money to build a AAA ballpark at Blanchard Property.

The Blazers would likely fight this scenario to the bitter end since they are targeting Interstate URD money for the "live" district idea.

Could be a win-win for the Beavers and Lents...
Problem is... the deal needs to be completed and constructed by 2011 for AAA to continue it's run in the city. Otherwise, Beavers will need to find another location either in the area or leave. City Council has separated the issue to focus on ensuring MLS arrives on time. Second, URA (not URD) funding cannot be spent on schools... the David Douglas issue is still sitting with the lawyers. Third, PPS will need to have the whole process funded by URA money, which will create another hot button issue with the neighbors who just rallied to fight against a $47M stadium proposal.

Lents NA/ URA folks do not like to be told what is best for them. I think you will be hard pressed to get another mega project funded in with that funding. All projects in the works for the next 5 years would need to stop, with moderate funding capacity in the following 5 year scenarios.

Also, and this might be a bigger off-topic discussion, but Portland has constructed several single user government buildings which do not generate property taxes. Why not consolidate the operations for PPS, PDC and maybe Trimet into a larger high rise building, sell or lease the other buildings to create revenue? Metro has a large squat building, but can you imagine how efficient it would be to have a 40 story building with all of their building operations managed? The Portland Building was a bad design, but the concept of holding all of the city offices in one central location would be a boom for property taxes. Perhaps Trimet can consolidate their operations too (RedPdxer?) and lease rather than own.

Just a thought
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #426  
Old Posted Jun 24, 2009, 8:13 PM
MightyAlweg MightyAlweg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Orange County, California
Posts: 160
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottyboi View Post
Just for the sake of argument...wouldn't tearing down PPS to build a stadium also be seen as unsustainable...it's still usable. I'm constantly amazed that people go on and on about how razing MC is hypocrisy for a city that touts sustainability...then they turn around and say "we could always get rid of the pps building". Either it's bad or it's not...you can't have it both ways depending on the aesthetic value you place on a building.
Good point.

But then nothing about profesional sports is "sustainable". Any major sporting event attracts thousands of people who ride cars and buses and electric trolleys that use energy created by wasting natural resources. Then the thousands of people sit there in a big facility made of steel and concrete and toxic chemicals using up more electricity, eating thousands of pounds of cheap food and drink with little nutritional value and a degrading impact on the environment, while hundreds of people either work to put on the game or support the game or clean up the mess from the game, using more electricity and more resources. All for a silly game.

Now, you could argue that at least Portland has the good sense to not build some hulking monstrosity like the new Dallas Cowboys arena. http://stadium.dallascowboys.com/

But really, any time you purposely attract 10,000 people to a large venue for the sole purpose of entertaining them for a profit, you aren't doing anything sustainable.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #427  
Old Posted Jun 24, 2009, 10:19 PM
twofiftyfive twofiftyfive is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by MightyAlweg View Post
Good point.

But then nothing about profesional sports is "sustainable". Any major sporting event attracts thousands of people who ride cars and buses and electric trolleys that use energy created by wasting natural resources. Then the thousands of people sit there in a big facility made of steel and concrete and toxic chemicals using up more electricity, eating thousands of pounds of cheap food and drink with little nutritional value and a degrading impact on the environment, while hundreds of people either work to put on the game or support the game or clean up the mess from the game, using more electricity and more resources. All for a silly game.

Now, you could argue that at least Portland has the good sense to not build some hulking monstrosity like the new Dallas Cowboys arena. http://stadium.dallascowboys.com/

But really, any time you purposely attract 10,000 people to a large venue for the sole purpose of entertaining them for a profit, you aren't doing anything sustainable.
Which only goes to show that "sustainable" is not a meaningful end in itself.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #428  
Old Posted Jun 24, 2009, 10:24 PM
scottyboi's Avatar
scottyboi scottyboi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 60
To the two previous posters...AMEN!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #429  
Old Posted Jun 24, 2009, 10:27 PM
mmeade mmeade is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Portland
Posts: 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by MightyAlweg View Post
But really, any time you purposely attract 10,000 people to a large venue for the sole purpose of entertaining them for a profit, you aren't doing anything sustainable.
I guess that depends on your definition of sustainable. The word itself means able to be continued. As long as this is a business model that produces more income than it costs, it is indeed sustainable. Possibly not eco-friendly, but certainly a sustainable business. Sports entertainment supplies our economy with thousands of jobs, even here in Oregon. As you've undoubtedly noticed lately, a robust economy makes sustainable construction a whole lot easier.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #430  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2009, 4:37 PM
WonderlandPark's Avatar
WonderlandPark WonderlandPark is offline
Pacific Wonderland
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Bi-Situational, Portland & L.A.
Posts: 4,129
Yep, everyone should sit at home and watch an energystar* television all day save for the occasional bike ride to the store.

No fun for Johnny.
__________________
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away"

travel, architecture & photos of the textured world at http://www.pixelmap.com
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #431  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2009, 6:15 PM
urbanlife's Avatar
urbanlife urbanlife is offline
A before E
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
Posts: 10,999
Quote:
Originally Posted by WonderlandPark View Post
Yep, everyone should sit at home and watch an energystar* television all day save for the occasional bike ride to the store.

No fun for Johnny.
Dont forget harvesting your own poop for top soil.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #432  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2009, 7:42 PM
JordanL JordanL is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,004
I love that people here in Portland know when to not take themselves seriously.

As an aside, I agree that I haven't heard a non-hypocritical argument for keep the MC. I'd like it if the people who want it kept just admitted the truth: like all people, they have different rules for the things they support.

Trying to pretend that they have some kind of moral vindication in their defense of the MC, and that the people promoting the coming of a new sports team don't, is silly.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #433  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2009, 5:48 PM
eric cantona's Avatar
eric cantona eric cantona is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 509
"but demolishing PPS while crying "sustainability" seems silly"

you are correct on that point. but i would also add that your equating sustainability to merely heating/cooling is a little short sighted, at best. there's a lot of embedded energy in existing structures. tearing them down because they "get horribly hot in summer and leak like a sieve in the winter" is only looking at part of the picture. if i could argue that the MC will need to be replaced by a similarly sized facility in the next 20 years (and i can), then tearing it down is folly, regardless of what you think of it's aesthetic qualities. upgrading it to meet today's standards would be the most sustainable option.

"Which only goes to show that "sustainable" is not a meaningful end in itself." - huh? did sustainability kick sand in your face at the beach? not a meaningful end? what would you propose? should we all have coal furnaces in our homes and workplaces?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #434  
Old Posted Jun 27, 2009, 3:20 AM
urbanlife's Avatar
urbanlife urbanlife is offline
A before E
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
Posts: 10,999
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric cantona View Post
"but demolishing PPS while crying "sustainability" seems silly"

you are correct on that point. but i would also add that your equating sustainability to merely heating/cooling is a little short sighted, at best. there's a lot of embedded energy in existing structures. tearing them down because they "get horribly hot in summer and leak like a sieve in the winter" is only looking at part of the picture. if i could argue that the MC will need to be replaced by a similarly sized facility in the next 20 years (and i can), then tearing it down is folly, regardless of what you think of it's aesthetic qualities. upgrading it to meet today's standards would be the most sustainable option.

"Which only goes to show that "sustainable" is not a meaningful end in itself." - huh? did sustainability kick sand in your face at the beach? not a meaningful end? what would you propose? should we all have coal furnaces in our homes and workplaces?
of course with the PPS, you have to consider how under utilized the area is. Also, the building is much larger than what the PPS needs, so it would be much more efficient for them to be in a space that better suits them and allows the land to be reused for efficiently.

There are more than one way to look at sustainability, and sometimes, tearing down to rebuild is the best way...though, one could also say that the reuse of the building is also sustainable...reusing much of the materials that are currently there to construct new structures.

An example of that is the Pittsburgh Convention Center, where they managed to reuse 90% of the original building in the new building.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #435  
Old Posted Jun 27, 2009, 7:15 PM
New Madrid's Avatar
New Madrid New Madrid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: pdx
Posts: 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottyboi View Post
Either it's bad or it's not...you can't have it both ways depending on the aesthetic value you place on a building.
pretty sure you can, actually.

also:
The sin is not so much in the demolition of a building as it is in the process of replacing it with something. When you develop a site, no matter what was existing beforehand you should feel compelled to replace it with something more useful/beautiful/flexible than what was there.

MC has TONS of possibilities, the run down parking garage that is the PPS annex simply doesn't. No two ways about it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #436  
Old Posted Jun 28, 2009, 4:00 AM
crow's Avatar
crow crow is offline
momentum
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: portland
Posts: 555
tear down PPS, or take a drive around for yourself, it seems there are so many low rent auto dealers and parking lots that collectively could be combined to give a site for the stadium. where there is a WILL there is a WAY. I am sure the city could help PPS move their schedule forward - that is the perfect spot and could really be a catalyst.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #437  
Old Posted Jul 17, 2009, 5:56 AM
bvpcvm bvpcvm is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Portland
Posts: 2,708
http://blog.oregonlive.com/portland_...mem/print.html

Cyclists push velodrome for Memorial Coliseum
Posted by mhaberman July 16, 2009 16:13PM


Ankrom Moisan Associated Architects

At the moment, it's a glimmer in the eye of bike-track fans, but a group of racers -- who in their other lives are developers, architects and the like -- has drafted this plan to build a velodrome in Memorial Coliseum, drawn by track racer Jeff Mitchem, an urban planner at Ankrom Moisan Associated Architects.

The dreamers whom Steve Brown bikes with can see it already: a velodrome, with a gasp-inducing view of downtown Portland, centrally situated to draw on the city's bicycle culture and attract businesses, families and world-class racers.

And for them, the dream comes alive ... inside Memorial Coliseum.

A week ago, Portland Mayor Sam Adams announced a task force to examine how to revitalize the 50-year-old coliseum, which was spared the wrecking ball when local architects lamented this spring at the prospect of tearing down an example of Modernist architecture and replacing it with a baseball stadium.

As far as Brown and like-minded cyclists are concerned, an indoor velodrome is the answer.

"I don't know if the building itself is screaming for a velodrome, but it's certainly screaming to find a best use at lowest cost," said Brown, 57, a Portland developer and elite velodrome racer.

A velodrome is a banked track designed for bicycle racing. Lengths can vary: An Olympic-sized track is at least 250 meters or about .15 of a mile. The United States has 19 velodromes, all outdoors except the Home Depot Center near Los Angeles.

Portland's track, a concrete velodrome at Alpenrose, opened in 1967 and has hosted national and world competitions. Starting today, the track opens its biggest weekend of racing, the annual Alpenrose Velodrome Challenge, which will attract racers throughout the world.

But the Alpenrose facility is getting harder to maintain, and since 2004, an informal committee of racers, including Brown and urban planner Jeff Mitchem, has been looking for a site to build an additional track or a replacement.

Brown lobbied the 2007 Legislature to get lottery money for construction of velodromes in Portland and in southern Oregon, but the bill died. The committee kept searching. In late April, a prospect they had never considered before arose.

Tom Miller, Adams' chief of staff and a cyclist, invited the committee to come to City Hall, and he asked the members to generate a proposal on what it would take to put a velodrome in the Rose Quarter.

Brown said the chat focused on whether a velodrome would fit in the area and "whether it would be more of a broad-based activity or would it be based for elite racing only."

"Our program, as we see it," Brown said, "would be as broad as possible, to get as many people on the track as possible."

Brown said he, Mitchem and two other committee members walked around the Rose Quarter, then into Memorial Coliseum. When they examined the building, they became intrigued by its possibilities.

"I said, 'By golly, let's draw a picture and see if this fits,'" Brown said.
Mitchem, who works at Ankrom Moisan Associated Architects in Portland, and his colleagues Matt Janssen and Patrick Cavaleri drew up plans for a 200-meter track that would fit in the coliseum, with room for other activities -- "big enough to have a national draw through the amateur and professional ranks."

Brown said the track, made of wood, would cost about $250,000 and could be designed with removable sections to allow events such as the Rose Festival's Grand Floral Parade to continue using the coliseum.

"The neatest part of it," Mitchem said, "is that you get the indoor velodrome, and then you sort of accessorize it with activity around that: I can see the hand-built bike show there. There's all this great energy in the cycling community that is sort of looking for a home."

The Trail Blazers would have a final say in what goes into Memorial Coliseum. J.E. Isaac, senior vice president for business affairs for the Blazers, said he talked with Brown this week.

"One thing I don't want to do is get in a situation before we've even had time to look at the ideas and offer an opinion about them," Isaac said. "The city is going to take the time to fully examine all of the options, and (a velodrome) is certainly an option that should be considered and explored."
Warren Jimenez, Adams' deputy chief of staff, said the process of selecting a fate for the coliseum was young and the velodrome idea is "one of the ideas that would be considered as well as the rest of them."

But Brown, Mitchem and other bike advocates say an indoor velodrome in a region with an eight-month rainy season could be a 24-hour facility, where people could take classes or bike-safety instruction.

"We think it's a super idea," said Michelle Poyourow, advocacy manager for the nonprofit Bicycle Transportation Alliance.

"It's an awesome idea," said Kenji Sugahara, executive director of the Oregon Bicycle Racing Association. "It would be a big draw. There would be people from all over the country showing up to train and compete. It would be big for our sport."

-- Anne Saker:
annesaker@news.oregonian.com.

Categories: Breaking News, Cycling, North/Northeast Portland, Portland Neighborhoods, Traffic
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #438  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2009, 10:25 AM
RoseCtyRoks's Avatar
RoseCtyRoks RoseCtyRoks is offline
shozbot!
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: City Of Roses
Posts: 213
A Chance To Put In Your 2 Cents!

Thinking outside the Rose Quarter box
By Janie Har, The Oregonian
November 20, 2009, 9:30PM
Thomas Boyd/The OregonianThe city has extended the deadline for ideas from the public on what it should do with the city-owned Memorial Coliseum. Justin Gast has no political connections, no deep pockets. He's just a managing editor for a trade publication who rides his bike past the Memorial Coliseum almost every day and sees what could be.

Gast envisions an outdoor amphitheater with a view of the city, a hotel to welcome visitors and music clubs to turn this dead corner of Portland into a more diverse Pearl District.

"There has to be another option that the public gets behind."


Got an idea?
Find applications to submit a concept for Memorial Coliseum at www.rosequarterdevelopment.org. You can submit ideas just to see what sticks or to solicit partners who could help turn the idea into a fully developed proposal. View current proposals at the Web site.
His is among two dozen or so proposals that have come in since Portland Mayor Sam Adams called for a citywide brainstorm on what to do with the aging coliseum and, by extension, the moribund Rose Quarter.

Few of these early ideas come with seed money or blueprints. And they won't have the financial backing of bigger players, such as the Portland Trail Blazers, who have their own plan. But what the ideas lack in specifics, they make up in imagination and desire.

"I don't have a stake in this venture," says Gast, 33. "I don't have an architecture or contracting firm that could benefit from my vision. I'm just a Rose City citizen who sees a tremendous amount of potential for this area."

The Rose Quarter in Northeast Portland holds the Memorial Coliseum and the Rose Garden. Even as fans flock to the Garden for sporting and music events, the general area remains dead most days and nights.

Last summer, Adams convened a 32-member task force to study the future of a coliseum in need of millions of dollars in upgrades and no firm consensus.

The Blazers would like to turn the district into a sports and entertainment playground called "JumpTown." Architects want to keep the coliseum's unique bowl-in-a-glass design. Military veterans cherish the monument to their service in the sunken plaza.

City Commissioner Randy Leonard thinks the coliseum is ugly and wanted to raze it for an open-air Triple-A baseball park.

"The future of that area really touches on the heart of Portlanders. It's really important we think about it that way," says Sandra McDonough, chief executive of the Portland Business Alliance.

"But it's also important we think about the economic viability of what we do there."

Sean-Michael Riley, 34, is a freelance video editor and the first to submit his plan online. Like the Blazers, Riley envisions a rollicking night life destination with music, sports, and restaurants -- but with a roller coaster outside the coliseum.

Riley moved back to Portland after eight years in Los Angeles, where the traffic and the sprawl wore him out. But he credits the City of Angels in one critical area.

"They think a little bit bigger sometimes when it comes to development or public entertainment," he says. "Portland lacks BIG."

Portland also lacks a world-class natural history museum, says Gina Botel, 29, a political science student at Portland State University. She first came up with the idea in 2004, talking with her family over a meal at the Widmer Gasthaus Pub near the Rose Quarter.

After consulting with architects and museum experts, Botel said she realized the current building could easily house a Museum of Natural History specializing in the Pacific Rim. Best of all, the current building could stay as is.

"I could picture it," she says. "The large glass structure illuminated from within to reveal stunning prehistoric fossils hanging from the rafters. The large open spaces filled with displays and interactive exhibits."

Many of the proposals involve entertainment or family amusement. One pitch calls for a botanical garden, maybe with butterflies. Another an aquarium. Several are for a baseball stadium.

Alan Smith, 55, an administrative assistant at Standard Insurance, pictures people turning out wind-turbine propellers or solar cells in a glassed-in coliseum.

"It would bring in a lot of jobs," he says. "Which I think would be more valuable than a place for entertainment."

The Portland Development Commission, the city's economic development arm, has extended the deadline for submissions from Dec. 1 to Jan. 8. Kevin Brake, senior project and program coordinator, expects fleshed-out proposals from the Blazers and others, such as architects, to come later.

All proposals must be submitted by the deadline to be considered. The Blazers have first dibs on development of the coliseum, but that option expires next November.

Cost will matter, since the city doesn't have urban renewal or other public money to throw at development. But how to pay for a project isn't as important at this stage, says Brake, given that the mayor is looking for uses and values that resonate with residents.

"It's an even playing field, and we are really trying to keep it that way," Brake says. "It's pretty cool that people are throwing all kinds of stuff in there, whether they're realistic or not."

Portland developer Doug Obletz says he's not sure whether to jump in with a retooled version of his earlier plan for a community recreation and athletic center, given the Blazers' deep pockets.

"We're not afraid of playing the role of David in the David and Goliath story, but we want to make sure we have a good slingshot," he says.

-- Janie Har
__________________
One can never know for sure what a deserted area looks like.....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #439  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2009, 6:57 PM
Okstate's Avatar
Okstate Okstate is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: SE PDX
Posts: 1,367
Not necessarily all Rose Quarter but it includes the area:

I really think we ought to make the industrial eastside into a museum corridor for a few large museums which would have a trickle down effect/affect? to foster small gallery/museums to fill in some of the abandoned buildings. Portland is seriously lacking in museums, especially since we are considered such a cultural mecca. I would personally love a natural history museum, aquarium, bicycle museum (the little temporary gallery in the Pearl brought this into my head), indoor botanical gardens, & maybe a funky unique one like a "Bikes, Brew, & Barista" museum of Portland.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #440  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2009, 7:50 PM
urbanlife's Avatar
urbanlife urbanlife is offline
A before E
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
Posts: 10,999
Quote:
Originally Posted by Okstate View Post
Not necessarily all Rose Quarter but it includes the area:

I really think we ought to make the industrial eastside into a museum corridor for a few large museums which would have a trickle down effect/affect? to foster small gallery/museums to fill in some of the abandoned buildings. Portland is seriously lacking in museums, especially since we are considered such a cultural mecca. I would personally love a natural history museum, aquarium, bicycle museum (the little temporary gallery in the Pearl brought this into my head), indoor botanical gardens, & maybe a funky unique one like a "Bikes, Brew, & Barista" museum of Portland.
Actually that really surprises me that we dont have more museums here, especially around the South Park Blocks around the art museum. Heck, if I am not mistaken, I think Tacoma might have more museums that Portland does.
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 > Downtown & City of Portland
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:54 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.