HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum.

Since 1999, SkyscraperPage.com's forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web.  The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics.  SkyscraperPage.com also features unique skyscraper diagrams, a database of construction activity, and publishes popular skyscraper posters.

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #461  
Old Posted: Jul 27, 2007, 8:14 PM
tworivers's Avatar
tworivers tworivers is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Portland/Cascadia
Posts: 1,893
Wow. I can't believe that he accidentally bought a Belluschi house. And then deconstructed it and had it taken away!!!

Another great interview.

Mark, what are your reasons for hating 12.5? Have you actually checked out the site? I'm just curious. My "like" comes with significant qualifiers, btw.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #462  
Old Posted: Jul 27, 2007, 8:14 PM
mcbaby mcbaby is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 557
i found a link of the 12.5 http://www.360pdx.com/index.php?page...nos.php&id=412 seems pretty stark inside. the courtyard garage doesn't make for pleasant viewing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #463  
Old Posted: Jul 27, 2007, 8:21 PM
Aya Murase Aya Murase is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 30
26th/Division Art School?

Does anyone have any info on the art school building that is going in on SE 25th/26th & Division? I saw an image in the DJC yesterday, but accidentally recycled it before I had a chance to take a closer look.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #464  
Old Posted: Jul 27, 2007, 9:40 PM
Dougall5505's Avatar
Dougall5505 Dougall5505 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: P-town
Posts: 1,974
the watershed in hillsdale I took this one with my crappy old camera
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #465  
Old Posted: Jul 28, 2007, 12:45 AM
bvpcvm bvpcvm is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Portland
Posts: 2,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aya Murase View Post
Does anyone have any info on the art school building that is going in on SE 25th/26th & Division? I saw an image in the DJC yesterday, but accidentally recycled it before I had a chance to take a closer look.
are you talking about the "fire and earth art center"? the dept planning and development review has a pre-app notice about it here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #466  
Old Posted: Jul 28, 2007, 1:13 AM
NJD's Avatar
NJD NJD is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland
Posts: 582
Looks like the new building will block a lot of the downtown views of the Clinton Condos... I wonder if Rapaport feals good about this neighboring project... Looks good to me, the entire 7 corners/ Clinton area is defnitely getting built up... I hope all the building doesn't push away more local businesses though...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #467  
Old Posted: Jul 28, 2007, 4:27 AM
holladay's Avatar
holladay holladay is offline
Bombshell Vintage
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 1,248
It's interesting to me that 12.5 has generated so much controversy. From the virtual tour I agree 12.5 is stark on the interior, though not exactly in a successful way. The main living space is clean, but it lacks presence. Also, the 2 street elevations are a little closed. I would've liked the project more if the main elevations were less static, more like the courtyard, which is enlivened by the wood siding and the banded portions on the middle level. All-in-all I really respect Holst and the work they do, and I appreciate the daringness of this project. I just wish that it had more of the sensuality that came through in their best works like Belmont St and Thurman St.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #468  
Old Posted: Jul 28, 2007, 10:43 AM
mcbaby mcbaby is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 557
Quote:
Originally Posted by bvpcvm View Post
are you talking about the "fire and earth art center"? the dept planning and development review has a pre-app notice about it here.
is there a rendering? is there a pic of what currently is located at that address?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #469  
Old Posted: Jul 28, 2007, 4:33 PM
bvpcvm bvpcvm is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Portland
Posts: 2,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcbaby View Post
is there a rendering? is there a pic of what currently is located at that address?
just follow the link - no renderings, but some elevations.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #470  
Old Posted: Jul 30, 2007, 9:03 PM
ATR ATR is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 12
There's a model of the art academy building at http://www.fireandearth.org.
__________________
Alison Ryan
DJC
alison.ryan@djcOregon.com
www.builtpdx.blogspot.com
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #471  
Old Posted: Jul 30, 2007, 10:46 PM
Aya Murase Aya Murase is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 30
Looks like the architect for the art academy building is Perkins Architectural.
http://www.perkinsarch.com/commercial.shtml

hmmmm.....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #472  
Old Posted: Jul 31, 2007, 2:59 PM
MarkDaMan's Avatar
MarkDaMan MarkDaMan is offline
Go By Streetcar!
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Portland
Posts: 5,970
City bets on courtyards
TRIB TOWN • Planning agency contest seeks designs that meld density, family-friendliness
By Anna Johns
The Portland Tribune, Jul 31, 2007

After years of hearing complaints from neighbors, the city of Portland’s Bureau of Planning is taking the first step to encourage real-estate developers to build high-density housing that is family-friendly.

This month, the bureau launched a nationwide design competition for courtyard housing. Traditional courtyard housing rises only two or three stories high and wraps around a courtyard on three sides with all the units opening up to the courtyard.

The fourth side of the courtyard is open to the street.

“As higher density housing is a larger component of new housing, we want to look at how family housing might be part of that mix,” said Bill Cunningham, city planner.

Courtyard housing, Cunningham said, is an obvious choice for families because of the semiprivate courtyard that is shared among neighbors. Courtyard units – with up to three bedrooms and two levels – tend to be larger than many compact condominium units that are popping up throughout Portland.

The city already has courtyard housing complexes sprinkled throughout its neighborhoods. Many of the complexes were built in the 1930s and 1940s, often as affordable housing for families after World War II.

The design competition is meant for lots that are typical for two areas of Portland most likely to experience high-density housing:

• Inner Southeast: 100-foot-square lots, which can accommodate four to 10 units facing a shared courtyard space.

• East Portland: lots 95 feet wide and 180 feet deep can accommodate seven to 17 units facing a shared courtyard space.

Courtyards can be limited to pedestrian-only use or can be mixed-use with narrow streets that provide pedestrian access, but no through traffic. The designs are intended to be on quieter streets in the neighborhoods, not on main business streets where complexes featuring retail on the ground and housing above are most profitable for developers.

Cunningham said courtyard housing is meant to be an alternative to row houses or “skinny” houses that developers are building on those lots.

The advantage to developers, he said, is that they can fit more units on a lot in a courtyard-style development than with row houses. The disadvantage is that courtyard housing developments tend to be better rentals than ownership opportunities because of liability insurance costs.
Resident loves the design

Caroline Skinner has lived in a courtyard housing complex in Northwest Portland for 20 years. She raised her daughter – now college age – in their two-bedroom apartment in the Quimby Court Apartments.

“For years, I’ve been saying the city should get more courtyards like this one,” she said. “I love the design.”

For Skinner, the shared green space provides limited privacy from the road but also provides limited intimacy with the neighbors who live in her building.

Because of the courtyard each of the 16 units in the building are far enough away from one another that no one looks directly into someone else’s living space.

“I’m really glad that Portland is recognizing the seriousness of the situation that housing is just about out of reach for ordinary people,” Skinner said.

In inner Southeast Portland, the word “infill” has a negative connotation. The Hosford-Abernethy neighborhood – which borders the Willamette River, 29th Avenue, and Hawthorne and Powell boulevards – has approximately 100 new condominium units under construction.

“People within this neighborhood and this inner-Southeast area have been concerned for a long time with trying to find a way to take our share of the increased density and hold on to what makes our neighborhood special to us,” said Linda Nettekoven, vice chairwoman of the Hosford-Abernethy Neighborhood Association.
More families wanted

Nettekoven identifies families and local businesses as key assets to her neighborhood. Hosford-Abernethy has seen growth in local businesses along Hawthorne and Division Street, but new families have been slow to move into the neighborhood.

“We’re always nervous about enrollment at the neighborhood schools,” Nettekoven said.

Nettekoven is supportive of the design competition and hopes that the city actively encourages developers to build family-friendly, high-density housing once the contest is complete. And, she said, it will take more than development opportunities to entice families to return to the inner city.

“We need community centers and settings where families can come together,” Nettekoven said. “If families are going to settle for less space so they can live in the city, we need some amenities for them.”

The designs are due Oct. 24. The winner will receive $20,000. Information is at www.CourtyardHousing.org.

annajohns@portlandtribune.com
http://www.portlandtribune.com/news/...82942332189500
__________________
make paradise, tear up a parking lot
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #473  
Old Posted: Aug 1, 2007, 3:11 PM
MarkDaMan's Avatar
MarkDaMan MarkDaMan is offline
Go By Streetcar!
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Portland
Posts: 5,970
this doesn't really go here...it mentions the Gateway project near the end so I'm going to see if I can't find something on portlandonline today.


Design’s early-look process to get closer look from city

Daily Journal of Commerce
by Alison Ryan
08/01/2007


The two Portland commissions that review building design are expected to take a closer look at how well the city’s design advice process works.

The design advice option, introduced in 2003, is a way for developers to get early feedback from the Portland Design Commission or Historic Landmarks Commission on what may be complicated or limit-pushing projects. Unlike design review and the pre-application conference, design advice sessions aren’t mandatory.

Developers pay a flat fee of $1,501 for design advice. City staff says paying a small amount before spending between $7,611 and $24,712 for formal Type III design review is worth the added cost.

“That’s just excellent due diligence,” city planner Tim Heron said.

But commissioners have started to question whether repeat appearances are time well spent. The fee paid covers the entire design advice process, which can involve two or even three appearances before the commissions.

A recent design advice session for a Reach Community Development project on Southeast Division Street had Historic Landmarks Commission members questioning the role of the advice option in the entire process. The project, in its third appearance before the commission, hadn’t changed significantly since the last session, Commissioner Peter Meijer said.

“Basically, they’re looking for approval before they submit to the formal application process,” he said.

Most often, Heron said, projects returning two and three times have undergone significant, fundamental changes along the way. For example, he said, a project in Portland’s Gateway District that began as two five-story buildings with ground-floor retail space has shifted to six stories with no retail component.

As building activity in the central city, historic districts and other areas subject to design review has grown, so has interest in the design advice option. The variety in what’s submitted, in terms of level of detail, accompanying renderings and photographs and plans, is widening as the process becomes more popular.

Design advice is due for a look by both commissions. City review processes are constantly being refined, Heron said, and design advice issues popped up in Historic Landmarks Commission meetings as well as Design Commission meetings.

The process is likely to be on the agenda for commissioners’ yet-to-be-scheduled retreats, typically held once a year in a half-day recorded session.

“We’ve had a lot now to reflect on,” Heron said. “Let’s look at some that weren’t as successful and some that were.”
__________________
make paradise, tear up a parking lot
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #474  
Old Posted: Aug 1, 2007, 3:12 PM
MarkDaMan's Avatar
MarkDaMan MarkDaMan is offline
Go By Streetcar!
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Portland
Posts: 5,970
dup
__________________
make paradise, tear up a parking lot
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #475  
Old Posted: Aug 2, 2007, 6:09 AM
tworivers's Avatar
tworivers tworivers is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Portland/Cascadia
Posts: 1,893
Brian Libby's latest blog post is worth posting here in its entirety. Interesting discussion happening in the comments.

Email From A Frustrated Architect

A few weeks ago I wrote about the small Portland firm William Kaven Architecture and its various housing projects. This week I received a follow-up email from co-principal Daniel Kaven expressing some major frustration at the apparently lengthy process of making his firm’s latest design, a multi-family project in North Portland called the North House, a reality.

The City of Portland actually recently approved the Kaven design on North Vancouver, but it has been appealed by a neighbor near the property. "The proposed development is in a residential zone and therefore should be designed to enhance these existing and predominant features," the appeal argues. "The design is not compatible with the existing structures and neighborhood."

A design review commission hearing this Thursday, August 2 (1900 SW Fourth Ave., Room 2500A) will allow public testimony, and the architects asked me to appeal to the design community to come and support their efforts. It’s not just about the North House, Daniel argues, but the ability of contemporary architecture to get approved in a timely fashion that doesn't let good projects die on the vine.

“The City of Portland has made it excruciatingly difficult to make the most simple changes to its own community-design standards,” he goes on. “I have been sucked into the BDS [Bureau of Development Services] bureaucracy for months now based solely on my attempt to have flat roofs, which exist in order to have more urban space and foster green roof development.”

“The manner in which the City of Portland and neighbors can hold your design hostage has really gotten out of control. There needs to be major changes in the "community design standards" in order to accommodate modern design. Modern housing, which might only slightly deviate from the standards, is slathered in red tape, while awful track housing still gets the green light.”

I present Daniel’s experience not as gospel, because to be honest I hear varying things about city design review and have never been through this process myself. Anyone I’ve ever talked to at the City seems pretty reasonable about crafting a balance between unchecked design freedom and rigid guidelines. But proof is in the project, of course. What do other architects and developers trying to generate contemporary urban infill projects in historic neighborhoods have to say about their experiences?

It seems tempting to cast this, as Daniel has, as evidence of civic growing pains, wherein residents who love their Craftsman bungalows, Tudors and other pitched-roof single family homes see the arrival of contemporary architecture as out of character. I and many others have argued that, done properly, modern buildings and homes fit in easily with historic styles, and the diversity enriches the entire neighborhood. However, with any project there can be a lot of subtle but important details regarding scale and material that can and should be worked out in order to help a modern structure fit into a more historic context or accentuate the pedestrian experience. One of the appeal's other complaints other than the contemporary style had to do with public access and pedestrian integration, which I think may have been better served as a stand-alone argument rather than this "the world is flat" mentality about the place of contemporary architecture.

The city may have certain legitimate concerns about certain details regarding the North House they want to take time to resolve, and quite often the timetables of public and private concerns can be different ones - like two cars on the freeway who belong in the far-left and far-right lanes but have to somehow ride together. But I know William Kaven is not the only architecture firm to express frustration about red-tape. The very term "red tape" is a cliche, after all, because so many people have reached for such shorthand terms over time for government slowness and time-wasting. Does the BDS need more resources to do its job, or are these architects just Kaven to the pressure?

Posted by Brian Libby on July 31, 2007




Last edited by tworivers; Aug 2, 2007 at 7:20 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #476  
Old Posted: Aug 2, 2007, 6:22 AM
pdxman's Avatar
pdxman pdxman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland
Posts: 1,039
The design looks great...but nimbys will be nimbys and of course the city caves in whenever neighbors get involved. ONE person has complained, ONE! and they send it back. Thats ridiculous IMO. The portland process is alive and well and this situation proves it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #477  
Old Posted: Aug 2, 2007, 6:49 AM
kvalk kvalk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 74
PDXMAN, it would probably be good if you had some basic understanding of the process before making comments such as those. Because apparently you don't.
Now I'm not high on the city processes, but I'm also not a fan of placing blame were it doesn't belong.
One person has appealed, by following the process of the code. The city has done no caving, they actually APPROVED the project. Now the Design Commission will hear the appeal. That's the process, nothing has been sent back.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #478  
Old Posted: Aug 2, 2007, 4:42 PM
hi123 hi123 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 587
How iss lane 1919 progresing? Any new pics?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #479  
Old Posted: Aug 2, 2007, 5:56 PM
pdxtraveler pdxtraveler is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 396
Quote:
Originally Posted by hi123 View Post
How iss lane 1919 progresing? Any new pics?
I can see it from my desk. I don't think you want pics now, it looks HORRIBLE. I hope once they do the finishing touches it looks good. My fingers are crossed!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #480  
Old Posted: Aug 2, 2007, 6:16 PM
CouvScott CouvScott is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Vancouver, WA
Posts: 992
Gateway to Gateway takes a lower profile

Thursday, August 02, 2007
By Fred Leeson
Special to The Oregonian

Barely more than three years ago, the City Council expressed high hopes for the block bounded by Southeast 102nd and 103rd avenues between Burnside and Ankeny.

It had the potential, the city said, to become a gateway to the Gateway District. So the council gave it a zoning label that would allow a building height of 150 feet -- say, 12 or 13 stories.

What will come to this block, however, is a senior housing complex of three and four stories. And that's just fine, city and neighborhood officials say.

"Conditions for redevelopment are very difficult," says Justin Douglas, a project coordinator for the Portland Development Commission. He says incomes in the area are declining, and unpaved streets and a lack of parks discourage major developers.

The "gateway" block -- vacant except for a house that will be removed -- soon will become the third phase of Russellville, a development that began in 1999 after the Rembold Cos. bought what was then a vacant school site in 1995.

The latest, and final, phase will contain 139 units for senior residents, including 17 group-living units for seniors suffering from memory disabilities.

Four wings will frame a central courtyard. The Burnside and 103rd Avenue facades will be four-story, flat-roofed structures. The southern and western sides will have three stories topped with pitched roofs and gables.

Robert Moreland, a principal in MCM Architects, says a pedestrian link across 103rd will allow senior residents in Russellville II to use fitness and dining facilities in the new building.

While not as urban (read dense) as planners had once hoped, Moreland says the new block will help create a defined district within Gateway.

"The new development reflects a lot of the patterns and motifs of the existing development," he says. "We feel our neighborhood is developing a pedestrian feel, and what we are doing will be a continuation of that. We think it is a community that really works."

With a nod to the city's planning goals, the Burnside frontage has a more urban look, with its flat roof and a horizontal Art Moderne feel. Moreland's plan turns the corner at 102nd with a bold curve that will add visual interest before the pitched roofs march down the rest of 102nd.

The pitched roofs raised some eyebrows on the Portland Design Commission. But Linda Robinson, vice chair of the Hazelwood Neighborhood Association, says neighbors like the residential feel of the pitched roofs and gables.

"Some feel it might not be urban enough," she says of the plan, "but it's a big step from what's there now. It's really tough to put in big fancy new buildings when there's nothing there now."

Douglas of the PDC says the completion of Russellville has the potential to attract more development to the Gateway urban renewal area.

Wayne Rembold, head of the development team, says the first two phases filled slowly. He thinks the third phase will fill faster with seniors who already live in Southeast but who need assisted care.

Final approval of the plan is expected from the design commission later this month. Construction should begin soon thereafter. "We have our phase three financing, and we're ready to go," Rembold says.
__________________
A mind that is expanded by a new idea can never return to it's original dimensions.
Reply With Quote
     
     
 
 
Reply

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


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:45 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.