Portland Infill | Northwest Portland

[maccoinnich]

The proposal is for a single building trying to pretend it's at least four different buildings. How that is more interesting to pedestrians than a single well executed half block building I don't know.

[DMH]

The proposal is for a single building trying to pretend it's at least four different buildings. How that is more interesting to pedestrians than a single well executed half block building I don't know.

I will await the publication of drawings to determine if this is a 4-in-1 building, though the Ballow Wright building in the middle makes that assertion doubtful. And yes, these 3 or 4 building faces will have a much better chance of presenting a varied elevation to pedestrians. You need only to walk around NW Portland to notice that most new full-block-face buildings leave very much to be desired.

[maccoinnich]

Portland is full of great half block buildings that don't try to pretend that they're multiple buildings. To take two wildly different examples from Northwest there's the Empress Condominiums by Claussen & Claussen or the Lovejoy Medical Building by James Gardiner.

In the whole city I can't think of a single good example of a building that tries to pretend it's more than one building. In this case the architect is admittedly now stuck with the constraint of a structure that can't be demolished in the middle of the site, but that's no justification for the massing on the quarter block at 17th & Irving. Northwest has loads of historic 4, 5 and 6 story quarter block buildings, and not a single one of them has a giant setback from the street starting half way up the building.

[eric cantona]

someday, if we're really really lucky, NW Portland can look like this:

https://ljbinc.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/disney2.jpg

'murica!

[subterranean]

:rolleyes:

[DMH]

Portland is full of great half block buildings that don't try to pretend that they're multiple buildings. To take two wildly different examples from Northwest there's the Empress Condominiums by Claussen & Claussen or the Lovejoy Medical Building by James Gardiner.

In the whole city I can't think of a single good example of a building that tries to pretend it's more than one building. In this case the architect is admittedly now stuck with the constraint of a structure that can't be demolished in the middle of the site, but that's no justification for the massing on the quarter block at 17th & Irving. Northwest has loads of historic 4, 5 and 6 story quarter block buildings, and not a single one of them has a giant setback from the street starting half way up the building.

Are we all discussing the same project? Does someone have access to the drawings? I have seen only the one rendering depicting the three buildings along NW 18th Avenue. They are indeed three buildings, one on each side of the Ballow Wright building. That all three are part of the same project does not result in an illusion of three buildings: they ARE three buildings. How is this different from the Brewery Block in which the old Henry Weinhard's brewery was renovated and integrated with a new office building? A better example of urbanism came out of that effort, and I believe the NW 18th block face between Hoyt and Irving will be better urbanistically than other new block faces rising further north on 18th Avenue.

[urbanlife]

someday, if we're really really lucky, NW Portland can look like this:

https://ljbinc.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/disney2.jpg

'murica!

But that is what Oldtown is suppose to look like.

[QAtheSky]

Went for a walk in the nice weather today around Slabtown/Nob Hill. Lots of deep holes in the ground to gawk at.

https://preview.ibb.co/kOowDb/IMG_20180128_165731.jpg (https://ibb.co/iS3UYb)
https://preview.ibb.co/eBZKYb/IMG_20180128_165808.jpg (https://ibb.co/gstreG)

On NW 22nd and Pettygrove (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5327069,-122.696676,3a,75y,229.88h,90.84t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAnDNrQBk_SAAFs6eFJtufQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DAnDNrQBk_SAAFs6eFJtufQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D76.528725%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656). I was glad to see they saved two of the street trees during construction.

https://preview.ibb.co/nKKBDb/IMG_20180128_170410.jpg (https://ibb.co/muSbeG)
https://preview.ibb.co/cRxL6w/IMG_20180128_170353.jpg (https://ibb.co/gAiGeG)

A notice for NW 19th and Pettygrove (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5327797,-122.6906111,3a,60y,232.42h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9rO4fhme1Dbc935agsj2AA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). Been waiting to see something crop up here after they demoed those old houses. Looks like a pretty maximal use of the lot.

https://preview.ibb.co/k89Hmw/IMG_20180128_170513.jpg (https://ibb.co/cAkZYb)

The siding is more than halfway done on NW 19th and Quimby (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5335189,-122.6906369,3a,75y,46.16h,100.65t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1skszIaWbOp_ii-exwSqW_tQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) (nextportland link (http://www.nextportland.com/2016/03/07/nw-19th-quimby-approved/)). Met a guy outside the apartments across the street and we lamented the loss of Quimby's and the little food cart pod. Shame there's not nearly the commercial space compared to what it replaced.

https://preview.ibb.co/dSOzzG/IMG_20180128_170946.jpg (https://ibb.co/eyFq6w)
https://preview.ibb.co/dhrV6w/IMG_20180128_170813.jpg (https://ibb.co/jWoXKG)
https://preview.ibb.co/ibqORw/IMG_20180128_170807.jpg (https://ibb.co/e7VORw)

The big deep parking hole at NW 17th and Pettygrove (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5327803,-122.6896153,3a,60y,127.79h,86.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDxQO_8wn6uR45AHRrt1MGA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) (nextportland link (http://www.nextportland.com/2017/03/31/17th-pettygrove-approved/)). And a look at the soon to be dwarfed auto shop on the same block. A few of the slightly less recent apts look on with interest.

https://preview.ibb.co/eX4Ttb/IMG_20180128_171525.jpg (https://ibb.co/bw1V6w)
https://preview.ibb.co/mH1meG/IMG_20180128_171425.jpg (https://ibb.co/e5vq6w)

The front and rearview of the Apartments formerly know as the pile of rubble formerly known as Slabtown (the bar) on NW 16th and Marshall (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5306831,-122.6874875,3a,60y,222.59h,85.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUvqeYGD9zJlKEvkjWNrvpg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) (nextportland link (http://www.nextportland.com/2017/02/06/derby-nw-approved/)).

https://preview.ibb.co/bv3hKG/IMG_20180128_171338.jpg (https://ibb.co/gBPBDb)
https://preview.ibb.co/fg7WDb/IMG_20180128_171248.jpg (https://ibb.co/kDvweG)

I have a bad angle here, but the excavation is already well under way, a good story and a half into the earth. NW 17th and Kearney (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5292432,-122.6884798,3a,60y,316.58h,90.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOnqw50MeG8hC2YTgp_Rhfg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) (nextportland link (http://www.nextportland.com/2016/11/25/905-nw-17th-approved/)).

[maccoinnich]

Photos: Reconstruction project coming together

http://djcoregon.com/files/2018/01/0131_23rd_Glisan_02_WEB.jpg

A project is under way in Northwest Portland to reconstruct a building damaged in a fall 2016 gas explosion. R&H Construction is rebuilding 2281 Glisan, a five-story mixed-use structure originally designed by Allied Works Architecture and completed in 2000.

The building sustained harm after utility workers on a nearby site severed a gas line, causing an adjacent building at 2275 N.W. Glisan St. to fill with gas. The resulting explosion leveled that building and directed a concentrated blast at 2281 Glisan, heavily damaging the slab and steel on the west side of the second and third floors. The explosion resulted in pan decking being separated from steel by about seven inches.

Following the explosion, crews with Interstate Restoration performed heavy demolition work and cleaned up the site. R&H Construction began work on the rebuild in November 2017, performing additional demolition work including removal of MEP systems, façade and slabs. The building has been stripped down to its structural members, with pieces of damaged steel and slab removed. A total of 10 pieces of compromised steel on levels two and three have been replaced, new pan decking has been laid, and slab pours are slated for this week.


...continues at the DJC (http://djcoregon.com/news/2018/01/30/photos-reconstruction-project-coming-together/).

[maccoinnich]

Staff Report (https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bds/article/671813) for NW Flanders Co-Housing, which does not yet recommend approval.

[maccoinnich]

Request for Response (https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bds/article/671765) for 1111 NW 16th Ave Residential Mixed-use

[maccoinnich]

Staff Report (https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bds/article/671813) for NW Flanders Co-Housing, which does not yet recommend approval.

Drawings (http://efiles.portlandoregon.gov/Record/11658850/File/Document) [PDF - 42 MB]

[maccoinnich]

Also, here are the drawings (http://efiles.portlandoregon.gov/Record/11534890/File/Document) [55 MB] from last month's DAR for 1727 Hoyt. Apparently it got a cool reception from the HLC, and there were a lot of neighbors opposed.

[johnliu]

Also, here are the drawings (http://efiles.portlandoregon.gov/Record/11534890/File/Document) [55 MB] from last month's DAR for 1727 Hoyt. Apparently it got a cool reception from the HLC, and there were a lot of neighbors opposed.

The elevations seem to show windows on the 5th and 6th floor that do not appear in the plans.

The basement apartments will be grim places. The interior apartments too.

Seven floors of entirely studio apartments. Interesting.

After showing many existing buildings and highlighting their decorative detailing, the drawings present a design with no decorative detailing other than small strips of protruding brick "texture".

[johnliu]

Drawings (http://efiles.portlandoregon.gov/Record/11658850/File/Document) [PDF - 42 MB]

Wow, very nice!

[maccoinnich]

Drawings (http://efiles.portlandoregon.gov/Record/11663323/File/Document) [20 MB] and Staff Report (https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bds/article/672475) for 1327 NW 19th.

[QAtheSky]

Drawings (http://efiles.portlandoregon.gov/Record/11663323/File/Document) [20 MB] and Staff Report (https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bds/article/672475) for 1327 NW 19th.

I like this proposal quite a bit. Not to overwrought on any of the details, nice on the street level. And some much needed retail space.

[2oh1]

I don't know. Those silver stripes running up the building look terrible to me, not to mention cheap. It's a shame they couldn't use dark brick instead, but I assume the point of the panels is cutting costs. Otherwise, it's great. Simple, understated, lots of large windows... but the silver stripe metal panels look like a cheap afterthought to me.

[maccoinnich]

Revised drawings (http://efiles.portlandoregon.gov/Record/11679996/File/Document) [70 MB] for 1727 NW Hoyt. I'm glad they've eliminated the stepped back massing on NW Hoyt St, which was totally out of character with the district.

[johnliu]

Revised drawings (http://efiles.portlandoregon.gov/Record/11679996/File/Document) [70 MB] for 1727 NW Hoyt. I'm glad they've eliminated the stepped back massing on NW Hoyt St, which was totally out of character with the district.

I have the same reaction.

[Leo]

Revised drawings (http://efiles.portlandoregon.gov/Record/11679996/File/Document) [70 MB] for 1727 NW Hoyt. I'm glad they've eliminated the stepped back massing on NW Hoyt St, which was totally out of character with the district.

That's really too bad. Now it's just a copycat old-timey building. That setback would have enabled some really great south-facing terraces; now it's just a brick wall.

[curt-pdx]

in the NW faux-storic district . . .

That's really too bad. Now it's just a copycat old-timey building. That setback would have enabled some really great south-facing terraces; now it's just a brick wall.

[zilfondel]

That's really too bad. Now it's just a copycat old-timey building. That setback would have enabled some really great south-facing terraces; now it's just a brick wall.

Haha, oh man are you not kidding!

[DMH]

Haha, oh man are you not kidding!

Get over it, all of you naysayers! This is NOT the Pearl District with its encouragement of height and clean modernism. This is the Historic Alphabet District with clear requirements for reduced scale and architectural compatibility. Walk along the abutting NW Hoyt and Irving Streets between 17th and 18th Avenues. Observe the handsome collection of historic homes that are contributing buildings of the historic district. Then you will hopefully understand why this project receives such scrutiny and concern by the community. Every effort will be made so that this project will not overwhelm its neighbors and stick out like a sore thumb.

Hmm....sounds like a worthy goal throughout the city.

[maccoinnich]

This is the Historic Alphabet District with clear requirements for reduced scale

[citation needed]

[Leo]

Get over it, all of you naysayers! This is NOT the Pearl District with its encouragement of height and clean modernism. This is the Historic Alphabet District with clear requirements for reduced scale and architectural compatibility. Walk along the abutting NW Hoyt and Irving Streets between 17th and 18th Avenues. Observe the handsome collection of historic homes that are contributing buildings of the historic district. Then you will hopefully understand why this project receives such scrutiny and concern by the community. Every effort will be made so that this project will not overwhelm its neighbors and stick out like a sore thumb.

Hmm....sounds like a worthy goal throughout the city.

LOL, please no! Living in a city where every new building must be fake old-timey would be my own special place in architectural hell! :haha:

[urbanlife]

LOL, please no! Living in a city where every new building must be fake old-timey would be my own special place in architectural hell! :haha:

I second that, we don't need a Disneyland style city of old timey buildings.

[johnliu]

I second that, we don't need a Disneyland style city of old timey buildings.

Since the Alphabet historic district is only a small part of the city, I don't think you need worry.

Historic districts are about 2% of Portland.

[urbanlife]

Since the Alphabet historic district is only a small part of the city, I don't think you need worry.

Historic districts are about 2% of Portland.

Even there, buildings that pretend to look old never pull it off for me, I would rather see a building complement its surroundings while still being designed to more modern styles.

[soleri]

Even there, buildings that pretend to look old never pull it off for me, I would rather see a building complement its surroundings while still being designed to more modern styles.

To split this difference, as it were, I think the greater principle in design is to maintain the scale of the neighborhood. Therefore, you don't necessarily require ornamented buildings although it can work depending on the skill of the architect. It is true that New Urbanism design can really be weak, party because of cheap materials and a lack of skilled craftsmen. It's why we use Disney as an epithet - cheap historicism grates. Still, in a city like Portland with so many wonderful old buildings, I can't help but wonder why it's virtually impossible. You would think some developers/architects have devised creative solutions in this area. Judging from what I've seen, it's frustratingly rare.

[DMH]

[citation needed]

Fine. I happily cite the Historic Alphabet District Interim Design Guidelines. Following is a PDF of the document which I have attempted to attach but I am not certain if it can be opened from your website. If it cannot be opened, any of you can find the document in a Google search at the City's website.

historic_alphabet_district.pdf

[maccoinnich]

Care to quote the text of a guideline that requires reduced scale?

[DMH]

Care to quote the text of a guideline that requires reduced scale?

Too lazy to look it up? From P. 55 of the referenced document:

33.846.140 Historic Design Review
The approval criteria for historic design review are:

8. Architectural compatibility. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will be compatible with the resource's massing, size, scale and architectural features.......

The NW 18th and Hoyt project certainly falls into the category of 'related new construction' as it incorporates the historic Buck-Prager building in the middle of the proposed development.

[maccoinnich]

You’re referencing a code section that doesn’t exist.

[DMH]

You’re referencing a code section that doesn’t exist.

False. That is copied and pasted directly from the Historic Alphabet District guidelines that are on the City's own website.

Now it is your turn to show proof that the referenced document does not exist or is not in effect.

[maccoinnich]

Well the city deserves some blame for having a document with out-of-date code on its website, but if you look at chapter 33.846 (https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/article/53488) you'll see that there is no section 33.846.140 today. But even the repealed code that you found isn't relevant, because it states that section only applies to "Historic Landmarks, Conservation Landmarks, and Historic Districts without adopted design guidelines" — none of which is the case at 1727 NW Hoyt.

Looking at today's code, section 33.846.060.E.1.c states:

In the Alphabet Historic District, approval criteria are the Community Design Guidelines and the Historic Alphabet District Community Design Guidelines Addendum.

Neither the Community Design Guidelines (https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/article/58822) or the Historic Alphabet District Community Design Guidelines Addendum (https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/article/58828) have guidelines requiring new buildings to be smaller that what's allowed by zoning.

[DMH]

Well the city deserves some blame for having a document with out-of-date code on its website, but if you look at chapter 33.846 (https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/article/53488) you'll see that there is no section 33.846.140 today. But even the repealed code that you found isn't relevant, because it states that section only applies to "Historic Landmarks, Conservation Landmarks, and Historic Districts without adopted design guidelines" — none of which is the case at 1727 NW Hoyt.

Looking at today's code, section 33.846.060.E.1.c states:



Neither the Community Design Guidelines (https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/article/58822) or the Historic Alphabet District Community Design Guidelines Addendum (https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/article/58828) have guidelines requiring new buildings to be smaller that what's allowed by zoning.

I feel like I have entered a Trumpian world in which Truth is hard to discern. The link to the
Historic Alphabet District Community Design Guidelines Addendum that you provided leads directly to the same document that I had cited and that you dispute. Is there actually an updated set of regulations in place that supercedes the one that you and I have been citing?

[maccoinnich]

A new building in Northwest Portland is reviewed against:


The *current* zoning code
The Community Design Guidelines
Historic Alphabet District Community Design Guidelines Addendum [a sum total of three guidelines]


The fact that the PDF of the Alphabet District Guidelines has an appendix of an old section of code has no legal weight. But even if it did it wouldn’t matter because that section explicitly says it doesn’t apply in this case.

[urbanlife]

I feel like I have entered a Trumpian world in which Truth is hard to discern. The link to the
Historic Alphabet District Community Design Guidelines Addendum that you provided leads directly to the same document that I had cited and that you dispute. Is there actually an updated set of regulations in place that supercedes the one that you and I have been citing?

If it is coming from mac, it is a safe bet it is accurate. It is pretty common knowledge that he knows what he is talking about, especially when it comes to building codes in the city.

[DMH]

If it is coming from mac, it is a safe bet it is accurate. It is pretty common knowledge that he knows what he is talking about, especially when it comes to building codes in the city.

I have forwarded this discussion thread to a colleague who is a member of the Landmarks Commission and have requested that person to provide a confirmation or correction of what regulations apply in the Historic Alphabet District. I will report back if and when I get a response.

[maccoinnich]

Well, regardless of what codes / guidelines apply, the revised design is much stronger. I'm not a fan of the faux historic design, but at least it looks convincing now. The first iteration was a weird frankenbuilding.

[DMH]

I have forwarded this discussion thread to a colleague who is a member of the Landmarks Commission and have requested that person to provide a confirmation or correction of what regulations apply in the Historic Alphabet District. I will report back if and when I get a response.

My colleague on the Landmarks Commission felt compelled to not even open the link to our discussion thread because ethical standards require no undue influence. So my colleague forwarded my message and discussion thread to City design staff. Grace Jeffreys, urban design staffperson assigned to the project wrote:

"For a Historic Resource Review for a proposal on this site, the applicable approval criteria will be the Community Design Guidelines, the Historic Alphabet District Community Design Guidelines Addendum (Appendix I), and the Northwest Plan District (Appendix J). The Community Design Guidelines can be found on BPS’s web site: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/index.cfm?&a=58822



While a “reduced scale” is not a requirement for new buildings in the Historic Alphabet District, the guidelines do speak to levels of compatibility, starting primarily with the resource (in this case, the Buck-Prager building), then the adjacent context, and finally with the district.

Currently, the applicant has not yet applied for a Historic Resource Review. They have chosen to first have a couple of voluntary Design Advice Request (DAR) meetings with the Landmarks Commission, who will be the decision makers for this case once it is submitted as a Type III Historic Resource Review."

[Delaney]

Compatibility is subjective. The Historic Landmarks Commission has a bad habit of letting their taste trump the zoning code, resulting in a lack of predictability and consistency that creates an unnecessary rift between the design community and the City, when in general our values and goals are the same. Just as applicants shouldn't be allowed to spot zone their sites for personal gain, the City (or City-appointed volunteers) shouldn't be able to use subjective opinions to disregard objective written criteria.

Specifically related to the Alphabet District, I doubt you can find another neighborhood in the city with more varied heights between low-rise and mid-rise structures. There is nothing incompatible about the scale or height of this proposal. All arguments i have heard otherwise smack of protectionist elitism.

[DMH]

My colleague on the Landmarks Commission felt compelled to not even open the link to our discussion thread because ethical standards require no undue influence. So my colleague forwarded my message and discussion thread to City design staff. Grace Jeffreys, urban design staffperson assigned to the project wrote:

"For a Historic Resource Review for a proposal on this site, the applicable approval criteria will be the Community Design Guidelines, the Historic Alphabet District Community Design Guidelines Addendum (Appendix I), and the Northwest Plan District (Appendix J). The Community Design Guidelines can be found on BPS’s web site: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/index.cfm?&a=58822



While a “reduced scale” is not a requirement for new buildings in the Historic Alphabet District, the guidelines do speak to levels of compatibility, starting primarily with the resource (in this case, the Buck-Prager building), then the adjacent context, and finally with the district.

Currently, the applicant has not yet applied for a Historic Resource Review. They have chosen to first have a couple of voluntary Design Advice Request (DAR) meetings with the Landmarks Commission, who will be the decision makers for this case once it is submitted as a Type III Historic Resource Review."

Please forgive the minutiae but there is inconsistency in documents available to the public on design guidelines. Grace Jeffreys at the City wrote:

"Dear DMH,

I can see how that is confusing.

The zoning code is constantly being updated (Title 33), however, many reference materials are not, such as specific neighborhood character source documents like this one, the HISTORIC ALPHABET DISTRICT: COMMUNITY DESIGN GUIDELINES ADDENDUM (9/5/2000). https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/article/58828. Really, they shouldn’t have quoted title 33 in a reference document like that…. The current code (Title 33, in this case) will always overrule earlier refences.

The applicable design guidelines, the Community Design Guidelines (Updated September 2008) and Appendix I, Excerpt from Historic Alphabet District Community Design Guidelines Addendum, do refer to the “Context Statement” for the district (page 192). https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/article/58822, And, the HISTORIC ALPHABET DISTRICT: COMMUNITY DESIGN GUIDELINES ADDENDUM (9/5/2000) provides this for Alphabet (pp/ 9-31, esp. pg. 30&31 which provide a summary statement)."

[AdamUrbanist]

The irony of NW Portland is that the "character" that people love so much is precisely the fact that the historic buildings are so varied. You have single family mansions rubbing shoulders with five story apartment buildings. And it's charming. It's a state of neighborhood transition that happens when you have a growing city and you aren't using zoning to enforce uniformity on the neighborhood. If Portland had boomed in 1875 instead of 1905, NW might well be developed with a continuous fabric of 5 story buildings. But since development in the neighborhood was abruptly halted, first by the great depression and world war II, then by zoning and historic preservation, it has remained in a transitional state. The city has zoned this kind of varied development out of existence in most other neighborhoods of the city while simultaneously trying to freeze it in amber in north west.

I think if you really get down to it, the problem is not having different types of buildings next to each other, the real issue is that a lot of what we're building just isn't very good.

[Delaney]

i think if you really get down to it, the problem is not having different types of buildings next to each other, the real issue is that a lot of what we're building just isn't very good.

100%

[johnliu]

100%

I think that's really the answer in a nutshell.

What most of the historic buildings have in common is detailing and ornamentation. At a fairly small scale. I don't see that in most contemporary buildings. There is massing and design at a large scale. But otherwise surfaces are pretty blank and shapes are rudimentary. So not only do those contemporary buildings have a hard time looking "compatible" with the surrounding historic buildings, they don't look "interesting" enough to make the incompatibility worth it.

I don't think the HLC has often been presented with a really innovative, striking, dramatic contemporary design that proposes to squeeze between two historic buildings in a historic district. It usually seems to be just another filler building, no different from dozens of other buildings anywhere in the city.

[2oh1]

I don't think the HLC has often been presented with a really innovative, striking, dramatic contemporary design that proposes to squeeze between two historic buildings in a historic district. It usually seems to be just another filler building, no different from dozens of other buildings anywhere in the city.

And worse... CHEAP.

I don't mind filler buildings. Sure, they're a disappointment, but filler is better than cheap eyesore design, and that's the thing about so much current architecture. It seems like modern multi-family housing only comes in two forms these days: luxury and well designed after having gone through multiple forced revisions, or cheap cheap cheap Cheap CHEAP. There's so little middle ground.

This one is obviously faux-historic, but that's better than the typical modern metal panel bargain basement cheap. Geez, I'm a hardcore modern guy but I'm shocked by how bad a lot of modern design is - not because of the concept, but because of the materials used and the absolutely bogus renderings that might as well come with the words "Believe me, believe me. It'll be the biggest, the best, it'll be yuge, believe me believe me."

Why don't more modern apartments use brick unless they're forced to in order to fit into a historic neighborhood or to meet some sort of design standards? They don't because it's cheaper to slap on siding like the metal panels on the faux-prison known as the Yard, or worse, and then sell it to some investors who will deal with it later if they don't sell it again to the next suckers. Too many developers these days seem like they'd use construction paper siding if they could get away with it, and I'm sure there are unscrupulous firms out there like Skylab who would sit some kid at a computer to whip up phony renderings showing how stupendous it will look in their fantasyland ("Believe me, believe me").

But why?

And why do so many people who know better make excuses for it? Even here, among architecture's most fervent fans, people make excuses for horrible design.... as if the idiots who designed The Yard or the NV had no idea what their budgets would be or what energy standards their designs had to meet until after the fact. ("OMG. Windows let in light and heat? Who knew?") That doesn't even make sense. Excuses are made. But why?

I don't know.

I'm no fan of the regulations forcing faux-historic design, but this faux-historic design is a heck of a lot better than the cheap trash that probably would have been plopped on this lot. And in 50 years this will still look good whereas so much of today's cheap trash will be tomorrow's eyesores.

[zilfondel]

To answer your question, "why?" - would be because architecture has been commodified to the point of the only thing that matters is square footages of leasable space.

Anything else is totally irrelevant to a developer, in general. Or at least out of state developers, or those who build speculatively to unload their asset once it is complete and occupied.

Construction costs are escalating so fast that a lot of architects don't even know how much materials cost. We have architects still quoting $20/SF for a storefront system. And brick is extraordinarily expensive - metal panel now costs what brick used to cost 10 years ago.

[maccoinnich]

Staff Report (https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bds/article/671813) for NW Flanders Co-Housing, which does not yet recommend approval.

Drawings (http://efiles.portlandoregon.gov/Record/11658850/File/Document) [PDF - 42 MB]

According to the current Landmarks Commission agenda the project has been withdrawn by the applicant, which is a shame.

[maccoinnich]

Posting notice (http://efiles.portlandoregon.gov/Record/11683197/File/Document) for 500 NW 23rd Ave, where the explosion happened last year.

I can't imagine the Landmarks Commission approving anything that looks like that.

[johnliu]

According to the current Landmarks Commission agenda the project has been withdrawn by the applicant, which is a shame.

That was one of the nicest infill designs I've seen. I hope it resurfaces.

[urbanlife]

Posting notice (http://efiles.portlandoregon.gov/Record/11683197/File/Document) for 500 NW 23rd Ave, where the explosion happened last year.

I can't imagine the Landmarks Commission approving anything that looks like that.

Who is the architect? That design seems kind of simple, nothing bad with it, just don't see it being more than average infill based off that little picture.

[maccoinnich]

Who is the architect?

Allied Works

[urbanlife]

Allied Works

I thought so, interesting design for them compared to the building they are rebuilding next to this one that was also designed by them. I would have thought they would have tried to create an extension of the other building or something more striking for a corner lot.

[Leo]

I thought so, interesting design for them compared to the building they are rebuilding next to this one that was also designed by them. I would have thought they would have tried to create an extension of the other building or something more striking for a corner lot.

It's also too bad that they are essentially covering up the building next door so it can't really be seen from 23rd ... That is one of my favorite buildings in Portland.

[maccoinnich]

Staff Report (https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bds/article/674685) for 1111 NW 16th Ave Residential Mixed-use, which does not yet recommend approval.

[maccoinnich]

Posting notice (http://efiles.portlandoregon.gov/Record/11683197/File/Document) for 500 NW 23rd Ave, where the explosion happened last year.

I can't imagine the Landmarks Commission approving anything that looks like that.

Drawings (http://efiles.portlandoregon.gov/Record/11702706/File/Document) [85 MB] and memo (http://efiles.portlandoregon.gov/Record/11702707/File/Document) to the HLC.

[eric cantona]

Drawings (http://efiles.portlandoregon.gov/Record/11702706/File/Document) [85 MB] and memo (http://efiles.portlandoregon.gov/Record/11702707/File/Document) to the HLC.

it will be fascinating to see where the commission lands on this one. I'm skeptical they'll be able to see the actual beauty and value of how Allied has interpreted the code requirements of the district. I don't recall anyone laying out an argument as cogent and well founded as this one. I also haven't paid a tremendous amount of attention to previous arguments, so take that with a grain of salt.

overall I like it.

[urbanlife]

It is definitely an elegant looking little building. I really like the details and the historical references to the design, it seems to be very well thought out. The initial issue I can see any design or historic commission having with this building is its retail entrance not being on the corner. That is one of those big issues for some reason that design and historic commissions have with any corner building that doesn't do that.

[eric cantona]

Drawings (http://efiles.portlandoregon.gov/Record/11702706/File/Document) [85 MB] and memo (http://efiles.portlandoregon.gov/Record/11702707/File/Document) to the HLC.

I heard through the grapevine that this project had their hearing and was approved. Can't find confirmation on the City's website, though.

[maccoinnich]

Not approved, but the Design Advice hearing went well:

Alphabet Historic District building design lauded

http://djcoregon.com/files/2018/03/0314_HLC_23rd_Glisan_WEB.jpg

Plans for a new four-story mixed-use building in Portland’s Alphabet Historic District received praise at a Historic Landmarks Commission design advice hearing on Monday.

The Allied Works Architecture design of a building at the corner of Northwest 23rd Avenue and Glisan Street would have five residential units above 925 square feet of ground-floor retail space and eight long-term bike parking spaces.

The 1,789-square-foot site has sat vacant since a 2016 gas explosion destroyed the historic Alfred C. F. Burkhardt House.

“I think the design is amazing,” Commissioner Wendy Chung said. “It really does draw from the historic features of the neighborhood. Even though it’s clearly a modern building, it’s a perfect example of something that’s compatible but modern.”


...continues at the DJC (http://djcoregon.com/news/2018/03/13/alphabet-historic-district-building-design-lauded/) (temporarily unlocked).

[eric cantona]

Not approved, but the Design Advice hearing went well

Wow. It seems the HLC isn't actually against modern architecture, just against shitty modern architecture. I'm good with that.

Now, if we could get them to dislike shitty faux historic architecture we'd be getting somewhere!

[johnliu]

Wow. It seems the HLC isn't actually against modern architecture, just against shitty modern architecture. I'm good with that.

Now, if we could get them to dislike shitty faux historic architecture we'd be getting somewhere!

I like this building too. The picture above shows it to better effect than previous pictures. It shows the detail and texture, and the rhythm.

Now to ask, why aren't we seeing work of this quality in historic Chinatown?

[BrG]

Thoroughly on-point and comprehensive published presentation focused solely on what the commissioners are tasked with interpreting - The Design Guidelines. I'm assuming it was augmented by an extremely cogent 'in-person' walk through at the initial hearing.

The detailing looks set to be exquisite, and the building budget appears to be more generous per sf than many, so that certainly gives the design team some options which they utilized skillfully.

Well done Allied Works.

[MarkDaMan]

http://www.oregonlive.com/front-porch/index.ssf/2018/03/portland_official_weighs_in_on.html

Portland official weighs in on affordable housing proposal across the street from her home
Updated 7:00 AM; Posted 7:00 AM
By Elliot Njus enjus@oregonian.com
The Oregonian/OregonLive

A member of Portland's Historic Landmarks Commission did not recuse herself from a discussion about an affordable housing development proposed across the street from her Northwest Portland home.

Instead, Commissioner Wendy Chung -- who, like all of the landmarks commissioners, serves in a volunteer capacity -- argued to shrink the development proposed at 1727 N.W. Hoyt St., which she said was out of scale with the immediate neighborhood.

Chung, a neighborhood activist who was appointed to the commission in 2016 by then-Mayor Charlie Hales, appears to have met her legal obligation by twice disclosing a potential conflict of interest.

She's also taken a harder stance on the size of the project than her fellow commissioners. And underlining the awkward position Chung has put herself in is the fact that her husband, Tony Schwartz, testified against the project at a hearing where Chung was sitting as a commissioner.

In an interview, Chung said it wasn't clear what effect development on the site could have on the value of her condominium and that her input was consistent with positions she's previously taken on the commission.

...(continues (http://www.oregonlive.com/front-porch/index.ssf/2018/03/portland_official_weighs_in_on.html)).

[maccoinnich]

This is shocking.

[subterranean]

What a joke. There's something in the water in NW Portland.

[maccoinnich]

Latest drawings (http://efiles.portlandoregon.gov/Record/11780041/File/Document) and Staff Report for 1327 NW 19th (https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bds/article/678370)

[johnliu]

This is shocking.

Chung consulted the city attorney who confirmed she did not need to recuse herself. She has no financial interest that would require recusal. She simply lives across the street from the project.

Now, I think Portland should have a stronger recusal policy at all levels of government. For example, we have real estate developers making decisions on land use and zoning matters (Planning and Sustainability Commission, various stakeholder committees). That should be prohibited. And if we tighten recusal rules, maybe living across the street from a project will become grounds for recusal. But changing zoning to favor your own business interest certainly should be.

[AdamUrbanist]

I think the most salient issue here is that the historic commission (or the design commission) shouldn’t have the authority to dramatically reduce the development capacity of a site. If a commissioner didn’t like the brick color on a project across from their house no one would really be that upset by it. The ambiguity about the commission’s authority to essentially rezone a property outside the usual public process is what is truly damaging. It makes development incredibly unpredictable and no doubt it’s a major reason why many of our historic districts are suffering from neglect while developers wait for a political opening to invest in these neighborhoods.

[cityscapes]

I work for a large city in the midwest now after leaving Portland and I've seen coworkers recuse themselves from approving or denying minor permit applications for being across the street from where they live. I feel like she should have done the same even if the city attorney said otherwise.

[maccoinnich]

Chung consulted the city attorney who confirmed she did not need to recuse herself. She has no financial interest that would require recusal. She simply lives across the street from the project.

Now, I think Portland should have a stronger recusal policy at all levels of government. For example, we have real estate developers making decisions on land use and zoning matters (Planning and Sustainability Commission, various stakeholder committees). That should be prohibited. And if we tighten recusal rules, maybe living across the street from a project will become grounds for recusal. But changing zoning to favor your own business interest certainly should be.

She doesn’t “simply” live across the street; she has been in a multi year battle to block development on that site. The only reason I even knew who she was before she joined the HLC is that I sat beside her when giving testimony to council on opposite sides of the issue over whether to downzone the Alphabet District. In saying that this building would be great on some other hypothetical site in Northwest, she’s demonstrated that she can’t review this proposal without bias.

You mention the PSC, but in my experience the members of that body recuse themselves when there’s even the potential for the perception of bias. Chung could and should have done the same, even if she was not strictly required to do so.

[maccoinnich]

Northwest 23rd gets a posh new furnishings and design gallery (Photos)

Gary Friedman, CEO and chairman of RH — Restoration Hardware Holdings Inc. — said his company doesn't build plain old retail stores.

"Most retail stores are archaic windowless boxes that lack any sense of humanity," he said in a release. "We are building inspiring spaces that blur the lines between residential and retail, indoors and outdoors, physical and digital."

That's a pretty good summation of the new RH Portland, which opens its doors today at 474 N.W. 23rd Ave.

The 46,000-square-foot, four-story building showcases RH furnishings, artwork and accessories in a gallery-like setting. Designed by Friedman and James Gillam of Backen, Gillam & Kroeger Architects, the store also offers professional design services in a studio setting.



...continues at the Portland Business Journal (https://www.bizjournals.com/portland/news/2018/03/30/northwest-23rd-gets-a-posh-new-furnishings-and.html).

[pdxtex]

What a joke. There's something in the water in NW Portland.

its just retired nimby hippies who got in when it was cheap. have you ever read the NW examiner??? "dont change my neighborhood.....ever!!!!"

[RED_PDXer]

...continues at the Portland Business Journal (https://www.bizjournals.com/portland/news/2018/03/30/northwest-23rd-gets-a-posh-new-furnishings-and.html).

I visited this store over the weekend and it felt like such a soulless place. A whole bunch of generic oversized furniture and gaudy artwork. That said, the views from the roofdeck with amazing! If it goes under, I hope they convert the building to condos!

[maccoinnich]

Latest drawings (http://efiles.portlandoregon.gov/Record/11780041/File/Document) and Staff Report for 1327 NW 19th (https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bds/article/678370)

Project was approved last week.

[urbanlife]

its just retired nimby hippies who got in when it was cheap. have you ever read the NW examiner??? "dont change my neighborhood.....ever!!!!"

Thankfully these days it is a very small group of people since most of the nimby hippies have either sold for huge profits or died.

[maccoinnich]

Photos: A creative transformation in Northwest Portland

http://djcoregon.com/files/2018/04/0418_Redfox_Commons_01_WEB.jpg

A renovation project is under way in Northwest Portland to repurpose a pair of 1940s-era industrial buildings into a creative office space. R&H Construction began work earlier this year on the LEVER Architecture-designed Redfox Commons, which will feature approximately 55,000 square feet of divisible office space intended to reflect the industrial character of the neighborhood.

The two buildings, formerly known collectively as The Old Freeman Factory, are located along Northwest Wilson Street between 26th and 27th avenues, one block east of the Montgomery Park building. They will be joined by a glass-enclosed breezeway that will serve as the building’s main entry and reception area. The buildings’ old-growth timber posts, beams and joists have been sandblasted and cleaned, and will remain exposed as part of the industrial look.

Mezzanines will be constructed in both of the buildings, and ample daylight penetration will be afforded by a series of skylights. The building will be clad in weathering steel that will take on a reddish color with exposure to the elements. The project is being built by L&L Investment Partners.



...continues at the DJC (http://djcoregon.com/news/2018/04/17/photos-a-creative-transformation-in-northwest-portland/) (unlocked).

[urbanlife]

That is awesome that they are saving the timber structure with the rebuilding of the building. I originally thought they were just going to tear the whole building down and start new.

[maccoinnich]

Presentation (http://efiles.portlandoregon.gov/Record/11840270/File/Document) [62 MB] and Staff Report (https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bds/article/681089) for 1111 NW 16th Ave. Project was approved on Thursday.

[NickO2]

https://i.imgur.com/ddcl0YK.jpg?1

The huge ESCO site is being wiped off the map.

What's happening here?

[maccoinnich]

TBD. Portland Diamond Project (MLB) put in an offer, but I believe other developers did too.

[zilfondel]

Yeah, lots of competition to redevelop it.

[bvpcvm]

Anyone know anything about 1831 nw 28th?

[NickO2]

TBD. Portland Diamond Project (MLB) put in an offer, but I believe other developers did too.

Thanks.

Something like this then.

https://image.oregonlive.com/home/olive-media/width620/img/portland_impact/photo/img-0297e5jpg-e024daf7fa39f435.jpg

[winstonLT5]

NW Portland site eyed for baseball stadium sold to another group of developers
Updated 1:19 PM; Posted 12:42 PM
By Elliot Njus enjus@oregonian.com
The Oregonian/OregonLive

A large Northwest Portland industrial site eyed for a potential Major League Baseball stadium has been sold to a group of longtime real-estate investors and developers.

The sale sidelines a group angling to bring a baseball team to the city, but it doesn't totally preclude the possibility of building a ballpark on the site, one of the buyers said.

The seller is ESCO Corp., a maker of mining and construction equipment that was founded more than a century ago in Portland.

The $33 million deal, which closed Friday...

...(continues (http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index.ssf/2018/06/esco_site_in_nw_portland_eyed.html))

[Derek]

It’s PPS or bust in my opinion. Nice, central location. Already well served by both the MAX and the Streetcar. Huge potential when they finally cap I-5.

[urbanlife]

It’s PPS or bust in my opinion. Nice, central location. Already well served by both the MAX and the Streetcar. Huge potential when they finally cap I-5.

No other site is as good as that one, the sites in NW are interesting but would require massive improvements to transit to be viable without reworking the whole area for cars.

[eric cantona]

No other site is as good as that one, the sites in NW are interesting but would require massive improvements to transit to be viable without reworking the whole area for cars.

all true, and if you add NWDA into the mix there's a whole slew of impediments to that particular site (ESCO) actually working.

[maccoinnich]

ESCO buyers not high on return to baseball

A group of local investors is buying 22.5 acres of ESCO Corp. property in the Northwest Industrial Area.
Although the property has been identified as a possible site for a major league baseball stadium, the investor group has other plans. It envisions creative office and flex industrial uses, reflecting the recently adopted CC2035 Plan that transitions this area from heavy industrial zoning to a mixed employment designation.

The buyers include:
Warren Rosenfeld, president of a metal recycling company located next to the ESCO property.
Al Solheim, a Pearl District developer.
Bob Walsh of Walsh Construction.
Bob Ames, a Pearl developer and former bank executive.
Noel Johnson, a principal in Cairn Pacific LLC, the leading developer in the Slabtown area.
Roger Burpee, a real estate investor.
Greg Burpee, a real estate broker.
Scott Tillman, an East Coast developer.
There is also an unnamed investor.

Johnson, who is managing the project for the investment group, lives on Northwest Raleigh Street a few blocks from the ESCO site.

While the ESCO property is not zoned for housing and the group does not intend to seek rezoning, he said the line between office and residential buildings has become blurred. Office buildings now typically have couches, nap rooms, kitchens and roof decks—the amenities formerly limited to residential buildings, he said. Meanwhile, in his recent residential projects, Johnson said, about half of the units are occupied by people who work from their homes.



...continues at the NW Examiner (http://nwexaminer.com/esco-buyers-not-high-on-return-to-baseball).

[urbanlife]

That seems like a better use for that property than a baseball stadium. For a ballpark, the area lacks transportation options and would require major parking infrastructure to work.

[johnliu]

Excerpts from article:

"Johnson expects most of the site will eventually have two- or three-story structures devoted to creative/high-tech/engineering companies."

"Johnson, who joined the Northwest District Association board only weeks before the sale opportunity arose, wants to overcome the sense of a “steel curtain” separating the industrial sanctuary from the residential neighborhood along Northwest Vaughn Street.

"Some foresee serious traffic and parking congestion if development of the scale Johnson speaks of occurs. He thinks that can be overcome as transformational change is about to impact urban transportation

"the buyers will be contributing $500,000— an obligation inherited from ESCO—toward infrastructure improvements around the Northwest 23rd and Vaughn intersection.

"PDP spokesperson John McIsaac, who grew up in Willamette Heights, said baseball backers have identified two other possible sites in Northwest Portland.

The more appealing of these is Terminal II, owned by the Port of Portland. A non-disclosure agreement has been signed by the Port and PDP.

“We love it,” McIsaac said of the 49-acre site at 3556 NW Front Ave. “Number one, it’s on the waterfront. It’s a beautiful location. Every week I get more excited about this property.”

The Diamond Project’s hope would be to rezone the surrounding area to allow up to 8,000 housing units. Approaching such density would necessitate tall buildings, a concept McIsaac worries might be opposed by the Northwest District Association.

“The era when a billionaire baseball owner can come in and change the zoning is over,” Johnson said. “My view from 15 years of involvement is that’s no longer how City Hall is working. Portland is a multi-stakeholder community.”

Issues of social equity must also be considered in redirecting city resources toward major league sports, said Johnson."

Owners of ESCO property don't seem so hot on the baseball stadium idea.

Look at ATT Park, which people seem to like. Its a privately financed stadium like the Portland stadium will have to be.

Building ATT Park in SF cost $360MM 18 years ago. What would that cost now - $400MM? $500MM? And how much to get MAX there, plus all the road/infra improvements? Are we talking a $500MM+ or $600MM+ project?

It was financed partly by a $100MM sale of naming rights. Will naming rights for a brand new MLB team in a second-tier market fetch that much? Also $72MM from selling 16K seats. Is there that much $ and interest in Portland? $15MM from city. Will CoP contribute significantly to building a pro sports stadium?

[subterranean]

Off topic, but I'd love it if a MAX line went from downtown to NW, continued north and crossed at the Burlington Northern rail bridge, made a couple stops in St. Johns/Portsmouth, and then continued on into downtown Vancouver. Just daydreaming...but that would make things a heck of a lot easier on me and my wife.

[RED_PDXer]

Off topic, but I'd love it if a MAX line went from downtown to NW, continued north and crossed at the Burlington Northern rail bridge, made a couple stops in St. Johns/Portsmouth, and then continued on into downtown Vancouver. Just daydreaming...but that would make things a heck of a lot easier on me and my wife.

I think that's a perfect commuter rail alignment with one stop in St. Johns, and one or more stops in Vancouver, depending on how far north it goes. It could go as far south as Oregon City..

[urbanlife]

I think that's a perfect commuter rail alignment with one stop in St. Johns, and one or more stops in Vancouver, depending on how far north it goes. It could go as far south as Oregon City..

Oregon City? A commuter rail should run all the way south to at least Salem if not further.

[maccoinnich]

Staff Report (https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bds/article/695152) for 1727 NW Hoyt St, which recommends approval.

[maccoinnich]

Staff Report (https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bds/article/695152) for 1727 NW Hoyt St, which recommends approval.

Drawing Part I (https://efiles.portlandoregon.gov/Record/12165349/File/Document) [88 MB] and Part II (https://efiles.portlandoregon.gov/Record/12165348/File/Document) [109 MB].

[maccoinnich]

Notice of a Pre-Application Conference (https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bds/article/697461) for NW 29th & Wilson:

A Pre-Application Conference to discuss a land division to create 14 lots for attached housing on the south portion of the site (R1 zoning). The proposal also includes preparation of parcels and infrastructure for future development on the EX portion of the site. There will also be a discussion regarding creating three of the attached housing lots though lot confirmation and property line adjustment.


A previous land use review application for development on the north half of the site, submitted in late 2016 IIRC, looks like it was withdrawn / never deemed complete.

[urbanlife]

That is surprising that it is designated as R1 Zoning, this locations looks like it would be better suited for an apartment building, but at least it does allow for attached housing.