SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//index.php)
-   Downtown & City of Portland (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//forumdisplay.php?f=192)
-   -   Rose Quarter Redevelopment (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//showthread.php?t=152548)

MarkDaMan Jun 8, 2011 5:57 PM

http://djcoregon.com/files/2011/06/0...hematic_02.jpg
(Rendering by Bastien and Associates)

MarkDaMan Jun 21, 2012 9:56 PM

http://media.oregonlive.com/portland...4129-large.jpg
Courtesy City of PortlandHigh density development along Northeast Clackamas Street as envisioned by the N/NE Quadrant Plan.


Rose Quarter plan would ease height, zoning rules
Published: Thursday, June 21, 2012, 12:41 PM Updated: Thursday, June 21, 2012, 2:00 PM
Cornelius Swart, The Oregonian

http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/i...ld_ease_h.html

Quote:

A revised plan for redeveloping the Rose Quarter, the Oregon Convention Center and the Lloyd District re-envisions the area as a walkable, high-density urban district with some of the tallest buildings in the city.

Under the plan, a cap across Interstate 5 and a pedestrian/bike bridge would connect the Lloyd District and the Rose Quarter.

The buildings near the east side of the Broadway Bridge could be up to 325 feet tall, and those near the convention center could reach near 400 feet.

The N/NE Quadrant and I-5 Broadway/Weidler Plans, a joint effort by the state and Portland, has no identified sources of funding. But Portland project managers believe easing height and zoning restrictions would encourage private investment.

A draft plan for $400 million worth of transportation projects, including an I-5 widening between I-405 and I-84, was completed June 13.

"In the past we've done a good job redeveloping areas using light rail and streetcar," said project manager Steve Iwata. "This is a new paradigm. By working with ODOT we have a chance to do something centered on a freeway."

Changing zoning
Iwata said the new height allowances are a response to the challenge of working in areas without the urban renewal tools used to redevelop the Pearl District, South Waterfront and downtown.

"The Oregon Convention Center Urban Renewal Area expires in 2013," Iwata said. "So we have to look at new incentives for redevelopment."

The plan would loosen zoning constraints in the Lower Albina Industrial Area north of Northeast Broadway and allow for commercial uses such as film production, back-office space and retail.

Areas along the North Vancouver/Williams Avenue corridor and the site of the Portland Public Schools headquarters on North Dixon Street would receive flexible zoning to encourage investment.

State and city officials are looking toward future federal transportation budgets for money to pay for freeway improvements.

Nonetheless, development in the area appears to be proceeding. Work has begun on a Memorial Coliseum renovation. And in March, Langley Investment Properties announced plans for a 750 apartment development in the Lloyd District.

Iwata said he believes lifting height restrictions might help long-delayed ambitions for a convention center headquarters hotel become a reality.

Height controversy
Not everyone has been happy with the changes, though.

Members of the nearby Irvington Community Association have successfully lobbied to have the plan's height limits lowered from 100 feet to 75 along Northeast Schuyler Street, on the southern edge of the neighborhood. Further height restrictions are under negotiations.

Dean Gisvold represents the association on the N/NE Quadrant's stakeholders advisory group. Gisvold said he was still reading the latest draft of the plan, released earlier this month, but that he thought the concentration of density in some parts was too much.

"I'm OK with 25 stories in Lloyd District," said Gisvold, who worked on the city's landmark 1971 downtown plan. "I don't think (the proposed heights) have any precedent in the city and certainly not downtown. It's going to cause transportation problems, and it's going to be out of scale."

Gisvold said residents preferred to see more of a Main Street design for Broadway up to the Hollywood District.

Planners said lifting height limits would stimulate growth by capitalizing on views and that growth would be multi-modal in nature, meaning residents were expected to use more transit and bikes to get around the area.

The final draft version is scheduled to go before the Portland City Council in October and the Oregon Transportation Commission in December. The current plan will go before a stakeholders committee at 5:30 p.m. at the Calaroga Terrace Auditorium, 1400 N.E. Second Ave., next Thursday.

-- Cornelius Swart

bvpcvm Jun 21, 2012 10:45 PM

http://media.oregonlive.com/portland...ae038fc86d.jpg

Derek Jun 22, 2012 12:51 AM

Me gusta.

davehogan Jun 22, 2012 5:35 AM

Three MAX lines, streetcar, and a bunch of buses and bike tracks? I'm surprised so few developers are publicly on board with it.

zilfondel Jun 23, 2012 11:45 PM

Quote:

Planners said lifting height limits would stimulate growth by capitalizing on views and that growth would be multi-modal in nature, meaning residents were expected to use more transit and bikes to get around the area.
Hmm. Considering that South Waterfront developers aren't even cashing in on the "views," whats the chance they will in the Lloyd?

Planners seem pretty optimistic to me!

Still, Lloyd is defined by its taller buildings. Would like to see some more in that area.

PacificNW Jun 24, 2012 1:35 AM

Wasn't there an agreement with the residents who live on the hills overlooking the So. Waterfront that the towers narrow sides would face the hills so that "their" views of the river and Mt. Hood would not be too obstructed...that along with height restrictions???

zilfondel Jun 25, 2012 10:29 PM

^ Sort of. Tower height was restricted so as not to block views from SW Terwilliger, a historic highway. They did opt for narrow-profiled towers so as to not block as much of the views for the neighbors who live on the slopes of South Portland/Lair Hill, but their views are still blocked to a fair degree. Portland doesn't offer SF-like view preservation by legal fiat or zoning.

Delaney Jun 27, 2012 3:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zilfondel (Post 5746328)
^ Portland doesn't offer SF-like view preservation by legal fiat or zoning.

Portland Zoning Code does. That's what the little "s" means on some lot designations: http://www.portlandonline.com/bps/in...=89965&c=47529

RainDog Jan 31, 2013 4:22 AM

Does anyone know what that walkway/round just south of the intersection of interstate and the steel bridge is? It looks like space for public art of some sort but i haven't seen or heard anything about it.:shrug:

MarkDaMan Jan 31, 2013 6:36 AM

It was one of the shafts for the Big Dig project.

davehogan Feb 6, 2013 6:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Delaney (Post 5747960)
Portland Zoning Code does. That's what the little "s" means on some lot designations: http://www.portlandonline.com/bps/in...=89965&c=47529

Wow, that page 5 map with the proposed freeways gave me pause. I forgot that two of the four places I've lived in Portland would have been torn down for freeways.

eric cantona Oct 22, 2013 11:39 PM

what the what?:

Quote:

Oct 22, 2013, 12:29pm PDT
New group makes pitch for Major League Baseball in Portland

Some eight years after a previous effort fizzled out, another drive has emerged to bring a Major League Baseball team to Portland.

A loosely formed group that includes noted architect Barry Smith and Lynn Lashbrook, founder of Sports Management Worldwide, who’s worked with previous Portland Major League Baseball efforts, is leading the charge. The supporters have hit City Hall to push their cause, meeting with representatives from Mayor Charlie Hales’ office as well as several city commissioners’ aides.
the rest is here: http://www.bizjournals.com/portland/...3-10-22&page=2

two things immediately jump out at me:

1. National Register. there's no freaking way that they are going to be able to do this now, if they couldn't before the MC was registered.
2. Barry Smith is a "noted" architect? no offense to him (Mr. Smith), but what is Mr. Giegerich smoking?

having baseball in Portland would be very cool on a number of levels. but to continue to go all Bart Simpson (can I now? no. can I now? no. can I now? no... on and on until Homer gives in) on the MC site seems pretty silly/stupid.

2oh1 Oct 22, 2013 11:56 PM

Memorial Coliseum is such a disaster. Does anyone know how much money has already been spent on trying to figure out what to do next with it? Acoustics are bad. The venue is too small for really big concerts, but it's too big for smaller stuff. As of a few years ago, the biggest use for Memorial Coliseum was assemblies. OMFG! What a waste of such a prime location.

I think the fight over what to do with Memorial Coliseum will live on until an earthquake hits, at which point that sucker is coming down, and let's all hope nobody is in or near it when that happens. I understand the appeal of preserving a significant piece of architecture, but it's a mostly unused piece of architecture, so what exactly are we preserving it for?

2oh1 Oct 22, 2013 11:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eric cantona (Post 6312220)
what the what?:

the rest is here: http://www.bizjournals.com/portland/...3-10-22&page=2

two things immediately jump out at me:

1. National Register. there's no freaking way that they are going to be able to do this now, if they couldn't before the MC was registered.
2. Barry Smith is a "noted" architect? no offense to him (Mr. Smith), but what is Mr. Giegerich smoking?

having baseball in Portland would be very cool on a number of levels. but to continue to go all Bart Simpson (can I now? no. can I now? no. can I now? no... on and on until Homer gives in) on the MC site seems pretty silly/stupid.

Keep in mind, TMT is working on getting permission to tear down the Cornelius Hotel which is also on the national historic register.

maccoinnich Oct 23, 2013 12:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eric cantona (Post 6312220)
2. Barry Smith is a "noted" architect? no offense to him (Mr. Smith), but what is Mr. Giegerich smoking?

That jumped out at me too. I'd say he's noted for doing terrible work. The student housing by PSU must be the worst new building in the city.

tworivers Oct 23, 2013 4:25 AM

Quote:

2oh1: I understand the appeal of preserving a significant piece of architecture, but it's a mostly unused piece of architecture, so what exactly are we preserving it for?
Um...kind of like the Cornelius?

2oh1 Oct 23, 2013 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tworivers (Post 6312491)
Um...kind of like the Cornelius?

I don't disagree. My gripe about TMT wanting to demolish the Cornelius is that they have no plans to develop the site.

tworivers Oct 23, 2013 11:16 PM

Yeah, I don't think TMT should be allowed to demo the Cornelius under any circumstances whatsoever. It should be on the National Register if it's not already; even if they did have a plan to redevelop the site, the building itself is too important.

The discussion around MC is somewhat moot because it is --rightfully-- fully registered as a historic building. It's not going to be torn down and the people behind the new MLB effort are looking pretty clueless. Someday down the road I'm sure that whole area will be redeveloped. Who knows, maybe one day it will be Portland's contemporary art museum...

I'd love to see a baseball stadium get built and I think the PPS site across Broadway would be the perfect location.

bvpcvm Oct 23, 2013 11:25 PM

Is it just me? Baseball doesn't seem very Portland.

tworivers Oct 23, 2013 11:34 PM

This is what Lynn Lashbrook has to say about Memorial Coliseum (full article here):

Quote:

PBJ: Why Memorial Coliseum?

Lashbrook: But Barry Smith has identified something unique. The Veterans Memorial Coliseum is a urinal. I’m embarrassed that people think it needs to be preserved. We need to honor vets another way, the right way.
I'm embarrassed for him that he apparently has so much respect for Barry Smith :koko:

2oh1 Oct 24, 2013 6:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bvpcvm (Post 6313438)
Is it just me? Baseball doesn't seem very Portland.

I have to admit, the sports scene is one thing I don't understand about Portland. This should be a baseball city. But instead, it's a town for basketball? I don't get it. We have such marvelous baseball weather. And the relaxed vibe of the city fits the sport so well. I'm not surprised at all that soccer is doing so well here. I am surprised that baseball isn't.

Eugenepdx Oct 24, 2013 3:34 PM

Well having worked at the Coliseum as a Utility Worker, i can honestly say that it is time to tear it down. I've walked around, climbed up and down, crawled in and out of every little crevice you can imagine inside of the Coliseum and one thing i can say is that, it is old.
Imagine your trying to get ready for a hockey game and all of a sudden, plywood falls from the rafters because of the heavy rain that is hitting the roof. Or imagine your trying to get ready for the Rose Festival Parade but have to patch up 3 holes on the main floor because the ground itself is so old and cracked, a float rolling over one of the holes might actually sink in. The building is just not worth saving.
I think the only ones who are trying to save the Coliseum are the ones that went to shows and concerts there back in the 70's and 80's, or just like the building because of its "all glass" exterior.
So again, the building is not worth saving, there are other ways to remember veterans, whether its a baseball stadium, condos, a 35 story tower, whatever it is, theres other ways of doing it, but the Coliseum is not the way to go.

Photogeric Oct 24, 2013 3:56 PM

I don't think this overrated structure is going anywhere anytime soon....

A city spokeswoman said the new council directed staff to break apart the agreement and renegotiate individual operating and renovation pieces for the iconic Rose Quarter structure, home to the Portland Trail Blazers before they moved to what is now Moda Center. ...

http://www.bizjournals.com/portland/...next-june.html

cab Oct 24, 2013 4:46 PM

Its the architecture community. They talk a good game, but when push comes to shove to show up and actually do something, they go missing. They pushed hard to keep this building, where are they now? They should be leading the charge. I do feel the structure has merit as an architecture piece, but unless a function can be identified and paid for do we really need to keep it around for form? I kind of feel sometimes architects forget function and get too obsessed with form.

eric cantona Oct 24, 2013 5:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cab (Post 6314212)
Its the architecture community. They talk a good game, but when push comes to shove to show up and actually do something, they go missing. They pushed hard to keep this building, where are they now? They should be leading the charge. I do feel the structure has merit as an architecture piece, but unless a function can be identified and paid for do we really need to keep it around for form? I kind of feel sometimes architects forget function and get too obsessed with form.

they're still around, no-one's gone missing. just because it's not on the front page doesn't mean that nothing's happening. renovation plans have been drawn up (BOORA?) and it is now a funding issue. what do you expect out of the architecture community at this juncture?

I find it really curious that there are so many in this community that seem to DESPISE the MC. I don't think it's an iconic structure, but appreciate many of the design elements. it certainly has a use, if properly maintained and cared for. tearing this down would be beyond silly, in my personal view.

beyond that, the area available for an MLB stadium is simply not enough in the RQ. it's great to maximize the existing infrastructure (parking and transit primarily) but to attempt to shoehorn a massive structure like this is foolhardy. especially considering the amount of land available across the street at the Blanchard property. that would provide enough room for the stadium and the additional parking that would be needed, while still being able to utilize the RQ facilities and transit options.

but the biggest question is whether MLB in PDX would actually fly long term. once the honeymoon is over then it comes down to population, disposable income and corporate spending. we are considerably deficient in all of those areas from a major sports franchise perspective. are we truly a major league city, or are we really, really (really) hoping to be? hope don't pay the bills.

maccoinnich Oct 24, 2013 5:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eric cantona (Post 6314285)
renovation plans have been drawn up (BOORA?)

It's Opsis. Although maybe it's a collaboration involving multiple firms.

urbanlife Oct 24, 2013 7:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eric cantona (Post 6314285)
they're still around, no-one's gone missing. just because it's not on the front page doesn't mean that nothing's happening. renovation plans have been drawn up (BOORA?) and it is now a funding issue. what do you expect out of the architecture community at this juncture?

I find it really curious that there are so many in this community that seem to DESPISE the MC. I don't think it's an iconic structure, but appreciate many of the design elements. it certainly has a use, if properly maintained and cared for. tearing this down would be beyond silly, in my personal view.

beyond that, the area available for an MLB stadium is simply not enough in the RQ. it's great to maximize the existing infrastructure (parking and transit primarily) but to attempt to shoehorn a massive structure like this is foolhardy. especially considering the amount of land available across the street at the Blanchard property. that would provide enough room for the stadium and the additional parking that would be needed, while still being able to utilize the RQ facilities and transit options.

but the biggest question is whether MLB in PDX would actually fly long term. once the honeymoon is over then it comes down to population, disposable income and corporate spending. we are considerably deficient in all of those areas from a major sports franchise perspective. are we truly a major league city, or are we really, really (really) hoping to be? hope don't pay the bills.

I don't think Portland could handle a MLB team, as it is now Seattle needs to use Portland when including their numbers to support a team. I would like to see Portland get back a minor league baseball team (though the Hillsboro Hops do technically count) and maybe an NHL team. But there is more than enough fan support for the Blazers and the Timbers.

2oh1 Oct 25, 2013 2:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eric cantona (Post 6314285)
I find it really curious that there are so many in this community that seem to DESPISE the MC. I don't think it's an iconic structure, but appreciate many of the design elements. it certainly has a use...

Please tell us what that use is, because I have no idea, and those booking the venue clearly have no idea either since the MC sits mostly unused or severely under-used. So much money and effort has been poured into figuring out what to do with the MC during the past 18 years, and each plan fizzled out. But hey, if you have the answer, by all means, let us all know. The main use for the MC is assemblies. ASSEMBLIES. It's crazy how much land - how much amazingly prime land - is being eaten up by that structure and its parking.

Personally, I love the look of the MC and I appreciate it's historic significance. But it's under-used and often not used at all. It isn't prepared to withstand a quake and there certainly isn't money around to fix that, especially since no one has been able to even find a proper use for the thing. And let's not even bother talking about energy efficiency. HA!!!!!!!!!!!1!!!1!!!!!!!


Quote:

Originally Posted by eric cantona (Post 6314285)
the area available for an MLB stadium is simply not enough in the RQ.

You might want to tell that to the representatives involved with MLB who came here, evaluated the site and deemed it acceptable. But, hey, what do they know, right?

I'd be glad to see Memorial Coliseum come down and be replaced by a baseball stadium, even if it's minor league.

My prediction is that the MC will sit as it is now, under-utilized, mostly empty, for decades. When a major quake hits, it'll be damaged beyond repair. And then, finally, something marvelous will happen on that site. I hope I'm wrong though. It's a gorgeous structure, but I hope it gets leveled, the sooner the better.


Quote:

Originally Posted by eric cantona (Post 6314285)
but the biggest question is whether MLB in PDX would actually fly long term. once the honeymoon is over then it comes down to population, disposable income and corporate spending. we are considerably deficient in all of those areas from a major sports franchise perspective. are we truly a major league city, or are we really, really (really) hoping to be? hope don't pay the bills.

I agree completely, but I don't view that as a reason to keep the MC. Whether or not Portland can support major league baseball has nothing to do with the fact that the MC sits mostly unused or under-used.

urbanlife Oct 25, 2013 4:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2oh1 (Post 6315060)
Please tell us what that use is, because I have no idea, and those booking the venue clearly have no idea either since the MC sits mostly unused or severely under-used. So much money and effort has been poured into figuring out what to do with the MC during the past 18 years, and each plan fizzled out. But hey, if you have the answer, by all means, let us all know. The main use for the MC is assemblies. ASSEMBLIES. It's crazy how much land - how much amazingly prime land - is being eaten up by that structure and its parking.

Personally, I love the look of the MC and I appreciate it's historic significance. But it's under-used and often not used at all. It isn't prepared to withstand a quake and there certainly isn't money around to fix that, especially since no one has been able to even find a proper use for the thing. And let's not even bother talking about energy efficiency. HA!!!!!!!!!!!1!!!1!!!!!!!




You might want to tell that to the representatives involved with MLB who came here, evaluated the site and deemed it acceptable. But, hey, what do they know, right?

I'd be glad to see Memorial Coliseum come down and be replaced by a baseball stadium, even if it's minor league.

My prediction is that the MC will sit as it is now, under-utilized, mostly empty, for decades. When a major quake hits, it'll be damaged beyond repair. And then, finally, something marvelous will happen on that site. I hope I'm wrong though. It's a gorgeous structure, but I hope it gets leveled, the sooner the better.




I agree completely, but I don't view that as a reason to keep the MC. Whether or not Portland can support major league baseball has nothing to do with the fact that the MC sits mostly unused or under-used.

I have only heard the PPS building being a good location for a MLB stadium, I have never heard of MC being a large enough space for a MLB stadium. It barely could hold a small minor league baseball stadium.

2oh1 Oct 25, 2013 4:42 AM

Isn't that the site they were talking about here?

tworivers Oct 25, 2013 5:16 AM

Everyone can argue about whether or not MC should be demolished until the cows come home. It's a protected structure and it's not going to be torn down, period. Not even for a giant Salt & Straw with a spinning ice cream cone on top.

Mind you, I'd love to see it creatively re-purposed and even significantly altered for the right project. High speed rail station? Contemporary art museum? Portland isn't even close to that kind of game, though. Too timid, too poor, too provincial. Either way, it would continue our ugly history of cultural shortsightedness if we simply wiped it off the map.

Also, it may indeed come down in a massive earthquake (from what I've read, more likely all the glass will come off). That will be the least of our worries, seeing as just about every un-reinforced masonry structure will be toast, probably killing thousands of people and completely altering the Portland we know forever. At that point --all the vintage bridges down, what's left of historic Portland gone, thousands of people dead, massive population loss-- I'm not sure if I'd care what, if anything, gets built in its place.

bvpcvm Oct 25, 2013 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tworivers (Post 6315231)
Not even for a giant Salt & Straw with a spinning ice cream cone on top.

Now THAT I could get behind! :)

eric cantona Oct 25, 2013 4:08 PM

@ 2oh1: a better analysis of the MC situation is here:

http://pamplinmedia.com/pt/9-news/15...ssal-conundrum

my understanding is that the Opsis plans (thanks maccoinnich) were supposedly completed late last year, which is where the $31.5m figure came from, but I'm not 100% certain of that. bottom line is that the MC is currently being used, but the clusterfucky bureaucracy that is part and parcel of this city is making it extraordinarily difficult to KNOW anything about what's possible or probable.

I believe that the MC has a place due to it's size and location for a variety of events, just as it is now. with upgrades it will be an even more attractive draw for similar events. can it be profitable? ask an economist. or better yet, ask the City to do a better job of due diligence for the MC and the RQ. I've heard wildly divergent estimates on cost, ROI, etc. throughout this 'debate', and put little faith in them since the two sides of this question (MC or not to MC) are as polarized and vitriolic as MSNBC and Fox.

check out the latest planning efforts for the area by the City here:

http://www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/article/415852

pg. 26 has some graphics showing the potential for the RQ and vicinity that is consistent with the majority of the latest thinking about the types and layout of uses.

cab Oct 25, 2013 4:20 PM

When the architecture community makes the case to save this building, it somehow became the cities problem to figure out a business venture? This is the problem. Fine, its an architecture jewel decreed by the architects, let them find a business model that is profitable. Instead they force the hand of the city and hand them a white elephant with a built in excuse when it fails. Oh it was the clusterfucky bureaucracy that did it in. BS, it was the private architect firms that didn't have a workable business plan other than "its a beautiful glass jewel box, save it" They didn't find any private partners or business that made sense, did they?. I'm so tired of the government blame game. No private entity has stepped up to save this beast. If you are going force the hand of government to save it, than deal with the public process.

2oh1 Oct 25, 2013 9:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cab (Post 6315565)
When the architecture community makes the case to save this building, it somehow became the cities problem to figure out a business venture? This is the problem.

Exactly.

And it's a similar problem in cities with these old arenas. In many cases, there simply isn't a use for them and resources are being wasted in trying to figure out what to do with them. This problem isn't unique to Portland. And to say the MC is being used isn't just laughable. It's insulting. The MC's main use is assemblies, and the city loses money every year on the thing. It's a beautiful structure without a purpose, and it gets in the way of every plan to rejuvenate the Rose Quarter.

zilfondel Oct 27, 2013 7:46 AM

Memorial Coliseum hosting 400,000 to 450,000 visitors/year is hardly a "useless" or unused building. I do not understand the rhetoric on this forum regarding the MC, when I read comments that are against any demolition of historic brick buildings downtown, regardless of how significant they are, but call for the demolition of one of our most iconic buildings in the city. I have been to several events this past year at the MC alone. It does need a renovation; any building 50+ years old needs one!!

Mayor Hales really needs to foot the bill for the renovation. Buildings continuously degrade and fall apart the moment they are built. They are all money pits - and their upkeep must be funded, otherwise you will end up like Detroit. You know the old saying? "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure."

Sustainability wise, its a no-brainer to spend the effort and actually get it renovated and programmed properly. Stop with the idiotic rhetoric, FUD and pipe dreams; this building can function very well as part of our entertainment venue area known as the Rose Quarter.

Note that MLB or baseball does not appear once in the draft NNE Quadrant Plan document. More importantly, the original plan for MLB by HOK & Fosler was for it to be built to the north of the RQ & Broadway bridge (Blanchard Property), where there was more room. Anyway, last time I heard it may be 10-20 years before MLB had a team open to moving. Why would they move to Portland? An unproven market without a viable site?

I suggest re-reading Brian Libby's coverage of the stories from his archives: http://chatterbox.typepad.com/portla...rial-coliseum/

And the MLB stadium plan: http://www.oregonstadiumcampaign.com...um_concept.htm

Opsis MC page:
http://www.opsisarch.com/blog/projec...ial-coliseum/#

Quote:

Originally Posted by cab
When the architecture community makes the case to save this building, it somehow became the cities problem to figure out a business venture? This is the problem.

BS. The city owns the MC, and architecture firms don't work for free (they also don't write business plans). The city listened to the public, which did not want the building destroyed. They need to have the balls to actually DO SOMETHING and not twiddle their thumbs for the next 5 years. Jesus, how long have they thought about moving forward on the Convention Center Hotel? 10 years? This city has serious leadership issues - as in it doesn't have any.

zilfondel Oct 27, 2013 7:50 AM

Aaaaanyways, the latest news on the MC:

Quote:

Originally Posted by bizjournals.com
New Veterans Memorial Coliseum plan due next June
Oct 24, 2013

The city of Portland is revising terms of a $31.5 million deal to renovate Veterans Memorial Coliseum after coming close to approving it last November.
The city council assigned the matter to the Office of Finance and Management last spring after Mayor Charlie Hales took over and several newcomers joined the council.
Adams and the prior council nearly approved the renovation deal at Christmas, but stepped back when the Portland Winterhawks were sanctioned by the Western Hockey League. The hockey team was to contribute $10 million to the renovation.
A city spokeswoman said the new council directed staff to break apart the agreement and renegotiate individual operating and renovation pieces for the iconic Rose Quarter structure, home to the Portland Trail Blazers before they moved to what is now Moda Center.
The city signed off on a new two-year operating agreement with Portland Arena Management in May.
The council set a June 2014 deadline for the OFM to return to the council with a new proposal, which will include potential new funding sources.
Veterans Memorial Coliseum, which was added to the National Register of Historic Places in 2009, is back on the public radar this week after a group working to recruit Major League Baseball identified it as a favorite site for a future baseball stadium.
Any move to remove the beloved glass box will raise stiff opposition from its fans in the architectural and veteran community. Too, its historic register listing ensures any proposal will be thoroughly vetted by the city’s Historic Landmarks Commission.

http://www.bizjournals.com/portland/...next-june.html

Eugenepdx Oct 27, 2013 6:58 PM

400-450,000 people annually, you can't be serious. I would say that number is closer to 200,000 visitors annually. The only major events there are FrightTown, the comic book show and the OSAA events. Maybe that's just a little over 100,000 visitors combined. Those numbers haven't changed since I started working there in 2002.

This building needs to get bulldozed and made way for something new, different and exciting.

davehogan Oct 27, 2013 11:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eugenepdx (Post 6317488)
400-450,000 people annually, you can't be serious. I would say that number is closer to 200,000 visitors annually. The only major events there are FrightTown, the comic book show and the OSAA events. Maybe that's just a little over 100,000 visitors combined. Those numbers haven't changed since I started working there in 2002.

This building needs to get bulldozed and made way for something new, different and exciting.

If the Winterhawks attract 10,000 people per home game (that was near their average last season), that's 360,000 people a year to start with, and doesn't count preseason or post season. Some of those are played at the Rose Garden, but that's still a significant number of people just for one team.

urbanlife Oct 28, 2013 1:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by davehogan (Post 6317703)
If the Winterhawks attract 10,000 people per home game (that was near their average last season), that's 360,000 people a year to start with, and doesn't count preseason or post season. Some of those are played at the Rose Garden, but that's still a significant number of people just for one team.

I actually enjoy going to Winterhawks games at the MC, it is a great building for Hockey. Though it could use some renovations and improvements.

Eugenepdx Oct 28, 2013 5:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by davehogan (Post 6317703)
If the Winterhawks attract 10,000 people per home game (that was near their average last season), that's 360,000 people a year to start with, and doesn't count preseason or post season. Some of those are played at the Rose Garden, but that's still a significant number of people just for one team.

Sorry but the winter hawks averaged about 6,500 people annually. That's only about 250,000 a year and attendance has stayed flat for the past 5 years.
I'm not sure where your getting your facts from.

2oh1 Oct 28, 2013 5:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by davehogan (Post 6317703)
If the Winterhawks attract 10,000 people per home game (that was near their average last season).

BZZZZZZZZZZT. Incorrect. The Winterhawks didn't even average 10,000 per game during the playoffs. In fact, their average - during the playoffs - was 9,261/game.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Eugenepdx (Post 6317918)
Sorry but the winter hawks averaged about 6,500 people annually. That's only about 250,000 a year and attendance has stayed flat for the past 5 years.
I'm not sure where your getting your facts from.

Probably from Brian Libby, whose articles on the MC are ridiculously one-sided, regardless of whether or not facts support what he writes. His site has some excellent content, but he can also be the architecture version of Fox News. I had to stop reading his site a while ago.

PDX City-State Oct 31, 2013 5:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cab (Post 6315565)
When the architecture community makes the case to save this building, it somehow became the cities problem to figure out a business venture? This is the problem. Fine, its an architecture jewel decreed by the architects, let them find a business model that is profitable. Instead they force the hand of the city and hand them a white elephant with a built in excuse when it fails. Oh it was the clusterfucky bureaucracy that did it in. BS, it was the private architect firms that didn't have a workable business plan other than "its a beautiful glass jewel box, save it" They didn't find any private partners or business that made sense, did they?. I'm so tired of the government blame game. No private entity has stepped up to save this beast. If you are going force the hand of government to save it, than deal with the public process.

This is 100 percent right on. We're not talking about saving a building like the Cornelius that, if fixed, could have many uses--office, retail, housing, hotel... We're talking about a 50 year old coliseum for which the city has explored a variety of different uses for as long as I've lived here--now going on 11 years. It, along with the Portland Public Market, wins the Lack of Momentum and Future Award.

2oh1 Oct 31, 2013 8:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PDX City-State (Post 6322257)
This is 100 percent right on. We're not talking about saving a building like the Cornelius that, if fixed, could have many uses--office, retail, housing, hotel... We're talking about a 50 year old coliseum for which the city has explored a variety of different uses for as long as I've lived here--now going on 11 years.

Exactly this. The irony here is that the Cornelius is being torn down due to the cost of renovation. Meanwhile, the MC is being kept despite the cost of renovation and despite the fact that the city loses money on it and despite the fact that there isn't even a plan for what to do with it. In fact, a lot of money, resources and time have already been poured into figuring out what to do with the MC - all for nothing, as nothing has been decided and nothing has been done.

scleeb Nov 5, 2013 2:39 PM

Well, it looks like Portland isn't the only city dealing with an iconic structure in need of a new purpose: http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireSto...oters-20785297

If Houston can pull off an re imagining of the Astrodome, I have hope for the Coliseum. I think Portland needs to think beyond an arena. I would be in favor of keeping the glass exterior, gutting the interioir, and establishing a year-round open-air market... A "Saturday Market on Steroids" if you will...

2oh1 Nov 7, 2013 1:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scleeb (Post 6327512)
Well, it looks like Portland isn't the only city dealing with an iconic structure in need of a new purpose: http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireSto...oters-20785297

If Houston can pull off an re imagining of the Astrodome, I have hope for the Coliseum. I think Portland needs to think beyond an arena. I would be in favor of keeping the glass exterior, gutting the interioir, and establishing a year-round open-air market... A "Saturday Market on Steroids" if you will...

Yesterday, Houston voters voted against the effort to save the Astrodome.

Quote:

After Texas voters on Tuesday rejected a referendum that would have authorized up to $217 million in bonds to turn the Astrodome into a giant convention and event center, the stadium is likely to be demolished.
So much for that.

scleeb Nov 7, 2013 2:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2oh1 (Post 6329899)
Yesterday, Houston voters voted against the effort to save the Astrodome.



So much for that.

I just read that the Astrodome has been nominated to the National Register of Historic Places. The Texas Historical Commission held a hearing on October 19 and the nomination was heard by the Sate Board of Review. So, once the Feds sign off, it's a done deal.

So... if the Astrodome gets listed, will it still be demolished? If yes, that may mean the Historical Registration is not the "silver bullet" everyone thinks it is...

MarkDaMan Nov 7, 2013 4:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scleeb (Post 6329950)
I just read that the Astrodome has been nominated to the National Register of Historic Places. The Texas Historical Commission held a hearing on October 19 and the nomination was heard by the Sate Board of Review. So, once the Feds sign off, it's a done deal.

So... if the Astrodome gets listed, will it still be demolished? If yes, that may mean the Historical Registration is not the "silver bullet" everyone thinks it is...

I'm not completely sure, but I believe being listed on the National Register of Historic Places only 'encourages' the preservation and restoration of the property, not an actual mandate to do so. I think each city or county devises their own rules on how to handle historical places.

maccoinnich Jul 22, 2014 5:41 AM

Interesting that Cordish even have a representative in Portland to meet with the mayor. Personally I think anything that could bring life to the Rose Quarter is a good thing, even if it's filled with Olive Gardens and Hard Rock Cafes.

Quote:

Portland Mayor Charlie Hales takes meeting with developer that proposed 'terrible' JumpTown district

http://imgick.oregonlive.com/home/ol...816-mmmain.jpg

The last word that many Portlanders may remember about The Cordish Companies wasn't flattering.

"Terrible."

That's what then-Mayor Sam Adams had to say about early drawings for a proposed Rose Quarter entertainment district from the Trail Blazers and Baltimore-based Cordish.

"The most un-Portland-like, significantly un-Portland like, renderings of what it would be," Adams said of the so-called JumpTown proposal in 2010.

On that note, guess who is back in town?

Portland Mayor Charlie Hales had a one-hour "check in" with Cordish representatives last Thursday.

Asked about the purpose of the meeting, Dana Haynes, a spokesman for Hales, said this in an email:

"I'm told it was an introductory meeting with a company the mayor didn't know much about," Haynes said. "Meet-and-greet."
...continues at the Oregonian.


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:04 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.