Portland Infill | North Portland

[zilfondel]

Haha, the building won an architecture design award. Skylab has it beautifully featured on their portfolio:

http://skylabarchitecture.com/work/c...ilding/#slide1

[eric cantona]

Originally Posted by zilfondel

Haha, the building won an architecture design award. Skylab has it beautifully featured on their portfolio:

http://skylabarchitecture.com/work/c...ilding/#slide1

It's a beautiful project, no doubt. but having talked to some engineers that work there I understand that it's not the greatest place to work. one issue is that the curving wall in the work area allows sounds to travel from one end to the other. apparently you can hear someone's phone conversation from the other end of the room. that, and the slatted sunscreen eyebrows aren't actually located properly to shield the sun for people in the building for much of the year.

[hat]

Overlook blvd building is under construction.

[zilfondel]

Originally Posted by eric cantona

It's a beautiful project, no doubt. but having talked to some engineers that work there I understand that it's not the greatest place to work. one issue is that the curving wall in the work area allows sounds to travel from one end to the other. apparently you can hear someone's phone conversation from the other end of the room. that, and the slatted sunscreen eyebrows aren't actually located properly to shield the sun for people in the building for much of the year.

Considering I worked in a windowless office building for several years...

[maccoinnich]

Approval [PDF, 10MB] for revisions to the previously approved Cook St Apartments at N Williams & Cook. Not that it's going to win any design awards, but it's actually somewhat better looking than I remember. Lots of retail facing Vancouver / Williams.

[hat]

Originally Posted by maccoinnich

Approval [PDF, 10MB] for revisions to the previously approved Cook St Apartments at N Williams & Cook. Not that it's going to win any design awards, but it's actually somewhat better looking than I remember. Lots of retail facing Vancouver / Williams.

Having difficulty recognizing this document for some reason. It also seems to be much larger than 10MB

[zilfondel]

Originally Posted by hat

Having difficulty recognizing this document for some reason. It also seems to be much larger than 10MB

21 MB file

[maccoinnich]

According to the Urban Works blog, the Security Properties on the former OAME site has broken ground. Images from an Oregonian story in earlier in the year:










Floorplans [PDF].

[PDXDENSITY]

That area is going crazy with construction, but it strikes me we should be seeing multiples of this type of corridor going up right now. Division happened. And some areas are in the midst of adding some density, but we are severely undersupplying a demand to live here.

In any case, I love how Williams looks now. What was once empty, poorly cared for lots is now a thriving corridor. I hope to see something like this happen along Sandy, Powell, and various N-S corridors in SE and NE.

[hat]

Originally Posted by PDXDENSITY

That area is going crazy with construction, but it strikes me we should be seeing multiples of this type of corridor going up right now. Division happened. And some areas are in the midst of adding some density, but we are severely undersupplying a demand to live here.

In any case, I love how Williams looks now. What was once empty, poorly cared for lots is now a thriving corridor. I hope to see something like this happen along Sandy, Powell, and various N-S corridors in SE and NE.

Ditto. But I think one of the problems with Sandy and Burnside, for example (keep in mind there are a couple sites under construction near 28th), is its fast through-commuter pace. There is no bike access, few safe pedestrian crossings... they're both kind of no man's lands. These variables are just a few of many, but until we can calm traffic and create a setting where people feel safe, those streets aren't good candidates for a livable-type walking neighborhood. That may have had an effect on development.

[PDXDENSITY]

Originally Posted by hat

Ditto. But I think one of the problems with Sandy and Burnside, for example (keep in mind there are a couple sites under construction near 28th), is its fast through-commuter pace. There is no bike access, few safe pedestrian crossings... they're both kind of no man's lands. These variables are just a few of many, but until we can calm traffic and create a setting where people feel safe, those streets aren't good candidates for a livable-type walking neighborhood. That may have had an effect on development.

Burnside has had a few calming projects recently! I think they need to go all in with both Burnside and Sandy. Protected bike lanes for both, along with reduced speed limits and more cross walks to create congestion and slow traffic. More mixed use zoning for shop fronts and housing to create customers. We don't need suburban, drive-through wastelands in our center city. Heck, Out to 57th or beyond on Sandy could really become something like Montavilla if things were pushed in that direction.

I have been pressuring city commissioners about this, and recommend you do as well. I think we can be doing far more to create a dense, livable, and AFFORDABLE city.

[urbanlife]

Originally Posted by hat

Ditto. But I think one of the problems with Sandy and Burnside, for example (keep in mind there are a couple sites under construction near 28th), is its fast through-commuter pace. There is no bike access, few safe pedestrian crossings... they're both kind of no man's lands. These variables are just a few of many, but until we can calm traffic and create a setting where people feel safe, those streets aren't good candidates for a livable-type walking neighborhood. That may have had an effect on development.

Sandy and Burnside would both be good streetcar routes. As for bike routes, if I remember correctly SE Ankeny is actually a pretty heavily traveled bike route for those running the route Burnside goes. Sandy would be a good route for putting in a separate bike path.

[hat]

Originally Posted by urbanlife

Sandy and Burnside would both be good streetcar routes. As for bike routes, if I remember correctly SE Ankeny is actually a pretty heavily traveled bike route for those running the route Burnside goes. Sandy would be a good route for putting in a separate bike path.

Perhaps this thread should go elsewhere, but...

The traffic calming recently on Burnside was a baby step in the right direction. Yes, Ankeny serves as an ostensible greenway, albeit with one diverter on 20th and a hellscape on Sandy and 11th (though certainly not as bad as the Clinton gauntlet. If Ankeny had diverters (meaning several), perhaps Burnside wouldn't need bike lanes. Either one or both is fine with me.

Sandy, on the other hand. This street is begging for a traffic diet like on Foster (which has a similar layout and will be turned into three lanes with bike lanes hopefully soon). I can't presume to know how often traffic is traveling faster than the posted limit, but I know Foster was well over.

I agree with Density's sentiments, although I have seen how slow and unresponsive PBOT can be to change. It will be interesting to see the effect research on these road diets has had on their outlook.

[PDXDENSITY]

Originally Posted by hat

I agree with Density's sentiments, although I have seen how slow and unresponsive PBOT can be to change. It will be interesting to see the effect research on these road diets has had on their outlook.

It's an interesting conundrum, in any case. It's clear we need a better multimodal Sandy and Burnside. On the other hand, there's arguments that the poor now have to commute in to work so they are getting the brunt of traffic "calming."

I personally think these improvements to make our roads more multimodal and ultimately safer for bikers and walkers need to happen. On the other hand, we need to be beefing up the same kind of infrastructure all the way out to 162nd, along our city's border. Nowhere should be wanting for fixed transit, be it MAX, streetcar, or true BRT along with protected lanes. Throw in narrowing some of these corridors significantly by adding density like what is going in along Williams and all of Portland could be a great place to be.

We need to keep building housing stock, putting our roads on diets, building more pedestrian/bike infrastructure, building densely along vital corridors, finding some way to increase affordable housing stock. This can all happen, but there needs to be a more unified local government vision for where money can go.

I am honestly tired of the suburbs outside of the city limits trying to muddy the waters when we try to improve a street that tons of people are using as a commute route. I get that it imacts the poor, but it also impacts some selfish people that demand to be beholden to their car. I wish we could be dedicating much more of our transportation budget to building bike infrastructure and spurring dense development.

I apologize for meandering off topic, but I feel this is relevant in the context of the densification of Williams. That's the kind of infill I wish we could be seeing happening all over the city. It's obvious the demand is there because people want to live here. I really hope we don't slip toward Seattle or San Francisco type rents. Despite all we're building, the rents over the last few years make it clear it is far far far from enough.

[zilfondel]

Originally Posted by hat

Ditto. But I think one of the problems with Sandy and Burnside, for example (keep in mind there are a couple sites under construction near 28th), is its fast through-commuter pace. There is no bike access, few safe pedestrian crossings... they're both kind of no man's lands. These variables are just a few of many, but until we can calm traffic and create a setting where people feel safe, those streets aren't good candidates for a livable-type walking neighborhood. That may have had an effect on development.

They already reduced the westbound lane of east burnside to 1 lane. So there's that.

[PDXDENSITY]

Originally Posted by zilfondel

They already reduced the westbound lane of east burnside to 1 lane. So there's that.

That, honestly, felt like a drawn out concession. It should be two lanes with a turning lane in the middle and bike lanes on the sides... if possible, protected somehow.

[maccoinnich]

BDS has approved [PDF] a Design Review for 8 new townhomes at 1532 N Blandena Street.

[hat]

I was worried for a while that no one would want to touch this place. The adjacent parking lot's been used as a construction storage space; it's across from a Taco Bell, behind a Plaid Pantry, and close to the Going viaduct. I'm relieved this can get funding. Also, the building on the NW corner of Alberta and Interstate is nearly finished. Looks like a cafe.

[PDXDENSITY]

It's a good looking bit of infill, I think! I feel like there will be more areas that will start to be developed that seemed impossible before. It really feels like a metamorphosis is happening all over the city.

[Rob Nob]

Very tastefully designed. We need more of this kind of fabric infill.