The Sleeping Green Giant: Lloyd Crossing

An article in the new issue of Metropolis by Clair Enlow features the Lloyd Crossing plan, which also was honored by the AIA’s Committee on the Environment earlier this year as part of its list of Top Ten green projects for the year.

Because there are not yet any cranes erected or big holes in the ground, it’s easy to underestimate what a potentially huge, if not revolutionary, plan Lloyd Crossing could become if fully realized. “If we can successfully implement [Lloyd Crossing],” Portland Development Commission project manager Sloan Schang told the magazine, “then we have in effect created a new model for the development of urban areas.”

Designed by Mithun Architects of Seattle (a firm in our rival city I think we should all root for to do more work in Portland) in cooperation with a multidisciplinary team, the plan is a public-private partnership that will add numerous innovative green elements to the area: bioswales on the shoulder of streets to collect rainwater, a local sewage treatment facility for the neighborhood, widespread use of photovoltaic solar panels, wind turbines mounted on poles, and perhaps most interestingly of all, an underground thermal loop shared by the neighborhood that stores and distributes heat captured from office exhaust airstreams and other sources.

It’s ironic that such innovation could come to a neighborhood that has been largely left behind in Portland’s continuing push toward high-density, pedestrian friendly development. The MAX train is already there, and the location across from downtown with two adjacent freeways couldn’t be better. We just need some housing, and pronto. Sienna Architecture’s Cascade Condominiums was built years ago but has not done especially well attracting tenants, despite being an attractive building right on the MAX line with a station a few feet away. It takes more than housing, of course; grocery stores and other amenities are needed to make this area dominated by the Lloyd Center shopping mall and unattractive office-building monoliths. But if a neighborhood like South Waterfront can grow exponentially from scratch, why can’t the Lloyd District do just as well or better?

Comments

[Ray]

So this dream is still out there (evolving into Lloyd Crossing). Years ago when the Lloyd Center was remodeled, there was a small former shop area for people to see a vision for the Lloyd District. I remember the renderings of multiple new towers to the west of the shopping mall. That must have been twenty years ago!?!

Ray

[Eric Berg]

The PDC has agreed to purchase land for a hotel in and adjacent to the same area as Lloyd Crossing. Does anyone if the hotel is going to be incorporated into the LC project?

Here's a PDC PDF of the LC:

http://www.pdc.us/pdf/ura/occ/lloyd_crossing_sustainable.pdf

[Brian]

That's a very good question. Can anyone from PDC answer this? Meanwhile I'll try and find out.

[ccl]

I am heavily (too much) involved in the Lloyd District. It does have the potential to become a vibrant, sustainable, and intelligent community filled with office and residential towers, parks, and a transit core. Its location could not be more ideal considering that transit core and highway acess. I heard South Waterfront referred to as a fancy cul-de-sac due to its lack of interaction with the rest of the city. The Lloyd district is opposite. Currently it is a destination place whether it be shopping, convention, events, and work...or a place you pass on the MAX, bus, or highway. It should be so much more. I do live in Cascadian and have been a major advocate for residential living.
I was also on the Lloyd Crossing committee. The problem with the Lloyd District is that there are multiple and powerful landowners. The Pearl and South Waterfront can grow exponentially because there is essentially just one landowner. The Lloyd Stakeholders have great ideas, but it is more a problem of implementation and resources. Because of the subsidies involved in the Pearl and S. Waterfront, the Lloyd stakeholders expect the same financial support only if it is a benefit ($$$) to them. They will almost always not support public subsidies for housing in the Lloyd District. It is a shame because it seems they can not see the benefit to the community and neighborhood. Cascadian is now completely full with selling prices approaching the Pearl's. Here is the hard-to-understand part. Block 45, where Cascadian II was supposed to be built, is owned by PDC. They are selling it without creating development parameters, rather more suggestions. We do need more home-ownership housing and if you want to help, contact PDC and suggest, recommend, threaten (not really) that they create development parameters and use what resources they can to help subsidize a condominium tower similar to Cascadian Phase II. I have heard talk that local stakeholders would love to see an entertainment use similar to a ESPN zone. When I heard this, I almost blew up. Does this sound like Portland to you?

[Ray]

My biggest concern is really not a issue if the heating and cooling loop systems are placed below grade at a level that doesn't conflict with my hope that I5 is moved to the east.

I am pushing with every conversation and email to have I5 re-aligned in the Lloyd District to tunnels and a split interchange near the 12th Ave. Bridge at I84. This I5 realignment will allow the connection of the Rose Quarter to the Lloyd District with new parks and development.

Something on this in the Tribune is to be printed in the near future.

I sure hope that "Lloyd Crossing" becomes a reality soon and we see cranes in that part of Portland also (excluding the OCC HQ Hotel and the Bridgehead which technically isn't in the LD).

Ray

[Mike]

brain,

mithun had some help on this project from greenworks, a local landscape architecture firm with a growing national reputation. they just received a national award from ASLA (american society of landscape architects) for this work.

landscape architects in this town are creating some beautiful and innovative work. i encourage you to familiarize yourself with them.

mike

[Brian]

Thanks, Mike. I should have included Greenworks in the post and appreciate the heads-up.

But believe it or not, I am not completely oblivious to the fine work of local landscape architecture firms, as the last portion of your post seemed to imply.

That said, there's always more to learn.