Portland Architecture

Potestio on Potestio,the Bus Mall Redesign, and Torino

Enclosed below is the second half of my recent email interview with Rick Potestio, principal with Mahlum Architects.

In addition to being against the Burnside-Couch couplet proposal discussed in part one of our interview, you've also come out against the Bus Mall redesign downtown and a MAX line there. Why?

My objections to the bus/rail transit mall project stem first from the fact that no comprehensive master plan has been generated for the city that integrates land use, multi-modal transportation and urban design. I believe that Portland has matured such that it is time for a public debate on a future vision for the city and region that will address all forms of transportation.

I think that a rail transit system should be designed in accordance with very clear and distinct objectives. Heavy and light rail should serve inter-city travel and connect major points of activity such as airports, employment and entertainment centers. Trolleys should serve intra-city travel, connecting neighborhoods, institutions, business districts and parks.

I think that the largest obstacle to achieving this goal is the fact that much of the MAX system runs on surface streets with multiple stops and slow speeds. Exacerbating this situation is its existence on the surface streets of downtown Portland. Inter-city or long cross regional travel is slowed by the need to traverse downtown Portland. Because express trains would not be compatible with the pedestrian character of downtown, I believe a subway is an obvious solution.

To illustrate the problem, I know people who reside in Northeast Portland and work in Hillsboro. They ride their bikes to the Goose Hollow station and then board the MAX train to reach their jobs. This is faster than boarding at Lloyd Center, the closest stop to their homes, and riding the train through downtown.

I believe that rather than adding more MAX lines to downtown's streets, the city should be planning a route around the CBD that connects to a few major points and institutions and interfaces with an expanded trolley system. I believe that bypass tracks should be incorporated into the existing MAX lines outside of downtown to facilitate express trains.

I realize that an immense amount of study and planning has gone into this project, much of it by very dear friends, and therefore tread cautiously in my suggestions. However, I think that if we had a master plan for a tiered system of rail transportation it would shed light on other options.

With regard to the transit mall idea, I think it will just not work. I do not believe that cars, busses and rail can occupy the narrow space effectively, nor do I believe that the combination of all these vehicles on the right of way will result in an enhanced and attractive environment for pedestrians or result in better transit service.

I think it is very difficult for a regional oriented transit mall to also serve as an attractive pedestrian/retail environment because the nature of its use is to move people in and out quickly. As such it is the antithesis of a destination where people congregate and stroll. This is an inherent contradiction that people intuitively understand and therefore they behave accordingly. Amsterdam provides examples of intensive multi-modal streets, where trolleys share space with buses, bikes, pedestrians, and the occasional auto. However, the large scale regional train systems are not included on these streets.

But here are further considerations:

The Pioneer Courthouse is one of the most important federal buildings in the west, and one of the most architecturally significant buildings in the country. Can you imagine placing a steel fence twelve feet high around it, covering that fence with garish advertising and then placing that fence in constant motion? That is in effect what MAX will do. The building will be lost behind a moving wall of trains and TV personality portraits. The cupola will be obscured by wires and posts. The desired calm of the square will be shattered by the constant energy of moving trains. The postcard shot of the monument will be destroyed by the MAX blur in front of it.

In lieu of a fully realized subway, I have a counter-proposal that I think makes sense and saves dollars: place both north and south bound trains on Sixth Avenue, and send the trains below grade for three blocks from Alder Street to Taylor Street. Place a transit station under Pioneer Square. Close Sixth Avenue to all bus and auto traffic between Alder and Taylor, creating widened sidewalks along glass pavilions that shelter the descending and ascending tracks and trains. This would enable one to connect Pioneer Square directly to the Pioneer Courthouse, creating a unified, two block long public space. This act would justify a renovation to Pioneer Square that would re-orient the square on an un-obstructed view of the Pioneer Courthouse. I would continue the arc of the square on the north side to create symmetry on axis with the Courthouse. I would place the principal entrance to the underground transit station at the site of the old bookstore entrance. Further changes to the square could open up the corners, create a dining terrace, provide permanent shelter for food venders, and create a real fountain in the place of the one that flanks the entrance to the restrooms. (Restrooms would be accessed from the transit station and would no longer be on axis with the cupola or flanked by waterfalls--a very peculiar metaphor indeed).

By using only one street to accomplish the light rail function, half the disruption (and cost?)of the project might be avoided. Those savings could be applied to pay for the short subway and improvements to the square.

What other firms or projects in Portland do you like other than your own?

I like Holst's Belmont Lofts, Skylab's new digs, and Doug Fir. I like the Eliot Tower by ZGF. I think that the Portland Art Museum's new addition, with the sculpture court and space between, the Eliot to the west and the church tower to the east comprise one of the best urban spaces on the west coast. I like ZGF's work at OHSU. (I am not impressed by the new hospital with the funny canted side). River Campus Building One by GBD is the most remarkable building on the skyline, and a landmark in sustainable design. I anticipate the Metropolitan tower will set a new standard for high rise condos in the Pearl. I look forward to work from Bill Neburka of Works Architecture, and Gary Larson of MulvannyG2. I would greatly appreciate seeing Gary's work published such as his Pasco Baking Co. and the GranPac Building--both in north Portland. They are extremely elegant in form, function and composition.

Who have you learned a lot about architecture from?
Thomas Hacker, Earl Morisund (UofO), John Cava, and Bill Hawkins have taught me the most. In many ways I think John Yeon was Portland's most talented/sensitive architect, and Pietro Beluschi, Portland's most talented/visionary architect. I think Frasca's early work is extremely strong and beautiful.

What's your favorite city other than Portland?

Right now it is Torino. It combines the grandeur of Paris with the sensibility of Italy. It is the best model for Portland I have yet seen. A great city on a river, with hills to one side and mountains to the other, it has parks, piazzas, grand arcades, great streets, trolleys, and neighborhoods. NBC is doing a fantastic job of showcasing the city.

I love Paris and Nice. And of course I love the cities of Rome and Venice...how can you beat that? But I always think in terms of Portland and what is relevant to Portland. I have just returned from Amsterdam and Torino. Amsterdam and the Netherlands are amazing. Portland can learn a lot from the Netherlands regarding transportation systems, urban planning, architecture and of course, its bike culture...but for style and scale,(as well as food and wine), I think Torino is the place to emulate.

Potestio on Potestio...and Burnside

I’ve been meaning for several months to publish more interviews with architects and other members of the architecture community.

I chose Rick Potestio first because I think he’s long proven to be a very talented architect - he's won numerous design awards - and also because he has recently made the transition to a larger local firm (Mahlum Architects) after many years running his own shop.

Additionally, Rick has a lot to say about the proposed Burnside-Couch couplet; even if you disagree with him (he’s against the proposal), it’s worth hearing what he has to say. I’m actually breaking this interview into two parts and will plan to publish the second half, in which we discuss the proposed Transit Mall redesign and a few other things, on Monday.

Some cynics out there may point out that I’ve already written about Rick Potestio a couple times in the past. But hopefully this is merely the first in a series of interviews to appear on the site. And if anyone would like to suggest a future candidate, I’m always looking for ideas.

This interview was conducted by email.

You recently made the transition from running your own small firm for many years to becoming a principal at a larger firm. What have been some of the rewarding and challenging aspects of that?

It’s a rewarding opportunity to work on larger projects and project types, particularly public projects: university buildings, health care projects and large scale mixed-use urban projects. I also appreciate having the resources of a large firm.

It’s challenging learning how to work within a larger corporate structure, where I am not the solely responsible person. I also must earn the trust and respect of people whom I have not had a hand in hiring and integrate into a system that I have not created. I held my office to very high standards and rigorous behavior. And I held my clients to very high values and aspirations. The challenge is to activate the corporate structure now and infuse it with the same sense of urgency and immediacy typical of a small office.

What project(s) have you been working on so far, or will you be working on in the near future?

Ziba Design World Headquarters is the most exciting project. However there are many great projects. The Ganz law office in Hillsboro will be a great midsized project on a wetlands-adjacent site in the Intel district. There’s a high-rise condo project (don’t remember the latest name) in downtown Sacramento near where Liebeskind will have a building. Also a gallery/addition to a house formerly owned by [restaurateur] Bruce Carey, now owned by German sculptor Julia Mangold and Bob Feldman of Parasol Press a premiere fine art printer in the US. We will do it in conjunction with Stefan Braunfels, designer of the German Bundestag, the Paul Lobe Haus and The Marie Elisabeth Luders Haus in Berlin and the Pinakothek Der Modern in Munich. It is a great honor for Mahlum to be the local architect on this project. Also a new clinic prototype for Providence Medical Group with their first building on Interstate; working on planning for Linfield, Willamette and other colleges/universities; a remodel of a Van Evra Bailey house in Fairmont; and we have qualifications package into a developer in New York City for medical research and office work for Columbia University.

You've gone on record in a few places against the proposed Burnside-Couch couplet. What's the just of your argument?

My fundamental objection is that this project is being proposed without any master plan in place for the city. No big-picture version has been produced by the planning department or any others. Therefore it is inappropriate to propose such radical readjustment to the most important street in the city without understanding the big picture.

Burnside connects east and west, mountain to river, hill to valley. It is also the seam of north and south and therefore connects them too, despite the rhetoric to the contrary. As a street, it acts like a boulevard: not only a transportation spine, but the communication spine of the city. It is the one street common to the whole city, and therefore is its conceptual, experiential and physical spine, with the highest and broadest concentration of economic, cultural activity on it or within five blocks of it.

No other street serves this function, nor can a couplet do so, for in order for it to be the best activity connector that it is, it must be egalitarian. It must connect east to west and west to east equally. It must serve north and south not only by movement across it, but by collecting movement to it.

To disengage it would be to destroy its role in the city. Would Paris re-route half the traffic off the Champs Elysees and block the views of the Louvre and the Arc? Would San Francisco do the same for Columbus or Market Streets? What about Los Angeles and Hollywood Boulevard?I do not believe a one-way street can ever play a significant urban unifying and figurative role; the rest of the arguments, pro or con, regarding the couplet are really technical.

Although the proposal reduces capacity overall, it is disjointed, causing indirect flow in the west direction. It also does not address bottlenecks/limitations of capacity on the bridge and west of I-405 , floods Couch’s pedestrian-friendly environment with traffic, does not extend so-called fixes for the entire street, does not address the issues raised in a consistent manner, is based on so-called facts that are not evident in reality (such as the statement that the narrow sidewalks discourage use, while statistics and observation state it is the most walked upon round-the-clock street in the city), widens sidewalks in front of all the human servicesentities, which suggests more loitering room for the group of people that the West Hills/suburban shopper avoids. Proponents argure that the couplet increases efficient movement of traffic-however it reduces the total lanes on two streets from 6 to 4. Is the capacity reduced or increased?

My intent in raising this point is to question how the couplet will address what many percieve as an un-attractive environment. Does the couplet seek to improve the environment of the population served by the institutions located in the area or does it disregard them with visions of sidewalk cafes?

Another South Waterfront Headline

Oregonian reporter Dylan Rivera, whose expose of major funding gaps for the the OHSU-to-South Waterfront tram helped ignite controversy over that project, is back with a lengthy and high-profile story about additional funding problems with infrastructure, parks and other components of the neighborhood.

The contention this time around is that developers and the city have not performed proper “due diligence” in finding the funds for the ambitious amenities that will make this not just a collection of highrises, but a vibrant neighborhood that avoids major traffic problems.

As I write this, I’m actually in a business trip in Washington, DC. Even though I can read any newspaper article online as easily as I can pick up my morning paper, somehow with the physical distance I hesitate to delve into a long soliloquy about whether such parties as Williams & Dame Development have or have not done their job when it comes to working out their accounting.

That said, the just I get from Rivera’s article is that however big the typeface may be on the newspaper headline, this isn’t a major scoop uncovering any kind of surprise.

A case in point is this three-paragraph passage from Rivera’s article:

“For years, the PDC and city planners have said their aims for civic improvements for the $1.9 billion extension of downtown far exceeded their financial grasp -- at least in the near term. And while the City Council has stated that it stands by the aim of a lush, mixed-income district, it has not committed to specific funding or deadlines for many elements.”

“The construction of high-rise condos and research facilities, PDC and city planners have said, will generate urban-renewal tax dollars that will be spent to develop the neighborhood's amenities. Moreover, the city and OHSU expect continued success in winning federal and state tax allocations and grants for the project.”

“Larry Brown, a PDC planner overseeing the development, said the funding gaps are different from the tram's cost overrun."

It kind of sounds to me like one of those mob movies where one guy’s yelling, ‘Where’s my f---ing money?!” And the other guy's, stammering, “It’s coming! It’s coming!” In other words, a cliche.

I don’t mean to say there’s nothing substantive to Rivera’s article. It’s good a reporter is on the scent of this billion-dollar development and holding developers and the city accountable in such a mammoth undertaking.

Yet I think considering the scale of South Waterfront, and the fact that it’s a neighborhood being built from scratch, there’s really just no way that the men and women building it won’t run into some pratfalls along the way. Some of this they just have to figure out along the way. However dangerous it sounds, a building campaign like this has to be somewhat of an exploration.

Do Williams & Dame and the others building South Waterfront have every last dollar in place for all the parks, roads, trains and affordable housing provisions? It sounds like they may not. And it’s a good thing that Rivera’s article is pointing the spotlight on such matters.

But as I’ve said before about the tram, it’s vitally important we take a long view of things. As the passage from Rivera’s article I cited indicates, the taxes generated by all these tiny million-dollar condos in the sky will go a very long way toward making South Waterfront a pleasant, well-functioning neighborhood. If it turns out that the greenway along the Willamette isn’t delivered properly, or there aren’t the proper amount of affordable housing units there, then we have a big problem.

But after several decades of fits and starts building South Waterfront, I’m personally willing to cut these guys a little slack. Not slack in the sense of omitting our collective watchful eye, but slack in the sense of refusing to be swayed by big headlines that imply there are Keystone Cops building our big new stretch of downtown. Sure, we check our stats at halftime and during time-outs, but we also keep our eye on the ball.

Lovejoy Columns Update

Yesterday I spoke by phone with James Harrison, the local artist who, as many know, has long been an unofficial caretaker of the Lovejoy Columns, the former Lovejoy Bridge onramp columns onto which railroad worker Tom Stefopolous painted numerous intriguingly beautiful murals in the first half of the last century.

Some readers may recall from a previous post I wrote a few months ago that, for the first time since the ramp was demolished, the columns have been on display in public—well, sort of. They’re standing in the plaza of the Elizabeth Lofts in the Pearl District, the space having been offered by developer John Carroll. But because there is uncertainty (and some outright disagreement) about whether the columns’ artwork can survive outside and uncovered, the columns are currently wearing a protective exterior cover. But it’s an evocative cover, with photographic duplications of the actual painted surface. From a distance you get the same effect. And there’s also written information on the columns telling their story.

Last heard, the Portland Development Commission and the Regional Arts & Culture Council had become involved with the Lovejoy Columns preservation effort. Which is great, considering the city’s resources. But along the way, those agencies came to the conclusion that the proper way to save the artwork was to remove it from the columns. I know they had the best interest of the columns at heart, but as you can imagine, that seemed to many like a very unfortunate prospect. In fact, I felt then and continue to do now that the context of those columns should be considered indispensable to the artwork. In other words, uh…please don’t get out the saw just yet.

Harrison tells me that now the city has stepped back from that position and has now agreed to conduct new tests by an outside party to determine whether the columns can indeed survive outside without deteriorating unacceptably. For what it’s worth, Harrison also told me the original conservator of the columns, who also oversaw preservation of the Astoria Column, believes they would be fine outside, that while you can never guarantee any columns or sculptures outdoors won’t deteriorate a little bit, that columns would survive like so many other works do.

It’s unclear just when these tests will take place, but the fate of the Lovejoy Columns appears to be on hold until the results are released. Either way, though, let’s hope the idea of removing the artwork from their columns is now history

From Iceland to Rain Land

I don't always do a bang-up job when it comes to publicizing architecture-related public events, but there's a lecture coming up tomorrow night at Portland State University that's certainly worth a mention.

Steve Christer, of the Icelandic architecture firm Studio Granda, will present recent work and talk about design in the context of the natural landscape and culture of Iceland. Working in a harsh, primeval landscape of rock, sea and sky, his work is a gutsy and sensuous synthesis of spatial interplay and tactile materiality.  Studio Granda has designed some very prominent works, including Reykjavik City Hall (1992, pictured), the Supreme Court of Iceland (1996) and the Reykjavik Art Museum (2001).

The lecture is free and open to the public and will be held at 7:30 pm in Room 212 Shattuck Hall on the PSU campus.

From the press release:

Often set in sites of apparent desolation, Studio Granda's work, which ranges from public monuments to small-scale residences, mediate and interpret the potency of nature and man's inherent need to establish a presence on the land. As Steve Christer explains, "In the far north an untouched wilderness ripples treeless to the horizon. The ground still bears the scars of its formation and is softened only by the thinnest veneer of lichen and moss. One is critically aware that each footstep on this fragile surface is the first footstep it has ever endured and is the start of a process of erasure that is often irrevocably concluded by construction. The practice of architecture should always challenge preconceptions and egoistic goals but in this environment the fundamental challenge is how to live with the landscape before we succeed in destroying it."

And because Studio Granda's work is so impressive, and at least by tomorrow Christer will have presumably had a positive introduction to Portland, it begs the question: Why doesn't somebody have the firm design something in town? Obviously you'd need to partner Granda with a local firm that understands American building practices. And it goes without saying that we have plenty of talented architects here that deserve good commissions too. But I think having architects from the rest of the United States and the world working here on occasion would really enrich local architecture.

Merryman and Brown Named AIA Fellows

The American Institute of Architects has elevated Portland architect Nancy Merryman of Robertson, Merryman, Barnes Architects and Eugene's G.Z. "Charlie" Brown, of the University of Oregon's Department of Architecture, to its prestigious College of Fellows, an honor awarded to members who have made significant contributions to the profession. Having FAIA behind your name forever means you're an architect who's really done something special.

The elevation to fellowship is conferred on architects with at least 10 years of membership in the AIA who have made significant contributions in one of five areas. 

Merryman, who is also serving as 2006 AIA Portland chapter president, was honored in the category of "Advancing the living standards of people through an improved environment." Indeed, Robertson, Merryman, Barnes has been involved with the design numerous projects that have improved the local communities in which they're built, such as Douglas Meadows and Columbia Villa housing projects as well as numerous churches and nonprofit centers. Robertson, Merryman, Barnes has received some bad publicity in recent years (and undeservedly so) because of their involvement with the Portland Classical Chinese Garden and, more specifically, the constant leaks in its pond. But they're an excellent firm, and the only one in Portland in which all the firm principals are women--including another AIA Fellow, Linda Barnes.

Brown has been mentioned a few times on this blog before. In addition to heading UO's Energy Studies In Buildings Laboratory in the Department of Architecture, he also heads the BetterBricks Integrated Design Lab in Portland, where architects can model the daylighting properties and other crucial aspects of high performance buildings. Brown also co-wrote the acclaimed and influential book Sun, Wind and Light as well as a recent BetterBricks book-length publication about natural ventilation in Northwest buildings. For his AIA fellowship, the Yale-educated Brown was honored in the category of "Advancing the science and art of planning and building by advancing the standards of architectural education, training and practice."

Congratulations to Nancy and to Charlie, and to their Fellowship sponsors, Bud Oringdulph, FAIA and Bob Frasca, FAIA.

One Year Anniversary

Today marks one year since the Portland Architecture weblog began. I'll keep this short and sweet, but a sincere thank you goes out to all of you for the 107,873 site visits since February 16, 2005. (If you're counting, that averages out to 295 per day, or about 400 per weekday.) Thanks also to AIA/Portland for their ongoing sponsorship, as well as those smart, generous, good-looking folks who have advertised on the site.

As always, the goal of Portland Architecture is to generate a constructive and entertaining dialogue about the local design industry. Topic suggestions are always welcome, and although I've written every word so far, guest contributions are something I'm increasingly interested in pursuing. Got something interesting to say about architecture in Portland? Drop me an email.

Meanwhile, thanks again to all of you for dropping by.

Fractals and the Eliot Tower

Bear with me, because this might not sound like it’s about architecture at first. But it is—really.

In the Science section of today’s Oregonian, Richard L. Hill reports on University of Oregon physics professor Richard P. Taylor. (Why do people have to include their middle initials like that? A handwriting expert once told me it was a subtle demonstration of vanity.)

Taylor first was profiled in the paper a year or two ago regarding his pioneering studies of fractals, which Hill describes as:

“…the irregular geometric patterns that repeat themselves on different scales within the same object…Fractals represent mathematical equations that can be used for studying unpredictable patterns that are in trees, clouds, waves, coastlines and the human body. For example, a fern is fractal because each frond is composed of smaller fronds, each a miniature but not necessarily an identical copy of the whole.”

In today’s article, Hill writes about professor Taylor’s involvement in an art-world controversy over the authenticity of some paintings recently discovered that may or may not be the work of Jackson Pollack. The previous article on Taylor was more focused on explaining how fractals occur not only in nature, but also in certain works of art, most notably Pollack’s “drip paintings”.

Although his technique seems haphazard because paint is splattered in freefall onto the canvas instead of applied meticulously with a brush, Pollack clearly had a very precise idea of what he was doing. Whether he knew it consciously or not, the artist had a sense of how the geometry of nature and how we respond to it.

In other words, what’s interesting about fractals is how humans have evolved over millions of years to be soothed by them. Look at a fractal pattern and at the very least on some intrinsic cognitive level, and quite possibly in a more noticeable way too, you’re going to find it pleasing. I don’t mean like ice cream Sunday pleasing, but kinda nice.

The reason I mention all this on an architecture blog is because today, while riding my bike downtown on a picture-postcard sunny afternoon, I happened to be near the Eliot Tower, which is in its last few months of construction at Jefferson between 10th and 11th in the West End. (John Carroll is the developer, Ankrom Moisan also contributed design work, principally on the interior as I understand--and Howard S. Wright is the general contractor. Benson Glass is among the key subcontractors.)

I happen to be working on an article about the Eliot’s principal architect, Zimmer Gunsul Frasca (more on that in a few weeks). In interviewing the project’s lead designer, Gene Sandoval, we talked about the pattern-making that happens with the exterior of a building. Architects are in a sense putting a puzzle together, playing with different ratios of glass and solid materials like metal or masonry according to the needs of the occupants on the inside.

The Eliot is just the latest building to do so, but I find it interesting the kind of pattern-making that’s going on with its interplay of transparent glass (windows) and shadow boxes (the portions where behind the glass is solid material like metal or masonry in order to meet energy-code restrictions on how much transparent glass you can have).

I can’t tell you yet how I think the Eliot succeeds or fails in the total sense as a building, but I find the patterns of its façade really interesting. Like the Adidas headquarters on North Greeley, designed a few years ago by BOORA, the Eliot’s exterior skin is reminiscent of an abstract painting. More so than Adidas, though, the Eliot almost seems like a fractal pattern. The building’s rectangular windows and shadow boxes nearly mirror the form of the overall building mass.

(Incidentally, the rendering I included with this post doesn't adequately show the pattern I'm talking about. I'll try to update the post with a photo of my own soon.)

It should go without saying that the pattern of its exterior is just one aspect of a building’s overall architectural merit. But as it nears completion this spring, I think the Eliot has a kind of magnetic quality that I have to really commend ZGF for.

And more broadly, I think projects like the Eliot as well as the as-yet-unnamed, 29-story tower ZGF is designing for Gerding/Edlen Development and parking magnate Greg Goodman, illustrate an increasingly interesting aspect of the artistic side of architecture. Naturally these facade patterns aren't worth doing unless they work for the people on the inside, but I like that these buildings are going for something more abstract, and less symmetrical. Personally, I can think of some other condos that could have benefitted from this kind of effort.

Dwelling on a Cool House

Dwell magazine has done more in the last few years to bring contemporary architecture to the masses and make it popular as a more mainstream style, than any other person or institution I can think of. Without relying on perfect bouquets and fruit bowls, the magazine offers simple, compelling stories of people living in warm, inviting spaces that happen to be rendered in a crisp, modern style.

And while Portland is not necessarily known for a great collection of modernist houses, at least compared to the Hamptons or Palm Springs, this month’s issue of Dwell, local writer Matthew Stadler (who doubles as editor of the wonderful Clearcut Press) features a Portland home owned and by Stefan and Nicol Andrén, who relocated here in 2003 from Milan, Italy. Nicole actually designed the house herself (she studied architecture before moving into advertising at Wieden + Kennedy).

Situated on Skyline Boulevard in the West Hills, the house—called Skybox—is a simple, boxy configuration glass and of stained cedar, looking out onto a forest view. There are windows of all different sizes, and the main living area uses an X-shaped crisscross of steel cables providing extra structural support, while also forging a nice pattern in the glass.

It’s enough to forgive them for choosing the cow-skin option for their otherwise gorgeous Mies recliner.

Marketing Urbanism

The other day I was standing at the Pioneer Courthouse Square MAX stop when three scooters rode by, each pulling a small billboard on a trailer. The billboards were advertising The Harrison, the re-christened name of the Portland Center Apartments at 2nd and Harrison downtown that are being converted into condominiums. The building couldn’t be seen anywhere on the ads, but there was a gorgeous black and white nighttime shot of downtown. After all, you don’t sell the steak—the old advertising cliché goes—you sell the sizzle.

Of course other condominiums don’t just have a fancy website, but also a special showroom with models of the project and a full mockup of different kitchen and bedroom amenities. And the South Waterfront neighborhood has gone even further, with an entire Discovery Center that helps advertise and sell the whole area. The developers even brought in Ziba Design, heretofore known more as an acclaimed industrial design firm, to help craft the entire experience. And Ziba, in turn, is using that project as a springboard to designing lobbies and other environments with meticulous care and style.

In all of these cases, the features of the building—inside and out—are part of a broader appeal to buyers that urges them to take the plunge into urban living. On countless project websites and brochures, the walkability and easy access to parks, restaurants and the arts as almost as much of a selling point as the granite countertops and bamboo floors.

In one sense, you have to laugh at the marketing. After all, the notion of many people living in the downtown core is relatively new. But it’s interesting to see how quickly marketing and advertising gurus have zeroed in on the optimism of this burgeoning era of people flocking en masse to high-density residences. Even out in the suburbs they sell places like Orenco Station and The Round as urban-like places.

In the case of The Harrison, it’s not even a new building that they’re marketing—just a makeover and a switch from rental apartments to tenant-owned condominiums. Granted, the original was designed in the 1960s by the legendary national firm Skidmore Owings Merrill. But until recently, it was an old apartment building with cheap rent that no one outside of its tenants paid any attention to. Now a two-bedroom condo starts at $285,000.

You tell me: A crazy fad or an era with staying power?

Schools As True Community Centers

A couple nights ago I attended a basketball game at Tigard High School. I’d never have expected to be there, since I never even set foot in my own nearby alma mater, and this was smack in the kind of auto-oriented, single-use-zoned suburban environment I dislike. (I even thought about taunting Tigard's team with suburban jibes: "Hey fellas, will it be Applebees or Chili's after the game? Hope your SUV can fit inside the parking spaces!") But an old friend was coaching the opposing team, Woodburn, so I went to cheer him on.

When we got to Tigard HS, the place was absolutely packed. There were three different events happening that same evening: the b-ball game, a music performance in the adjacent auditorium, and a soccer game outside. Nowhere else in the low-density Tigard/Durham area was there any sense of collective activity, but here you sensed people come together often.

It got me thinking: Schools throughout greater Portland have faced funding difficulties, especially as you get closer to the urban core. We’ve tried all sorts of funding mechanisms, but ultimately the voters usually reject the necessary taxes to adequately fund education. At the same time, with schools usually occupying large land parcels, I wonder if more could be done to make schools mixed-use facilities that enhance this notion of being community centers, while at the same time bringing in extra revenue.

Take a school like Jefferson or Grant in Northeast Portland. Maybe it wouldn’t pencil out today, but what if in the future we looked at building a new kind of school where the building is shared with retail, offices, even residential? Instead of a single, two or three-story building for classes, administration and other school-only uses, you could build a new multi-story structure that could be rented out for various purposes. You could provide lower-income housing on the altruistic side, or you could take advantage of the gentrification happening in this area by renting out higher-end apartments.

Ultimately it doesn’t even really matter what the uses would be, for the point is that schools could take better financial advantage of the land they own and occupy.

At the same time, schools could use this higher-density space not just economically, but also to foster even better integration with the community. You could have social services there, or arts facilities: people and institutions that might interact with students in a positive way.

If you haven’t already guessed, I’m just thinking out loud here. What do the rest of you think of such a proposal? What are the pros and cons?

I’m certainly not saying that Tigard and its high school are a model for Portland to follow—not at all. But with education so perilously under-funded and our higher-density future in the metro area making the land an ever-more precious commodity, I think it’s time we  re-think what the physical makeup of schools can be.

Architects In Schools

Last Saturday brought the annual Architects In Schools event at the Architectural Heritage Center, sponsored by the Architecture Foundation of Oregon and the American Institute of Architects/Portland Chapter. Twenty pairs of architects and teachers were there, as were many kids, for a full-day session that introduced lesson plans and exercises designed to used design and architecture as a curriculum builder.

I’d already been familiar with the Architects In Schools’ job-shadow day, in which scores of high school and middle school kids spend the day with a host of local architects. But recently I was able to get ahold of the nearly 300-page curriculum that the AFOregon and AIA/Portland have created for schools.

The Architects In Schools program dates to the original Earth Day in 1972, and was spearheaded by renowned local architect Marjorie Wintermute, FAIA. Wintermute also wrote much of the curriculum and provided the numerous illustrations.

Perusing the curriculum guide, I was astonished at how much information it provides. There are introductions to many Native American tribes of the Northwest, with diagrams of how their different structures are built: the sweat lodge common to the plateau tribes, the and the gras-matted wickiup more common on the Great Basin.

The curriculum of course then moves into the architecture of local pioneers, with detailed explanations of interlocking and notched configurations of log buildings, and then continues to such established vernaculars as the Colonian, Gothic Revival, Queen Anne, Prarie, Victorian, Tudor, and Georgian before concluding with, modern, postmodern, sustainable and other contemporary forms.

Beyond just listing styles and histories, the curriculum also teaches practical considerations for getting buildings built. For example, there is an exercise in which the goal is simply to make a mask, but the process teaches the relationships between architect, owner and contractor. As AFO executive director Jane Jarrett explained to me, “Each person decides what they want their mask to be like; they describe it to the next person who draws it up and writes down instructions for the third person who constructs it, and gives it back to the 'owner'.  Kids learn a lot about articulating their
ideas, and the teamwork that's necessary to create a complex project.”

Congratulations to the AFO, AIA and all the volunteers who have made this curriculum and these events possible. Many of the important architectural and urbanistic issues we adults face today would greatly benefit from a more informed community when it comes to the challenges, history and possibilities of good design and healthy process.

The International Architectureof Yost Grube Hall

In today’s Oregonian, Angie Chuang reports that Yost Grube Hall is designing the new American University of Afghanistan in Kabul. It will be that country’s first private university. And, if successful, the $35 million, 42-acre project will represent a new chapter for Afghanistan based on peace, learning, and cross-cultural exchange.

I’ve long been meaning to write about YGH’s portfolio of international projects, which also includes work in Botswana, Kazakhstan, Nigeria and other countries. This dates back to German-born co-founding principal Joachim Grube (yoo-WALK-em GROO-buh), who in 1961 worked as an architect for UNESCO’s Regional School Planning Center in Khartoum, Sudan. That allowed Grube and YGH, over the years, to secure overseas contracts with a host of governments and corporations. I can’t begin to imagine some of the logistical difficulties that come with such work, and one has to commend YGH for delivering them.

Following today’s article, I had hoped to post some renderings of the new Afghanistan project, but YGH tells me those are not quite ready for public viewing just yet. But chances are you haven’t seen some of the firm’s other recent international work, so I’m posting a couple of those images instead.

First, there is the Tengizchevroil office building in Kazadkstan, a 310,000 square foot office building for Chevron. To me it has some of the modernist iconography of midcentury Soviet architecture, but it also has a warmth of materials that is more indicative of Portland. (YGH collaborated with Pietro Belluschi on several of his late churches.)

More recently, YGH has designed the new US embassy in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, which is quickly becoming a very important strategic base of operations for the US military with allies like Saudi Arabia becoming unstable. The design does something very clever: With security of paramount importance, the building needs to be a kind of fortress. But it also needs to respect the historic context of Islamic architecture, and YGH’s design does so by embracing the courtyard vernacular with a series of outdoor rooms on the interior portion of the complex. Which, as it happens, is particularly secure.

Congrats to YGH on the University of Afghanistan project. And if there are other Portland firms with international projects to share, I’ll be happy to post them.

Wood for the Trees: Randy Leonard, Tom McCall and A Long View of the Tram

It was hard to miss today’s multi-column, large-print headline on The Oregonian‘s front page about how the Portland Aerial Tram’s estimated cost has risen once again, from $45 to $55 million, after results were released yesterday of engineering firm Pinnell/Busch’s independent study for the Portland Development Commission.

Indignation amongst elected officials and media pundits is running high right now. At the end of Ryan Frank’s report in today’s paper, for example, Commissioner Randy Leonard was quoted as saying if OHSU doesn’t pay for the latest cost overrun, some $10 million, “we’ll back up a tow truck and hook it up to the pilings and pull them out.”

As it happens, the words of another elected official—only one who was apparently much more of a true statesman—have been on my mind: Tom McCall.

Recently I found myself reading a Wikipedia online encyclopedia entry about the history of Pioneer Courthouse Square. It describes how funding problems surfaced after the international design competition for that project was completed. Mayor Frank Ivancie was among those who opposed Will Martin’s wonderful design, now a beloved Portland landmark. It was at this time that McCall, the legendary former governor, delivered a commentary on KATU news, saying:

“It would be a shock ... to many Oregonians to learn that a few power brokers have declared that the result of a nationwide design rivalry is meaningless...”

I’ve tried for several days to verify the accuracy of that quote, because as many know, Wikipedia can be factually suspect due to the fact that anyone is allowed to change or rewrite its online encyclopedia entries. But assuming it is even close to what McCall said, the quote should serve as a reminder of how short-sighted it will be of us if the tram is sacrificed to the fury of budget squabbles.

Of course it would be ludicrous to argue that $55 million isn’t a huge amount of money to spend. But assuming the tram does indeed get built, I still resolutely argue that this lynchpin of a multi-billion-dollar, high-density neighborhood and biosciences campus comprises one of the most important and most worthy public transportation projects in the city’s history.

As OHSU, PDC, and private developers in South Waterfront squabble over who will make up the budget gap, it’s easy to get sucked in to the notion of an exploding scandal. But remember the old cliché that journalism is the first draft of history—one likely to be rewritten several more times as we gain the vantage point of hindsight. And the difference between a politician and a leader comes in large part from the vision and courage to recognize what’s important for the populace not just today or tomorrow, but a generation from now.