Portland Architecture

Street Trees, Gentrification and Dim Sum

The Chinese restaurants may be moving out, with the flophouses presumably not far behind. But change is underway in Old Town and Chinatown thanks to a series of street improvements on Northwest Third and Fourth Avenues that will significantly affect neighborhood revitalization.

First there are more than 125 new street trees, many of which are of Asian origin and extend the botanical theme from the Chinese Classical Gardens into the neighborhood.  The tree planting plan was designed by Nevue Ngan Associates and has a pattern of two species on each block featuring bookended by gingko trees near the corners with another flowering tree species between them.

Between Third and Fourth Avenues on Northwest Davis and Flanders Streets are what are called festival streets, which are constructed without curbs; instead, black granite bollards delineate the boundary between sidewalk and roadway. Efforts are already underway to plan the first major festival as part of the grand opening of the project late next summer.

There is also public art, in the form of twenty bronze plaques along the sidewalks. Designed by Portlander Suenn Ho, they include anecdotes about the neighborhood selected by Dr Jackie Peterson from oral histories collected by the Old Town History Project. Each plaque also depicts a flower or plant with certain ethnic/cultural significance to the neighborhood. The Regional Arts and Culture Council has commissioned eight public art “lanterns” for the project area from sculptor Brian Goldbloom.

A nicer streetscape is almost always worth the investment because of how it prompts socio-commercial development in the area. In Old Town/Chinatown, of course, that can be a double-edged sword because this has long been a low-income or, perhaps more accurately, no-income area. Can condos and shelters co-exist?

Major changes are already well underway here, with art galleries and restaurants moving in. I’ll be very curious to see what Old Town/Chinatown looks like in ten years. Will all of Chinatown have moved to the 82nd Avenue area by then? What a shame that would be, both for that community and for all of the central city. Will Old Town retain that hallowed seediness that has inspired more than one Gus Van Sant film? Or will it just become the latest victim/beneficiary of the SoHo effect?

It’s not that I blame gentrification on street improvements, though. The infrastructure desperately needed improvement. I may worry about Old Town/Chinatown losing its historic character, but the real estate value of a neighborhood adjacent to both downtown and the Pearl and mere blocks from the riverfront simply can’t sit underutilized. I just hope you’ll always be able to find good dim sum.

John Carroll: Sultan of the Streetcar

In an interview with the Daily Journal of Commerce’s Kennedy Smith published last week, developer John Carroll has some candid things to say about Portland.

At the best of the Loeb Foundation and Bruner Foundation, Carroll has been touring East Coast cities such as Baltimore and Washington, touting the potential of streetcars. As president of Portland Streetcar, Inc., Carroll was the recipient of the Bruner Foundation's 2005 gold medal, which annually recognizes the project that best contributes to the livability of American cities.

What we've done is shared our story from a development standpoint. I'm a private developer, I take risks along with the other developers in the community, and we try to tell our story, which is that a streetcar is a commitment. It adds permanence. It's a catalyst to development and activity. It's not going to be like one day a streetcar shows up and there's all this activity in your neighborhood. It's a product of coordination. And so there's that recurring theme. How is it going to work in our neighborhood?

When I went to Baltimore, we started downtown and moved up along the street to Johns Hopkins University, and they want to put the streetcar there. I sat in a room with developers and property owners and big businesses, and they said, "How is this going to work?" I just wanted to run out of the door and find the first for-sale sign on the alignment, because if they put a streetcar there, I know what it's going to do.

Carroll, a pioneering Pearl District developer behind the Chown Pella Lofts, Mackenzie Lofts, The Gregory and The Elizabeth, also was asked what his mindset is when developing a new building. Smith, the interviewer, had suggested that for all the Pearl’s success as urban placemmaking, it all starts to look the same after a while.

I think it's a balancing act, absolutely. When we did the Chown Pella (Lofts), we didn't want to abandon the (Pearl’s existing) feel. The same with the Mackenzie Lofts: A lot of people didn't want the character to leave, so we work very hard to keep that. The best compliment I can get is, "What a great rehab."

With the Gregory, I didn't like the squat nature of the building, and we proposed to shorten it 20 feet on either end and build up, but we got rejected on that.

I don’t always love the buildings he has been responsible for, particularly The Gregory and The Elizabeth. And not just because they’re squatty, which was largely out of Carroll’s hands given the height restrictions in that part of the Pearl, but even more so because they has a kind of Disney-esque, skin-deep style, especially the art-deco Gregory.

But Carroll’s next project to be completed, the Eliot Tower by Zimmer Gunsul Frasca (with an assist from Ankrom Moisan), is shaping up to be a very, very handsome building.

In his initial forays with the Pella and Mackenzie projects, Carroll understood the attractiveness of the existing industrial milieu of the Pearl. Later, with the Gregory, there came challenges with height restrictions and exactly how to stylistically render a completely new building. In more recent projects like The Edge and The Eliot, there has been a greater embrace of modern architecture. Which, of course, I think it the right way to go.

But as a thirtysomething contemporary design enthusiasts, I probably don’t have the same taste as a lot of the aging Baby Boomers buying condos. It must be very difficult, if not impossible, to satisfy the entire lot of us.

For all this talk of variety, though, Carroll also has been successful doing projects according to a kind of formula, with similarly proportioned units (often with the bowling-alley-lane shape, which I find problematic but has clearly been successful) and an architect-contractor team of Ankrom Moisan and Howard S. Wright Construction.

His employment of Holst Architecture on The Edge was a great sign, although when that project switched from office to residential in program, he called in GBD to finish the job. With all due respect to GBD, I think the building, while nice, would have been better if John Holmes and Holst had had a chance to see it through.

But as for Carroll, I’m hoping that The Eliot is not only ultimately as nice as it appears to be while under construction, but that there are more projects like it in the future. And not just because it’s on the streetcar, but because it’s an honest, elegant piece of architecture no matter where you build it.

Street of Eames

Although it's not happening until Spring, I wanted to pass on news of a new homes tour in Portland that will provide a nice alternative to some of the McMansion tours out there.

Scheduled for April 8, 2006, the Street of Eames tour will focus exclusively on modern architecture. Midcentury designs by local legends Pietro Belluschi, Van Evera Bailey and Herman Brookman will be included. (What, no John Yeon?) There will be a couple recently-constructed homes as well.

And it's for a great cause: All proceeds from sponsors and ticket sales will go to a Portland Public School program called Project Return, which provides clothing, transportation, school supplies and after-school tutoring to public school students living in Portland's homeless shelters.

It's about time somebody put together a modern homes tour in Portland. The Northwest Modern style practiced by Belluschi, Yeon and others was often times best articulated in private homes that are seldom open to the public. Their availability on this tour will be a real treat.

Designing Community atOleson Woods Apartments

Last Thursday in The Oregonian, Lucianna Lopez wrote a story about the Oleson Woods Apartments, a nicely done affordable housing project in Tigard designed by Carleton/Hart Architecture. It's nice to see a capable small firm like Carleton/Hart get some attention.

I've known co-principal Brian Carleton since he was president of AIA/Portland in 2000 and I worked at the chapter. His partner is Bill Hart, who was once a New York Yankees prospect. Good guys with an interesting portfolio. (If you go to their website, I recommend checking out the unbuilt Black United Fund building.)

Although located near Washington Square mall, the project is adjacent to wetlands and residents have compared living there to being on a retreat. And considering the income restrictions that are part of life here, it’s encouraging to know people struggling to make ends meet are getting a nice place to live too—at least the handful living at Oleson Woods.

For me what’s interesting about the design is not necessarily the aesthetics. The residences are in a row of tall thin units with pointy, pitched roofs—basically a modern interpretation of traditional single family homes in apartment building form. I imagine making multifamily housing look and feel more like a neighborhood of single-family homes is successful with residents. The fantasy of white picket fences still looms large. But from a sculptural point of view, I think the pointed tops emphasize their skinniness. (Although the second row of pitched roofs helps.) Maybe it’s just my own preference, but I’d have rather seen something more boxy with a flat roof: a contemporary style that achieves a sense of warmth through materials, particularly the use of wood, like Holst Architecture’s Belmont Lofts.

What I think is fabulously done by Carleton/Hart with the Olseson Woods Apartments is its place-making. Everything is oriented around a sense of community. Units look out on playgrounds and sustainability-oriented landscaping. Pathways guide you to an onsite community center. And when you live in a suburban area like this where most every aspect of your outside world can only be reached by automobile, it’s got to be a Godsend to live somewhere where you can stretch your legs a bit.

Congratulations to Carleton/Hart on an excellent job. And if there are any other small firms out there reading, you are encouraged to email me with info about your projects.

The Mayor's New Transportation Plan

As reported in Thursday’s Daily Journal of Commerce by Libby Tucker (no relation), Mayor Potter delivered his first speech on transportation recently.

“The city of Portland has not done a good job of ensuring that we have money in the bank to pay for the maintenance of our infrastructure system,” the mayor told a Women's Transportation Seminar luncheon held at the Embassy Suites Hotel, “and certainly transportation is at the head of that list."

But the mayor also eschewed promising any funds to be devoted to that infrastructure. In fact, he made what I find a astonishing suggestion: that we do it ourselves:

"Around Portland, there are people who decide they're going to pave their own streets because the city doesn't have the money to provide all the street paving necessary. I want to encourage citizens, when the city cannot do those kinds of things, to do it for themselves. But I want to work with them to ensure that when they do build a street in their neighborhood, that it's wide enough for a fire truck, that it's stable enough to support heavy equipment and that it drains water off the street properly."

Is this a joke?

Obviously the funds that local government can raise and devote to transportation projects is limited. But is the city really so strapped for money that the mayor is actually encouraging citizens to pave their own streets?

Maybe next, if police funding is down, we could hire vigilantes packing their own guns to keep the peace. Or perhaps we could hook City Hall’s electrical system up to a treadmill that’s manned from 9-5 by various citizens. Maybe we could each pitch in a quarter to have the homeless collect our garbage.

There’s one other possibility, of course: raise taxes. I know it’s blasphemous even to suggest it. But maybe if we each were taxed an extra few pennies per gallon, suddenly the city could actually pave some roads without having to pass around a hat.

BetterBricks Awards

A few days ago the BetterBricks Awards were handed out to recipients in or serving the commercial building industry for their support, use and design of sustainable, high performance buildings.

Criteria for the award are worth listing because they comprise a kind of cheat-sheet for how to build a green building:

• An integrated design approach (with engineers and contractors collaborating with the architect)
• Achieveing substantial energy savings
• Incorporation of daylighting with electrical lighting
• Considering climate when designing ventilation, heating and cooling systems
• Reduced operating/maintenance costs
• Enhanced productivity and support commissioning, which ensures that building systems operate as designed

In the category of architect, this year’s award went to Greg Acker of the City of Portland’s Office of Sustainable Development. Acker has over 30 years of experience designing environmentally-friendly buildings, and in his role with the OSD he’s been instrumental in faciliting other architects’ green buildings and encouraging the public to build greener homes.

There is just one concern I have about Greg getting the award, however: His colleague at OSD, Mike O’Brien, was a member of the jury. Did Mike excuse himself from deliberating about Greg’s reception of the award? Otherwise there seems to be a conflict of interest.

The engineering award went to Andy Frichtl of Interface Engineering. I hesitate to say much about this for fear of my own conflict of interest; I’ve done some work with Interface on a book about River Campus One, which Andy led Interface’s efforts on. But even if I’m biased, I can say that the results for that and other projects (the Ecotrust building, Hillsboro City Hall) Andy has worked on are exceptionally impressive.

And, as the judges said in their official comments, “Andy has taken high performance building to the next level by inspiring others.  He has tirelessly educated his colleagues and younger professionals about the possibilities of sustainable, high performance building.  We need more engineers like Andy Frichtl who make such landmark achievements.”

The BetterBricks award for service providers went to Steve Hathaway, an energy engineer with Siemens Building Technologies. The judges said, “Steve goes beyond the norm to identify and actually achieve significant energy savings for his clients. He has been an eager early adopter of new strategies and approaches, which is evident with his participation in the Building Performance Services (BPS) pilot program.” In other words, he helps people make their existing buildings a lot more efficient in their use of energy—an instrumental part of collective reduced energy for the region.

Commissioner Dan Saltzman was also honored. He was instrumental in creating the Office of Sustainable Development in 2000, one of the first city offices in the nation to address green building.

Congratulations to all the winners.

A Judge's Verdict

Today I exchanged an email with architect Bruce Fowle, FAIA, who was one of three jurors for the recent AIA/Portland Design Awards. Fowle co-founded FX Fowle Architects in New York City and his firm’s projects include the Conde Nast Building @ 4 Times Square, which won the AIA’s 2001 National Honor Award for Design, as well as the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China in Shanghai.

I asked Bruce to reflect on the overall caliber of design in Portland after serving as a juror. Here’s what he had to say:

“I was very impressed by the number of medium to high-density projects that were submitted for awards.  There seems to be a true commitment to enhancing urban environments, both by the architects and their developer clients, and the fact that so many of them were seeking recognition for design is unusual, in my experience.”

“There were a good number of projects submitted that were community-based facilities.  These were well designed and serving a wide variety of social needs - indicating a serious commitment to the well-being of the people of the region.”

“I sensed a strong regional awareness of the importance of architecture and transportation-based planning.  The overall quality of the work was good (if not cutting edge) and much of it demonstrated a genuine concern for the quality of life within Portland's urban fabric.”

“A substantial amount of the work was mixed-use residential infill that appropriately addressed street wall continuity and the creation of a vibrant public realm. It is unfortunate that we could not recognize more of these projects, but by appropriately not calling attention to themselves, and by the repetitive and prescribed nature of such work, they are merely good - not prize winners by the current standard. I was surprised, however, that more submissions were not planning related - perhaps indicating a kind of schism between the architecture and planning communities. If true, this is unfortunate, as neither should be working in isolation.”

“I was a bit disappointed with the projects that were submitted for sustainability - especially given Portland's leadership in this regard. There seemed to be a lack of innovation and strong commitment beyond what was required for a LEED rating.  Perhaps this is the result of LEED's requirement for such a broad range of green initiatives. While that program has been terrific in creating a common language and bringing awareness to the public at large about sustainable design, it should not be looked at as an end in itself. I would love to see next year's design awards go only to those projects committed to at least a minimum degree of sustainability - thereby eliminating a separate sustainability category. Ideally, projects that ignore the sustainability issue should not be honored for design excellence, and conversely, green projects that are not well designed need not apply.”

Obviously these thoughts are coming from someone who only spent a couple of days in our city. But Bruce Fowle is a tremendously capable architect who sifted intensively through scores of local projects here.

I'm particularly interested in what he had to say about sustainability here in Portland. We do a lot of patting ourselves on the back, and for the most part deservedly so. But are we designing too many projects, as Fowle says, that are simply LEED-by-numbers? Regardless, it's a healthy exercise to challenge ourselves as if that accusation were true.

Herbert Dreiseitl on Portland

This morning I interviewed German landscape architect Herbert Dreiseitl, designer of Tanner Springs Park (in association with the excellent local firm Greenworks), for an upcoming magazine article. Before we got talking in particular about his work and the park, Dreiseitl had some interesting things to say about Portland that I wanted to pass on.

In particular, Dreiseitl, whose impressive resume also includes a beautiful reed-festooned embankment along Berlin's Potsdammer Platz that collects rainwater for use in flushing toilets and irrigation, says he likes Portland a lot:

"What I love about visiting in Portland is when I’m there for a little while working on a project and visiting friends, I can use a bicycle. In Europe, we use bicycles a lot and have a very urban life in cities where people sit outside for a good drink or to eat at a good restaurant, and it’s all in walking distance. There’s public life on the streets. The Pearl District has a vibrant life with the old warehouses and the Brewery Blocks and so on. I also think on the other side of the river, where you have more neighborhoods where there are not so rich people living, they’re very friendly and there’s a nice atmosphere on the street."

Relatedly, Dreiseitl also touched on the relationship between architecture and psychology:

"Two weeks ago I was at Harvard for a very interesting symposium on the question, ‘Can design improve life in cities?’ I don’t know what the crime statistics are in Portland, but I think it influences society enormously the idea that you feel welcome in a city. I’m very interested in the social components of design. And I think in Portland you can see immediately the mentality of people changing."

This latter comment is interesting in light of recent troubles Portland has had with a series of shootings. For the short term, people actually seem to be more worried about safety downtown and in Old Town. But in the long term, I think Dreiseitl is right. The more vibrance there is to the city in terms of people being rooted there and living a sizable portion of their lives in public at sidewalk cafes or browsing storefronts, the better off we'll all be in terms of the collective ambiance of the city.

Where to Put Saturday Market

Beginning last week and continuing through tomorrow, the Portland Development Commission is soliciting online public input on a possible future location of Saturday market.

There are six sites being considered, including the current site underneath the Burnside Bridge and around Ankeny Plaza. I was a little surprised to see the current site considered, because I thought the whole point of going through this process was that the current site’s days were numbered. But apparently everything is still in play.

One site being considered is the U&R Blocks along Northwest Broadway between Glisan and Irving, across from the post office and adjacent to Union Station. PDC already owns these two blocks, making transition easier. And it would bring proximity to a future light rail line while straddling the Pearl and Old Town/Chinatown. But PDC might be better served to see this land developed into high-density architecture. I personally would vote ‘no’ on this one.

Another potential site is very close to the U&R Blocks, at Northwest 5th and Hoyt. It would keep Saturday Market officially in Old Town/Chinatown and also have easy MAX access once the new line is extended there from the bus mall. As they put it on the PDC website, the site would have “similar social problems to Old Town”. But for better and worse, I think that’s part of what Saturday Market is all about. This isn’t a mall, and people know that going in. I’d support this site if the market indeed had to move.

A bold and interesting choice, albeit one fraught with potential problems, is the public space between the Rose Garden and Memorial Coliseum. Having Saturday Market here would help jump-start an urban space that is absolutely dead 99% of the time. But it’s hard to imagine Saturday Market there. It’d probably feel like Houston compared to the current location. And with Memorial Coliseum possibly being redeveloped, it’s not a secure long-term solution. And why else would you move the market in the first place if not to have that?

Waterfront Park is also being considered, and as I understand it the specific site would be, like the current site, under the Burnside Bridge—only across Naito Parkway and inside the park itself. Access would be more difficult if many people have to cross Naito. And there are already several major events in the park each year—way too many, in my opinion. But having Saturday Market here would keep it in a centralized urban location with cover provided by the bridge—no small factor. I’m honestly not sure about this one. I believe too much Portland park space is over-programmed, but this site does make some sense other than the Naito issue.

Still another possibility is the Morrison Bridge Blocks, the space between the two ramps. It’s not a very pretty space, but it keeps Saturday Market downtown and near a MAX stop. This seems like a pragmatic solution if the market absolutely has to move but inferior to the current location otherwise.

Finally, there is the South Park Blocks. Logistically this would be tough, with access to utilities, storage, restrooms and parking all compromised. There could be either synergy or conflict with the Farmer’s Market already sited there. But it’s a lot more attractive stretch of land than some of the other locations. Still, I think the Park Blocks would be overwhelmed. I’d veto this one.

In addition to these choices, again, the existing location is still in play. And personally, if it seems possible to keep the market there, why move it? It’s not perfect, and both vendors and customers have not been without complaints over the years. But part of what’s appealing about Saturday Market is the tradition it has established.

Meanwhile, you can cast your vote here (scroll to the bottom of the page). And then be sure to stop by for some hemp clothing or Polish food next time you’re in the area.

The Broken Record: PDC and Accountability

In Thursday's Oregonian Ryan Frank's article described how Mayor Potter is seeking to transform the Portland Development Commission into a more open organization that listens to the public. This is of course a topic that has come up many times in the media since the damning City Club report earlier this year and the ensuing bruhaha over the Burnside Bridgehead project over its initial inclusion of big-bix retail. I think this a drama that's not entirely reality-based.

While it's indeed important that the organization be cognizant of and open to public opinion, ultimately this is but one criteria by which we judge the agency. With all due respect to those who have been frustrated by any closed-door tendencies at PDC, I'm getting a little tired of hearing this issue come up again and again.

Frank writes that "...given the chance to declare his goals for the agency, Potter doesn't mention the skyline-altering projects that his predecessor, Mayor Vera Katz, shepherded into downtown in the Pearl and South Waterfront districts."

Instead, Potter "talks about attracting family-friendly businesses and creating wealth through homeownership. He worries about big-box stores' effect on small shops. He questions long-held commission beliefs: that a taxpayer-subsidized hotel next to the Oregon Convention Center is necessary or that property tax waivers for housing developers help downtown."

There's an implication here that Potter is more in touch with public sentiment while Katz was somehow in the picket of big-project developers. And I don't think that's fair to Katz or PDC.

As for the headquarters hotel idea, quite frankly I'm not sure if that one is necessary or not. But I worry that it's being treated too much as a symbol. Just because a project is big doesn't mean it's not worthwhile. Can you imagine if all PDC did was encourage home ownership and small businesses, like the mayor suggests we focus on? We'd then be accusing the agency of not seeing the big picture or contributing sufficiently to density.

Regarding PDC's efforts in official urban renewal areas like the River District and South Waterfront, or the tax abatement sought for lower-income housing, there seems to be a growing perception that the market success in these neigbhorhoods with multifamily residential projects should make them less of a priority for PDC. But it is precisely the city's involvement that helped transform these neighborhoods from blighted industrial to healthy urban areas.

As the succession of recent Oregonian articles indicates, the notion of an uncaring, out-of-touch bureaucracy being tamed by the will of the people makes a good dramatic story to tell. You'd think Don Mazziotti was Louis XVI and PDC's headquarters were the Bastille. But I think this conversation is becoming a bunch of hot air that has floated above our heads too long.

I'd like to get back to basics. What are we going to build? Where are we going to build it? Who will design it, what will it look like and how will it work? These are the issues that I'm concerned with, and I'll wager many others are too. If forced to decide, I'd rather have an agency fostering good projects and successful developments and a perception of inaccountability than a blessedly open one that's lost its power to do good work. Fortunately we don't have to decide. In my experience, PDC has gone out of its way to solicit public input. I just never paid attention to it until it was put in question, until the focus got off the built environment.

Blade Towers and the Limits of Retail

Yesterday one of the comments made to my post about Block 38, the latest South Waterfront condo tower to be announced, addressed something I've also had on my mind for awhile. With the architecture in that neighborhood taking the form of taller, thinner blade towers set back from the sidewalk with courtyards, what does that mean for the vibrancy of the streetscape?

In downtown, the Pearl District and in certain neighborhood clusters along major avenues, one walks past a near-continuous line of storefronts. Any buildings there are come right up to the sidewalk. But when we transition from bulkier buildings that fill out the circumference of the block to taller, thinner towers, it seems we must necessarily give up our kind of architectural and commercial front-row seat.

Which is not to say I'm arguing against these kinds of blade towers, because in many other ways they're much better for the city. More light reaches the streetscape and building interiors, while the sculptural quality of the buildings is also more attractive.

But while talking with an urban planning friend recently, I was reminded there's another cause and effect happening with retail anyway.

At any given moment, the city can only support so many retail establishments. Sure, maybe Starbucks and Subway franchises seem to multiply like rabbits, but if we keep on building retail spaces, ultimately supply exceeds demand. In fact, the addition of mixed-use buildings with ground-floor retail in the Pearl and elsewhere definitely seems to play a role in the array of empty storefronts downtown.

Of course South Waterfront and other places with blade towers occupying a portion of their horizontal lot will have a host of mixed-use retail establishments. Each condo seems to come with either an adjacent single-story commercial structure or incorporate it into its ground floor. But the fact that not every inch of sidewalk has a storefront in front of it may be for the best--even if sometimes a walled courtyard seems less inherently welcoming than some idyllic mom and pop store.

$3.3 Billion Strong...And Growing

This week many of Portland’s top architects are in Atlanta for the US Green Building Council’s annual Greenbuild conference, which last year was held in Portland to record crowds.

And today at Greenbuild, McGraw-Hill Construction, publisher of Architectural Record and several other publications, released a report indicating the green building market will reach $10-$20 billion over the next five years. The research findings presented in the Green Building SmartMarket Report, as it’s called, show that:

Green building comprised approximately 2% percent of nonresidential construction in 2004, valued at $3.3 billion. By 2010, the green building market is expected to be 5%-10% of nonresidential construction, valued from $10billion - $20billion.

Furthermore, over 70% of a representative sample of architects, engineers, contractors, and building owners anticipate sales growth from green building. And 60% of architects, engineers and contractors are specifying and installing green building products in their construction projects. Operating costs of green buildings expected to be between 8% and 9% lower than other, traditional buildings. Green buildings are expected to have increased values of 7.5%.

Here in Portland, of course, we’re way ahead of the curve. But there are still many lessons to be learned. Many owners and developers are still building with an eye only on first costs. Others have prejudices that green building has to mean wearing sustainability on your sleeve with an ugly cob bench outside. I think many more will come around to sustainability, though, when fossil fuels begin their inevitable supply decline and skyrocketing sales—oh wait, that may be happening already.

Block 38

The latest condo tower in the South Waterfront district has been unveiled to the public. So far it doesn't have a name, other than the temporary Block 38. But it will be the fourth residential project in the neighborhood and fifth overall.

The project is designed by GBD Architects, which is no surprise given the firm's strong relationship with co-developer Gerding-Edlen.

Part of me is tempted to complain that the commission could or should have gone to another firm, one with a stronger design acumen and less service-oriented. But it's not that simple. GBD is certainly no slouch, and I think their work continues to improve. And this is actually the first residential building in South Waterfront that GBD is designing exclusively. (Peter Busby was the lead designer on the Meriwether and GBD was the architect of record. GBD did design OHSU's River Campus One in the South Waterfront.) Of course the firm did already design all five Brewery Blocks for Gerding-Edlen and also has The Casey, an ajacent residential building in that neighborhood, on the way.

I had been under the impression that another firm, BOORA Architects, was possibly in line for the next South Waterfront condo project, but perhaps they will get the next one. Which would be a good move on the developers' part, I think. To me BOORA still produces the best designs among the larger Portland firms. I was also very happy when Thomas Hacker Architects was chosen for the last condo project, Atwater Place. So while GBD is not the boldest choice, I still have faith that Gerding-Edlen and development partner Williams & Dame are open to new architectural avenues and care about the city's built legacy.

In the future, be it in South Waterfront or other sections of town adding to the condo boom, Emmons Architects is a worthy candidate, as is Mahlum Architects now that award-winning designer Rick Potestio is on board. Holst Architecture does truly fabulous work and now has plenty of experience with multifamily residential projects.

Oh, and what about Allied Works, for God's sake? Of course the firm hasn't done much of any multifamily housing, but Brad Cloepfil's burgeoning international reputation and his experience designing numerous striking art museums should speak more than enough to Allied's ability to build a great building in South Waterfront or anywhere else. I am continually perplexed as to why they never get any big Portland commissions. One person in the design community once said to me something to the effect of, "Brad Cloepfil designs unique architecture. When you're designing a condo, it isn't uniqueness that you're after. It's basically a formula." That's true to an extent, but I have every faith that Brad can do great work even with FAR restrictions. Quite honestly, it's ridiculous to even have to have this conversation.

As for Block 38, the image enclosed here represents an unfinished design. But at first glance it looks a lot like the John Ross, which Thompson Vaivoda designed. I'm not saying it's copycat architecture, because the impetus here was clearly in how the curved shape allows more of the coveted views. It was a big success with the John Ross. But still, it's a little disconcerting if we get too much similarity. Having said that, though, this may become a good building.

What's the feeling out there from our architectural peanut gallery?

The Fate of Downtown: Perception, Reality and People

Former state legislator Gretchen Kafoury wrote a commentary in yesterday’s Oregonian that offers a different perspective on our collective sense that downtown is digressing.

Kafoury, now a professor at Portland State, cites statistics showing that, despite the fear generated by the recent string of downtown shootings, crime is down 30 percent since 1996. Retail space rental in the central city has increased since 2003. And unemployment in Portland is also down 6.5 percent from last year.

Of course there are distressing stats as well, such as Portland’s net job loss of nearly 5,000 jobs since 2001. But what I’m interested is not comparing figures so much as the fact that most of us seem to perceive something that may or may not be happening.

On Saturday evening I attended a concert at Schnitzer Hall and, as usual, felt part of an uneasy mix of people. For all those going to concerts, plays or movies downtown, there seems to be almost as many asking for money, screaming wildly to themselves, or huddled asleep in an alleyway. I don’t think it takes merely a suburburban and/or Republican viewpoint to feel uneasy in this environment. Broadway or Morrison Street may be teeming with people one moment, but you come on to an eerily empty North Park Blocks the next.

And to me those moments of emptiness on the streetscape are the key.

I’ve said this before, but I think the best thing for downtown Portland is housing. In any healthy city, the reality is a wide cross-section of people: some destitute, some affluent, but mostly those in between. There’s often a noticeable chasm on a weekend evening downtown between the SUVs coming for the culture on one hand, and the tattered denizens of the streets and shelters on the other hand.

Quite honestly, both groups have equal right to be there. But the key is to fill that chasm. I’ll bet when the Eliot Tower, Benson Tower and other residential buildings have filled the West End with hundreds of new residents, the uneasiness will begin to subside. And hopefully it won't just be the most affluent who can afford to live there.

A little more than a decade ago I was living in Manhattan’s Greenwich Village neighborhood, and there was many a time at night where somebody on the street made me nervous. But that feeling was always short lived, because there were always people from the neighborhood nearby: walking out of their apartments for a quick stop at the delicatessen, or coming and going from an evening out.

I think the key to key to safety in a major urban center—or perhaps more importantly the perception of safety—lies in numbers and in a residential environment interwoven into the fabric of shops, parks and offices. Ultimately the condo boom crossing from the Pearl into downtown isn’t just about design and architecture, but planting important seeds in the city.

Oak Tower

For all the residential development that has blossomed in the Pearl and South Waterfront districts, there are many portions of downtown that seem ideal and yet have remained underutilized. After all, you don’t have to create a new neighborhood from scratch here. It just takes a catalyst project or two.

Which is what the Oak Tower could be. Its future location, the corner of SW Third and Oak (just south of the Bijou Café and Stumptown Coffee), has been an empty eyesore for years, despite being just three blocks from the Willamette and also within easy walking distance of Old Town, Chinatown, the Pearl, and any downtown location. (It's part of the Portland Development Commission's Downtown Waterfront Urban Renewal Area.)

The Oak Tower is also interesting in that, with only a quarter-block footprint but 26 stories in height, it will be the skinniest tower in Portland—yes, even more than all these blade towers.

Furthermore, the project is designed by one of the city’s more talented and accomplished architects, Gary Larson, now of Mulvanny G2.

At first glance I think it looks a little more like an office building than a residence. It’s very sleek, although that’s not necessarily a bad thing. For the most part I like what I see from the renderings, but it’s hard to tell anything based on them other than the basic form. I’ll be curious to see how this building is fleshed out in its material palette. I’m also told this is not at all the finished design.

Still, with nearby Ankeny Plaza set to be transformed in the years ahead with a public market and a new mixed-use housing project where the old Fire Station 1 will soon relocate from, this corner of downtown figures to be seriously reinvigorated.

USGBC Honors UO's Brown

Congratulations to G.Z. "Charlie" Brown, who heads the University of Oregon School of Architecture's Energy Study In Buildings Laboratories in Eugene Portland. Today the US Green Buidling Council announced that Brown is among a handful of winners of the fourth annual Leadership Awards, which "recognize outstanding individuals and organizations that signify vision, leadership and commitment to the evolution of green building design and construction."

I've written about Brown before, both on this blog and in other publications. He's a kind of guru for Portland architects when it comes to sustainable architecture, but especially daylighting. If I were an architect, it's hard to imagine not taking one of my projects to be modeled on the heliodon at the lab Brown heads next door to the Duck Shop downtown at 2nd and Yamhill.

Portland? Nagoya. Nagoya? Portland.

A couple years ago I met architects Michel Weenick and Brian White of Architecture W, which has offices in Portland and Nagoya, Japan. Michel, an American from Texas, heads the Nagoya office, while Brian heads the Portland office. So far the firm’s work in Portland has been a series of small projects—single family homes, mostly. But a series of multifamily housing and office projects in Japan, one of which I wrote about in Dwell magazine's June 2005 issue (see attached photo), provide additional proof of this firm’s exceptional talent.

This morning I received an email from Michel about a speech he gave in Nagoya recently that was, he tells me, “as much about introducing Portland's unique urban qualities as it was about our work.” It was at a conference titled "Building Green Cities", and dealt with the integration of parks and high-density architecture. Michel says Portland’s urban parks like Jamison and Tanner Springs Parks in the Pearl, as well as Laurelhurst park, are of interest to the Japanese because it’s the kind of amenity that country lacks. Michel continues:

“Japanese cities lack these types of parks and the cities suffer for it.  As architects, its hard to change a city's character in one fell swoop and having these public green anchors available as foils to privately developed architecture provides both challenges as well as the opportunity to create interesting architecture and interesting cities.  In contrast, most of our Japanese work has to look inward towards light wells, courts, atriums, etc. and we have to create our own public spaces as none really exist in normal neighborhoods of Japanese cities.  We can and do create interesting spaces, but because they are internal to our projects, they don't enrich the overall city's appeal or image.”

“In the course of the speech I was able to give a brief history of how the Pearl has developed in the last 10 years, and a lot of the Q&A centered around Portland's urban development. I actually believe many of the issues that Portland has and is dealing with as a city—green architecture, creating denser,richer urban development, etc—are very appropriate and common to the challenges that face Japanese cities.”

I think Michel’s words serve as a reminder of what a treasure Portland’s array of parks are, and how crucial they are to healthy communities. Of course there is also a great deal we can learn from the Japanese about architecture and urban density. But it’s nice to know the emerging exchanges between architects and planners of the Pacific Rim go both ways.

AIA Design Awards

On Friday night the Portland chapter of the American Institute of Architects held its annual Design Awards gala as part of Architecture Week 2005. The top prize, the Honor Award, went to two projects: the Niemeyer Arts Center at Clackamas Community College in Oregon City, designed by Opsis Architecture; and the Temporary Arts Complex at MachineWorks, designed by BOORA Architects for the Time-Based Art festival.

It’s hard to argue with the Niemeyer Center. It’s a poetically simple modern building of concrete and glass that’s also admirably sustainable. I can only assume that Opsis will continue to emerge as one of the region's best designers of public buildings.

I can completely understand the jury’s affection for the TBA festival space; it was very compelling and ingenious. But should it be favored over complete lasting buildings? Much as I admire what BOORA did, I’d have found it difficult to choose that project over, say, the Belmont Street Lofts by Holst or the Hillsdale Branch Library by Thomas Hacker, both of which won People Choice Awards but didn’t garner any recognition from the jury. (Hacker did win a Merit Award for another project, the US Port of Entry in Blaine, Washington.)

Another award, the Unbuilt Merit Award, went to a new firm, Works Partnership Architecture, for the Yamhill Insustrial WORKspace Buidling. Works Partnership is comprised in part of two former architects from Opsis (one of whom, Bill Neburka, was project designer for the Niemeyer Center and also co-designed the unbuilt Albina Arts Center, which won a previous AIA award, with the ultra-talented Rick Potestio) and one from DiLoreto Architects. The firm has assisted developer Brad Malsin with the Eastbank Commerce Center, Water Avenue Commerce Center, and a restoration of the B&O Warehouse in the Central Eastside. I would love to see this new building get built.

The South Waterfront Discovery Center, which played host to the ceremony, itself was honored for its architecture, courtesy of GBD Architects and Ziba Design. Watch out for Ziba in the future. Although the company is has been known in the past for its industrial design (everything from an ergonomic keyboard to a new squeegee), Ziba is now orienting itself more toward experiential design, where architecture and marketing meet to, ideally, form something greater than the sum of their parts. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Ziba again partner with GBD on the in-progress Armory project at the Brewery Blocks (although that’s definitely a bizarre drama in and of itself).

Still another award, the Built Citation Award, went to Skylab Architecture for Doug Fir restaurant. I unabashedly adore both the interior architecture and the crispy hash browns at Doug Fir, so the only question left is, who is going to hire Skylab next? Hopefully some developer is reading this. Or, failing that, the owner of the Galaxy restaurant across from Doug Fir, which is crying out for a Jeff Kovel-santioned makeover.

One of the three People’s Choice Awards went to a house on the Oregon Coast designed by architect Nathan Good that achieves “net zero” energy use. (In other words, it generates as much as it uses.) Good’s home follows the Rose House by SERA Architects, which I believe achieves the same goal. Hopefully these projects are just the first of many.

And the first Mayor’s Design Award to be given out by Tom Potter was bestowed upon Richard Brown Architects’ design for a New Seasons grocery store at Arbor Lodge. As a loyal patron of another New Seasons (on Southeast Division), I appreciate how the architecture contributes to a much more favorable shopping experience. But I also think Potter’s selection adds increasing credibility to many people’s fear that the mayor is simply not that interested in architecture. With all due respect to Brown, an excellent architect, or to the mayor himself, do you think Vera Katz would have chosen a grocery store as the best architecture in Portland over the last year?