Last Tuesday the Design Review Commission staff recommended approval of the revised Ladd Tower proposal and transfer of FAR (‘floor-area-ratio’, basically meaning more height) that the developers requested. This is a non-binding recommendation. But this Thursday at 1:30pm, the DRC (comprised of several prominent local architects including Jeff Stuhr of Holst, Tim Eddy of Hennebery/Eddy and chair Mike McCullough) will make the official ruling. (Which, as the recent Allegro project reminds us, can also be appealed to City Council. To my knowledge the Supreme Court is not scheduled to be involved.)
For those new to the Ladd Tower dilemma, it’s not just about the tower. Although the project’s owner, the First Christian Church, has been lauded for agreeing to preserve the historically significant Ladd Carriage House on site, still set to be demolished to make way for the Ladd Tower is the Rosefriend Apartments, an old brick building seemingly everyone (including those involved in the Ladd Tower project) agrees is a work of great beauty and character.
But the issue before the Design Review Commission is the Ladd Tower’s height. As such, the architect’s design (by Ankrom Moisan) has been modified to add an additional setback on the Park Blocks side of the project, thereby reducing some of the bulk. To opponents of the project, this may not seem like much of a concession. Downtown neighborhood association member Daniel Friedman called this design change “purely token” in the comments section in a previous post I wrote about the project.
According to the staff report, the setback is "…enough to create a usable and residentially scaled outdoor terrace at the fourth floor…The west setback will offer a better transition in scale from the lower, older buildings lining the Park to the tower, and will better protect views along the Park blocks, such as of the Oregon Historical Society building. The tower height has also been reduced (to 240') along the west by pulling the louvered mechanical enclosure off the northwest building corner and locating it in the center of the building's roof area.”
Friedman believes that the staff report “dismisses with almost no explanation…the zoning code's seemingly straightforward prohibition on transfer of FAR to the Park Blocks [Chapter 33.120.205.E.5.2: "Transfer of density or FAR to sites on the Park Block frontages shown on Map 510-13 are prohibited."] and about various planning documents over the years, such as the 1972 Downtown Plan, which states that any development in the South Park Blocks should be ‘compatible with existing buildings’ and ‘in scale with the Park Blocks.’”
“In light of the recent Allegro decision,” Friedman continues, “in which Council repudiated an attempt to transfer FAR from a property in the Lloyd District to a site in Goose Hollow, it appears that there is heightened scrutiny on how developers are making use of FAR provisions…The Downtown Neighborhood Association continues to oppose the project as currently designed.
You may notice that this post gives a lopsided point of view, one on the side of the project’s opponents. I personally am against the Ladd Tower, not so much because of the height issue on the Park Blocks but because of its destroying the Rosefriend Apartments. I don't have a strong feeling either way about the architecture of the Ladd Tower itself, but it does seem to me that the tower is too tall for that site right on the Park Blocks, regardless of what is or isn't allowed.
That said, I want to be fair about this continuing Ladd Tower issue. In the past, I’d tried to seek comment from the project’s developers, but they declined. (Ankrom Moisan, however, has been very open, professional and cordial.) If a proponent of the project wants to make his or her case for its being approved, I will strongly consider posting again with their comments. I am not impartial on this issue, but in the greater sense, I’d like for Portland Architecture to be as fair-minded as possible. Also, if there are any factual errors to this post, people are always welcome to email me and I will make any necessary changes.
Meanwhile, the Commission hearing is open to public (as always) and will be held in Room 2500A at 1900 SW Fourth Avenue this Thursday, September 7.
Not even a single comment about Ladd Tower/Rosefriend Apartment/South Park Block details from the most recent Design Review Commission meeting?
That's very interesting. Actually, somebody who attended the meeting did make the effort to provide a worthwhile report about some things discussed at that meeting. You'll find their account over at portlandindymedia via the following address:
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/09/345700.shtml
The incident related knowledge I've gained from following the situation with the Ladd Block leaves me feeling disappointed and disgusted with some of the people associated with the planned development of this block. Does the phrase "That's Progress!!" fit in here? I'm really wondering about that.
Posted by: ws | September 11, 2006 at 06:03 PM
this is funny:
http://www.myspace.com/3666669
Posted by: m conroy | September 12, 2006 at 10:37 AM