Portland Architecture

Jennings to Realtors: yes we can (and already have)

Recently the Commercial Real Estate Development Association, which for some weird reason is abbreviated as NAIOP, issued a press release asserting that increases in buildings’ energy efficiency of 30% or more over energy codes aren’t economically feasible.

John Jennings of the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance has penned a response, which essentially says, “Uh, excuse me? You don’t know what you’re talking about.”

The NEEA is the parent organization of BetterBricks, which is a sponsor of this site. This post is not intended in any way to act as advertorial, but I felt Jennings’ open letter to the NAIOP is worth passing on, even if it didn't touch upon one my other big real estate pet peeves: capitalizing the word "Realtor".

Here is Jennings' response:

"The recent press release by NAIOP attempts to throw cold water on the growing momentum for sustainable energy efficient buildings.

Those who have been designing, building and promoting high performance buildings for a long time are finding the study very difficult to swallow. But let’s all use it as a learning opportunity.

First of all, just in the Northwest - where electricity rates are lower than those used in the study - there are a lot of buildings that have achieved significant levels of energy efficiency. These buildings range from small offices, to schools, to university buildings and even healthcare facilities. Over 50 buildings in Washington and Oregon alone have achieved levels better than 30% over code. 

A recent study of 121 LEED buildings by the National Buildings Institute found that on average these buildings were achieving savings of 28% with one-quarter above 50% and some as high as 75%. NBI’s Getting to Fifty program also contains a register of buildings achieving close to, or better than, 50% savings. For anyone needing more evidence, there is the USDOE High Performance Building Database and the magazine High Perfomance Buildings, that presents detailed case studies every month.

Several Northwest buildings further illustrate what is achievable. These include the Idaho Central Credit Union office in Chubbuck, Idaho; Banner Bank in Boise, Idaho; OHSU Center for Health and Healing in Portland, Oregon. The Idaho Central Credit Union office is a typical small city bank branch with 68,000 square feet built in 2007. It achieved savings of 35%. The 180,000 square foot Banner Bank building built in 2006 appears on the outside to be a fairly conventional mid-height office building. Yet it has received LEED Platinum certification and measured energy savings have been around 48%. According to the developer, Gary Christiansen, these savings were achieved at no incremental cost. 

A recent post occupancy evaluation of the OHSU project has found building savings to be close to 45% over ASHRAE 90.1-2004, with an incremental cost for energy efficiency measures of less than 1% of total cost. 

What bothers me the most though is the approach NAIOP took to the analysis and the way the results were disseminated. They base their claims on energy simulation modeling of one existing building design rather than research the state of the market. As a result, they lock out many of the key elements designers can manipulate to improve performance. No consideration was given to building orientation, massing, daylighting, shading, or natural ventilation.

The study simply adds a number of conventional efficiency measures to a generally inefficient base building. This obviously has limitations. It is understood by most building scientists and efficiency experts that there is an economic limit for simple additive efficiency measures. Estimates range from savings of 25% to 40%. To achieve higher levels of savings cost effectively requires an integrated design approach where cost efficiencies result from down-sizing or eliminating mechanical and electrical equipment due to synergies between systems (i.e. taking advantage of the interactive effects between heating and cooling and lighting, etc). 

The press release uses the study findings to take a stab at policies seeking to set building energy codes to higher levels. Codes set the legal minimum and thus level the playing field. Codes do not set one method for all as stated by the press release. Instead, codes set prescriptive requirements for each climate zone and also provide an optional performance path target to allow designers to find innovative ways to meet those targets. 

Now we need to begin working together to figure out how to best achieve the 2030 Challenge targets for all new construction over the next 20 years. This process is beginning with numerous “Net-Zero Building” conferences and articles. We need to broaden the dialogue to include the real estate and development community."

Working in a creative economy

On Wednesday, April 1 (that's tomorrow - no joke) at the University of Oregon's White Stag Block in Portland, three experts from local creative industries will be discussing opportunities for both business and imagination in the downturned economy.

"Yes, it's a dismal economy," the press release says, "but it is also one that inspires creativity, ingenuity and innovation. It's exactly the creative challenge we all look for - a genuine opportunity to make something from nothing. Optimism is just one ingredient for actually positioning yourself with work right now. Come and learn how the experts do it right."

The experts in question will be Susan Hoffman, executive creative director of local advertising giant Wieden + Kennedy; Randy Higgins, creative director of Vizwerks, a hybrid design/branding company; Steve Potestio, managing director of creative industry staffing agency 52 Limited (any relation to Rick, Steve?); and Jolie Giese, general manager of the Nau and Horny Toad clothes lines.

I've written about Randy Higgins numerous times before. Although not officially a registered architect, that is his training (he holds an architecture degree from University of Oregon). And while this isn't necessarily a guarantee of a good panel discussion, Randy is one of the brightest minds I have encountered when it comes to thinking conceptually about design - not just in an abstract way, however, but rather almost mathematically.

In the 1990s Randy worked at Holst Architecture, a time when the firm was designing the Pacific Northwest College of Art's new home in a renovated Pearl District warehouse. In about 2004, he returned to PNCA to fashion its exterior paint job, which is quite sophisticated but comes across with wonderful simplicity: a translation of a Rimbaud poem rendered in a language he created out of differently sized and colored squares and rectangles. (Which I wrote about for Metropolis magazine at the time.)

Randy in the ensuing years gravitated more toward retail design, including projects like the Mario's menswear store and Elizabeth Leach Gallery, which made landing at Vizwerks a natural next step.

"Working In A Creative Economy" will be held at 6PM at the UO's White Stag Block, at 70 NW Couch Street. Admission is free and refreshments will be provided.

Welcome sponsor: Glacier Window & Door, Inc.

Portland Architecture is pleased to introduce our newest Lead Sponsor, Glacier Window & Door, Inc.  Also known as the Loewen Window Centre of Portland, Glacier specializes in a wide variety of high-end fenestration products including Loewen, Fleetwood USA, Bella Vista, Custom Windows and Hope's Steel Windows. Their showroom is at 1229 SE Grand. I've visited with the Glacier crew on a couple of occasions now and have found them to be extremely passionate about what they do.

Loewen builds gorgeous Douglas fir and Honduran mahogany window and door products from a small plant in Steinbech, Manitoba. Their product line also includes the Bella Vista Collection of hand built windows.  Numerous different profile options, factory-applied distresses, unique and special window styles such as European tilt/turn and bi-folding.  They can also build from exotic wood species like incense cedar, teak, mesquite, walnut and afromosia.

From how different glazing systems affect u-factors to FSC certification to discussions about LEED tax credits, these folks are a wealth of information.  They've provided windows and doors for many of the special projects I've written about over the years including Skylab Architecture's M1 house (pictured below), Emerick Architects’ Northwood residence, Path Architecture's Williams Five.

I also recently learned they are doing a complete window and door installation on a high-end home in Seattle by Olson Sundberg Kundig Allen, winner of this year’s national AIA firm of the year award.

The Glacier crew are experts on Fleetwood USA windows and doors.  Fleetwood builds aluminum products for the entire home including three window styles, swinging doors and phenomenal sliding doors.

Glacier's custom capabilities draw from years of experience building a wide variety of things from bi folding windows to pivot doors and other extremely detailed, historically accurate fenestration products.  They are a full-service dealer, meaning they offer skylights and interior doors as well as installation.

A good group of hard working people carrying high-quality products, I'm pleased to introduce Glacier Window and Door as one of Portland Architecture's newest sponsors.

Two Portlanders among winning team in Los Angeles transit ideas competition

An interdisciplinary team including two Portlanders, architect Aaron Whelton of AAW Studio and planner Jacob Brostoff of the city of Portland, took first place in an ideas competition sponsored by the Southern California Institute of Architecture (Sci-Arc) and The Architect's Newspaper.

The competition, entitled "A New Infrastructure: Innovative Transit Solutions for Los Angeles," invited designers to imagine LA's transit solutions for 30 to 50 years in the future. Judges included some heavy hitters of Los Angeles architecture, such as Thom Mayne, Eric Owen Moss, and Neil Denari.

The winning entry, called "Más Transit" is according to the press release "a regional high-speed rail system for Los Angeles with a landscape to match. Promoting dense, organic development, it diversifies the communities in the built environment, making travel less necessary, easier and more predictable, and bypassing roadway congestion through a new raised infrastructure." 

Looping around the city, with connections to subways, light rail and buses, MásTransit links local and inter-regional commuting, providing frequent service that will also sync up with the California High Speed Rail network. San Diego via m·sTransit is less than an hour away, including transfer times; San Francisco is less than three hours away."

Now if we could only get some people started on imagining regional high-speed rail for the Pacific Northwest. At the very least, there needs to be a high-speed line connecting Portland and Seattle. Really, it ought to also include connections to Vancouver (BC), Bend, Tacoma, Olympia, Salem and Eugene or maybe even to Medford and San Francisco. Much more than a new bridge for the Columbia River and Interstate 5, we need high speed rail. However, maybe rail could also be incorporated into this crossing.

Meanwhile, congratulations to Whelton, Brostoff and the rest of their team. 

A green lodge: Emerick Architects builds Portland's first stand-alone LEED Gold house

Recently I visited a new house by Emerick Architects that was designed for the firm's husband and wife principals, Brian and Melody Emerick. The Northwood Residence, as it's called, is slated for this year's was part of last year's Street of Eames modern homes tour and is, as part of a US Green Building Council pilot program, one of the first single-family home in the nation to achieve Gold LEED status.

The house, located on a one-acre parcel in the West Hills, is at the end of a windy road on a site other builders hesitated to build on for several years. A large McMansion, you see, would have had difficulty fitting here. Yet the Emericks' home feels substantial even on a comparatively smaller floorplate. And making this site work when others walked away allowed the Emericks to take advantage of a spectacular view. The property abuts 300 acres of forest Forest Park and Terwilliger Parkway and looks through the trees at a panoramic view to the east.

From outside, the house looks like a ski lodge, reminiscent of regional landmarks like Timberline Lodge. The exterior is a combination of naturally pigmented cement plaster and natural wood siding, topped by a zinc alloy roof, all of which will be desirably durable. The architects sought to showcase an alternative to the look of gyp board.

The house's mass is also broken up by making the garage a separate structure connected by an elegant covered walkway. It also slopes down the site in a way that conforms subtly to the topography. There is also an onsite stormwater treatment system.

Inside, the lodge-like feel continues with Douglas fir windows, doors and ceilings, Oregon white oak flooring, and furniture made from Red Alder by local craftspeople.  No matter where you are in the house, there is natural light pouring through. That not only eliminates the need for electric lighting, but allows the Emericks (including their two daughters) to look out at the incredible wooded view. And all the small details of material, spacing and craftsmanship feel extra sound: this is an exceptionally well built house.

Overall, both inside and out, I was impressed by how the Northwood Residence has the feel and style of traditional architecture and interiors, yet never feels the slightest bit trite or faux. The home is a modern interpretation of traditional forms, materials and spaces, yet it's crucially important that the architects achieved the right balance. Personally, I'm extremely sensitive to the appearance of faux-traditionalism or neo-historicism, and yet I loved the job the Emericks and their colleagues did here.

The home was constructed using 100 percent wind power, and 80 percent of construction waste was recycled. The design also boats minimal site disturbance; the Emericks preserved a centuries old maple tree. And the exceptionally solid building envelope, featuring 15 percent more insulation than code stipulates, in addition to extensive use of concrete, means the home will hold its thermal mass very well, keeping it cool in the summer and warm in the winter - even though the house was also built with 15 percent fewer framing materials to save cost.

Emerick Architects previously oversaw designs for the Ford Building renovation in Southeast Portland, and the firm also designed an acclaimed restoration of the Porter Building in the Pearl District and Grand Central Baking's headquarters in North Portland. 

I also enjoyed the vibe when I visited the firm's downtown Portland offices. All the employees seemed to be sitting on exercise balls instead of chairs at their desks, and a jovial B-52s album was playing in the background. Talk about a "Love Shack". Keep up the good work, gang!

Notes on the Columbia crossing

Two weekends ago, while making an overnight trip to Seattle, I couldn't help but think about the proposed new Columbia River bridge as I crossed the existing Interstate Bridge on Interstate 5.

Today I was reminded of that ride as I read a blistering Oregonian editorial that takes the Bicycle Transportation to task for opposing the new bridge. The BTA is organizing a rally on Sunday, April 5 to protest the bridge. 

"It shows an insularity in the thinking of the organization, just at a time when it ought to be broadening its reach," the editors write of the BTA. "The Alliance has decided to oppose what many freight, business and transportation advocates consider to be the No. 1 economic development goal for the region."

I've wrestled with the politics and parameters of the bridge for awhile. On one hand, a big new piece of infrastructure like this is a key investment in transit that will aid economic development and ease congestion. But I've been troubled by the focus on and debate about how many lanes the bridge might have: 10, 12, whatever.

To me, the lane discussion is almost wholly irrelevant, because the bridge is merely a small conduit between the freeway segments on each end. As one approaches the Interstate Bridge on the Oregon side, there are sometimes as little as two lanes in each direction, or three if you're lucky. Who cares if there are suddenly 12 lanes on the bridge? It doesn't help congestion unless the whole freeway throughout the area is that many lanes.

Honestly if transportation and highway advocates wanted quicker passage along Interstate 5 in the Portland area, they'd add more lanes further south from the Columbia: down near the Rose Quarter where there are just two lanes in each direction and, worse yet for congestion, an interchange with two other freeways (84 and 405).

At the same time, although I'm unequivocally a supporter of sustainable concepts, values, design and community building, I don't necessarily believe environmentalists' claims that widening the Columbia crossing will encourage sprawl. Being able to commute home with a little less headache isn't necessarily going encourage a sea of people to move further out. Transportation infrastructure is the circulatory system of a healthy city and region. If our land-use policies are sound with proper urban growth boundaries, and if highways are complimented by proper investments in mass transit, then proper highways are only part of a larger holistic transportation picture.

Given the economic and political climate, in which the economy is hurting and public investment is on the upswing, the timing is right for the Portland-Vancouver area to commit to a new bridge. It should of course have plenty of bike lanes in addition to car lanes, and space for light rail as well. It should be built as sustainably in terms of materials and energy use as possible. But sustainability and the amount of lanes aren't the only store here, nor are they the only factors in the design. If this project is to go forward, we need inspiration, a design that not only solves problems but adds beauty and imagination to this massive piece of concrete and steel.

Chances are the bridge will be completely approved in the weeks and months to come, regardless of whether a bicyclists advocacy group opposes the plan or a newspaper like The Oregonian advocates for it. It will be a hugely important juncture when approval happens, because that is when the community needs to hold the bridge to high standards of design: not just a series of quotas about lanes or the recycled content of the concrete, or the amount of wind turbines we affix to the sides.

Architect's Questionnaire: David Hyman

This is the second Q&A in our series with local architects and designers. David Hyman is a principal with DECA Architecture in Portland, which celebrated its 10th anniversary in 2008. The firm, which Hyman co-runs with his wife and business partner, Sallee Humphrey, has been responsible for a number of architecture and interiors projects, arts and cultural institutions, educational facilities, retail and housing as well as furniture design and even glass sculptures.

Portland Architecture: When did you first become interested in architecture as a possible career?

David Hyman: I was in construction for 11 years. When the economy turned down in the early 80’s, I decided that it was an opportune time to change careers. I always had a passion for design and decided to pursue it. I closed my construction company and enrolled in architecture school.

Where did you study architecture and how would you rate the experience?

I attended University of Oregon. I thought it was a great education. They offered a good basic foundation in the skills required for an architectural career, but also gave you the freedom to steer your field of study in either a technical or more theoretical direction. I chose to take a lot of architectural theory and history classes and sought out studio professors with a more theoretical emphasis.

What is your favorite building project that you’ve worked on?

An International Student Center for KAIST (Korean Advanced Institute of Science and Technology). The client wanted a building that appealed to foreign students attending the Korean University. But, it also required developing an understanding of what that meant within the context of the Korean culture. [Note: the project is pictured at left.]

Who has been an important mentor among your colleagues?

Truthfully, my most important mentor has been my wife and business partner. She is an interior designer and has taught me so much about client relations and marketing. She also has a very fresh perspective about design. Our debates about design energize us both.

What part of the job do you like best, and as an architect what do you think you most excel at?

I love the exchange of ideas that comes from designing a project, both with team members and with clients. I have spent most of my career as a designer, but as my wife and I have built our practice, I have learned to also appreciate the role of empowering others to express their design ideas. I enjoy that role as much as designing.

What are some Portland buildings (either new or historic) that you most admire?

Central Library, Union Station, Portland Art Museum, Visitor’s Center by John Yeon, Medical Clinic by John Storrs on NW 16th Ave., Wieden + Kennedy headquarters, Woodstock Library by Thomas Hacker

What is your favorite building outside of Portland and besides any you’ve worked on?

Pierre Chareau's “Maison de Verre”. [Pictured at right.]

Is there a local architect or firm you think is unheralded or deserves more credit?

There are a number of talented small firms that have emerged in the last few years. I would keep my eye on Paul McKean.

What would you like to see change about Portland’s built environment in the long term?

As much effort as Portland has put into reinvigorating the waterfront on the east and west sides of the Willamette River, with the esplanade, Tom McCall park, OMSI, etc, we still are far short of fulfilling the potential of that resource. The greatest missed opportunity was failing to relocate the freeway on the east side when we had the chance. We should be making much more of an effort to take advantage of the river with more parks, river walks and pedestrian focused development.

How would you rate the performance of local government like the Portland Development Commission, or the development and planning bureaus?

I think PDC has taken a lot of hits over the years, some deserved and some not, but I really don’t think they are given enough credit for their successes. They played and continue to play an instrumental part in creating a vibrant and successful downtown. And, their storefront improvement and DOS programs, as well as other financial incentives have helped to jumpstart neighborhoods in North Portland, such as Alberta, Mississippi, Killingsworth and MLK.

Would you rather live in a South Waterfront condo, a craftsman bungalow in Laurelhurst, a warehouse loft in the North Mississippi district or a mid-century ranch in the West Hills?

Condo in downtown.

Who is a famous architect you’d like to see design a building in Portland?

Renzo Piano.

Which would you rather be responsible for: an ugly LEED platinum building or a beautiful modernist energy hog?

10 years ago, I would have said a beautiful modernist energy hog. But, today, I think’s that’s a false choice. I am decidedly modernist, but in recent years I have yet to meet a client who appreciated modern architecture and did not have a concern for the environment. We’re often forced to weigh the cost of sustainable solutions, but it’s a matter of degree, not choosing one over the other.

Name something besides architecture (sneakers, furniture, umbrellas) you love the design of.

I admire well designed housewares, particularly “Nambe”.

What are three of your all-time favorite movies?

"Brazil", "Blade Runner", "Chinatown".

Thanks again to David Hyman for being our ginny Guinea pig. In the future we will be running additional Q&As with local architects, and if you'd like to join in, simply fill out the questionnaire using the same questions and send to [email protected] with a photo of yourself and a rendering or project photo.

An Architects Without Borders talk about social responsibility for designers

Portland State University and the Oregon chapter of Architects Without Borders are sponsoring a forum on social responsibility and engagement in the design professions featuring Bryan Bell, founder of the nonprofit organization Design Corps and editor of the recent book “Expanding Architecture: Design as Activism”. Bell will joined in discussion by  

Janet  Hammer, Director of PSU’s Social Equity and Opportunity Forum, PSU architecture professor Sergio Palleroni, Outside In clinic director John Duke, and Abby Dacey of Architects Without Borders and Boora Architects. The public is invited to join this group in a discussion of the potentials and challenges in efforts to create greater accountability and responsible engagement in the profession.

“Designers have the potential to benefit many more people than they currently reach,” the press release says. “No, this is not a call for pro bono work. Instead we are being challenged to play a more direct role in solving the critical social and environmental problems  facing the nation and our communities--and to incorporate outreach into our own  practice to serve what is an ever-growing client base with real needs.”

The forum, free and open to the public, is this Friday, March 27 from 12-1:30PM in PSU’s Shattuck Annex at 1914 SW Park.

If you're interested in joining the Architects Without Borders-Oregon chapter, their next meeting is April 22 at AIA/Portland's Center For Architecture at 403 NW 11th Avenue at 5:30PM. Meetings are held the fourth Wednesday of every month.

Notes from a Cloepfil-Kundig summit

Recently two exceptionally acclaimed Northwest architects Brad Cloepfil of Portland's Allied Works and Tom Kundig of Seattle's  Olson Sundberg Kundig Allen (which I just profiled for Architecture Week), were guests for an extended conversation at The Back Room, an ongoing dinner and discussion series hosted by author Matthew Stadler and Stephanie Snyder, curator of Reed College's Cooley Gallery. Although I didn't make it to the event, held a couple of weeks ago, another freelance architecture writer, Brett Campbell, was there, and generously agreed to offer his thoughts:

For the past four years, Portland author Matthew Stadler has put together Back Room gatherings. Stadler's theory is that bringing people together over food and ideas and music gets important conversations about public issues going, and he's so sincere and idealistic about this that it's hard to resist.

On Feb 27, Seattle architect Jerry Garcia acted as interlocutor for two of the region's most prominent architects. Tom Kundig (pictured above) is a principal and partner at Seattle's Olson, Sundberg, Kundig, Allen, which was named the AIA's national Firm of the Year for 2009. His work has been published widely, including in a book from Princeton Architectural Press, Tom Kundig: Houses. Brad Clopefil (pictured below) is the founder and principal of Portland's Allied Works. His recent projects include the Museum of Art and Design, in New York, the Clyfford Still Museum in Denver, Colorado, and the Booker T. Washington High School for the Performing and Visual Arts, in Dallas, Texas.  Garcia is a senior project manager at Kundig’s firm.

Probably most of the people who paid for the dinner and abundant red wine were either architects or intensely interested in architecture. I'm not an architect, so I didn't recognize many of the attendees, except fellow journalist Randy Gragg, who specializes in architecture and urban design issue. Nevertheless, even for an amateur like me, the conversation was pretty fascinating, helped in part by questions from Gragg and other audience members that kept the discussion from being too much for insiders.

One topic was the Museum of Art & Design Cloepfil recently refurbished on Columbus Circle in Manhattan (pictured at right in a shot borrowed from Flickr). Cloepfil said he was happy with the galleries. It started as a concrete box without light. He said he looked not at what Edward Durrell Stone had done but what the building should be in 2006—a true modernist attitude, it seems to me. His work at MAD involved cutting holes and letting the light in, as with Cloepfil's celebrated Weiden & Kennedy building here. He called that process a "tracheotomy," a sharp analogy. Cloepfil said he wasn't trying to make W+K iconic—just to let the light in. Cloepfil said it was a lucky break for him because getting that kind of blank slate will probably never happen again.

On developing an identity and regionalism, Cloepfil said growing up in Portland when Michael Graves was supposedly the trend, it wasn't till he saw a Richard Serra piece that he realized that that's what architecture can be. The work he saw going up in the US was "horribly meaningless" while he was in Switzerland, where he saw terrific architecture that had meaning.

Someone asked about how Cloepfil and Kundig are regarded on the national scene, and Cloepfil said that if for someone living on the east coast and someone comes in from the west, they're regarded as a cowboy coming and telling you about the frontier.

Cloepfil also says in the US regional voices get contained and stereotyped. New York, he said, loves people like him and Kundig as long as they stay within that stereotype. There are just a few strong regional voices (such as Arizona’s Rick Joy) but that he and others had to deal with the attitude among New Yorkers: "Who the fuck is he? He's from Oregon. He's not Zaha Hadid."

On the relationship between art and architecture, Garcia said he and Cloepfil share a similar obsession with art. Cloepfil said architects look to artists for courage, boldness, as "springboard to purity." Clopefil said he's inspired by Richard Serra, 60-something years old and still working so hard.

Kundig (one of whose designs from OSKA is pictured above) agreed that architecture is functional or applied art and he looks to real artists for inspiration. His philosophy of architecture is setting the stage and watching what happens. What goes on inside the building is more interesting than the architecture.

Randy Gragg [editor of Portland Spaces] asked what are some projects they'd like to do. Kundig said he’d like to do something here because he loved Portland and compared to Seattle it was kind of a pleasant-ville because it understands role of urban settings. Kundig also wishes people in Seattle would develop cultural will to do good design and address problems.

Cloepfil said he wants to work with an institution that can really inspire in a Portland way. It happened in the 1970s here but not since. "Green is good, but it ain’t gonna do it,” he said. "It's our strength, but we have to go deeper” than just green design. We have to look at evolving principles of design before just sustainability.

(Whew, all this talk about architecture is making me thirsty. And — what a lucky break! — there appears to be a glass of red wine directly in front me. I’m sure it was empty just a minute ago.)

On sustainability and good design, Cloepfil said the built environment has neglected beauty and purity of design in favor of trends and sensationalism of the last 15 years He said he'd attended Mayor Adams's talk at the city club the other day and that the talk about green design and sustainability overshadowed good design as an enduring core and ethic.

Kundig said design decisions now have to do multiple things on a low budget -- have to do smart things that can bring in light and at same time do things like rooftop irrigation etc.

On integrity and process, Kundig views the architect’s responsibility in context of being part of a team. Cloepfil said temporality has a purity in itself. (That sounds really deep, and at the time, that made perfect sense to me, but you see, I'm remembering this without benefit of pinot noir.) His creation manifesto is channeling cultural energy. Architecture is an assault—the initial cut is a clear cut.

Kundig differs a bit here. To him, architecture is more of a process, like jazz. Unlike Cloepfil, whom he sees holding on for dear life to his original ideas, Kundig is willing to compromise more. Every project that was most successful has gotten better after interaction with the clients, contractors, etc. He's not an artist.

You have to trust time, Cloepfil added. It's not about the process. You have to hope that you can move all those other forces, including the mayor, politics. [I think he was talking about MAD mostly here.] You have to look at things that are pure and hope that they survive cultural forces. "Edward Durrell Stone -- what were you thinking? The city has moved on." So you have to look beyond the temporal process.

Obletz offers alternative Rose Quarter, Coliseum & baseball stadium plan

In Sunday's Oregonian, an op-ed by Douglas Obletz offered a more sane and reasonable idea for the Rose Quarter in light of the recent awarding of a Major League Soccer franchise to Portland (and the ensuing need to build the Portland Beavers a new baseball stadium).

Instead of tearing down Memorial Coliseum for the ballpark, Obletz says, we should build the stadium across Broadway on the site of the Portland Public Schools Blanchard Education Center, which he calls "oversized and outdated."

"By moving the school district's administrative offices and warehouse to smaller, more energy-efficient buildings (or vacant space downtown), the district will save on operating costs; and the eight-block site will extend the Rose Quarter and its development opportunities."

The Coliseum could then be turned into a public sports and recreation center, Obletz argues, as was proposed in 2004 when several million in donations were up for grabs.

Obletz, president of the local development firm Shiels Obletz Johnsen, also calls for arts and entertainment and health and wellness centers on the site. "With the removal of the unsuccessful office and retail building and redesign of the large plaza west of the Rose Garden, there is plenty of room for the venue envisioned by [Paul] Allen, extending the legacy of great entertainment in the Coliseum." I also like Obletz's idea of a Nike Oregon Sports Museum here. The Oregon Sports Hall of Fame has been a huge disappointment.

One commenter on the Oregon Live website where Obletz's piece was originally published made the point that Obletz is head of a big local development company that could stand to profit from involvement at the Rose Quarter site. Maybe that's true, although I'm not aware of Shiels Obletz Johnsen having ties there currently. And regardless, I think Obletz's proposal is much, much better than what the Blazers and Beavers owner Merritt Paulsen have planned so far.

There are a couple issues happening simultaneously. One is location of the stadium. I've repeatedly argued that adding a stadium to the Rose Quarter site is bad urban planning. We need to integrate the area into the city fabric, not make it more of an isolated island for big sports and entertainment events. However, even though the Blanchard site would only be a block away, I think this proposal for the stadium is much better urbanistically.

The other issue is the preservation of Memorial Coliseum, a midcentury modern jewel (pictured at right in a shot by Jeff Jahn). Another commenter on the Oregon Live site chastised Obletz for wanting to save the building because, in this commenter's opinion, formed after attending Winter Hawks hockey games there, that "the MC is becoming a disgrace." That's an argument not for the Coliseum's eradication, though, but for its renovation. The same commenter actually vehemently argued for a casino on the Rose Quarter site. "Do something truly unique that will enliven the area and dump millions of dollars into the economy," he/she said. But I'd argue something far less crass would be better.

What do the rest of you think about how Memorial Coliseum should be saved and where else beside the Rose Quarter proper we could put the baseball stadium?

PSU students imagine a café on the Hawthorne Bridge

A Portland State University architecture studio class led by professor and former architecture department head Rudy Barton has set its sights on an unexpected building site, the Hawthorne Bridge, for imagining a new café.

"Bridges are some of the most significant pieces of infrastructure citizens have," Barton said. "Bridges should be places to be, not just places to quickly get across. When one thinks of the world's great bridges, from New York City's Brooklyn Bridge to London's Millennium Bridge, they are wonderful places to see the city and contemplate the natural and manmade worlds. The middle of the river could be an unforgettable place to stop and have a cup of coffee."

To explore that idea, Barton's students investigated the creation of a café on Portland's Hawthorne Bridge with a simple program:  a café serving coffee, tea, and light refreshments, accommodating 15-25 customers. It had to be right on the bridge, but still allow the drawbridge to function (if you call going up and down when there is no water traffic a "function").

Over the course of five weeks students designed cafés using three general strategies: on top, on the side, and underneath the bridge. Half the class selected a location underneath the bridge in order to provide access from both sides and to develop a closer connection to the river and back to the city. Another group of students developed schemes that were on either the north or south side of the bridge, and yet a third group positioned their buildings on the upper reaches of the bridge's towers. In each case, the café became a clear additive element that could be attached to the Hawthorne Bridge.

"This project started with the art and craft of making additions to buildings," said Barton. "Since the overwhelming majority of architectural work focuses on the remodeling of existing buildings, I felt it was important that our students confront the tough design issues of adding on to an existing structure. The Hawthorne Bridge is probably the toughest site we've ever worked on and our students rose to the challenge."

The four student projects shown here are by (in order of top to bottom) Jamie Tausen, Stephen Christian, Johnny Karam, and Zephyr Anthony.

I love this idea. Is there any chance of taking this proposal out of the classroom and into the real world? I also think the Hawthorne would be the perfect bridge for this. Being Portland's oldest bridge, it would provide a wonderful context to a new structure grafted onto the span. And because the Hawthorne goes up and down all day regardless of whether there's river traffic (in order to keep its ancient parts moving), one could often use a place to hang out until the bridge is back down.

The notion of having programmed space on a bridge is also one with lots of tradition. Bridges in London three centuries ago often were crammed with housing or other functions, for example. And I've seen numerous amateur proposals for new bridges like the one planned for the Willamette south of downtown to carry MAX. It's a fun, intriguing idea about how to invigorate crossings as places and destinations in their own right.

UO architecture students tackle Burnside Bridgehead (updated)

On Monday I had the pleasure of spending the afternoon with several graduate students from the University of Oregon's School of Architecture & Allied Arts, who presented ideas for the Burnside Bridgehead project as part of a class taught by architects from Mulvanny G2 (led by Suenn Ho), one of the firms that has been involved in the job.

Ironically, being with these grad students, professors and architects from UO cheered me up after I'd thrown a small temper tantrum earlier that morning about their school, when the nation's top-rated running back prospect, Bryce Brown, announced he was attending Tennessee over Oregon (the perceived front runner for his services.) A giant cross hanging from his neck, Brown had reportedly prayed and fasted in search of the right decision about where to matriculate, but then chose Tennessee because it was his fastest route to the NFL and millions of dollars. So it was great to spend time with Oregon students who saw their education as more than a personal means to an end disguised in flamboyant piety.

The format, as architecture school jury critiques seem to go, was to have each student present his or her idea to a handful of us jurors (non-grading, just opinion-giving) over about a half-hour. Unfortunately I didn't get to see all 11 grad student presentations, but the ones I did see were a treat. 

I've also attached at left an image from a presentation I didn't see by student Fai Chong, called "Learning Hub" for "using intentionally-designed landscaping in an urban area to evoke our imagination on how to use the land and what to build on it, informing the future programs of the site." At the bottom of this post is an image from Elisabeta Curea's project.

Masaye Harrison (pictured above) offered the most realistic plan for Burnside Bridgehead, which she branded the "B-side Blocks". She spoke about re-establishing the city grid here, and better connecting this large parcel with the surrounding urban fabric. Her plan an incubator for creative industries in the spirit of other nearby projects like the Olympic Mills Commerce Center, developed by Burnside Bridgehead developer-in-waiting Brad Malsin and his Beam Development company.

Harrison also had the simplest and perhaps most singularly effective design idea, not to mention the cheapest: The Eastbank Esplanade connects to the Burnside Bridge's edge with a stairway on the south side, she pointed out, but not the north side. Simply by putting in another stairway on the north side of the bridgehead, Masaye's plan established a better connection. No other student presentation I saw did anything like this exceptionally simple move to connect Burnside Bridgehead with the Burnside Bridge.

That said, two other students had the kind of bold ideas that we can only get from young, idealistic designers with open minds.

Kevin Ellingson imagined a relatively banal series of traditional buildings occupying the core of the Bridgehead site, but he also created a perimeter of very sculptural, curving architecture to ape the contour of the adjacent I-84/I-5 freeway interchange. Ellingson's design, which you can see a little bit in the photo above, looked like a long piece of origami, all folded triangles and angular facade. Were it to be built, the structure would become an instant icon for the city.

Then there was Kristopher Celtnieks, or "Special K," as I heard a fellow student call him. Celtnieks (pictured at left) proposed--are you ready for this?--a working dairy farm for Burnside Bridgehead, complete with cows grazing on the sloping green roofs of the buildings there. It wasn't something the designer pulled out of nowhere, though: He did all the research to prove that an urban dairy was not only possible for the site, but came up with a business plan that could turn a profit. 

Special K's plan also included a public market, which is actually a very viable idea for Burnside Bridgehead. Some of his buildings, curvy and classy with large overhangs, also recalled the landmark TWA terminal at New York's JFK airport by Eero Saarinen.

And if the dairy idea seems outrageous, I liked the fact that he was trying an idea so different. If you're not going to brainstorm wildly in a college setting free from the budget and client strictures of everyday practice, when will you?

Marc Holt had some of the best-looking displays for his project (a rendering is at right), which started with a more conservative, real-world idea: relocating Columbia Sportswear to the site. Within that simple plan, though, his designs offered some of the strongest ideas for how to energize the site with broad sweeping plans and integration with the surrounding streetscape. As it happened, one of the fellow jurors offering commentary alongside me during Holt's presentation on a Columbia headquarters was Eric Cugnart of Mulvanny G2, who served as a lead designer for another sports corporation headquarters in Portland, the Adidas Village, while working with BOORA Architects earlier this decade.

Cugnart, who happens to be French, also offered some of the most frank insights and commentaries to the students, which made good theater for the rest of us, being Americans more concerned with politeness. Cugnart wasn't afraid to say, "This doesn't work," when some of the rest of us weren't. I don't mean to imply he was nasty; Eric's a good guy without a doubt. But overall, I appreciated being part of a forum where my fellow jurors, people like architects David Horsely, John Duncan, and Kevin Valk (among several others) gently nudged students to both articulate their ideas and learn from opportunities not fully met.

Although this was clearly not an official brainstorming session for Burnside Bridgehead (I seriously doubt a dairy farm will go there, much as I enjoyed Special K's presentation), it was also good to see real decision makers there to participate, like the project's presumed actual developer, Brad Malsin, as well as Amy Ruiz from mayor Sam Adams's office.

In the future, Portland could very much use an integrated, collaborative approach to generating ideas for public-funded sites at key intersections such as this. Together the public and private sector should invite the academic portion of the design community to help generate ideas with as wide an initial net as possible. Kudos to UO and Mulvanny G2 Architecture for making this happen.

Oh, and Duck football fans: don't forget to root against Tennessee!

Update, 3/19: I've added some additional images from students below; the first four are of Kristopher Celtnieks' dairy project and the last two are from Jon DeLeonardo, a mixed-use public market project.

 

Also, I forgot to mention one other idea I had for Burnside Bridgehead. In Marc Holt's presentation, one of the jurors suggested his proposal might be better with a taller, more dramatic building at the point closest to the river. Hearing that, I thought: What if, were the Blazers and Portland Beavers intent on building a baseball stadium next to the Rose Garden--which I think is a terrible, disastrous idea--instead of letting Memorial Coliseum be demolished, what if it were to be disassembled and rebuilt at to the Burnside Bridgehead site? Obviously plenty of liberties would have to be taken with the design, but why not preserve the Coliseum at this prominent Burnside Bridgehead site as a concert hall, public market, or other space?

Latest Designs On Portland discussion features PNCA president Tom Manley

For this Thursday's new installment of the Designs on Portland series at Design Within Reach, I will be interviewing Pacific Northwest College of Art president Tom Manley - or, to be more official about it, Dr. Thomas Manley. Either way, as leader of PNCA since 2003, he has helped make the school Portland's intellectual nerve center. PNCA is today a place not just where students learn about painting, drawing, sculpture or other traditional artistic media, but also a place for countless exchanges, discussions and events surrounding a wide cross section of art, culture and design. PNCA has also done a great job of connecting its educational offerings to opportunities in other cities around the world.

I first met Manley four years ago while working on a story about a new exterior paint job for the school, fashioned by designer Randy Higgins, that is a mathematical, geometrical language that expresses the text of a Rimbaud poem. It was an excellent example of how the school would in the ensuing years continually exhibit dynamic thining as it applies to education, culture and even city building.

In the ensuing years, I've covered serveral different events and undertakings at PNCA, from the Tokyo Flow conference that brought creative minds from Tokyo and Portland together to a host of visual art exhibits to an ambitious campaign to expand the school's physical presence with the historic 511 Broadway building and, more recently, acquisition of the Museum of Contemporary Craft. PNCA began about a century ago as part of the Portland Art Museum. Much of that history was respectable but somewhat quiet. Since the turn of the 21st century, and Manley's arrival, PNCA has begun to roar with life and have a hugely significant impact on Portland's burgeoning culture of creativity and design.

PNCA is also a great center of activity for the Pearl District. This neighborhood can no longer be called a place of merely condos, trendy restaurants or even galleries and furniture stores. As its campus branches out, not only with 511 and the MCC but also the inclusion of student housing and integrated graduate study programs involving other schools like the Oregon College of Art & Craft (through a joint degree program), PNCA's influence and importance, both to the Pearl and Portland proper, will only incease. And while that has been a collaborative effort at PNCA inolving a lot of faculty and board members and students as well as collaborators like architect Brad Cloepfil and Wieden + Kennedy executive creative director John Jay, Manley unquestionably deserves ample credit for taking PNCA to a new sphere of influence and interest.

Design Within Reach, host for our discussion, is located at 1200 NW Everett Street, on the ground floor of the Wieden + Kennedy building. Doors open at 6PM with the discussion beginning officially at 6:30 but actually a few minutes afterward.

Getting electricity from rivers without damming (or damning) habitat

Before the industrial revolution and the invention of electricity, communities all over the world had water mills that relied on river currents turning turbines (a wheel in the water) to produce products like flour, lumber and textiles. In fact, the water mill is an iconic form of the 18th and 19th centuries.

Last night on the Discovery Channel, needing a distraction from the Blazers' last-second loss, I learned about an alternative energy project curiously similar to the thinking behind old water mills: Putting turbines in rivers. The documentary focused on a company called Verdant Power that has experimented with putting turbines in the East River, which has a fast tidal current (about 6MPH) because of its proximity to New York Harbor and the Atlantic Ocean. (Time has also covered these efforts.) The turbines are currently powering a Gristede's supermarket on the upper east side, but could do much, much more.

When thinking of hydro-electric power, we usually think of massive dams like Bonneville, which threaten fish and wildlife populations while also transforming local topography in a heavy-handed industrial way only the can-do World War II generation could come up with.

But what if, instead of extending hydro power across the width of entire rivers, we did it in a more benign way like Verdant is doing in the East River? Imagine a series of individual turbines that look and function like wind turbines, only they're buried under the Willamette River or the Columbia River in a way that's benign to the local wildlife habitat and shipping lanes? Although neither the Willamette or the Columbia has the same current speed as the East River, with Portland at more or less the confluence of two waterways, there ought to be ample opportunity.

Of course, efforts like these require millions in venture capital to get going, and today's stiffened credit markets either won't allow that or will scare investors from trying. Even so, given that river and tide currents are completely predictable in a way that winds aren't, I'd think this kind of alternative energy source, once the right investment is made, could accomplish a great deal.

I've spoken with locals in the green building community who one day envision solar panels on top of practically every Portland home. What if someday, in complement to that, scores of underwater turbines in the Willamette and Columbia were powering hundreds of homes, or all of our local government facilities?

City Council approves MLS soccer plan

As reported by several outlets in within the last quarter hour (the Portland Mercury quickly followed by Willamette Week and The Oregonian if you go by the time the articles were posted online), Portland's City Council has approved the proposed plan for bringing Major League Soccer to the city with a renovated soccer-only PGE Park. (The accompanying image of the Timbers Army, is from The Oregonian and was taken by Brent Wojahn.)

The measure passed by a 3-2 vote, with Nick Fish joining Amanda Fritz in 'no' votes and Dan Saltzman joining Randy Leonard and Sam Adams with a 'yes'. Saltzman's deciding vote was conditional upon a new amendment to the original agreement that rescinds the use of money from a new urban renewal district. That leaves $15 million from the financing package that has to be made up.

I've wrestled with this decision a lot personally, and I can't definitively tell you what the best decision would have been. The deal includes many millions that Timbers owner Merrit Paulsen is offering to the city through rebuilding a stadium and bringing the city's second major league professional sports franchise. But it's probably also true that Portland committing to the deal could mean less funding for other, arguably more worthy causes. I am a soccer fan, and I'm also a major-league snob; I've wanted this, but not so much that I felt I could argue vehemently for it.

Assuming that PGE Park gets rebuilt for Major League Soccer, what about the issues of who might oversee that design? Let's make sure this is a first-class stadium and not the antiseptic yet dreary environment of the existing baseball stadium.

At the same time, part of me will always be skeptical about the chances of PGE Park becoming a good stadium, for a reason seemingly out of anyone but a select few people's control. The Multnomah Athletic Club abuts the stadium so closely that you can't put any seats on the south end. I wish the MAC would move somewhere else and the new MLS stadium would include taking over that space. But it'll never happen.

Also, as I understand it, the accompanying issue of where a new Portland Beavers baseball field would be built is undecided. I am absolutely positively against the idea of building a baseball stadium at the Rose Quarter. The other main idea, putting it in the Lents neighborhood in outer Southeast, I'm ambivalent and not sure what's best. Where do the rest of you think a baseball stadium should go?

Here is a portion of the statement released today after the vote by mayor Sam Adams:

"Today we mark a huge step forward in realizing the dream of bringing major league soccer to our great city. The City Council, by supporting the resolution to accept a partnership with Merritt Paulson and the Paulson family, has demonstrated a commitment to raising our city’s national and international profile. And, the Council has chosen to support an effort that will bring jobs, revenues, visitors and much-needed spending to Portland’s Central City." 

"Every commissioner on the City Council has the best interests of the City at heart. The partnership with Mr. Paulson protects those interests by leveraging the best assets and attributes of the private sector with the long-term planning and fiscal responsibility of Portland’s public servants."

"The myriad businesses downtown, the thousands of soccer fans, the tens of thousands of youth soccer players, and all the citizens of the Portland region stand to gain from the revenue, visibility and benefits of welcoming Major League Soccer to Portland. From the construction and operational jobs that will be created to the hundreds of thousands of visitors that will bring their families and their pocketbooks downtown and year-round, this deal means economic development as much as it means family-friendly entertainment."

"And, we must not minimize the investment that the City and Merritt Paulson are making in the existing AAA baseball club that is so beloved in our city. This deal brings real investment and real revenues for the tens of thousands of baseball fans who come downtown, 80 percent of whom travel from outside the City of Portland to attend games."

Council member Amanda Fritz had this to say in voting against the plan:

"I think I've probably watched more professional soccer games than anyone on this council, but I'm not making my decision today based on whether soccer is a wonderful game or not. I'm being asked to vote on the dedication of millions of dollars of taxpayers' money. This increased debt capacity would take money away from those neighborhoods. We're in really bad shape as a city and we spent yesterday, our whole day in heart-breaking reviews of our city budgets."

Stastny and Gragg on Pioneer Courthouse Square and design competitions

Apologies for the short notice, but today from 5:30-7:00PM the AIA/Portland Center For Architecture will host a lecture and discussion about Pioneer Courthouse Square and design competitions featuring architect Don Stastny and Portland Spaces editor Randy Gragg.

As previously mentioned, Courthouse Square and the design competition that produced it are the subject of a monthlong exhibit at the Center For Architecture (located at 403 NW 11th Avenue) in celebration of the square's 25th anniversary.

Gragg will begin by discussing the competition to design Portland Courthouse Square, and Stastny will discuss other design competitions that he has led or observed around the country. 

Stastny, an AIA Fellow, has with his firm, StastnyBrun Architects, been involved in some very high profile design competitions, including the one for the memorial in rural Pennsylvania to Flight 93 passengers killed on September 11, 2001 as well as for the Walt Disney Concert Hall in Los Angeles (now a Frank Gehry designed landmark second only to his Guggenheim Bilbao), the US embassy in Berlin, the Alaska state capitol (won by Pritzker Prize winner Tom Mayne), the memorial in Oklahoma City to those killed in the 1994 domestic terrorist attack there, and Pioneer Courthouse Square itself.

 

Gragg and Stastny will then team up for a question and answer period and general discussion of what has worked, what hasn't, and what lessons Portland can apply to future competitions.

LOVE the Blazers, but worried about their Rose Quarter plans

As The Business Journal and other media outlets reported last week, the Portland Trail Blazers have launched a campaign to remake the 36-acre Rose Quarter as an "entertainment-themed district "alive with activity 24 hours a day". I'd have thought making it feel alive on a regular old Tuesday afternoon would have been challenge enough.

Our beloved NBA franchise--did I mention the Blazers are the greatest NBA team in the history of the universe, and lifelong love of my sporting life?--has teamed with The Cordish Company, which also was a finalist for the Centennial Mills development commission. Cordish is based in Baltimore and has created similarly themed entertainment districts there and in Kansas, with projects in Philadelphia and Los Angeles on the way.

Cordish seemed to have the most corporate-feeling of the Centennial Mills proposals, the one that felt the least like a good fit for Portland. Or as Portland Spaces blogger Mike Thelin put it at the time, "about as good as a fit for Portland as a new NASCAR track in Pioneer Courthouse Square." Another Spaces blogger, Tim DuRoche, describes the developer's track record as "projects that jiggered loose much economic development in the way of high-voltage, big-bang retail, manufactured experiences but were sharply criticized for their garishness and cultural politics."

What's more, the very idea of a ghettoized "entertainment district" seems circumspect. It's true that, at least according to the Business Journal report by Wendy Culverwell, the Blazers would plan to have offices and residences in addition to clubs and restaurants. But plans for those kinds of spaces seem less thought out than bringing in entertainment outlets.

I mean, do you think a local outpost of the ESPN Zone sports bar chain is the right solution for The Rose Quarter's future? I watch ESPN more than any other channel, and I sure don't. I know the Blazers plan much more than that; I'm mostly kidding. I wish I could say I was entirely kidding. There's strong reason to feel like the spirit of Portland will be lacking and the feel of the suburbs will be in full supply.

Then there's Memorial Coliseum, which the Blazers have at least hinted could be either torn down entirely or significantly altered. It's such a tragedy: you really don't need two arenas sitting next to each other. I hate the clustering of sports stadiums, at least in central areas. They're hard enough to make feel an accepted part of the urban fabric with just one behemoth of a stadium or arena. Two is worse. So there's a logic in getting rid of Memorial Coliseum, of course. It's just really too bad, because architecturally it's so much better than the Rose Quarter. Memorial Coliseum is really unique to me; among all the basketball arenas I've ever seen, it's the most transparent. Because of the glass facade, you could be inside that building and be surrounded by the city. If the Blazers really want this entertainment zone, isn't there room for that kind of structure?

The team plans to utilize the Rose Quarter's link to the Willamette River, and that could be a special urban place if done right. But again, I worry that the Blazers and Cordish, even though they've announced lots of admirable intentions to build green, don't have the pulse of Portland of how to create the right kind of urban place for the center of the city. I think they need to parcel out this work in a way the organization almost assuredly wouldn't be willing to do: a design competition, for example. Or to hire an architect with great pedigree and let them not just follow a cookie-cutter quasi-mall plan but actually design a program. Or to hold a series of forums and brainstorming sessions with the public and with local leaders.

Then there's the talk of putting a minor league baseball stadium for the Portland Beavers on the Rose Quarter site. That's the last thing that should be on the table. This site is already over-crowded with behemoth arena buildings. We need some foothills to these mountains, not another mountain.

The Rose Quarter, even aside from its 200-plus events per year at the two arenas, is a hugely important urban intersection, where bus lines and MAX lines from all over the east side come together. Yet despite Portland's reputation for progressive urban planning, owner Paul Allen forced through a suburban-style environment with the threat always looming of pulling the plug. And Earl Blumenauer, then a city council member, was eager to get the arena on the light rail line; that may have caused as much trouble as it did good by allowing such an unsuccessful urban crossroads to be built the way it was.

To repair the Rose Quarter, the Blazers need to integrate this area into the fabric of the city. Instead of forwarding a cheesy "entertainment zone", they should be looking to erase all surface parking and above-ground parking garages, then add a mix of housing, commercial and retail, and do so in a matter that refrains from thinking of the Rose Quarter as an island. We need the Rose Quarter better integrated with land across busy NE Broadway and better pedestrian connections for people to move freely across the site. We need a building scale that allows small local businesses and not just big brewpubs that host sports-talk shows and serve cheap steaks to people coming from out of town for the night in their SUVs to see the monster truck pull and eat at Tony Roma's. We need the Rose Quarter to borrow a little of the Portland spirit happening in its backyard at Leftbank or the Eastbank Commerce Center or the Brewery Blocks. The Rose Quarter should incorporate onto its property the ambitious Lloyd Crossing sustainable infrastructure plan.

Again, let me be perfectly clear about the Blazers organization: I love you guys. I adore you. I bleed red and black. Sometimes I actually think my whole life is just about holding on long enough for either the Blazers or the Oregon Ducks football team to win a championship. When the Blazers won two Western Conference titles in the early 1990s, I jumped up and down and screamed and told half of New York City about it whether they liked it or not (they didn't). When the team lost the heartbreaking 7th game of the 2000 Western Conference Finals after holding a 13-point fourth quarter lead, I literally sobbed and blubbered. Not just a tear or two: outright crying. Even when it was the thick of the "Jail Blazers" era with embarrassment and unlikable players like Rasheed Wallace, Ruben Patterson, Bonzi Wells and Damon Stoudamire, I was with the team every step of the way. I was holding my breath when Rudy Fernandez got hurt last night. And Greg Oden? Calling him a bust is fightin' words in my house.

(By the way, we have the one of the best logos in sports. I'd like to see us go back to the lower-case font like in this picture of LaRue martin from the 1970s, but keep the symbolic troupe-leader's diagonal sash. Oh, and please don't sell out naming rights to the Rose Garden!)

But please, Portland, don't let the Blazers be in control of urban planning for the Rose Garden, at least not without a very transparent process, good co-leadership from the city and appropriate talent on both the development and design teams. I have every faith they can put a championship squad together. Kevin Pritchard is like a Michael Jordan of the front office, and Larry Miller has quietly done an excellent job as president. But these are basketball team builders, not city builders. I worry these are people, judging by affiliations and track record, with a bad combination of Robert Moses and Las Vegas as their guiding principle. And a development being green doesn't make it a good development.

I'd love to be wrong about this. Really, I would. But I worry the Blazers are just going to make a bad urban setting even worse.

Then again, if Roy, Alridge and Oden can win a championship, the team could just fill turn the whole place into a toxic waste dump and I wouldn't care.

Architect's Questionnaire: Nathan Cooprider

This is the beginning of a new occasional series on Portland Architecture called The Architect's Questionnaire, in which a series of architects and designers answer a basic set of questions about their career, inspirations, lessons and motivations.

Inspired by the 'Proust Questionnaire' in Vanity Fair magazine (only without ten gazillion fashion ads), the idea is for the questions each time to remain the same and then compare answers. Although there will be some firm principals invited to participate, more often than not the intention is instead to feature men and women who may be in more supporting or emerging roles at firms or people lesser known in the design community.

I have sent out the questionnaire to a handful of architects so far, and the first set of answers came from the one Portland architect I can say has been a good friend of mine for over 20 years: Nathan Cooprider. I wrestled a little bit with whether to include Nathan (pictured here with his daughter Leila) because of this personal connection; I don't want to play favorites or seem insular in my picks, and I'm sure Nathan doesn't want that either. Even so, Nathan epitomizes the kind of emerging architect I enjoy featuring, and after three years of writing the Portland Architecture blog, this is my first time mentioning 'Coop', as we from McMinnville High Class of 1990 sometimes call him.

From the time I first got to know Nathan in the late 1980s, he was interested in drawing. At his mother's barber shop in McMinnville was always displayed Nathan's drawing of Ghandi from high school in the strippling style (with small dots). Later, when the rest of us left for college, he instead spent a year volunteering in Haifa, Israel at the Bahai World Center, some of that time with a gas mask on as Saddam Hussein's SCUD missiles hit the city during the 1991 Gulf War.

A few years later, after graduating with a bachelor's degree in architecture from the University of Oregon, he got his start in the business working for venerable firms like Yost Grube Hall and Waterleaf. Earlier this decade Nathan also lived for a few years in Kauai, Hawaii working on designing houses for a firm there, DeJesusArchitecture. (The Kauapea residence at right is one of the projects he worked on there.)

Today Nathan works for Portland-based Terraforma, along with principals Andrew Montgomery and Dana Montgomery. Terraforma has been responsible for numerous homes in the Portland area and on the Oregon Coast, as well as planning. Meanwhile, here is the Q&A with Nathan:

Q: When did you first become interested in architecture as a possible career?

A: Growing up, I loved getting lost in the process of drawing and building things.  I lived abroad for a year after high school and then enrolled at the University of Oregon as a fine arts major. Not completely satisfied with the arts program, I applied and was accepted into the school of architecture.  I didn’t know much about architecture as a career at that point, but I appreciated the rigor of the architecture program, and figured that I would get a great education whether I pursued a career in architecture or not.

Where did you study architecture and how would you rate the experience?

At Oregon, the first thing I learned was not to be as concerned with the sculptural ‘object’ I was creating as with the ‘place’ I was making and the interconnected series of places which make up our world.  That perspective really broadened my view of the world and the responsibility that architects have to shape the environment.  That being said, it would have been great to have more classes dedicated to the purely sculptural quality of design.

What is your favorite building project that you’ve worked on?

The Waipaki Residence in Kauai, Hawai’i.  It’s currently under construction, and the last project I worked on in Hawaii.

Who has been an important mentor among your colleagues?

At Yost Grube Hall I worked with Joachim Grube on an additional to a church he designed with Pietro Belluschi.  Joachim is a true modernist and humanist in the sense that he sees his work as a chance to improve people’s lives.  Working with him on a Belluschi building gave me the chance to connect with the first generation of modernists in Portland.

What part of the job do you like best, and as an architect what do you think you most excel at?

What I like best – The excitement, shared with my clients, of seeing their buildings taking shape. What I’m best at - solving problems through design.

What are some Portland buildings (either new or historic) that you most like?

Belluschi’s Equitable Building, The Japanese Garden, Pioneer Courthouse Square.

What is your favorite building outside of Portland and besides any you’ve worked on?

To name a few: Jorn Utzon’s Sidney Opera House, Alvar Aalto’s Villa Mairea, and Luis Baragan’s Casa Gilardi.

Is there a local architect or firm you think is unheralded or deserves more credit?

There are many small firms out there doing high quality work under the radar: Yanni Doulis, Design Department, DAO Architecture, Reveal Architecture, just to name a few.  I am very proud of the work that we are doing at Terraforma.  There is also the local 11xDesign movement of architect/developers designing and building their own cutting edge projects. 

What would you like to see change about Portland’s built environment in the long term?

Keep building our green infrastructure.  Plant more trees, convert surface parking lots into parks and plazas, extend light rail lines to southeast and southwest neighborhoods, improve and increase the city’s sidewalks/bike paths, schools, and parks.

How would you rate the performance of local government like the Portland Development Commission, or the development and planning bureaus?

Not only has the city created guidelines for smart and sustainable growth, they have also created programs which motivate citizens to improve their city.  So it is an example of not just good planning but also good follow through.

Would you rather live in a South Waterfront condo, a craftsman bungalow in Laurelhurst, a warehouse loft in the North Mississippi district or a mid-century ranch in the West Hills?

I’d love to design my own home – but for now we’re happy in our light-filled 50’s ranch in a pedestrian friendly southwest neighborhood.

Who is a famous architect you’d like to see design a building in Portland?

Sverre Fehn.  He is 85 years old and still practicing in Norway.  He is a very sensitive modernist who would understand our climate.

Which would you rather be responsible for: an ugly LEED platinum building or a beautiful modernist energy hog?

First of all, it’s hard for me to see this as “either – or”.  One thing architects are trained in is to reconcile seemingly contradictory requirements.  Architects aren’t purveyors of style, we are problem solvers – and to respond to the environmental crisis, and to do so in a profound and poetic way is one of the greatest challenges facing us today.  To me, beauty is the highest objective of architecture.  We should surround ourselves with a built environment which uplifts and inspires.  Conserving our natural resources is everyone’s responsibility.  There is only one earth, and we need to take our stewardship seriously.

Name something besides architecture (sneakers, furniture, umbrellas) you love the design of.

Surfboards.  Like a building, a surfboard is a man-made object through which we experience nature.  Every surfboard is handmade and unique, and the surfboard shaper and glasser pour their hearts into their craft.   It’s another example of how art is a critical part of the human experience, and that not all things can be mass-produced.

What are three of your all-time favorite movies?

"8½", "Baraka", "Buena Vista Social Club".

Thanks to Nathan for playing along. If you are a Portland architect and would like to have your own answers to the Architect's Questionnaire published, feel free to email them to me at [email protected]. Coming up will be Q&As with architects Michael Great, Brett Schulz, Richard Brown and David Hyman.

Bridging inspiration: Zaha Hadid, Santiago Calatrava, and SRG Partnership

Portland firm SRG Partnership is keeping some very good company in the March issue of Architectural Record. In a long continuing-education feature devoted to pedestrian bridges, SRG’s design for an elliptical span at Seattle’s Museum of Flight is one of three projects featured, and the other two are by a couple of the most famous architects in the world: Zaha Hadid and Santiago Calatrava (both of whom should be considered for the Columbia River Crossing).

The Seattle branch of SRG (which has its original main office here), headed by Rick Zieve, FAIA, came up with the $6.4 million bridge design, which is intended to mimic the forms of jet plane contrails.

As Joann Gonchar writes in Record, “The bridge’s primary span is a 200-foot-long tube truss, about 17 feet in diameter, tapering to about 12 feet at the ends. SRG had originally hoped to make it out of pipe sections bent into ellipses…[but] the architect came up with a more cost-effective and buildable alternative: The webs are made up of two sets of 5-inch-diameter pipes bent into pure circles.”

The more than 300 bent pipes are inclined in opposite directions to overlap, giving the bridge an elliptical section even though its individual elements have a simpler geometry.

I’d also strongly recommend that readers here go to the source and check out the other two bridges featured: Calatrava’s Ponte della Constituzione in Venice (pictured below) and Hadid’s combination bridge and building that served as the entry pavilion to this past summer’s Zaragoza Expo, in Zaragoza, Spain. 

Although none of these pedestrian bridges have the same program or scale as the three Portland bridges going through design right now—the Columbia River Crossing, the light rail & pedestrian bridge on the Willamette, or the reconstructed Sellwood Bridge—but they should serve as a reminder of what great design can bring.

If we’re willing to select bridge designers with great talent and not just a track record of building other bridges, and if we’re able to craft a public process that not only gets them in place but allows them creativity, this will be the route to bridges we can all be proud of. Sure, the amount of lanes matters. So do budget and sustainable design principles. Even so, the design is what will last for generations even as other factors from the time of construction fade away.

Meanwhile, even if we get boring cookie-cutter bridges in Portland made on the cheap, we can at least congratulate SRG Partnership on a job well done in Seattle.

Trimet chooses suspension/cable-stayed hybrid bridge: did design win out, or budget?

Dylan Rivera reports in today's Oregonian that a TriMet advisory committee, the Portland Design Commission and other decision makers have chosen a hybrid of the cable-stay and suspension bridge prototypes, pictured in a rendering at left, for the new Willamette River crossing between the Ross Island and Marquam bridges that will serve MAX, the Portland Streetcar and pedestrians.

Miguel Rosales and his firm (Rosales + Partners), already hired by TriMet, came up with the design after the cable-stay prototype and the wave design were previously listed as the two finalists.

The design that Rosales has come up with has "both the elegance of the St. Johns Bridge and the modernity of the cable-stayed idea," Portland Design Commission chair Lloyd Lindley told Rivera.

I was somewhat surprised by the selection. In my conversations with architects and members of the design community--while admittedly not a scientific sampling--it seemed clear that the wave design was a better fit for this cramped site and it would have been more unique. Rosales stated explicitly that he preferred the wave.

More troublesome is this paragraph from Rivera's story:

"Yet TriMet, weathering cost overruns on a Washington County rail project [the WES], remains nervous about anything that deviates from bridges of more common design -- and lower cost."

Or this one:

"Many on the Katz committee were enthusiastic about a co-called wave frame girder...Rising only 120 feet above the water, it would present a modest profile...But the wave would require high-performance steel produced by only one company in the United States. So TriMet urged rejection of that choice."

Or this:

"TriMet staff nudged the committee to favor a cable-stayed bridge...But many on the Katz committee blanched at the cable-stayed design's tall, thick concrete towers as out of proportion...'I still think the wave would be better, but I'm still pleased with this design,' Rosales said."

I'm not trying to argue here that TriMet should have chosen the wave option. Rosales is a real talent, and he seems to have coaxed more refined elegance and appropriately smaller scale out of the cable-suspension hybrid design. In one sense, the bottom line here is that we seem to have a good designer, and that's worth a great deal.

Even so, there may be warning signs here that TriMet was not putting design first.

I can understand the agency being concerned about pragmatic issues like cost. They have a responsibility to deliver this infrastructure on time and on budget. Besides, even the ugliest bridge would get MAX and light rail trains across the Willamette, and that's TriMet's first obligation.

Still, I challenge you to imagine this bridge in 25 years, when the budget issues have long been forgotten but the bridge's tenure in Portland is still in its infancy. Will the next generation be glad that bridge is there, and that bridge specifically versus the ones they'll see the renderings of that didn't get built?

And this isn't even getting into siting for the bridge. I think taking MAX and the Streetcar across the river at a point further north would have better served a wider topography and constituency of users. However, that would have left out South Waterfront, and infrastructure projects, particularly streetcar and light rail, are development tools.

As I wrote in a blog post earlier this week, today the AIA Center For Architecture is debuting an exhibit of Pioneer Courthouse Square's design competition in celebration of its 25th anniversary. I think most all Portlanders can be happy with the design that was chosen, even a quarter-century later, and even after we go back and look at the other options. Will we do the same with this bridge in 2038?

There's a connecting thread here between this light rail bridge, the Columbia River Crossing project, the Sustainability Center of Excellence, and most of the other public projects happening or being discussed in Portland. Each has real promise to improve the city and make us proud. But in each case, I worry that design is taking a back door to other more pragmatic concerns, be it the number of car lanes or budget constraints or, most of all, the system we have for making these selections and decisions.

With a whole new era of public works projects in America and in our region, is the system set up to deliver us the best buildings and infrastructure? I'm just not sure.

Gerding Edlen, GBD and SERA win Sustainability Center job (updated)

The Portland Development Commission has announced that Portland's Gerding Edlen Development, in collaboration with GBD Architects and SERA Architects, has been selected for the Sustainability Center of Excellence commission.

"After lengthy deliberations, debate and discussion," the announcement reads, "[the] Committee unanimously agreed that Gerding Edlen Development is the most qualified and experienced team to deliver this complicated project within the schedule and meeting as many objectives as are likely to be met for this ambitious project (e.g. satisfying LEED Platinum and Living Building Challenge requirements, fostering and promoting Oregon leadership in sustainable design and development, coordinating and creating creative and innovative partnerships and opportunities, identifying innovative funding sources to make this project feasible, advancing and facilitating an inclusive programming phase, etc.)."

It's hard to argue with the track record Gerding Edlen brings to the table. The Request For Proposal process that decided this job was geared toward experience and qualifications, and the ability to get the job done. Gerding and its architect partners certainly fit those criteria.

In the "Notice of Intent to Award" that PDC produced, they also list all 11 entities that made proposals for the Sustainability Center.

Besides the aforementioned team finalists led by Gerding, Holst Architecture, Winkler Development and Ethos Project Management, there were proposals from Brad Cloepfil's firm, Allied Works, as well as THA Architecture, Ankrom Moisan Architects, Hennebery Eddy Architects, Skylab Architecture, Philadelphia hotelier real estate developer Citizen & Company, and Urban Renaissance Development of Baltimore and Urban Renaissance Group (based in Seattle with office in Portland) with SRG Partnership and Lease Crutcher Lewis.

I'll be the first to admit I'm sometimes biased towards certain acclaimed architects and designers. So it's surprising to me that Allied Works and some of the other award winning architecture firms that made proposals were not even made finalists. Haven't many Portland architecture enthusiasts been yearning for another major Brad Cloepfil building ever since the Wieden & Kennedy headquarters was completed a decade ago?

I think it'd be wrong to second-guess PDC or the selection committee for making the choice they did given the structure of the whole process. At the same time, I wonder if the Sustainability Center of Excellence is an example of the need in Portland's public projects for a new way of making selections, one based on design more than qualifications. Gerding Edlen, GBD and SERA might have won a design competition too; it's not to take anything away from their efforts. But did this process satisfy everyone that the decision was made the right way? I'm not making accusations here so much as raising questions.

Meanwhile, the overall attitude toward this project ought to be positive, even if there is some second-guessing about the larger question of how we award public projects. These are tough times for everyone in the building industry, and the Sustainability Center is an example of hope and optimism when we sorely need it.

Additional note, March 5: I previously mis-identified one of the non-finalist teams as Urban Renaissance Development of Baltimore. In reality that team was Urban Renaissance Group (based in Seattle and has a Portland office) with Portland architecture firm SRG Partnership, contractor Lease Crutcher Lewis, and the University of Oregon's resident sustainability guru, G.Z. "Charlie" Brown. My apologies for the error.

Celebrating (and learning from) Pioneer Courthouse Square

It is probably the most popular urban space in Portland. It's been America's 4th best public square by the Project for Public Spaces. The American Planning Association named the square one of its 10 Great Public Spaces along with landmarks like Central Park in New York and Santa Monica Beach.

This year marks the 25th anniversary of Pioneer Courthouse Square's completion. To celebrate, AIA/Portland (a sponsor of this site) and Portland Spaces magazine are collaborating on a March exhibit at the Center For Architecture called "Pioneering the Square."

It's no coincidence that this is an exceptionally successful public space, for Pioneer Courthouse Square came about through an international design competition. For all the simple enduring quality of the square, from its gentle curving stairs that double as seating to the series of columns that play with postmodernism much more successfully than Michael Graves's Portland Building down the street, Pioneer Courthouse Square could have been an ugly disaster. But the competition received 162 different submissions, including finalists from around the country: New York, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Los Angeles and Portland. However it was actually a local team, led by the late Portland architect Will Martin, that won the job.

At one point after the competition, there was a ridiculous effort to enclose the square and make it a private space out of concern there would be too many transients there. It's true today if you go to PCS, there are a lot of unshowered people playing hackey sack, but they have as much right to Portland's living room as anyone else. Thank goodness this plan never went through, in part because of an indignant former governor Tom McCall standing up for Martin's design.

It's really too bad there haven't been many design competitions since. The competition for the Portland Building seemed to scare away the notion for many years. Then we had a terrific competition for the tram, but then the city made an ill-advised move to back away from a design competition for Fire Station 1 after THA Architecture won the job. Today we're having teams of developers and architects vie for public projects like the Sustainability Center for Excellence and, a couple years ago, Burnside Bridgehead. But those aren't design competitions. They choose a team before a design is ever produced, and the teams are usually led by developers, not the architects.

Another legendary politician but one now disgraced, former Portland Mayor Neil Goldschmidt, was also key. In 1975, while mayor, he negotiated directly with the Meier & Frank store to sell the parcel to the city instead of using it for a parking garage.

Pioneer Courthouse Square also might not have been created were it not for the MAX line. It was this project that kick started the idea of a public square downtown, and TriMet funds for an information center and transit stops provided key dollars.

And speaking of funding, one of the wonderful little features about Pioneer Courthouse Square shows how citizens stood up to make it possible. The square's brick surface is embedded with the names of thousands of citizens (one on each brick) who donated money.

The bricks and the TriMet funding reveal how Pioneer Courthouse Square was almost derailed out of budget concerns. But you know how much this priceless landmark cost? About $3 million for the land and $4.3 million to build. That would be pocket change today for an urban development. This was something I often kept in mind when foes of the Portland Aerial Tram were citing this very successful transit project as a boondoggle.

Sometimes I get tired of all the countless events that are held in the square, especially in the summer. Do we really need Scientologists in their yellow circus tents trying to convert people? Do I have to hear that lowest-common-denominator rock music at noon on summer days? On the reverse side, Pioneer Courthouse Square's security and rules can be excessive in my opinion. I was once prevented from using a tripod there, for example.

But those criticisms are relatively small compared to the pride, thankfulness and enjoyment the square generates. Portland may not have many landmark buildings by famous architects like our urban West Coast neighbors to the north and south. But Pioneer Courthouse Square epitomizes the veritable jewelry box of beautiful public spaces in this city, from Lawrence Halprin's fountain at Keller Auditorium to Peter Walker's Jamison Square Park. the Olmsted brothers' Park Blocks, and much more.

The "Pioneering The Square" exhibit at the CFA, put together by Portland Spaces editor Randy Gragg with an assist from researcher Audrey Alverson, will feature not only Will Martin's original model and drawings, but many of the plans that didn't make the final cut. Mayor Terry Shrunk, for example, proposed a two-block square in the 1960s. And then there were the other finalists. How differently might our living room have looked?

The exhibit officially opens tomorrow with a First Thursday early-evening reception from 5:30 to 8:30pm.

Marjorie Belluschi: 1920-2009

She wasn't an architect, but she was beloved to many in the local design community and a steward of some of the city's most important architecture. Marjorie Bruckner Belluschi, widow of the great architect Pietro Belluschi, passed away in her home--the Burkes House that her husband designed--on February 24.

During World War II, she served for four years in the Women's Army Corps. A year after peace broke out in 1945, Marjorie went to work as a secretary at the Massachusetts Institute of Tenchology and was, five years later assigned to Pietro when he became dean of the school of architecture. It was another 14 years before they married in 1965, and in 1973 they moved from Boston to Portland.

 

As mentioned in a Sunday Oregonian obituary, Marge "was well known as a reference and resource to the many inquiries about Belluschi designs, buildings and projects. She often welcomed individuals and groups into her home for tours, discussions and meetings. She was generous in sharing her knowledge about the historic and anecdotal details of various Belluschi buildings."

 

I was one of those people. Last year when Marge and Pietro's grandson, Jeff Belluschi, brought me by the magnificent Burkes House, Marge was there to say hello and share a variety of stories about the home and its history, even though she wasn't in the best of health.

 

Memorial donations in Marjorie Belluschi's name may be made to the Pietro Belluschi Professorship at the University of Oregon. A lot of people have surely made contributions to the professorship in Pietro's name, and deservedly so. But I like the idea of a part of that endowment representing Marge as well.

Saul Zaik: mid-century master and Energizer bunny of Portland architects

This month Portland Modern, realtor Bob Zaikoski’s website, is featuring a profile that Bob and I wrote about architect Saul Zaik, FAIA.

Portland Modern is a sponsor of this site, but this post is not intended to be extra promotion. Rather, I’m writing this to spread the word about Zaik, an 82 year old architect of great significance who, despite still coming to work everyday, confesses to feeling like an “invisible man” compared to the presence he once had on the local architectural scene. If I were a young architect, I'd be taking this guy out to lunch and soaking up Zaik's knowledge like it was au jus for my French dip sandwich.

Zaik has practiced continuously here since 1952, creating a portfolio that’s extensive as it is impressive. Early in his career, he was influenced by legendary local architects like Pietro Belluschi, John Yeon, Van Evra Bailey, John Storrs and others. Zaik was part of the “14^th Street Gang”, a group of practitioners in the generation immediately following Belluschi and Yeon who distinguished themselves with exceptional mid-century modern houses.

The article is too long to reproduce here, and Bob has a huge collection of photographs that were taken and digitized from Zaik’s personal collection, so it's worth going to the source. Even so, I’d like to share a few extra thoughts.

Zaik has had a few different partners over the years but has always run or co-run some kind of small firm, save for the start he got working in the Portland office of Skidmore, Owings & Merrill not long after graduating from the University of Oregon.

Single family residences and vacation homes have comprised the majority of the Zaik portfolio, and a couple of houses are particularly celebrated.

Best known of these is probably the Zidell House, which was designed and built in 1970 for shipping magnate Arnold Zidell. It’s octagonal in shape and built around a 48-foot ship’s mast (seen at left in an archive photo).

“He was a crazy guy, Zidell,” Zaik told us for the article. “The mast idea was his. He came in with that thing and said, 'I want to make it round.' It was built like an umbrella or a ski-lift tower—just bolted on. At one point he wanted to make it rotate.”

An earlier house from 1956, the Feldman House, is also a gem; it was included in last year’s Street of Eames tour and is pictured below in a shot I took earlier this year while visiting with Zaik, Zaikoski and a group of designers from Path Architecture.

 

Originally built for Philip Feldman, heir to the Mt. Hood Borax Company, the structure has a cantilevered, low-pitched gable roof and cedar siding. Its combination of ample glass and broad overhanging eaves is quintessential Northwest Modern in the tradition of Zaik’s forebears, Belluschi and Yeon.

The same could be said of Zaik’s own house, built in 1959, which the architect and his wife still occupy. (The picture below was taken the same afternoon as the Feldman House visit.) Nestled into a northwest Portland hillside near Skyline Boulevard, it has two distinct boxy spaces connected by a walkway, allowing light to permeate the space and retain a human scale to the residence.

Zaik has also designed apartments and condominiums, banks, shopping centers, schools, medical buildings and commercial buildings. When Nike was first looking to build a campus in the 1980, the company came to Zaik with a location near Wilsonville in mind (the job later went to Thompson/Vaivoda, now TVA Architects, and a location in Beaverton was chosen instead). Zaik also designed lots of homes and buildings at two forward-thinking landmarks, Sunriver and Salishan.

Although he has always worked in a contemporary architectural language, Zaik also has a special touch when it comes to fitting in with historic architeture. In 1968 his firm designed an addition to Timberline Lodge (pictured below in an archive photo) that is vastly more congruent with the original then the Wy’ East Day Lodge constructed later. Zaik has also done lodge buildings at Crater Lake that, like the Timberline work, express historic forms with a contemporary palette of clean lines. Restoration has also been a specialty. Zaik helped oversee the restoration of historic Vista House at Crown Point in the Columbia Gorge.

It’s patronizing to remark how an 82-year-old guy still has a lot of energy, but during the several visits Bob and I had with Zaik at his office, I always noticed how he practically would leap for a ringing phone, palpably excited at the prospect of a new client. Zaik could have sat at home collecting Social Security since before the Clinton administration began, but he has a contagious enthusiasm for architecture. Last week when I was on the 11xDesign homes tour, there Zaik was checking out all the houses; he’s a big fan of the emerging architects and firms. And lest that comment about his lurching for the phone paint a picture of a designer merely hungry for business, it was equally clear that Zaik was happy as a clam talking architecture with us for hours.

But it needn’t be over, especially if you ask Saul. Anybody need a house designed by an outright living legend of Portland architecture?

(Meanwhile, here are three more shots of Zaik's home and two more of the Feldman.)

Reactions to Sustainability Center proposals

Although I was not at the presentations late last week by four teams vying for the city's new Sustainability Center commission, a few friends of Portland Architecture were. So I'd like to pass on their thoughts.

First is architect and artist Fredrick Zal, a regular at such events:

Walking into the City Council Chambers of Portland, Oregon for the Living Building Challenge’s Sustainability Center of Excellence, I was prepared to be WOW’d, but I got even more.

I have the greatest of respect for Gerding Edlen Development, as they have made their name and significant money over the last number of years as a community partner and by marketing their sustainability. They certainly were the favored team walking into the room, with their established relationship with PDC, their standing contract for the Block 153 property, and having harnessed the best and brightest of Portland, Oregon to work with them on their many LEED projects. But, something went awry.  Mark Edlen continually harped upon his Oregon base for the entire team, even though they have a significant presence in Los Angeles, and marketed themselves as ‘all about California’ for their San Diego Civic Center proposal, which also happens to be their poster child for sustainability and their ‘Liveable Place Index’.

Facing a competing team with Brightworks, that could have potentially shown just about every one of the same project images as GED, since they worked together on most of them, I believe that they were hedging their bets against the German influenced Brightworks/Behnisch team. It was for good reason, as Stefan Behnisch simply put, “We cannot keep doing what we have done in the past and expect change”.  Or, in the words of Albert Einstein, “No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it”.

I am not saying the GED created the problem.  Certainly not!  They have done immense work to pioneer the LEED efforts by constructing many prototypes for the US Green Building Council to champion.  Dennis Wilde was able to show a number of ‘on-the-boards’ sketches of how sustainability can influence design form and orientation.  But, their projects have primarily been a series of boxes with layers that only address LEED marketing, but not core design issues or lifestyle choices.  With all due respect to GED, SERA and GBD, we have seen many examples of what their collaboration and financial willingness constructs.  GED’s Civic Center design with ZGF could serve as inspirational for this proposal, but they left it out of the presentation, as they determined that the design was not financially viable and withdrew from developing it for San Diego.  GED’s primary LEED consultant, Chris Forney of Brightworks put it clearly, that sustainability is not about a bunch of checklist, but it is about creating work that is regenerative to our community and our Planet Earth.

In November of 2008, Ethos Development split into three components and Brad Wellstead is heading up the Project Management division.  It was awkward for him to be presenting his exceptional project management skills on complex projects, which is very relevant to Phase II of this project, when he needed to be acting as the Phase I developer for this RFP, which he is not.  Even though Brightworks is hands-down the best sustainability consulting firm in Portland, they unfortunately do not have the important developer component necessary to secure the federal stimulus dollars from Governor Ted Kulongoski that David Van't Hof spoke of.  Even with Stefan Behnisch showing the impressive Institute for Forestry and Nature Research in Wageningen, the Netherlands that he co-designed with the scientist user-group, which is perfectly synonymous with the P+OSI/OUS/LBI [Living Building Initiative] tenants, he ran out of time to revive his team.

Similarly, Holst Architecture was only able to show a few projects of minimal relevance to the intent of the Sustainability Center.  They are one of the best mid-density mixed-use designers in town, and prior to the dismissal of Randy Higgins, one of the best designers in town, but they have lost their inspiration.  Their presentation was flat.  It did not help that Bruce Fowle, of FXFowle, barely scratched the surface of the benchmark New York Times Building that they managed for the Italian designed Renzo Piano Building Workshop. The scale of development presented by both Pettigrove Venture and Equity Community Builders again was just not inspirational in scale nor execution.

The Winkler Development Corporation with Busby Perkins + Will, and LRS Architects team is clearly the best selection for a number of reasons:

Jim Winkler, and his sometime business partner Bob Naito, have been the silent force behind the urban revitalization of Portland in all of the areas that other developers did not have the patience or vision to touch.  It is great to see them moving in this ecologically-minded direction.Winkler has always contributed greatly to the culture of Portland, following in the model established by the Schnitzer family.

LRS shows great potential with their Cosmopolitan Point Tower for the PDC.  The project not only shows how they can collaborate as the Architect of Record with the IBI/HB Architects design team, but it also resolves the long-standing partial development of the Cascadian.

With the adjacent historic Harrison Court Apartments on the National Registry, it will be important to have an architect as sensitive as LRS was in the adaptive reuse of the deSoto building, where their offices reside in the Pearl District.

Busby, Perkins + Will has an immense portfolio of sustainable, commercial, educational, and mixed-use projects that are at the leading edge of architectural best practices.  [Some of which were shown as ‘best’ examples in the presentations of their competition this evening.]

The Dockside Green Development in Victoria, British Columbia demonstrates how bio-filtration can not only be beautiful, but a community amenity.  [The GED and Ethos teams bury their bio-systems, or tack them on as an afterthought, instead of engage them holistically.]

The Laurentian University Cooperative Freshwater Ecology Unit in Sudbury, Ontario, Canada not only harnessed future technologies in a harsh environment, it acts as an educational model for others.  This will be important in allowing the Sustainability Center to teach the public and professionals.

And lastly, the VanDusen Botanical Garden in Vancouver, British Columbia shows the direction of their current / future works, which is greatly influenced by the sinuous femininity of Mother Earth and would certainly serve as a beacon for tourists and researchers to engage the City of Portland as a world leader in Creative Sustainability.

Then there were the comments of John Jennings. In full disclosure John works for BetterBricks, which is a sponsor of this site. I'm posting his thoughts, however, because I thought they were worth reading in their own right:

Last night after sitting though all the presentations by the four finalists for the Sustainability Center of Excellence to be located in downtown Portland, I asked myself which team would I choose.

Although there were world class leaders in sustainable design on the teams and enough images of really dramatic and substantial buildings that purportedly come close to meeting the ambitious Living Building goals, I came away thinking a recombination of some of the team members might be best. Pick the best of each specialty from each team and mix them back into a super team. Too bad we can't do that. But what makes a good team anyway? 

What kind of team can assure successful delivery of this highly ambitious innovative project that aims for zero carbon emissions, no off-site energy resources consumed, zero waste, all water use from captured or reused water from the site, with no wastewater discharge, a healthy interior environment, and at the same time beautiful and inspiring.

From our experience, it will require a team with a client that sets clear and significant performance goals (done here by the project sponsors); a developer that is open to ideas, willing to take risks and innovate; an architect able to work collaboratively with lots of team members (not a visionary "starchitect"); engineers with out-of-the box thinking empowered by significant technical expertise; and a sustainability consultant with a holistic view (not just a list checker).

In fact, all team members need to be well versed in ecosystem thinking (ecology, systems dynamics, regeneration, balance, biomimicry, biophilia, etc.). The whole team must be open to community input. And to ensure effective integrated design, the team has to be able to easily and quickly communicate on a regular basis.