 |
||||||||
 |
||||||||
 |
MEMO BLOG | |
Memo Calendar | Memo Pad | Business Memos | Meals on Wheels | Letters | Home |
LEE PERLMAN
THE MID-COUNTY MEMO
 |
| A graphic rendering of Glisan Commons phase two, the construction project currently underway on Northeast Glisan Street between 99th and 100th avenues. Developers will likely make additional changes based on feedback received from the Portland Design Commission. COURTESY REACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT |
Phase II, on the northern half of the property, will be a 60-unit apartment building, five stories high at its highest, owned and operated by REACH Community Development. Most of the first floor will be given over to 84 “tuck-under” parking spaces, to be shared by all three non-profits, as will a plaza on the southern half of the property. All the units will be one-bedrooms, architect Ben White said, and all will be reserved for people 55 years old and older. The building will have a common community room and laundry facilities, and current plans call for some common balconies as well as private ones for some units.
The top story will be “stepped back” to make it less visible and reduce the impact on neighbors. For the same reason, the eastern portion of the building, facing Northeast 100th Avenue and some single-family homes across from it, will be reduced in height to 47 feet, White said. The main entrance will be on 99th, and as originally designed was “minimalist,” White said. In addition, on that street, the wall of the garage was right against the sidewalk and “very pedestrian-unfriendly,” White said. In his revision, there was a more prominent entrance to a main lobby; it included a main room and a computer area. On the theory that fewer seniors will cycle, another requested code adjustment would reduce the permanent bicycle storage area from the required 66 spaces to 59.
Another change was to substitute cement board lap siding and metal panel as exterior materials for cement fiber panel, which White conceded had durability issues, and brick. Commission member David Keltner suggested the loss of brick was an attempt to save money, and White admitted it was an attempt to balance costs.
Last month's session was a design advisory, a voluntary, informal discussion in advance of a formal application. During the discussion commission members indicated that they would probably support the two code adjustments; chair Gwen Millius said she'd support even further reductions in bike parking if it resulted in more closet and storage space.
However, commission members were critical of other things. Keltner and others called for more coherence and consistency in design features. Commission member David Wark called on White to edit the number of materials and colors he used. Wark called a required pathway through the project “what's left over rather than designing with pedestrians in mind.”
Commission member Jeff Simpson questioned the inclusion of common balconies. Several criticized plans to wrap pillars in synthetic Hardie Panel. Tad Savinar questioned plans for outdoor common areas, saying, “For one or two people or someone reading a book, they'd be more comfortable in a more intimate space.”
 |
 |
 |
MEMO Advertising | MEMO Archives | MEMO Web Neighbors | MEMO Staff | Home