MEMORANDUM
Date: January 4, 2010
Date Mailed: January 6, 2010
To: Alex Haecker, Meyer, Scherer, Rockcastle Ltd
From: Kara Fioravanti, Development Review
Phone number 503-823-5892
Re: 09-170059 DA – Centennial Mills
Design Advice Request Summary Memo December 3, 2009
Thank you for taking advantage of the opportunity to hold a Design Advice Request regarding your project. I hope you find it informative and valuable as you continue with your project development. Attached is a summary of the comments provided by the Design Commission at the December 3, 2009 Design Advice Request. This summary was generated from notes taken at the public meeting and a subsequent review of the public meeting recordings. For a small fee we can provide you with copies of those recordings; to request copies, please call 503-823-7814.
These Design Commission comments are intended to guide you in further design exploration of your project. These comments may also inform City staff when giving guidance over the course of future related land use reviews. It should be understood that these comments address the project as presented on December 3, 2009. As the project design evolves, the comments, too, may evolve or may no longer be pertinent.
Design Advice Requests are not intended to substitute for other Code-required land use or legislative procedures. Please keep in mind that the formal Type III land use review process [which includes a pre-application, a land use review application, public notification, a Staff Report and a public hearing] must be followed once the Design Advice Request meetings are complete, if formal approval for specific elements of your project is desired.
At the end of the hearing, it was understood that you would return for a second Design Advice Request, which will take place on January 21, 2010. Please continue to coordinate with me.
Encl:
Summary Memo
Cc: Design Commission
Respondents
This memo summarizes Design Commission design direction provided at the December 3, 2009 DAR.
Greenway trail/River
• What happens if the lower level doesn’t happen – how are the GW trail connections impacted? How do you ensure GW trail connections?
• Are you investigating more areas/opportunities to allow people to get to the water, get closer to the water, get lower, etc? If opportunities arise that allow people to get lower, it would be nice to perforate those spaces in some manner.
• How far along are you in your coordination with the Federal and State reviews for Greenway and River work (they require significant processes that could greatly impact the project)?
• A low wharf and trail are intriguing, but they will be in shadow each day from noon on. Are you considering shadows? Are you considering homeless? What about gates? Good lighting, programmed activity and possibly 24-hour surveillance might be necessary for it to work. We don’t want to see gates. You are responsible to create safety and a clear perception of safety. Because of safety issues, the alternate route above needs to be as good as below.
• Are you coordinating with the bike community?
Architecture/Buildings
• Are you considering HVAC requirements early-on and how they will be thoughtfully integrated into the development’s design?
• What are your LEED goals?
Landscaping
• Describe the landscaping.
• Have you considered the Tanner Creek pipe? Make it more of a feature in your integrated design. It was noted this includes a ‘cove designation’. An interpretive element would be a minimal requirement for Tanner Creek.
Fields Park/Centennial Mills Bridge
• If you could place the bridge anywhere, what is the optimal location?
• It seems a long journey to get from the Fields Park to Centennial Mills due to the bridge location you chose.
• How are you addressing security issues and 24-hour access from the park to the Greenway Trail through the building? The wrong solution is to culminate the bridge experience in a gate right before entry into the building – think about this issue when locating the bridge. Public money is behind this project – you need to provide access.
• Have you considered flipping the bridge and landing it in the grove?
• Please bring other bridge alternatives next time.
• What is the experience under the bridge along Naito? Naito is a challenging street. We need to repair its current condition and activate it for pedestrians. This street is in the Central City, one block from the River – it needs to be pedestrian-friendly along the street edge.
• You need to address the security issues surrounding the bridge entering the building – how will the development operate and what security measures will be in place? Each solution must be great, and you should propose alternate solutions to us including worst case scenario (i.e. needing a gate).
Other
• Have you considered talking with the Portland Public Market and/or the nearby Food Innovation Center to coordinate efforts?
• Have you considered outdoor movies on the long, blank wall surfaces of the building?
• Was housing ever considered for this project?
Exhibit List
A. Applicant’s Narratives
1. 10-28-09
2. 11-5-09
B. Zoning Map
C. Drawings
1. Drawings mailed to DZC in preparation for 12-3-09 DAR (25 pages)
2. Drawings presented to DZC at 12-3-09 DAR (25 pages) – ‘site plan’ and ‘schematic design rendering’ attached
D. Notification
1. Mailing list
2. Mailed notice
E. Bureau Responses
F. Public Testimony
G. Other
1. Application form
2. Land use history
3. Memo to DZC, 11-24-09
4. Excerpts from 2006 Framework Plan
5. List of Issues for 12-3-09 DAR hearing
6. Staff notes from 12-3-09 hearing
7. Staff presentation for 12-3-09 hearing
1