DOCSLIB.ORG

I CHANGING MINDSETS: SUSTAINABLE DESIGN in HISTORIC PRESERVATION a Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School Of

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
I CHANGING MINDSETS: SUSTAINABLE DESIGN in HISTORIC PRESERVATION a Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School Of i CHANGING MINDSETS: SUSTAINABLE DESIGN IN HISTORIC PRESERVATION A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Cornell University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts by Jennifer Lynn Buddenborg August 2006 © 2006 Jennifer Lynn Buddenborg ABSTRACT At a time of rapid resource depletion and world population growth historic preservation rests at a pivotal point in the advancement of sustainable development and design. Historic preservation is inherently sustainable. Unfortunately, current green building practices focus more on the ever-growing technological innovations that can be applied to new construction. A lack of education and collaboration amongst historic preservation and sustainable design practitioners, scholarly research and publications that join the two fields, and building research, pose additional roadblocks in greening historic preservation in the United States. The question is whether or not historic preservation and green building practice can effectively work together. They can and they do. The key to integration is the changing of mindsets. Educating industry stakeholders as to how and why this linkage can be made is a vital component to effectively taking green building and historic preservation to higher elevations of outreach and implementation. This paper investigates this statement in two ways, by [1] providing a theoretical and evolutionary framework of sustainable design and the inherent role that historic preservation plays within it, and [2] comparing the two sets of standards that guide the two practices: in historic preservation it is The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and in green building it is the widely used Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED™) rating system. The methodologies used to substantiate these points are varied. They include a literature review of sustainable development publications, a brief survey of the ‘green’ education of State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPO), an analysis of the LEED New Construction (NC) and Existing Building (EB) rating systems and their considerations of historic preservation, and a case study analysis of the green iv rehabilitation/renovation of the Jean Vollum Natural Capital Center in Portland, Oregon. Combined, this analysis proves that historic preservation is inherently sustainable in the most basic sense, and as a result lends itself to green building rating systems. However, it also proves that there are many kinks to be worked out on both sides before a full integration is a reality. The rules and regulations surrounding The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and LEED can be cumbersome, and this paper is a reminder that while both systems are worthy tools in the stewardship of natural and cultural resources, they are not hard and fast rules. They are basic guidelines, and the fusion of the two holds the potential to more closely align the fields of historic preservation and environmental conservation, and to allow the field of historic preservation to assert itself as a viable and integral means to promoting sustainability. iii BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Jennifer Lynn Buddenborg was raised in the Great Lakes State in metropolitan Detroit. She attended Wayne State University in Detroit where she earned a Bachelor of Arts in History with a minor in Anthropology. After two and a half years working as a Research Development Coordinator for a social anthropologist at Wayne State University’s Institute of Gerontology, and as a last hurrah before beginning graduate studies, Jennifer set off on a five month thru-hike of the Appalachian Trail from Georgia to Maine. Already possessing a deep interest in the ties between historic preservation and environmental conservation, it was the simple living amongst nature over this 2,174 mile footpath that first introduced her to a sustainable way of life. She tailored this new perspective to her studies at Cornell University and life in Ithaca, New York, where she became involved in the burgeoning field of sustainable design in historic preservation. iii iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS After completing my thru-hike of the Appalachian Trail I was told by a number of people that I could accomplish anything in life. I knew, however, that writing a Master’s thesis would present me with a formidable task. This proved true. Hence, I have many people to thank for providing guidance and motivation throughout the thesis writing process. First and foremost I would like to give gratitude to my advisor and friend, Michael Tomlan. He kept me afloat in any number of ways, always with the bright light of knowing that we were “moving right along.” Jack Elliott, my second Committee Member, provided the yin to the yang, offering the valuable insight of a LEED accredited professional and, more importantly, the perspective of a like-minded sustainable-living advocate. I could not have asked for a better pairing of minds. My Cornell preservation colleagues: My time in Ithaca would not have been the same without the close ties I made with Alec Bennett, Liz Blazevich, Jayme Breschard, Jess Evans, and Matt Gundy. Sara Shreve, a late installment in our initial group of six, became my compatriot in the world of thesis, and good friend. In addition, all of the amazing friendships made during my extra year in Ithaca, and those friendships that followed me to Ithaca, provided much needed support and, oftentimes, mind-clearing distraction. A certain gap-toothed friend, who shall remain somewhat anonymous, deserves special thanks for never giving up faith in me. And of course my family, who ever so gently poked and prodded, providing unceasing support. It is my parents, I believe, who deserve the accolades for this thesis, for without their love and encouragement, I may never have landed where I have today. iv v TABLE OF CONTENTS Biographical Sketch iii Acknowledgements iv List of Figures vii List of Tables viii Introduction 1 Chapter One: Sustainable Design: A Fuzzy Concept or a Concrete Goal? 11 Definition of Sustainability 12 Definition of Sustainable Design 16 Joining Historic Preservation and Sustainability 26 Conclusion 29 Chapter Two: Reinventing the Wheel, With an Added Spoke 30 The Industrial Revolution and the Machine Age 32 Post-World War II Development 35 1960s and 1970s Environmentalism 36 Toward a Modern Sustainable Design 46 Conclusion 61 Chapter Three: A Look at LEED 63 A History of LEED 64 How LEED Works 70 Analysis and Criticism 74 Conclusion 83 Chapter Four: Standard v. Standard 84 Similarities 84 Differences 85 v vi vi Shared Elements 87 The Rules of Engagement 89 Conclusion 96 Chapter Five: A Case Study: The Jean Vollum Natural Capital Center 98 The Setting 98 The Site 102 The Project Plan 106 The Greening 109 Conclusion 123 Conclusion 125 Appendix A: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation 132 Appendix B: NCSHPO Survey 134 Appendix C: The Hannover Principles 136 Appendix D: LEED-NC Version 2.2 138 Appendix E: LEED and Standards Comparison Charts 141 Appendix F: The Jean Vollum Natural Capital Center LEED Scorecard 168 Works Cited 169 vi vii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1 – NTHP, Preservation Week Logo 29 Figure 2.1 – Willis Faber and Dumas Headquarters 46 Figure 2.2 – The Gregory Bateson Building 47 Figure 2.3 – The Environmental Defense Fund Building Interior 58 Figure 2.4 – National Resources Defense Council Building Interior 60 Figure 2.5 – The Audubon House 61 Figure 2.6 – The Solaire 66 Figure 4.1 – S.T. Dana Building 98 Figure 4.2 – S.T. Dana Building Interior Infill 99 Figure 4.3 – Balfour-Guthrie Building 101 Figure 5.1 – Pearl District Redevelopment 107 Figure 5.2 – The Brewery Blocks in Portland’s Pearl District 108 Figure 5.3 – Rapid Transfer & Storage Company 110 Figure 5.4 – The Ecotrust Building, 1998 111 Figure 5.5 – The Ecotrust Building, 2005 117 Figure 5.6 – Ecotrust Ecoroof 121 Figure 5.7 – Ecotrust Parking Lot 122 Figure 5.8 – First floor example of low-finish aesthetic, open design and 126 refinished Douglas-fir plank flooring Figure 5.9 – Steel tower seismic code upgrades 130 Figure 5.10 – Portion of deconstructed building 131 vii viii LIST OF TABLES Table 1.1 – Life Cycle Costs of Slate v. Fiberglass Roofing Material 30 Table 3.1 – Current LEED Rating Systems & their Applications 73 Table 3.2 – Owners of LEED Registered & Certified Projects, May 2005 75 Table 3.3 – LEED-NC v2.1 & LEED-EB v2.0 Certification Levels 78 Table 3.4 – Point Distribution of LEED-NC v2.1 & LEED-EB v2.0 Categories 79 Table 3.5 – Fee Summary for NC, EB, & CI 80 Table 4.1 – LEED Certified Historic Buildings (October 2005) 100 Table 5.1 – Natural Capital Center LEED-NC v2.0 Point Earnings 119 viii 1 INTRODUCTION In an age when natural resources are becoming scarcer by the minute, perhaps even the second, the conservation and preservation of the existing built environment becomes a basic priority. The concept of sustainability in all of its various forms and definitions has become common to our everyday vocabulary. In the world of architecture it takes on various monikers, including ‘high-performance design,’ ‘integrated design,’ ‘sustainable design,’ or ‘green building.’ Buildings negatively impact people and the environment through the over- consumptive use of virgin materials like wood and minerals, energy resources, and water, and the production of waste and unhealthy indoor air. They account for one- sixth of the world’s freshwater withdrawals, one-quarter of its wood harvest, and two- fifths of its material and energy flows.1 Such significant resource use wreaks havoc on our environment, causing deforestation, air and water pollution, stratospheric ozone depletion, and the risk of global warming.2 And within the construction of most modern buildings about half of the energy used in the building construction and operation is expended in creating an artificial indoor climate in heating, cooling, ventilation, and lighting systems, a climate that often leads to sick building syndrome.3 These numbers alone should encourage the preservation and green retrofit of our existing built environment to reduce resource use and health threats, as opposed to the wasteful enterprise of demolition and new construction.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • JAPANESE TRAVEL PORTLAND / Mini Guide 2016-2017 TRAVEL PORTLAND / Mini Guide 2016-2017
    Travel Portland ©2016 Travel Portland / Media Surf Communications Inc. www.travelportland.jp ポ ートラ ン ド ・ ミ ニ ガ イ ド Edit : Travel Portland + Media Surf Communications Inc. Art Direction and Design : Shinpei Onishi Design : Aya Kanamori JAPANESE TRAVEL PORTLAND / Mini Guide 2016-2017 TRAVEL PORTLAND / Mini Guide 2016-2017 Why Portland? Profile_ ケリー・ロイ Kelley Roy ADX と Portland Made Collective の創業者兼オーナー。米 国でのものづくり事業支援から、世界中から寄せられるメイカー Owner / founder スペースのつくり方のコンサルティングまで手がける、アメリカ ADX & Portland Made Collective でのメイカームーヴメントの第一人者。地質学の学位と都市計 画学の修士号を持ち、2010 年にはフードカートについての著書 「Cartopia: Portland ’s Food Cart Revolution 」を出版。ク メイカームーブメントの 震 源 地 リエイティブな人々の技術向上を支え、起業を応援し、「自分の WHY 好きなことをして生きる」人々を助けることに情熱を燃やす。 “ WHY PORTLAND? ” 米国北西部「パシフィック・ノースウ エスト」に属するオレゴン州ポートラ ンド。緑にあふれ、独自のカルチャー を育み、「全米No.1住みたい町」に度々 登場する人口60万人の都市。その魅 力はある人にとっては、緑豊かな環境 比較的小さくコンパクトな大きさの街で、そこに ADXは20 11年に始動しました。様々な背景を持っ ときれいな空気、雄大な山と川であり、 住む人は正義感が強く、ちょっと変わったものや実 た人々を一つ屋根の下に集め、場所とツールと知識を Maker community またある人にとっては、インディペン 験的なものが好き。こんな要因がポートランドを「メ 分かち合い、一緒に働くことによって、この街にあふ デント・ミュージックやアートシーン イカームーブメント」の震源地としています。職人 れるクリエイティブなエネルギーをひとつのところに に象徴される「クール」な面であった 的な技術を生かしてものづくりにあたり、起業家精 集めるというアイデアからはじまったのです。エネル りする。ここで出会う豊かな食文化 神にあふれ、より良いものをつくり出そうという信 ギーに形をあたえることによって、新しいビジネスや とクラフトビールやサードウェーブ・ 念に基づき、リスクを厭わない人々を支援する気質 プロダクトが生み出され、アート、デザイン、製造過 Columns Feature PORTコーヒーをはじめとする新しいドリン が、この街にはあるのです。 程を新しい視点から捉えることができるようになり ク文化も人々を惹きつけてやまない。 ポートランドに移住してくる人の多くが、何か新 ました。ADXは、人と地球と経済に利益をもたらし、 比較的小さなこの都市がなぜ、こんな しいことをはじめたいという夢を持っています。そ 高品質かつ手づくりの製品に価値を置く「アーティサ に注目されているのか。まずは現地に して、まわりにインスパイアされて、同好の士とと ナル・エコノミー（職人経済）」のハブ兼サポートシス
    [Show full text]
  • PLAZA HOTEL INTERIOR Designation Report
    PLAZA HOTEL INTERIOR Designation Report New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission July 12, 2005 Designation List 366 LP-2174 PLAZA HOTEL INTERIOR: TABLE OF CONTENTS Site Description 2 Testimony at Public Hearing 2 Essay Summary 3 Fifth Avenue and the Site 4 Construction and Opening of Plaza Hotel 4 Hotel Architecture 5 Frederic Sterry 6 Henry Janeway Hardenbergh 6 Warren & Wetmore 7 The 1905-07 Design of the Plaza Hotel’s Interiors 8 1919-1922 addition and 1929 Grand Ballroom 11 The Hilton Plaza (1943-1953) 13 Plaza Hotel (1953 to present) 14 Plaza Hotel Social History 14 Site Plans 21 Individual Room Entries The Edwardian Room 24 59th Street Lobby 29 Fifth Avenue Lobby and Vestibules 31 Grand Ballroom 35 Corridor and Foyer Main Corridors 44 The Oak Bar 49 The Oak Room 52 The Palm Court 57 Terrace Room 62 Corridor, Foyer Stairways Findings and Designation 72 Report researched and written by Research Department Mary Beth Betts, Director of Research, Michael Caratzas, Gale Harris, Virginia Kurshan, Matthew A. Postal, Donald Presa, and Jay Shockley All photos by Carl Forster PLAZA HOTEL INTERIOR Plaza Hotel, ground floor interior consisting of the Fifth Avenue vestibules, Lobby, corridor to the east of the Palm Court, the Palm Court, Terrace Room, corridor to the north of the Palm Court connecting to the 59th Street Lobby and the Oak Room, foyers to the Edwardian Room from the corridor to the north of the Palm Court and the 59th Street Lobby, the Edwardian Room, 59th Street Lobby and vestibule, the Oak Room and the Oak Bar, corridor
    [Show full text]
  • Housing Opportunity Program
    NEW ISSUE RATINGS: 2005 Series C − Moody’s Aa2 BOOK-ENTRY ONLY 2005 Series D − Moody’s Aaa (Ambac-Insured) In the opinion of Preston Gates & Ellis LLP, Bond Counsel, interest on the 2005 Series C Bonds is included in gross income subject to federal income taxation. Interest on the 2005 Series C Bonds is exempt from Oregon personal income tax and is also exempt from personal income taxation by Multnomah County, Oregon. See “TAX MATTERS” herein. In the opinion of Preston Gates & Ellis LLP, Bond Counsel, assuming compliance with certain covenants of the City, interest on the 2005 Series D Bonds is excluded from the gross income of the owners of the 2005 Series D Bonds for federal income tax purposes under existing law. Interest on the 2005 Series D Bonds is not an item of tax preference for purposes of either individual or corporate alternative minimum tax. Interest on the 2005 Series D Bonds may be indirectly subject to corporate alternative minimum tax and certain other taxes imposed on certain corporations. Interest on the 2005 Series D Bonds is exempt from Oregon personal income tax and is also exempt from personal income taxation by Multnomah County, Oregon See “TAX MATTERS” and “OTHER FEDERAL TAX MATTERS” herein. City of Portland, Oregon $3,170,000 $6,975,000 Limited Tax Housing Limited Tax Housing Revenue Bonds Revenue Bonds 2005 Series C 2005 Series D (Federally Taxable) (Tax-Exempt) (Housing Opportunity Program) (Housing Opportunity Program) BASE CUSIP: 736704 DATED: Date of Delivery DUE: June 1, as shown on inside cover The City of Portland, Oregon, Limited Tax Housing Revenue Bonds, 2005 Series C (Federally Taxable) (Housing Opportunity Program) (the “2005 Series C Bonds”) and Limited Tax Housing Revenue Bonds, 2005 Series D (Tax Exempt) (Housing Opportunity Program) (the “2005 Series D Bonds” and, collectively with the 2005 Bonds, the “2005 Bonds”) will be issued in registered book-entry form only without coupons in denominations of $5,000 or integral multiples thereof.
    [Show full text]
  • Sun Mon Tues Wed Thurs Fri
    NYU Urban Design and Architecture Studies New York Area Calendar of Events July 2019 Sun Mon Tues Wed Thurs Fri Sat 1 2 3 4 5 6 Paul Rudolph Five Squares Heritage and a Circle ​ Foundation Open House In the Wake of the High Line: Far West Village & Hudson Square 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 The Changing East Village New York’s Old ‘Perfection is The Landmarks Face of North Community French Quarter One Thing’: of Sunset Park Midtown: Gardens Tour in Chelsea Chatsworth and ​ Crosstown the Art of Shaping Our Below the Park Prodigy of the Telling the Art Capability City: Depression: Deco Story of Brown Morningside NYCHA Is Born Downtown Heights to and Changes Brooklyn & The Glamour of Harlem the Housing Brooklyn Rockefeller Model in New Heights: Talk & Center Industrial York Walk Waterway Tour: Sunset Freshkills Park Transportation Sketching at in Staten Island Conversations Four Freedoms Park NoHo: Contemporary Architecture amidst Historic Landmarks The Hunt: Jackson Heights 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 A Walking Tour Backstage Tour Architects, Women Sunset Tour of of Historic 19th of the Developers, Construct Manitoga Century Noho Delacorte and Title 1 Panel ​ Theater Discussion The Terra Cotta Graphic Design Architecture of Midtown in Transit Park Avenue South 9/11 Memorial From Blueprint and World to Bill: NYC’s Mansions of Trade Center: Building Riverside Drive Architecture, Emissions Law Tour 1 Urban Planning and History SAH Change Manhattanville ​ Agent Award Douglas Manor Reception Guided Tour en Español: Astor Place & East Village 21 22 23 24 25 26
    [Show full text]
  • CITY of PORTLAND, OREGON $163,500,000 $93,080,000 First Lien Sewer System First Lien Sewer System Revenue Bonds Revenue Refunding Bonds 2004 Series a 2004 Series B
    NEW ISSUECOMPETITIVE via PDXAuction.com RATINGS: Moody’s Aaa BOOK-ENTRY ONLY Standard & Poor’s AAA (FSA-Insured) In the opinion of Preston Gates & Ellis LLP, Portland, Oregon, Bond Counsel, assuming compliance with certain covenants of the City, interest on the 2004 Bonds is excluded from the gross income of the owners of the 2004 Bonds for federal income tax purposes under existing law, as currently enacted and construed. Interest on the 2004 Bonds is not an item of tax preference for purposes of either individual or corporate alternative minimum tax. Interest on the 2004 Bonds may be indirectly subject to corporate alternative minimum tax and certain other taxes imposed on certain corporations as more fully described under the caption “TAX EXEMPTION” herein. Under the laws of the State of Oregon, as currently enacted and construed, the interest on the 2004 Bonds is exempt from Oregon personal income tax. Under the laws of the State of Oregon and current ordinances of Multnomah County, the interest on the 2004 Bonds is also exempt from personal income taxation by Multnomah County, Oregon. City of Portland Oregon $163,500,000 $93,080,000 First Lien Sewer System First Lien Sewer System Revenue Bonds Revenue Refunding Bonds 2004 Series A 2004 Series B BASE CUSIP: 736742 DATED: Date of Delivery DUE: As shown on inside cover The First Lien Sewer System Revenue Bonds, 2004 Series A (the “2004 Series A Bonds”) and the First Lien Sewer System Revenue Refunding Bonds, 2004 Series B (the “2004 Series B Bonds”), (collectively, the “2004 Bonds”) will be issued in registered book-entry form only, in denominations of $5,000 or integral multiples thereof.
    [Show full text]
  • Improving the Energy Efficiency and Environmental Impact of Historic Building
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Theses (Historic Preservation) Graduate Program in Historic Preservation January 2008 Shades of Green: Improving the Energy Efficiency and Environmental Impact of Historic Building Anita M. Franchetti University of Pennsylvania Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/hp_theses Franchetti, Anita M., "Shades of Green: Improving the Energy Efficiency and Environmental Impact of Historic Building" (2008). Theses (Historic Preservation). 105. https://repository.upenn.edu/hp_theses/105 A thesis in Historic Preservation Presented to the Faculties of the University of Pennsylvania in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of the Degree of Master of Science in Historic Preservation 2008. Advisor: Michael C. Henry This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/hp_theses/105 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Shades of Green: Improving the Energy Efficiency and Environmental Impact of Historic Building Abstract The recent dramatic increase in oil prices as well as a growing worldwide concern with climate change has brought renewed attention and interest in energy efficiency and consideration for the environment among all areas of industry, in particular the built environment. According to the U.S. Department of Energy, operational energy consumption in residential and commercial buildings accounted for 40% of total energy consumed in the United States in 2007, and produced nearly 48% of the country's greenhouse gas emissions.
    [Show full text]
  • 376-380 Lafayette Street Building and the Proposed Designation of the Related Landmark Site
    Landmarks Preservation Commission May 17, 1966, Number 4 LP-0193 376-380 LAFAYETTE STREEI' BUILDING, Borough of Manhattan. 1888; architect Henry Janeway Hardenbergh. Landmark Site: Borough of Manhattan Tax Map Block 531, Lot 12. On March 8, 1966, the Landmarks Preservation Commission held a public hearing on the proposed designation as a Landmark of the 376-380 Lafayette Street Building and the proposed designation of the related Landmark Site. (Item No. 17). At that time two speakers spoke in favor of designation. The Connnission continued the public hearing until April 12, 1966 (Item No. 4). At that time one person spoke in favor of designation. The owner of the building also testified at this public hearing. Both hearings were duly advertised in accordance with the pro­ visions of law. DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS This six-story building standing resolutely on its site is unusu2lly i Qposing in its mass. It was completed in 1888 When buildings of this size were still considered high. Handsome dark brown brick piers form five bays for windows on the Great Jones Street side and four on Lafayette Street. These tiers of windows are four stories high and terminate in segmental arches, also of brick. The piers, supported at the first floor by interesting dwarf columns of sandstone, rest on polished gray granite bases. Handsome ornamental sandstone blocks are a conspic­ uous feature of the piers at the third story and may also be seen at the inter­ section of the arches with the piers. Solid sections of light colored brick wall terminate the succession of arched bays at both ends of the building si gn~lizin~ the location of entrances, stairs and elevators.
    [Show full text]
  • Portland City Council Agenda
    CITY OF OFFICIAL PORTLAND, OREGON MINUTES A REGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORTLAND, OREGON WAS HELD THIS 10TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2014 AT 9:30 A.M. THOSE PRESENT WERE: Mayor Hales, Presiding; Commissioners Fish, Fritz, Novick and Saltzman, 5. OFFICERS IN ATTENDANCE: Karla Moore-Love, Clerk of the Council; Ben Walters, Chief Deputy City Attorney at 9:30 a.m.; Linly Rees at 2:03 p.m.; Jim Wood, Sergeant at Arms at 9:30 a.m. and 5:03 p.m.; and Greg Seamster, Sergeant at Arms at 2:03 p.m. Item No. 1267 was pulled for discussion and on a Y-5 roll call, the balance of the Consent Agenda was adopted. The meeting recessed at 1:30 p.m. and reconvened at 2:03 p.m. Disposition: COMMUNICATIONS 1257 Request of Eltah Brinson to address Council regarding the Young Entrepreneurs' Advocate House (Communication) PLACED ON FILE 1258 Request of Linda Birth to address Council regarding saving the Gasco Building (Communication) PLACED ON FILE 1259 Request of Nicole Brannon to address Council regarding saving the Gasco Building (Communication) PLACED ON FILE 1260 Request of Jamie Partridge to address Council regarding the City Fair Wage Policy (Communication) PLACED ON FILE 1261 Request of Scott Matley to address Council regarding spray paint fume issues at Skidmore Fountain (Communication) PLACED ON FILE TIMES CERTAIN 1262 TIME CERTAIN: 9:30 AM – Accept report from Market Street Services on a Draft Implementation Assessment: Portland Economic Development Strategy and Neighborhood Economic Development Strategy (Report introduced by Mayor Hales) 45 minutes requested ACCEPTED Motion to accept the report: Moved by Fritz and seconded by Novick.
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of Historic Places Weekly Lists for 2000
    National Register of Historic Places 2000 Weekly Lists WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 12/27/99 THROUGH 12/31/99 .................................... 4 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 1/03/00 THROUGH 1/07/00 ........................................ 6 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 1/10/00 THROUGH 1/14/00 ........................................ 9 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 1/17/00 THROUGH 1/21/00 ...................................... 11 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 1/24/00 THROUGH 1/28/00 ...................................... 14 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 2/07/00 THROUGH 2/11/00 ...................................... 23 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 2/14/00 THROUGH 2/18/00 ...................................... 26 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 2/21/00 THROUGH 2/24/00 ...................................... 29 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 2/28/00 THROUGH 3/03/00 ...................................... 33 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 3/06/00 THROUGH 3/10/00 ...................................... 36 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 3/13/00 THROUGH 3/17/00 ...................................... 39 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 3/20/00 THROUGH 3/24/00 ...................................... 43 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 3/27/00 THROUGH 3/31/00 ...................................... 47 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 4/03/00 THROUGH 4/07/00 ...................................... 51 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 4/10/00 THROUGH 4/14/00 ...................................... 55 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 4/17/00 THROUGH 4/21/00 ...................................... 58 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 4/24/00 THROUGH 4/28/00 .....................................
    [Show full text]
  • Placemaking Vision August, 2018 This Page Is Intentionally Left Blank
    Placemaking Vision August, 2018 This page is intentionally left blank. This page is intentionally left blank. 3 Broadway Corridor Placemaking Vision Table of Contents 1. Introduction 5 2. Findings 10 Timeline of Engagement 11 Key Themes 12 Accountable 12 Connected 12 Equitable 13 Prosperous 13 Resilient 14 Vibrant 14 3. Recommendations 15 Placemaking Guidelines 16 Accountable 16 Connected 18 Equitable 20 Prosperous 22 Resilient 23 Vibrant 25 Place Concept 28 Bubble Diagram 32 Street Hierarchy 48 4. Appendix 52 Summaries of Community Engagement 52 June Steering Committee Meeting (06/26/2018) 52 Sunday Parkways at the Green Loop Pop-up (7/22/2018) 56 July BCMP Steering Committee Meeting (7/24/2018) 58 Open House (7/25/2018) 60 Online Open House (7/25/2018–8/1/2018) 66 4 1 Introduction Introduction Building on the guiding principles established by Prosper to build, and how to build it, will be in the hands of the users.” Portland and its Steering Committee, the Broadway Corridor This led to one of the best early models of participatory has the potential of becoming a neighborhood unlike any planning in the country which continues to inspire Oregon in the City of Portland, or indeed, the entire country. The planners. In 2011, the City of Portland created an Office of concept of an economically, racially and culturally inclusive Equity and Human Rights by city ordinance, whose mission district, where people from a broad cross-section of the statement is to provide “education and technical support Portland region will feel not just welcome to visit, but also to to City staff and elected officials, leading to recognition and live and work together could give this new community and its removal of systemic barriers to fair and just distribution of public realm a truly unique identity.
    [Show full text]
  • Hotel Martinique, 1260 Broadway, Aka 1260-1268 Broadway, 49-51 West 32Nd Street, and 54- 58 West 33Rd Street, Manhattan
    Landmarks Preservation Commission May 5, 1998, Designation List 292 LP-1983 Hotel Martinique, 1260 Broadway, aka 1260-1268 Broadway, 49-51 West 32nd Street, and 54- 58 West 33rd Street, Manhattan. Built 1897-98, 1901-03, 1909-11; architect, Henry J. Hardenbergh. Landmark Site: Borough of Manhattan Tax Map Block 834, Lot 11. On February 10, 1998, the Landmarks Preservation Commission held a public hearing on the proposed designation of the Hotel Martinique (Item No. 2) . The hearing was duly advertised according to the provisions of law. There were two speakers in favor of designation and the representative of the owner stated that they were not opposed to designation. Summary The Hotel Martinique, a major work of the prominent designer Henry J. Hardenbergh, was constructed in three phases, in 1897-98, 1901-03, and 1909- 11. Developer William R. H. Martin, who had invested heavily in real estate in this area of the city, built and expanded the hotel in response to the growth of entertainment, shopping, and transportation activities in this busy midtown section. Martin hired the distinguished architect Henry J. Hardenbergh, who had acquired a reputation for his luxury hotel designs, including the original Waldorf and Astoria Hotels, as well as the Plaza. In his hotel and apartment house designs, Hardenbergh created picturesque compositions based on Beaux-Arts precedents, giving special care to interior planning and appointments. For the sixteen-story, French Renaissance­ inspired style Hotel Martinique, the architect capitalized on the openness made possible by Greeley Square, to show off the building's boldly-scaled mansard roof, with its towers, and ornate dormers.
    [Show full text]
  • Pearl District Development Plan Appendix 1
    Pearl District A Future Vision for a Neighborhood in Transition Development Plan APPENDIX October 2001 Pearl District Development Plan Table of Contents Planning Process . .A-3 Glossary . .A-4 Buildout Analysis . .A-6 Background Information . .A-10 Policy Conflicts Memo . .A-41 Open House #1 Summary . .A-43 Open House #2 Summary . .A-50 P earl District Development Plan page a-i Pearl District Development Plan Planning Process he Pearl District Development Plan has been drafted by a 26-member steering Tcommittee, representing a wide range of viewpoints. The steering committee met monthly over the course of a year to discuss the future of the Pearl District, to re-evaluate current plans and policies, and to focus on the development priorities for the neighborhood. In addition to the steering committee, an executive commit- tee met in between the steering committee meetings to provide advice on the plan- ning process and to make initial recommendations to the steering committee A draft vision statement and an initial set of goals and objectives were presented and reviewed at a public open house on December 6. The open house format of the meeting allowed participants to comment on a series of display stations for the vision statement and each category of goals and objectives (i.e. Built Environment, Housing, Transportation, etc.). The steering committee made changes to the vision statement and goals and objec- tives based on the open house comments. Each category or section was then sent to an adhoc subcommittee, which included other community members. An intensive series of meetings was held to refine each set of goals and objectives and to identify specific action items.
    [Show full text]