Infill and Small Developments | Portland

nomc said:
I was thinking this too. Homogenized, cheap and quick to build.
Click to expand...
I was surprised; you can see in the first photo that the box was already there, and the mansard roof was just wooden trim. It's hard to tell and I didn't get a pic at that stage, but the lowermost strip in the new design was fresh red brick, and it looked really good when they installed it (or took off the cladding and cleaned it). But then they had to paint it gray. :sick:

And yes, moving away from their well-known visual identity architecture (either the OG Golden Arches walk-up, or the Mansard design when they introduced dining rooms) to a plain box is uglifying and dumb. As far as losing our history goes, though, my understanding is that before the McD's, the site was a used car lot. Historic Aerials shows some houses in the area in the 1970 pic, but I don't remember them.
 
A 3 story, 5-unit condominium infill project at 56 Cumberland Ave. on Munjoy Hill

1701199139069.png

1701199121543.png
 
markhb said:
Looks like a McDonald's.
Click to expand...
… and I think there may be almost the same amount of parking.

Also, I'm surprised to see 2/3 of the plot not host to more units. Seems that a three-story building (if that's the height limit) could cover at least half of the lot to accommodate one or two more units — and it looks like the open area on the lot could still accommodate one or two more cars (if we HAVE to continue building homes for cars).

Or maybe the owner/developer is wisely leaving room for a potential phase two addition, if parking minimums ever get adjusted downward.
 
GIL said:
… and I think there may be almost the same amount of parking.

Also, I'm surprised to see 2/3 of the plot not host to more units. Seems that a three-story building (if that's the height limit) could cover at least half of the lot to accommodate one or two more units — and it looks like the open area on the lot could still accommodate one or two more cars (if we HAVE to continue building homes for cars).

Or maybe the owner/developer is wisely leaving room for a potential phase two addition, if parking minimums ever get adjusted downward.
Click to expand...
Portland's zoning code no longer requires *any* on-site parking for sites within 1/2 mile of a METRO route – which applies here (and in most of the city).

I have no way of knowing whether this is the case, but I'd just note that this is being built on a lot that's already being used for parking for the adjacent building (54 Cumberland).

It's possible that the sellers are only allowing this to proceed if it preserves their existing parking for the adjacent building. If that's the case, it would be a net reduction in parking, with a gain of 5 new apartments.
 
cneal said:
Portland's zoning code no longer requires *any* on-site parking for sites within 1/2 mile of a METRO route – which applies here (and in most of the city).

I have no way of knowing whether this is the case, but I'd just note that this is being built on a lot that's already being used for parking for the adjacent building (54 Cumberland).

It's possible that the sellers are only allowing this to proceed if it preserves their existing parking for the adjacent building. If that's the case, it would be a net reduction in parking, with a gain of 5 new apartments.
Click to expand...
Portland seems to want to make everyone ride a bus....are they doing anything for EVs?
 
cneal said:
The multi-billion dollar subsidies for free highways and free parking aren't enough for you? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Not really. I take a bus to Logan because financially and convenience wise it make sense. I'm not being forced to take a city bus which can compromise both health and safety. I do realize that the bus/bike mafia in Portland is very powerful though.
 
Also....are people that buy $1 million+ condos REALLY bus riders? Me thinks not.
 
mainejeff said:
Also....are people that buy $1 million+ condos REALLY bus riders? Me thinks not.
Click to expand...
So let me get this right: people who ride buses and bikes are in an all-powerful mafia and they're trying to force you onto a city bus – maybe even as we speak! – "which can compromise health and safety" (not sure I understand this part, when car owners are the state's biggest source of air pollution and also killed 177 people in crashes in Maine alone last year, in addition to thousands of other serious injuries for other victims).

BUT this bike/bus mafia isn't quite influential enough to be able to afford to live in new condos, so, therefore, we should be raising everyone's housing costs even more by adding zoning red tape that requires more parking so that the poor millionaire car owners who buy expensive condos can bring more cars into our city. Because at the end of the day, forcing someone to ride a bus is obviously wrong (shaking a fist at the bus/bike mafia!), but forcing someone to build yet another parking spot nobody wants is obviously the right thing to do.
 
cneal said:
So let me get this right: people who ride buses and bikes are in an all-powerful mafia and they're trying to force you onto a city bus – maybe even as we speak! – "which can compromise health and safety" (not sure I understand this part, when car owners are the state's biggest source of air pollution and also killed 177 people in crashes in Maine alone last year, in addition to thousands of other serious injuries for other victims).

BUT this bike/bus mafia isn't quite influential enough to be able to afford to live in new condos, so, therefore, we should be raising everyone's housing costs even more by adding zoning red tape that requires more parking so that the poor millionaire car owners who buy expensive condos can bring more cars into our city. Because at the end of the day, forcing someone to ride a bus is obviously wrong (shaking a fist at the bus/bike mafia!), but forcing someone to build yet another parking spot nobody wants is obviously the right thing to do.
Click to expand...
This is brilliant. Please publish this as an editorial piece to PPH.
 
cneal said:
So let me get this right: people who ride buses and bikes are in an all-powerful mafia and they're trying to force you onto a city bus – maybe even as we speak! – "which can compromise health and safety" (not sure I understand this part, when car owners are the state's biggest source of air pollution and also killed 177 people in crashes in Maine alone last year, in addition to thousands of other serious injuries for other victims).

BUT this bike/bus mafia isn't quite influential enough to be able to afford to live in new condos, so, therefore, we should be raising everyone's housing costs even more by adding zoning red tape that requires more parking so that the poor millionaire car owners who buy expensive condos can bring more cars into our city. Because at the end of the day, forcing someone to ride a bus is obviously wrong (shaking a fist at the bus/bike mafia!), but forcing someone to build yet another parking spot nobody wants is obviously the right thing to do.
Click to expand...
Yawn.
 
Nice! That’s an improvement. Develop that corner across the street too! Dirt lot.
49A9D157-7859-48BA-BEE6-7B57A88D2487.jpeg
 
I love when Renderings not only don't show the surrounding buildings...but replace the surrounding buildings with trees to give the impression that this building is sitting in the middle of a low-density suburb rather than a dense urban neighborhood.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top