P
Patrick
Guest
You're not the first to highlight that. However, Portland is far from down and out.
Portland Bayside
- Thread starter grittys457
- Start date
You're not the first to highlight that. However, Portland is far from down and out.
This is a valid concern. I don't spend as much time as I would like in Boston so my observation might not be worth much, but whenever I am there it seems like the beggars do nothing more than rattle a cup with some change in it. They seem pretty non-threatening, at least to me (white college-educated male in his mid 20's). Whereas in Portland they are much more likely to try and give you some bullshit excuse and they are sometimes verbally aggressive. Earlier this year the City Council rejected a proposal to ban panhandlers (or anybody) from standing on traffic medians at intersection and would have required that they move to the sidewalk. I don't think that panhandling should be outlawed, but at some point it does become a public nuisance. While it makes sense to cluster social servies like the soup kitchen, homeless shelters, and DHHS all in one area, I think it does put a burden on Bayside that will continue to be a big challenge. This article in the Bangor Daily News from last month summarizes the outcome of a task force on homelessness in the city.
grittys457
Active Member
- Joined
- May 25, 2006
- Messages
- 748
- Reaction score
- 0
Exactly what I was going to post Corey. Boston is all cup jinglers and usually pretty tame. Portland is all signs and verbal asking and yes many times they can get nasty. I see more bums and beggars in Portland than on any walk around Boston
No, it definitely isn't, but when I think about creating a family friendly tourist destination, the last place I would want to go is somewhere with the level of aggressive panhandling that I see in Portland relative to Boston. My mother lives on Munjoy Hill and depending on where I get off on the highway and if I take congress st, I'll see 2-3 beggars. The problem is probably magnified by portland being such a small city relative to Boston, but also the expectation that Maine will be a relaxing place to go, not one where a homeless person will run into traffic and try to make me drive him somewhere (actually happened).
The PressHerald posted an article on the latest development on the Maritime Landing Project....
Portland developer to refine design of $38 million project
PORTLAND – Developers of an ambitious residential and commercial project in Bayside are headed back to the drawing board to address concerns over how the complex could affect views and the city's skyline.
Originally, the project envisioned seven 14-story towers to be built along Somerset Street. Preliminary plans for Maritime Landing included as many as 700 residences, retail space and two parking garages.
The Planning Board was scheduled to review a master plan and a request for zone changes for the project Tuesday. But Greg Shinberg, who is representing the developer, Federated Cos., said the company has requested the meeting be postponed until later this month so the building designs can be refined to reduce the visual impact.
"It's fair to say we're going to make big changes from the original scheme," Shinberg said Wednesday. "The configuration of the housing towers will change. We're looking at trying to improve the impact on the skyline."
Developers are sensitive about the impact and are trying to develop a project that shows the city in its best light, said Jeff Levine, the city's Planning and Urban Development director.
"It's a very high-profile project in an important redevelopment area," Levine said. "We're trying to make sure this project comes out wonderfully. It is going to be one of the first things people see when they come into town on the highway."
The Planning Board largely supported the proposed development during a November workshop, but expressed some concerns over the seven-tower layout.
Preliminary designs indicate views from the area around Elm, Cedar and Myrtle streets could be affected. Planned building heights, which could reach 165 feet, could block views of Back Cove and local landmarks from some areas.
Among the residents to be affected by the towers are those living at the Chestnut Street Lofts on the corner of Chestnut Street and Cumberland Avenue, which overlook Back Cove.
Condo association president Jan Williams said residents of the 37-unit condo building likely have varied opinions about the project. Many support the economic impact of the development, while others are worried about the design.
Williams has formed a committee to learn more about the project and its potential impact. That committee is expected to report back to the association, which likely will take a position on the project during the public review process, he said.
Neighborhood leaders, meanwhile, are excited about how the project's market-rate housing could transform Bayside, a former industrial area with scrap yards that is now an epicenter for social services.
"(Bringing in) more people really enhances the neighborhood because there is more activity day-to-day," said Steve Hirshon, president of the Bayside Neighborhood Association. "And that's what we need."
Concerns over sight lines and the skyline also were raised in 2008 when the Intermed building and the Bayside Village were proposed. But some neighbors appear willing to accept a new view.
Cumberland Avenue resident and neighborhood association member Ron Spinella expects to lose his view of Back Cove, but he accepts that.
"I don't own the view," Spinella said. "I'm glad something's moving forward. It's pretty exciting knowing the neighborhood will grow. I'm not offended by the tall buildings."
Federated Cos. currently has a purchase and sale agreement to buy 3.25 acres of city land along Somerset Street for $2.2 million.
The full build-out still is expected to take place over three phases and include up to 700 residences, 90,000 square feet of retail and two parking garages for about 1,110 vehicles.
The first phase of the project was estimated earlier to cost $38 million. It would include a 700-space parking garage and, as of this week, two residential towers with retail space and up to 180 residences.
Earlier this year, the city provided Federated, which has offices in Miami and Boston, with a $9.07 million grant to help pay for construction of the $15 million 700-space parking garage.
Of that $9.07 million, $8.2 million would come from a low-interest loan from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The city would be responsible for repaying the loan and an estimated $2.8 million in interest from property tax revenues.
Developers need some zoning changes to build the project as envisioned.
There are two separate zoning districts for the property, one limiting height to a maximum of 125 feet (with a possible 165 feet if conditions are met); the other limiting height to 55 feet (with a possible 105 feet, if conditions are met).
Much of the project is being proposed in the more restrictive zoning district, so the developer is recommending rezoning that land to allow for the taller buildings.
The developer is also asking the city to waive the conditions that would be required to increase the height limit to 165 feet, such as reducing setbacks and top-floor design standards meant to minimize the shadowing effects and preserve view corridors.
"The implication for Maritime Landing is that the upper stories of the building would have limited floor area because of the step backs, which would have an impact on total number of dwelling units," the staff wrote.
The developer is also asking the city to approve a master plan for the project, even though one is not required.
That change would extend the allowed time frame for development from the current requirement that construction start within one year (with a possible three-year extension) to allowing it to start within four years (with two, one-year extensions possible).
The developers are also altering their plan in light of the Somerset Street flood that resulted when a 20-inch water main ruptured several weeks ago. Now, developers are looking to increase the base height of their buildings to be 12 feet above high tide.
Even with the delays, Shinberg said Federated Cos. is eager to get the project under way.
"We're really on course to start this project as soon as possible," Shinberg said. "We have a very aggressive schedule but we also have to respect the process."
Staff Writer Randy Billings can be contacted at 791-6346 or at:
rbillings@mainetoday.com
Twitter: @randybillings
Further Discussion
Here at PressHerald.com we value our readers and are committed to growing our community by encouraging you to add to the discussion. To ensure conscientious dialogue we have implemented a strict no-bullying policy. To participate, you must follow our Terms of Use.
Questions about the article? Add them below and we’ll try to answer them or do a follow-up post as soon as we can. Technical problems? Email them to us with an exact description of the problem. Make sure to include:
Type of computer or mobile device your are using
Exact operating system and browser you are viewing the site on (TIP: You can easily determine your operating system here.)
Portland developer to refine design of $38 million project
PORTLAND – Developers of an ambitious residential and commercial project in Bayside are headed back to the drawing board to address concerns over how the complex could affect views and the city's skyline.
Originally, the project envisioned seven 14-story towers to be built along Somerset Street. Preliminary plans for Maritime Landing included as many as 700 residences, retail space and two parking garages.
The Planning Board was scheduled to review a master plan and a request for zone changes for the project Tuesday. But Greg Shinberg, who is representing the developer, Federated Cos., said the company has requested the meeting be postponed until later this month so the building designs can be refined to reduce the visual impact.
"It's fair to say we're going to make big changes from the original scheme," Shinberg said Wednesday. "The configuration of the housing towers will change. We're looking at trying to improve the impact on the skyline."
Developers are sensitive about the impact and are trying to develop a project that shows the city in its best light, said Jeff Levine, the city's Planning and Urban Development director.
"It's a very high-profile project in an important redevelopment area," Levine said. "We're trying to make sure this project comes out wonderfully. It is going to be one of the first things people see when they come into town on the highway."
The Planning Board largely supported the proposed development during a November workshop, but expressed some concerns over the seven-tower layout.
Preliminary designs indicate views from the area around Elm, Cedar and Myrtle streets could be affected. Planned building heights, which could reach 165 feet, could block views of Back Cove and local landmarks from some areas.
Among the residents to be affected by the towers are those living at the Chestnut Street Lofts on the corner of Chestnut Street and Cumberland Avenue, which overlook Back Cove.
Condo association president Jan Williams said residents of the 37-unit condo building likely have varied opinions about the project. Many support the economic impact of the development, while others are worried about the design.
Williams has formed a committee to learn more about the project and its potential impact. That committee is expected to report back to the association, which likely will take a position on the project during the public review process, he said.
Neighborhood leaders, meanwhile, are excited about how the project's market-rate housing could transform Bayside, a former industrial area with scrap yards that is now an epicenter for social services.
"(Bringing in) more people really enhances the neighborhood because there is more activity day-to-day," said Steve Hirshon, president of the Bayside Neighborhood Association. "And that's what we need."
Concerns over sight lines and the skyline also were raised in 2008 when the Intermed building and the Bayside Village were proposed. But some neighbors appear willing to accept a new view.
Cumberland Avenue resident and neighborhood association member Ron Spinella expects to lose his view of Back Cove, but he accepts that.
"I don't own the view," Spinella said. "I'm glad something's moving forward. It's pretty exciting knowing the neighborhood will grow. I'm not offended by the tall buildings."
Federated Cos. currently has a purchase and sale agreement to buy 3.25 acres of city land along Somerset Street for $2.2 million.
The full build-out still is expected to take place over three phases and include up to 700 residences, 90,000 square feet of retail and two parking garages for about 1,110 vehicles.
The first phase of the project was estimated earlier to cost $38 million. It would include a 700-space parking garage and, as of this week, two residential towers with retail space and up to 180 residences.
Earlier this year, the city provided Federated, which has offices in Miami and Boston, with a $9.07 million grant to help pay for construction of the $15 million 700-space parking garage.
Of that $9.07 million, $8.2 million would come from a low-interest loan from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The city would be responsible for repaying the loan and an estimated $2.8 million in interest from property tax revenues.
Developers need some zoning changes to build the project as envisioned.
There are two separate zoning districts for the property, one limiting height to a maximum of 125 feet (with a possible 165 feet if conditions are met); the other limiting height to 55 feet (with a possible 105 feet, if conditions are met).
Much of the project is being proposed in the more restrictive zoning district, so the developer is recommending rezoning that land to allow for the taller buildings.
The developer is also asking the city to waive the conditions that would be required to increase the height limit to 165 feet, such as reducing setbacks and top-floor design standards meant to minimize the shadowing effects and preserve view corridors.
"The implication for Maritime Landing is that the upper stories of the building would have limited floor area because of the step backs, which would have an impact on total number of dwelling units," the staff wrote.
The developer is also asking the city to approve a master plan for the project, even though one is not required.
That change would extend the allowed time frame for development from the current requirement that construction start within one year (with a possible three-year extension) to allowing it to start within four years (with two, one-year extensions possible).
The developers are also altering their plan in light of the Somerset Street flood that resulted when a 20-inch water main ruptured several weeks ago. Now, developers are looking to increase the base height of their buildings to be 12 feet above high tide.
Even with the delays, Shinberg said Federated Cos. is eager to get the project under way.
"We're really on course to start this project as soon as possible," Shinberg said. "We have a very aggressive schedule but we also have to respect the process."
Staff Writer Randy Billings can be contacted at 791-6346 or at:
rbillings@mainetoday.com
Twitter: @randybillings
Further Discussion
Here at PressHerald.com we value our readers and are committed to growing our community by encouraging you to add to the discussion. To ensure conscientious dialogue we have implemented a strict no-bullying policy. To participate, you must follow our Terms of Use.
Questions about the article? Add them below and we’ll try to answer them or do a follow-up post as soon as we can. Technical problems? Email them to us with an exact description of the problem. Make sure to include:
Type of computer or mobile device your are using
Exact operating system and browser you are viewing the site on (TIP: You can easily determine your operating system here.)
Dr. StrangeHat
Active Member
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2012
- Messages
- 812
- Reaction score
- 931
This guy gets it. Can we have him speak with residents of Back Bay Tower, who seem to think they own the view (e.g. Waterview lawsuit)?
Lost in all of this are aesthetics. Why does everyone want the first thing that is presented by Federated??? Do they do that in other cities. Personally, I think that a solid wall of box-like same height buildings is butt ugly........no matter where they are placed, no matter what city they are in.
I don't think that height is the problem, but rather design and placement. Also.....just how far does $38 million go???? Is that for one building?
Dr. StrangeHat
Active Member
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2012
- Messages
- 812
- Reaction score
- 931
My comment wasn't in reference to the design of these buildings. It was in reference to some residents that may complain about the scale of these buildings and losing their view of Back Cove. More specifically, my comment was in reference to the residents of Back Bay Tower that sued the developer of The Waterview, because they felt it would ruin their views.
The article states that they are going back to the drawing board to re-design the buildings. I believe the renderings shown so far have been preliminary and for scaling. I agree that these buildings shouldn't be boxy, and the developers appear to agree with that, hence the article.
Also, $38 million is for the first phase, which is only two buildings.
The article states that they are going back to the drawing board to re-design the buildings. I believe the renderings shown so far have been preliminary and for scaling. I agree that these buildings shouldn't be boxy, and the developers appear to agree with that, hence the article.
Also, $38 million is for the first phase, which is only two buildings.
Nexis4jersey
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2012
- Messages
- 760
- Reaction score
- 127
It looks funky and hip , although the blue seems to throw things off...
Dr. StrangeHat
Active Member
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2012
- Messages
- 812
- Reaction score
- 931
It would look better without the telephone poles
Nexis4jersey
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2012
- Messages
- 760
- Reaction score
- 127
Well at least it ends halfway through the block ...lol
Some changes to Maritime Landing....the pressherald ran an article today detailing the changes. For starters, its now called Midtown, not Maritime Landing....
$38 million Portland project has new name, design
By Randy Billings
Staff Writer
PORTLAND – Developers of a massive mixed-use project in Bayside have submitted a new concept plan to the city that eliminates the narrow, monolithic towers previously envisioned along Somerset Street.
The project, formerly known as Maritime Landing, originally included seven residential towers, several of which would have been 14 stories high.
Now called Midtown, the project is still huge but developers have consolidated the layout into four L-shaped, 14-story towers in an effort to lessen the impact on view corridors and the city skyline, especially when viewed from Interstate 295 and Back Cove.
"We are very excited about this redesign," said Greg Shinberg, the local consultant for the Florida-based developer, Federated Cos. "With the redesign, we believe it should substantially improve the ability to see through the buildings (to) see the Portland skyline."
City planners are still evaluating whether the new layout, submitted on Thursday, will improve view corridors and reduce shading. But Jeff Levine, the city's director of planning and urban development, said the new plan is an improvement from an urban design standpoint.
Levine complimented the move away from seven "fairly monolithic towers" as well as the addition of little parks along the Bayside Trail.
"This has four buildings that have a little bit of character to them. They can differentiate between each other and be a little more interesting," Levine said.
Shinberg said the design team is looking to create an urban plaza where the development meets the trail. The design will draw on a variety of urban plazas, including some in Manhattan.
While the layout has changed, the basic features of the project remain the same: 675 market-rate housing units, 97,000 square feet of retail space and parking for 1,000 vehicles in two garages.
Phase I of the project, estimated to cost $38 million, would consist of 165 market-rate apartments, 40,000 square feet of retail and a 700-space garage between Chestnut Street and Pearl Street extension, Shinberg said.
Shinberg said the new design will allow clear sight lines from I-295 and Marginal Way up the hill to landmarks such as Portland High School and City Hall, particularly along the Chestnut Street corridor.
"This has been a very give-and-take process," Shinberg said. "We have listened well to people, especially to the Bayside neighborhood organization, and we're really trying to incorporate these ideas."
The Planning Board will hold a workshop on the new design on Jan. 29. No public comment will be taken at that meeting.
*
Staff Writer Randy Billings can be contacted at 791-6346 or at:
rbillings@mainetoday.com
$38 million Portland project has new name, design
By Randy Billings
Staff Writer
PORTLAND – Developers of a massive mixed-use project in Bayside have submitted a new concept plan to the city that eliminates the narrow, monolithic towers previously envisioned along Somerset Street.
The project, formerly known as Maritime Landing, originally included seven residential towers, several of which would have been 14 stories high.
Now called Midtown, the project is still huge but developers have consolidated the layout into four L-shaped, 14-story towers in an effort to lessen the impact on view corridors and the city skyline, especially when viewed from Interstate 295 and Back Cove.
"We are very excited about this redesign," said Greg Shinberg, the local consultant for the Florida-based developer, Federated Cos. "With the redesign, we believe it should substantially improve the ability to see through the buildings (to) see the Portland skyline."
City planners are still evaluating whether the new layout, submitted on Thursday, will improve view corridors and reduce shading. But Jeff Levine, the city's director of planning and urban development, said the new plan is an improvement from an urban design standpoint.
Levine complimented the move away from seven "fairly monolithic towers" as well as the addition of little parks along the Bayside Trail.
"This has four buildings that have a little bit of character to them. They can differentiate between each other and be a little more interesting," Levine said.
Shinberg said the design team is looking to create an urban plaza where the development meets the trail. The design will draw on a variety of urban plazas, including some in Manhattan.
While the layout has changed, the basic features of the project remain the same: 675 market-rate housing units, 97,000 square feet of retail space and parking for 1,000 vehicles in two garages.
Phase I of the project, estimated to cost $38 million, would consist of 165 market-rate apartments, 40,000 square feet of retail and a 700-space garage between Chestnut Street and Pearl Street extension, Shinberg said.
Shinberg said the new design will allow clear sight lines from I-295 and Marginal Way up the hill to landmarks such as Portland High School and City Hall, particularly along the Chestnut Street corridor.
"This has been a very give-and-take process," Shinberg said. "We have listened well to people, especially to the Bayside neighborhood organization, and we're really trying to incorporate these ideas."
The Planning Board will hold a workshop on the new design on Jan. 29. No public comment will be taken at that meeting.
*
Staff Writer Randy Billings can be contacted at 791-6346 or at:
rbillings@mainetoday.com
grittys457
Active Member
- Joined
- May 25, 2006
- Messages
- 748
- Reaction score
- 0
So is phase one the two towers with the garage in the middle on the new design?
I like the idea of building plazas or some sort of square.
Nexis4jersey
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2012
- Messages
- 760
- Reaction score
- 127
Are the gray spaces parking garages?
Portlander
Senior Member
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2010
- Messages
- 2,544
- Reaction score
- 5,524
I think Phase One will now be the most eastern tower beside Chestnut Street along with garage next to it. Was hoping the initial Phase would also include the next closest tower as in the original plan (two towers, one garage).
P
Patrick
Guest
It looks like, in an effort to provide some character, the stepbacks will be incorporated, but the same square footage will be attained by fatter buildings. I honestly don't know how wider buildings improve sight corridors. If someone can explain that one....
I get that there is now a wider view over the central parking garage to "landmarks" like Portland High, but since when has that been part of the skyline that so many people complain has been blocked by new development like Intermed or the student housing? I don't see the project as bad now, but I also don't see it as necessarily an improvement. These buildings all look like Intermed or Back Bay tower. I think the potential of the former design was greater in terms of adding diversity to the skyline. Instead of seven thin towers now the plan calls for four blocks. It's like there is this perception that regardless of height towers are only acceptable in Portland if they don't actually look like towers. Strange.
I get that there is now a wider view over the central parking garage to "landmarks" like Portland High, but since when has that been part of the skyline that so many people complain has been blocked by new development like Intermed or the student housing? I don't see the project as bad now, but I also don't see it as necessarily an improvement. These buildings all look like Intermed or Back Bay tower. I think the potential of the former design was greater in terms of adding diversity to the skyline. Instead of seven thin towers now the plan calls for four blocks. It's like there is this perception that regardless of height towers are only acceptable in Portland if they don't actually look like towers. Strange.
P
Patrick
Guest
Patrick J. Venne
157 Wolcott Street
Portland, ME 04102
January 21, 2013
Carol Morrissette, Chair
Portland Planning Board
C/O Rick Knowland,
Senior Planner
City of Portland
389 Congress Street
Portland, ME 04101
RE: Maritime Landing/Midtown Redesign
Dear Chair Morrissette and Members of the Portland Planning Board:
This letter is in response to The Federated Companies’ (“TFC”) recent redesign of plans submitted under the project formerly named “Maritime Landing.”
As you are aware, by virtue of its size and location TFC’s proposal will, if constructed, change Portland in a number of ways, chief amongst which is visually. While the developer’s efforts to respond to supposed concerns about view corridors are admirable, I am writing to state my belief that they are also perhaps unnecessary and may even be detrimental to the City’s design. I ask you to, collectively, consider why this is so.
Portland has seen many proposals for “tall” buildings in the past. The history of each is relatively similar: slender structures become progressively shorter, blockier, and altogether less appealing from a “landmark” perspective with each successive stage of review. By way of example, consider that One Monument Square was proposed as a 20-story building in the 1960s but is today a 10-story box; that “Lincoln Square” was proposed as a four tower project reaching as high as 330’ and 22 stories, but was scaled back to 15 stories before being scrapped altogether; and that Back Bay Tower was proposed as a 19-story building and is today a fifteen-story square. And this all-too-familiar sequence of events continues to happen in spite of a policy to diversify building heights.
In part because of the negative aesthetic impact a series of tall boxes can have on a city’s skyline, the Portland hired a design firm to study height limits in its urban core, and subsequently adopted a number of revisions to downtown zoning in the 1990s (see the Downtown Height Study and supporting graphics for further reference). These revisions moved away from a largely uniform height cap to a mixture of allowable building heights in an effort to diversify the skyline. The same approach was taken in Bayside a few years ago: height limits were adjusted in an effort to allow a variety of shapes and sizes. In both cases, the public voiced strong and clear support for a diverse skyline, not one composed of squat buildings of uniform height.
It is therefore critical to ensure, as this project moves forward, that it does not follow in the footsteps of other large-scale projects and become a series of squat high-rises that abut even squatter parking garages. To allow this would not only run counter to the rationale underlying these design changes (wider buildings by definition will block more of the existing view), but also flies in the face of decades of public support for a diversified skyline.
TFC’s project can be a game-changer for the region, and should not strive to protect views of the rest of Portland. Instead, it should strive to create a new view of Portland. That is, after all, what the Bayside Plan is in large part about: creating a “new” vision for that neighborhood—the City’s front door. In fact, one presumes the lackluster nature of pre-existing views partially underlies the public’s desire to redevelop this gateway.
An additional point with respect to the impact these most recent revisions will have on Portland’s urban design—and one unrelated to height—is that by the consolidation of Phase I’s towers into one stump, the plaza envisioned for “Kennebec Crossing” will be deactivated before it ever has a chance to ‘take off.’ This stems from rearrangement of the site and the effect it will have on abutting streets. Whether the plaza on Chestnut Street is flanked by a garage wrapped in retail or not, the fact remains that under the current design scenario it will be flanked by a garage. As recent developments in the “New Port” (Eastern Waterfront) will show, this is not good.
The public has a strong distaste for parking garages even when constructed to promote active first floor uses. While they may be necessary in some instances, then, it is not the best idea to situate a garage of any sort next to a public space envisioned as the focal point to a new neighborhood. And that’s precisely what the plaza at issue here is; consider the following language, excerpted from ‘A New Vision for Bayside,’ part of the City’s Comprehensive Plan:
"The Kennebec Crossing District clusters offices, shops, service agencies, apartments and cafes around the new plaza at the junction of Chestnut Street and the trail."
Rhetorically, I ask: does a parking garage fit this vision? Can it?
In closing, I ask that the Board keep these thoughts in mind as it reviews the design changes proposed. While I agree character and urban design are absolutely essential to the success of this or any project—and support the changes submitted to the extent they enhance either—this premise demands neither stumpy buildings nor destruction of the Kennebec Crossing plaza. TFC’s site is the centerpiece of an intensively planned neighborhood; something better than “average” should materialize on it. The developer clearly agrees, and the Board should provide it the flexibility to utilize its top-rate design team to come forward with a taller—or at least slimmer—and all around more urban proposal.
Sincerely,
Patrick Venne
157 Wolcott Street
Portland, ME 04102
January 21, 2013
Carol Morrissette, Chair
Portland Planning Board
C/O Rick Knowland,
Senior Planner
City of Portland
389 Congress Street
Portland, ME 04101
RE: Maritime Landing/Midtown Redesign
Dear Chair Morrissette and Members of the Portland Planning Board:
This letter is in response to The Federated Companies’ (“TFC”) recent redesign of plans submitted under the project formerly named “Maritime Landing.”
As you are aware, by virtue of its size and location TFC’s proposal will, if constructed, change Portland in a number of ways, chief amongst which is visually. While the developer’s efforts to respond to supposed concerns about view corridors are admirable, I am writing to state my belief that they are also perhaps unnecessary and may even be detrimental to the City’s design. I ask you to, collectively, consider why this is so.
Portland has seen many proposals for “tall” buildings in the past. The history of each is relatively similar: slender structures become progressively shorter, blockier, and altogether less appealing from a “landmark” perspective with each successive stage of review. By way of example, consider that One Monument Square was proposed as a 20-story building in the 1960s but is today a 10-story box; that “Lincoln Square” was proposed as a four tower project reaching as high as 330’ and 22 stories, but was scaled back to 15 stories before being scrapped altogether; and that Back Bay Tower was proposed as a 19-story building and is today a fifteen-story square. And this all-too-familiar sequence of events continues to happen in spite of a policy to diversify building heights.
In part because of the negative aesthetic impact a series of tall boxes can have on a city’s skyline, the Portland hired a design firm to study height limits in its urban core, and subsequently adopted a number of revisions to downtown zoning in the 1990s (see the Downtown Height Study and supporting graphics for further reference). These revisions moved away from a largely uniform height cap to a mixture of allowable building heights in an effort to diversify the skyline. The same approach was taken in Bayside a few years ago: height limits were adjusted in an effort to allow a variety of shapes and sizes. In both cases, the public voiced strong and clear support for a diverse skyline, not one composed of squat buildings of uniform height.
It is therefore critical to ensure, as this project moves forward, that it does not follow in the footsteps of other large-scale projects and become a series of squat high-rises that abut even squatter parking garages. To allow this would not only run counter to the rationale underlying these design changes (wider buildings by definition will block more of the existing view), but also flies in the face of decades of public support for a diversified skyline.
TFC’s project can be a game-changer for the region, and should not strive to protect views of the rest of Portland. Instead, it should strive to create a new view of Portland. That is, after all, what the Bayside Plan is in large part about: creating a “new” vision for that neighborhood—the City’s front door. In fact, one presumes the lackluster nature of pre-existing views partially underlies the public’s desire to redevelop this gateway.
An additional point with respect to the impact these most recent revisions will have on Portland’s urban design—and one unrelated to height—is that by the consolidation of Phase I’s towers into one stump, the plaza envisioned for “Kennebec Crossing” will be deactivated before it ever has a chance to ‘take off.’ This stems from rearrangement of the site and the effect it will have on abutting streets. Whether the plaza on Chestnut Street is flanked by a garage wrapped in retail or not, the fact remains that under the current design scenario it will be flanked by a garage. As recent developments in the “New Port” (Eastern Waterfront) will show, this is not good.
The public has a strong distaste for parking garages even when constructed to promote active first floor uses. While they may be necessary in some instances, then, it is not the best idea to situate a garage of any sort next to a public space envisioned as the focal point to a new neighborhood. And that’s precisely what the plaza at issue here is; consider the following language, excerpted from ‘A New Vision for Bayside,’ part of the City’s Comprehensive Plan:
"The Kennebec Crossing District clusters offices, shops, service agencies, apartments and cafes around the new plaza at the junction of Chestnut Street and the trail."
Rhetorically, I ask: does a parking garage fit this vision? Can it?
In closing, I ask that the Board keep these thoughts in mind as it reviews the design changes proposed. While I agree character and urban design are absolutely essential to the success of this or any project—and support the changes submitted to the extent they enhance either—this premise demands neither stumpy buildings nor destruction of the Kennebec Crossing plaza. TFC’s site is the centerpiece of an intensively planned neighborhood; something better than “average” should materialize on it. The developer clearly agrees, and the Board should provide it the flexibility to utilize its top-rate design team to come forward with a taller—or at least slimmer—and all around more urban proposal.
Sincerely,
Patrick Venne
Well said, Patrick! I walked around the ol' Back Cove yesterday afternoon to get some photos of the skyline and to get a feel for how this development would look from various angles. I do think a mixture of heights would be beneficial for the skyline. I also think people whose top priority is the view of the skyline from I-295 are off base. The central skyline, around Monument Square, doesn't even look that good from the interstate now and most of City Hall is already blocked by the back of Merrill Auditorium.
Anyhow, I climbed the Bayside Glacier last night for a view of the sunset. I think this will be roughly the view from the 3rd floor of the building that gets built here:
Anyhow, I climbed the Bayside Glacier last night for a view of the sunset. I think this will be roughly the view from the 3rd floor of the building that gets built here: