Portland Bayside

Lots of neat renderings of TFC midtown on the planning board site. Not sure if this is improvement or not. The detailed renderings look nice yet the rest of the massing looks bad. Who exactly wants to preserve sight lines? I actually like what is referred to in urban design as a terminated vista where a major building is at the end of a sight line. Like interned looking down preble from congress.
 
I know somebody in with the company who will probably be building Thompson's Point and said they will not break ground until they've secured the office part, similar to Phase II Jordan's Meat. Yes it appears to be Wright Express and if they can't pull them, this project could be in trouble.
 
Page 33 on the planning board update is giving me an architectual chubby if that's the design of the building. Cornering it with glass on the sides all the way up.
 
midtown1.jpg

midtown2.jpg
 
Not sure if this is improvement or not.

I honestly think this is an improvement, but I'm a layman when it comes to urban design concepts. Sure, the towers will all be the same height, but as long as they're varied enough in architectural design, I think I can live with that.

I think the building heights of Phase 2 and 3 will change with market demand anyway. Federated is probably more focused on Phase 1 right now. Beyond that, how well Phase 1 goes will probably dictate the size of Phase 2 and 3 (whether it's Federated building those or not).

Also - is there any slope to this land, or is this all flat? I can't recall from memory, since my excursions to this area these days are limited to a once-a-month quick trip to Whole Foods.

Another thought is that these towers might also look a little funny initially when built on their own, but that may change if/when other buildings are built around them, namely on the Oakhurst and Noyes/United Van Lines properties between Somerset and Kennebec and the E. Perry Iron property. Something to consider.
 
Thanks portarch. Do you think the second pic is also phase one from the backside or phase II?

Also they shouldn't be tossing a football over the head of a man and woman trying to change their baby's diaper on the ground. That's just plain dangerous.
 
I honestly think this is an improvement, but I'm a layman when it comes to urban design concepts. Sure, the towers will all be the same height, but as long as they're varied enough in architectural design, I think I can live with that.

I think the building heights of Phase 2 and 3 will change with market demand anyway. Federated is probably more focused on Phase 1 right now. Beyond that, how well Phase 1 goes will probably dictate the size of Phase 2 and 3 (whether it's Federated building those or not).

Also - is there any slope to this land, or is this all flat? I can't recall from memory, since my excursions to this area these days are limited to a once-a-month quick trip to Whole Foods.

Another thought is that these towers might also look a little funny initially when built on their own, but that may change if/when other buildings are built around them, namely on the Oakhurst and Noyes/United Van Lines properties between Somerset and Kennebec and the E. Perry Iron property. Something to consider.

Good points. My reservations are in terms f how bad this will look from across the boulevard. Interned already ruined the skyline because its too short an square and this will extend the width of intermed visually without adding height. See the mock up on the city website. Also looks like they are now trying to preserve what I've always thought was a gap in the skyline between city hall and Franklin towers. What view is there there? And the garage backing up to chestnut street makes NO sense but I get why the tower is on the other side (whole foods). The arch details are good but the site layout is not.
 
Interesting stuff in that revised submittal for Midtown. I think the detailed street-level renderings/sketches posted above look beautiful, but I do echo the concerns about the layout and massing not being all that it could be. Overall I guess I can't complain too much. I'm also trying to be positive and ignore the sea of parking between Marginal Way and Somerset Street and trying to imagine more new (hopefully smaller scale) developments in this part of Bayside (or should the neighborhood be called Midtown now!?).
 
There are now three phases, and I think the detailed renderings show Phase I looking toward Phase II
 
The "Midtown" name makes absolutely no sense? I agree with Corey, "Bayside" would have been more appropriate.
 
I like the new name. Bayside has meant hood for decades. Time for a new start
 
Looking map of Portland, I can see it being a sort of "Midtown" area. I like the name better than "Maritime Landing". Back Cove is no longer a navigable "maritime" waterway, nor are there any "landings" anywhere near this. If we want to get technical, then we could call this area "The Land Fill," but that isn't all that attractive a name.
 
I'd like to see each building named differently. There could be "The Longfellow," "Baxter Tower," "Bayside Center," for example. When the whole project is named at the same time, it sort of brings up the concerns Corey repeatedly states about super block developments. There is an obvious lacking attention to detail. Each building becomes a detail, rather than a focal point composed of many smaller details.

I'd really like to see Marginal Way renamed to Bayside Ave, as is suggested in the Comp Plan.

The best part of this project is where Phase II meetings Phase III on Elm. But, that's probably also the portion of it unlikely to be built. Right now, we should be asking ourselves if only Phase I gets built, is that acceptable? It amounts to a tower in a park adjacent to a parking garage and overlooking a scrapyard.
 
Right now, we should be asking ourselves if only Phase I gets built, is that acceptable? It amounts to a tower in a park adjacent to a parking garage and overlooking a scrapyard.

It's fine with me. The current Portland skyline along Congress St. and Cumberland Ave. wasn't built over night. It came about over the course of decades. It will probably take several more decades for everything in this new section of the skyline to fill in.

If there's one thing I've learned from keeping an interest in the development landscape/environment of Portland since I was a kid in the 1980's, it's that nothing ever gets built quickly or as planned around here. Just look at the sheer number of proposed developments since the 1980's that never came to fruitition. I'm almost of the mindset that we have to take what we can get when we get it.

That's not to say we shouldn't demand and expect quality developments. I just think we can't fully expect Bayside to be developed in one-fell-swoop in just a few years. Heck, it'll probably be 30 years before the entire area is filled in with developments.
 
Last edited:
Here is an article about midtown....and the concern over the buildings height....
Fourteen stories is definitely not to tall...



$38 million Bayside project gets a renewed look


PORTLAND – Concerns about building heights and impacts on a walking trail are prompting city planners to re-examine a proposed $38 million development in Bayside.
Residents and Planning Board members said Tuesday they have reservations about increasing zoning limits on building heights to accommodate one of four proposed residential towers along Somerset Street. They said they are also concerned about how one of two proposed parking garages would interact with the Bayside Trail.
"Unfortunately, I don't think it's going to be a very quick process," board Vice Chairman Stuart O'Brien said. "I think there are some issues we need to take time on."
Tuesday's meeting was the first time board members and the public were able to weigh in on the new design of the former Maritime Landing project, which is now being called midtown, with a lower case 'm.' Federated Cos., based in Miami, is developing the project.
The developer originally planned to build seven towers along Somerset Street, but revised its plans to address impacts on the skyline and views from parts of the city.
The 3.25-acre property straddles two height zoning districts, one with a maximum of 165 feet, the other a maximum of 105 feet. Some of the buildings in the original plan would have exceeded the 105-foot limit.
The new plan calls for four L-shaped buildings with courtyards and two parking garages. Three of the buildings would approach the 165-foot limit on part of the parcel, and one would exceed the 105-foot limit on the other portion.
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 two-phase project, estimated to cost $38 million, calls for 165 market-rate apartments, 40,000 square feet of retail and a 700-space garage between Chestnut Street and Pearl Street extension.
Board members and residents said they liked the new layout, but remained concerned about height.
Proponents have said such a project is needed in Bayside.
"It's important for the city; it's important to Bayside to get this influx of residents and commercial activity," said Ron Spinella, a member of the Bayside Neighborhood Association.
The maximum building heights in Bayside were established in 2006 after a consultant worked with the community to produce a consensus among residents.
"I kind of feel like we're moving too quickly away from a very deliberate work that was done," said board member Elizabeth Boepple.
Local developer Michael Scarks said he was concerned that raising the height limit for the one building would be giving Federated Cos. special treatment and wondered whether other area projects would get height extensions.
Scarks questioned whether the additional height is needed, but Federated's development team said the cost of the parking garage is driving the height of the building.
Although developers received $9 million from the city toward the $15 million cost of the garage, a 165-foot building is still needed to make the project financially viable, said Greg Shinberg, a local consultant representing Federated.
"We absolutely need the density," Shinberg said. "We see a great opportunity, but it's a challenging site."
The Somerset Street property is considered a contaminated Brownfield site that is mostly landfill and suffers from poor drainage, Shinberg said.
Peter Monro, a local landscape architect, lamented the fact that parking was driving the building design, and that too little accommodation is being made to pedestrians.
Board members, while supportive of the project in general, also said they were concerned about the Bayside Trail, which would have to be relocated to make room for the garage, and would still abut the garage and be overshadowed by the building.
Wolfe Tone, state director of the Trust for Public Land, noted the trail came into being with help of donations. He said the project should maintain the intent of the trail and was pleased developers were taking it into account.
Board members said that the board should examine why the height restrictions were put into place before considering whether to change them.
*
Staff Writer Randy Billings can be contacted at 791-6346 or at:
 
Here is an article about midtown....and the concern over the buildings height....
Fourteen stories is definitely not to tall...



$38 million Bayside project gets a renewed look


PORTLAND – Concerns about building heights and impacts on a walking trail are prompting city planners to re-examine a proposed $38 million development in Bayside.
Residents and Planning Board members said Tuesday they have reservations about increasing zoning limits on building heights to accommodate one of four proposed residential towers along Somerset Street. They said they are also concerned about how one of two proposed parking garages would interact with the Bayside Trail.
"Unfortunately, I don't think it's going to be a very quick process," board Vice Chairman Stuart O'Brien said. "I think there are some issues we need to take time on."
Tuesday's meeting was the first time board members and the public were able to weigh in on the new design of the former Maritime Landing project, which is now being called midtown, with a lower case 'm.' Federated Cos., based in Miami, is developing the project.
The developer originally planned to build seven towers along Somerset Street, but revised its plans to address impacts on the skyline and views from parts of the city.
The 3.25-acre property straddles two height zoning districts, one with a maximum of 165 feet, the other a maximum of 105 feet. Some of the buildings in the original plan would have exceeded the 105-foot limit.
The new plan calls for four L-shaped buildings with courtyards and two parking garages. Three of the buildings would approach the 165-foot limit on part of the parcel, and one would exceed the 105-foot limit on the other portion.
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 two-phase project, estimated to cost $38 million, calls for 165 market-rate apartments, 40,000 square feet of retail and a 700-space garage between Chestnut Street and Pearl Street extension.
Board members and residents said they liked the new layout, but remained concerned about height.
Proponents have said such a project is needed in Bayside.
"It's important for the city; it's important to Bayside to get this influx of residents and commercial activity," said Ron Spinella, a member of the Bayside Neighborhood Association.
The maximum building heights in Bayside were established in 2006 after a consultant worked with the community to produce a consensus among residents.
"I kind of feel like we're moving too quickly away from a very deliberate work that was done," said board member Elizabeth Boepple.
Local developer Michael Scarks said he was concerned that raising the height limit for the one building would be giving Federated Cos. special treatment and wondered whether other area projects would get height extensions.
Scarks questioned whether the additional height is needed, but Federated's development team said the cost of the parking garage is driving the height of the building.
Although developers received $9 million from the city toward the $15 million cost of the garage, a 165-foot building is still needed to make the project financially viable, said Greg Shinberg, a local consultant representing Federated.
"We absolutely need the density," Shinberg said. "We see a great opportunity, but it's a challenging site."
The Somerset Street property is considered a contaminated Brownfield site that is mostly landfill and suffers from poor drainage, Shinberg said.
Peter Monro, a local landscape architect, lamented the fact that parking was driving the building design, and that too little accommodation is being made to pedestrians.
Board members, while supportive of the project in general, also said they were concerned about the Bayside Trail, which would have to be relocated to make room for the garage, and would still abut the garage and be overshadowed by the building.
Wolfe Tone, state director of the Trust for Public Land, noted the trail came into being with help of donations. He said the project should maintain the intent of the trail and was pleased developers were taking it into account.
Board members said that the board should examine why the height restrictions were put into place before considering whether to change them.
*
Staff Writer Randy Billings can be contacted at 791-6346 or at:

Hopefully as in past projects (Maine State Pier for example) the Planning Board doesn't drag this process out so long that the Developer becomes frustrated and eventually scraps the project altogether. Seams like the only projects that get approved with ease in Portland are Hotels.
 
Got so mad reading that last night. I heard from a friend that has dealt with federated before that they said Portland was the hardest city they've ever dealt with planning a project. That was a year ago, can't imagine what they think now. I hope the board will be Proud of themselves when federated pulls out and that remains a dirt pile for another decade. I'm so sick of councils and boards here acting like Portland is some unearthed ancient Mecca . It's a regular friggin city... With an ugly skyline at that. Buildings are tall, buildings block other buildings, buildings cast shadows. This Portland on top ten lists fad isn't going to last forever. These boards need to stop sniffing this elitist air and get stuff built while we can. Even just phase I would make a huge difference down there and jump start the residential boom of that area
 
Here is the link to that PPH article. Portlandneedsanewarena and Grittys bring up some good points about dragging our feet on this process. This is a huge development (maybe that is part of the problem here) that requires a lot of time and effort from the developers and the city, but I thought they had already agreed on some things like the height of the buildings. There clearly has been a lot of time invested in this process and it must be frustrating everyone involved. I wonder if it would be more efficient to further separate each phase of the project to ensure that at least some of this gets built and that whatever eventually gets built (if anything) is able to "stand on its own" from an urban planning perspective.
 
Got so mad reading that last night. I heard from a friend that has dealt with federated before that they said Portland was the hardest city they've ever dealt with planning a project. That was a year ago, can't imagine what they think now. I hope the board will be Proud of themselves when federated pulls out and that remains a dirt pile for another decade. I'm so sick of councils and boards here acting like Portland is some unearthed ancient Mecca . It's a regular friggin city... With an ugly skyline at that. Buildings are tall, buildings block other buildings, buildings cast shadows. This Portland on top ten lists fad isn't going to last forever. These boards need to stop sniffing this elitist air and get stuff built while we can. Even just phase I would make a huge difference down there and jump start the residential boom of that area
I totally agree with everything you stated. Portland's current skyline on a scale of 1 to 10 I would rate about a 3. If they cared so much about blocking the skyline view why did they allow the atrocity that is Bayview Apartments next to the Intermed building? Also, the unfinished look of the back of the Merrill Auditorium is another gem!!
The midtown project would only enhance the overall look of the City.
 
I think that the city wants to accomodate what people dont want rather than what people do want and whats good for the city. Obviously, they make more decisions based on complaints than whats economically feasible and sustainable
 

Back
Top