Portland, ME - New Construction Continued

33 million is alot....I hope the rendering is available before voters have to make their choice. Also, if it gets approved, maybe they can modernize the design and aesthetics.
 
I really think this is where an advocacy group would come in handy. I will not be voting for this ridiculous policy SNAFU. Over 10 years ago, land was offered in Bayside (for the low price of free!) along with $20 million. Free land, plus the $33 million to be issued pursuant to the bond up for vote, plus $20 million given away, plus whatever could have been generated since the Noyce offer was made would have enabled a fine facility indeed, and one in an up and coming neighborhood. Instead there is this urban monstrosity which pretty much disconnects two parts of the city and feels like a prison and looks hideous. Renovations won't change this ugly thing, and everyone knows it, but no one wants to deal with taking it down and the large void it will create. News flash: it is already a void.
 
I also plan to vote "no". Why do we need to pay $33 million to renovate a tax-exempt arena in the middle of downtown, when private developers are building a taxpaying arena on Thompson's Point with their own money? I'd rather see the County sell the Civic Center to private owners who can manage it properly, put it on the tax rolls, and redevelop it as a less ugly conference and convention hall.

With $33 million you could build a streetcar line from downtown to Woodfords Corner...
 
Selling it and having a capable party is a much better idea than a bandaid that will cost 33 million dollars.
 
The idea of selling the Civic Center to private owners sounds like a win-win situation.

And not too far from the Civic Center, some steel is starting to rise on Oak Street, taken tonight:

july2011portlandmaineoa.jpg


july2011portlandmaineoa.jpg
 
Although selling naming rights would make sense to increase the revenue flow for improvements and.or hopefully replacement of the venue, I don't think this building is a cash cow, and a private developer would likely tear it down and replace it with office space as the economy demands. It is centrally located and easily accessible. I believe it operates without generating a profit, and no private entity would entertain that idea.
 
Kinda stumbled across this. Has a few more detailed pics and it's way bigger than I thought it was going to be. Thought it was just gonna be a small square building. I'm not sure about the part sticking over to where they just building the entrance to bank of maine. Seems like they wouldn't glass over to there now. Anyway, for those of you who know how to post the pics, please do

http://www.newenglandcommercialproperty.com/jsp/listings/listing_overview.jsp?listingID=2118492
 
This rendering sums it up well, looks bigger than I thought also:
3952742_Picture1.jpg
 
3952707_MiddleStLEVEL1.jpg

3952708_CloseupINTERIOR2.jpg

3952709_MiddleStLEVEL2.jpg

3952743_Picture2.jpg


Im not sure restaurant space is in high demand right now, but maybe. the space in Monument Square is supposedly for restaurant use, too. Also, I don;t think Middle Street will ever be as attractive as Exchange Street to tourists, simply because of its width and architectural deficiencies, but I do agree that we would like to see them make it that way.
 
I agree, but because they have chosen not to use their typical trade dress (what they call a trademark when its architecture) they need a sign that consumers recognize. This has got to be one of the best looking Hampton Inns in the country, other than the sign.
 
Man, they couldn't even run those Canal Plaza renderings through IDX or Artlantis? Straight SketchUp incl. default textures - really?

Anyways, aside from the amateur sophomore renderings, I don't think having a glass roof on that restaurant or even the exterior "covered patio" is a good idea. There should undoubtedly be some sort of brise-soleil controlling how light might enter that space.

I think the larger gesture and siting is appropriate (its relationship to filling in the open plaza), but I sure as hell wouldn't want to be under that covered patio.
 
I am more interested to see how the rooftop height additions are going to look, has anyone seen renderings on this portion of the project?
 
I'm not architect major but yeah those renderings looks pretty lame as far as whatever they used to make them.

I've mentioned it before, but I swear that plaza is the coldest spot in the city in the winter. The wind tunnel is brutal. I guess the more space they take up there the better. I just don't get extending it to the right building though. Kinda looks weird that way. Maybe they wanna get people from that building to the central/retail stuff without having to really go outside.

A decent restaurant will do a killing there. I also thought that Starbucks could move from exchange street over since their spot is too small for them, especially the seating. Maybe a Starbucks/bookstore/newstand
 
grittys457 said:
The hampton inn signs sucks. Cheesy style. Motel like
Click to expand...

Agreed 100%. Both of those signs are horrible, both the one at the top and the one that hangs over the street. Doesn't the city require some kind of context sensitivity when it comes to signage? Those signs stick out like a sore thumb.

In fact when I was in Portland a couple weeks ago I noticed a few new signs on buildings around town, including a new one up on One City Center, although I forget what the business was. In my opinion runaway signs can clutter up a city pretty quickly, and in this day and age you don't need a large sign for wayfinding anymore. Everyone has a GPS in their car or a smartphone in their pocket, large signs are unnecessary.
 
I am personally not offended by the Hampton Inn signs. I would go as far as to say that I like the vertical signs on the corner. A hotel needs to have signs to identify itself and the Hampton Inn signs seems to accomplish that goal. It's my understanding that the signage, being part of the new construction, was approved by the powers-that-be when the building was in the design phase. Could they be more creative with the signs? Sure. If anyone has some pictures of types of signs that would work better on this building, I'm open to taking those into consideration to form my opinion. How does everyone feel about the signs for the Eastland or the Regency sign along Fore Street?

I also noticed a new sign on One City Center, a pretty small one if I recall, and I too don't recall what business it was for. Looking at old photos of Portland, our retail and commercial districts had tons of signs of every shape and size. I think they can add to the environment when they are in the right context. There will always be a need for signs I'd say. I'm sure Patrick could say a few words about how signs could perhaps be part of a form based code to ensure they are of a certain quality.
 
Last edited:
I agree Corey, I really actually like the vertical sign. Without it the building would look more sterile. I also agree that the history of Portland (and all cities) shows that signs are a part of urbanism. That said, however, people have always hated signs, too. There is legal controversy whenever someone tries to regulate signs, because in a way it can be argued to be restricting freedom of speech and expression in violation of the Constitution. However, there are ways around this, and ways to make the appearance of signs more context appropriate, which a form-based code could do (but not all do). I think this hotel is important because it keeps families which would otherwise stay in Freeport or by the Maine Mall right in Downtown Portland, and they need to know they have an option in-town that is not as exclusive as the other places. Even the other chains are quite pricey. This sign tells people that Portland is not exclusive, which I think is a good thing. I do agree, however, that it is not the best looking sign around, but signs generally aren't good looking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top