If you’re an urban planning nerd, a lover of great cities, and/or you’re looking for reasons to be optimistic about the future of Portland, consider attending a special event Sunday that will give you a peek into the future of our central city.
City of Possibility is the title of a series of events that kick off tomorrow night (January 31st) and run through March 17th. The initiative aims to give us, “an unprecedented look at the ongoing legacy of Portland architecture and urban design.” It’s being hosted by the nonprofit PDX Design Collaborative, which has partnered with the Portland Art Museum, Architecture Foundation of Oregon, Oregon Historical Society, Urban Land Institute (ULI) Northwest, UO College of Design, Portland Architecture Program, and the PSU School of Architecture.
Among the intriguing events in the lineup is “Portland’s Next Horizon: 7 Projects That Will Redefine the Central City” that takes place in the Mark Building downtown this Sunday from 2:00 to 4:00 pm. The event is billed as a, “fast-paced look the future of the central city with the people who creating it.”
In just two hours, you’ll hear opening remarks from Portland Mayor Keith Wilson and then view presentations from the following local luminaries and their exciting projects:
- Albina Vision Trust: Executive Director Winta Yohannes and Director of Government Affairs JT Flowers offer a look at the largest restorative redevelopment project in the US.
- OMSI District: OMSI President and CEO Erin Graham and Northwest Native Chamber Executive Director James Parker share the vision for an inclusive new neighborhood that will restore Tribal presence on the Willamette river and serve as a one-of-a-kind public learning ecosystem.
- Broadway Corridor: Prosper Portland’s Director of Development and Investment Lisa Abuaf details the latest news on the former USPS site: new streets and two innovative major housing projects.
- Green Loop: PBOT’s Deputy Director of Projects Art Pearce offers a glimpse at the sections taking shape for the 7-mile, bike/pedestrian corridor that will link the central city’s neighborhoods.
- Portland Art Museum – Campus Transformation: Museum Director Brian Ferriso shares updates on the new galleries and public spaces under construction on the South Park Blocks
- Lloyd Center Redevelopment: Urban Renaissance Group’s Tom Kilbane details the latest plans for the 29-acre Lloyd Center redevelopment.
- Made in Old Town: Field State’s Matthew Claudel offers a look a creation engine for the future of footwear and apparel – and a neighborhood revitalization project in the heart of Portland.
- Earthquake-Ready Burnside Bridge: Landscape architect Carol Mayer-Reed, FASLA, principal with Mayer/Reed, will look beyond the critical seismic resiliency to the urban design improvements and connections the towering new bridge will bring.
Noted architecture reporter and City of Possibility co-director Randy Gragg says, “Rarely, if ever, can you see in one afternoon the major cultural, development, and infrastructure projects — together — that will write the next chapter of a city.”
But wait, there’s more!
Between now and March 17th, there are a slew of other events that will tempt urban planners and transportation reformers alike. There’s a “Bold Visions for Portland” panel on February 10th, a “Streets of Possibility: Well Beyond Cars” event on February 24th that will explore the question of how we can do more with streets that just put cars on them. That event will feature guest remarks on streets and personal fashion from PBOT Director Millicent Williams, a teaser about the upcoming “Bridgeless Burnside” project from Ryan Hashagen, ideas on next-generation street plazas, and much more. An event on March 3rd will consider design ideas for excellent infill housing, and the spotlight will shine on Portland’s waterfront at an event on March 10th.
Don’t miss Sunday’s event and learn more about what’s in store at CityofPossibility.net and follow them on Instagram for updates.
Thanks for reading.
BikePortland has served this community with independent community journalism since 2005. We rely on subscriptions from readers like you to survive. Your financial support is vital in keeping this valuable resource alive and well.
Please subscribe today to strengthen and expand our work.
Oh I should have known that Randy Gragg was involved! (It has been a long mental drought for this topic…I sooo miss those days when Randy was writing ~weekly Oregonian articles on urbane architecture and planning.)
Some of these have had so many false starts that my interest, which used to be high, has waned. It would be nice if they could be scored in terms of likelhood of groundbreaking in the near future–my interest would then rise.
“Fast paced look at the future of the central city with the people creating it.”
Should read: “…with the people who dream of creating it.”
Granted that the cast of players in this event are talented and accomplished artists, designers and influencers who bring an optimistic vision of Portland’s future. They are the same characters with the same vision who have shaped the Portland experience that we now have. We have seen colorful renderings of green and populated streetscapes many times, but reality paints a different picture. Why only optimistic dreamers and no steely eyed pragmatists in the pool? Shaping plans, policy and spending decisions on a rose colored vision of the future is comparable to the funding of capital improvements with no accounting for maintenance. The rust never sleeps. Anyway, good luck with that
Granpa, I hear your frustrations with the pace of change, but the people and projects listed here are not just dreaming. There’s probably over $1 billion (with a “B”) already committed to these projects and there has been legitimate, real progress on them. So while I share your impatience and tire of visions that have no basis in reality, that’s not entirely the case here! And without inspiration and information from events like this, I guarantee that your pessimism will be substantiated.
I would label myself a skeptic rather than a pessimist. Is seeing the current reality pessimism? To be frank, my work is in the cohort of designers and planners and I would love to see this type of vision realized. Too often the work and vision of narrowly focused, pollyanna designers is derailed by unplanned for users. That is why the “visioning “ should include pragmatists
I feel like we agree in general. My Pollyanna meter is very sensitive and I’ve been through that in a major way in being very close to the bike advocacy community during the peak heyday of 2010-2012 when there was a ton of optimism — so much that I believe it led to complacency and became detached from certain realities. But I feel like the folks on the list for this event that I know about are more than visionaries and deserve a bit more credit than I feel you are giving them.
Jonathan, the Great [Bad] Recession also ‘knee capped’ a lot of real estate investment [good with the bad] and also decimated a lot of design expertise / oversight in local governments for livability*. [*Typically the planning/ community / multimodal focused staff were the first staff cuts, leaving the traditional engineering staff, who back then often did not have as deep of an awareness of good urban design / multimodal mobility [pre NACTO] as they do now.]
I’m a life-long Portland resident so I’m all for getting some positive news, but let’s be realistic:
Broadway Corridor – Prosper Portland completely squandered the opportunity at the USPS site by trying to be everything to everybody. Even their own lawyer working on the development agreement, who also worked on Pearl District and South Waterfront development agreements, said that Prosper’s asks were laughable and not feasible. This is the guy who negotiated a deal for the City to help pay for a super fancy tram, so not exactly a small picture thinker. It will take decades to recover and come close to what could have happened there.
Old Town – no or almost no private capital is going to Old Town unless it is buying office buildings for pennies on the dollars. The progress that was made has also been squandered by crime/public safety/office vacancy issues. Empty buildings, companies don’t want to go there or near there, U of O wants to be out…even the shelter at the old greyhound station is saying they cant’ operated safely.
OMSI – grandiose vision without the money to pull it off.
Burnside Bridge – it’s exciting to see the City/County focusing on basis infrastructure needs, but closing Burnside for this long will be an absolute s*it show.
Lloyd Center – big opportunity, but also a very long term one. URG has done some cool projects, but they don’t actually own this property and the magnitude of investment to have a bold vision here is going to be very hard to come by. City isn’t in a position to provide the subsidy needed and private capital won’t make sense of it for a long time.
Albina Trust – have the experience to do something great, and potentially the capital if Phil Knight actually steps up.
Thanks. I understand your realistic take on this! It’s very warranted and appreciated.
I’m with you here, Granpa. Sweep the bike lanes on the streets I ride regularly, and I’ll be more optimistic that Big Things can actually happen. In other words, I need to see basic competence before I’ll believe shiny new things can happen.
You don’t get to cut a ribbon as a city council member when you sweep the streets.
It does look interesting. I’m so down on Portland right now due to the lack of provision of basic and essential municipal services (combined with the high tax burden) but I’ll try to improve my attitude. Maybe I can gain some inspiration from these events.
I’ve been hurt before – had my hopes raised by Portland and then dashed again. So I don’t think I’ll be attending any of these events. But thanks for letting us know.
Agreed and I become more skeptical with age. Someone could offer to radically transform our city and make it a shining example of all that is good, clean, and right about urban development. They could even have private money and the clout to secure matching public funds, but then petty politics will get in the way:
Councilor #1: I don’t see my eastside district getting a station on the proposed 300mph maglev train to Seattle and Eugene. I’m out because downtown shouldn’t get the train because they always get everything!
Councilor #2: Alaska Airlines just gave me $10K towards re-election. Drop the maglev train or I’m out.
Councilor #3: I do not see enough public artwork celebrating indigenous peoples so I might have to vote against this.
Councilor #4: The car and truck tunnels under the city give me pause for when The Full Rip 9 hits. I’m a no vote.
Councilor #5: All minority contractors for building contracts and all homeless get free Class 3 e-bikes or I am also a no.
Councilor #6: Bikes don’t pay taxes! No!
Councilor #7: I want to do this, I really do. But some of the proposed 75 story housing towers block my view of Mt. Hood and hurt the value of my historic West Hills home so I cannot vote for this unless those towers are scrapped or moved to St. Johns.
Councilor #8: I’m with Councilor #7 but my concern is that such tall buildings will confuse migrating flocks of Canada geese.
A bit of over-the-top parody for sure, but this isn’t too far off of how our local politicians act and why I cannot get excited about anything pitched as widely and truly transformative.
I’m excited to be attending – Though I understand much of the negativity in the comments re: dreams vs. reality, as Jonathan points out below, many of these projects are in advanced states of planning and funding. Regardless of if all of them actually get completed or not, I throw my enthusiastic support at anyone making real efforts to build a better Portland.
I hope their vision and results are more compelling than their IG feed.
As much as I like some of the projects on that list, my favorite thing about it is that it doesn’t include a baseball stadium.
Yeah what city would want 30,000 people coming downtown (LLoyd center?) to spend money 82 times a year.
As long as not one penny of taxpayer money is used, go for it.
With all the failures the city has at taking care of what we already have, spending our taxpayer money on something so frivolous shouldn’t even be considered.
Yes, the city really is screwing up by owning Providence park, isn’t it.
Terrible frivolous investment……
Except that the latest location being discussed isn’t downtown, it’s shoe-horning it into the South Waterfront between OHSU buildings and across from the tip of Ross Island. Who would want 30,000 people coming THERE 82 times a year?*
*not that I’d agree a new team in Portland will outdraw half the teams in Major League Baseball, and nearly as many as the Mariners in much-larger Seattle.
That location is one that is being discussed by Private investors, there is nothin concrete at all. Maybe they will only draw 20,000 a game if you want to quibble.
Anyway Portland really needs to just remain a small time cow town to make you happy.
What you just said–that there’s “nothing concrete at all” about the site most in the news now, and your instantly changing your attendance figure drastically downward are exactly the kind of reasons I’m glad a new stadium isn’t on the list of projects being discussed.
That’s exactly the attitude that I and lots of other people find tiresome. It’s also ironic given that my first comment mentioned I liked some of the projects on the list–none of which are the types of projects a “small time cow town” would be discussing.
20,000 is a very reasonable number and the ballpark should be in the Lloyd center which is a no brainer.
By your small town thinking the Timbers would not be here, Providence park would never have been renovated.
What is the problem with having a stadium and a baseball team?
The cities that have them love them. The franchises are difficult to get. It would be a coup for this city to have one.
All those folks would take transit, right?
Yes, they’d all take transit, the crowds would be the same as for much larger cities with very competitive, established teams, and the private developers would make sure no public money would be ever be needed, and they’d guarantee to never move the team, or ask to renegotiate any terms that they agreed to to get the stadium approved!
Exactly ONE baseball franchise has moved in the last 20 years and only 5 teams have moved in the last 40 years.
Some facts might help your argument.
One team in the last 20 years, and two in the last 21. I bet that’s 1 or 2 more than the number of owners who’ve guaranteed they’ll never move a team (and held to it) which is what my comment was about.
Moving a team isn’t common, but owners using the threat of moving as leverage to negotiate or renegotiate agreements with cities IS common.
I also never said 20,000 attendance wasn’t a reasonable number–I said 30,000.
I also never said anything critical about a Lloyd Center location.
All your responses are illustrating why I made my original comment–that I’m glad the list of conference topics doesn’t include a baseball stadium.
The reason isn’t that I’m dead set against having a team here–I’m not. It’s that stadium supporters often react to people who aren’t rabidly in favor of building a stadium by doing all the same things you’ve just done–attacking them for positions they don’t have, saying those people won’t be happy unless Portland remains a “small time cow town” (your exact words to me) etc.
I’m confident I could go to any of the City of Possibility events and discuss, debate, and disagree with presenters there–about any project–without having them miscast my positions or belligerently tell me “some facts might help your argument”.
If the baseball stadium were on the agenda, I wouldn’t be confident of that at all. That’s why I said I’m glad it’s not.
You gave NO good reason why we should not pursue and build a baseball stadium except you don’t like the stadium supporters… what a ridiculous position.
Sorry but that epitomizes a SMALL town attitude.
You’ve ignored or misunderstood everything i wrote, and proved exactly why I said I was glad the stadium wasn’t on the agenda.
I love the concept of this, but it’s super disappointing to see that most of these are still “all talk” and no progress. Let’s actually get going on these things.
But we need focus groups and committee’s and and and
Why are so many Portlanders so dadgum negative. They poo poo every great idea, want the city to “rebound” yet complain about every idea. Y’all do realize it will take many solutions right? This is a start. Geez people. You’re becoming like our city leaders: always at odds.I love the concepts. Let’s do it
Because we moved past and out of a Golden Age; takes a while to get over that.
Did anyone attend the launch event? I tried to, it was pretty funny, there were no bike racks and all of the street signs around the museum were loaded with bikes. Unfortunately, the event was sold out. I couldn’t find any information about how to purcahse tickets online for this first event, or for any of the others. Any idea how to get more details about upcoming events?