Comments on: Developer chooses deconstruction over demolition

By: Gentle Demolition in Portland | Young Abundance

Gentle Demolition in Portland | Young Abundance — Wed, 09 Dec 2015 02:37:26 +0000

[...] http://djcoregon.com/news/2011/04/18/developer-chooses-deconstruction-over-demolition/ [...]

By: Moe from The Simpsons

Moe from The Simpsons — Sat, 23 Apr 2011 05:30:41 +0000

I lived in those apartments in the mid-90’s and they were really bad then, I can’t imagine what they are (were?) like fifteen + years later. I applaud The Rebuilding Center for providing this service because are so many pieces to these buildings (and others) worth saving…but I have to agree, the “systems and envelope” as Fowler explained had to be pretty bad unless there had been some serious updating done. As a native Portlander, I hate to see them go because of the many nostalgic drive-bys now that the Couplet is operating, but the area is changing so much for the better that maybe now is the time for an upgrade, and at least they are saving everything possible. Good for them. In cases such as these, deconstruction should be encouraged, not frowned upon.

By: del Monico

del Monico — Thu, 21 Apr 2011 21:21:49 +0000

I agree with Chris Wilson. I have seen the two buildings on NE Couch, and they provided a lot of character and interest in that part of the inner Eastside. It is very sad and frankly unnecessary that they are being deconstructed. It would be far better if such enlightened developers utilized surface parking lots, of which there are many on NE Couch, for their redevelopment projects. Infill the many gaps in our urban fabric.

By: Brandon Spencer-Hartle

Brandon Spencer-Hartle — Tue, 19 Apr 2011 16:50:49 +0000

It’s great to hear that the ReBuilding Center and developers like Fowler Andrews have made the push, at no small expense of time, commitment, and money, to make building deconstruction a new expectation when redeveloping an existing site. While this is a very good direction for the industry generally, one has to wonder why adaptive ruse isn’t always the preferred path in cases where medium and large size buildings are considered for redevelopment. Because of the flexible nature of this site and the human scale of the existing buildings, a near-100% on-site reuse of materials and the incorporation of a new building addition could have made for an even more environmentally-friendly project, with the creativity of the architect, developer, and contractor expressed throughout the new and old buildings alike.

By: Chris Wilson

Chris Wilson — Tue, 19 Apr 2011 16:24:37 +0000

Though I am glad that many items from these historic buildings are not making their way into a land fill the greenest most respectful to the neighborhood option of course would have been keeping them. If we live in a city where people can say of the new structure “the modern exterior of the building will update the look of the Northeast Portland corner” I’m afraid that we will loose almost everything that makes Portland well, Portland. There’s a believe out there that Portland keeps too much – that the city is obsessed with keeping everything. Anyone who has ever seen old photos of the city of course would never think this. They call parts of the city “Old Town” not realizing that all of downtown was old – it’s just in one main area less was torn down. Urban renewal, sports complexes and freeways have taken their toll. I hope soon we learn our lesson. Once it’s gone it’s gone.