Franklin Boulevard Transformation

Otto Poticha, FAIA, recently sent me an email suggesting the AIA Oregon/Eugene Section Committee on Local Affairs (CoLA) become more actively involved in the City of Eugene’s current planning for major changes to Franklin Boulevard. He rightfully believes the project is too important to the community for CoLA to ignore. Thanks to Otto, it’s clear to me its implications are far-reaching and certainly worthy of my attention and that of all Eugene-based design professionals. The City hopes to transform Franklin Boulevard from an automobile-oriented arterial to a safe, comfortable, high quality, walking, biking, and transit street. Additionally, the project goals include: 

1. Improving the corridor for businesses, residents, and the university population 
2. Doubling the BRT lanes
3. Accommodating motorists and freight
4. Welcoming people to the city and the University of Oregon 
5. Making the area attractive, green, and connected 
6. Changing the street so people walking and cycling are accommodated safely, comfortably, and conveniently

The Franklin Boulevard Transformation project area extends between Alder Street and Interstate 5, and includes Garden Avenue and its connections to Franklin Boulevard. 

The City hired are large team of specialists for the project: 

• HDR: Traffic analyses, street and intersection design, public transit design, and traffic control 
• Cogito: Public engagement 
• Toole Design: Pedestrian and bike accommodation, business relations, street design, and urban design 
• SERA: Gateways, arrival experience, character

As noted on the project’s web page, the boulevard—with its wide lanes and fast-moving vehicles—can be an uninviting, unsafe, and uncomfortable street. For people who walk, bike, or ride the bus, it can be a significant barrier to getting from place to place, hindering the City’s long-term efforts to reach climate-reduction goals. 

Fortunately, the future of Franklin Boulevard may be bright. If successful, the project will achieve its stated goals, with the street wholly transformed to become a more comfortable connector of places, rather than a divider. Ideally the street will serve all modes of travel, graciously accommodating people who walk, bike, ride the bus, and drive. 

The project kicked off last October and will conclude late this year. The City is providing opportunities for community input throughout the process, including two intensive, multi-day workshops, the first of which occurred in January. That four-day workshop gathered ideas, incorporating them into preliminary design concepts for a transformed Franklin Boulevard. 

A concept image from the January 31, 2019 Franklin Boulevard Transformation reveal presentation

Otto attended the initial workshop, remarking that besides himself, only CoLA member Eric Gunderson was on hand to represent local AIA members. In his typical fashion, Otto quickly cut to the chase: Why no specific mention of the Millrace, the Willamette River, and Judkins Point? Shouldn’t such key physical features be factored into the development of a new vision for Franklin Boulevard? Ditto for the new Knight Campus for Accelerating Scientific Impact and its “scientists-only” pedestrian bridge. How will necessary standards for highway utilities and lighting be addressed? 

Why is providing dual lanes for the EmX buses necessary or even desirable? Dual lanes would gobble up valuable ROW, not to mention a massive chunk of the improvement budget. Why not broaden the vision to encompass a greater set of impacts? Imagine how the entire equation might be altered by envisioning another Willamette River bridge. Such a crossing would disperse heavy vehicular traffic. An excessive number of large semi-trailers and log trucks use Franklin Boulevard today because alternative routes do not exist. 

Why do the initial notions emphasize the development of roundabouts as gateways? Otto doesn’t believe a front door should be an intersection; what it should be is a positive space or place. Why no emphases on connections to existing open spaces, such as the meandering path along the Millrace in the vicinity of Franklin and Alder Street? 

As always, Otto is on point. Fundamentally, he doesn’t want to see a renewed Franklin Boulevard realized as a generic set of solutions to a very place-specific problem. Its master plan shouldn’t be a mere assemblage of assorted ideas. The process shouldn’t be reduced to a multiple-choice exercise. The boulevard is a significant public space and deserves to be planned with purpose. Design does matter. 

Notwithstanding his cogent thoughts to the contrary, Otto considered the initial workshop to be a good start for the project. Moving forward, the City is seeking input and answers to four discussion questions to help guide and shape the corridor’s future. 

Beyond the survey input, the City envisions the following activities: 

• February – May 2019: Project Alternatives Evaluation and Screening 
• May 2019: Design Refinement Workshop #2 
• May – August 2019: Project Alternatives Design and Refinement 
• August – November 2019: Corridor Analysis and Recommendations

Ultimately, there will be a report documenting the analysis of the opportunities and constraints involved with transforming Franklin Boulevard, as well as final recommendations for how to design and implement the plan. The incorporation of public input throughout is important, and it’s especially important for local design professionals to weigh in during the process. Ideally, our voices will contribute to a design for a transformed Franklin Boulevard possessing a true sense of place, while also being pleasant, accessible, and safe for people using all modes of transportation. 

Where the City Meets the River

Early (January 2018) rendering of the proposed downtown riverfront development (SERA Architects)

The January 25 edition of The Register-Guard noted the signing of the formal agreement between the City of Eugene and Portland-based Williams/Dame & Atkins (WDA) for the redevelopment of the former Eugene Water & Electric Board property along Eugene’s downtown riverfront. Accompanying the piece was a loosely sketched rendering of the proposed development (see above). 

The admittedly uninspiring image took members of the AIA Oregon-Eugene Section Committee on Local Affairs (CoLA) by surprise. A stirred sense of immediacy sparked CoLA’s ensuing, spirited discussion (by email): the project is happening, and it’s about to leap from paper to reality. Was this the best WDA and its architects (SERA) could come up with? The rendering suggested a trite, generic response absent qualities expressive of its unique setting along the Willamette River. Indeed, why feature this one perspective, and why such a seemingly random assortment of banal brick boxes? Did the image portend a failure to measure up to promises made to the community for developing a lively and inviting district reconnecting Eugene to the river that runs through it? 

I chimed in even though I recently relinquished my seat on CoLA to make room for new blood around the table. I agreed with the others in finding the published rendering underwhelming. I echoed the consensus that if WDA wanted to create a buzz about their project, this wasn’t the way to do it, but I also suggested reserving judgment until there was an opportunity to see more. 

It turns out withholding fire was the judicious course to take, at least for now. The exchange among the members of CoLA prompted me to learn more. I discovered the offending rendering was only one of a series produced by SERA more than a year ago for WDA’s presentation of their initial vision for the downtown riverfront site to Eugene City Council. That presentation included a wealth of additional information, including a series of diagrams highlighting a thoughtful evolution of the 2010 EWEB Riverfront Master Plan and the 2012 Specific Area Plan. The newly refined development scheme builds upon the community’s vision expressed in the earlier plans, maximizes value for the public realm and private investment, is designed for the realities of today’s marketplace, and integrates with the City’s planning for the future riverfront park. 

Another one of the images from the January 2018 WDA presentation

So, I’ll criticize the R-G for choosing to accompany its recent article with a dated, preliminary sketch rather than a more current image or a series of more representative views from different vantages (it may be that SERA did not make newer renderings available to the paper). A year is an eternity in the evolution of a design concept. SERA is too talented a firm not to have honed its recommendations for buildings truly responsive to their unique setting. I suspect we’ll soon see detailed designs for the first of the development’s new buildings, at which time we’ll all have a legitimate opportunity to decide whether they hit the mark. The lesson here is to have all the facts at hand before choosing to respond in a public forum. 

Riverfront Development Master Plan by SERA Architects for William/Dame & Atkins 

What the City presently has available for scrutiny on its Downtown Riverfront Project web page today is WDA’s and SERA’s year-old presentation rather than anything newer. Presuming the proposed plan expressed in that presentation remains current, it is fair game for comment. 

I believe WDA and SERA are saying the right things. They envision a flexible framework, as opposed to a fixed plan, citing the difficulty of predicting the future and how their past developments occurred in ways they could not entirely imagine up front. Their master plan emphasizes “seamless” connections that SERA’s designers hope will feel like they have always been there. An extension of 5th Avenue will be a pedestrian-oriented “festival” street, with a straight shot to a riverfront plaza/overlook. There will be a connection to the eastern terminus of 8th Avenue at the location of the existing railroad crossing. WDA envisions a new, landmark pedestrian bridge over the river, providing convenient access to Alton Baker Park, as well as other links to the existing riverfront trail system. The plan promises “site porosity and transparency.” 

WDA will build the project in phases, in their words “organically and at the right pace,” with ultimate completion years from now. When fully built-out, the plan will include more than two-hundred apartments, seventy market-rate townhouses, a hotel, a restaurant, retail space, and an affordable housing complex with seventy-five units. A key to the project’s success will be attracting people to live downtown. WDA believes the site’s unparalleled setting and the right mix of amenities will sell themselves, and they’re probably right. 

SERA’s recommendations include limiting the size of the buildings, such that no one structure is taller than four stories. Additionally, they’re advocating for active ground-floor spaces, quality building materials, and a fine-grained scale. In the words of SERA principal Kurt Schultz, AIA, “the buildings shouldn’t appear like they’ve come from outer space.” This may suggest a proven, conservative formula for the architecture, though ideally one that will steer clear of an overtly ersatz, historicizing expression. 

Bird's eye view looking toward the northwest from the south end of the downtown riverfront project site

I won’t mind if the majority of the development primarily becomes a backdrop for its riverfront setting and the public spaces its buildings help shape. I don’t think a huge dose of architectural bravura is called for here. The exceptions may be the proposed restaurant building, which by virtue of its siting adjacent to the 5th Avenue river overlook and plaza warrants pavilion-like treatment, and the new pedestrian bridge crossing to Alton Baker Park. Both of these have the potential to be postcard-worthy icons for Eugene. 

One thing that does bother me about a single development parcel like this in a city of Eugene’s size is that it may be too large relative to the urban fabric into which it is being inserted or appended to. Ideally, WDA will indeed develop the property incrementally and organically over time, though a certain critical mass will be necessary to begin with. In a perfect world, WDA would not be working with what is effectively a clean slate and starting almost everything from scratch. Thankfully, the City retained the Steam Plant, which will provide a modicum of historical texture for the site. My biggest fear is the completed project will feel sterile, lacking the richness that accompanies neighborhoods featuring successive layers of development.(1) 

Steam Plant vision by the deChase Miksis/Arcimoto/Rowell Brokaw team 

Speaking of the Steam Plant, the City of Eugene is seeking comments(2) from the public on its recently unveiled redevelopment proposal by a separate team led by Mark Miksis of deChase Miksis Development and Mark Frohnmayer of Arcimoto. As noted on that project’s website, the Steam Plant (completed in 1931 and in use until 2012) is “an iconic representation of our community’s history, ripe with possibility for the future,” and “the last physical representation of the birthplace of industry for the southern Willamette Valley.”  Mark Frohnmayer believes the project is an “opportunity to build something that is undeniably Eugene . . . that’s infused with our spirit of innovation, that’s at the nexus point on the river between downtown and the university, and that truly invites community participation on multiple levels.” 

The Steam Plant team’s website includes a video and draft renderings (by Rowell Brokaw Architects) suggesting the abundant potential of the redevelopment. It all seems very promising: the project team is a high-powered amalgam of innovative, locally-grown talents. I particularly like the suggested pairing of a public part of the cultural landscape with co-working/shared office space within the building as a way to make the project financially sustainable. The Steam Plan website also includes a link to the City of Eugene’s online survey, which will be open for public comment through February 19. 

Future interior view of the Steam Plant (rendering by Rowell Brokaw Architects)

In my opinion, the successful repurposing of the Steam Plant is critical to the fortunes of the overall riverfront development. The renovation of the building is ambitious. It is also a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to honor the historic significance of the downtown riverfront site, and to link the heart of our city to the river by helping fulfill the “Willamette to Willamette” initiative. In the words of the deChase Miksis/Arcimoto/Rowell Brokaw team, “the rest of the [riverfront] district will be enhanced and will flourish if the Steam Plant—with its history, grit, and toughness—is the authentic anchor and connector that the public has been asking for.” 

I’m guardedly optimistic about both WDA’s riverfront development plans and the future of the Steam Plant project. If both are fully realized as their respective teams envision, Eugene might finally embrace the Willamette River in a manner befitting the waterway’s historical significance to our community. 

(1)  The City is about to remove the old, visually prominent bow-truss building adjacent to the Coburg Road viaduct. WDA considers it “an obstacle to getting the maximum value out of the property.” 

(2)  Representatives from the Steam Plant Team and the City of Eugene are hosting an Open House on February 7 from 4-7 p.m. at the EWEB Community Room. They will also be present at several community events to answer questions and get feedback. Community members will have the opportunity to speak with the team and learn about the concepts for the Steam Plant, as well as take virtual tours of building.

• February 7:  Open House at EWEB Community Room, from 4-7 p.m.
• February 8: Presentation at the Ignite, University of Oregon Campus
• February 16-17: Table at the Asian Celebration, Lane Events Center

CoLA: Review-Overview-Preview

The upcoming November meeting of the AIA-Southwestern Oregon Chapter, which will occur this coming Wednesday, November 28, will feature a presentation by the members of the AIA-SWO Eugene-Springfield Committee on Local Affairs (CoLA), along with special guest Will Dowdy, Urban Development Manager for the City of Eugene. 

The presentation’s objectives will include the following: 

• Building awareness of AIA advocacy at the national, state, and local levels, the mechanisms for each, and the strength of professional associations in advocating for positive outcomes on issues that benefit from the expertise of design professionals.
• Reviewing the adopted AIA federal policy agenda, released earlier this month. The policy agenda includes affordable housing and expanded tax credits, sustainability and tax incentives for retrofits, school safety design, student loan debt forgiveness for architectural graduates, resilience design and disaster response, and tax repeal on foreign entities.
• Reviewing the history and mission of CoLA. The committee’s areas of emphasis have included various issues of local importance to AIA-SWO, and advocacy for positions of common professional interest. 
• Introducing the current members of CoLA, who will be on hand to answer questions and lead the evening’s presentation. 
• Calling for those who may be interested in being a member of CoLA during the coming year. 
• Conducting an overview of selected CoLA issues during 2018. These have included the affordable housing crisis, the work of Better Housing Together (BHT) in moving toward solutions to that crisis, and support for and participation in the community forum BHT hosted; monitoring the River Road corridor planning work and City of Eugene efforts to increase density along that major transit corridor; and support for careful planning in the redesign of the Park Blocks as part of a newly imagined Town Square (including publishing an op-ed piece in The Register-Guard and another here on my blog). 
• Previewing what CoLA plans to focus upon during 2019. 

The meeting will also feature a presentation by Will Dowdy on the subject of the City of Eugene’s proposed Town Square project (Park Blocks, year-round Farmers’ Market, and new City Hall) and how AIA-SWO members may contribute to its design. He’ll report on the status of the current RFQ/RFP selection process, the timeline for key decisions by City Council, and the goals for a proposed peer design review process. 

There will be plenty of time during the chapter meeting for questions and discussion. As one of the current CoLA members, I encourage you to attend and let me and my fellow committee members know your thoughts. We’ve tried to be proactive and visible during 2018. Our hope is to carry our momentum into 2019, bring aboard new blood and energy, and continue to be relevant advocates for design excellence in the service of ensuring the Eugene-Springfield community enjoys a healthy, inclusive, and livable future. 

What:               AIA-Southwestern Oregon November Chapter Meeting 

When:              Wednesday, November 28, 2018; 5:30 – 7:30 PM 

Where:             The Loft at Turtles, 2690 Willamette St, Eugene (enter off 27th Ave) 

Cost:                No meeting charge. Food/beverages at cost from Turtles menu. 

CEU:                (1.00) AIA LU

We Shouldn’t Fear the Change Diverse Housing Types Herald

Aerial view of a typical, established R-1 neighborhood in Eugene (Imagery: © 2018 Google)

It's human nature to be wary of change. Change is perturbing and stressful. We instinctively cling to the few certainties we can count on. They constitute our comfort zone. It’s no surprise many of us want our neighborhoods to stay just the way they are now. We don’t want them to change, especially if we intend to stay in our current homes for a long time. 

The problem is, as much as we’d like to forestall change, no one can avoid it: We work for decades but eventually retire. Our children grow up and leave the nest. We may separate or divorce, dramatically altering our life’s equation. We’re not immune to the possibility of financial misfortune or encountering health problems. We certainly can’t escape becoming older and less capable of maintaining the lifestyle we may presently enjoy. Change is simply a fact of life. 

Leaving our comfort zone is unsettling but we’ll need to if we and our communities are to adapt and thrive. Today’s housing affordability crisis is a case in point. Resistance to the introduction of new and creative housing solutions responsive to our changing demographics and marketplace is symptomatic of our fear of change, but we ignore it at our own peril. We instinctively know this but many Eugeneans reflexively resist change rather than embracing the possibilities inherent in new opportunities. We do this even though we may one day directly benefit from the availability of a greater breadth of housing options, such as those that allow us to gracefully age in place. 

Those fortunate enough to be housing-secure can easily misjudge how the lack of affordable housing impacts our entire community. Rather than fearing the housing affordability challenge and the change it portends, we need to confront it to preserve the qualities we find most attractive about life in Eugene. 

Growth here has widened a disparity between the supply of housing and the tremendous demand for affordable options. Increasing the breadth and availability of a range of housing types is part of the solution to a problem that threatens Eugene’s resilience and everyone’s standard of living. For example, “missing middle” housing types—which include side-by-side and stacked duplexes, bungalow courts, carriage houses, fourplexes, townhouses, courtyard apartments, and accessory dwelling units—can provide a range of choices, a range that presently is conspicuously absent here. 

Done well, what missing middle housing looks like belies the density possible; higher densities do not necessarily translate to bigger buildings. Keeping individual units small is the secret; 600 to 700 square feet apiece is often enough. Side-by-side duplexes can achieve a density of 12-19 dwelling units per acre; townhouses, up to 29 units per acre. As many as 50 DU/acre are possible with courtyard apartment configurations. Densities of 16 DU/acre or more are sufficient to support a nearby main street with locally-focused businesses and public transportation. 

All well and good, but where can we provide expanded housing opportunities while fulfilling the affordability, compact urban development, and neighborhood livability pillars of Envision Eugene? The intractability of concerned residents within long-established R-1 districts has proven to be a considerable obstacle, and yet it’s clear overcoming that obstacle is necessary to responsibly address our community’s growth and change. If we do nothing we will effectively accept financially gated neighborhoods in our midst, contrary to our better natures. 

Clearly, the market is demanding change. We need to provide a critical mass of housing to support complete, diverse, and walkable neighborhoods, while reducing pressures for development on the urban periphery. Taking R-1 districts off the table is problematic because so much of our land within our growth boundary is presently locked up inside them. 

All neighborhoods change over time. The recipe for success includes sustaining the patterns that make older neighborhoods unique, but also demands creative, inspired design. This may be the reason why it is elusive: the making of good, deferential architecture that respects its context isn’t always assured. Regardless, it’s clear our housing stock needs diversification to adequately address the myriad ways Eugene is changing. Certainly, managing change by densifying established neighborhoods will only work if it is the outcome of a community and neighbors-driven process that dives deeply into issues of structural form, market demand, affordability, and traffic impact. Lacking such a process, the inevitable results will be continued resistance. 

The housing affordability puzzle is enormously complex and certainly one a jiggering of our land use codes alone will not solve. Cities by themselves cannot attend to the deep structural issues responsible for a globally confounding problem. That said, we know fostering innovation in our housing rather than stifling it is necessary. The affordability crisis demands a ladder of housing opportunities.  Introducing new housing types within the fabric of R-1 districts won’t eliminate the problem but they can help address a range of issues beyond affordability. This is change we should not fear.

Better Housing Together: The Community Forum

The Better Housing Together Forum, Wednesday, February 21, at the EMU Ballroom, University of Oregon (photo by Jenna Fribley, AIA)

I joined 250 of my Eugene-Springfield neighbors this past Wednesday evening in a packed EMU Ballroom on the University of Oregon Campus for the inaugural Better Housing Together Forum. As promised by the members of the Better Housing Together steering committee, the event was filled with inspiring conversations, an enlightening and respectful panel discussion, and brainstorming around what to do about a housing crisis that impacts all of us, whether our own needs are met or not. Importantly, a broad spectrum of interests was in the room, each one bringing its perspective to the challenge of solving one of our community’s most intractable problems. How will we expand and diversify our housing options to create more local affordability?

Project lead and event host, Kaarin Knudson, AIA, set an appropriate tone by quoting Ronald Heifetz, founding director of the Center for Public Leadership at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government. As Heifetz noted “Attention is the currency of leadership.” It’s incumbent upon leaders to get people to pay attention to the tough problems everyone would often rather avoid facing. Our housing crisis is one of these tough problems. Here in Lane County, 42% of local households struggle to simply meet basic needs, and this struggle is compounded by the high cost of available accommodations.

Better Housing Together intends to provide leadership through public education and advocacy. It is a community-led effort built to address a community problem. Every community grows in the direction of the questions it answers, and the question of housing affordability is perhaps the biggest one those of us living in Lane County must confront today. As a prominent community leader, University of Oregon president Michael Schill emphasized this to the audience by stressing that now is the “right time,” and that the housing crisis is the “right issue” for the “right people” to address. During his academic career, Michael’s prominent work has focused on a wide range of matters related to housing law and policy, so his endorsement of the Better Housing Together platform is significant. He welcomed the prospect of shining a light on the problem and encouraged all of us to do what we can to work toward solutions.

Moderated by Noreen Dunnells, president and CEO of United Way of Lane County, the forum’s panel discussion, entitled Perspectives + Solutions, featured four experts whose backgrounds made them eminently suited as panelists:

Jim Long, Affordable Housing Manger, City of Bend (retired January 2018):
Jim cited the success of the City of Bend’s implementation of a construction excise tax (CET) in 2006 to help leverage the development of affordable housing (more on CETs in just a moment). In Jim’s words, we need to change the discourse to a “both/and” conversation. We need housing abundance and diversity.

Shane Johnson, Regional Director, Hayden Homes:
Shane firmly believes private builders must be part of the solution. That said, municipalities can prime the pump by instituting incentives in the form of density bonuses (to increase the diversity of housing types) and exemptions from a portion of systems development charges for projects involving affordable units. There is no one solution, but tools like these are available. The key, according to Shane, is to use those tools that are at hand. Trying something is better than doing nothing.

Emily Reiman, Executive Director, Neighborhood Economic Development Corp. (NEDCO):
Emily emphasized there is a cost to inaction. Every moment we wait compounds the problem. She cautioned any group whose goal it is to help ameliorate the crisis to not fall into the trap of becoming an “echo chamber.” It’s important that opposing views are in the room to build real consensus toward the identification of solutions everyone can rally behind.

Dylan Lamar, Architect, Cultivate Design-Development:
Dylan imagines every neighborhood as a unique ecosystem. Neighborhoods that are exclusively comprised of single-family residences are monocultures lacking in healthy diversity. Dylan favors inclusionary zoning, and ordinances that work to create affordable housing units in market-rate developments. Inclusionary zoning fosters diverse neighborhood ecosystems. As with biology, diversity contributes to the greater vitality, health, and resilience of a community.

The Perspectives & Solutions discussion panel; from left to right: moderator Noreen Dunnells (at the podium), Dylan Lamar, Jim Long, Shane Johnson, and Emily Reiman (my photo)

The subject of a construction excise tax was a common thread during the panel discussion. A CET can be a powerful tool to help local jurisdictions address their communities’ housing needs and ensure everyone has a safe, stable place to call home. It’s not clear to me why, but the State of Oregon Legislature banned CETs in 2007. The city of Bend had adopted the state’s first CET the year before, so it was grandfathered in. Bend’s CET has generated millions in revenue since its inception, which it has leveraged to obtain an additional $77.6 million in state and federal affordable housing development funds, and $28.4 million in private investments. Bend kept opposition to its CET to a minimum by involving representatives of the construction and real estate communities in crafting the tax and giving them seats on the city’s Affordable Housing Advisory Committee, which decides how the revenues will be invested.

In 2016, the Oregon State Legislature passed SB 1533, which permits local jurisdictions to implement a construction excise tax for affordable housing and allows inclusionary zoning. Seven jurisdictions (Portland, Corvallis, Tillamook County, Cannon Beach, Hood River County, Hood River City, and Newport) have passed local construction excise taxes to date, and many others (including Eugene) are considering adopting this important tool. A recent Register Guard editorial explained how a 1-percent CET in Eugene would raise an estimated $3 million a year during periods when construction activity is strong, as is currently the case. If Bend’s experience is a reliable guide, that amount could be expected to leverage 7.5 times that much in public and private investment, or about $25 million a year.

Click image to enlarge

The steering committee carefully populated each table with as varied a group as possible. The table activity portion of the program consisted of each person engaging in a group discussion, and also recording his or her own responses to a predetermined set of questions from the forum organizers. For example, I answered the question about what I would personally do to help solve the housing crisis by saying I would advocate for increasing the range of available housing types through implementation of updates to local development codes, property tax exemptions, and other incentives. Ultimately, Better Housing Together will compile the results of the table activity and make them available for anyone to review.

My one reservation about the forum is one I expressed during our table discussion. While it was easy for me to attend, the same is certainly not true for the many who comprise the very constituency at the center of the housing crisis in Lane County. They are families and individuals who simply could not afford to attend the forum and be heard. They may have been burdened by an inability to pay for temporary childcare or transportation. They may have lacked the time to attend because by necessity they work two or more jobs. They may not be fluent English-speakers and so may have felt unwelcome or uncomfortable. They simply may have been unaware of the forum. The bottom line is—if they were underrepresented—we missed their voices.

Regardless, I’m guessing Kaarin and the other members of the Better Housing Together steering committee were thrilled with how the forum played out. I’ve no doubt their primary goal was not to find a silver bullet—a simple, seemingly magical solution to the housing crisis—because that unicorn doesn’t exist (sorry for mixing metaphors). Instead, they achieved something else, something potentially game-changing, which was to bring together motivated community members and leaders with the hope of galvanizing the will to finally take positive steps toward a broadly supported set of strategies for addressing the challenge. If Better Housing Together bottled the energy I witnessed as I left the forum, I’m confident they will channel it with great effectiveness.

Better Housing Together

One of the ironies for those who work tirelessly to expand prosperity, increase livability, and generally enhance the desirability of their communities is a concomitant loss of affordable housing. The affordability issue is enormously complex and stubbornly resistant to easy solutions. Nevertheless, it is an issue we ignore at our peril.

The southern Willamette Valley boasts the dubious distinction of being one of the tightest housing markets in the United States, second only to Seattle.(1) Nearly half of our residents are housing “cost-burdened,” stretching their incomes just to pay for housing and other basic necessities.(2) The crisis affects young people unable to break into the local housing market, working families struggling to make ends meet, and seniors looking to downsize with few options available. It impacts every homeowner, renter, neighborhood, business sector, and organization in our community.

Many have attempted to crack the housing affordability nut with little success. Despite the intractability of the problem, an exciting new Eugene-Springfield metro area group is stepping up to assume the mantle, having fully dedicated itself to the development of effective strategies to meet the challenge.

Better Housing Together is a coalition of community leaders working to address the local affordability crisis. Including key representatives from Better Eugene-Springfield Transportation (BEST), the Eugene Association of REALTORS, AARP Oregon, University of Oregon researchers, AIA-Southwestern Oregon, and an impressive list of other organizations, these leaders want to better understand the problem and identify practical solutions. The members of Better Housing Together are committed to identifying policies and strategies that support local affordability and more quality, walkable, age-friendly housing.

To help meet achieve its goals, the coalition has organized what promises to be an outstanding event. The Better Housing Together Forum, which will take place on February 21 at the University of Oregon’s Erb Memorial Union Ballroom, will include a facilitated community-wide discussion, as well as an exhibit of work about housing in our community by University of Oregon researchers. Additionally, there will be a short video featuring personal stories underscoring the magnitude of the crisis. Members of community focus groups will share their diverse perspectives. Eugene Mayor Lucy Vinis, Springfield Mayor Christine Lundberg, Lane County Commissioner Pat Farr, and other elected officials will actively participate and learn more about how they can help advance community desires.

Despite the immensity of the challenge, the outlines of a solution exist. As Better Housing Together steering committee member Kaarin Knudson, AIA, noted in her piece for the 2017 Register Guard Design Annual, there is a direct connection between housing affordability and the wellbeing of all of a community’s residents. By adding supply to the market, affordability increases. By locating housing in areas where infrastructure and transit access already exist, we increase our tax base without increasing our acreage of liability. By supporting more walkable and efficient housing types, we also advance many of our climate and equity goals.

Better Housing Together wants everyone to join the discussion and learn more about how we can increase housing choice and affordability. Make plans to attend the February 21 forum. Registration is necessary to guarantee a seat. The organizers expect this free event to be at capacity. Registration opens on February 5, 2018.

The housing crisis isn’t just coming: it’s here. Better Housing Together knows we can all do more to help, which is why the group has organized the coming forum event. I hope to see all of you there.

What:  Better Housing Together Forum

When:  Wednesday, February 21, 2018, 5:00–7:00 PM

Where:  Erb Memorial Union Ballroom University of Oregon, Eugene

Cost:  Free

To Register:  https://www.betterhousingtogether.org/forum/ 

To Learn More: Visit www.BetterHousingTogether.org

(1)   "Sold Out: These 10 U.S. Cities Have the Biggest Housing Shortages" www.realtor.com/news/trends/top-10-housing-markets-constrained-by-tight-inventory

(2)   ALICE Report, www.unitedwaylane.org/what-we-do/annual-reports/alice

Rebuilding Eugene’s Civic Center

Image from Placemaking in Eugene: Findings, by Project for Public Spaces

The following is a draft of a piece regarding the future of downtown Eugene’s Park Blocks, primarily authored by Eric Gunderson. The AIA-SWO Committee on Local Affairs (of which Eric and I are both members) intends the letter as an opinion piece for publication in The Eugene Weekly or The Register-Guard. It remains subject to further editing by CoLA; I’ll update this post once the committee has finalized it.

We’re excited by the unprecedented opportunity to transform four downtown city blocks with a new City Hall, Lane County Courthouse, and updated Park Blocks. How the City of Eugene chooses to enhance the Park Blocks and create a possible new City Hall-Market Plaza is especially intriguing. Should the City enhance the existing Park Blocks or start over?

The Eugene Park Blocks are central to downtown Eugene’s identity. Known to most as the home of Saturday Market and Lane County Farmers Market, they draw 10,000 people to downtown on a good day. The stone walls, fish fountain, arched roofs, and tall trees are all familiar. Together, the Park Blocks comprise our town square and are "Eugene Modern." But they feel forlorn on most weekdays. Can we do better?

The City recently commissioned New York-based Project for Public Spaces (PPS) to produce a study entitled Downtown Placemaking Initiative—Places for People. This effort focused on the need to make our urban open spaces more active, and notoriously described downtown as “dirty, homeless and unsafe.” The winter lights display and holiday music performances, improvements to crosswalks, and the creation of spaces for food carts are welcome experiments using the “lighter, quicker, cheaper” approach championed by PPS. The report also recommended longer-term improvements, but what improvements and what of the place itself?  What about architectural design excellence or the value of the existing Park Blocks as an artful place of history and meaning in our community?

Both the PPS effort and the Eugene Park Blocks Master Plan from 2006 recommend a major new building and new plaza on the block currently occupied by the “Butterfly” parking lot. The 2006 master plan additionally recommended improved security, better lighting, an enhanced shelter for performances, improvements for both market days and non-market days, additional water features, redesigning the Park Streets and sidewalks, and more. A proposed New City Hall and year-round Lane County Farmers Market will add vitality, but more is needed.

We believe the lack of active uses surrounding the Park Blocks is the key issue. Downtown has changed greatly since the park’s construction. A 1956 downtown land use map shows fifty ground-floor businesses including retail stores, restaurants, and hotels fronting on the Park Blocks. Today, we have only the back door of Full City Coffee and Park Street Café as active uses facing the park. Unless this changes, the lack of “eyes on the street” and pedestrian activity will continue to be an issue, regardless of what occurs with the Park Blocks.

We can capitalize on a mix of old and new for our downtown public spaces. Successful cities consist of diverse buildings and places. In her book, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, Jane Jacobs states that “in real life only diverse surroundings have the practical power of inducing a natural, continuing flow of life and use.” Historically, Eugene hasn’t valued “diverse surroundings.” 1960’s urban renewal resulted in the wanton demolition of downtown’s older buildings. Today, our community struggles to recognize the merits of noteworthy mid-century buildings (the debate about the old City Hall being a case in point). Other cities do value mid-century design highly—imagine Seattle without the Space Needle.

The southwest park block during a weekday evening last summer (my photo).

The Eugene Park Blocks were built in 1958, designed by Wilmsen Endicott Architects and Lloyd Bond Landscape Architect. It is one of the few midcentury-modern public squares in Oregon. The plan drew its inspiration from modern art of the early 20th century, including that of painter Piet Mondrian (think Broadway Boogie Woogie). The plan contrasts with traditional civic spaces that follow the designs of Olmstead and his followers. Public art in the park includes sculptures by Jan Zach and Tom Hardy, both well-known mid-century modern northwest artists. There were once two fountains in the east park block, now gone. The plantings are much changed from the original plan. Continuing to chip away at the Park Blocks will result in the loss of their original, truly unique character.

What would a set of all new Park Blocks look like? There’s no doubt a talented team could produce an outstanding design. Starting over would allow the design to fully address today’s needs without compromise. The PPS plan seems to favor this route and offers suggestions for the types of activities that might occur in different areas. On the other hand, why not restore and rejuvenate the spirit of the original 1958 design? As we said, the success of the Park Blocks depends as much or more upon the active use of the properties that define the edges.

We hope this piece prompts others to comment and that we as a community openly discuss the merits of differing directions. We should fully commit to achieving design excellence in our most important civic open space regardless of which path we follow.

Eric Gunderson, Scott Clarke, Stan Honn, Travis Sheridan, Katie Hall, Austin Bailey, Randy Nishimura

Members, American Institute of Architects Southwestern Oregon Chapter Eugene-Springfield Committee on Local Affairs (CoLA).