Downtown Eugene: Brainstorming Solutions

 

Screenshot from the October 25, 2022 Downtown Priorities and Projects brainstorm session.

At the invitation of the City of Eugene, I participated last month in a group conversation intended to brainstorm solutions to some of downtown Eugene’s most vexing challenges. The conversation was part of an ongoing effort to develop a list of priorities to guide future improvements in the city center. The Eugene city council will consider this list and identify the most pressing among them. Ultimately, the goal is to develop a practicable strategy and implement impactful projects to address the myriad problems afflicting downtown.
 
A council work session back in June kicked off the Downtown Priorities and Projects process. Since then, city staff conducted a series of interviews with a representative cross-section of downtown stakeholders, before proceeding with online and in-person focus group brainstorming sessions (I opted for the online meeting). Next is a public open-house event scheduled to take place on Tuesday, November 15 from 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM, at the Farmers Market Pavilion. This will be an opportunity for all community members to help inform the prioritization process. The City of Eugene also intends to launch an online survey to collect additional input.
 
Downtown Eugene’s problems have proven intractable; if anything, they have worsened in recent years despite the City’s best efforts to make the area more attractive and accessible to all Eugene residents. The vision has always been a downtown that is safe, clean, vibrant, diverse, and filled with activity 24/7. The problem is people perceive it as unsafe, dirty, and largely deserted. Those who do visit often fail to see a reason to go back, as what they find too readily affirms their negative preconceptions and biases. News of downtown shooting incidents, the visibility of the tragically indigent, the unpredictable behavior of individuals in need of mental health care, and vacant storefronts reinforce their prejudices. The pandemic did not help things as it further reduced downtown foot traffic, prompting the shuttering of some businesses (most recently, Sizzle Pie closed its doors in September and Crumb Together called it quits just last week).
 
The City of Eugene wants downtown to become the community gathering place it once was many years ago. Toward this objective, it has commissioned numerous studies over the years and adopted successive plans. Unfortunately, the scope of the numerous challenges facing downtown exceeds the ability of local government to address alone. The plight of the homeless—exacerbated by the affordable housing crisis—is a case in point.
 
The City can only do so much to tackle the problem of homelessness as a means to cure the extent to which it ails downtown. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development has promoted, and some local governments (including Lane County) have mandated, a “Housing First” policy. This policy seeks to immediately house anyone without preconditions (such as sobriety). Advocates argue providing housing first arms people with the best odds to successfully attend to their serious physical or mental health conditions, battle their additions, or find steady employment because they are not simultaneously dealing with homelessness.
 
Critics of Housing First contend such programs have largely failed to reduce drug addiction, address mental illness, and improve general well-being, and have not reduced overall rates of homelessness. They instead exclusively favor a “Continuum of Care” approach, wherein there is a communitywide commitment to the goal of ending homelessness by promoting access to a coordinated series of services intended to help individuals address their unique needs.
 
Both purely Housing First and Continuum of Care models have their downsides, including their relative effectiveness at increasing housing stability and cost.
 
Downtown Eugene’s problems are complex. Many of these problems are rooted in issues that are fundamentally global in nature, such as the impact of remote working, the commodification of housing, rising inflation, demographic trends, and political gridlock. As I said, there is only so much a municipal government can do. Additionally, we should be wary of relying too heavily upon imperfect planning tools shaped by imperfect, albeit well-intentioned, human beings. The dynamics of development and the factors that contribute to achieving a vibrant downtown citizens will point to with pride are multifaceted and systemic in nature.
 
Eugene has too often lacked popular consensus on what its downtown should be. Investing intellectual and monetary capital in downtown Eugene is crucial, but how the city expends that capital will be critical. When it comes to prioritizing issues and identifying a set of projects in response to them, I believe incentivizing the type of development we want for our downtown—as opposed to doing nothing at all—is one means to achieve the best possible outcomes. The key will be identifying exactly what this development should be.
 
I plan to attend the November 15 open house at the Farmers Market Pavilion and further offer my input. If you are a Eugene resident and care about your downtown, I hope you will do the same.

2022 People’s Choice Award Winners

Mountain Rose Herbs Aroma Bar by Agate Architecture, one of the 2022 People's Choice Award recipients.

Each year, the American Institute of Architects Oregon Chapter/Eugene Section (AIA Eugene), in collaboration with the Willamette Valley Section of the American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA), sponsors the People’s Choice Awards for Architecture. The venerable awards program aims to educate and inspire our fellow citizens by showcasing architecture, interiors, and landscape architecture projects created within the AIA Eugene section area by AIA or ASLA members.

2022 marks the 33rd year of the People's Choice Awards. The projects presented for consideration were uniformly of a high quality, a testament to the maturation and increasing skill of local design professionals. Voting opened October 1 and continued through October 17, with the public and AIA and ASLA members alike casting their ballots, either at the display of projects boards in the Broadway Commerce Center, or online through the AIA Eugene website. 

For the first time since 2019, the awards celebration took place in-person at 255 Madison on October 26 (as opposed to occurring virtually). I unfortunately was unable to attend (I had/have a cold and did not want to share my unpleasant bounty with others). Those who did attend tell me the event was a success.

The 2022 program presented a total of sixteen projects across six categories (this is a small number in comparison to prior years; hopefully, we will see an increase in submissions for 2023). While boasting rights are a definite plus for the award recipients, the real benefit is raising the public’s awareness of quality architecture and the talents of local architects and landscape architects.

Without further ado, here is the list of 2022’s People’s Choice Award recipients:

Interiors (Commercial/Public/Institutional)

Mountain Rose Herbs Aroma Bar - Agate Architecture

Landscape Architecture 

Downtown Riverfront Park - Walker Macy

Multi-Family Residential

Sage Commons - Rowell Brokaw Architects

 

Public/Institutional

DeNorval Unthank Jr. Hall - Rowell Brokaw Architects

 

Single Family Residential

West View Residence - Aligned Architecture

 

Unbuilt Projects

Echelon - DC Design and Consulting, Drake Architecture and Design

The event organizers at AIA Eugene/ASLA prepared presentation boards for each of the winners. The boards are currently viewable outside of the Octagon at 92 E. Broadway in downtown Eugene, so check them out if you’re in the neighborhood. Each board features a detailed description and more photographs of the winning projects.

Congratulations to all the award recipients, and big thanks to the event sponsor—Rubenstein’s—and to the members of the organizing committee for producing this year’s People’s Choice Awards program.  

Eugene/Architecture/Alphabet: L

 

The Lane Building, east facade (my photo)

This is the next in my Eugene/Architecture/Alphabet series of blog posts, the focus of each being a landmark building here in Eugene. Many of these will be familiar to most who live here but there are likely to be a few buildings that are less so. My selection criteria for each will be threefold:  

1. The building must be of architectural interest, local importance, or historically significant.

1. The building must be extant so you or I can visit it in person.

1. Each building’s name will begin with a particular letter of the alphabet, and I must select one (and only one) for each of the twenty-six letters. This is easier said than done for some letters, whereas for other characters there is a surfeit of worthy candidates (so I’ll be discriminating and explain my choice in those instances).

This entry’s selection begins with the letter L, for which my choice is the Lane Building.

The Lane Building
The Lane Building is located at 488 Willamette Street in downtown Eugene just south of the Southern Pacific Railroad depot (today Eugene’s Amtrak Station) and across the street from the Oregon Electric Railway Passenger Station. George G. Gross, a realtor and founder of the Willamette Valley Land Company, developed the three-story wood-framed building as a hotel in 1903, capitalizing upon its convenience to intercity rail service. He immodestly named the hotel after himself. Gross sold it in 1908, whereupon it became in succession the Griggs Hotel, the Hotel Lane, the Palace Hotel, and eventually the Lane Building. The historic structure is no longer a hotel, but it thrives today recognizably close to its original form, accommodating a variety of offices and small businesses.
 
I do remember finding the Lane Building distinctive upon first seeing it. That was back in 1980 when I arrived in Eugene to study at the University of Oregon. My wife and I would later frequent it when the Monster Cookie Company operated a storefront shop there. What struck me about the Lane Building was that it appeared quite old. Its plain, relatively unadorned construction and wrap-around wood porch/veranda suggested an archaic, bygone era to me. In truth, the Lane Building’s vintage is not especially remarkable, as a handful of surviving buildings, including the nearby Smeede Hotel, are older. Regardless, the Lane Building stood out then and remains today a singular example of its type in Eugene.

View looking northwest (my photo).

 
So, of what style is the Lane Building? The 1977 nomination form for its placement on the National Register of Historic Places describes it as Italianate, though the height of this style’s popularity in Oregon mostly spanned years between the 1860s and 1890s. Regardless, the Lane Building does feature a few characteristically Italianate elements:

• Low-pitched hipped or sometimes flat roofs, especially on commercial buildings.
• Projecting eaves with decorative brackets.
• An attempt to capture in available materials the look of Italian Renaissance palazzos and villas.

Wealthy Americans who toured Europe during the 1800s brought back with them a taste for Renaissance-inspired designs. The Italianate style evolved as an indigenous response, becoming widely popular because of its suitability to many different building materials and budgets. The designer/builder of the Lane Building (a Mr. C. McFarland) capitalized upon these attributes, realizing a suitably gracious expression through economical means (the construction budget in 1903 was $6,000).

5th Avenue facade (my photo).

 
The wrap-around, 8-feet deep veranda (and deck above supported by simple turned columns) is the Lane Building’s most distinguishing feature. The veranda mediates between the flanking sidewalks and the plain box of the main structure, while the deck and its balustrade suggest the piano nobile of Italian Renaissance villas. The third-floor balcony on the east façade furthers the Italianate allusions, bringing to mind a belvedere.
 
Some of the original hotel’s features remain preserved within the first-floor retail spaces. I haven’t been through the upper two floors of the Lane Building, but I suspect the successive renovations and adaptations to their use for offices have altered them considerably.

Eugene, view looking south from Skinner Butte, 1910. The Lane Building is in the center of the photo, near the bottom.

I do consider the Lane Building important because, like the Baldwin Market Building, it stands as one of too few a number of Eugene’s early examples of commercial architecture. It contributes significantly to the character of its immediate vicinity, one of the city’s remaining clusters of historical architecture.

2023 CSI Certification Classes

For the 41st consecutive year, the Construction Specifications Institute–Willamette Valley Chapter (CSI-WVC) is pleased to offer a series of classes on Construction Contract Documents in addition to another set covering Construction Contract Administration. While the principal purpose of the courses is to assist those planning to take one or more of the CSI-sponsored certification examinations, they’re also beneficial to anyone in the AEC industry seeking foundational training in the preparation and use of construction documents. Additionally, the classes can be of significant value to architectural interns and to the firms for whom they work, as well as very helpful to those preparing to take the State Architectural Licensing Exams.  

The evening classes begin in January 2023 and continue weekly through the first half of March.  

Click on the following links to locate detailed information about the classes, dates, fees, and registration: 

Construction Contract Documents (CDT) Classes:
https://app.box.com/s/azanc7k301k0iics1oyl6ctzu46ro7iv  

Construction Contract Administration (CCA) Classes:   
https://app.box.com/s/e1iczk7yt4us5vrn0m7bspykinkuc1z0

Due to the continued risks associated the COVID-19 outbreak, the Chapter will conduct the 2023 certification classes virtually rather than in person. The organizers are confident the quality of instruction will be as close to the real classroom experience as possible; regardless, the Willamette Valley Chapter’s board of directors approved a 50% reduction of the standard registration fees in acknowledgement of the limitations of online teaching. 

Photo by Chris Montgomery on Unsplash

Both certification courses can help students develop a conceptual understanding of the entire construction process, and concrete skills in:

• Construction document development and administration

• Specification writing and enforcement

• Product research and sourcing

• Communication with the design and contracting teams

The Construction Documents program provides a comprehensive overview for anyone who writes, interprets, enforces, or manages construction documents. Being able to understand and interpret written construction documents helps architects, contractors, contract administrators, material suppliers, and manufacturers' representatives perform their jobs more effectively. Understanding the roles and relationships of all participants improves communication among all members of the construction team. The Construction Contract Administration course goes further to emphasize the specific knowledge and skills necessary to administer and enforce construction contract documentation. While not necessary, some students may find it helpful to have completed the Construction Documents course before taking the Construction Contract Administration program. 

As mentioned above, both classes serve as excellent means to prepare for CSI’s certification exams. Certification as a Construction Documents Technologist (CDT) means you have demonstrated ability to prepare, use, and interpret construction documents. CDT certification is a prerequisite to CSI’s advanced certifications, which include Certified Construction Specifier (CCS), Certified Construction Contract Administrator (CCCA), and Certified Construction Product Representative (CCPR). 
 
CSI offers its certification examinations twice annually, in the spring and the fall. Taking the 2023 Willamette Valley Chapters classes this winter would set you up nicely to register for the spring set of exams. 
 
The classes are especially beneficial for emerging design & construction industry professionals, and to the firms for which they work. They’re also particularly helpful to aspiring architects preparing to take a State Licensing Exam. 
 
The Willamette Valley Chapter is working with the American Institute of Architects to renew the eligibility of the courses for AIA continuing education credit. Once approved, fully fledged architects will be ablet to earn up to 16 Continuing Professional Education (CPE) hours to apply toward maintaining Oregon State Board of Architect Examiners professional licensure; AIA Members will earn up to 16 Continuing Education Learning Units (LU) which CSI will report directly to AIA/CES.
 

Hundreds of local AEC professionals have already benefitted immeasurably by taking one or both CSI certification classes. Do the same and you’ll learn about the importance of clear, concise, correct, and complete construction documents, and more fully understand how projects unfold from conception to delivery. Best of all, you’ll advance your career prospects and become a highly valued member of any project team.

If you have any questions or encounter any problems with the course registration process, please email me at rnishimura@robertsonsherwood.com.  

Architecture is Awesome #25: Vernacular Architecture

 

Mugsum mud hut, Cameroon (file licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license).

 
This is another in my series of posts inspired by 1000 Awesome Things, the Webby Award winning blog written by Neil Pasricha. The series is my meditation on the awesome reasons why I was and continue to be attracted to the art of architecture. 
 
Vernacular architecture is a category of building characterized by high adaptation to local needs and traditions. Typically, architecture we regard as vernacular utilizes pre-industrial, indigenous construction materials and methods, forthrightly addresses climate and geography, and relies upon highly evolved skillsets of local craftspeople. It is very much context driven, particular with respect to its time and place. Most consider vernacular architecture to be absent pretension, and genuine in the sense that it principally evolved through trial and error over many generations, by way of transferred wisdom, the outcome being a culturally distinct built heritage. Vernacular architecture is not the product of academically prescribed “styles” dissociated from regional constraints and the imperatives of site, setting, and context.
 
Most of the world’s buildings are ordinary and vernacular, and not designed by architects. Nevertheless, the range of architectural expression is as broad as the multitude of local building traditions is vast. Just some of the countless examples of vernacular architecture types I can cite include the Kath-Kuni style of architecture in India, the Ma’dan reed houses (mudhif) of Iraq, the Ab-anbar cisterns of Iran, the Mugsum mud huts of Cameroon, and the shotgun houses of the southeastern United States. Each of these examples represent a regionally and culturally specific response to a very particular set of considerations.
 

Bhimakali temple in Himachal Pradesh, India, built in the Kath-Kuni style of architecture (photo by John Hill, licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0>, via Wikimedia Commons)

 

Iraqi mudhif (Photo by Mohamad.bagher.nasery, licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0>, via Wikimedia Commons)

 

An Ab Anbar cistern in a qanat water system, located in the Iranian desert city of Naeen (photo by en:user:Zereshk) 

 

Shotgun houses, Mobile, Alabama (photo by Jeffrey Reed, CC BY-SA 3.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0>, via Wikimedia Commons)

 
Interestingly, many do not believe architecture designed by professionals can be vernacular because, as a Wikipedia article on vernacular architecture notes, they argue the very process of consciously designing a building makes it not vernacular. The article further cites architectural historian Paul Oliver, who defined vernacular architecture as an “architecture of the people, and by the people, but not for the people.”  Oliver elaborated by saying “. . . popular architecture designed by professional architects . . . does not come within the compass of the vernacular.”
 
I disagree with those who maintain that professional architects cannot, by definition, design within a vernacular tradition. Certainly, architects can extend such a tradition by means of critical regionalism, an approach to contemporary design that adapts to local climate, specific site conditions, and the availability of regionally sourced building materials and construction labor. Regardless of whether a building is designed by its users or by trained architects, it should be tied fundamentally to its geographical and cultural setting.
 
The AWESOMEness of vernacular architecture resides in the many socio-cultural, socio-economic, and environmental lessons to be learned by architects like me from its expression across the considerable legacy of historically distinct regional cultures. These humbling lessons are directly applicable to the work we do today. Whether the design-related concerns are associated with respecting nature, ensuring optimal building performance, reducing pollution and waste, encouraging social cohesion, or preserving a cultural landscape, architects should approach each new project they undertake as an opportunity to seriously consider and learn from the established, local vernacular.
 
Next Architecture is Awesome:  #26 Details