Former Thunderbird Hotel to be replaced with large retail store
The owner of the fire-damaged Thunderbird hotel on Hayden Island is seeking permits to construct a 126,000-square-foot retail building on the property.
A suspected arson-caused fire on Sept. 2 destroyed the Thunderbird, 1401 N. Hayden Island Drive, causing an estimated $17 million in damage. The hotel had been closed for several years and sported numerous “U” signs signaling it was unsafe to occupy. The property had been fenced, with full-time security to keep unauthorized visitors at bay.
A city permit report indicates the owner, Thunderbird Inn LLC, intends to construct a $10.3 million, one story building on the property. The permit application is under review. Baysinger Partners Architecture PC is designing the project.
The Thunderbird is across Hayden Island Drive from the Jantzen Beach SuperCenter shopping center, where Target recently opened a new store in tandem with a $50 million renovation meant to reposition Jantzen Beach as Portland's premier stateline shopping destination.
I hope they do put in a WalMart or Kohl's or some other shopping. Maybe a decent restaurant too. There really aren't a lot of options near North Portland without driving forever. You have Fredies and a Safeway, that's it. And try finding a restaurant that isn't a bar. Maybe even a WinCo foods would be nice...
Could this become another Oregon State Video Poker row like on the other side of the freeway? Couple the video poker with the State's largest liquor store and we could corner the market on drinking and gambling Washingtonians! Certainly an opportunity to be explored, eh Sammie Adams?
Who's going to be buying from these big-box
Chinese goods retailers when we go off the fiscal cliff?
The stores, the malls, will become modern day ghost towns.
A complete waste of riverfront access and prime use for river front enjoyment.
Â
Shopping at Jansen is a last resort for me. Personally, I do not appreciate driving to each store I want to visit, in and out of the car, in the rain and wind. I would have preferred they placed the store's in the center with an open or partly sheltered courtyard and parking around the outside of the complex. Either way I think they would have more interest if there was a shuttle that ran the circumference to accommodate a more enjoyable shopping experience.
Â
I liked the "old" Jansen Beach more than what they are doing, and I like even less what is proposed for the Thunderbird. I also believe that the owners of the Thunderbird missed their opportunity to convert some if not all of the older complex into needed and better suited uses, before their convienient fire.
 @erudite Or you could quit whining, and go shop somewhere else. People who want to shop there, really don't need outside commentary from the peanut gallery.
@pdxd  Excuse me, but I do believe this is an opinion forum,  pdxd, of which I have taken advantage of just as you have only not with such rude inapt, uninsipred commentary.
 @erudite BTW, if you had such a better plan for the area, why aren't you running the company that owns the land over there?
 @erudite And you are one shopper. Whever I have been to the Target, or Barnes & Noble (when it was located over there, until it was removed for the Target expansion), they both had a lot of business, and a lot of customers coming and going. And while I'm sure they'd appreciate your opinions, I'm also sure that their profits would indicate that they are doing just fine.
@pdxd   ârude to educate you to the fact"?  It would be my opinion that your commentary is again rude.
Â
Retailers, of which I have been, thrive on constructive, supportive opinion especially when it comes to profit. Why shoppers would go elsewhere is a very important concern when they are competing for consumers spending habits.Â
Â
Surveys of shoppers experience are a critical component of a retailerâs decision process.
 @erudite Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realize it was rude of me to educate you to the fact that if you don't wish to shop someplace, that you have the right to shop in another location. For those that want to shop there, they should be able to do so, and considering the amount of large retailers that faced national bankruptcy and have since left, I'm sure having another business will be a benefit to those that do their shopping in that area.Â
I'm confused, too. Â I thought, originally, the property owners wanted to do this but, because the bridge alignment might change, they were holding off on getting the permits.
Â
So, if the property owner had an up and up attitude about their business, wouldn't (and shouldn't) they have been paying property taxes and whatever else they hadn't paid? Â I was also under the impression they had let their insurance lapse, too.
Â
I find it rather convenient that, when they were discussing this option a few years ago, the decision was squashed by everyone involved as being too costly and that it might conflict with the new bridge alignment, now, suddenly, the owner is rallying behind "his" old plan. Â Where is the money coming from? Â I certainly wouldn't trust him for investment purposes. Â Looks like this story is full of swiss cheese.
ok lets call bs on this arson story, one ya they fenced the building however it was littered with homeless people and when portlands finest came to run out the vagrants they came with dogs and riot gear. second the security that was to watch it would not go inside or near the building. so lets call this one to the homeless heating themselves inside the building as there was no heat. typical media hype trying to make it look like the rich were trying to evade a payment for an old building. If I was the owner of that building and it was being overrun by homeless and the city was lax on dealing with it I would be suing the city. but this is portland and everybody has to play nice
 @freedom123 If you own a building you have a responsibility to keep it from becoming a fire hazard or an attractive nuisance which is what this situation sounds like. It isn't the job of the police to control your private property, it is your job. In fact, if you look at the situation from a private property rights perspective it would be anathema to use the public police force to maintain your private property.
A lawyer and an engineer were fishing in the Caribbean. The lawyer said, "I'm here because my house burned down, and everything I owned was destroyed by the fire. The insurance company paid for everything." "That's quite a coincidence," said the engineer. "I'm here because my house and all my belongings were destroyed by a flood, and my insurance company also paid for everything." The puzzled lawyer asked, "How do you start a flood?"
We don't need a Walmart there..  Before there are any permits ... there should be an answer about the fire...
Come on now, don't play me like that.. Who set that fire ??????????
How convenient...to have that white elephant nuisance hotel  building burn down ( and hence, be outa the way) for new construction...
Building a Bog Box store is exactly what the owner of the land will do. When it comes time to "take" land to build the CRC, it will be worth more to him if it is developed than not, with the ruins of a buisling on it as it is now. Therefore the bilders of the CRC will hvae to pay him more money for the developed land than they would now.
I wish they'd build another way to get to and from Hayden Island other than the freeway.
 @Mikey StarTrek transporter room
At least Empress Adams won't be around to interfere this time.
@dianned
Wall Mart is opening at Delta park next fall.
Â
Better local access too. (There is a back way in other than I-5.)
 @WebFootSTi  @dianned Actually, there are four "back ways" other than I-5
Oh, let me guess....Wal Mart.
Why can't they use the space for the new bridge construction? Â I don't get it, its a perfect site to place the new bridge!
@portlandborn83 http://www.columbiarivercrossing.org/FileLibrary/ConceptMaps/Map_Construction_Packages_OR.pdf
 @portlandborn83 As I understand it because of clearance issues for Pearson Field and PDX, they need to keep the bridge on the east side of the current I-5, basically where that nice new Safeway is.
Â
I'm not sure I believe that excuse, but that was the one given a year or two back.
Â
Either way it seems like a real waste to rebuild such a great location right on the Columbia as a big box store. Â I understand the desire to have a retail hub there to some degree, but if we're going to be spending a ton of money to run MAX to and across Jantzen Beach it seems really stupid to just put a bunch of suburban-sprawl type structures there.
 @knottriel  @portlandborn83 it,s called METRO and CRC. and portlands mayor "" no choo-choo to vancouver, ,no bridge"" metro needs money,,so they want to go to vancouver and get theirs. also, it does not make sense to put the bridge closer to the air port,,moving it west does make sense,,away from the air port.
 @onabudget I'm pretty sure moving it west would cost more, since there would be more temporary structures required to complete construction, or the current bridge would need to be closed a lot longer to complete the replacement.  The existing bridge already requires the roadway to jog slightly west on both the Washington and Oregon sides, so making it jog further west would likely require even more construction than the current plan.
 @knottriel I agree, but thats sorta what jantzen beach is, a place to purchase things tax free for those who live in washington!
 @portlandborn83 I had read that that is exactly what they were doing.  Someone needs to get the facts straight.
Well, why not have another store over there, with lousy on/off single lane traffic nuances? It's crazy!