HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Pacific West > Portland > Parks, Metro, Urban Design & Heritage Issues


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2017, 5:08 AM
innovativethinking innovativethinking is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 591
Tall buildings in Portland

OHHh wow this project looks sooooo exciting.. AN 11 STORY PROJECT IN THE MIDDLE OF A MAJOR DOWNTOWN LOCATION!

Eugene or Boise would be so excited!!

Smh
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2017, 7:13 AM
Derek Derek is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 8,382
^^^This guy.
__________________
Portlandia
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2017, 11:57 PM
urbanlife's Avatar
urbanlife urbanlife is offline
A before E
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
Posts: 11,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by innovativethinking View Post
OHHh wow this project looks sooooo exciting.. AN 11 STORY PROJECT IN THE MIDDLE OF A MAJOR DOWNTOWN LOCATION!

Eugene or Boise would be so excited!!

Smh
If you say so....it's as if you wish Portland were Hong Kong or something, no building should be under 50 stories. This is an infill building, and a hotel at that. It is roughly the expected size that a hotel would build in downtown. The only unfortunate part with this building is the food carts that it displaces.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Oct 2, 2017, 12:52 AM
DMH DMH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Portland (part-time); warm foreign countries (part-time)
Posts: 598
Quote:
Originally Posted by innovativethinking View Post
OHHh wow this project looks sooooo exciting.. AN 11 STORY PROJECT IN THE MIDDLE OF A MAJOR DOWNTOWN LOCATION!

Eugene or Boise would be so excited!!

Smh
Be realistic. We should be happy that a developer would attempt an 11-story building on a site that is smaller than one quarter of a Portland tiny block! I am surprised that the developer can make it pencil out.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Oct 2, 2017, 2:52 AM
DMH DMH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Portland (part-time); warm foreign countries (part-time)
Posts: 598
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife View Post
If you say so....it's as if you wish Portland were Hong Kong or something, no building should be under 50 stories. This is an infill building, and a hotel at that. It is roughly the expected size that a hotel would build in downtown. The only unfortunate part with this building is the food carts that it displaces.
Does Portland code even allow a 50-story building? When I gaze at zoning, max FAR, and max height maps with no number greater than 460, I surmise that no new building will exceed by much, the height of Big Pink. Does anyone else know how a high a tower can be in Portland?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Oct 2, 2017, 3:35 AM
innovativethinking innovativethinking is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 591
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife View Post
If you say so....it's as if you wish Portland were Hong Kong or something, no building should be under 50 stories. This is an infill building, and a hotel at that. It is roughly the expected size that a hotel would build in downtown. The only unfortunate part with this building is the food carts that it displaces.
Not at all. Trust me I love Portland. All I'm asking for is a 35 plus story tower once every 5 years if that...

Is that too much to ask for in a booming market such as ours?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Oct 2, 2017, 7:16 AM
urbanlife's Avatar
urbanlife urbanlife is offline
A before E
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
Posts: 11,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by innovativethinking View Post
Not at all. Trust me I love Portland. All I'm asking for is a 35 plus story tower once every 5 years if that...

Is that too much to ask for in a booming market such as ours?
Don't hold your breath, building codes in Portland make it so buildings above 30 stories don't pencil out to well. Instead you need to be happy with the 20-30 story buildings that get built.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Oct 2, 2017, 4:42 PM
mhays mhays is offline
Never Dell
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 21,062
Not just building codes....land use codes, parking geometries, the pleasant lack of full-block lots that would make going tall easier...
__________________
"Alot" has never been a word.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Oct 2, 2017, 5:02 PM
urbanlife's Avatar
urbanlife urbanlife is offline
A before E
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
Posts: 11,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhays View Post
Not just building codes....land use codes, parking geometries, the pleasant lack of full-block lots that would make going tall easier...
True, there are a number of factors, I was mostly referring to the seismic upgrades that are required when a building goes taller than 35 stories (or something like that, I don't remember it specifically, just know it is an expensive upgrade and tends to eat up a lot of real estate in a building.)

Personally I have no problem with a city full of 200-350ft buildings in and around its downtown. If done right, a lot of great architecture can be achieved with buildings like that. Oslo is a great example of what can be done with modern buildings that aren't 500ft+ towers.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Oct 2, 2017, 6:35 PM
mmeade mmeade is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Portland
Posts: 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by innovativethinking View Post
Not at all. Trust me I love Portland. All I'm asking for is a 35 plus story tower once every 5 years if that...

Is that too much to ask for in a booming market such as ours?
Yes.

There are two towers over 35 stories in this town. One was built in '73 and one in '83. There have been a lot of boom years between then and now. There is a reason it has been almost 35 years since something that tall has been built. Much of it is that our small city blocks require small footprint towers. Both Big Pink and the Wells Fargo tower are on multiple city blocks. Gathering that quantity of land is a challenge in itself these days, and then you need to be able to make it pencil.

I just don't see it happening again in the near future.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Oct 2, 2017, 7:29 PM
geohiker geohiker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmeade View Post
Yes.

There are two towers over 35 stories in this town. One was built in '73 and one in '83. There have been a lot of boom years between then and now. There is a reason it has been almost 35 years since something that tall has been built. Much of it is that our small city blocks require small footprint towers. Both Big Pink and the Wells Fargo tower are on multiple city blocks. Gathering that quantity of land is a challenge in itself these days, and then you need to be able to make it pencil.

I just don't see it happening again in the near future.
We might get something out of the Post Office Redevelopment. As I understand it with the 2035 Plan there is the possibility for a 400' building on that site.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Oct 2, 2017, 8:35 PM
eric cantona's Avatar
eric cantona eric cantona is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 697
this thread is brilliant. thanks, Mac.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Oct 2, 2017, 10:27 PM
Nunya Nunya is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife View Post
True, there are a number of factors, I was mostly referring to the seismic upgrades that are required when a building goes taller than 35 stories (or something like that, I don't remember it specifically, just know it is an expensive upgrade and tends to eat up a lot of real estate in a building.)
My recollection is that with the implementation of the 2009 IBC that it requires an additional exit stairway for any building taller than 420', this is above and beyond the other stairway exits required by code. That eats up a lot of extra space in small blocks.

I believe it came out of the 9/11 findings/recommendations along with increase fire protection requirements for steel sprayed on foam and other emergency communication requirements for high rises.

Notice all the buildings being built in Seattle at exactly 440'. I believe they have a 20' bonus for something that lets you go above 420.

So in effect you aren't likely to see anything get past 420. Not worth it to only go up to 460. 420' is really the new cap for Portland for the foreseeable future.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Oct 2, 2017, 10:54 PM
maccoinnich maccoinnich is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Portland
Posts: 8,073
Quote:
Originally Posted by DMH View Post
Does Portland code even allow a 50-story building? When I gaze at zoning, max FAR, and max height maps with no number greater than 460, I surmise that no new building will exceed by much, the height of Big Pink. Does anyone else know how a high a tower can be in Portland?
Height is unlimited in the North Pearl, and only limited by FAR. It would be theoretically possible to transfer height away from other buildings in the North Pearl to build a 50+ story point tower, though I think the chances of that ever happening are near zero.
__________________
"Maybe to an architect, they might look suspicious, but to me, they just look like rocks"

https://bsky.app/profile/maccoinnich.bsky.social
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2017, 7:51 AM
urbanlife's Avatar
urbanlife urbanlife is offline
A before E
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
Posts: 11,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nunya View Post
My recollection is that with the implementation of the 2009 IBC that it requires an additional exit stairway for any building taller than 420', this is above and beyond the other stairway exits required by code. That eats up a lot of extra space in small blocks.

I believe it came out of the 9/11 findings/recommendations along with increase fire protection requirements for steel sprayed on foam and other emergency communication requirements for high rises.

Notice all the buildings being built in Seattle at exactly 440'. I believe they have a 20' bonus for something that lets you go above 420.

So in effect you aren't likely to see anything get past 420. Not worth it to only go up to 460. 420' is really the new cap for Portland for the foreseeable future.
Yeah, it was something like that, I use to know all that really well. With small blocks, we just aren't going to see a developer lose too much floor space just so they can spend even more building a building taller. That 200-350ft range seems to be the safe zone for a developer looking to build a tower in the city. That is fine with me, buildings like that can create a good looking city, and Portland has been actively expanding its urban core on both sides of the river giving the city multiple skylines.

I am betting the next building to break 400ft will be in the Pearl with the post office site. I also think we will see a building break 400ft in the Lloyd District someday as well.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2017, 10:21 AM
Pavlov's Dog Pavlov's Dog is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 356
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife View Post
True, there are a number of factors, I was mostly referring to the seismic upgrades that are required when a building goes taller than 35 stories (or something like that, I don't remember it specifically, just know it is an expensive upgrade and tends to eat up a lot of real estate in a building.)

Personally I have no problem with a city full of 200-350ft buildings in and around its downtown. If done right, a lot of great architecture can be achieved with buildings like that. Oslo is a great example of what can be done with modern buildings that aren't 500ft+ towers.
I live in Oslo and work in the middle of the new barcode area so I can give some feedback on the situation here.

The primary reason we don't build tall in Oslo is the fact that we are at 60 degrees north and the shadow of a tall building would be massive in the middle of winter. Development in Norway is very sensitive to sun exposure and having a southern exposure is highly valued as it gives a lot of free energy in a country where the ambient temperature seldom exceeds 70 degress.

I disagree with the notion that the mid-rise architecture in Oslo is great let alone good. The buildings in barcode are very long and thin with only a small frontage along the main boulevard. The other three sides are mostly devoid of stores and anything appealing to pedestrians. The distance between buildings is minimal so there is a major wind tunnel effect along the long sides of the buildings. Also office workers can pretty much see directly into the offices of other companies and see what's being presented on screens in meeting rooms. For some idiotic political reason there is an apartment building smack dab in the middle of the office buildings. Their office neighbors can see if they've made their beds, see what they're watching on tv and what they're eating for dinner. In my opinion Portland is doing a much better job with office buildings than Oslo.

There is a lot of good to great mid-rise 6-10 floor housing being built in Oslo though although most of it is condos unlike Portland. Pretty much all new housing construction in Oslo also features balconies that are large enough to have a table and four chairs around. Personally I can't fathom why this is not common in Portland as well.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2017, 3:32 PM
Rob Nob Rob Nob is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nunya View Post
My recollection is that with the implementation of the 2009 IBC that it requires an additional exit stairway for any building taller than 420', this is above and beyond the other stairway exits required by code. That eats up a lot of extra space in small blocks.

I believe it came out of the 9/11 findings/recommendations along with increase fire protection requirements for steel sprayed on foam and other emergency communication requirements for high rises.

Notice all the buildings being built in Seattle at exactly 440'. I believe they have a 20' bonus for something that lets you go above 420.

So in effect you aren't likely to see anything get past 420. Not worth it to only go up to 460. 420' is really the new cap for Portland for the foreseeable future.
THIS is pretty much what is spelled out in 403.5.2 of the IBC:
https://codes.iccsafe.org/public/chapter/content/6737/
The extra 20' is for spires, towers, and other uninhabited rooftop structures from 504.3:
https://codes.iccsafe.org/public/chapter/content/6738/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2017, 4:00 PM
mhays mhays is offline
Never Dell
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 21,062
Seattle's heights have very different rules. Until recently we had a lot of 400' zoning on the edges of Downtown, and residential uses got another 10% (40') for amenities, architecture, and mechanical. The new aspect is that another bonus program raised the 400' by 10%.
__________________
"Alot" has never been a word.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2017, 5:35 PM
urbanlife's Avatar
urbanlife urbanlife is offline
A before E
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
Posts: 11,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pavlov's Dog View Post
I live in Oslo and work in the middle of the new barcode area so I can give some feedback on the situation here.

The primary reason we don't build tall in Oslo is the fact that we are at 60 degrees north and the shadow of a tall building would be massive in the middle of winter. Development in Norway is very sensitive to sun exposure and having a southern exposure is highly valued as it gives a lot of free energy in a country where the ambient temperature seldom exceeds 70 degress.

I disagree with the notion that the mid-rise architecture in Oslo is great let alone good. The buildings in barcode are very long and thin with only a small frontage along the main boulevard. The other three sides are mostly devoid of stores and anything appealing to pedestrians. The distance between buildings is minimal so there is a major wind tunnel effect along the long sides of the buildings. Also office workers can pretty much see directly into the offices of other companies and see what's being presented on screens in meeting rooms. For some idiotic political reason there is an apartment building smack dab in the middle of the office buildings. Their office neighbors can see if they've made their beds, see what they're watching on tv and what they're eating for dinner. In my opinion Portland is doing a much better job with office buildings than Oslo.

There is a lot of good to great mid-rise 6-10 floor housing being built in Oslo though although most of it is condos unlike Portland. Pretty much all new housing construction in Oslo also features balconies that are large enough to have a table and four chairs around. Personally I can't fathom why this is not common in Portland as well.
That is actually some great insight on Oslo, I can see the similarities with Portland when it comes to access to the sun at street level. That has been a major factor on building heights for a while in Portland due to its small blocks and limited sunny days, as well as protected sight lines as well.

I honestly wasn't talking about the architecture of the barcode (which I love that name because it is so fitting for that cluster of towers) at the street level, I was more talking about it in the skyline affect and overall look of the architecture. Without experiencing it at street level, Google maps can only tell me so much. Personally I care more about how buildings interact with the street level than how tall they are or even what they look like as buildings because that is how almost all of us interact with architecture is at the street level.

The mid rise buildings in Oslo is what really fascinates me because for the most part, I like the architecture, and I like how the buildings interact with the street level. That is why I am more than happy to see buildings in Portland being 5-10 stories high rather than 400ft+ towers being built. I do agree with you about the balconies, I think a lot of new buildings that have been going up in Portland lack large balcony space and that isn't good. Having people have outdoor space with their apartments and condos should be an essential part to this city because we are a city that is very connected with nature and being able to breathe outdoor air.

There are a number of factors that go into why we don't see more condo buildings going up in Portland because for the most part the city is still a single family house city. It is also harder for developers to get loans for condos after that last recession; we will probably see developers doing condo conversions with their apartment buildings in the future when the next condo craze picks up. We also need to move away from this idea that only the most expensive things should be built, developers are more interested in building to the high end market rather than the middle class market. As the cost of single family homes rise in the city, the availability of affordable condos should rise as well. It should be easy for a middle class family of four to afford a condo with 2-3 bedrooms and a large balcony if they cannot afford a single family house. Instead we are seeing there be little price difference between the two.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2017, 9:05 PM
crackerd crackerd is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Tigard, OR
Posts: 63
Make Portland's Skyline Great Again!!! 😂😂
__________________
Representing the beautiful city of Portland, OR!!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Pacific West > Portland > Parks, Metro, Urban Design & Heritage Issues
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:30 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.