[brandonpdx]

http://www.oregonlive.com/living/oregonian/randy_gragg/index.ssf?/base/entertainment/117348455810700.xml&coll=7

Developer Weston pushes era-shifting 'point towers' here
Sunday, March 11, 2007
RANDY GRAGG
Standing in the 27th-story penthouse of his soon-to-be-finished condo The Benson, developer Joe Weston foresees a taller, thinner Portland.

The building is the city's first "point tower." Each floor will be 8,000 square feet or less, hence the "point" compared to the more typical Portland "slab towers" of 12,000 to 20,000 square feet. Vancouver, B.C., built hundreds of these more slender buildings in the past 20 years, increasing the city center's population by more than 50 percent and drawing the attention of cities across the world for its combination of higher density and livability. For years, Portland has sent delegations of planners, architects and politicians north of the border to see them.

But Weston is the first Portlander to build one. And he wants to do more, maybe lots more. In the fall, 12 blocks away at Southwest Alder Street and 14th, Weston plans to break ground on the 31-story The Manhattan. After that (he's uncertain when), The Cosmopolitan, at Northeast Grand Avenue and Multnomah, which could go well more than 30 stories, is expected to follow.

"The city is promoting greater density," Weston says. "The neighborhoods don't want big-footprint buildings corner to corner. I thought, 'This is doable. Why not try?' "

Soon he will launch an effort to sell a simple change to Portland's zoning code that he believes will make building point towers easier: Remove any height limit for buildings with floors of 8,000 square feet or less.

Weston was lured into The Benson as an investor by a young Vancouver developer, Eric van Doorninck, who died in an airplane accident just as the project broke ground. Now, Weston's a true believer and wants the city to become one, too.

At age 69, Weston is becoming a city shaper, a new role for him. But the role of city maker he's long played. In the 1970s and '80s he built more than 130 eastside apartment buildings, nearly all simple affairs with 20 or fewer units fronted by parking lots.

Dubbed "Weston Specials," they were (and still are) much loathed by Craftsman-hugger residents. But wholly owned and well-maintained by Weston, they have played a manifold role in Portland.

Their considerable cash flow made the Joseph E. Weston Public Foundation among the city's richest, funding self-sufficiency projects through the likes of Habitat for Humanity and the Special Olympics. Weston is the chief financial backer of Hoyt Street Properties' transformation of 40 acres of empty train yards into the internationally lauded River District. Without his good-as-gold signature, bank backing for high-density urban projects would have taken years longer. Weston continues to gobble up land for future development, both in the city and suburbs, most recently 20 city blocks along Northeast Sandy Boulevard.

But maybe most important to the vibrancy of the city is how all those eastside apartments with their $700- to $800-a-month rents have become one of the city's largest sources of de facto affordable housing.

In short, everything from the city's most successful urban redevelopments to its ever-burgeoning class of musicians, artists and other youngsters living here on barista salaries owes Joe Weston.

But the point towers mark a new phase.

The short-burst sentences of Weston-speak reveal little of the path from tossing up lapsided apartments to building high-rise landmarks of a type no other Portland developer will or even can attempt.

"When you get older," he says, "your priorities change."

Longtime friends and associates chortle about Weston's skyward turn. When I parroted his quick rap on point-tower virtues delivered in The Benson's penthouse ("They protect view corridors, cast smaller shadows, leave more open space . . ."), Hoyt Street's president, Tiffany Sweitzer, howled, "He said that?"

Prone to wearing button-down sweaters with American flag ties and driving a late-model VW Bug with a "Buy American" bumper sticker, Weston's even gone Canadian for his towers; his design architect, engineer and contractor are all from Vancouver. Portland's LRS Architects serves as the legally required local affiliate.

Former business partner Homer Williams says it's all just about Weston keeping busy. Despite being one of the city's richest men and largest property owners, Weston "is bored 90 percent of the time," Williams says.

"It's the challenge," he adds. "Joe doesn't like anyone telling him he can't do something."

So will the city lift its height restrictions?

"It's an intriguing idea," says Gil Kelley, Portland planning director. "Point towers could have substantial utility in adding more density on quarter-block sites but preserving the city's historic, lower-rise, finer-grain character on the other three-quarters."

The key questions to Kelley are where and how taller towers would "sculpt the skyline" and what developers should give back to the public to get them. To Kelley, they are ripe topics for the planning bureau's soon-to-commence "Central City Plan Update" in which downtown's overall urban design will be re-examined. Any change in height limits ultimately must be approved by City Council.

In short, a taller-tower surge is, at best, three years off.

The more immediate question, of course, is whether the 30-story-plus Weston Specials that he can build right now will stand taller architecturally than the two- and three-story ones of three decades ago. The Benson suggests they might -- a little. The more curvilinear shapes shown in the early drawings of The Manhattan promise more.

"When it becomes your own," Hoyt Street's Sweitzer says in a hopeful tone, "a building is a reflection of you."

With his swollen cash flow both pushing and enabling him to build, Weston is one of the city's only developers who is free to push Portland architecture past what the banks allow. Indeed, so why not leave us one proud tower called The Weston?

At a recent Portland Design Commission hearing, chairman Mike McCulloch tried to inspire The Manhattan's design team to push "the bar higher" with features like solar panels on what will be the building's sun-soaked, city-gateway site right on Interstate 405.

Weston sat quietly in the back of the room.

Asked later about this, the first landmark building he will develop on his own, he quickly volunteered that what he was really excited about was the garbage chutes: There won't be any. He wants door-side pickup.

"People don't recycle when there are garbage chutes."

Randy Gragg: 503-221-8575; randygragg@news.oregonian.com

[pdxman]

http://www.oregonlive.com/living/oregonian/randy_gragg/index.ssf?/base/entertainment/117348455810700.xml&coll=7

Soon he will launch an effort to sell a simple change to Portland's zoning code that he believes will make building point towers easier: Remove any height limit for buildings with floors of 8,000 square feet or less.
:yes:

[sirsimon]

Sounds awesome to me. But "In short, a taller-tower surge is, at best, three years off"?

<Rolls on floor clutching stomach in agony>

[pdxman]

^hey, 3 years is pretty short by portland standards ;)

[PacificNW]

↑↑ I agree....I think we will probably see some interesting proposals/renderings once, and if, this idea gets approved by the city...

[alexjon]

I actually squealed in delight at reading that

Wow

[edgepdx]

That would be fantastic if it went through. I really don't care for the whole block developments that are the norm in the Pearl or SOWA (not that some of them aren't nice), but 1/4 blocks give texture to the city, full blocks just seem pretentious and overbearing. Good for Weston for pushing the idea, but I'll bet he would have an easier time with a 600' or 800' cap on buildings under 8000 sq. ft. floor plates. Nothing will send the NIMBY's into a tizzy like "unlimited" height. 1200' 1/4 block anyone :haha:

Maybe add the designation that any sites that allow the "unlimited" height not currently contain historic buildings since this could be a backdoor way to demo 1/4 block sites with nice existing structures. Think of how many 1/4 block sites there are with nice small older fabric buildings that might start to pencil out for redevelopment when they are suddenly unlimited height. It certainly increases the developability of parking lots however which are often 1/4 block.

[65MAX]

Weston owns 20 blocks along Sandy?! Does anyone else see a string of point towers from Lower Burnside to Hollywood? Along with an extension of the Burnside/Couch Streetcar?

Yeah, 3 years is nothing. In the meantime, the Manhattan will be his prototype to sell his concept to the city.

[zilfondel]

I wish Weston a long, healthy life so that he can spend a lot of time building, building, building! =D

[pdxman]

I wish Weston a long, healthy life so that he can spend a lot of time building, building, building! =D
:cheers:

[der Reisender]

i hope he splashes some money out for lobbyists to get his no-height limit through city hall...i'd bet money he'll have a battle on his hands. but even if he can't get the limits removed, i'd settle at least for a new tallest

greg goodman better be taking notes

[Drew-Ski]

[QUOTE=edgepdx;2681444]Good for Weston for pushing the idea, but I'll bet he would have an easier time with a 600' or 800' cap on buildings under 8000 sq. ft. floor plates. Nothing will send the NIMBY's into a tizzy like "unlimited" height. 1200' 1/4 block anyone :haha:

Quote=To Kelley, they are ripe topics for the planning bureau's soon-to-commence
"Central City Plan Update" in which downtown's overall urban design will be re-examined. Any change in height limits ultimately must be approved by City Council.


I totally agree with you edgepdx....just the fact that the Portland Planning Director is willing to put this topic on the table for discussion, indeed is a very promising sign. Portland is ready for the next step. I would love to see 600' -800' point towers scattered throughout the Core Region. Perhaps throw a few in the Lloyd Distric for good measure.:cheers:

[pdxman]

We'll see if city council has any balls and not cave-in to the west hills hermits

[zilfondel]

How tall is that new Vancouver Shangri-La tower supposed to be? That's going to be their new tallest, right?

We really need to break through that idiotic 250' height limit for downtown more than anything! I can see view corridors preserved for that one overlook park up in the hills and Pittock Mansion, although Pittock is so high up you could probably fit a 900 footer directly underneath Mt. Hood without it blocking any view.

[urbanlife]

I really like this idea. Living by the Benson Tower, I really like how the height doesn't feel overbearing to the area, but adds a unique element to the area.


Speaking in building codes in this country, taking away the height limits doesn't mean that buildings can be as high as they want. At 8000sq ft or less per floor, once elevators and staircases consume too much space, a building can't go any higher and still turn a profit. With that said, we would still get some amazing, dynamic buildings that were much taller than the normal for Portland. But the funny thing about that, is these new point towers are a better example of Portland life than the current full block slab towers we have been building.

[NJD]

although Pittock is so high up you could probably fit a 900 footer directly underneath Mt. Hood without it blocking any view.
from Pittock Mansion:
http://www.oregonhiking.com/photos/img171x.jpg

:yes:

EDIT: so... where exactly are these 'view corridors' based from? ... not from Pittock or Council Crest they are way too high up and places like the Rose Gardens and Vista Bridge are totally impaired views already:
from Vista Bridge:
http://www.rstasel.com/Web%20Pans/Portland%2002.jpg

Where are the view corridors?

[Drmyeyes]

Well, comments expressed so far clearly express very limited consideration of the signifcance, impact or effects associated with the kind of towers Weston proposes. It's the same old, 'Let's see how high they can build them in Portland!'.

Weston dodges a reasonable question about solar energy collection on building's he proposes that will clearly compromise solar exposure to neighbors of those buildings. At least he hopes to eliminate garbage chutes for the stated good reason of encouraging recycling.

Exactly what needs these proposed unlimited height sub-block towers are intended to fulfill besides gratifying people with a fascination for tall buildings and making a lot of money for developers is not clear from material in Gragg's article or in anything from the comments above. Increased density, of course, is one need, but in this case, obviously not the primary one or even an aparrently significant one judging by comments made here and elsewhere.

There's nothing about fairness in income level affordability to downtown housing as a consequence of the proposed towers. Very little about view conservation or aesthetics of the downtown landscape beyond raising the verticality of its current character. Someone expresses concern about not allowing such a proposal to provide an excuse to tear down existing significant buildings. That's about it.

Weston's a pretty good guy as developers go. Still, aside from its basic proportions, when the Benson Tower is completed, and people begin to view it repeatedly as they enter the city from Hwy 26 onto Market St, I'll be interested just what kind of impressions that part of the public has of the building, and of the idea, when informed, that certain people may want to put up a whole bunch of them even higher, much like the Benson.

[NJD]

it's all about shadows and street feel when it comes down to point towers. not every block should have them, nor will any ever, but the whole idea is density without the slab building feel. there should be a cap on building height for sure to retain portland's feel, but I feel that 400-600 ft towers with small footprints and thin shadows are far better for preserving pdx's feel than more 250-325 ft slabs that block more views and cast deep, wide shadows...

[sirsimon]

Anyone: How tall do the true "point towers" in Vancouver get?

[edgepdx]

Well, comments expressed so far clearly express very limited consideration of the signifcance, impact or effects associated with the kind of towers Weston proposes. It's the same old, 'Let's see how high they can build them in Portland!'....

I respectfully disagree. Walk down to the Pearl and stand next to the Gregory or The Metropolitan and then stand next to the Benson and tell me which one feels more overwhelming and pretentious. Point towers due to their nature of only taking up a small portion of the block will lead to a more open skyline and a more varied street level. I'd hate to see Portland take on a second meaning to the nickname "Slabtown" as downtown becomes a mass of interlocking slab buildings. The Pearl is already getting that way.

Also, I said I was actually concerned that without safeguards point towers could lead to MORE demolition of existing buildings since the developer no longer has to piece together a 1/2 or whole block to make a project pencil. However on the other end it could also lead to more parking lots being developed since they are often 1/4 blocks.

[Snowden352]

My question is purely related to engineering; specifically how tall a building, with an 8,000 sq. ft. floor panel, COULD a developer build--safely?

Side note: the Living Shanri-la tower is, according to Emporis.com, about (edit) 646 feet tall.

[urbanlife]

My question is purely related to engineering; specifically how tall a building, with an 8,000 sq. ft. floor panel, COULD a developer build--safely?

Side note: the Living Shanri-la tower is, according to Emporis.com, about (edit) 646 feet tall.

Just an educated guess without doing any serious leg work at the moment, I would say about 750ft high would be about as high as one can go within an 8000sq ft footprint.

[zilfondel]

from Pittock Mansion:
http://www.oregonhiking.com/photos/img171x.jpg

:yes:

EDIT: so... where exactly are these 'view corridors' based from? ... not from Pittock or Council Crest they are way too high up and places like the Rose Gardens and Vista Bridge are totally impaired views already:
from Vista Bridge:
http://www.rstasel.com/Web%20Pans/Portland%2002.jpg

Where are the view corridors?

No, that's what I meant: Council Crest, Pittock, and Mt Hood to Rose Gardens (maybe).

[zilfondel]

Personally, I would like to see more 5-6 story tall streetwall buildings (perhaps with courtyards or lightwells inside the block), or perhaps acting as a podium to really create an enclosed street feeling like you find in Europe. As an addition to that, tall point towers that reflect light (important - don't make them black or light-absorbing material, but glass and light colors) on the southern part of a block will add a lot of residential density - very important for the central city with smaller lots and if you want to preserve some of the historic architecture.

However, there is a large swath of very old historic collection of buildings in the area of Old Town that stretches SW along Naito to the Commonwealth building that should be preserved as-is with no teardowns of older buildings, but instead renovate them. Many of them are over 10 stories, and is an extremely dense and dilipidated part of downtown. Perhaps we should be using PDC money to get this area all new and shiny, add office space and residential in some of the boarded-up buildings down there. There are also some quarter-block buildings that are hideous beyond any comparison and should be torn down and replaced with quarter block highrises (ala The Casey or whatever); point-towers with short podiums won't fit in when the building next to it is already 15 stories street-to-roof.

[77e]

Just an educated guess without doing any serious leg work at the moment, I would say about 750ft high would be about as high as one can go within an 8000sq ft footprint.

With 12.5' floors, that would be 60 floors. If you had only 10-foot floors, that would be 75.
How many floors are you thinking would be practical?

And how many elevator banks can be accomodated in 8000 square feet floor plates?

[zilfondel]

At that height structural issues become pretty serious... wind and seismic would be really tough challenges for an engineer on such a slim little tower. I'd imagine the price per square foot would be exceeding $1500 at 750' alone.

[Snowden352]

So, based on what people have said, it sounds like if this idea passes then the tallest building we'd likely see in the near future (read 5-10 years) would be between 600 and maybe 650 feet .
Am I right?

[alexjon]

Snowden, you have to go and look at what developers have done recently in other cities where this has happened-- for example, Austin, a city with a million more restrictions than Portland, decided to let them do something similar by stripping back height restrictions...

Two of the first 5 proposals to blaze through the process are 700'+.

[zilfondel]

The problem, however, isn't the height limit... it's the FAR. If you can only go 15:1 FAR, you could do at maximum build a 75 story tower on a full 40,000 square foot block @8,000' floor plates. On a 1/4 block site, it falls to under 18 stories.

FAR bonuses come primarily from affordable housing and green roofs... I think you can get around a bonus of 6:1, which ain't that much when you consider most of downtown & the Lloyd stipulates a max of 6:1 and 9:1 FAR.

[Dougall5505]

Snowden, you have to go and look at what developers have done recently in other cities where this has happened-- for example, Austin, a city with a million more restrictions than Portland, decided to let them do something similar by stripping back height restrictions...

Two of the first 5 proposals to blaze through the process are 700'+.
true and the little city of nashville is getting a 1,000 footer

[PDX City-State]

Yeah--but Austin's new tall buildings are pretty bad. I would personally rather see more skinny towers around 300 and 400 feet than a few big ones. I love me a skyscraper, but there is such a thing as too tall in my opinion--at least for now.

[Dougall5505]

i would welcome this building of austin's without the podium
http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b234/KevinFromTexas/Austin%20renderings%20highrises/AustinTheAustonianrenderingnight.jpg

[PDX City-State]

I take it back. That's sweet.

[pdxman]

Yeah, i would ditch the podium too. thats a nice building tho...those are some pretty fugly buildings around it tho.

[Snowden352]

I was only saying that considering the cost to build these buildings, plus the cost of the units et al. would result in smaller buildings; taking into consideration also the slowing down of the housing market and the unavailability of funds to purchase condos I thought any new proposals above the heights I mentioned would be too much of a risk for a developer to take.
That's how I reached my conclusion.

[alexjon]

Yeah, i would ditch the podium too. thats a nice building tho...those are some pretty fugly buildings around it tho.

Oh, but they're so cute!

The Frost Bank Tower is so awesome

[65MAX]

true and the little city of nashville is getting a 1,000 footer

That's not a point tower though.

[NJD]

engineering is not a problem: 120 story, 1675+ foot proposal, 6500 sq ft floorplate:

http://img66.imageshack.us/img66/640/52843474tf7.jpg
"The Pentonium in Dubai will become the world's tallest residential tower
Plans for the world’s tallest residential tower - the Pentonium in Dubai - have been unveiled today.

Trident International Holdings has partnered to create unique alliances with premium brands from across the world for its new 516 metre-tall tower, a development they describe as the 'defined height of luxury'.

The top floors of this world’s only Pentominium will contain a Sky Lounge, Sky Pool, Business Centre and a private observation deck along with ladies & gentleman’s health clubs and a cigar lounge, squash courts, a banqueting hall and private theatre.

Each individual residential unit will take up a complete floor of the tower providing over 6500 sq.ft. of living space."



so, um... let's keep a height limit around 400-600 or so... portland is far better off without something this tall.

[zilfondel]

No? You don't want 500 or 600 of those point towers? Would have a great view of Mt Hood tho... =P

[edgepdx]

The top floors of this world’s only Pentominium will contain a Sky Lounge, Sky Pool, Business Centre and a private observation deck along with ladies & gentleman’s health clubs and a cigar lounge, squash courts, a banqueting hall and private theatre.

Each individual residential unit will take up a complete floor of the tower providing over 6500 sq.ft. of living space."
.

Your gas dollars hard at work. :hell:

[brandonpdx]

Portland shouldn’t open up height limits carte blanche. They should do the same as they do now; that is providing height increases or bonuses for providing certain amenities or set back on their buildings. However, they should open up the height limits by adding more height bonuses such as providing units and amenities that can accommodate families, preserving views, preserving historic structures, limiting shadows, etc.

Basically give some guidance on how to get height bonuses and then go on a case by case business to review the impacts of a new building that exceeds certain heights.

[urbanlife]

This should be treated like a credit. Build on 8000sq ft or less and you get a bonus of this number of feet that can be applied to the FAR that will be used or transfered over. That would set an undefined height limit, but still keep everything within respect to its surroundings. Basically, the city would get a few new tallest, but not by much would be my guess.....well unless it happened over in the Lloyd District. I think if a developer there were to use a height credit like this in combined with FAR and transferring some FAR from other properties in the Lloyd, they could build some really tall buildings. But then again, the Lloyd is basically a screwed up area, so I don't see that happening. Apparently though the Lloyd district might be getting a couple buildings like what the new OHSU building is like, which would be cool....but off topic.

[JoshYent]

Weston owns 20 blocks along Sandy?! Does anyone else see a string of point towers from Lower Burnside to Hollywood? Along with an extension of the Burnside/Couch Streetcar?

Yeah, 3 years is nothing. In the meantime, the Manhattan will be his prototype to sell his concept to the city.

YES! i can!



I am pro height all the way 100% everywhere i go, i envision if i had the money and the go ahead, how i would develop every piece of property i see almost as if i am playing simcity 4 in my head, i think about the past, present, and the future, and then 50 years after the towers are built, what will replace THOSE.....its an interesting world inside my head :D

[JoshYent]

I wish Weston a long, healthy life so that he can spend a lot of time building, building, building! =D


agreed...


i wonder how i could get involved with his company....or if he would be interested in taking me under his wing, and helping me to become the next big developer for the next 50 years :)


all i want to do is have a job in development/city planning road building mass transit.....

[vjoe]

Your gas dollars hard at work. :hell:

Oil reserves in Dubai are less than one-twentieth those of Abu Dhabi, and oil income represents a small proportion of the emirate's income.

Dubai is distinct from other members of the UAE in that revenues from oil account for only 6% of its gross domestic product.

They treat migrant labor pretty bad though.

see wiki

[edgepdx]

Oil reserves in Dubai are less than one-twentieth those of Abu Dhabi, and oil income represents a small proportion of the emirate's income.

Dubai is distinct from other members of the UAE in that revenues from oil account for only 6% of its gross domestic product.

They treat migrant labor pretty bad though.

see wiki

Yes, however Dubai and the UAE are the major financial, resort and business center for middle east and world wide petro dollars. It's sort of the Switzerland of the mid east. I'm sure you heard the recent news about Haliburton moving their "executive" headquarters there. Sounded like a bid to avoid prosecution of the top execs to me.

Anyway, truly mind bending projects going on there and yes they are being financed with from your gas tank.

[JoshYent]

ya dubai is definitely being built with american dollars acquired over the years

[robbobpdx]

http://www.oregonlive.com/living/oregonian/randy_gragg/index.ssf?/base/entertainment/117348455810700.xml&coll=7

Developer Weston pushes era-shifting 'point towers' here
Sunday, March 11, 2007
RANDY GRAGG

. . . .

At a recent Portland Design Commission hearing, chairman Mike McCulloch tried to inspire The Manhattan's design team to push "the bar higher" with features like solar panels on what will be the building's sun-soaked, city-gateway site right on Interstate 405.

Weston sat quietly in the back of the room.

Asked later about this, the first landmark building he will develop on his own, he quickly volunteered that what he was really excited about was the garbage chutes: There won't be any. He wants door-side pickup.

"People don't recycle when there are garbage chutes."

Randy Gragg: 503-221-8575; randygragg@news.oregonian.com

I've been a foe of not having garbage chutes, a la The Benson not having one. And since Joe Weston talks about not having them in his Manhatton Tower (or other future projects), and since he is modeling this and other developments after Vancouver, BC, I thought I'd test a theory I had about Vancouver condos and garbage chutes.

Short answer is . . . it depends on the quality of the building. Higher end buildings in Vancouver HAVE garbage chutes. Lower end, or more "affordable" buildings don't.

Buildings that DO have garbage chutes that have been completed recently, or are proposed include the Shangri La (60 stories), and the Shaw Tower (42 stories). So height isn't the problem. The Woodward (the W), on the other hand (billed as a more affordable development) has 42 stories, but has no garbage chute.

Just in case anyone wondered.

Regarding doorside garbage pick-up . . . I wonder how that works if you work? Pick-ups at night? What if you work a swing shift. Leave garbage outside your door? Just curious :D

[robbobpdx]

Continuing my own train of thought on garbage chutes (for Portland). All the SOWA buildings have garbage chutes, including the 31 story John Ross. The Eliot and Ladd Tower have chutes in the West End (the Benson does not). The Henry, Gregory, Elizabeth and Metropolitan have chutes in the Pearl.

Often there is room for recycling bins on each floor in the room with the garbage chute (or nearby), and people DO recycle. It's the recyling that is picked up regularly, but the "food garbage" and "pet litter" can be put down the chute (thankfully).

So even in Portland, the quality buildings do seem to have garbage chutes. I had more examples for Vancouver also, but thought giving examples of taller buildings would be a better example. Some have said building height is a reason for not having the chutes, but if 42 sories and 60 stories can have them then . . . .?

[sirsimon]

All I know is I wouldn't want to live in a swanky tall building and have to walk down a hallway with all my neighbor's garbage stinking up the place. Give me the chute! ;)

[MarkDaMan]

An apartment tower I lived in behind PGE Park had utility rooms on each floor with garbage/recycle cans the building maintenance emptied, I assume, daily. It never stunk up the hallway. They just collected and took all the garbage to the dumpsters which were picked up weekly. The building did have garabage chutes also, but the story as I was told was that some kid crawled into the chute and feel to his death, so they were all sealed shut.

[PacificNW]

Mark...I think we lived in the same building (if I remember correctly). Their garbage collection system worked quite well.

[MarkDaMan]

yeppers, Portland Towers.

[robbobpdx]

An apartment tower I lived in behind PGE Park had utility rooms on each floor with garbage/recycle cans the building maintenance emptied, I assume, daily. It never stunk up the hallway. They just collected and took all the garbage to the dumpsters which were picked up weekly. The building did have garabage chutes also, but the story as I was told was that some kid crawled into the chute and feel to his death, so they were all sealed shut.

It's a sad tale about the kid who fell to his death, but geesh. To make a building totally kid safe there would need to be a host of changes to many buildings . . . affordable AND luxury that have just been built. Just having balconies on highrise buildings for a start.

But one thing about the garbage chutes, and it's mainly because Weston is so happy not to have them, is like I said earlier . . . they're in the better buildings, but not in the ones that are considered "affordable" or middle quality. That speaks volumes about how Weston wants to construct his buildings, because many other things may go by the wayside as well. In the Benson Tower there are only two elevators for 26 floors of units. Seems like a long time can be spent waiting in a set-up like that. Higher end buildings, again, have more elevators (although that's hard to do with the small footprint of the Benson).

Back to the chutes, though, and the thought of someone picking up the garbage each day on each floor. That costs money !!! Whether it's a condo or an apartment, staff would have to be paid to do that. In a condo the cost would be passed on to the owners in Condo dues, but in an apartment just added into the rent. The maintenance, overall, can be quite expensive (if a building is being kept up, that is). I also just don't buy Weston's argument that in buildings with chutes people don't recycle. People in Portland recycle regardless . . . and many would carry it all down to the basement themselves just to do that. But, many buildings I've seen have a chute for the yucky stuff, and recycling space on each floor that is picked up maybe once a week. You can do that with recycling (with less staffing), but you wouldn't be able to with other food garbage etc. IMO.

[PacificNW]

↑It's nice to know my place in life....."affordable" or middle quality... :)

[robbobpdx]

↑It's nice to know my place in life....."affordable" or middle quality... :)

Absolutely no offense intended.

I was referring to NEW construction mostly. Standards have changed in a lot of things over the years, from ceiling height to floor thickness, to the number of windows, etc. The garbage chutes I was referring to are in new buildings (or in some case NOT in the new buildings). The Benson, for example (another Weston development), actually was billed as affordable by its original developer Eric VanDornink, who died in a plane crash before construction got very far. Later the finishes were upgraded and they then referred to it as "Luxury." Things that weren't or couldn't change or be upgraded and still keep the same design are the ceiling height (about a foot shorter than most new construction condos), no garbage chute, and only two elevators for 26 stories.

Several buildings I've lived in here in Portland (and all of them would NOT be billed as "Luxury" at all), have had garbage chutes. And the Portland Towers (as Mark pointed out) used to have a chute that was closed up.

My point was mainly to respond to Joe Weston's glee at NOT putting in garbage chutes, and draw some comparisons from Vancouver, BC and from some of the recent higher end developments here. When I looked at the floorplans for several of the recent newer developments, I found the higher end buildings had chutes and those not as high end -- those actually selling themselves and billing themselves as "affordable" (not my term, but theirs). So I mainly referred to the "Luxury" billing, because that is what the developers (or sales folks) are calling the ones that seem to have the chutes. I wonder what Joe Weston will refer to the Manhattan as?

(If I keep talking . . . er typing . . . I'm sure I'll dig myself deeper into this hole I'm standing in?) :(

[robbobpdx]

Just for full disclosure . . . I used to live next to PGE Park also, but not in the Portland Tower. I used to live in the Civic when I was a young-un, and I don't mean the one under construction now. For the record, I don't think they had a garbage chute. Seems to me we had to take garbage down to the basement or something. Oh well.

The Portland Towers would definitely be considered "Luxury" compared to the old Civic.
:D

OK, I'll try to get off the "Luxury" condo kick, but developers and sales folks may still be bringing that up.

[PacificNW]

I was just pulling your leg.. :)

[asher519]

Hell! If someone would just open their eyes to the non-luxury majority and build a cute point tower that I could actually afford, I'd gladly drag my garbage down my two elevators to the dumpster myself! :D

[robbobpdx]

Hell! If someone would just open their eyes to the non-luxury majority and build a cute point tower that I could actually afford, I'd gladly drag my garbage down my two elevators to the dumpster myself! :D

I think what you said is exactly what Weston is counting on . . . but it will be interesting to see how much the condos in the Manhattan go for, and whether he'll shy away from the "luxury" billing. I hope it turns out great. Sure looks like an interesting shape, and it definitely looks like a point tower !!!