HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Pacific West > Portland > Downtown & City of Portland


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Feb 5, 2019, 8:12 PM
maccoinnich maccoinnich is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Portland
Posts: 7,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric cantona View Post
It's almost like P+W did not do any research into previous projects that went to the HLC. Weird. Hope that have a decent design budget because they're going to have to redesign the whole damn thing.
[screams in vallaster corl]
__________________
"Maybe to an architect, they might look suspicious, but to me, they just look like rocks"

www.twitter.com/maccoinnich
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Feb 5, 2019, 9:31 PM
urbanlife's Avatar
urbanlife urbanlife is offline
A before E
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
Posts: 11,756
I like it, and this will be much nicer than the final building that will be 4-6 stories and have a cornice and pretend to look "historic."


Also, don't look up the word "cornis" when trying to spell the word "cornice" though it was a pretty funny lewd definition.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Feb 10, 2019, 8:59 PM
Inner Ring Inner Ring is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 81
Weatherly was just the first skyscraper

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnliu View Post
It is an interesting question whether the existence of one 175' building in a historic district of otherwise much lower buildings means that all new buildings of 175' are automatically of "compatible" scale.

Kind of like does the presence of the Eiffel Tower mean that 1000' buildings are compatible with the 7eme.

Conceptually, associating the new building with the Weatherby might help. But other than being on the same block and owned by the same entity, what is the association? No design association is apparent from the rendering, other than both buildings are generally rectangular.

So because of the historic district, we can have no more tall buildings beyond the Weatherly. Poor Mr. Weatherly, who built this and dreamed of creating a "second Downtown" on the Central Eastside, will roll over in his grave. Because development didn't follow, now we're saying we're going to forbid it to follow? This historic district is all over the map, anyway. It's got an early period, and a late period. They should just admit there's not consistency in the district, and allow new buildings of any height. It's in the Central City!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Feb 10, 2019, 10:14 PM
maccoinnich maccoinnich is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Portland
Posts: 7,389
I think the "East Portland Grand Avenue Historic District" is a good example of a historic district that shouldn't be a historic district. The buildings in it are too eclectic in character and too scattered to form a cohesive district. The National Register program allows for multiple property nominations, which would have been a more appropriate choice.
__________________
"Maybe to an architect, they might look suspicious, but to me, they just look like rocks"

www.twitter.com/maccoinnich
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Feb 10, 2019, 10:39 PM
Inner Ring Inner Ring is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by maccoinnich View Post
I think the "East Portland Grand Avenue Historic District" is a good example of a historic district that shouldn't be a historic district. The buildings in it are too eclectic in character and too scattered to form a cohesive district. The National Register program allows for multiple property nominations, which would have been a more appropriate choice.
My feelings exactly. Individual listings for some, yes.

The staff report lays out how they could be approved if they mimic the Weatherly's cornice, and more solid base, etc., so I suppose that's what it'll take. Staff report at least was not dogmatic on height (just "sculpting"). We'll see if the HLC is even that reasonable.

I hope HLC doesn't throw away the opportunity to get the Weatherly seismicked. (new verb?)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2019, 12:04 AM
johnliu johnliu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by maccoinnich View Post
I think the "East Portland Grand Avenue Historic District" is a good example of a historic district that shouldn't be a historic district. The buildings in it are too eclectic in character and too scattered to form a cohesive district. The National Register program allows for multiple property nominations, which would have been a more appropriate choice.
Which Portland historic district do you think should be a historic district?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2019, 4:16 AM
maccoinnich maccoinnich is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Portland
Posts: 7,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnliu View Post
Which Portland historic district do you think should be a historic district?
Northwest Thirteenth is a good example of a district that's unique, cohesive and tightly drawn (and, seeing as you ask, not just a collection of rich people's houses).
__________________
"Maybe to an architect, they might look suspicious, but to me, they just look like rocks"

www.twitter.com/maccoinnich
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Feb 19, 2019, 2:09 AM
maccoinnich maccoinnich is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Portland
Posts: 7,389
Quote:
Proposal not ready for historic district



The project team behind a proposal for a mixed-use tower in Portland’s inner eastside will return to the drawing board after the Historic Landmarks Commission, in a design advice hearing held Monday, recommended changes to the building’s massing, materials and height.

Members of the Seattle-based team, which includes developer Unico Properties and architect Perkins+Will, presented plans for a 12-story building on the southern portion of a block bounded by Southeast Grand and Sixth avenues and Morrison and Belmont streets. The block’s northern portion is occupied by the Weatherly Building – a 12-story office tower completed in 1928 and a contributing structure in the East Portland Grand Avenue Historic District.

Two massing schemes were presented for the development. Both include a 12-story office building with ground-floor retail space, three levels of below-grade parking and a mid-block woonerf connecting Southeast Grand and Sixth avenues.
...continues at the DJC (temporarily unlocked).
__________________
"Maybe to an architect, they might look suspicious, but to me, they just look like rocks"

www.twitter.com/maccoinnich
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Feb 19, 2019, 4:41 AM
tworivers's Avatar
tworivers tworivers is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Portland/Cascadia
Posts: 2,598
Does anyone here know for sure what it would take to defang the HLC? 3 votes on Portland City Council?

I'm curious how this commission has been given so much power yet, as a city, we're not even able to compel the preservation of historic structures like the 1892 United Workmen Temple.

By "defang" I mean that they should not have the power to determine any aspect of new development in designated historic districts, merely acting instead as a body that sends up non-binding recommendations to the Design Commission.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Feb 19, 2019, 4:51 AM
tworivers's Avatar
tworivers tworivers is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Portland/Cascadia
Posts: 2,598
This is proof in the pudding of how culturally backwards this city is, despite its mythology. Have these people seriously never been to Europe, where it's perfectly normal to place contemporary buildings-of-the-times adjacent to buildings-of-previous-times?

"Commissioners and Bureau of Development Services staffers took issue with the modern materials proposed for the building, which include a prominent glass curtainwall and metal paneling. The transparent glazing would expose the building’s interior, which would contain cross-laminated timber framing and concrete cores. Commissioners agreed that the building ought to incorporate the masonry and punched openings prominent among buildings in the district, and that a glass box would neither meet district design guidelines nor fit within the context of the area."

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Feb 19, 2019, 7:08 AM
urbanlife's Avatar
urbanlife urbanlife is offline
A before E
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
Posts: 11,756
This is just mind-numbingly annoying. If the building falls within the requirements for FAR and the current height limits in the area and doesn't involve tearing down an old building or using an old building any way, the HLC should have zero say in the design and size of the building.

Of course that is what is happening here and the HLC is basically saying they don't care what is allowed for that site through zoning and that whatever gets built has to conformed to their warped ideas of what the building should look like.

So as I and many others predicted, this building, if it gets built at all, will be nothing more than a 4-6 story building that will have a generic looking cornice.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Feb 19, 2019, 7:12 AM
maccoinnich maccoinnich is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Portland
Posts: 7,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by tworivers View Post
Does anyone here know for sure what it would take to defang the HLC? 3 votes on Portland City Council?

I'm curious how this commission has been given so much power yet, as a city, we're not even able to compel the preservation of historic structures like the 1892 United Workmen Temple.

By "defang" I mean that they should not have the power to determine any aspect of new development in designated historic districts, merely acting instead as a body that sends up non-binding recommendations to the Design Commission.
The Discussion Draft of Historic Resources Code Project is out for public comment until April 12, 2019. The changes being proposed are somewhat smaller than what you're suggesting, but you can certainly submit your comments.
__________________
"Maybe to an architect, they might look suspicious, but to me, they just look like rocks"

www.twitter.com/maccoinnich
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Feb 19, 2019, 5:04 PM
AcmeGreg AcmeGreg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 131
[QUOTE=tworivers;8479103]This is proof in the pudding of how culturally backwards this city is, despite its mythology. Have these people seriously never been to Europe, where it's perfectly normal to place contemporary buildings-of-the-times adjacent to buildings-of-previous-times?

Agree 100%. What is the HLC talking about vis-a-vis "context" here? You've got a myriad of contemporary buildings going up within blocks of the Weatherly, including a veritable cornucopia of glass boxes courtesy of W.PA. And who knows, maybe the Weatherly was the "Yard" of its day... the object of scorn and ridicule for not living up to the high expectations as promised in the renderings.

Gee, I'd love to be around 100 years from now when these guys will force developers to build something that conforms to 7 SE Stark, Cosmo in the Pearl... the Black Box downtown...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Feb 19, 2019, 9:56 PM
RED_PDXer RED_PDXer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 794
No matter how much we want to wish away the historic district and all the strings it provides a select group of people, this design team put together an unpersuasive design package. My only thought is that they wanted to start with the most broad, unregulated design envelope in order to make just about anything more palatable to the HLC.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Feb 20, 2019, 4:39 AM
MarkDaMan's Avatar
MarkDaMan MarkDaMan is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Portland
Posts: 7,508
Quote:
Originally Posted by RED_PDXer View Post
No matter how much we want to wish away the historic district and all the strings it provides a select group of people, this design team put together an unpersuasive design package. My only thought is that they wanted to start with the most broad, unregulated design envelope in order to make just about anything more palatable to the HLC.
Agreed. There is a disconnect between allowable zoning (city) and desired massing (HLC). It would be helpful if both parties got together and defined desirable outcomes and broad possible solutions.
__________________
make paradise, tear up a parking lot
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Feb 20, 2019, 5:05 AM
AdamUrbanist AdamUrbanist is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 177
I think a well designe, modern Perkins and Will building with masonry and punched openings could be a lot more interesting than the glass box they proposed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2019, 6:45 AM
urbanlife's Avatar
urbanlife urbanlife is offline
A before E
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
Posts: 11,756
At this point, they might as well proposed a grey box massing model knowing full well the HLC will shoot down anything that is proposed for this site that is over a couple stories high.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Pacific West > Portland > Downtown & City of Portland
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:47 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.