HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Jan 20, 2007, 6:12 PM
sirsimon sirsimon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Nowhere...now here
Posts: 355
Nice looking building! It is awesome that they mention the Broadway building as well - I assume it is the same one that had a rendering we all drooled over in the past. One of the coolest parts about the Park Ave West project is the rapid timeline...I wish some of the other buildings proposed around here could get "fast tracked" like this one.

Impatiently waiting...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Jan 20, 2007, 6:13 PM
Dougall5505's Avatar
Dougall5505 Dougall5505 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: P-town
Posts: 1,976
Quote:
trust me, i've thought about it, but then things like, i don't know, "life" or whatever, interfere. i figured someone else would do it sooner or later.
don't worry about it i wouldn't have time to do it either
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Jan 20, 2007, 6:32 PM
sirsimon sirsimon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Nowhere...now here
Posts: 355
Does anyone know if 410' is at the height limit for this location?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Jan 20, 2007, 7:26 PM
alexjon's Avatar
alexjon alexjon is offline
Bears of antiquity
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Downtown/First Hill, Seattle, WA
Posts: 8,340
Anyone have a portland file for google earth? :o
__________________
"The United States is in no way founded upon the Christian religion." -- George Washington & John Adams in a diplomatic message to Malta
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Jan 20, 2007, 7:35 PM
alexjon's Avatar
alexjon alexjon is offline
Bears of antiquity
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Downtown/First Hill, Seattle, WA
Posts: 8,340
Oh, the city does... ta
__________________
"The United States is in no way founded upon the Christian religion." -- George Washington & John Adams in a diplomatic message to Malta
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2007, 9:52 AM
65MAX's Avatar
65MAX 65MAX is offline
Karma Police
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: People's Republic of Portland
Posts: 2,138
Quote:
Originally Posted by sirsimon View Post
Does anyone know if 410' is at the height limit for this location?
I may be mistaken, but I think that 460' is the max for that block. I know it is for the blocks immediately N and S of the Galleria. But they're already maxed out on FAR, including a transfer of the air rights above PB5, and bonus FAR for amenities.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2007, 5:42 PM
sirsimon sirsimon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Nowhere...now here
Posts: 355
^ Gotcha.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Jan 23, 2007, 6:56 AM
bob1954 bob1954 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 869
Nice looking building! To bad it was'nt 610' instead of 410'! Will someone in Portland ever build a building or two over 600'!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Jan 23, 2007, 9:40 AM
mcbaby mcbaby is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 587
so are they going to tear down the galleria parking garage next?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Jan 23, 2007, 4:32 PM
MarkDaMan's Avatar
MarkDaMan MarkDaMan is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Portland
Posts: 7,508
New Moyer tower’s design is ‘simple, elegant’
by Alison Ryan
01/23/2007


First Fox Tower. Then the underground parking garage at Park Block 5. With the announcement of Park Avenue West, set to rise at neighboring Park Block 4, comes a third downtown core addition to the city’s built environment by TVA Architects Inc. and developer Tom Moyer.

The 35-story tower being developed by Moyer’s TMT Development Co. will mix retail – double-height space on the lowest floors – with office space and condominiums. And that mix, said Robert Thompson, design principal at TVA, informed a design that nods to the unique purpose of each use.

“The goal was looking at how you take multiple uses, each having a different function, and finding ways to stitch together structurally a composition where they all tie together,” he said.

Tying what will be inside the building to what – eventually – will be outside was a goal as well. TVA is part of the team working on South Park Block 5, the urban green space that will ultimately top the also TVA-designed underground parking garage.

“We wanted the tower itself, in a subtle way, to respond to a number of the design features in the park,” Thompson said, “primarily a significant water feature we’re proposing.”

The link is made primarily on the park-facing south façade, where two canted surfaces will lock over each other in a flared, sculptural element. Practically, said Monty Hill, a TVA associate, the element creates additional corners for maximum office and condominium views. But it also, he said, adds another exterior dynamic.

“You get the sense of some kinetic energy,” he said, “with the two pieces kind of wrapped around one another.”

Distinctive design, said Vanessa Sturgeon, TMT president, was the idea.

“The design is meant to create a landmark in downtown Portland,” she said, “and add something significant and different to the skyline.”

Height will factor, too. The 410-foot tower will be one of the city’s tallest, and the design – especially the south side canting – emphasizes that, Thompson said.

“That element acts as a piece which accentuates the verticality of the overall tower,” he said.

The “simple, elegant, sophisticated” tower, Thompson said, will also mark a western expansion of downtown retail. The district “really moves in an east-west direction, from the river or Pioneer Place, through Pioneer Square and the Nordstrom block,” he said. “With the continuation of the development in the West End, this is the logical step.”

The tower, expected to begin construction in fall 2007, is anticipated to include about 280,000 square feet of office space, three floors of retail, 85 housing units and 350 underground parking spots.

Design, Hill said, has its own role in tenant attraction.

“The sculptural quality will help give it a unique identity,” Hill said. “That translates to marketability for the project.”

The team has been working with the city on preparing for pre-application, Thompson said, and hopes to take the project before the Portland Design Commission within the next 60 days.

TVA is also investigating design and planning options for another potential TMT tower, tentatively called Broadway Tower, at the corner of Southwest Broadway and Columbia Street.

Sturgeon said that TMT, whose longstanding relationship with TVA Architects also includes the firm’s design of the company’s Fox Tower, is pleased with both the design and its potential impact on downtown.

“We believe in Portland, and we believe in downtown Portland especially,” she said. “We always want to do what’s right in the way of design.”

http://www.djc-or.com/viewStory.cfm?...28761&userID=1
__________________
make paradise, tear up a parking lot
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2007, 7:29 AM
robbobpdx robbobpdx is offline
inside + out
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Portland
Posts: 113
VERY cool design, and on a skinny block too. Thanks to Mr. Moyer for upping the notch on downtown buildings. I sure hope he builds the Broadway Tower condos on Broadway and Columbia as planned. In the meantime, this is a terrific design, and terrific multi-use.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2007, 5:25 PM
65MAX's Avatar
65MAX 65MAX is offline
Karma Police
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: People's Republic of Portland
Posts: 2,138
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcbaby View Post
so are they going to tear down the galleria parking garage next?
I don't know if it's next, but it's definitely on the boards. I believe Gerding Edlen has the rights to redevelop that block, and it could possibly be our next tallest, if GE can convince the city to up the height limit and allow FAR bonuses. A few years ago, I would've said that wasn't possible, but thankfully today, there seems to be a trend towards increasing heights (while still preserving public view corridors). That's vital to maximizing density in the core and slowing sprawl at the edges.

GE has a lot of credibility and political good will built up. They should have the city on their side.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2007, 5:39 PM
PacificNW PacificNW is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,116
^We can only hope..
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2007, 5:42 PM
pdxman's Avatar
pdxman pdxman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland
Posts: 1,037
i doubt if building all of these new condos will slow down sprawl at the edges-it might a little. The unfortunate bit is that most people can't afford to live downtown, pearl, nw because of the prices. There needs to be more affordable housing. Plus, this is america and most people will tend to want to live in the burbs because they have families and the schools and such are generally better out there than in the city. Its unfortunate that these condos are so damn expensive...that said i'm very much in favor of seeing a new tallest, and more towers being built. I like to see development but it sometimes bothers me to see average families being priced out of the market
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2007, 6:19 PM
65MAX's Avatar
65MAX 65MAX is offline
Karma Police
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: People's Republic of Portland
Posts: 2,138
True, it won't slow the sprawl much, but 10,000 high-end condos in the core means fewer McMansions in Stafford. And unfortunately, I don't think we can build our way into a solution for affordable housing when so many people are making less than $10/hr.

The real check on sprawl will come from increased densities (i.e. mega multi-family housing complexes) along transit corridors in our existing suburbs. That's where most of our future workforce will be living. All the more reason for a more comprehensive high-capacity transit network here, to every corner of the metro area.

Oops, sorry. Back on topic..... yes, we need more towers like this Downtown.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2007, 6:32 PM
Urbanpdx Urbanpdx is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 561
Actually, most households do not have kids. The only major demographic that is NOT growing is the nuclear (nukuler if you are Bush) family. This is one of the reasons that condos are so hot.

I hate the word "affordable". Does it mean that regular people can afford it (like a $200,000 home) or does it mean that it is free or close to free for people who don't earn much and paid for by those who earn a little more?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2007, 6:49 PM
Drmyeyes Drmyeyes is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 384
Yeah, "affordable". I'm still coming to an understanding of what this means, but basically, I believe "affordable" in terms of housing, is based on median family income for a given area. In other words, average family income. Obviously, if an area has a substantial percentage of very high income earners, that raises the average to a height absurdly greater than that of minimum wage earners. Can't remember the last figure for median family income that I read, but it seemed ridiculous....doesn't sound right when I think about it, but $50-$60 thousand. Could be less. I'll try do a search later.

So anyway, you can figure out what that means. Nobody with a $20,000/yr job with a family to support is going to be able to afford much "affordable" housing. But the developers keep putting up their high priced crap based on the affordable housing figure anyway, further stratifying the society and making the best parts of the city ever more exclusively available to relatively wealthy people.

And just to give urbanpdx his due, his statement "Actually, most households do not have kids.", is probably roughly true. I seem to recall reading a blueoregon person saying some time back that 20% of Portland households have school age kids. Haven't confirmed this though.

Last edited by Drmyeyes; Jan 24, 2007 at 7:12 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2007, 10:07 PM
mcbaby mcbaby is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 587
i believe that's correct.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2007, 11:52 PM
urbanlife's Avatar
urbanlife urbanlife is offline
A before E
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
Posts: 11,752
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkDaMan View Post
ooooh, I can't WAIT to see the full rendering! Thanks for the info...

Question, at 410' but up 5 blocks from the Wells and US Bancorp, and even more from the KOIN, will this tower rise higher than those towers, elevation wise? I can imagine this looking like a new tallest from the eastbank because the Fox certainly looks taller than it is.

Urbanlife, great architecture? The Zell Block has always looked a bit shabby to me and doesn't connect with the street well at all, IMO. It was either gonna become a park or tower eventually...I'd rather have the tower.
sorry for being like late as hell on a reply to this. Yeah been stupid busy.

great architecture, not so much, but those blocks are very historically linked to our past and our old heart of town. With that said, this is the one block I am willing to lose the buildings on in hopes of reuse of the other historical buildings along those two streets. Although I have always enjoyed the Zell building for some reason.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2007, 12:32 AM
Urbanpdx Urbanpdx is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drmyeyes View Post
Yeah, "affordable". I'm still coming to an understanding of what this means, but basically, I believe "affordable" in terms of housing, is based on median family income for a given area. In other words, average family income. Obviously, if an area has a substantial percentage of very high income earners, that raises the average to a height absurdly greater than that of minimum wage earners. Can't remember the last figure for median family income that I read, but it seemed ridiculous....doesn't sound right when I think about it, but $50-$60 thousand. Could be less. I'll try do a search later.

So anyway, you can figure out what that means. Nobody with a $20,000/yr job with a family to support is going to be able to afford much "affordable" housing. But the developers keep putting up their high priced crap based on the affordable housing figure anyway, further stratifying the society and making the best parts of the city ever more exclusively available to relatively wealthy people.

And just to give urbanpdx his due, his statement "Actually, most households do not have kids.", is probably roughly true. I seem to recall reading a blueoregon person saying some time back that 20% of Portland households have school age kids. Haven't confirmed this though.

The problem is lately "affordable" is synonymous with "subsidized".   If a developer want to do houses or condos that median income families can afford and they call them "affordable" neighbors fight them and buyers shy away because everyone envisions the "projects".  Usually "affordable housing" is HUD or some other govt. program where people pay $100 per month.
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 > Downtown & City of Portland
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:26 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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