Portland design commissioners are girding for battle as they begin to confront a push to suspend the city’s mandatory design review process for two years.

The procedure is advancing quickly, and city staff anticipate the City Council will consider legislation to suspend design review as soon as December.

The Portland Planning Commission will weigh a suspension of design review on Aug. 25 as a prelude to council action. Design commissioners said Thursday they plan to write letters and perhaps testify in person at that meeting.

The time has come for design commissioners to make their case, said Tim Heron, a senior city planner who works with the Design Commission.

“So, it’s go time,” he said after laying out the calendar during a brief Design Commission work session on Thursday.

Two bureau directors, Eric Engstrom of Planning and Sustainability and Eric Kutch of Permitting and Development, sent councilors Angelita Morillo and Eric Zimmerman a letter May 7 outlining a potential two-year suspension of design review. That was prompted by councilors ordering a report on design review this past December.

Design review has attracted criticism for adding delays and expense while elected officials — including Gov. Tina Kotek and Mayor Keith Wilson — have made housing production a priority, to little effect. Other cities, including Seattle, have suspended design review.

Policy efforts have shown little progress to date. In 2025, the city of Portland approved only 22 new construction permits for multifamily projects.

The proposed suspension would affect only mandatory design review. Developers still could opt in if they prefer design review to a standards-based approval process.

Several Permitting and Development staffers who work on design review would be reassigned and integrated into a Planning and Sustainability project team, according to the directors’ memo. The directors also requested additional funding for the staffing during the two-year period to make up for reduced design review revenue.

The two bureaus, prompted by the December directive from the City Council, published a joint report on design review in April. The 119-page report painted a picture of a broad economic pullback. “… Development activity has steadily declined and, in 2025, experienced an even more precipitous decline. This multiyear decline has not been limited to projects in the Design and Historic Resource Overlay Zones but has been reflected citywide for almost all types of housing and commercial development.”

Design review proponents say the process benefits projects, often making buildings better and giving the public a voice.

“Design review is a time when the public is able to come provide testimony,” Design Commission Chairwoman Chandra Robinson said in February. “It’s the time when they’re able to get their voices on the record, and I think it’s an important part of the process that they’re able to share their thoughts on proposals in their neighborhood.”

They also say design review unfairly takes flack when national and regional macroeconomic conditions — interest rates, development cycles, construction costs — matter far more. The April joint bureau report also cast blame on larger factors.

“Development within the city remains at historic lows due to various factors including high interest rates, high apartment vacancy combined with stagnating rents and an aversion by institutional capital to investing in Portland due to real and perceived safety, taxation, regulation and market factors,” the report states.

On Thursday, Robinson said she would draft a letter to the City Council, either on behalf of the Design Commission or individually.

Commissioner Joe Swank said the Design Commission may want to write a different type of letter than one with typical dry, technical language, as it’s fighting for its life.

“I agree with a different approach,” he said.

The Historic Landmarks Commission is also expected to weigh in with its own concerns.

Design commissioners are expected to consider their response during an Aug. 6 meeting before transmitting it to the Planning Commission and City Council.

The post Fight over Portland design review process looms appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Portland’s Historic Landmarks Commission on Monday unanimously approved plans for to alter the two lower levels of the 12-story Selling Building for the James Beard Public Market.

The building is located at 610 S.W. Alder St. The project also includes modifying space in an adjacent building at 622 S.W. Alder St. The entire façade of 622 S.W. Alder St. and the first two stories of the Selling Building are being reconstructed to provide new market entries.

The project team includes lead architect and architect of record BCV Architecture + Interiors of San Francisco, local architect COLAB Architecture + Urban Design, civil engineer Humber Design Group, and general contractor Hoffman Construction.

The project is valued at $1.6 million, according to Portland Permitting & Development.

Market programming will include vendor stalls, prepared food vending spaces, a restaurant anchor tenant, a teaching kitchen/cooking school, common space for community events, common seating areas throughout the market, trash and vendor storage, and a rooftop bar with covered seating.

The Historic Landmarks Commission previously provided the project team with design advice during a hearing in May 2025. The design for the market’s western portion (622 S.W. Alder St.) was approved by staff in late February, said Ben Nielsen, senior city planner for Portland Permitting and Development.

Monday’s hearing was a type III historic resource review for proposed exterior alterations to the market’s eastern half — in the historic Selling Building, which was built in 1910.

“T��� alterations will essentially restore the lower two levels of the building to their historic states,” Nielsen said.

Alterations include replacing granite cladding, storefronts and windows on the ground floor and second floor with new polished black granite cladding, new aluminum storefronts, and new awnings on the ground floor and with new wood windows and terra cotta cladding on the second floor. Glass fiber reinforced polymer cladding was proposed as an alternate design. A sign band proposed above the new storefronts will be composed of black, back-painted glass with bronze lettering and decorative trim.

The historic storefront at Spella Caffè will remain, as will portions of the lobby entry to the Selling Building.

Hans Baldauf, founding principal at BCV Architecture + Interiors, said the firm is working with a terra cotta manufacturer — Gladding McBean, of Lincoln, California — that provided the original terra cotta for the building. The decision to use an alternate material came down to cost and technical matters, Baldauf said, adding that it looks promising for the team to use terra cotta for the project.

“T��� resin approach gives us that fallback,” Baldauf said.

The proposal includes two modifications related to signage. One increases the maximum area allowed per sign and the other increases the maximum area allowed for all signs. Ordinarily, total signage cannot exceed 250 square feet; the proposal calls for a total of approximately 282 square feet.

Commissioners voiced support for the proposal, specifically on restoring the two levels of the building, the multiple storefronts, the signage and the conditions of approval.

Construction of the market began this past fall. It’s on track to open next spring.

The post Group approves alterations for public market in Portland appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

A plan to encourage more dense housing projects in certain zones across Portland is raising the ire of Historic Landmarks Commission members, who fear it will encourage demolitions and sideline their ability to regulate building height and size in historic districts.

Commission Chairwoman Kristen Minor is at work on a letter to the City Council ahead of the council’s Wednesday meeting, when the group is scheduled to take up the zoning policies – known as Better Housing by Design – for two hours of discussion. A vote could be held in November.

During a Historic Landmarks Commission meeting on Monday, Minor said the Planning and Sustainability Commission‘s agenda is creating a conflict.

“Some parties would not like this commission to have a say over a project’s bulk or height,” she said. “That’s one of the key measures of compatibility.”

Minor told her fellow commissioners that she was inclined to make their objections known.

“I for one believe we should go in guns blazing to City Council, but I appreciate your discussion on this,” she said.

The Historic Landmarks Commission members’ concerns underscore the tension between their role – “maintaining and enhancing Portland’s historic and architectural heritage,” according to the city’s website – and Portland’s greater policy push to build more housing units throughout the city. That is something Mayor Ted Wheeler and others have sought as a key solution to Portland’s housing crisis.

Better Housing by Design would give larger height bonuses for affordable housing in multi-dwelling zones. It would also provide greater heights for buildings with 50 percent or more units made affordable at 60 percent of area median income – a provision intended as an incentive for nonprofit affordable housing developers.

“This is of course related to the housing crisis, and wanting to make better use of housing opportunities when they arise,” said Bill Cunningham, a Bureau of Planning and Sustainability project manager.

The proposal would also allow the transfer of floor area ratio to historic districts, enabling greater building heights in exchange for seismic upgrades. Earlier attempts by city officials to encourage seismic retrofits have run into roadblocks.

The proposal also would establish “base” floor area ratios. In a draft letter to the City Council, the Historic Landmarks Commission protested that provision.

“Giving developers of projects extra bulk or height in historic districts creates less predictability and more opportunity for contentious hearings for projects in these districts,” the letter dated Sept. 9 states. “Increasing a new development’s height or bulk (beyond code ‘maximums,’ which are themselves not always approvable in every situation) will not always meet Historic Review approval criteria. The (commission) strongly opposes opportunities to ‘earn’ more bulk in these areas, even for deeply needed affordable housing.”

The letter also states that a provision to allow measurement from a low point below the sidewalk would encourage tuck-under garages.

Better Housing by Design would apply to multi-dwelling residential zones (R1, R2, R3 and RH in zoning jargon) outside the Central City. In practice, much of this property lies in East Portland. The proposal would also affect the Alphabet and King’s Hill historic districts in Northwest Portland.

Cunningham said there’s nothing in Better Housing by Design that would remove the Historic Landmarks Commission’s authority to govern building height and bulk in historic districts. Among the commission’s primary tasks is reviewing development proposals on properties within historic districts.

“That’s not changing at all through this proposal,” Cunningham said. “T���y would continue to have the discretion to change (designs) based on context.”

Nevertheless, Historic Landmarks Commission members fear the proposal would sideline their review authority. Minor pointed to another city planning project, Design Overlay Zone Amendments (DOZA), that would limit the Design Commission‘s discretion in certain neighborhoods.

“It’s kind of been this implicit threat that the Landmarks Commission would also lose purview,” Minor said. “It would be a vastly different thing for us to lose that. They are in the position of wanting more height and density just about anywhere,” she said, referring to the Design Commission. “Whereas for us, there are definitely situations in historic districts where the maximums allowed under the code would result in noncompatible projects.”

Minor said the Historic Landmarks Commission is on board with the city’s overall goals to increase housing density. But, she added, the Better Housing by Design proposal should do more to discourage demolitions.

“T��� code has definitely swung in the direction to build our way out of the housing crisis,” she said. “That’s certainly part of the picture – but we also have to sustain what we have.”

The post Where historic preservation and housing density collide appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Oregon’s Land Use Board of Appeals has denied an appeal of a Portland City Council decision upholding approval for an affordable housing project planned in the Alphabet District.

Plans call for construction of two new buildings – one five stories and the other a four-story addition to the existing three-story Buck-Prager Building, at 1727 N.W. Hoyt St. Combined, they would hold 148 housing units, including 48 for seniors. Northwest Housing Alternatives is developing the project.

Portland’s Historic Landmarks Commission approved the project last year, and then neighbors of the project site submitted an appeal to the City Council. It voted 4-0 against the appeal, which led resident Kenneth Dobson to appeal to LUBA.

LUBA, which hears appeals of land use decisions made by local jurisdictions, listened to that appeal in July. Then the board earlier this month upheld the City Council’s decision and rebuffed all five points of error claimed by the appellant.

In the appeal, Dobson claimed the proposed project would not be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood, and the proposed height, scale and design would violate city design standards. He also claimed the city erred in allowing elimination of on-street loading space.

The board, however, did not agree.

“Petitioner has not demonstrated that the city’s interpretation of ‘compatible’ is inconsistent with the express language of HAD-3, the purpose of that design standard, or the underlying policy that provides the basis for that standard,” stated in denying the first assignment of error.

As to the second assignment of error, the decision stated, “We conclude that a reasonable person could rely on that evidence to support a finding that the development will ‘maintain the district’s architectural scale and its fine-grained pattern of development,’ as required.”

The project is being designed by Carleton Hart Architecture. Michelle Black, a principal with the firm, declined to comment on LUBA’s decision.

Dobson or another appellant may appeal to the Oregon Supreme Court. If not, the project team will be able to apply for building permits; however, there is no timeline for such action.

The post Alphabet District project withstands challenge appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

GBD Architects‘ plans for a thorough core and shell renovation of the historic Multnomah County Courthouse may not be able to include punching new vehicle access points into the building.

The project team plans to convert the seven-story building into primarily office space, with some retail use – possibly a restaurant – on the ground floor. But plans require approval from the Historic Landmarks Commission, which offered its initial design advice at a hearing on Monday.

GBD is designing the project on behalf of NBP Capital. The Portland developer purchased the 275,000-square-foot courthouse from the county in November 2018 for $28 million. An early plan for adaptive reuse has gone by the wayside.

“A hotel is no longer planned,” said Agustin Enriquez, a GBD Architects principal who is leading the design team.

The courthouse, located between Salmon and Main streets and Fourth and Fifth avenues, was built in two phases, in 1909 and 1914, with a design by Whidden and Lewis, according to a Bureau of Development Services staff report. It was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1979.

Commissioners were generally complimentary of GBD’s plans, but expressed reservations about some proposed changes to the structure – most notably two new vehicle entrances that would require curb cuts.

“I have some real problems with creating these new vehicular access points,” Commission Chairwoman Kristen Minor said. “I’m concerned with changing buildings enough so they can be used – that’s how we keep old buildings – but I am equally concerned with creating a poor pedestrian environment.”

Architects said the building will need vehicle access points for loading, including for the potential ground-floor restaurant. The entries are proposed along Salmon Street on the north elevation.

Ashley Koger, a GBD senior associate, pointed to other historic Portland buildings with modern curb cuts, including the Galleria Building, which has vehicle access along Alder Street for Target loading, and the former Meier and Frank Delivery Depot building that is now leased by Vestas. However, Minor was not persuaded.

“I am not convinced that you need vehicle access,” she said.

Seeking common ground, Minor floated the possibility of approving one, narrow vehicle entrance. Koger said the Portland Bureau of Transportation would be unlikely to approve a vehicle entrance narrower than about 20 feet. That was too sizable for the commissioners.

“I don’t think I’d be able to support a 20-foot-wide opening on this building,” Minor said. “It would stick out like a sore thumb.”

Commissioner Andrew Smith agreed.

“It’s hard to imagine how it would get done successfully, so I sort of echo that,” he said.

GBD Architects plans to add numerous windows to the penthouse that was once a jail.

“T���re’s not many windows on the top floor,” Enriquez said.

A 10-foot parapet that blocked prisoners’ views of freedom has been largely removed, but a portion remains.

“It was originally meant to be for prisoners, and we want it to be a great home for office workers for 100 years or more,” Koger said.

No additional height is being requested; the building will remain at 113 feet, 9 inches.

The project team is requesting to build new entrances. A sealed pedestrian entrance along Fifth Avenue would be reintroduced. Also, on the south elevation facing Main Street, an entrance would be built where a Sheriff’s Office entryway once stood.

“We are super excited to be working on this project,” Enriquez said. “It’s one of the few full-block national landmarks in the city. There are others, but not a lot of them.”

While GBD is working on the historic courthouse, the new, $324.5 million Multnomah County Central Courthouse is under construction near the west end of the Hawthorne Bridge. Hoffman Construction is serving as the general contractor; SRG Partnership provided the design. The 17-story building is slated to open midsummer 2020.

The post Plans continuing to form for historic structure appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

By the end of 2019 a Portland-based project team will break ground on perhaps the most important building the city has seen this century, and potentially usher into Oregon a new era of environmental and technological responsibility.

ZGF Architects and PAE are leading the effort to bring to fruition the first Living Building in Portland. The five-story, 58,000-square-foot mixed-use structure, when built, will be the world’s largest Living Building, according to PAE project lead Marc Brune. Gerding Edlen is serving as the developer of the project, which will be built by Walsh Construction.

The PAE Living Building will have four stories of office space (the top three occupied by PAE) above ground-floor retail space. It’s set to rise on a quarter-block parcel at the corner of Southwest Pine Street and First Avenue, in the Skidmore/Old Town Historic District.

Portland’s Historic Landmarks Commission last month voted unanimously to approve project plans, which call for achieving the International Living Future Institute‘s Living Building Challenge. Its exceptionally high standards are intended to inspire a built environment without negative ecological impacts.

But this isn’t PAE’s first Living Building project. The company provided mechanical, electrical and plumbing engineering for Seattle’s Bullitt Center, which Brune said is currently the world’s largest Living Building at 55,000 square feet. That building houses PAE’s Seattle office.

“T��� PAE Living Building is a logical next step for a company that has already helped show the world what’s possible in several high-profile projects,” ILFI Vice President Kathleen Smith said. “When people look for examples of companies really stepping out front to lead on climate change, the PAE Living Building should be top of mind.”

One of the most daunting elements of the Living Building Challenge is the “red list” of prohibited materials because of the toxins they contain. The banned chemicals pollute the environment and are harmful to construction workers and building occupants, according to the ILFI’s website.

But the project team is using a number of tools to avoid red-list products, Brune said. For instance, Red2Green, a database of materials information, makes location of products outside the red list quick and easy. The project team will also call major manufacturers and ask for applicable products free from toxins – and if one doesn’t exist for the needed purpose, the ILFI will make exceptions.

As Living Buildings increase in popularity, Brune said, manufacturers will eventually be forced to make more products free from the red list. He believes competitors will then emerge, and costs will drop.

Incidentally, PAE and ZGF are using an innovative investment model – one not used before – to finance the building, Brooks and Brune said. While neither one was willing to explain the model any further, they said it gives investors a return and could prove replicable for other Living Buildings in the future.

Of course, such an environmentally-friendly project comes with a cost premium – about 10 percent greater than a typical building’s cost, Brune said. As a result, tenants’ leases will cost 5-10 percent higher than market rate, he added. However, the team is confident that PAE Living Building occupants’ productivity will be better than average. Research has proven that natural daylighting and ventilation can increase employee productivity from anywhere between 2 and 14 percent, he said.

“If we get a 1 percent productivity increase, that makes it totally cost-neutral for us,” he said. “We’re likely to get more than that.”

Similar boosts in efficiency are evident throughout the project, thanks to the design team’s line of thinking that optimizes solutions over the bottom line, according to ZGF project lead Justin Brooks.

For example, the building’s roof will feature an array of solar panels as well as a cistern to collect drinking water. That left no room for an eco-roof, which ordinarily would be required under city code. But the requirement’s intent will be fulfilled anyway, Brune said, because part of the Living Building Challenge requires the team to purchase an acre of land off-site, and that land will be dedicated to natural green space.

Those solar panels are intended to give back to the city too. The building will use a 500 kilowatt-hour battery to store power, Brune said, and PAE has partnered with a low-income housing complex nearby to share some of that power below market rate.

Another example of solution-oriented thinking can be found in the building’s concrete core and wood structure. It’s intended to ensure the building will be able to not only withstand a sizable earthquake, but continue to operate thereafter.

Most buildings require a minimum amount of buffer, because in a large earthquake they will likely rock back and forth. But because the PAE Living Building will meet a higher degree of safety, regulations allow it to stand a bit closer to its neighbors. This has allowed two sides of the building to each grow by six inches, Brune said. That means more leasable space, and subsequently greater rents, which in the end will help cover the greater costs associated with seismic safety.

“T��� return is the same, and now we have a building that will be standing for the next hundred years,” Brune said.

“Those sorts of creative, collective thinking are what make these projects work,” Brooks added. “You have to be that much more collaborative, which for me as a designer is a pleasure because I learn something every time.”

PAE learned a lot from its work on the Bullitt Center. The foam-flush toilets in that building are each connected to a composter, Brune said. The problem is that when one toilet receives more use than the others, its composter becomes clogged. For the PAE Living Building, the project team plans to use a valve so that composters are alternated each time a toilet is used. That will prevent clogging, and reduce the number of composters required. This is the first time a five-story building will use vacuum-flush toilets connected to basement composters, Brune said.

Brune and Brooks both said they hope this kind of learning provides a road map for other firms looking to take on the Living Building Challenge in Portland. They each said the experience has been incredibly valuable for the firm, and future projects will be easier as more companies become involved.

“T��� next person behind is going to have a little more of a path,” Brooks said. “I hope that in such a forward-thinking city as Portland, we’ll just see people following in that wake.”

The post Creating the world’s largest Living Building appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Portland’s Bureau of Development Services announced Monday its intention to fill a vacancy on the Historic Landmarks Commission. A volunteer is needed to take on a “public-at-large” spot.

The Historic Landmarks Commission hears proposals for large infill projects and new developments, as well as alterations to existing landmarks and structures in historic and conservation districts. The commission meets two Mondays each month.

Members of the Historic Landmarks Commission serve four-year terms, which can be renewed. There are seven commissioners, none of whom can concurrently hold positions of elected office.

Applications must be submitted with a cover letter and resume to the Office of Community and Civic Life by Friday, Aug. 16. People can learn more about the commission by contacting Hillary Adam at 503-823-4519, or hillary.adam@portlandoregon.gov.

The post Historic Landmarks Commission seeking new member appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

The Portland Bureau of Planning and Sustainability is looking to tighten a historic zoning designation around the Police Block downtown.

Reducing the area would allow the proposed Toyoko Inn project to proceed through design review before the Portland Design Commission, rather than the Historic Landmarks Commission, according to BPS.

A boundary reduction would require the Historic Landmarks Commission’s approval. The request is slated for the commission’s June 10 agenda.

The Police Block consists of three buildings that were constructed between 1912 and 1955. Additions were built in 1944 and 1955. All three buildings were vacated by the city in 1984 after the completion of the Justice Center.

The block is bounded by Southwest Oak and Pine streets and Second and Third avenues. The proposed boundary adjustment pertains to the property at 209 S.W. Oak St., which is owned by Menashe Properties through a limited liability company.

Menashe Properties principal Jordan Menashe said he opposes the boundary change.

“Why should our city be punished by losing a historic block for a 2.5-star Toyoko Inn?” he said.

The Japanese hotel chain last year revealed preliminary plans to build a 19-story business hotel with 120,000 square feet and 486 guest rooms. The proposal has not entered the design review process. In October, Toyoko Inn requested a complex zoning analysis from the city to check on zoning rules at the site in a possible prelude to development.

The city decided to pursue a boundary reduction to reflect changes to the historic nature of the block over time, said Brandon Spencer-Hartle, historic resources program manager for BPS. “T��� character of the rest of the block has been altered beyond recognition from what it was during the historic period,” he said.

The request for the boundary change was not prompted by Toyoko Inn or any other party, Spencer-Hartle said.

Toyoko Inn purchased the quarter-block property at the southwest corner of the block from the Portland Development Commission (now Prosper Portland) for a little more than $1 million in September 2016.

The post Historic property’s boundary could change appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

The Historic Landmarks Commission has approved a design for the Rothko Pavilion – an ambitious, $70 million to $75 million renovation and expansion of the Portland Art Museum.

The museum’s staff and supporters are raising money for the project, which is meant to enhance the institution’s ability to attract world-class artwork, improve accessibility and show off the museum’s art – even to passing pedestrians.

“Our goal is to be part of the fabric of the city, interwoven, and reflective of the community,” said Brian Ferriso, director of the Portland Art Museum.

Approval of the design by Chicago’s Vinci | Hamp Architects and Portland’s Hennebery Eddy Architects came via a 4-0 vote on Monday. The design centers on a four-story glass box bridging the museum’s Belluschi and Mark buildings.

The Historic Landmarks Commission spent much of Monday’s meeting discussing plans for the museum’s exterior, including a plaza with planters and textured walkways. Commissioners questioned the placement of bollards – structural barriers that will prevent vehicles access – but eventually acceded to them for security reasons.

“If it’s a safety feature, then it’s fine to keep them where they are,” Commissioner Maya Foty said.

Perhaps the Rothko Pavilion’s most remarkable feature will be a glass passageway between the two buildings. Pedestrians will be able to peer into curated spaces in both buildings. The passageway will have a clear height of 11 feet, with widths of 16 feet on the west side and 15 feet on the east side.

Historically, an easement has ensured public access between the two buildings. City staff assured commissioners that a deal previously approved by the City Council will continue to guarantee access.

The design sought to solve a decades-old problem for the museum: how to link the Belluschi building, completed in 1932, with the Mark building (a former Masonic temple), erected in 1927. Museum officials have said visitors are often confused about how to navigate the buildings.

Anthony Belluschi, a son of the original architect, Pietro Belluschi, who died in 1994, weighed in on the project.

“I am quite sure that my father would approve of this new plan,” said Anthony Belluschi, who is also an architect.

The design includes a revolving door on the east side’s ground floor, replacing two smaller revolving doors in earlier versions.

The project involves removing a small amount of brick masonry where the glass box bridges the buildings. The material dates to a 2005 remodel.

“We’re not removing virgin material,” said Philip Hamp, president of Vinci | Hamp Architects.

Public comment focused on potential traffic impacts. The city of Portland’s Central City in Motion plan calls for turning Jefferson Street into a one-lane street. Commissioners said that city initiative is not within the purview of their Rothko Pavilion review, but downtown residents still took the opportunity to question the move.

Disability advocates praised the design.

“T���y have been very receptive to our feedback,” said Philip Wolfe, a member of the Portland Commission on Disability.

The project, first announced in 2016, was the subject of three design advice hearings before it proceeded to design review. Opponents have 14 days to appeal the Historic Landmarks Commission’s approval, but no serious organized opposition was evident at Monday’s meeting.

“It’s a good process,” Ferriso said after the vote. “We’re very pleased.”

Ferriso declined to specify when construction would begin, saying it depends on fundraising. The Rothko Pavilion fundraising drive began with an $8 million anonymous donation and a $5 million donation from the Schnitzer family.

The project team also includes Mortenson Construction, Walker Macy, Andrea Cochran Landscape Architecture and Urban Resources Inc.

The post Portland Art Museum pavilion project OK’d appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

PAE Living Building, a planned five-story structure in the Skidmore/Old Town Historic District, could become the first in Portland to be certified as a living building.

The Historic Landmarks Commission on Monday provided design advice for the project team, which is being led by PAE Consulting Engineers and ZGF Architects. Commissioners in attendance, a bare quorum of four, questioned some of the design details, but ultimately supported the concept and urged the applicants to submit a formal proposal for design review.

“If you’re able to do this, I think it will do wonders from a historic preservation perspective on what can be done,” Commission Chair Kristen Minor told the applicants at the conclusion of the hearing. “We need some positive examples of progressive architecture in historic districts.”

The project team also includes developer Gerding Edlen and general contractor Walsh Construction. Plans call for constructing a 58,700-square-foot cross-laminated timber building on a roughly quarter-block property, owned by Downtown Development Group, at the northwest corner of the intersection of Southwest First Avenue and Pine Street. Currently, it’s a surface parking – adjacent to the historic Carriage & Baggage Building holding the Pine Street Market.

The building would hold ground-floor retail space along the frontages of Southwest First Avenue and Pine Street, along with an entrance to office space. The latter would include a bike hub with storage, showers, restrooms and lockers, along with mechanical and electrical systems.

The second through fifth floors would contain office space; two of those floors would host new headquarters for PAE Consulting Engineers. Overall, the structure would be 75 feet tall – the maximum height allowed in the historic district. A glass fiber reinforced concrete facade would be used on the ground floor and different shades of brick on the top four floors.

To earn Living Building Challenge certification, the building would need to show over at least a year that it produces more energy and water than it consumes, and much more. The project team’s target is for 105 percent of the building’s annual energy needs to be produced on-site from solar sources. Meanwhile, to achieve net zero water, stormwater, and wastewater use, the team plans to employ a 50,000-gallon cistern, composting toilets, and urine diversion for fertilizer generation.

PAE President Paul Schwer likened Living Building Challenge certification to “LEED platinum on steroids.”

“We have 200 staff that can’t wait to move into this building,” he said. “We think it’s an important project for the city; it will be the largest living building in the world, and also the first that’s a replicable project. We will live just off the water that lands on the roof of the building, as we’re trying to close the ecological loop with this building in a really significant way.”

On top of meeting the seven Living Building Challenge “petals,” the team was tasked with the challenge of designing a building complementary with others in Portland’s most well-known historic district.

ZGF Architects principal Justin Brooks told commissioners the building is modeled after the 19th century Italianate style found throughout Old Town, particularly in its cast iron buildings built more than a century ago.

“We really think it’s important that the building responds to that context, with the street wall along First (Avenue),” Brooks said. “It’s a key defining characteristic of the district.”

There are at least two sticking points, however, that will need to be resolved before design approval is given. The first is a city requirement in the Central City to include at least two Type A loading docks for new commercial buildings; the second is another city requirement to provide at least three feet of dedication from the building frontage on Southwest First Avenue. The applicants have requested modifications to those requirements, which they say are incongruent with historic district standards and could threaten the project’s viability.

“We think it’s problematic,” said Kathy Berg, a ZGF partner. “It reduces active ground-floor use, and second, they are not historically done in this district.”

Editor’s Note: The story was edited to properly attribute a quote to commission chair Kristen Minor.

The post Proposal for living building in Old Town draws praise appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.