ART Tower (1515 SW Morrison St) | 224' | 20 floors | Complete

[urbanlife]

Originally Posted by AdamUrbanist

The argument against inclusionary zoning was never that it would shut down all development (clearly it hasn't) but that overall it would mean less housing development (clearly it has) and that in the long run lower rates of housing production would push prices up.

I question that in the short term because so many developers tried to push through any and every building they could before the rules went in affect. In a sense, potentially flooding the market with new units. This would cause any developer to take a pause to see how this all plays out before taking any risks, thus a lower amount of new buildings being proposed.

[AdamUrbanist]

I think a lot of project that were in the pipeline sped up their timelines to get vested under the previous rules. Some of those projects may be pretty half-baked and it remains to be seen how many will actually get built. In 5 years I don't think it will be accurate to say that the impending inclusionary rules caused us to build more housing than we otherwise would have, it just caused a lot of projects to submit for permits or land use earlier than they otherwise would have.

It's also clear that the pipeline post IZ is a lot thinner than it was before. Unless something changes we will start to produce significanly fewer units on an annual basis in the near future.

[urbanlife]

Originally Posted by AdamUrbanist

I think a lot of project that were in the pipeline sped up their timelines to get vested under the previous rules. Some of those projects may be pretty half-baked and it remains to be seen how many will actually get built. In 5 years I don't think it will be accurate to say that the impending inclusionary rules caused us to build more housing than we otherwise would have, it just caused a lot of projects to submit for permits or land use earlier than they otherwise would have.

It's also clear that the pipeline post IZ is a lot thinner than it was before. Unless something changes we will start to produce significanly fewer units on an annual basis in the near future.

That is the part I am not so sure about, I think as long as demand is there, developers will continue to build and just deal with the new rules.

[AdamUrbanist]

How much inclusionary housing is suppressing development is a counter-factual that we can't measure in the real world. The best we can do is take an educated guess by comparing against the amount of development occurring in neighboring jurisdictions without IZ. It's still too soon to say what the long run effects of IZ will be, but it is clear it's having an effect in the short run.

What we know for sure from empirical evidence is that metros that have high development costs and greater degrees of uncertainty in the development process produce less housing and have higher housing costs, metros with low development costs and a predictable land use process produce more housing and have lower housing costs. The problem with IZ is not that the market won't "adjust", the problem is that "adjust" means housing will continue to get more expensive until the higher rents justify the increased cost of development. This is why economists, even very liberal economists, are extremely skeptical that IZ will actually do more good than harm for low income people.

[zilfondel]

Right, this is why its helpful for housing to be developed through funding other than taxing the thing its trying to server, housing.

Taxes on vice and sales tax would be a better funding source. Or federal sources.

[MarkDaMan]

Originally Posted by AdamUrbanist

How much inclusionary housing is suppressing development is a counter-factual that we can't measure in the real world. The best we can do is take an educated guess by comparing against the amount of development occurring in neighboring jurisdictions without IZ. It's still too soon to say what the long run effects of IZ will be, but it is clear it's having an effect in the short run.

What we know for sure from empirical evidence is that metros that have high development costs and greater degrees of uncertainty in the development process produce less housing and have higher housing costs, metros with low development costs and a predictable land use process produce more housing and have lower housing costs. The problem with IZ is not that the market won't "adjust", the problem is that "adjust" means housing will continue to get more expensive until the higher rents justify the increased cost of development. This is why economists, even very liberal economists, are extremely skeptical that IZ will actually do more good than harm for low income people.

In a capitalist society, this could also lead to higher densification in our suburbs. Not all developers want to develop 19 units at a time or face higher penalties. A 200 unit building at Beaverton Transit Center or Rockwood starts to look appealing.

[urbanlife]

Originally Posted by MarkDaMan

In a capitalist society, this could also lead to higher densification in our suburbs. Not all developers want to develop 19 units at a time or face higher penalties. A 200 unit building at Beaverton Transit Center or Rockwood starts to look appealing.

This is true, in the near future, provided the economy of the country doesn't collapse again, we could very likely see large scale developments like 200 unit complexes near transit centers, as well as a lot more small developments from small developers.

[johnliu]

For Beaverton, Vancouver, or parts of them, to develop into dense, walkable cities would be a good thing. Those cities are already growing significantly faster than Portland.

[urbanlife]

Originally Posted by johnliu

For Beaverton, Vancouver, or parts of them, to develop into dense, walkable cities would be a good thing. Those cities are already growing significantly faster than Portland.

I have always wanted to see Sunset Transit Center turn into an urban center with 10-15 story residential towers and a walkable center full of shops and restaurants.

[maccoinnich]

Posting notice (with image) and staff memo

[urbanlife]

I was gonna complain about the name of the tower, but that makes sense. 20 stories sounds good, even if it turns out to be a rather generic looking residential building.

[2oh1]

As long as it doesn't end up looking cheap, I'm for it in a big way. The design isn't exciting, but it has potential. I'm guessing that's an early rendering. If the street level is welcoming & active, and if they actually do give it a big pop of color along the top, it could be nice.

It is amazing how much potential that whole neighborhood has for growth.

[urbanlife]

Originally Posted by 2oh1

As long as it doesn't end up looking cheap, I'm for it in a big way. The design isn't exciting, but it has potential. I'm guessing that's an early rendering. If the street level is welcoming & active, and if they actually do give it a big pop of color along the top, it could be nice.

It is amazing how much potential that whole neighborhood has for growth.

It really is beginning to feel like downtown is spilling over 405 to Goose Hollow. The Pearl already feels like an extension of downtown.

[maccoinnich]

Presentation [30 MB] to the Design Commission.

[urbanlife]

I like it, nothing groundbreaking, but a good tower overall. I do feel bad for security that will constantly be kicking people out of those bum-covered spots along the sidewalk.

[tworivers]

Very curious if the Design Commission pushes back on the diagonally-recessed ground floor. Looks like generally nice work by Ankrom, though. (pinches self)

[maccoinnich]

Memo to the Design Commission in advance of DAR #2.

[johnliu]

Originally Posted by urbanlife

I like it, nothing groundbreaking, but a good tower overall. I do feel bad for security that will constantly be kicking people out of those bum-covered spots along the sidewalk.

I like the slogan: "active base and top".

At the base, the triangular recesses are going to be where smokers and homeless mix 'n mingle. "Actively". At the top, the terrace will be where eight penthouse occupants and two poodles mix 'n mingle. Probably less "actively".

[maccoinnich]

Applicant presentation [33 MB] from last week's DAR.

[DMH]

Originally Posted by maccoinnich

Applicant presentation [33 MB] from last week's DAR.

Bravo! I hope it gets built. What a breath of life for a dead block of SW Alder Street.