Density - Page 7

58rhodes · #**121** Posted **Sep 4, 2015, 7:29 PM**

I think the greatest attribute to Portland are the residential neighborhoods--they are one of the main reasons Portland gained national attention as Americas most livable city back in the 80s. I dont want to see those areas turned into super high density unless its just on the thoroughfares, if that happens Portland becomes every like other major city full of apartments.I also think that there is plenty of underdeveloped land in the core area to build mixed use and create densities of 11 to 12 thousand ppl P/sqm.
Im also not a fan of mid rise buildings because they usually become budget buildings with little or no character. I am a fan of mixed use and density in the right places and that is the core and along transit lines. I like to see structures where you can see that the developer makes a REAL commitment to the city and not just some 15 story box that was built to sell and re sell etc.

As far as a skyline goes Im not promoting that we should go nuts over a bunch of tall towers, in fact Im NOT for building over 600ft. Im not exactly convinced that we should build 343 ft in the LLoyd district either. I think 4 or 5 buildings in Downtown around 400 to 500 ft and a few more 325s in Sowa would be great for now and the near future.

urbanlife · #**122** Posted **Sep 4, 2015, 8:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by downtownpdx

^^ From my understanding there are tighter lending restrictions on condo developments like we saw 10 years ago, thanks to the financial crisis. Even Seattle doesn't have lots of condo projects going up, mostly apartments. But the preleasing of the Cosmopolitan looks healthy... so who knows maybe there'll be more on the way sooner than we think.

I have a feeling in about 10 years, maybe sooner or later, we will be hearing about renters being pushed out of their high priced newer apartments as these newer buildings get converted to condos. It is much easier to get financing for an apartment building with plans of making them condos at a later date.

urbanlife · #**123** Posted **Sep 4, 2015, 9:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 58rhodes

I think the greatest attribute to Portland are the residential neighborhoods--they are one of the main reasons Portland gained national attention as Americas most livable city back in the 80s. I dont want to see those areas turned into super high density unless its just on the thoroughfares, if that happens Portland becomes every like other major city full of apartments.I also think that there is plenty of underdeveloped land in the core area to build mixed use and create densities of 11 to 12 thousand ppl P/sqm.
Im also not a fan of mid rise buildings because they usually become budget buildings with little or no character. I am a fan of mixed use and density in the right places and that is the core and along transit lines. I like to see structures where you can see that the developer makes a REAL commitment to the city and not just some 15 story box that was built to sell and re sell etc.

As far as a skyline goes Im not promoting that we should go nuts over a bunch of tall towers, in fact Im NOT for building over 600ft. Im not exactly convinced that we should build 343 ft in the LLoyd district either. I think 4 or 5 buildings in Downtown around 400 to 500 ft and a few more 325s in Sowa would be great for now and the near future.

What's the difference between a developer building a 15 story apartment building and a 30 story apartment building? If a developer wants to go cheap, they will, regardless of the height.

What's the issue you have with a 343 ft building going up in the Lloyd District where it will be surrounded by 250 ft buildings?

As for what you would like to see in Portland, I wouldn't be surprised if we see a few new 400+ ft buildings downtown in the next 10 years, as well as a few more 325ft towers in SoWa. We are also going to keep seeing a lot of 4-10 story buildings throughout the city that will truly add to the number of units available. Which will help the city grow much better than a 60 story building will.

58rhodes · #**124** Posted **Sep 4, 2015, 9:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by urbanlife

What's the difference between a developer building a 15 story apartment building and a 30 story apartment building? If a developer wants to go cheap, they will, regardless of the height.

What's the issue you have with a 343 ft building going up in the Lloyd District where it will be surrounded by 250 ft buildings?

As for what you would like to see in Portland, I wouldn't be surprised if we see a few new 400+ ft buildings downtown in the next 10 years, as well as a few more 325ft towers in SoWa. We are also going to keep seeing a lot of 4-10 story buildings throughout the city that will truly add to the number of units available. Which will help the city grow much better than a 60 story building will.

well for starters I dont like them-ugly bulky boxy

re LLOYD --out of place

and you are right--Rental developers build dirt cheap and renters really arent the type to make long term commitments to the structure of the community.

thats about it

65MAX · #**125** Posted **Sep 4, 2015, 9:55 PM**

Real estate prices here are not quite as expensive as Seattle or other west coast cities, so there is less incentive and more risk with going taller. However, as evidenced by the 1/4 block United Way parking lot at the corner of 13th and Washington selling for a cool $4 million today, prices for developable land here are starting to skyrocket. As more sites are filled in with 6, 15, 20 story buildings, the next wave of construction (after this current wave) will almost certainly be taller. Available land will be too scarce NOT to be.

So eventually, we will get taller buildings, but in the meantime, I think it's more important to make sure we get quality infill that activates our streetscapes.

58rhodes · #**126** Posted **Sep 4, 2015, 9:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 65MAX

Real estate prices here are not quite as expensive as Seattle or other west coast cities, so there is less incentive and more risk with going taller. However, as evidenced by the 1/4 block United Way parking lot at the corner of 13th and Washington selling for a cool $4 million today, prices for developable land here are starting to skyrocket. As more sites are filled in with 6, 15, 20 story buildings, the next wave of construction (after this current wave) will almost certainly be taller. Available land will be too scarce NOT to be.

So eventually, we will get taller buildings, but in the meantime, I think it's more important to make sure we get quality infill that activates our streetscapes.

I agree for the most part, I was over on Killingsworth yesterday around 7: PM and it was pretty active --I like that especially for a residential hood

urbanlife · #**127** Posted **Sep 5, 2015, 12:09 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 65MAX

Real estate prices here are not quite as expensive as Seattle or other west coast cities, so there is less incentive and more risk with going taller. However, as evidenced by the 1/4 block United Way parking lot at the corner of 13th and Washington selling for a cool $4 million today, prices for developable land here are starting to skyrocket. As more sites are filled in with 6, 15, 20 story buildings, the next wave of construction (after this current wave) will almost certainly be taller. Available land will be too scarce NOT to be.

So eventually, we will get taller buildings, but in the meantime, I think it's more important to make sure we get quality infill that activates our streetscapes.

I am hoping we will see more half block and quarter block towers going up in city. I like how those tend to fit in better with the cityscape.

mhays · #**128** Posted **Sep 5, 2015, 12:52 AM**

Highrises can bring more density than lowrises. That's not automatically true, as some highrises have low podiums and are short and skinny, and in Portland they're apparently limited to one per block (due to geometry or by rule). But even with one, you can easily do 400-500 normal-sized units on a typical Portland block if you go large enough. Lowrises can't do that. That sort of unit count, on enough blocks, can mean a very different pedestrian count, volume of retail, etc. Often it means more commuters turn into pedestrians. Personally I love that kind of density.

A lot of factors go into whether woodframe or highrise make more sense. A big one is land cost. I don't know what's typical for Portland in the dense mixed/multifamily areas...but add another $100 or $200 per square foot and you'll see more highrises.

downtownpdx · #**129** Posted **Sep 5, 2015, 4:25 AM**

It's interesting to see different types of density, for example the densest ensus tract in Oregon is downtown around 12th & Clay where the Benson tower is. Yet it's a very quiet area and not somewhere you'd go to hang out unless running errands at safeway or something. Then you look at comparatively low density street like Hawthorne and it's alive all hours of the day. Just interesting. I'm all for the kind of high rise density we see downtown etc, but as far as creating an inviting, lively streetscape it really just comes down to having the right mix of retail, pedestrian friendly sidewalks, etc.

mhays · #**130** Posted **Sep 5, 2015, 8:29 PM**

Dense streets are often quiet. But they support the nearby walkable retail, which likes to concentrate even in the densest cities. Another 500 units has way more effect than another 200 units.

Obviously there are other factors. How much can the residents spend? Between car ownership, street design, age, etc., how inclined are they to walk to the nearby retail streets vs. driving to big box centers?

urbanlife · #**131** Posted **Sep 18, 2015, 5:24 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by downtownpdx

Very true and that's fine, I'd rather have a varied skyline than a sea of high rises and dark canyons. Anyway, back to the topic (maybe this should move to the density thread) the pearl west building looks great, and is a perfect example of the kind of low rise/high quality infill we'll hopefully see more of

Quote:

Originally Posted by 58rhodes

when is it going to vary

It already does.

Speaking of skylines, I think I forgot to post this one a while back of what the Pearl District skyline looks back in April of this year. The amount of change this skyline view will see in the next 10 years is going to be amazing.

innovativethinking · #**132** Posted **Sep 18, 2015, 9:12 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by urbanlife

It already does.

Speaking of skylines, I think I forgot to post this one a while back of what the Pearl District skyline looks back in April of this year. The amount of change this skyline view will see in the next 10 years is going to be amazing.

It won't be much changes from this view within 10 years. Maybe one more Cosmo level tower but the rest will be mainly stubby 12 story buildings if that..

urbanlife · #**133** Posted **Sep 18, 2015, 11:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by innovativethinking

It won't be much changes from this view within 10 years. Maybe one more Cosmo level tower but the rest will be mainly stubby 12 story buildings if that..

Well except for the fact that the Post Office site is in that shot, and I am expecting that to get redeveloped with several new buildings plus at least one or two tall towers in the next 10 years. The combine that with the Cosmo and maybe another building or two at similar height as the Cosmo going up, there will definitely be some changes coming.

innovativethinking · #**134** Posted **Sep 19, 2015, 1:22 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by urbanlife

Well except for the fact that the Post Office site is in that shot, and I am expecting that to get redeveloped with several new buildings plus at least one or two tall towers in the next 10 years. The combine that with the Cosmo and maybe another building or two at similar height as the Cosmo going up, there will definitely be some changes coming.

The post office site is nowhere near close to being developed. Yes, they've begun some really early perliminary work but it's still loooong ways to go. If anything let the official sale of the site be made before we can even take it serious.

urbanlife · #**135** Posted **Sep 19, 2015, 5:36 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by innovativethinking

The post office site is nowhere near close to being developed. Yes, they've begun some really early perliminary work but it's still loooong ways to go. If anything let the official sale of the site be made before we can even take it serious.

Within 10 years. It is a safe bet.