Yard | 200' | 21 floors | Complete - Page 5

2oh1 · #81 Posted **Nov 20, 2013, 10:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by NESteve

A smart (and honest) developer wouldn't build this thing. Maybe it would work in the Pearl where some might pay $2,000 per month, maybe. Being a life-long eastsider (and now a renter), I find trying to capitalize on the inner eastside, under-the-bridge, grungy/edgy, skate-park, industrial, train-track "vibe" with a frigging yuppie, high-rent glass tower to be pure comedy gold. The east side used to be about regular people earning a living and being creative...pulling into the parking garage in your Audi A7, wondering if the skateboarder can get in seems so out of place for this area. Portland already has a Pearl district.

And the scale of this project...like 300 units. Really?

A smart and honest developer wouldn't build it? I can't understand that thought at all. What is dishonest about building housing in a rapidly changing neighborhood? I have no doubts that they'll be able to rent those units. Or sell them, if they're condos.

The inner east side that you knew isn't what it will be in ten years. The east side was never "about" "regular people" (whatever THAT means. Gee, Sarah Palin, who is regular?). The east side was affordable because it was less desirable than other areas. Landlords charge the maximum that they can get for their units. If they could have charged more, they would have.

Like it or not, changes are coming to inner east side. Big changes. Portland's population has grown too much for so much prime land to sit under-developed so close in to the heart of the city. It simply is not realistic to think inner east side could have stayed the same. And the idea that building this tower is somehow dumb and dishonest...? Well, it smacks of classism.

soleri · #82 Posted **Nov 20, 2013, 10:51 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2oh1

Portland's population is growing rapidly, but it's hard to compare what's going on here to what other cities are seeing because other cities don't have an urban growth boundary. Other cities sprawl out. Our urban growth boundary forces Portland to evolve inward. Our urban growth boundary makes Portland a very special city, but it also inflates prices the same way a natural boundary would, such as the water that surrounds San Francisco. Portland is growing, but we're not growing outward. I'm a firm believer that our urban growth boundary strengthens our neighborhoods, but it does push prices skyward.

Yes and no. The urban growth boundary did restrain some of the worst excesses in suburban sprawl. It's why Beaverton actually has a higher population density than Portland itself. But Portland really had little choice given its tight ring of suburbs. There was never going to be a Phoenix or Oklahoma City here gobbling up raw land for future housing pods. Portland's decision to "evolve inward" was a necessity but it was also fortuitous in the sense Portland had the good bones and urban texture in place to capitalize on its assets. The cultural shift in America wasn't just in Portland. It was happening in every city with similar assets. Crime was going down while the thirst for "urban cool" was a rising, national phenomenon. Sprawling metorplexes like Denver and Seattle were also experiencing this. Yes, Portland did many of the good-government sort of things like transit to magnify its fortune. But make no mistake: it was going to happen anyway given the character and cultural richness of the city.

bvpcvm · #83 Posted **Nov 21, 2013, 1:16 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2oh1

Portland's population is growing rapidly, but it's hard to compare what's going on here to what other cities are seeing because other cities don't have an urban growth boundary. Other cities sprawl out. Our urban growth boundary forces Portland to evolve inward. Our urban growth boundary makes Portland a very special city, but it also inflates prices the same way a natural boundary would, such as the water that surrounds San Francisco.

I don't agree with this - if the UGB were really driving prices up, we'd see rental prices up across the metro area. But the rental increases we're talking about are only happening in our world: west of 60th. Go out to Hillsboro and you can find 2-3 br places for $850. With a pool. (At least according to padmapper - I haven't checked on my own)

My own story of ridiculous rent: $600 for a 1br in Goose Hollow with huge balcony and amazing view of downtown, plus I think $50 for parking, back in 2000.

2oh1 · #84 Posted **Nov 21, 2013, 1:48 AM**

To be clear, I'm not suggesting the UGB is the only factor driving housing prices up. That'd be silly. I'm saying it is a factor, especially when you consider the changes it brought to Portland decades ago, during a time when other cities were still sprawling out and our own downtown was in decline. Those changes, decades ago, laid a foundation for what Portland would become. I think Portland would be a very different city today had the UGB never been created.

BrG · #85 Posted **Nov 25, 2013, 8:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bvpcvm

I don't agree with this - if the UGB were really driving prices up, we'd see rental prices up across the metro area. But the rental increases we're talking about are only happening in our world: west of 60th. Go out to Hillsboro and you can find 2-3 br places for $850. With a pool. (At least according to padmapper - I haven't checked on my own)

My own story of ridiculous rent: $600 for a 1br in Goose Hollow with huge balcony and amazing view of downtown, plus I think $50 for parking, back in 2000.

New construction rents are quite high out there too. Platform 14 rents for $1.80 sf to $2.30 sf. for example. No doubt 5-6% annual increases are a factor. All the new housing coming on line in Orenco will be similar.

http://units.realtydatatrust.com/Uni...8&propID=45068

The UGB is certainly a factor in all of portland metro area rents...

BrG · #86 Posted **Nov 25, 2013, 8:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2oh1

To be clear, I'm not suggesting the UGB is the only factor driving housing prices up. That'd be silly. I'm saying it is a factor, especially when you consider the changes it brought to Portland decades ago, during a time when other cities were still sprawling out and our own downtown was in decline. Those changes, decades ago, laid a foundation for what Portland would become. I think Portland would be a very different city today had the UGB never been created.

Without question.

Orlando · #87 Posted **Jun 2, 2014, 1:55 AM**

Not sure which thread to post this in or if this has already been posted. It's the most recent rendering I've seen of the Burnside Bridgehead tower/project by Skylab.

http://skylabarchitecture.com/

urbanlife · #88 Posted **Jun 2, 2014, 3:09 AM**

That skylab building is going to look stunning if it ends up being constructed just like the rendering.

As for the Apple building, I am still on the fence. The building itself is nice, the location of the building feels awkward to me. I would have preferred something that was bigger on that site. I will have to wait to see it in person, but based on the pictures it looks nice, and architecturally it looks beautiful, something the original building was not.

RainDog · #89 Posted **Jun 2, 2014, 6:18 PM**

Ha! The nude recumbent cyclist in that Skylab rendering... nice touch.

Though he does appear to be making an illegal right hand turn into oncoming traffic....

pdxpearl · #90 Posted **Jun 5, 2014, 11:36 PM**

Looks like developer expects to break ground on the 21-story tower, and its adjacent 2-3 story commercial structure, sometime in August.

http://djcoregon.com/news/2014/06/05...gehead-finale/

Derek · #91 Posted **Jun 5, 2014, 11:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by pdxpearl

Looks like developer expects to break ground on the 21-story tower, and its adjacent 2-3 story commercial structure, sometime in August.

http://djcoregon.com/news/2014/06/05...gehead-finale/

maccoinnich · #92 Posted **Jun 6, 2014, 12:11 AM**

It's in for permit. Main permit is listed as "21 story mixed use tower, 16 story tower on a 5 story podium". They've applied for a separate foundation permit, which is normally an indication that they want to get building quickly.

urbanlife · #93 Posted **Jun 9, 2014, 2:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by crow

Do you know if the building in the rendering is in for permit also, or just the tall one mentioned above.

I am not sure the stage those three buildings are currently in. But from the sounds of things, they are all three on the path to actually being built.

crow · #94 Posted **Jun 9, 2014, 4:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by urbanlife

I am not sure the stage those three buildings are currently in. But from the sounds of things, they are all three on the path to actually being built.

great news.

downtownpdx · #95 Posted **Jun 19, 2014, 11:25 PM**

Another August start announcement -- I guess this refers to the 21-story tower? Will be sooo cool to see cranes rising around East Burnside of all places

NOT something I ever saw as a possibility several years ago. So awesome to see the central eastside take off.

Burnside bridgehead project poised to start

By: Jeff McDonald in Real Estate and Development June 19, 2014 1:58 pm

Quote:

Construction of a $60 million, mixed-use tower at the Burnside bridgehead will begin in August, now that Block 67 LLC has closed on a $1.5 million land purchase.

Read more: http://djcoregon.com/news/2014/06/19...#ixzz3588p6R5z

philopdx · #96 Posted **Jun 20, 2014, 3:39 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by downtownpdx

Another August start announcement -- I guess this refers to the 21-story tower? Will be sooo cool to see cranes rising around East Burnside of all places

NOT something I ever saw as a possibility several years ago. So awesome to see the central eastside take off.

Burnside bridgehead project poised to start

By: Jeff McDonald in Real Estate and Development June 19, 2014 1:58 pm

Read more: http://djcoregon.com/news/2014/06/19...#ixzz3588p6R5z

Good news. Things are happening so fast now. Hope the boom lasts a little while before Macaulay Culkin's Home Alone face inevitably kicks in.

maccoinnich · #97 Posted **Jun 20, 2014, 5:11 AM**

I was bored and poking around on Portlandmaps, and noticed that the Eastside Big Pipe goes directly under that site. There's a perpetual easement, which does allow building over it, but with a lot of restrictions about how what types of foundation system are allowed to be used. I wonder how much that complicated the design of the building.

downtownpdx · #98 Posted **Sep 11, 2014, 7:21 PM**

So great to see this moving forward at its full height, this will be such an icon on the inner eastside!

Financing secured for 21-story apartment building at Burnside Bridgehead

http://www.oregonlive.com/business/i...l#incart_river

Print Elliot Njus | enjus@oregonian.com By Elliot Njus | enjus@oregonian.com
on September 11, 2014 at 9:36 AM, updated September 11, 2014 at 9:37 AM

Quote:

The developers of a planned 21-story apartment tower at the Burnside Bridgehead have secured a $71.75 million construction loan.

The financing, arranged by real estate firm HFF, will let the project get underway for an expected 2016...

The building will include 284 apartment units in the top 16 floors. The remaining space will be used for retail, commercial space and parking, as well as amenities including a barbecue area, pet exercise area, fitness center and spa. ...

maccoinnich · #99 Posted **Sep 12, 2014, 6:49 PM**

I went to an AIA event last night where Jeff Kovel of Skylab was speaking. He described construction of the block 67 tower as "imminent".

Derek · #**100** Posted **Sep 13, 2014, 6:56 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by maccoinnich

I went to an AIA event last night where Jeff Kovel of Skylab was speaking. He described construction of the block 67 tower as "imminent".

I love all the idiots on reddit who don't even live near the city center.

"OMG it's so ugly!"
"It's too tall!"
"There's not enough parking!"
"The Eastside shouldn't have tall buildings!"