Quote:
Originally Posted by PghYinzer
That would be them…two of the four are down for now.
|
Yeah, those were always weirdly out of scale-context with the surrounding block. Looking on the historic maps, they were built between 1910 and 1923, with that parcel staying undeveloped for some reason throughout the 19th century.
Honestly, replacement with more modern infill which has more similar building heights/setbacks to the neighboring structures will make the block read better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTH
I'm losing track--what is the status of the 20 stories they were planning to put over the YWCA?
|
I don't think it's dead, officially. Last November the developer committed once again to move forward with the project.
I more didn't mention it because the discussion was about apartment towers outside of Downtown.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTH
Generally, towers are cool, but I personally think the more widespread densification of various areas is a bigger deal from a public policy perspective. So while the NIMBYism frustrates me, I think a lot of good has been done anyway.
|
There's still plenty of space for more five-over-ones in The Strip and the like. I do not anticipate many new steel residential buildings landing outside of Greater Oakland in the next five years or so. Though even there, the idiotic new zoning which bans further residential construction along Fifth/Forbes will really hurt things (North Oakland theoretically allows for further towers like One on Centre to be built, but practically speaking the FAR required requires variances to get anything constructed.
Threaded Mode