Downtown Portland News - Page 107

Schertz1 · #**2121** Posted **Feb 1, 2009, 4:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Okstate

I guess San Antonio wouldn't count under my "requirements" having a smaller metro, which the census estimates at 1.8 million currently. I never look at "city" population b/c under that definition Oklahoma City is the EXACT same size as Portland + or - a couple measly thousand.

So we have- Baltimore, San Diego, Phoenix

At least we're not the only Stumptown... i couldn't resist

The San Antonio metro is over 2 million, not 1.8.

Okstate · #**2122** Posted **Feb 2, 2009, 5:11 AM**

Emporis normally updates their populations with accordance to the Census Bureau's annual population estimates. For example, Portland's metro population IS current on emporis. The latest population estimate is for 2007, which is 1,990,000 & that is directly from the Census Bureau's website. The next population estimates will be published this March.

See updated population schedules on the census website.

http://www.census.gov/popest/topics/

Schertz1 · #**2123** Posted **Feb 2, 2009, 6:11 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Okstate

I guess San Antonio wouldn't count under my "requirements" having a smaller metro, which the census estimates at 1.8 million currently. I never look at "city" population b/c under that definition Oklahoma City is the EXACT same size as Portland + or - a couple measly thousand.

So we have- Baltimore, San Diego, Phoenix

At least we're not the only Stumptown... i couldn't resist

Quote:

Originally Posted by Okstate

Emporis normally updates their populations with accordance to the Census Bureau's annual population estimates. For example, Portland's metro population IS current on emporis. The latest population estimate is for 2007, which is 1,990,000 & that is directly from the Census Bureau's website. The next population estimates will be published this March.

See updated population schedules on the census website.

http://www.census.gov/popest/topics/

The point is your claim the San Antonio MA is 1.8 million is incorrect. It was 1.99 million almost two years ago. Being one of the fastest growing areas, you can be sure that today San Antonio is closer to 2.1 million. Also, more recent county estimates are available on the census web site. By adding the contributing county estimates, you will find the SAMA surpassed 2 million Sometime in 2007.

philopdx · #**2124** Posted **Feb 2, 2009, 7:44 AM**

They have finally poured some concrete! To think that PAW has demo'd, dug the hole, poured the mat and gotten the core to street level in the time it's taken these jokers to lay some pipe and pour two walls.

philopdx · #**2125** Posted **Feb 2, 2009, 7:47 AM**

Update 1-28-2009:

hymalaia · #**2126** Posted **Feb 2, 2009, 9:03 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by urbanlife

Well, which city would you say has a better downtown atmosphere?

I actually find the height conversation to be a bit funny since living in Portland. I once was all about taller buildings, but now, I would rather take a vibrate, active city over tall towers. Though that is not to say that I wouldnt mind having a building like the proposed 5th and Columbia up in Seattle, that is definitely one amazing looking tower and would be an awesome new tallest for the city.

heh, there is no contest that Portland beats out Hartford not only for downtown atmosphere, but just about any other category you can think of for city life (not that Hartford doesn't have it's hidden gems if you know where to look). Really, New Haven, with almost no skyline to speak of, has a far more vibrant street scene than Hartford (thank Yale). I largely agree with your POV on height. In the big picture it doesn't matter all that much. What's peculiar though, is that the skyline of PDX just doesn't say much about how worthwhile a city it is. Stick it in the northeast corridor without the splendid scenery and it'd evoke a great big MEH compared with how much other urbanism is going on in that region of the country. I suppose I just haven't yet gotten over how much less densely populated the northwest is in comparison.

all the same, it would be nice if we could come up with a skyline that made Portland look like the big city it's becoming, rather than the small-medium sized city it is/once was.

Quote:

Emporis normally updates their populations with accordance to the Census Bureau's annual population estimates. For example, Portland's metro population IS current on emporis. The latest population estimate is for 2007, which is 1,990,000 & that is directly from the Census Bureau's website. The next population estimates will be published this March.

See updated population schedules on the census website.

for what it's worth, I'm pretty sure the census has stopped including Salem in the metro populations, even though it probably should.

65MAX · #**2127** Posted **Feb 2, 2009, 11:19 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by hymalaia

for what it's worth, I'm pretty sure the census has stopped including Salem in the metro populations, even though it probably should.

You're absolutely right. Salem was counted with Portland in 2000. Sometime after Bush stole the first election, they stripped Salem away because they changed their counting methods. This also affected Cleveland and a couple of other (very blue) cities. The result is Portland's metro population is under-represented.

As of July 1, 2007 (the last estimates reported), Portland's and Salem's totals were 2,175,113 and 386,714 respectively, or 2,561,827 total. The annual increase from the previous year was 49,000 and the gain gets larger every year. By July 1, 2008, it should be about 2.61 million. And by the 2010 Census, we should be well over 2.7 million.

PDX City-State · #**2128** Posted **Feb 2, 2009, 8:25 PM**

I don't feel like this is too important. Height is nice, but density is what's more important. I'd rather have ten blocks of 75 footers than one 750 footer. It's better for everyone.

rsbear · #**2129** Posted **Feb 2, 2009, 8:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by PDX City-State

I don't feel like this is too important. Height is nice, but density is what's more important. I'd rather have ten blocks of 75 footers than one 750 footer. It's better for everyone.

Agreed. And great street-level design is vital, too. I'll take a modestly tall Fox Tower over the fortress-like taller towers in many downtowns around the country.

Tykendo · #**2130** Posted **Feb 2, 2009, 10:24 PM**

A tall buiding can have a great street presence as well with a combination of retail and gardens that form a great welcoming plaza. Portland doesn't need to keep up with the Jones'es, but i don't think, thinging outside the Portland box when it comes to height is a bad deal either. The Morrison Tower was a cool design and it got canned in favor of the Odeous Tower.

Tykendo · #**2131** Posted **Feb 2, 2009, 10:32 PM**

I wish They would have added color to the bland design. It looks like a 50's government building. And the smallish windows give it a college dorm appearance.

hymalaia · #**2132** Posted **Feb 3, 2009, 8:29 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by rsbear

Agreed. And great street-level design is vital, too. I'll take a modestly tall Fox Tower over the fortress-like taller towers in many downtowns around the country.

I'm a fan of the Fox Tower as well. Height can be nicely done, but it's not necessary. Density is far more important than height and a cluster of 20-30 floor buildings can get that job done just as well as a 70+. The real scrooge on downtown Portland, IMO, is the excess space devoted to surface lots and parking garages. The latter can be decently concealed (to an extent) but there is no excuse for the former.

Interesting info on Salem not being counted (does this really help Bush?). So I guess for all intensive purposes, the PDX metro inches closer and closer to 3 million...

Okstate · #**2133** Posted **Feb 3, 2009, 8:38 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schertz1

The point is your claim the San Antonio MA is 1.8 million is incorrect.

Did you not read my comment?

I drew upon info from emporis, which is normally updated...in this case it wasn't. That's why I corrected the estimate to 1.9 million (the latest figures the census has).

Okstate · #**2134** Posted **Feb 3, 2009, 8:41 AM**

^ I'm glad its not the other way around though at least.

Okstate · #**2135** Posted **Feb 3, 2009, 8:43 AM**

How close till TO?

twofiftyfive · #**2136** Posted **Feb 3, 2009, 3:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Okstate

^ I'm glad its not the other way around though at least.

Why? I expect to get more use from the new park than from the new Niketown.

mmeade · #**2137** Posted **Feb 3, 2009, 5:15 PM**

I can already see the starts of stains on the concrete. North facing white panels of concrete in this environment are a bit of a bad idea unless you feel like cleaning your building annually. I bet that within a couple of years there will be dark black streaks running from the windows on this facade. It's a shame, but it's really why you don't see too many white buildings in this climate with large flat porous panels.

pylon · #**2138** Posted **Feb 3, 2009, 5:56 PM**

A nice/imaginative paint job on the bridge, noise abatement technologies, and more trees between the esplanade and the I-5 might help provide temporary relief until a tunnel is built.

downtownpdx · #**2139** Posted **Feb 3, 2009, 7:53 PM**

This isn't quite the right thread for this question, but i gave up trying to find it... so .... wasn't McMenamins also planning a hotel on the corner of Park and Alder downtown? Hotel Cornelius I think? Or was it gonna be another owner? Is it still moving forward?

PDX City-State · #**2140** Posted **Feb 3, 2009, 8:26 PM**

Different owner. That was Tom Moyer, and it was going to be a business-class hotel. I have no idea what's happening with it.