High-rise housing havens

[bobdreamz]

I grew up in North Miami a city about 8 miles north of downtown Miami. It's packed with low & midrise apartment complexes dating back to the mid 20th. century like these :

https://images1.apartments.com/i2/2Norll...ts-north-miami-fl-building-photo.jpg?p=1

https://images1.apartments.com/i2/9bAtAsD6E_ZHp1T5DinTUXgu4Ygs-Ls1OO1Xr1sqHHg/117/image.jpg

The city is 8 square miles (22 km) with a population of just over 62.000.
Most of North Miami is now a city of Haitian-Americans.

Something new planned:

https://images.search.yahoo.com/yhs/sear...for-North-Miami-Project_FT-Thumbnail.jpg

[iheartthed]

I was able to find the break out of 50+ unit counts in a different ACS housing report (B25024).

50+ unit %age of overall housing units per city, 2024 5-year estimates

40% -- Miami
34% -- Washington, D.C.
34% -- Atlanta
33% -- New York City
27% -- Seattle
24% -- Minneapolis
23% -- Denver
20% -- Houston
20% -- Chicago
20% -- San Francisco
20% -- Dallas
19% -- Boston
17% -- Austin
17% -- Los Angeles
16% -- Portland
15% -- San Diego
14% -- San Jose
14% -- Nashville
14% -- Cleveland
13% -- St. Louis
13% -- Pittsburgh
12% -- Baltimore
12% -- Cincinnati
12% -- Phoenix
12% -- Charlotte
11% -- Philadelphia
11% -- Milwaukee
9% -- Detroit
8% -- Fort Worth
8% -- San Antonio
8% -- Columbus
7% -- Las Vegas
7% -- Jacksonville
7% -- Buffalo
6% -- Memphis
6% -- Indanapolis
5% -- Oklahoma City
5% -- Louisville
4% -- El Paso


50+ unit count per city, 2024 5-year estimates

1,208,536 -- New York City
260,274 -- Chicago
258,147 -- Los Angeles
212,461 -- Houston
124,410 -- Washington, D.C.
116,568 -- Dallas
104,395 -- Seattle
91,357 -- Atlanta
89,817 -- Miami
85,114 -- Philadelphia
84,420 -- Austin
84,067 -- San Diego
83,337 -- San Francisco
81,424 -- Denver
76,900 -- Phoenix
59,415 -- Boston
50,392 -- Portland
49,643 -- San Jose
49,597 -- Minneapolis
48,595 -- San Antonio
47,573 -- Nashville
46,339 -- Charlotte
35,585 -- Baltimore
32,454 -- Columbus
30,978 -- Detroit
30,495 -- Fort Worth
29,159 -- Jacksonville
27,950 -- Milwaukee
27,453 -- Cleveland
23,324 -- Indanapolis
23,281 -- St. Louis
20,407 -- Pittsburgh
19,125 -- Cincinnati
18,700 -- Las Vegas
18,323 -- Memphis
16,315 -- Oklahoma City
15,226 -- Louisville
11,236 -- El Paso
9,252 -- Buffalo

[mhays]

That brings up the question of how many units each city (core city) has in the 20-49 category. Here's a partial list:

New York: 16%
LA: 13%
Seattle: 12%
SF: 11%
Minneapolis: 10%
Miami: 9%
Denver: 9%
Boston: 9%
DC: 8%
Dallas: 8%
Portland: 8%
Atlanta: 7%
Houston: 7%
Chicago: 7%

I imagined NYC's, Seattle's, and LA's numbers would be high. Buildings of that size are extremely common for new construction in Seattle because they can fit into one or two former house lots or single commercial lots particularly if they don't have much parking. They're also common in LA, often in the dingbat style though many of those are smaller than 20.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

I was able to find the break out of 50+ unit counts in a different ACS housing report (B25024).

50+ unit %age of overall housing units per city, 2024 5-year estimates

40% -- Miami
34% -- Washington, D.C.
34% -- Atlanta
33% -- New York City
27% -- Seattle
24% -- Minneapolis
23% -- Denver
20% -- Houston
20% -- Chicago
20% -- San Francisco
20% -- Dallas
19% -- Boston
17% -- Austin
17% -- Los Angeles
16% -- Portland
15% -- San Diego
14% -- San Jose
14% -- Nashville
14% -- Cleveland
13% -- St. Louis
13% -- Pittsburgh
12% -- Baltimore
12% -- Cincinnati
12% -- Phoenix
12% -- Charlotte
11% -- Philadelphia
11% -- Milwaukee
9% -- Detroit
8% -- Fort Worth
8% -- San Antonio
8% -- Columbus
7% -- Las Vegas
7% -- Jacksonville
7% -- Buffalo
6% -- Memphis
6% -- Indanapolis
5% -- Oklahoma City
5% -- Louisville
4% -- El Paso


50+ unit count per city, 2024 5-year estimates

1,208,536 -- New York City
260,274 -- Chicago
258,147 -- Los Angeles
212,461 -- Houston
124,410 -- Washington, D.C.
116,568 -- Dallas
104,395 -- Seattle
91,357 -- Atlanta
89,817 -- Miami
85,114 -- Philadelphia
84,420 -- Austin
84,067 -- San Diego
83,337 -- San Francisco
81,424 -- Denver
76,900 -- Phoenix
59,415 -- Boston
50,392 -- Portland
49,643 -- San Jose
49,597 -- Minneapolis
48,595 -- San Antonio
47,573 -- Nashville
46,339 -- Charlotte
35,585 -- Baltimore
32,454 -- Columbus
30,978 -- Detroit
30,495 -- Fort Worth
29,159 -- Jacksonville
27,950 -- Milwaukee
27,453 -- Cleveland
23,324 -- Indanapolis
23,281 -- St. Louis
20,407 -- Pittsburgh
19,125 -- Cincinnati
18,700 -- Las Vegas
18,323 -- Memphis
16,315 -- Oklahoma City
15,226 -- Louisville
11,236 -- El Paso
9,252 -- Buffalo

Moving the benchmark doesn’t help you… no matter where you draw the unit count boundary, the majority of units in the qualifying category are going to be low-rise.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

Moving the benchmark doesn’t help you… no matter where you draw the unit count boundary, the majority of units in the qualifying category are going to be low-rise.

Feel free to ignore the thread.

[mhays]

In Seattle, a dividing line like 250 units might leave highrises in the majority.

That said, in every major an awful lot of woodframes are well above that in unit count.

[Steely Dan]

More than anything, this thread has served to illustrate that unit count is a pretty poor proxy for "high-rise".

Additionally, a higher % of total units in higher unit count buildings does not directly indicate higher levels of functional urbanism, as demonstrated by the Atlanta and Philly comparison earlier in the thread.

And everything here is warped by the very apples to oranges aspect of using municipal limits.

[iheartthed]

Units per structure isn't a fool-proof way of measuring residential high-rises, but it seems like a fairly good proxy for it in the absence of a stats from the Census Bureau on high-rise residential structures.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Units per structure isn't a fool-proof way of measuring residential high-rises, but it seems like a fairly good proxy for it in the absence of a stats from the Census Bureau on high-rise residential structures.

I fully disagree.

Just look at DC.

[mhays]

The two have very little to do with each other, particularly in the US where it's routine to build large woodframes with hundreds of units.

The local mix will vary of course. Some jurisdictions limit woodframes more than others and highrises more than others, via land use codes, building codes, and local economics.

Sometimes there's no easy way to count something. This appears to be one of those times.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

I fully disagree.

Just look at DC.

D.C. is like the mid-rise leader of the country. The district doesn't have high-rises but it has a billion buildings in the 10 - 12 story range: https://maps.app.goo.gl/G3reXVhySU4pXv9d7

I'm a bit skeptical that there are a lot of 50+ unit residential buildings that aren't at least mid-rises.

[mhays]

How do you define "midrise"? Around four floors pretty much any city will have huge numbers of 50-unit + buildings. Two or three stories maybe not.

Seattle would have several hundred 50+ buildings in the 4-8-story range.

[Steely Dan]

^^ exactly.

And because we have zero info on how all these units in 20+ or 50+ unit buildings breakdown between highrises and midrises, that is why it's a poor proxy for "high-rise".

And then we still have the paradox of Atlanta being one of the very highest cities in the country on this svore, while simultaneously being one of the least densely populated cities in the country.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by mhays

How do you define "midrise"? Around four floors pretty much any city will have huge numbers of 50-unit + buildings. Two or three stories maybe not.

Seattle would have several hundred 50+ buildings in the 4-8-story range.

I'd consider mid-rise between roughly 8 - 20 stories.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

I fully disagree.

Just look at DC.

I agreed with you when you said this:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

There's likely a correlation between 20+ unit buildings and high-rises, but don't most worthy cities have shit-tons of 20+ unit mid-rises as well?

Local breakdowns on those proportions might very well vary.

Again, I'm not saying that it's a bulletproof metric for high-rises, but it does correlate to where people disproportionately live in multi-floor, multi-family housing structures.

[mhays]

So up to seven stories...in most US cities, most residents of 50+ buildings will be in lowrises, with a lot of variation.

[plinko]

Originally Posted by mhays

In my area it's common to build 40+ woodframe units on 5,000 square feet.

That's great. Up until recently that type of density was not allowed in most cities in California except the largest ones. Now that the state has stepped in it's getting there.

Currently working on a 40 unit building on 7,350sf in a SFD neighborhood in Santa Barbara. Pitchforks are out!

[mhays]

In fairness, most of our buildings of that size are on more like 7,000 square feet, but there are quite a few more like 5,000. Some are the zero-lot-line variety and others are the type with setbacks on all sides, depending on neighborhood.

Here's the greatest concentration of the setback type, mostly about 7,000 but some <5,000. Low or no parking tends to be part of the solution.
https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6219449,..._ep=EgoyMDI2MDgwOS4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D

[Notonfoodstamps]

Originally Posted by mhays

How do you define "midrise"? Around four floors pretty much any city will have huge numbers of 50-unit + buildings. Two or three stories maybe not.

Seattle would have several hundred 50+ buildings in the 4-8-story range.

Yeah it going to be impossible to find buildings counts in the 4-8 story range.

SSP diagrams page(s) has minimum +100' threshold on what can be submitted but you can view "all buildings" under drawing selections and its gives a pretty comprehensive list, granted the list is updated via submissions so take these numbers with a grains of salt.

List of principle US city propers with over 100 buildings over +100' tall (includes U/C)

NYC - 7,289
Chicago - 1338
LA - 628
Boston - 597
Miami - 585
Houston - 509
San Francisco / Oakland - 507 + 73
DC - 499
Honolulu - 471
Philly - 408
Denver - 348
Dallas / Fort Worth - 325 + 63
Atlanta - 323
Seattle - 294
Austin - 218
St. Louis - 213
Minneapolis / St. Paul - 211 + 61
Detroit - 197
Las Vegas - 183
Baltimore - 177
Portland - 175
San Diego - 168
Pittsburgh - 166
Nashville - 157
Kansas City - 149
Cleveland - 122
Cincinnati - 119
Milwaukee - 119
Charlotte - 113
Columbus - 101

Cites with small geographic footprints or high-rise nodes outside the city proper are going to be artificially undercounted at this height threshold.

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

I was able to find the break out of 50+ unit counts in a different ACS housing report (B25024).

50+ unit %age of overall housing units per city, 2024 5-year estimates

40% -- Miami
34% -- Washington, D.C.
34% -- Atlanta
33% -- New York City

50+ unit buildings are certainly have a greater chance of being high-rises than 20+ unit buildings, but many (most?) probably aren't, at least depending on the city. Case in point: DC's 34% rate despite having almost no residential high-rises. On the other hand, I'd wager that most of Miami's 40% or NY's 33% are in high-rises.

Originally Posted by mhays

In Seattle, a dividing line like 250 units might leave highrises in the majority.

That said, in every major an awful lot of woodframes are well above that in unit count.

I'm working on a ~300 unit, 5-storey woodframe building as we speak! That's certainly atypical though. Typical tower floorplates here have 8-10 units per floor, so you'd usually need around 30 storeys to get that unit count in a more conventional format.