Apartment Designs

[ita]

I think this is an interesting issue that comes up whenever an urban apartment project is announced/discovered. Generally, the feeling is that the big box apartment complexes are all too same-y and lack the design elements that lend to architectural character. We see a lot lacking much dimension, using the same color palette or facade finishes. While there are building code issues at play as well as investors wanting to maximize their pennies, it seems like many apartment building lack imagination. I appreciate that apartment buildings should be more utilitarian in design, otherwise fancy finishes, architecture or design substantially increase project costs which leads to higher rents. Also, there are some recent buildings in Omaha that are more appealing than others. While not an architect or designer myself, but interested in this topic, I thought we could start a thread about this. So, for some guiding questions, starting on a positive note, are there recent or projected low/mid-rise apartment buildings in Omaha you find appealing? What do you like about it? What are some examples outside of Omaha you would like to see more of here? What do you think would help these apartments standout? Courtyards, pedestrian through ways, adjacent mixed housing types, more balconies, new finishes/colors?

For myself, I like the recently revealed rendering for the apartment project in the Flatiron District. While it's hard to tell what the exterior finishes and colors will end up being, Iike the dimension lent by the recessed and projected patios, the incorporation of the pedestrian walkway through the development, and plaza. It looks like a great use of the space and should look great with the existing building in that block.

[ricko]

I agree. I don't think to takes much to make a commercial building, apartment/condo building, or subdivision attractive. Look what a minor color design change did for the formerly monochromatic old Kiewit/Berkshire Hathaway HQ. The Mid-West's endless miles of beige/grey suburbs are depressing, not to mention a lack of imagination in design.

[Dusty]

I have been seeing a lot of complaints lately about all the new apartments look big, boxy, and boring. I get it!
Aesthetics are in the eye of the beholder. Love it, hate it, or somewhere in between.

It's not always the developers fault. They have the work within the laws the planning department sets. If we want a variety of styles, designs, and options then we have to change the code.

Two main things I see that would open up a whole new world for Omaha.

1. Eliminating parking minimums. It eats up cost and space for the developer. It's up to them to decide how much parking feels right. If they want zero parking on a lot near a transit line, then it's their choice.

2. Allowing single point stairwells. Also known as Point Access Blocks. North American cities have strict laws that require 2 stairwells in every apartment complex. This is giving you the big and boxy feel. In the early 1900's they passed this for fire safety. Construction materials have come a long way since the 1900's Seattle is the only US city that has repealed this law. Single point builds the stairs in the center and on smaller lots. I would like to see anything 5-6 stories or less would be allowed a single stairwell.

Here is a great video that explains it all.

[TitosBuritoBarn]

One of the first commenters on that video notes that Chicago has been building new 3-flat and 4-flat apartments that adhere to the two stair case rule by placing one of the two required staircases on the exterior in the back.

The city has been building these in high numbers:



The backs look like this, with the staircases often doubling as porches on each floor:

https://maps.app.goo.gl/TLYtzFfrR9A2LA8P7

[Dusty]

Yes, I did notice that comment. Chicago found a way around the 2 stairwell rule. If we can't change our laws, then follow suit by putting the second stairwell on the outside of the building.

I love all the different character and variety this would bring!

[Garrett]

Yeah the back staircases are a huge thing in Chicago and give apartments a nice degree of semi private outdoor space. I really miss having them in nyc.

[Busguy2010]

I think it would be cool to reincorporate fire escapes into our designs. I think they look nice. But I think there's several reasons why we don't see them anymore. In winter they'd get covered in ice and I think modern Americans are too fat and clumsy and afraid of heights to navigate them effectively. I don't even know if the older buildings that have them know if they're functional still? Are they inspected? Do the windows function? Do they stick shut? Do people that live in them even know to use them? I loled when I saw a story on "how to decorate your fire escape". It turns out only the person at the very bottom has room to truly enjoy them as a "patio", and they put a bunch of furniture and plants out, blocking the ladder and messing up the flow. I'd be madder than heck if I had to escape a fire and ran into a barricade of a chaise lounge and coffee table. I'd kindly throw them to the ground.

[Garrett]

The Chicago examples are back porches, not fire escapes. Legally fire escapes can’t have anything on them, to my understanding.

[Dusty]

Do you feel we need to update the criteria Omaha by Design uses? Are we getting all these bland and boring designs from a checklist developers must follow by them?

I just found this video about a whole city in Guatemala that was built from scratch. Aesthetics and walkability was a high priority. Wow! This city is amazing! Do we need to raise our standards on architecture beauty? I know beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but still! I think Omaha can try a little harder.

[Garrett]

So Cayalá is lovely, but it’s also built for only the wealthiest of Guatemalans. The cheapest rents in Cayalá are 70 times the average Guatemalan income. Is a development like this possible in the states? Sure. But for who? And on a mass scale? I have my doubts.

[Dusty]

So Cayalá is lovely, but it’s also built for only the wealthiest of Guatemalans. The cheapest rents in Cayalá are 70 times the average Guatemalan income. Is a development like this possible in the states? Sure. But for who? And on a mass scale? I have my doubts.

I am not saying we are building a mini city for the wealthy like Cayalá. What I like is they made aesthetics important and didn't water down the design even if that meant taking longer to build. Can we apply some of those design standards when we build our apartments or infill developments?

Which brings me back to my original thought. Have developers given up on aesthetics or are they restricted to a few different layouts that Omaha by Design lets them build? Don't you find it odd all the apartments look similar regardless of the developer? Maybe it's our own fault by limiting the options developers are allowed to use.

[Brad]

Funny seeing complaints about the "Boxy Buildings". People that have been around this forum for a long time will remember when members complained if it wasn't a modern box, calling it "Disneyland Architecture". LOL. We have now come full circle.

I think a lot of the renderings we look at here on the forum look the same and some are boring. A lot of those renderings come from planning board documents and they are "good enough" to get approve. However, when I go around town and view the finished product in person, they almost always have more character and interest. Viewing things on a computer (Or way worse, your phone) just doesn't have the same effect as standing in front of a finished building. I think there are things we could improve in this city, but I wouldn't put urban apartment design on the top of that list.

[Athomsfere]

I'm with Brad.

I have my gripes with 5 over 1 construction. But I'm glad we are getting them.

I couple of things even I have to keep in mind sometimes though:

1. Taste changes. We might not love them today, but how we feel about them now has very little to do with how we might see them in 80 years. Even the beloved Brownstones of the NE were often hated for looking bland, all the same, and "mass produced". Not that everything old is good, or worth keeping. It is just that we won't know how these are viewed until most of us are long gone.

2. Architecture as it pertains to housing should be built for one thing above all else: Housing people safely. And these designs are bringing housing and services where they are needed. Even if I don't love one of these new boxes: It is adding housing AND density. That's an overall win. Anything more is just gravy. In the meantime, fervent YIMBYism is going to help keep the city affordable for more people as long as we keep building what we can, as much as we can.

3. The reason these are going everywhere is because they are relatively cheap. The "Type 5" materials in 5 over 1 are relatively cheap compared to concrete, steel, or bricks. If we required anything more we might see developments shrink, or not be built at all. If that doesn't seem so bad, re-read point 2.

4. Perfect is the enemy of good. We can argue setbacks, parking minimums, designing for buildings to look good from the freeway, zoning, transit etc. etc. etc. are the true problem and we should address those instead. And I'd say each of those is true, and hold merit. But we absolutely shouldn't hold building new, vital housing, hostage over such disparate topics. We should champion solutions every chance we get, yes. But not block a good housing project because it isn't pretty enough.

My final sort of thought is that what I find potentially the biggest flaw with 5/1 is possibly a great advantage in the long run. The longevity of the cheaper type 5 materials might solve the short term goals of adding density, and add enough demand so that when their functional lives start to end it only makes sense to add more interesting on those lots someday with even more density.

[Louie]

Thank you for posting that, Athomsfere.

[Dusty]

My big push is just to allow variety. Everyone likes different styles and looks. No matter what you build you will have someone complain that they don't like it. Developers will naturally follow what is trending, which right now is boxy style. Tomorrow it could be Seaside/Coastal themed. Next decade could be Tuscan or Spanish inspired. Who knows?

In a way the boxy style is a bit of a blank canvas. You can always add more details/style later. Not saying it's on the level of a Mr. Potato Head where you can swap out parts. Although, that would be an interesting concept! What? Corrugated metal is out of fashion? Let me remove that panel and swap it with my fake shutter look. LOL!

For me getting more housing options is more important than aesthetics right now. Omaha is really missing that middle housing option. You can buy a single family house with a sprawling yard or rent an apartment. There is very little in the middle. This is why I mentioned changing laws for setbacks, parking minimums, double stairwell, etc. This would encourage smaller infill projects to help accelerate density growth and drive down house prices. More rowhouses, condos, multi-units. I would love to buy a 3 story flat. Live in 2 floors and rent out 1 floor as an apartment to help pay for the mortgage. Unfortunately, you really won't find a lot of those options in Omaha.

[Athomsfere]

For me getting more housing options is more important than aesthetics right now. Omaha is really missing that middle housing option. You can buy a single family house with a sprawling yard or rent an apartment. There is very little in the middle. This is why I mentioned changing laws for setbacks, parking minimums, double stairwell, etc. This would encourage smaller infill projects to help accelerate density growth and drive down house prices. More rowhouses, condos, multi-units. I would love to buy a 3 story flat. Live in 2 floors and rent out 1 floor as an apartment to help pay for the mortgage. Unfortunately, you really won't find a lot of those options in Omaha.

On missing middle, I find myself wondering how to really bring it back myself. Those 2-8 unit buildings.

Honestly, I don't think we will see a return to those in meaningful form. Its so difficult to find even just the land IMO at a price that building anything for a couple units is hard. Everything you mentioned makes it much harder of course...

[Dusty]

I have noticed that most of the new apartments in Omaha focus on studio and 1 bedroom units. I thought people viewed studios as a dying trend? It's not like you are saving a ton of money by choosing a studio. Wow! A whopping $50-100 savings!

Plus, 2-3 bedrooms account for 20 % or less. This is preventing a lot of families from moving here. The house inventory is very low to pick from. If you can't find a house right away, then you scrambling to find available apartment.

[Omaha Cowboy]

Funny seeing complaints about the "Boxy Buildings". People that have been around this forum for a long time will remember when members complained if it wasn't a modern box, calling it "Disneyland Architecture". LOL. We have now come full circle.

I think a lot of the renderings we look at here on the forum look the same and some are boring. A lot of those renderings come from planning board documents and they are "good enough" to get approve. However, when I go around town and view the finished product in person, they almost always have more character and interest. Viewing things on a computer (Or way worse, your phone) just doesn't have the same effect as standing in front of a finished building. I think there are things we could improve in this city, but I wouldn't put urban apartment design on the top of that list.

Definitely have come full circle from the forum “Disneyland” days..

Right on!…

Ciao..LiO…Peace

[S.O.Boy]

This video explains why we have big apartment buildings now.

[legato9]

This video explains why we have big apartment buildings now.

That video was super interesting, and it makes perfect sense. Really glad you shared that. Thanks!

[Renovator2559]

Wow, I commend all of you that posted these great videos, which I came across a few months ago. I was thinking of sharing these videos in the future but it looks like we have a good discussion being carried out on things that have been overlooked in modern times.

I just found this video about a whole city in Guatemala that was built from scratch. Aesthetics and walkability was a high priority. Wow! This city is amazing! Do we need to raise our standards on architecture beauty? I know beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but still! I think Omaha can try a little harder.

Honestly, the city of Cayala demonstrates how there is a hunger for aesthetics and the preservation of local culture and tradition; while introducing modern refinement. I love how the city of Cayala, respects the local Guatemalan culture, while creating desirable architecture that is not soulless and boring.

So Cayalá is lovely, but it’s also built for only the wealthiest of Guatemalans. The cheapest rents in Cayalá are 70 times the average Guatemalan income. Is a development like this possible in the states? Sure. But for who? And on a mass scale? I have my doubts.

Although Cayala is built for wealthy tenants. Cayala is an open society and Cayala is teaming with people of any economic stance, in the public space.
Since the streets are walkable, low economic stance people are able to conduct business in the public space; via selling stands and talent.

Unlike gated communities, the City of Cayala; has something for everyone. We need more developments like this in which developers value the health of the community, over making a quick profit.




Apparently it is "far right" to suggest or even demand more aesthetically pleasing architecture that is not ugly and respects the local customs and culture. There is the "Architectural Revival" movement brewing in many European countries, in which soulless modern architecture is being rejected; in favor of traditional architecture that preserves their local identity and culture.

"Today, this traditionalist tendency is gaining renewed momentum in various corners of the European Right. In the Netherlands, far-right nationalist politician Thierry Baudet frequently derides the “ugly architecture” that is, in his mind, corrupting Dutch society. And in Germany, the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) party has spawned a movement of revivalist architecture by individual practitioners obsessed with Saxon mythology and pitted ideologically against the metropolitan built environment. Amid the rising tide of populism in Europe"

https://failedarchitecture.com/the-far- ... hitecture/



"A beautiful row of Georgian townhouses in London. At the end of the row, one of these houses burnt down and was then demolished. It was later replaced with a 1970’s ‘Modernist’ style of apartment block which does not integrate well into its surroundings. In recent years, this too was demolished and the streetline was restored to its former glory by rebuilding what was originally there in its traditional Georgian style. This is what is known as the ‘Architectural Revival’ movement…."

A Nordic revolt against ugly modern architecture in social media called "Architectural Uprising"; has led developers to go back to the drawing board, because the locals stood up for their values in demanding traditional architecture.





This early proposal for Sandakerveien 58 B/C in Oslo was rejected by local authorities in 2014.Courtesy of MAD Arkitektur



The revised building boasts a far more traditional look.Courtesy of MAD Arkitektur





​An early rendering for Risørholmen, a residential development on a tiny island near the town of Risør in southern Norway.Courtesy of Kritt Arkitekter



The developers changed architects and chose a more traditional coastal design for Risørholmen.Courtesy of Backe Prosjekt AS




While architects Kleihues + Schuwerk sought a timeless design for Norway’s National Museum of Art in Oslo, the Architectural Uprising named it the ugliest building of the year in 2022.Photographer: Per Ole Hagen/Getty Images Europe



Oslo’s Munch Museum, designed by Estudio Herreros, won the title of Norway’s ugliest building by popular vote upon its completion in 2021.​Photo by Sebastian Kahnert/picture alliance via Getty Images

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features ... chitecture



While we can be "content" in just getting any building, even if the architecture is ugly. We must remember that residents and visitors alike will have to see the good or bad architecture day to day as time goes and make a judgement on how well Omaha is put together.

I think the Brickline, downtown library and the Moxy Hotel are very promising examples of our own local architecture revival brewing. Since these buildings preserve the local aesthetic of the Old Market, while introducing modern refinement.

This video explains why we have big apartment buildings now.

Another great video! Honestly getting rid of the need of 2 staircases once a building is higher than 3 floors would be a good thing. The mandatory 2 staircase requirement is an impediment of implementing our missing middle housing. Which also allows developers to build according to 1 lot and not having to buy multiple lots to build a mega apartment complex.

Europeans have demonstrated that the single staircase has not affected their safety when it comes to fires.
We have much more benefits to gain, if we repeal this 2 staircase requirement.

[TitosBuritoBarn]

VOX recently dropped a video that touches a bit more on why apartment designs aren't great and also how the perception of the design may change over time (as well as explains some misconceptions about displacement and gentrification)

[Athomsfere]

VOX recently dropped a video that touches a bit more on why apartment designs aren't great and also how the perception of the design may change over time (as well as explains some misconceptions about displacement and gentrification)

This sounds so familiar in tone

[Dusty]

I feel like we have summed up many of the issues. It really comes down to a few planning codes. Bringing back the missing middle will help with apartment variety and affordability. Should we phase out Single family zones like Minneapolis did? Make our neighborhoods a blend of single family, townhouses, small apartments, multi-units, etc?

The About Here group that did that "Boxy Apartments" video above did another one on the missing middle. It proves you can build small apartments and multi-units that blend in nicely with single family homes.

[Renovator2559]

Chris Cuomo had this interview with Tucker Carlson a few days ago. This clip only covers the discussion on architecture. Some great points were made on Brutalism, beauty and how these tenants shape society, some good points raised by legato8 on the other Aksarben thread. Tucker's language can be abrasive at times and the delivery could be tweaked but the ideas on architecture are the same ideas that are arising in "Architectural Uprisings" happening all over Europe and America and the emphasis on building beautiful buildings and not soulless, over-imposing buildings.

[Athomsfere]

If Tucker Carlson said it: It's probably wrong. What a wanker.

[Renovator2559]

If Tucker Carlson said it: It's probably wrong. What a wanker.

I really don't see how throwing insults at someone making a valid argument help to make your points credible. He made valid points, that our cities have been plagued with uglification, leading to a nihilistic and down right the crushing of the human spirit. Even fashion shows have become uglified and a joke.

This is apparent on what they did to St Louis, they got rid of beautiful buildings and in place created modern boxes, leading to the decline of that neighborhood and a rise in crime.We discussed this in the St Louis thread.

Whether you agree or disagree with Carlson in this matter, this is the same case that the Architectual Uprising is making, that is spreading all over Europe and in the US. People are realizing how beautiful architecture uplifts the human spirit and are finally coming to their senses in rejecting ugly buildings.


The Aesthetic City, a very high quality channel. Presents on what is Traditional Urbanism and Traditional Architecture. Also detailed here, is as to why we should implement beauty and how the majority of people yearn for traditional architecture. This also details several cities around the world that have been recently been constructed with Traditional urbanism and traditional architecture.

There are nice modern buildings but a lot of them are bland and dull.



"Tradition is the sum of successful innovations"

[legato9]

Of all the eleventeen bazillion people who could credibly be quoted about architecture, someone decided to go with Tucker Carlson.

“Hey guys, here’s Hitler giving a lecture on algebra! B-b-b-ut….he’s right!”

My god.

[Renovator2559]

Many sources I mentioned and quoted first, it just happened as this discussion occurred, that at the same time this interview by Andrew Cuomo was held.

Let's not devolve into compromised, controlled opposition, Reddit and detract from the overall message of this thread.

Introducing more beauty, into our cities and identifying architecture that either lifts the human spirit or demoralizes the human spirit.

[thenewguy]

i do wish we had the ability to come up with more unique design aspects. It seems like all apartments kind of start to blend together in the US. I think that European architecture is great, but to replicate that here/now is cost prohibitive and developers aren't in it for the art: they are in it for the money. I think the United States is capable of the best 'anything' but that would mean people would pay out the |expletive| for it, and that means they won't do it.

[Athomsfere]

Tucker Carlson: He isn't an expert in this topic, he isn't great at getting to the root of an issue or really showing any degree of logic.

His entire schtick is drumming up new fear mongering tactics, packaging it, and selling it.

He's the antithesis of a good critic or source, and a danger to us all. I won't click a thing with his name attached to it in any way, in fear that he might get a fraction of a cent from me.

If that dumpster fire Carlson some how accidently made a good point, I don't actually care. We have a million better sources, including just plain dumb luck.


All that said, I think we'd all like to see more "cool" things built again. But it isn't worth the loss of catching housing stock up, over-legislation and trying to control the wrong things is what hurt us here in the first place.

[Renovator2559]

i do wish we had the ability to come up with more unique design aspects. It seems like all apartments kind of start to blend together in the US. I think that European architecture is great, but to replicate that here/now is cost prohibitive and developers aren't in it for the art: they are in it for the money. I think the United States is capable of the best 'anything' but that would mean people would pay out the |expletive| for it, and that means they won't do it.

Appreciate your mature comment and staying on topic.
I would say that our old American architecture is like European.

Our Architecture schools over the years intentionally discouraged the use of traditional techniques and pushed the idea that an architect should create a building that makes a statement of that individual architecture, despite the building not harmonizing well with the surrounding buildings or the locals not liking these "unique" buildings (a more selfish way of thinking).
Yet ironically, these architects choose to live in traditional architecture buildings.

And yes, when it comes to many developers these days, they just want to make a quick profit (greed), without thinking how an ugly building will affect the locals that have to interact day by day.

Sure modern buildings may be cheaper but they don't last as long, which then they have to be demolished, creating resource waste that is bad for the environment. Traditional buildings in the other hand are resilient and last a very long time.

Of course a style built outside of its time period can be cheap. A "traditional" building doesn't have to be built the same way now as it would've been in that style's time-period. If IKEA went to make a Victorian-style table, they wouldn't hire craftsmen trained in the style to hand-build each one, they would probably break the thing into five or so prefab pieces connected by hidden screws. It would basically look the same but it would be much cheaper. Same could be done with architecture with 3d molding and prefab.

The Aesthetic City, a very high quality channel. Presents on what is Traditional Urbanism and Traditional Architecture. Also detailed here, is as to why we should implement beauty and how the majority of people yearn for traditional architecture. This also details several cities around the world that have been recently been constructed with Traditional urbanism and traditional architecture.

There are nice modern buildings but a lot of them are bland and dull.



"Tradition is the sum of successful innovations"






I think the Brickline is an example of a an apartment that embraces modern and traditional undertones, such a nice building. Whenever I look at that building, I notice the layered textures, colors, subtle decorations, the sunken inward walls and the masonry that integrates well with the nearby Old Market. This building also fixes the blandness of a continuous plain box for an apartment of that footprint. The Brickline looks like a collection of buildings into one, visually appealing.

[Dusty]

I'm seeing Omaha and many other cities going crazy building only Studio and 1 bedroom apartments. This is drastically cutting the available inventory for families looking for 2-3 bedroom options. I get the developers are trying to maximize profits while the demand is high. But what happens when the market levels off? Are we stuck with a bunch of vacant studio apartments?

I was thinking it wouldn't be that hard to merge 2 Studios into a 2 bed, 2 bath. Knock a doorway between units. One side remains the same as kitchen/living space. The other side becomes the 2 official bedrooms. Is this a plausible conversion?