Phoenix Development News (3)

[PHXFlyer11]

Originally Posted by PHX31

The City of Phoenix selected the proposal from Smith Partners, LLC for the Central Station redevelopment project.

http://phoenix.gov/webcms/groups/int...ent/112728.pdf

Not sure how to see what their proposal actually was.

HAHA. There is an email address in the document... I was thinking of trying that. I did find a Smith Partners JJP (whatever that means) that has done a ton in Phoenix, including ASU. Gotta be the same company.

[nickw252]

The parking lot behind Alexi's is fenced off and it looks like preliminary work is being done for the apartment building:



The facade of the building is also being worked on:

[Jjs5056]

Originally Posted by Freeway

Here we go with ground floor retail again... Where is the market for all of this retail. I don't think Broadstone demonstrates that there is a lot of residential demand in Midtown. How many of these proposals are actually seeing dirt moving? Two?

I'm sick of saying the same thing over and over again. I don't advocate that every residential project include retail. I have said this time and time again. However, it's urban design best practice, it's in our Urban Form for downtown, that ground levels should be appealing to a pedestrian and in several documents, it's been system that all Central Ave development have a ground level use. Between the apartments and garage, tis project is taking up a significant amount of real estate in an urban neighborhood within our central city. Given that total sq footage fronting major city streets, I think it's completely within line to expect a portion of the ground level be for public use. This is especially needed given the surface lot fronting Central.

I don't know where you guys see all of this struggling retail. From what I see, the empty spaces are in buildings are old, non-historic cheap crap. Alta continues to lease most of its north side despite a sea of dirt lots as neighbors. Roosevelt Pointe and Tapestry are the main offenders; the former has 1 occupant and given time, and adjusted rates, we should see s fee more. Tapestry has been empty since it opened - that says more to me about their fees and management. But, otherwise, new restaurants are opening as others close all the time and midtown/uptown is a particularly hot restaurant market.

Right now, Midtown struggles because its little more than a daytime workspace, with garages in back, ensuring that none of the thousands of workers interact with Central. As residential infill projects are proposed, it's Midtown's chance to reidentify itself as an urban center on par with downtown. So, why, then, do we want to build project that make the same mistake the office towers did by making them single-use and garage-oriented?

We talk about urbanity, walkability, needs of the pedestrian and sense of place... So, let's encourage the residents of these dwellings to get out and explore their neighborhood, meet someone in the same field at the local pub, bump into a coworker at the new boutique... having these projects include at least one retail space (2 for full block development) ensure that we're creating a Midtown community and a Central Avenue main street. And, if they struggle a bit up front, that's normal. Let the project fill up, be seen and be surrounded by new, dense development with more customers.

As far as residential demand in Midtown, I never said that. I said there was momentum, given the high number of projects we've seen come through recently compared to other years and other markets like Doentown.

ArtHAUS - 99% chance of being built given the city's involvement
Highland Elevation - 90% chance if it hasn't broken ground
Broadstone - 99% chance given initial site work and track record
Edison - TBD; very early stages
Artisan Haus II - TBD, no info since original post regarding the details
Lennar Homes at McDowell/Central - TBD; no updates since original post

[Jjs5056]

I worked closely with SmithGroup on the IEB building at GCC; there were other partners, but it was a fantastic project. Intrigued to see what they've proposed. I was wanting something tall and iconic with a unique roof line, but that's not their aesthetic. Fingers crossed it isn't a 6-story midrise in a style similar to the Bio Campus.

[turpentyne]

Stroll down a downtown street in any properly dense city... New York, Toronto, Boston, etcetera. You'll see exactly what Jjs5056 is talking about, plain as day. Every opportunity we get, there needs to be ground-level options. Any number of them. He's not talking of a pipe dream. It's a proven reality.

[pbenjamin]

Originally Posted by turpentyne

Stroll down a downtown street in any properly dense city... New York, Toronto, Boston, etcetera. You'll see exactly what Jjs5056 is talking about, plain as day. Every opportunity we get, there needs to be ground-level options. Any number of them. He's not talking of a pipe dream. It's a proven reality.

The reality is a ton of empty storefronts, unlikely to be occupied, so long as we keep adding to the inventory.

[ASUSunDevil]

Reinvent PHX eyes development on light-rail system

Betty Reid, The Republic | azcentral.com 8:52 a.m. MST May 6, 2014

By 2040, Phoenix projects that areas along the city's light-rail line will have fewer autos, more trees to shade a pedestrian/bike lifestyle and business and residential developments that support that lifestyle.

Reinvent PHX is a proposed long-term plan that seeks to transform five of six districts in Phoenix that straddle light rail. The 20-mile rail route snakes through the neighborhoods of Gateway, Eastlake-Garfield, Midtown, Uptown and Solano.

"Transforming the light-rail (corridor) as a walkable area will take time," said Curt Upton, the Phoenix Planning Development Department's long-range planning project manager. "For now, (it) is designed for cars."

City officials say they expect to seek the City Council's approval of the plan by December. The city's urban villages are scheduled to view the plan in the fall.

Multiagency partnership:

Reinvent PHX is a partnership among Phoenix, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Arizona State University, St. Luke's Health Initiatives and others. The group proposes to develop walkable communities connected to light rail, according to the partnership's website.

Upton said Phoenix is providing a road map and the private sector would drive the concept.

The project would create "a new, transit-oriented model for urban planning and development along the city's light-rail system," according to the website (phoenix.gov/pdd/reinventphx.html), which has draft plans for two neighborhoods.

The Gateway District, for example, would have upgraded housing, a grocery store and family-owned businesses creating jobs. Existing vacant land would be developed and empty buildings would be rehabilitated and filled with residents and businesses.

Desert landscaping would complement parks and the nearby Grand Canal. The district's public spaces would be landscaped with trees and low-water-use plants that provided shade.

People would live close to where they worked and be able to meet most of their daily needs without a car.

Reinvention would be costly:

Reinvent PHX's cost is "likely to be in the billions," city officials said. The majority of the developments would come from the private sector in the form of real-estate, business and non-profit investments, Upton said.

The projects are designed to spark private investment while meeting such community goals as lowering the cost of living, he said. Upgrades would include sidewalks, trees, bicycle lanes, parks, urban plazas and water/sewer improvements. The work would involve investments by government agencies, businesses and foundations and would span several decades, Upton said.

Zoning overhaul needed:

So ambitious an undertaking has serious barriers to overcome.

City officials said zoning regulations need to be modified to attract urban development. The city's zoning is designed for development in the suburbs, with single-family housing, strip malls and large shopping centers with huge parking lots.

"That is one fit that fits all," said Upton, adding that existing regulations don't encourage the construction of buildings with living space on top and shops on the bottom.

The concept also needs a new walkable urban code, which Upton said will be before the City Council by December.

City officials said the vision is based on growing national trends. It is influenced by a survey by the Urban Land Institute titled "Where Americans Want To Live."

The research polled Baby Boomers and young people. The responses indicated the two groups desire a simple lifestyle in urban areas instead of big houses in the suburbs. The survey also suggested that demand will continue to rise for infill residential development that is less auto-dependent.

Reinvent PHX has received about $5.6 million in funding. Nearly half came from HUD, with the remainder from "in kind" staff time from the city and its partners and from real-estate developers' pre-development costs. So far, about two-thirds of the funds have been spent.

The funds paid for such expenses as research and data analysis, policy development and writing, code analysis and code development, urban design, traffic and parking analysis to help for design/engineering, legal and environmental costs for a transit-oriented development projects. The funds also finance community forums and workshops.


Reinvent PHX is looking at ways to make light rail in five neighborhoods the core of urban development. The goal of the group is to create a long-range plan that provides the framework for pedestrian/biking communities. Implementation would not be cheap and would require investment from the private sector.(Photo: Erin O'Connor/The Republic)
Concerns are raised

Two community design workshops occurred at the Phoenix Financial Center in March and April and involved conversations among residents and business and property owners. Many participants liked the walkable lifestyle concept, Upton said, while some raised concerns.

Some participants feared demolition of historic properties, while others said an excessive use of windows on multistory buildings might allow people to peer into neighbors' backyards.

Tamara Klein, 58, attended the April 4 design workshop. She said Reinvent PHX is a "lovely plan" but she has questions.

"I would like to see a beautiful, lush, green city," Klein said. "That would go so far, but to handle that in the Sonoran Desert, that is a pretty tall order. I wonder how viable putting in all the trees will be."

Not everyone will embrace the plan because people are used to the single-family lifestyle, she said, and an auto-oriented society will be hard to change.

Klein also is worried that the concept overlooks elders.

"I don't see elders biking around in the city, especially in the summer. I don't care how many trees you have," she said.

[turpentyne]

From my perspective, the issue of empty storefronts is a red herring. It's not the real problem. If we do things right, it's a self-solving problem.

We're talking about the core downtown/uptown area, where a majority of business in the Southwest takes place. Market prices will adjust on renting those places and people will fill those storefronts.

I personally feel that the fear of a blighted empty downtown is unfounded, as long as we do ALL the things we need to do. Not just street level shopping. But living space and public transport. If these things are done in synergy, we solve the problem faster.

That's why mixed-use construction is the best, in my eyes.

[Jjs5056]

Originally Posted by pbenjamin

The reality is a ton of empty storefronts, unlikely to be occupied, so long as we keep adding to the inventory.

Remember when Summit and 44 Monroe sat vacant for a year+? Did developers respond by building single-family homes throughout downtown as they waited for the market to pick back up? No. They did two things: 1) they got creative and changed their strategy from attracting luxury condo buyers to high-end rentals; 2) other developers ceased high rise condo construction and moved onto segments of the market that were financially feasible and in demand: student housing, senior housing, low income housing.

Building single-use projects in the central city is the equivalent of developers building single-family homes throughout downtown proper. Even if the storefronts were all vacant (which I don't believe to be true- I don't know how much more evidence I need to provide) now, every plan - all 101 of them - calls for Central Ave to be an extension of the live/work/play model created downtown. For that vision to be implemented, we need to build the infrastructure today that will support such an environment, and 1-use buildings are not doing anything to help reach that long-term goal.

Terpentyne - you're right on the money and thank you for making me feel like I'm not going crazy. Is there a surplus of retail in the city, yes? Is there demand for increased residential? Yes. As more population fills vacant land, more retail will fill those empty storefronts to service them. Everyone talks about the desire for a walkable neighborhood with grocery, cleaners, hardware, etc. all in walking distance. How do you propose that happen if there is no space for these services within walking distance of light rail?

Developers need to follow the model set by Summit and 44 Monroe: change strategies and get creative. They can't control what is built around them, but they can learn the ins and outs of their neighborhood, identify gaps, and actively pursue companies within that sector. Additionally, being on Central means that their retail will be visible and accessed by more than just nearby residents: bars, museums, unique/high quality restaurants, unique-to-Phoenix clothing, etc. are all segments that could be marketed toward to hit those consumers. Lastly, as with residential developers limiting projects' height/density for the time following the recession, a smarter strategy for mixed use projects' viability right now would be to include only 1 retail space per every __ amount of square footage. Central doesn't need to be lined with Tapestries where the entire ground level is retail space; but, it can't be miles upon miles of non-interactive pedestrian uses or Midtown is no more urban than Gilbert.

Lastly, pbenjamin - where are you seeing these empty storefronts, aside from Tapestry? The ones I see are either outdated or highly hidden from the main road. Is there a class system for retail like there is for commercial? I bet Class A space would be much higher than you think. CityScape is completely leased; Luhrs is 90% leased, though nothing has opened yet; AZ Center is close to 100% leased; Roosevelt Row and Evans Churchill (Portland-Garfield, 7th St - 7th Ave) is close to 90% aside from Roosevelt Pointe, but their rates have to be incredibly high for the typical small business - it's no surprise their one tenant is an architect. Anyway, my point is that retail is doing well in many areas and if you look at each one I listed, you'll notice that it is located in the middle of/next to a cluster of retail-business-residential (sometimes). They don't have the holes across the street that businessesin Midtown have to deal with, but we can't build thinking that they'll stay vacant.

I'm curious, though I doubt you made it this far, what is your suggestion for remedying the current vacancies, and for new construction on Central? You believe 1-use should continue until vacancies drop? Where do you propose placing future retail services if so, and do you not feel the city's vision for Central being an urban boulevard is reasonable?

This is the chicken-egg problem that happens when your central city serves - or attempts to serve - both residential and business segments. When done right, it creates a very diverse, denser, usually taller downtown. But, it raises many issues like noise control, retail uses, appropriate heights, and trying to keep a steady balance of development and retail that keeps the entire downtown 24/7. NYC was mentioned, but even they have districts. Most clubs or major nightlife is on the lower end, or west end which used to be trashy, but has now overgentrified like most NY neighborhoods. Park Ave is essentially business-only, and most ground levels are simply lobbies with plazas and sometimes a starbucks. But, with their grid system which we destroyed in Phoenix, you barely notice as a pedestrian, because the streets are all filled with retail. The only exception would be the upper east side, where the streets are lined with Brownstones. Some are live/work, but most retail is centralized around Lexington, which is a very convenient and easy walk.

[Jjs5056]

As for ReinventPHX, it's great to see so many leaders and residents passionate about creating a map for our city's future along its most urban areas. But, 1) this has to be the 10th or so plan created outlining a "vision" - seriously, there were plans for each urban village back in the 80s, a plan for turning Midtown into an arts district, a plan for Central Avenue, a plan for the Gateway District (I've seen 2).... we do an awful lot of creating renderings and maps and descriptions for what we think the city should strive for, but it's 2014 and Midtown still turns its back on Central, no recent parks have been added, and both surface parking and above ground structures are the norm, the simplest of things needing to be addressed as outlined in the 1990 Midtown Arts plan, and likely even before that.

If we can't get even a portion of our downtown properly shaded, I very much doubt this will go anywhere but the library with the rest of them. Even Urban Form, a collaborative plan, which was actually put into place, is largely ignored, evidenced by Roosevelt Point and the ASU Law School.

I also am interested to read it,because if the example given for Gateway is any indication, I have a huge problem with a plan that gets so granular as to recommend something as specific as where to locate a grocery store and that businesses should be family-owned. Grocers will open when the neighborhood can support it. Recommending a mix of service retail and locally owned businesses to serve an increased residential base says almost the same thing, but lets the market and investors make their own decisions on how to achieve that.

[pbenjamin]

Next time I get a chance I'll make a list. The ones that come to mind are in the Luhrs complex and Summit, but there are others.

I'm curious, though I doubt you made it this far, what is your suggestion for remedying the current vacancies...

Are you trying to be rude or is that a concession that you can be long-winded?

The obvious way to fill the spaces is to lower the rent, but I have no idea how to get there. It would seem like the building owners would be motivated to do so but they haven't done it. I doubt that the city is going to subsidize rents while they are cutting wages.

[MegaBass]

Vote Will Determine Partnership Between ASU, Papago Golf Course

The city-owned Papago Golf Course in Phoenix lost money for years until a change in management in 2011. Revenue has increased since then, but remodeling was never finished. A proposed agreement with Arizona State University might get the course the green it needs.

On Wednesday the Phoenix City Council will vote on the agreement that would have ASU manage the course through the creation of a nonprofit golf foundation. This means the city would still own Papago, but ASU would operate it and pay rent to the city — $200,000 annually to start.

It also means the golfers who currently play at ASU’s Karsten Course will be relocating after the university closes that course.

Rob Harman of Phoenix Parks and Recreation says regulars at Papago shouldn’t worry about bigger crowds.

"The university’s mens’ and ladies’ golf program will have access to the course for practices after 3 p.m. in the afternoon, but the rest of the time the facility will be available to the public just as it always has been for the last 50 years," Harman said.

Resident cardholders would have access to about 50 percent of all rounds at Papago. Since the city of Phoenix will still own the course, fees and club card rates will stay the same.

This is good news for Chuck Casillas, who comes to the driving range almost every day. As a regular for years, Casillas said he has seen improvements to the course. But then he pointed to the clubhouse.

"It’s a double-wide trailer. It’s in better shape than it used to be 5, 10 years ago but it still needs a lot of work," Casillas said.

A new clubhouse was started back in 2008, but the managing company at the time failed to complete it. Harman said this is a major reason for the agreement with ASU. The university would be required to construct a new clubhouse within three years. Plans for a new access road and parking are also in the works.

[NorthScottsdale]

What is going on at Central and Highland? That empty lot there is fenced off..

[dtnphx]

Originally Posted by NorthScottsdale

What is going on at Central and Highland? That empty lot there is fenced off..

An apartment complex. Here's a link:

http://downtowndevil.com/2013/11/26/...x-in-december/

[Jjs5056]

That project has been talked about quite a bit, and just 2 posts earlier, I created a list of "on" projects in Midtown. I don't expect people to read every detail of my novels but how much simpler can it get than a list?

[bwaynoh]

Some info on the proposed development for Central Station

http://www.downtownphoenixjournal.co...-station-site/

[gymratmanaz]

I like the Central Station idea.The building is different and looks good. A dog park is also a nice feature!!!!!

[HX_Guy]

Wow that's pretty stunning! How likely is this to happen?

[gymratmanaz]

It sure would looks great lit up at night.

Wonder where they got the rendering? Looks like some reflection of buildings across the street from it that are not in the picture. i wonder if it is a picture of a building already in another city that they want to do similarly here?

[HooverDam]

That looks like it could be a great project for downtown. More residential is always needed.

Early impressions:

The Good:
+ 500+ new people living downtown
+ Fairly tall by Phoenix standards (390'/34 floors)
+ Builds a new dog park that will actually be used by downtown high rise dwellers (the one at Hance Park serves the historic neighborhoods more)
+ Project appears to narrow Van Buren and widen the southern sidewalk
+ somewhat mixed use, adds space for a new Coworking space (though it does seem odd that they're saying that space will have to be used for that use)

The Bad:
- Current massing is rather wide east to west. Currently the view from Civic Space to the south is awesome because you see a variety of buildings of differing ages, sizes, etc.
- It'd be nice if the top was a bit more architecturally interesting, its sort of just another box on our skyline
- Its mixed use, but only barely. It'd be nice to see a lot of food options added, seems like a natural fit for a transit center. With Kahala HQ'd in the PHX area, you'd think the City could partner with them to get a bunch of their chains in a complex like this.
- Main issue: WAY over parked. You've got more than 1 parking space per apartment, that's silliness. The garages at Skyline and Roosevelt Point are consistently half empty. Considering this is built over a transit center, thats too much.