Tucson Development Thread

[Jjs5056]

I'm unfamiliar with Tucson - did that prposal include the entire superblock, or did/do some of the structures exist already? If the former, is anything there now, or is it an empty lot?

[Patrick S]

Originally Posted by omarainza

what ever happened to this proposal? does it still have a chance of getting built? the century tower, i rememeber reading about it when i was a kid in middle school

I only moved to Tucson in December of 2008, so I'm totally unfamiliar with this project. It looks like it could be the tallest building in the city and that it would be next to the main library on Pennington. It's actually a pretty nice design. Could anyone elaborate on this, please?

[Thirsty]

Originally Posted by Ted Lyons

Well, the facade restoration grants aren't about getting property owners to maintain their property, which seems to be the distinction you're making. You can give someone a bunch of money to fix their facade, but that won't guarantee they take care of it going forward.

The building that housed Grill is going to be torn down no matter what as that fire pretty much destroyed it and exposed a bunch of asbestos. However, your basic issue with those buildings (which, I agree, aren't beautiful) is their original architectural style. Even if they weren't torn down and were restored to their original best, they'd still be ugly. The Arizona doesn't actually look that bad to me. It just needs a paint job which goes to the issue in my first paragraph.

The Pioneer is different from all of those cases in that it's a beautiful building covered by a shell of midcentury crap. Maintenance aside, if you take that shell off and restore the original facade, you immediately improve our skyline significantly. That's mostly because it's actually visible in our skyline whereas none of the low-rises you mentioned are.

Even if that weren't the case, though, the point stands that a restoration of the Pioneer would entail a fundamental alteration of its appearance whereas repainting the other buildings you mentioned would be a temporary fix that would eventually be undone by poor maintenance.

I agree about the picture of the Arizona, but I don't really know anything about the building owners.

I'm sure the Grill building is more of "a beautiful building covered by a shell of midcentury crap" The lower ten feet suggest something older. One of the first two rounds of facade money included a similar building (can't remember which one) with a featureless wall raising from the tops of the door frames.

I'd love to see the Pioneer restored, but I don't think it's current look is particularly offensive. It's not great, but it fits and I never minded it until I found out what was underneath.

[Ted Lyons]

Originally Posted by Anqrew

view from Level, wish i had that view of downtown! (wlthough it might not be there once they build Hub lol)

Wow. Do we know the height of Level in feet vs. the proposed height of The Hub? The top floors of Level might still have a good view.

[farmerk]

A site with old photos of western cities including Tucson.

[omarainza]

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=231015

http://www.insidetucsonbusiness.com/...a46792bba.html

http://www.cognidev.com/images/centurytower2.jpg

lol i was 14 then i guess. now with the advent of the internet i see it just didnt happen. economically unfeasable apparently. it was back in 05 and along with the rainbow bridge was just shot down. it looks like it would've done great there instead of those little huts they set up there as an implied "farmer's market" that sells native jewelry and art.... yeah, tower any day. and to Jjs5056, the white building is the library and is there. the 2 buildings were going to be built on what are patches of lawn currently there.

[farmerk]

Originally Posted by omarainza

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=231015

http://www.insidetucsonbusiness.com/...a46792bba.html

http://www.cognidev.com/images/centurytower2.jpg

lol i was 14 then i guess. now with the advent of the internet i see it just didnt happen. economically unfeasable apparently. it was back in 05 and along with the rainbow bridge was just shot down. it looks like it would've done great there instead of those little huts they set up there as an implied "farmer's market" that sells native jewelry and art.... yeah, tower any day. and to Jjs5056, the white building is the library and is there. the 2 buildings were going to be built on what are patches of lawn currently there.

That tower would've been a nice addition downtown.

I've always have doubts these recent building developments are just temporary but come to think of it I think they would remain a permanent fixture being that Tucson is limited in growth physically - surrounded by mountains, saguaro parks, unincorporated areas and Tucsonan's constant hatred towards building a crosstown freeway (plus if that street car gets it's own lane all over Tucson)....And the overly abundance of "HISTORIC" neighborhoods. So the only way to compensate for future vehicular gridlock and population growth is to build up.

Btw, I'm seeing some development with surveyors/engineers(?) surveying(?) at the Tucson Marketplace. Starting stages of developing those KBHome/Lennar developments?

[kaneui]

Observations on a few of the recent topics of discussion:

Century Tower
This tower was a pipe dream that was never financially feasible. Downtown still has relatively little demand for office space, as the One South Church tower still has lots of room to fill since UniSource Energy moved to their own building in 2011.

Facade Grant Program
The current program awards grants of up to $5k for minor cosmetic facade work, and up to $125k for larger projects. However, I believe even the smaller ones have to keep the buildings in good repair for at least 5 years after the work is complete.

TCC hotel projects
Although everyone wants a primary convention center hotel, it's not going to be feasible or even necessary until the TCC is substantially enlarged and upgraded (the $6M of Rio Nuevo improvements will only be a drop in the bucket). However, Rio Nuevo is committed to investing in some smaller nearby hotels--whether it be the Stiteler proposal, the proposed Bourn hotel on the Thrifty block, the hotel in the Peach Properties mixed-use project next to the freeway, or even a possible hotel in the Mission District west of I-10. Once a "notice to proceed" is issued on at least one hotel, Rio Nuevo can then spend money on other projects within the district.

Main Gate UOD
The maximum height in this urban overlay district is 158', which is the height of LEVEL, and probably nearly the same for The Hub and Park Ave., which I believe are 14 and 13 stories, respectively.

[Ritarancher]

I think the Century Tower was going to be 70 million dollars to build. A great deal in my opinion considering that the Sheraton was 200 mill and rainbow bridge was over 300 mill. We really should have built the tower at the price it was at. We'd use the floor space one day

[omarainza]

Originally Posted by Ritarancher

I think the Century Tower was going to be 70 million dollars to build. A great deal in my opinion considering that the Sheraton was 200 mill and rainbow bridge was over 300 mill. We really should have built the tower at the price it was at. We'd use the floor space one day

I know it's a shame too, I feel like it could've brought in revenue as a mixed-use project. From my rendering, the bottom 2 floors would include a lobby/atrium that people could be welcomed to with retail on the ground and a gym/pool area on the 2nd floor. Perhaps a ballroom for them to cater to proms, gatherings downtown, weddings, etc. since it would open up to what is the library's plaza which with a little more sprucing up could be very attractive for photos. The next 7 floors of office space and then condos for the rest of the floors up to the top 2 floors which would include a top floor restaurant with a viewing gallery. It's right smack dab in the middle of the buildings and what a view of urban landscape and the surrounding mountains you'd get from those top floors made of glass. I wouldn't mind living there at all. The condos don't have to be super expensive posh studios that cater to the rich. Designed well and streamlined they would cater to middle class people who could afford to live there and perhaps set the cornerstone for more downtown living, other than student housing, low-income seniors, and rich artisans. They needn't charge a bajillion dollars/mo to live there and people would live there regardless of price if they can afford to pay off monthly.

I think it was just shot down prematurely in a time when the developments were unstable, the rio nuevo and city were and still somewhat are unreliable, and the thought of this radical proposal was too much for them to envision. But now with these new developers showing interest in building downtown, if the idea were to be brought up to, say peach, would the project have any chance of being brought to life? What would it take other than MONEY$$$

[Ritarancher]

A little off topic but here's an article for Vail becoming a town
http://www.tucsonnewsnow.com/story/2...as-newest-town

There have been rumors that Vail, a small rail stop on Tucson's southeast boundary, may become a town.

If it can garner half the vote in an election which supporters hope to hold in August, the 12,500 residents would become an incorporated town much like Sahuarita or Marana.

News 13 was told there hasn't been an incorporated town in Arizona since 2000. The last one in the Tucson area was Sahuarita in 1994.

It's not an easy process. Casas Adobes, Tortolita and Green Valley have all lost incorporation battles.

And because of state law, Tucson will have a say as to whether the town can incorporate.

Tucson will discuss whether to allow the move in its weekly study session this week.

Tucson Mayor Jonathan Rothschild talked about Vail specifically in his first state of the city address a year ago.

The Tucson area has been penalized by state tax law for decades. State shared revenues are distributed among incorporated areas.

Nearly half the Tucson valley is unincorporated.

Adding Vail to the mix would add state shared revenues to this part of the state.

It's estimated to be worth $3.2 million.

Still, the town would have to contract out for police and fire.

But the money could be used for transportation, library and other historical preservation.

The supporters will get the ball rolling by submitting their petitions for signatures.

In its first pass, the county pointed out an error in the petitions but that has since been corrected.

I think that Vail should become a town and dominate ALL of the land east of houghton and where Corona de Tucson is. I also am disappointed that Green Valley and Casas Adobes (our largest suburb) never became a town. Personally I think that Green Valley and Sahuarita should become one and own lots of that land down there. I also think that Catalina Foothills, Casas Adobes, Tanque Verde and Flowing Wells need to be a mega suburb with a population of over 150K and most citizens being fairly wealthy. That might attract some people to the desert. I also feel that we need to take control of the western suburbs like drexel heights.

Here's my most reliable source for population and city limit maps
http://www.census.gov/2010census/popmap/ It's easy to use and it shows tucson fairly well. Use this and you'll understand what I am talking about. You'd be surprised how many Tucson area residents are being uncounted for in population figures.
I watched the video. Old people hold us back from becoming better. LEAVE RETIREES , unless your from 'round these parts

[farmerk]

City plan keeps major bus hub downtown

Parcel had been focus of possible property transfer
FEBRUARY 11, 2013 12:00 AM • DARREN DARONCO ARIZONA DAILY STAR

Supporters of the Ronstadt Transit Center can breathe a bit easier.

For months, city officials were negotiating a deal to cede the Ronstadt Center and up to two other downtown properties to the owners of a scenic 284-parcel in the Painted Hills as a way to block development there. The city would have then sold the Painted Hills parcel to Pima County for $3.6 million.

When word leaked about the discussions, bus riders and their advocates staged a rally to protest what they feared may have been a backroom deal to hand off a vital transit hub for commuters to monied interests.

Last Tuesday, the mayor and council allayed those fears when they directed the city staff to create a "development vision" for the transit center that will maintain it as a transit hub while allowing for some mixed-use development. Once the plans are complete, the city will put the project out to competitive bid.

The move essentially separates the Ronstadt Center from the discussions with the Dallas Police and Fire Employee Pension Fund, which owns the Painted Hills property, said Councilwoman Karin Uhlich, who drafted the motion.

"They may well be one of the interested respondents," Uhlich said. "But there are two parallel conversations going on in the community now" - one with the pension fund and the other on what to do with the Ronstadt Center.

She said the conversation on the transit center had been fruitless for too long.

Now's the time to redirect the discussion to include how to attract development that will make downtown more vibrant without compromising transit.

"Tucson's been stuck over a decade in this polarized dynamic ... with some folks saying we don't touch (Ronstadt) and others saying we do away with it completely," Uhlich said. "So it really is exciting to think how pedestrian and transit and other modes of transportation can come together in the downtown to create this mix of people and activities that make so many (other) downtowns great."

Councilman Steve Kozachik said the city was never just going to hand over the transit center and give carte blanche to the Dallas pension fund.
"The firefighters had hoped that we would just give it to them and let them build on it, but that's not the way it's going to work," Kozachik said. "They can compete for it. ... But we weren't inclined to just turn it over. That would be absurd."

County tried to buy it

Pima County has had its eye on the Painted Hills property since 1997, when it was included in that year's open-space bond program. The county tried to buy it in 2006 but was outbid when the Dallas pension fund bought the property for $27 million.

The county was a party to the negotiations, but now it appears to be in the dark regarding the city's recent move, according to County Administrator Chuck Huckelberry.

"We haven't heard much of anything," Huckelberry said. "We're still prepared to cooperate with the city to ensure the Painted Hills is conserved. But somebody's got to tell us what they like."

If the county ever acquires the property, it would combine with part of Tucson Mountain Park and remain undeveloped.
The county would then attempt to buy additional land to connect Painted Hills to the rest of Tucson Mountain Park.

"It really is exciting to think how pedestrian and transit and other modes of transportation can come together in the downtown to create this mix of people and activities that make so many (other) downtowns great."

Councilwoman Karin Uhlich

Contact reporter Darren DaRonco at 573-4243 or ddaronco@azstarnet.com.

Source

Looks like downtown may have a new candidate for another mix-used building. Hopefully it will look as nice as the Hub ( I cried when I saw that rendering. Couldn't believe Tucson would allow such nice building ).

[Thirsty]

Originally Posted by omarainza

Designed well and streamlined they would cater to middle class people who could afford to live there and perhaps set the cornerstone for more downtown living, other than student housing, low-income seniors, and rich artisans. They needn't charge a bajillion dollars/mo to live there and people would live there regardless of price if they can afford to pay off monthly.

I'd love to have a new downtown condo, but it is hard to justify the cost when there are houses on land with tons of character available within a two or three minute walk at condo prices.

A bit of a tangent, but not really. To boost investor confidence in these public/private dorms AND to bring life and investment back into local neighborhoods (if they're gonna be historic we should at least want them to be kept up), the UofA really should enforce a residency policy for undergrads. If all freshmen and sophomores had to live in dorms, the demand for beds would triple if they met the 50k students by 2020 goal, and take a big bite out of the market for rental homes.

^FWIW I was once the proud inhabitant of a weed choked, cars in front yard, couch on porch, inebriated-teen-storage-facility in the Sam Hughes Neighborhood.

[Ritarancher]

Originally Posted by Thirsty

I'd love to have a new downtown condo, but it is hard to justify the cost when there are houses on land with tons of character available within a two or three minute walk at condo prices.

A bit of a tangent, but not really. To boost investor confidence in these public/private dorms AND to bring life and investment back into local neighborhoods (if they're gonna be historic we should at least want them to be kept up), the UofA really should enforce a residency policy for undergrads. If all freshmen and sophomores had to live in dorms, the demand for beds would triple if they met the 50k students by 2020 goal, and take a big bite out of the market for rental homes.

^FWIW I was once the proud inhabitant of a weed choked, cars in front yard, couch on porch, inebriated-teen-storage-facility in the Sam Hughes Neighborhood.

If all freshmen and sophomores had to live in dorms people would not like the U of A. I know many students who only go to school part time and it would seem impractical for them to move into a dorm for 2 years. I like Level and the Cadence but IMO the rates are through the roof (we've got some tall roofs there) as it is.
I like the historic neighborhood south of downtown. It's got nice homes and unique buildings

[phxSUNSfan]

Originally Posted by Ritarancher

If all freshmen and sophomores had to live in dorms people would not like the U of A. I know many students who only go to school part time and it would seem impractical for them to move into a dorm for 2 years.

I don't think that would be the case for the UofA...ASU requires freshmen and some sophomores to live on campus; mostly those students enrolled 3/4 and full-time. Some students are granted waivers and not required to live on campus but it must be approved by the university and can be a hassle. Because of this, ASU has one of the largest on-campus residential student populations in the U.S. It also has increased retention rates for freshmen/sophomores.

[omarainza]

[QUOTE=Thirsty;6020066]I'd love to have a new downtown condo, but it is hard to justify the cost when there are houses on land with tons of character available within a two or three minute walk at condo prices.[QUOTE]

or perhaps a market rate apartment? then the owners of the building can continuously rent out the spaces for profit? how much apartments/condos can a building like this hold per floor? 2-3 maybe? just pondering lol there has to be at least 50 people in the entire city who would enjoy this thought of living. or the option as a hotel. i live on the southside so my lack of urbanization down here kinda makes remote dreams like this exciting

also a question, does the lot next to unisource have to be an office building? could it also go into a mixed-use project there? i feel a smaller building not a twin but with a similar style would look nice there to add character. since the foundation is there already, wouldnt it be cheaper to develop it first than buy a new property and start from scratch?

[Ted Lyons]

Arizona doesn't have enough beds for all the people who apply for on-campus housing each year, so requiring on-campus living isn't feasible right now no matter what.

On another note, demo is occurring at The Herbert.

[Anqrew]

The Frat house on 1st and Tyndall is being torn down too as well, right now looks like most the roof is gone (as seen on the LEVEL cam) to make way for Hub.

[Thirsty]

Originally Posted by Ritarancher

If all freshmen and sophomores had to live in dorms people would not like the U of A. I know many students who only go to school part time and it would seem impractical for them to move into a dorm for 2 years. I like Level and the Cadence but IMO the rates are through the roof (we've got some tall roofs there) as it is.
I like the historic neighborhood south of downtown. It's got nice homes and unique buildings

Anyone who isn't a full time student should be exempt of course, as well as any Tucsonan who wants to stay with family and commute for financial reasons.

Originally Posted by phxSUNSfan

I don't think that would be the case for the UofA...ASU requires freshmen and some sophomores to live on campus; mostly those students enrolled 3/4 and full-time. Some students are granted waivers and not required to live on campus but it must be approved by the university and can be a hassle. Because of this, ASU has one of the largest on-campus residential student populations in the U.S. It also has increased retention rates for freshmen/sophomores.

^This. Dorm requirements are not unusual. And there is the grad rates.

Originally Posted by Ted Lyons

Arizona doesn't have enough beds for all the people who apply for on-campus housing each year, so requiring on-campus living isn't feasible right now no matter what.

On another note, demo is occurring at The Herbert.

Never would have brought it up without the new beds being added. With the new public/private dorms I bet they could fit all the freshmen, and build out from there.

[Anqrew]

i was downtown today when it was snowing! it was beautiful!