HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Southwest


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #161  
Old Posted Aug 10, 2016, 4:42 PM
PHX31's Avatar
PHX31 PHX31 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: PHX
Posts: 7,163
Quote:
Originally Posted by exit2lef View Post
“If the city doesn’t cooperate with the approval this space could get scraped..."

http://downtowndevil.com/2016/08/10/...ty-opposition/

If that isn't hostage-taking, I don't know what is.
That was pretty obvious from the beginning, the only difference is they actually said it.

This entire city can't get out of its own way. Many of the developers are either lightly funded or lack experience in major urban projects, and the various action committees and neighborhood associations and citizens out there are either activists for the sake of being a cool activist, or are just really not very bright or well versed (sorry to lump them all together, but some of the direct face to face discussions I've had with a couple of the more vocal and supposed leaders (not even always in relation to City-related topics) gives me very little confidence in them to do anything productive. Top it off with very poor city government and policies through the years and we have what amounts to a joke of an urban area and historic fabric compared to most of the rest of the country.

After more than 15 years of being on this forum, going through many of the ups and downs, watching nonsense happen, or more often than not, nothing at all happen, this fiasco is basically the straw that broke the camel's back for me. We can kiss this historic building goodbye, and it's past time to stop caring in general.

Last edited by PHX31; Aug 10, 2016 at 9:13 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #162  
Old Posted Aug 10, 2016, 6:57 PM
combusean's Avatar
combusean combusean is offline
Skyriser
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Newark, California
Posts: 7,181
^ Well maybe the historic preservationists can take a stand and prevent these sort of entitlements and exploitations when it comes to non-listed buildings.

They were really successful with Madison Square Garden, for instance.

/s
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #163  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2016, 2:37 PM
phxhbg phxhbg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 11
I don't see any solution here other than to give them what they want. Otherwise the rest of circles will be gone also. I would hope in the near future that the city could clarify a policy to prevent hostage taking in the future.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #164  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2016, 4:28 AM
Jjs5056 Jjs5056 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,724
The problem is that the developer has been suspicious from the start and it was predicted that he would likely flip the property. GPLET or not, there is a huge chance of demolition.

I think the city was right to deny the GPLET and take a stance that in order to receive benefits from a community, you need to be giving something back. Demolishing what many considered an iconic building downtown for a luxury tower outside most residents' means doesn't fit.

It's too bad this was not the original design. Regardless, I think it's unnecessary to insult those on either side of the fence.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #165  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2016, 10:24 PM
muertecaza muertecaza is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 2,221
Circling the wagons: The fight over Phoenix’s Circle Records building

http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/n...phoenix-s.html

Quote:
A Scottsdale development firm looking to build a 19-story apartment building on the Circles Records property near downtown Phoenix’s Roosevelt Row area continues to push for the project and a property tax break even as opponents dig in their heels...

The Circles Records building was built in 1946. It was previously home to the Circles record store and, before that, a Studebaker car dealership...

The developers are now calling the project The Stewart after the family that owned the Studebaker dealership...

But community critics to the project who don’t want a GPLET tax break for apartments and are upset with the demolition work still aren’t convinced.

“I don’t want to reward bad behavior,” said Stacey Champion, owner of Champion PR + Consulting, a Roosevelt Row-based public relations firm.

They have been used extensively for office and commercial developments but not as much for apartment projects...

Jordan Rose said the developer has been open to funding historic preservation in the downtown area and finding a way to incorporate the neighborhood's history into the apartment building...

Another lead Circles skeptic is Sherry Rampy, president of the Roosevelt Action Association, a Roosevelt Row community group.

Sherry Rampy says she’s not against developers or development.

“I’m a friend of developers,” said Rampy...

But Rampy isn’t a fan of the controversial Circles Records redevelopment.

Rampy said she would like to see an annual $150,000 allocation for historic preservation and a possible museum incorporated into ground-level commercial space.

The two camps in the Circles debate differ on what kind of requests, commitments and then lack of commitments have occurred when it comes to preservation funding and a potential museum space...

Rampy recently wrote to Empire/Aspirant principal executives Richard Felker and Geoffrey Jacobs offering to back an apartment GPLET but at another site.

Rampy’s offer calls for Empire/Aspirant to sell the Circles building for $1.5 million with a historic preservation designation.

That would be at a loss. Rampy said she would help the developers buy another property for their apartments. She estimates that will cost $3 million.

So, what’s in it for the developers?

They could then qualify for the GPLET which could offer them tax savings, Rampy said.

Under her scenario, the developers would net $4.5 million counting the tax break, the new land purchase and the Circles sale at the loss.

Jacobs emailed Rampy back last month declining the offer saying there is already financing set up for the 19-story apartment project...

There could be some movement from skeptics on the GPLET front if the tax benefit is tied exclusively to current ownership.

They worry Empire/Aspirant will sell the Circles property soon after getting the property tax break.

Rose said the developers want to develop apartments and own the project and not flip the prominent property.

“They will absolutely agree to fully construct and own the building – that is their business and they have been very successful over the last 50 years,“ Rose said. “This is not a flip situation.”
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #166  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2016, 10:39 PM
biggus diggus biggus diggus is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 2,838
People are absolutely bat shit crazy, I actually feel like that's being nice because really I could say they are downright stupid.
__________________
Mr. K the monopoly man
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #167  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2016, 10:41 PM
muertecaza muertecaza is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 2,221
Quote:
Originally Posted by biggus diggus View Post
People are absolutely bat shit crazy, I actually feel like that's being nice because really I could say they are downright stupid.
The whole situation has definitely devolved into the theater of the absurd.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #168  
Old Posted Oct 6, 2016, 3:57 PM
ASU Diablo ASU Diablo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,257
City Council will vote on a 30-day waiting period for historic building demolitions

http://downtowndevil.com/2016/10/06/...ric-buildings/

Quote:
Demolition of historic buildings may soon require a 30-day waiting period to prevent unwanted destruction to Phoenix landmarks.

The Downtown, Aviation, Economy and Innovation subcommittee voted unanimously to recommend the waiting period to be approved by City Council. The new rule would be applied to commercial buildings 50 years or older and all properties identified as eligible for historic designation.

The Development Advisory Board and the Historic Preservation Commission previously recommended approval. It stemmed from the historic preservation community’s concerns that historic buildings would be destroyed before other options were explored.

Proposed alternative options to demolition included moving properties, rehabilitation, adaptive reuse or selling the building. The Wurth House was mentioned as an example of a successful alternative which was successfully moved and saved.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #169  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2016, 2:31 PM
muertecaza muertecaza is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 2,221
The Saga Continues...

Roosevelt Action Association gets their piece, now supports GPLET for Circles.

http://www.downtowndevil.com/2016/11...et-for-circles

Last edited by muertecaza; Nov 2, 2016 at 2:44 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #170  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2016, 4:18 PM
ASUSunDevil ASUSunDevil is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 919
Quote:
Originally Posted by ASUSunDevil View Post
I agree, and I think it will. A small group of crybabies won't take this project down - it's way too good to succumb to them.
How the tables have turned.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #171  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2016, 5:08 PM
CrestedSaguaro's Avatar
CrestedSaguaro CrestedSaguaro is offline
Modulator
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 4,393
Quote:
Originally Posted by ASUSunDevil View Post
How the tables have turned.
I bet the developer was about to do a full demo....
__________________
Ronnie Garrett
https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?memberID=205
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #172  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2016, 6:08 PM
nickw252 nickw252 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: North Mesa
Posts: 1,631
Quote:
Originally Posted by airomero83 View Post
I don't like the 30 day waiting period proposal. This will likely just slow down and may hinder development as this would be seen as another bureacratic regulation. This may result in buildings that are technically considered historic because of their age not getting redeveloped.

To me, they are proposing to shut the barn doors after the horse got out.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #173  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2016, 8:43 PM
Obadno Obadno is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,586
Quote:
Originally Posted by airomero83 View Post
Good news I thought this was dead!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #174  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2016, 8:59 PM
ASUSunDevil ASUSunDevil is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 919
Quote:
Originally Posted by RonnieFoos View Post
I bet the developer was about to do a full demo....
Maybe those spaz's needed to be threatened. Regardless, a full demo has never been the developers intention:

http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/n...partments.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #175  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2016, 10:06 PM
Obadno Obadno is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,586
Quote:
Originally Posted by ASUSunDevil View Post
Maybe those spaz's needed to be threatened. Regardless, a full demo has never been the developers intention:

http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/n...partments.html
This ^^ the namesake of the project is the dealership....why would they demolish it?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #176  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2016, 10:52 PM
exit2lef exit2lef is offline
self-important urbanista
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 3,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickw252 View Post
I don't like the 30 day waiting period proposal. This will likely just slow down and may hinder development as this would be seen as another bureacratic regulation. This may result in buildings that are technically considered historic because of their age not getting redeveloped.

To me, they are proposing to shut the barn doors after the horse got out.
The 30-day waiting period just passed the City Council 7-2. The dissenting council members, DiCiccio and Waring, made arguments similar to yours.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #177  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2016, 10:56 PM
nickw252 nickw252 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: North Mesa
Posts: 1,631
Quote:
Originally Posted by exit2lef View Post
The 30-day waiting period just passed the City Council 7-2. The dissenting council members, DiCiccio and Waring, made arguments similar to yours.
Ugh, I don't find myself agreeing with DiCiccio and Waring very often.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #178  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2016, 11:05 PM
Obadno Obadno is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,586
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickw252 View Post
Ugh, I don't find myself agreeing with DiCiccio and Waring very often.
Whatever the case I think Dicicio is right in this regard, I don't mind cities having requirements if you wan to build things in the downtown, but Downtown Phoenix doesn't have the gravitas and draw to start making developers jump through a bunch of arbitrary hoops.

In 20 years when most of the lots in downtown have been developed and the desire for more housing, office and hotels is constantly high we can maybe talk about some serious concessions from developers but for now they can just as easily locate in a number of other urban enough areas around the valley.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #179  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2016, 3:00 PM
nickw252 nickw252 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: North Mesa
Posts: 1,631
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obadno View Post
Whatever the case I think Dicicio is right in this regard, I don't mind cities having requirements if you wan to build things in the downtown, but Downtown Phoenix doesn't have the gravitas and draw to start making developers jump through a bunch of arbitrary hoops.

In 20 years when most of the lots in downtown have been developed and the desire for more housing, office and hotels is constantly high we can maybe talk about some serious concessions from developers but for now they can just as easily locate in a number of other urban enough areas around the valley.
Exactly.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #180  
Old Posted Nov 15, 2016, 7:39 AM
pbenjamin's Avatar
pbenjamin pbenjamin is offline
METRO: Encanto
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 684
Quote:
Originally Posted by exit2lef View Post
The 30-day waiting period just passed the City Council 7-2. The dissenting council members, DiCiccio and Waring, made arguments similar to yours.
We heard a presentation on this at the Central City VPC tonight. I fail to see why 30 days and a $300 fee is objectionable. If anything it's toothless. The fines for demolition without a permit are small enough that they could be considered a reasonable cost of doing business in some cases.
__________________
Paul
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Southwest
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:36 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.