First McKinley/McKinley Green
 

Have some nice new McKinley Green hi-res renderings for everyone. The name now appears to have been reverted back to First McKinley instead of McKinley Green, but I need to verify that. I have to say, this may turn out to be one of the best damn-looking residential developments in Downtown Phoenix. Love the look of the 7 levels of brick-façade fronting 2nd Ave.

Enjoy! :cheers:

Hard to believe this pencils after they give up 25% of the developable land. Will watch to see.

Am I misremembering where this is? How did the light rail get next to it?

Nice find!

I agree, Shepley did a great job with this one! I think the balconies add so much variation and they really help break up the façade compared to a lot of the other new developments. The brick was a concession with the neighborhood for the added height. Apparently the neighbors said they would not fight it if they would wrap the garage in brick to help tie back to the single family residences more, a great compromise. I really like the building they saved too with the interior courtyard, hopefully they find a great tenant for that!

Its North of McKinley between 1st and 2nd Avenues. The light rail runs down 1st Avenue, so that rendering is correct.

Those rendering look amazing!

Fantastic renderings, thanks.

They would have had some pushback tearing down or gutting the McKinley Club.

Preserving some things like historic buildings give these oftentimes generic apartments some character in addition to built-in office/retail/etc flex space for the rest of their project.

I also don't think land values are high enough to justify developing every last square foot--most projects pencil out downtown with type V/I construction and oftentimes need tax incentives to go taller. Of course that changes once you go all concrete but this project is in a great location without Stewart's construction defects baggage/mismanagement so it's probably in a league of its own for now.

Great renderings Crested thanks for being always on top of things

I agree with a good bit of what you're saying combosean but the emotional appeal at the beginning is where we differ. Making people feel good about a building being there isn't going to be the difference between profit and failure. Obviously they're not going to develop a losing project but it just seems odd to me that one old building full of (probably) flex office space or retail can stay without additions.

Speaking of The Stewart, looks like a small Yoga studio might be going in on the first floor if I read the sign correctly this morning. It was dark and I was driving.

Any ideas of a start date for First McKinley?

Those are some beautiful looking buildings. Kind of reminds me of Portland on the Park. I must say, this project is quickly becoming one of my favorite ones and I hope it breaks ground soon...fantastic addition to the neighborhood.

I was thinking the same thing. :)

The developer is not there to make people "feel good" about the building, they're there to avoid lawsuits and obstruction from area NIMBYs--that's the push back I was talking about.

There would be a 30-day hold from the time they pulled the demolition permits to the time they would be reviewed and issued which could mess up their construction schedule.

The developer partner seems real enough and has historic preservation experience.

https://hatterassky.com/projects/

I was responding to your comment that leaving the building will add character and I don't disagree with you. I'm simply stating that if someone were to use that as any sort of justification to leave that building as is I would find it pretty flimsy. That's all. I find it interesting they are not building on top of that thing or expanding it to make the best use of the land. It's curious to me, that's all.

Many times I muse about things, looking at them in an academic context. I like to understand who is doing what, why they're doing it and what the endgame is. Has nothing to do with agreeing or disagreeing, I think you know if I have strong feelings I'll be pretty direct.

So, to clarify I'm just a little curious how they'll make it pencil using only 75% of developable land. They might have purchased something for a song, I don't know.

AFAIK, this forum's never existed solely to discus the financial aspects of development. You continuously reply to other perspectives with a dismissive "that doesn't make a profit" rhetoric. That POV is useful/ interesting, but anything built in a city is going to elicit so-called "emotional" commentary. If developers find that inherently obstructive, they can try to make $ in a different industry.

DTPHX is HOME to a growing # of people; not an office. They deserve to have their voices heard, from basic NIMBY complaints to more valid concerns over design, preservation, etc. Projects across the country show developers and residents can both benefit. As I've mentioned, PHX was held to a "better than nothing" standard for years and had to accept mediocre / destructive development. Now that it's attracting investment, 2 empty lots + historic structures may preferable to a superblock of cheap mid-rise rentals in the few neighborhoods that retained an authentic urban environment.

This looks gorgeous; residents turned their concerns into a feature that makes the finished product more expensive and permanent looking vs. others nearby. Every proposal for a large piece of land in the heart of a city should be similar: different heights, uses, materials, and mix of old/new, etc.

Is it really this bothersome to be interested in the nuts and bolts of something rather than the packaged product? :runaway:

100% agree :cheers:

I never said that, at all. They have to get zoning approval, final plat approval, ROW abandonment, buy-in from neighbors even aside from demolition holds. A NIMBY could obstruct them every step of the way if they saw it fit, and keeping a historic building is a good way to keep them away.

Looking at the deed the purchase price was $5.7 million which isn't that much. They aren't even touching the height limit with the other tower so it's not like they needed to develop every last bit of the lot.

Thanks for the number. At that price they don't need to do a whole lot, you're right. We've spent more than that on an 18 unit (completely renovated) apartment building in the past year. $5.7mm blows me away to a certain extent.