Isn't Aspirant/Empire Group behind the potential Astra?

Well this article is from today; I think until we start seeing little to no rent increases year over year or quarter over quarter then we will be close to a correction, instead we are still seeing large rent increases. Obviously that can change.

Of course financing for these projects is flowing at the moment which is why they are all going at the same time so Maybe they have enough liquid to push through months and months of low lease activity.

https://azbigmedia.com/real-estate/m...ent-increases/

Having trouble believing all these developers would move forward with new projects if that was the case. If rents fall hopefully we see taller buildings as they need more units to make a profit. The other side of the coin is that i would hope that at some point more condos are proposed since rents are in so many cases higher than what a mortgage would be.

Astra would be perfect for condos I believe as it would be the premier tower in all the valley.

I know the resident profiled in the early portions of the article, and I trust his account is an accurate one. I don't see anything in this specific article that demonstrates an anti-density/development/height point of view, although I've definitely seen that in other media coverage of changes on Roosevelt Row. I think this article has exposed some serious problems at one building without casting a shadow over all new development.

How many people really understand the way the apartment business works, though?

Developers don't care about anything other than getting the pro-forma in order enough to flip the building. As long as lenders see the ability to sell the building in 8-12 months after completion they'll keep lending money. Rent rolls and occupancy numbers play a factor there but the bet is more on the "will a canadian REIT buy this finished product?"

Building defects are not a new phenomenon being uncovered by The Stewart. I was in the trenches at Landmark when we had that legal battle. It's the same story. The homeowners sued the contractor there and won a large, but not large enough, sum of money.

Correct.

I agree that any building (especially newly built) will have defects and adjustment periods to be able to correct these defect. Also, as of now, I count 50 available units (according to Stewart's website) that are available out of 312 units. Of course this does not include the Airbnb floors. However, even factoring in the units reserved for Airbnb, that's substantially far below the vacancy rate stated in the New Times article. Inflated vacancy numbers on New Times or just dated information while the author gathered his research?

I haven't seen anyone verify the 50% occupancy claims stated in the article. More than likely it is higher.

Many apartment complexes, including ones without an occupancy problem, are renting out units to companies like Sonder and Wanderjaunt. Why wouldn't a developer want a 25% increase in revenue from 10% of their units?

1 does not make a trend, especially 1 where the word on the street is that the complex is poorly managed.

Verify the low occupancy numbers at The Stewart and corroborate those with The Link and Block 23 and then we can talk about a market correction.

The same short term rental inventory exists at essentially every apartment building up and down Roosevelt. It's much easier to be 100% occupancy when you take 10% of your inventory out for short term.

I'd like to see the numbers across the board. It's not as black/white as people are making it seem.

I posted the current occupancy numbers above your post. Going through it again, 50 units available out of 312 units. This does not include the 2 floors for Airbnb units which looks to be floors 4 and 13. Floor 4 only has 6 total units and 13 has 25 units. So that leaves 79 total units available counting the Airbnb out of 312 units. That is around 75% occupancy. Definitely way over the 50% stated in the article. Again, only basing my findings off Stewart's website.

75% is not good for an established property, but I'm not sure I would consider Stewart "established" at this point. Come back to me in six months.

If we get the feeling that 75% is the prevailing occupancy rate downtown then that's worrisome. Again, the inexpensive stuff rents instantly and people don't move out of it. There's a very high demand for a shrinking inventory. The question in my mind is how these "luxury" buildings will fare. Like I was saying at the beginning too much of one thing will result in hard times, not for the developers but for the guys left holding the bag.

I agree. These buildings should be 90%+ occupied but if the Stewart is at 75%, I could pretty easily write off the 15% deviation to poor management.

I think the downtown Phoenix luxury apartment market is one to monitor.

Will be interesting to see how things progress with the influx of the 2,000? or so new units coming in the next year and a half.

Yes, but this is also unprecedented territory for Downtown Phoenix. This is new game for this city and the numbers are not going to be perfect and will probably fluctuate quite a bit until everything settles down in the end. However, as long as the mass influx to Phoenix continues as well as the trend for urban-ism and multifamily development, I think in the immediate future Phoenix is probably going to do better than most think it will. However, we are only going by numbers from 1 building. I have not seen anything relating to total vacancy numbers for Downtown, so basing the rest of Downtown off of Stewart's numbers is inaccurate at best.

In the 1980's it resulted in management companies giving away the farm to get people to sign leases. There was one point when getting a free cruise was possible. I'm not sure we'll get that far since the city is growing so rapidly but I think it's extremely reasonable to expect some adjustments.

The main issue for me, and I've been saying it for a long time, is these buildings are all the same product. There may be a huge influx of new residents but developers are operating as if they are all in the same tax bracket. Not a good recipe for long term success - but again, developers only need to make it work long enough to get the pro forma in order.

I fully expect some of these apartments to not stay "luxury" in several years.

15 Downtown Phoenix Things To Look Forward To In 2020
 

A couple of updates here I haven't heard of before along with some anticipated opening dates of some known retail...

https://dtphx.org/2020/01/21/15-down...rd-to-in-2020/

Sounds like a rant to me. Yeah, brown water would not be good but I’m sure they fixed it along with electrical issues. Water pressure sucks in highrises or even midrises. Getting your own shower head fixes it :-). But the homeless problem in this City is a big issue. Proper locks for the lobby is a necessity to keep the wrong people out. Can’t do too much about someone throwing a rock through the window though even with security besides hopefully catching them. I rode by The Link the other day and they had a broken window too. City square had a broken window a while back, they fixed it and there’s another broken window again. Nothing makes me more upset that vandalism, destroying stuff with no purpose just proves your drag on society. I definitely feel there are some homeless and poorer people out there that are upset at the growth, beautification and just good things (at least to us) that are happening downtown. I over heard a conversation outside The Whinning Pig last week, talking about the haves and have nots referring to Block 23s Ryan Apartment’s going up. Like someone said earlier, it all comes down to supply and demand but what happens to the have nots????? I agree with biggie diggus to a degree, we may need some more lower income housing soon. Maybe some towers like New York City type projects.

Anyone who thinks there's a homeless problem here needs to spend about 3 days walking around San Francisco.

No this has been the render for a while, but this is a nice big version.

The heights of the buildgins are off as the Central and Van Buren tower is supposed to be 30-35 floors I thought, with the building fronting 1st ave being 25 but the rendering has like a 50 story south tower and a 12 story west tower.

Nah it's different. Found the rendering from the original RFP. Slightly different....the podium differs and the rooftop shade appears to be missing.

https://i.imgur.com/F31OQ2wh.png

But to your point...the new rendering and towers looks higher right?? Did this get a height increase!?

Edit: MODS - can we move these last couple of posts to the "Phoenix Central Station" thread?

I was there back in May last year and I thought the problem would be worse. I was in a lot of tourist areas but I didn’t see a lot of homeless. The thing is, there are so many people walking around, so regular people out number them so it didn’t seem that bad to me. We walked a lot too, from China Town to downtown to The Fisherman’s Wharf. Everyone just said stay away from Tenderloin. I went out in Downtown Oakland which was real nice as well, up and coming kinda like Downtown Phoenix. I don’t think anything compares to Skid Row in LA. I do wonder what is going to happen with all the development there. Somethings got to give.