It would be illegal for Native American Connections to only rent or sell to Indians. The problem with the complexes is that they're subsidized housing in an area that's trying to rebuild itself with merchants catering to the mainstream. Affordable housing keeps the area poor, which scares off any new retailer.

Not true...in a real mixed-income community (like downtown should be), retailers value having a workforce nearby; and most retail and service work is on the lower end of the pay scale. It makes running their business easier when employees don't have to bus it in from long distances. Also, the amount of "low-income" residential being built is not even half of what exists in the upscale market. 44 Monroe, alone, has more capacity than a few of the low income projects downtown.

Also, low to moderate units that are quality built in real neighborhoods like Roosevelt tend to integrate well and maintain well. Roosevelt Commons, which has been around for years, is case in point.

You can't seriously believe that retailers don't take into account area median incomes? Why would real estate developers here go through the hassle of providing that information to prospective tenants if they didn't care?

Retailers don't care about their workforce when compared to their customers.

Moreover, Roosevelt Commons is not "low to moderate" income. It's one of the most expensive complexes in the city.

Retailers do, but you also have to consider the fact that for downtown to be a real community that supports grocery stores, markets, shops, etc. it will take a mix of incomes...like in a real city. Low to moderate income earners tend to spend more of their discretionary income on goods and services (grocers, markets, stores) while higher-income folk tend to spend more of their discretionary income at restaurants, high-end stores, bars/wine bars, coffee houses, etc. This is why so many cities are encouraging development of real, mixed-income communities in their downtowns: http://urbanland.uli.org/Articles/20...irkMixedIncome

Of course there will be plenty of room for the expensive, typical "yuppie" shop and retailer, but that is no reason to push out lower and moderate income folks that can help make a complete community and not a whitewashed, culture-less, staid atmosphere. That includes the unique artist community in which not many of those people can afford rent in a luxury development.

I think you are confusing Roosevelt Commons with Roosevelt Square. Roosevelt Commons in a "low income-tax credit" rental property with rehabbed, historic buildings on 5th Ave and a new complex behind historic bungalows on 6th Ave south of Roosevelt...this is the front of Roosevelt Commons on 6th Ave:

http://medialibrary.propertysolution...5b69a8d150.jpg

You are seeing subsidized housing for the elderly and Native Americans because it is not very easy right now for a developer to go get a loan from a private lender for a typical development. But there is easy money out there from the government for subsidized housing (it usually comes in the form of tax credits for the developer).

And you better believe retailers care about the demographics of a neighborhood before they move in. And while a mix of incomes is ideal for the reasons you state, a retailer also doesn't want to move into a neighborhood that is predominantly low income. And the downtown zip codes are all low income. Granted, there are nice pockets in those, but overall, the area is lower income. I live in 85007. My neighborhood is nice, Encanto Palmcroft is really, really nice, but at the end of the day, the median household income in the zip code is low because for everyone one really nice house in Encanto, there is some slum lord's shit hole that rents to registered sex offenders (I know this because I get a flyer on my door every time they move in).

http://zipatlas.com/us/az/phoenix/zi...old-income.htm

There's no need to push anyone out, but you only exacerbate the perception and problem when you fill vacant lots with low income subsidized housing.

Deleted Post

I guess that's the reasoning when one lives in say, Chandler, but to say affordable housing scares off ANY new retailer is absurd. Nordstrom may not move in, but stores that cater to that income level, will. As for downtown, there is obviously a good mix to draw national retailers to places like Cityscape, for example. Yes, there's a shitload of poor like every other American city and yet the retailers come when there's enough people living there. That's what's happening now in downtown.

As for subsidized housing keeping an area poor, is because NIMBY's in the suburbs, say Chandler for example, want sterile, unaffected lifestyles. Seeing the poor walk around makes them feel unsafe.

^ Where are the retailers in Downtown Phoenix? There is an absolute abundance of vacant ground floor space. I bet the only reason the spaces haven't been filled with payday loan and dollar stores is that the rents are too high.

I maintain that building complex after complex of subsidized affordable housing does nothing to bring up the overall median incomes if they doesn't drag them down further, and those area median incomes need to raise substantially before retailers start taking the area seriously.

Seriously, where are the retailers in Downtown Phoenix? Don't get out much do you? Also, subsidized housing (part of urban housing) needs transportation, health and welfare services. Got those in your neighborhood? You're annoyed because a hipster joint might not open downtown to serve your poetry/music/veggie wrap needs because of old ladies and Native Americans. So sad now.

^ What crawled up your ass to turn you so personally offended to the reality of downtown retail and so combative to anyone who should point it out?

First off, I don't even live in downtown Phoenix anymore, much less Arizona, and I am no longer personally invested in the area at all beyond this forum.

Secondly, even if I did still live downtown, the last thing I would be wanting is another hipster wrap or coffee shop because downtown is already chock full of those things.

Thirdly, the only thing downtown Phoenix has is a plethora of restaurants and bars. I am utterly baffled that I have to spell this out for you but there are no hardware stores, electronics stores, furniture stores, pet supply stores, grocery stores, opticians, and very few clothing retailers beyond a couple niches, or much less of anything that suggests normal people actually live and shop in the area.

Subsidized housing isn't helping any of those things arrive. Period.

I lived in Downtown Phoenix for six years and found myself driving out of downtown for every last little thing from air filters to clothing to groceries. You are blind or on something if you think downtown Phoenix doesn't have a retail services problem.

Here are some pics from my camera phone on the work being done at Roosevelt/1st Ave. Mainly they're moving dirt and adding new curbs. That little spur of 1st avenue has been covered over. Sorrry the development isn't that interesting yet.

http://imageshack.us/a/img96/9720/20130419154913.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img845/7536/20130419154837.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img585/7168/20130419154829.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img194/4970/20130419154723.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img802/9342/201304191246492.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img801/3093/20130419124607.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img545/5668/20130419124542.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img849/2986/20130419124456.jpg


Here is what the old Phoenix Public Market looks like now. Sign says it will be open everyday and have breakfast, lunch and a bakery & bar.

http://imageshack.us/a/img834/7799/20130419125227.jpg

seems like it'd be a good time to snap some pictures of the view up 1st ave from the south. that church won't cap off 1st ave anymore.

I side with Combusean on this. While affordable housing projects replace dirt lots, it will not be good for DT Phx in the long run. Last thing anyone wants, including retailers, is ghetto ass, ignorant, low income consumers. I don't think they should be clustered anywhere near the core.

fucking.thank.you.

anyway, on to different news, I went to the farmer's market today and talked to the people from Aaron Chamberlain's new restaurant and they said mid May and it will have a grab/go barista bar with in house pastries, and open at 0700 daily. oh happy day.

Sheriff's Office
 

http://i37.tinypic.com/25qg9pw.jpg

http://i36.tinypic.com/sdmfq8.jpg

http://i36.tinypic.com/2873ol5.jpg

Is Chamberlain's restaurant the one that replaced the indoor portion of the market (picture above)? Great to see that space filled up again so quickly.

As far as the low income housing debate is concerned, I think the biggest issue is that these projects are the only ones we are seeing. Every city will and should have a diverse population so there isn't anything wrong with these projects in isolation. In fact, for the most part, they have all been fairly attractive buildings that are helping toward downtown's urbanization. However, for every 5 low income projects (3 native American, 1 senior, 1 student), we have only seen about 1 market rate project (1st ave and Roosevelt which is still very preliminary). A downtown filled with a population that has little income and/or is only here a portion of the year is not going to attract business or retail.

And, it isn't just Phoenix. I was just complaining the other day that Tempe has gone in the same direction, and that downtown is much smaller with a lot less developable land left, so IMO, can't really afford to throw away its prime real estate on these kinds of projects. An entire strip of land in their core is now being devoted to senior housing, while the only towers being proposed are for students. When you are missing options for working professionals, young families, affluent boomers, etc., you're essentially forcing money and business out to the burbs.

It sucks that financing and/or tax breaks for these projects seem to be so much easier to get.

However, low income residents are no more likely than a "professional" to be ghetto or ignorant. These traits have little to do with one's income level, and it's a shame if people really associate the two with each other.

Don't forget about the Cityscape Residences. They will be market rate and not designed for students.

1st Ave and Roosevelt
 

I don't see any signs of a building or foundation yet.


http://i36.tinypic.com/2pqubuf.jpg

http://i38.tinypic.com/33ah3qg.jpg

Native American Connections:

http://i36.tinypic.com/11l22w3.jpg

http://i33.tinypic.com/2rz5h5h.jpg

There were some questions about Hance Park a few posts ago. Here is a picture of it from 3rd Ave above I10 looking east towards Central Avenue/Burton Barr Library:

http://i34.tinypic.com/343i6ic.jpg

they sort of, to an extent, go hand in hand.

Typically low incomes jobs are taken by under or uneducated people. Undereducated people typically come from long lines of poverty or undereducation. Stupid people are typically classless.

Eventually you get to the term "scum".

Thanks, nick, of course CityScape is the most important residential project underway.

Great pictures. Anyone know if the apartments that are set to be demolished are shown in any of the pics (1st/Roosevelt)? If the project isn't real, I hope they stop now before they create a massive lot of nothing. Additionally, that damn park needs a grand entrance- is that part of the upcoming improvements? Are there any pedestrian entrances directly off the street or are they all through the parking lots?

I won't go into the psychographics of lower income folks. I just think it's unfair to make such sweeping generalizations, but to each their own.