I don't think there is a big enough gay population in general for that ever to be the case unless you get extremely extrememly specific.

Like a few square blocks in the biggest cities in the country.

Downtown is the only thing close to a "gay neighborhood" though but the only gay people I actually know live in Tempe

That last sentence was supremely idiotic. You're line of reasoning is that if you knew a few black, Asian, Scottish (insert group) people who lived in Scottsdale, would you make the assumption then that they don't live downtown? If you don't think they're are gays in downtown and adjacent neighborhoods, you must never leave your house.

Your comment is extremely idiotic because that's not what I said.

"Downtown is the only thing close to a "gay neighborhood" though but the only gay people I actually know live in Tempe"

Downtown is the closest thing Phoenix has to a gay neighborhood, the only gays I know live in Tempe.

I never said my social circle decides neighborhoods

He just said that downtown Phoenix is as close to a "gayborhood" that there is in Phoenix - it's pretty obvious he knows there is a large gay population there. His point was that it would be incredibly hard for an entire downtown to be described as PREDOMINANTLY gay given the ratio of gay:straight people. So, he isn't the one looking supremely idiotic...

Aside from One Lexington - which is almost entirely gay as I mentioned - there really isn't one area of concentrated gay population like a Hillcrest, Boys' Town, etc. Most of my younger friends rent in Tempe, while the older ones live in Central Phoenix but in various sections. Of the hundreds of gay people I met in Arizona, I've never heard a single one of them refer to Melrose as a gay neighborhood and have met maybe 1-3 who live in that area. Multiple gay bars in one area doesn't = gay neighborhood. There's no sense of connection between any of them, they aren't walkable, there isn't any urban residential or supporting service retail, etc. That's why I think it would be interesting if Portland on the Park really did end up selling to that demographic... there's already the arts-focused hotel renovation just east, FEZ to the south, and Bliss within walking distance. Too bad Amsterdam is gone (not really considering its regression), but there's a ton of potential for some new life along Central between Fillmore and Moreland.

Like Sean mentioned, downtown hasn't really attracted upscale establishments. I wouldn't want that entire area to be filled with traditional gay bars/clubs, but with some more of the upscale dining/drinking variety (like AZ88/FEZ), and some trendy - if not upscale - boutiques.

However, I can't see DeSoto successfully cashing in on an upscale niche in the market. It has branded itself as a neighborhood center and marketplace, which lends itself to a much more casual environment. The prices don't seem in line with what they are trying to sell themselves as, IMO. I can see it getting a lot of toot traffic and low sales volume. Hopefully, the remaining retail is more value-focused.

Well the City of Phoenix last year said there were about 8,500 people living downtown. If you factor the CDC's estimate of the gay population at 1.8-2% of 4,000,000 it wouldn't take much to make an area seem predominantly gay. So Obando you are sorta right.

Blah blah blah...I don't need your political comments all over this development thread. Not everyone is liberal on here.

Anyway, I'm not a big fan of "rankings" or "reports" like this. First of all, there are so many dynamics involved, so I don't know how credible a social media network is in compiling rankings as such. Second, some of these rankings already seemed bad. For example, public safety at 40? Look at FBI crime data and it will tell you otherwise. I can list plenty of sources that have Arizona middle ranked or better. What is pollution on here for? Because we don't spend millions on pollution prevention we're 30th? How is this a taxpayer "bang-for-buck"? If you believe that to be a top 6 issue than I suppose, but I don't think everyone (like myself) would say that pollution is a top priority when it comes to where their tax money is spent, especially when air quality can be uncontrollable (dust/allergens).

The problem (if it is one) is where Arizona focuses its money and it shows. Education is not a priority in this state, but the sports industry (tourism) is a huge investment. Valley freeways and streets are some of the best maintained and designed (aesthetically) in the nation. The public transportation is a little below average, but depending on how you see it you may say that its not an investment given the suburban sprawl of Phoenix. On the other hand, you may want more public transit. I guess we'll find the truth with the Transportation tax proposal (at least for Phoenix). The whole park issue I disagree with. What do they consider a park? A place where a child can play or the country's largest municipal park in South Mountain. Too many holes, not enough clear cut data or details, and too many conflicting sources.

@JJ, one of my best friends is gay and lives in Lexington. There are a lot of gay people in that complex.

No. Obadno's point was just the opposite, and I was agreeing with him. Less than 3% of the population identify as gay. In order for an area to be 'predominantly gay,' its population would need to be 51% gay at a minimum. That means an area would need to have ~25x more gay people there than the national average. Obadno was saying that while downtown Phoenix has a higher percentage (say, maybe 10% as opposed to 2%) than other areas of the metro, the gay population is more dispersed into areas like Tempe and Scottsdale.

I hate math and this is totally off topic, so in conclusion, I hope Portland on the Park and the Foundry Hotel attract the gays who then open boutiques, cafes, and bars all along Central from Fillmore > Moreland with beautified storefronts and attractive streetscaping, which in turns creates demand for more residential investment in the area between Roosevelt and Hance Park.

BTW, per soleri, McDowell (near 12th Street) was becoming a gay hub prior to the AIDS epidemic. How great would that have been if it had become the Phoenix version of Hillcrest? That strip is one of the only remaining areas with the bones to be potentially revitalized and turned into a really cool, urban neighborhood with a walkable main street at its core.

Fair enough and you do make some good points. Not sure that pollution is related to spending particularly; perhaps to policy.

As to the the analysis most sites will explain what data they used and where they got it in creating their model including WalletHub in this case.

As for liberal versus conservative, Eric Jay Toll referenced the Mountain and Pacific states. If I classify Nevada and Colorado as purple although they've traditionally been red states and also include New Mexico then that leaves 5 red states and 3 blue states.

The one political comment that I made about state decisions negatively impacting the City of Phoenix more than other parts of the metro area I believe to be true. The increasing regressive profile of the tax burden would be (only) one example. It would be generally true that most urban city centers value things often asserted to be liberal.

I think sometimes conservative and liberal labels are unfortunate. To me politics is more about power, control and greed. I would contend that any state that is dominated by one party will be abused by that party regardless of color, labels and the like.

The First Baptist Church's future use is still undecided; a restaurant is mentioned as a possibility, as well as an entertainment venue. That's great news, as originally it seemed like it would be used more for small, local community events every so often.

Either option would be great for the area, especially with the new restaurants coming to the Welnick Bros Warehouse just next door.

http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/n...rch-could.html

Your downtown comment combined with the gay friends comment was pretty lame. Besides, downtown is not the "only" gay neighborhood in Phoenix. Melrose, Willo, Coronado -- the list goes on.

Most people that live in the valley would consider those neighborhoods downtown.

I don't know why everyone is getting worked up about this.

We all know gay people in general are actually a very small percentage of the population. That isn't some radical idea, its just reality.

Even many areas around the country considered "gay neighborhoods" are probably not even 51% gay, Maybe a half dozen at most nation wide.

Its sort of difficult to get that wild of an overrepresentation in any situation unless ALL gay people ALLWAYS wanted to live in very specific types of neighborhoods.

So when he said "isn't the housing downtown predominantly gay" No probably not... although downtown is the closest thing we have to a "gay neighborhood" but I would classify it as an "arts district" first.

Great article on MetroWest's investment in downtown. It's really exciting to have a team like this who has a real interest in developing a true neighborhood downtown. All of their projects are perfect for their locations, and the designs are always really nice.

Some highlights:
1) Townhomes on 3rd are completely sold out; they will feature office/gallery space on the ground level, which hasn't been mentioned before
2) The 2 historic home renovations are complete
3) For both of the above projects, MetroWest has refused to sell to any investors... they want to promote home ownership and commitment to the community
4) A new project was unveiled: McKinley Row (I feel like something already has that name?) will be a new townhome development on 4th Ave/McKinley. Great place for some urban infill, and it'll be interested to see this part of town develop once the land to the south is RFP'd.

http://downtownphoenixjournal.com/20...hoenix-living/

McKinley Row was always proposed for 4th Ave and McKinley ... it just never got off the ground. Funny that several years later they still own the lot and still are attempting to develop it.

Here's the rendering:

http://emvis.net/~sean/ssp/projects/...ckinleyRow.jpg

All of Metrowests developments seemed to have taken a really long time but now they are all happening at once so... who knows maybe this will get built!

Thanks for the link; that was a good, fun read (even with your good highlights).


"Arizona’s tallest residential building sells for $51M"
Apr 15, 2015 by Mike Sunnucks, Phoenix Business Journal
It's often a good sign when property sells or becomes available. It could indicate the perception of investor interest picking up. It can also encourage other developers to consider new projects. For example Wood Partners has already cashed in on 3 of their 4 recent projects in metro Denver, the most recent a TOD near downtown while it was still in the initial lease-up. Having the option to hold or sell or hold and be able to sell when desired is attractive to many.

$51 million?!

What a roller coaster. It was built for $70 million, the developer owed Corus $87 million, it was sold to Starwood Capital Group for $20 million, and now it's resold for $51 million.

http://easylifecommunities.com/urban/az-44monroe.html

^ LOL... I knew the history was a bit checkered but not all the particulars.

per tumblr.comhttp://media.tumblr.com/64b4ec048631...oNb1sf0hhi.jpg


"EXCLUSIVE: BMO Harris pumping $2B into Arizona economy"
Apr 15, 2015 by Eric Jay Toll, Phoenix Business Journal
This doesn't have to be specific to downtown. Creating a positive buzz for the area perks up developer interest. There are out-of-state developers that like to be "early." It doesn't take a lot to make a noticeable difference downtown.

STARKJAMES officially won the bid (a while ago but just confirming) for 206 E Portland -- the site with the unfinished foundations. I just found renderings for the project; interestingly, it's being called The Foundry, which is also the new name for the Lexington Hotel on Portland/Central.

http://starkjames.com/projects - the very first green rendering called "Oscar"

8 shipping container dwellings on top of what looks to be 2 retail spaces -- they show an art gallery and a cafe. I'm REALLY impressed. I wasn't expecting any retail to be involved, but the combination of an affordable housing solution + affordable retail solution is exactly what Roosevelt Row needs. Imagine if similar projects were built in the awkwardly-sized lots on 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Streets between Roosevelt and McKinley?

I wouldn't have said retail was a good idea in this area a few months ago, but there is a real boom happening to the north and south of Roosevelt and there aren't many - if any - adaptive reuse sites available, so infill like this is definitely needed. It would be great to see 2nd Street develop into an active connection between Roosevelt and Hance Park. With this project, the 333 Synagogue, and EnHance on Moreland, that looks like a definite possibility. I also read that The Knipe House has been receiving attention lately, so that could be another piece of the puzzle.

en Hance Park condos have a site up for initial interest; says they are starting from the $150's - that's a pretty great price point, IMO. Looks like this cycle is finally bringing urban living to those with a middle-class income.

http://ensperience.com/

The rendering is larger so the orientation is clearer; the longer section will front 2nd Street.

This article on AZCentral gives a good overview of the upcoming projects in/around Roosevelt Row. No real new information, but it's the first time I have heard that Linear (across the street from iLuminate - the apartments replacing GreenHAUS and the Scientology building) is going to break ground this spring. I thought initially Baron was going to see how iLuminate did. Also, the first time I've seen full renderings for both of those projects, and I really like both. 3rd-2nd Street should look pretty decent once iLuminate and The Dressing Room are complete.

http://www.azcentral.com/longform/ne...rict/25886609/

It also says that plans for the 314 Roosevelt house will be announced soon.