SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Southwest (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=643)
-   -   Phoenix Development News (3) (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=173764)

ChelseaFC Jan 31, 2023 6:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by YourBuddy (Post 9853666)
But there is light rail downtown, which is where most people want there to be less car oriented development, where people should be able to walk a couple blocks. It’s funny how the heat is always used as an excuse to not have walkable area, but never the cold. It is very rare for businesses to close in cold cities like Minneapolis when it is extremely cold and people still walk and go to work. Less people walk in extreme conditions and that is never viewed as an excuse to not have less car oriented development. It is just a less busy day, just like it currently is here when the temperatures get that high in car oriented development.

I don't think it has as much to do with getting places downtown, but rather getting other places in the metro. If you want to go for a hike, how are you getting there? How are you getting to Flagstaff with your snowboard? If you need to go to Ikea or the hardware store and bring something home, how is that happening?

YourBuddy Jan 31, 2023 6:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChelseaFC (Post 9853675)
I don't think it has as much to do with getting places downtown, but rather getting other places in the metro. If you want to go for a hike, how are you getting there? How are you getting to Flagstaff with your snowboard? If you need to go to Ikea or the hardware store and bring something home, how is that happening?

Then you will find one of the many buildings that already has parking and live there and commute.

ChelseaFC Jan 31, 2023 6:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by YourBuddy (Post 9853685)
Then you will find one of the many buildings that already has parking and live there and commute.

The thing is, developers want to sell/rent units and need to make their new building attractive. If there's not enough parking, they might find it more difficult to find customers in the numbers and price points they are looking for. My guess is most people don't want to be stuck in DT Phoenix.

az_daniel Jan 31, 2023 6:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChelseaFC (Post 9853675)
I don't think it has as much to do with getting places downtown, but rather getting other places in the metro. If you want to go for a hike, how are you getting there? How are you getting to Flagstaff with your snowboard? If you need to go to Ikea or the hardware store and bring something home, how is that happening?

You do what people do literally everywhere else, rent a car, drive with somebody else, use rideshare, take a shuttle, have things delivered to you, etc. There are plenty of options, and that is the key...options

az_daniel Jan 31, 2023 6:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChelseaFC (Post 9853712)
The thing is, developers want to sell/rent units and need to make their new building attractive. If there's not enough parking, they might find it more difficult to find customers in the numbers and price points they are looking for. My guess is most people don't want to be stuck in DT Phoenix.

Almost the entire Phoenix area caters to one type of person - the person that has the ability and desire to drive everywhere. However, Phoenix is a big boy city now and we should ALSO be able to attract and retain people who want to live in an urban environment, and we should be empowering those who are already here who choose not to drive or are unable to drive, to be able to do so here without having to move out of state. Who knows how much young talent has left Phoenix to find jobs and start families elsewhere because it has not historically offered the urban amenities that they need and want. The demand is clearly there.

There are hundreds of square miles of car centric sprawl and car centric housing options to choose from. Downtown, at the very least, does not need to follow.

ChelseaFC Jan 31, 2023 7:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by az_daniel (Post 9853741)
There are hundreds of square miles of car centric sprawl and car centric housing options to choose from. Downtown, at the very least, does not need to follow.

If the city took away parking minimums, would developers significantly reduce their parking offerings? Or would they continue to provide it anyway because there is demand for it?

az_daniel Jan 31, 2023 8:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChelseaFC (Post 9853758)
If the city took away parking minimums, would developers significantly reduce their parking offerings? Or would they continue to provide it anyway because there is demand for it?

Yes, they would almost certainly reduce their parking offerings, especially in urban areas and near transit. Unnecessary required parking adds extraordinary costs to construction, especially for smaller projects, small businesses, or projects on heavily constrained sites, and it is an enormous barrier to delivering affordable housing.

This has been borne out by many of our recent projects in the valley, where we are almost always directed by clients to only do code minimum spaces as a baseline and to seek out every available strategic opportunity to reduce the number of parking spaces even further. They want to build less parking, and we should let them.

ChelseaFC Jan 31, 2023 9:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by az_daniel (Post 9853850)
Yes, they would almost certainly reduce their parking offerings, especially in urban areas and near transit. Unnecessary required parking adds extraordinary costs to construction, especially for smaller projects, small businesses, or projects on heavily constrained sites, and it is an enormous barrier to delivering affordable housing.

This has been borne out by many of our recent projects in the valley, where we are almost always directed by clients to only do code minimum spaces as a baseline and to seek out every available strategic opportunity to reduce the number of parking spaces even further. They want to build less parking, and we should let them.

Great to hear. So if the developers are for reducing/eliminating parking minimums, and there is consumer demand for units without parking, I wonder what the Phoenix City Council is waiting for? Are they beholden to some entity or constituency we're not thinking of?

YourBuddy Jan 31, 2023 9:45 PM

Organized nimby groups are a big problem for developers here.

exit2lef Jan 31, 2023 10:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by phoenixwillrise (Post 9853629)
Not sure but maybe some of you like walking around in 120% heat. So you want someone to live in Phoenix without a car or require them to have the car a few blocks from where they live? Do you actually walk long distances in 120% degree heat when you are not working out? Like going to work or to a restaurant? I am in on Light Rail and Electric trolley's but sorry there will never be enough of those to service every area of the city a person would be working or shopping and you would have to have stops like every 1/2 block. Do you presently buy groceries and walk multiple blocks to your condo or apt? Are you people serious?

Of all the hackneyed arguments to defend car culture in Phoenix, this is by far the weakest. It's seldom 120 degrees here, and even in the hottest months of summer, it's never above 100 degrees the entire day. Much of the time, the weather is pleasant enough for a brief walk. Regardless, abundant parking often makes conditions worse in terms of summer heat. An asphalt parking lot is so much hotter than a tree-lined sidewalk. Even when parking is in garages, the wide streets needed for induced traffic add to urban heat. No one here is "anti parking." Some parking is needed, but it should be based on true market demand as measured by how many people are willing to pay for it when it is not bundled into rent. Instead, we end up with more parking than needed due to antiquated regulations. In terms of grocery shopping, there are many approaches: using a car (perhaps one shared with others in the household), using rideshare, using a cargo bike, or shopping every few days for smaller loads. No one approach is best, which is why it's good to have choices.

az_daniel Jan 31, 2023 10:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by YourBuddy (Post 9853938)
Organized nimby groups are a big problem for developers here.

Yep, excess parking is very often a concession to NIMBY groups.

Mr.RE Jan 31, 2023 10:32 PM

The glass window walls are starting to go up on Palmtower: https://app.oxblue.com/open/clayco/palmtower

CrestedSaguaro Jan 31, 2023 10:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr.RE (Post 9853995)
The glass window walls are starting to go up on Palmtower: https://app.oxblue.com/open/clayco/palmtower

I saw them when I was driving by during lunch. The quality is much better than I thought it was going to be. Going to look great.

Spitfiredude Feb 1, 2023 1:35 PM

My spouse and I specifically decided to move to Biltmore due to lack of parking at a complex on Roosevelt Row that we really liked. She reverse commutes to north Scottsdale daily & I WFH, but have a tacoma I use every other week to go to the mountains.

Plus wouldn’t reduction of parking reduce most of these buildings by 30-50’ in height? When appropriate, why not just wrap the 1st parking floors in retail?

DesertRay Feb 1, 2023 2:57 PM

Parking isn't connected to height. Buildings can be designed with more housing where the parking was. It sounds like you made the best choice for you. Living nearer to the mountains, and getting more parking to boot. Win-win. As downtown gets denser, it's going to be harder to park all vehicles, much less larger SUVs and trucks. That's city life most places.

Obadno Feb 1, 2023 4:20 PM

AZBEX literally using us as a source https://azbex.com/planning-developme...be-growing-up/

Quote:

By Roland Murphy for AZBEX

Partly because of its proximity to the airport, partly because there has always been land to build out horizontally, and partly for any number of other reasons, the Phoenix skyline has never boasted the soaring height and volume of towers that other large cities can claim.

That has evolved, somewhat, in recent years. While the physical limitations of wood framing have kept the vast majority of development, particularly in multifamily, in the low-rise realm, the last decade has provided the landscape with a healthy dotting of mid-rise—up to 12 floors by most definitions—and even the occasional honest-to-goodness high-rise plan.

According to the high-rise enthusiast site skyscraperpage.com, Phoenix has an inventory of 41 buildings of more than 12 floors. Of those, however, only 12 have been built in the 2000s.

If we turn to the DATABEX project database and do a bit of filtering and scrubbing, we find at least 16 high-rise projects in various stages of development. Of these, three are in the 85003 ZIP Code; 11 are in 85004, and the remaining two are in 85012.

For reference, 85003 lies generally between the Salt River and Thomas Road and is roughly bounded on the east and west by Central and 7th avenues. 85004 has the same general north-south boundaries between Central and 7th Street, and 85012 carries those same east-west boundaries north between Thomas Road and Glendale Avenue.

Those 16 projects show a relatively even match between projects completed and projects under construction, with five of each. Of the remaining six, three are in design, one has been canceled, one is on hold and one is in pre-construction. Total estimated project valuations for the 16 towers are more than $2.2B, and the estimated build area comes out to a little less than 10.9MSF.

Those project counts, and the Phoenix skyline itself, could soon get a major bump, however, as no fewer than three major high-rise projects are in the pre-application stages with the City of Phoenix.

VeLa Roosevelt

Adding to the 85004 project count, VeLa Development Partners has proposed VeLa Roosevelt—a 26-story 401-unit multifamily tower with a build area of nearly 923KSF. The proposed 1.55-acre site is near the SEC of Central and McKinley Street, two blocks south of Roosevelt Street.

The current site is a parking lot with shade canopies, according to the project narrative.

The proposal calls for 22 floors of rental residential over a four-story parking podium and incorporates 5KSF of retail, lobby and leasing area space along with parking and loading areas. Bicycle storage space is planned on the west side of the ground floor. Open space and indoor and outdoor amenity spaces will be provided at the base of the residential tower, according to the narrative.

VeLa Development Partners is the developer. Lamar Johnson Collaborative is the architect, and Clayco, Inc. is the general contractor. The project is represented by Snell & Wilmer.

The Phoenix Board of Adjustment is scheduled to hear variance requests for the project at its Feb. 2 meeting. A preliminary site plan review request was filed in November, and a civil plan review request was filed earlier this month.

509 West Monroe Tower

LG Development Group submitted a Downtown Code Fact Finding meeting request to the Phoenix Planning and Development Department as part of a pre-application last November.

The request deals with a plan to build a 24-story development with an estimated 400 residential units and ground-floor retail/commercial space. According to the project overview, the plan calls for “a mix of studio, one-, two-, and three-bedroom units with an average unit size of approximately 796 square feet. The Project will incorporate customary, modern residential amenities, which may include a rooftop lounge, as well as leasing, fitness and amenity spaces. An above grade parking structure will serve the project’s parking requirements in addition to offering off site valet parking spaces to a nearby hotel. The Project as designed proposes 100% Lot Coverage. As such, the Project will pursue sustainability credits to increase the allowable Lot Coverage.”

The request was submitted on LG Development Group’s behalf by bKl Architecture.

1st & Pierce

Clayco Realty Group has submitted a pre-application to the Planning and Development Department for 1st & Pierce, a 36-story high-rise tower it is planning on 0.9 acres at the NWC of the intersection.

The initial plan calls for 396 apartments and 5KSF of ground floor restaurant/retail space, as well as the property’s leasing/administrative offices. An integrated parking structure will have eight levels of above-grade parking.

According to the project narrative, the development will offer, “Numerous resident amenities, including a podium-level outdoor deck with grill stations and lawn, a rooftop pool and pool deck, fitness center with rock wall and indoor basketball court, resident club lounge and co-working lounge, and a bicycle storage and maintenance room.”

Several infrastructure and street improvements are also planned along both Pierce and 1st streets.

Clayco Realty Group is the developer. Lamar Johnson Collaborative is the architect, and Clayco, Inc. is the general contractor. Kimley-Horn is the civil engineer and landscape architect. Meyer Borgman Johnson is the structural engineer, and the mechanical, engineering and plumbing firm is Solutions AEC. The project is represented by Gammage & Burnham, PLC.

PHX31 Feb 1, 2023 4:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Obadno (Post 9854551)
AZBEX literally using us as a source https://azbex.com/planning-developme...be-growing-up/

509 West Monroe Tower

Speaking of this area, has anyone driven by the pre-war building that burned on the backside of this lot? Is it still standing? Would be sad to lose an art deco small commercial store front building, even if it was in disrepair before. But I can't imagine they'll try to save it. From the recent aerial and fairly recent street view it looks nearly completely burned out, but the front is still ok. I guess I'm just glad the old duplex (?) and the New Windsor Hotel next to it didn't catch fire too.

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.4492...7i16384!8i8192

combusean Feb 1, 2023 6:07 PM

It's on streetview and there's definitely some scorching in back .. the problem is fire often weakens the brickwork. I don't think I've ever seen a fire-damaged brick building actually get rehabilitated.

I wonder what's on hold or canceled in that AZBEX list.

MiEncanto Feb 1, 2023 6:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PHX31 (Post 9854603)
Speaking of this area, has anyone driven by the pre-war building that burned on the backside of this lot? Is it still standing? Would be sad to lose an art deco small commercial store front building, even if it was in disrepair before. But I can't imagine they'll try to save it. From the recent aerial and fairly recent street view it looks nearly completely burned out, but the front is still ok. I guess I'm just glad the old duplex (?) and the New Windsor Hotel next to it didn't catch fire too.

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.4492...7i16384!8i8192

I've driven past a few times since the fire and it looks like a mess (and it wasn't nice before the fire); It doesn't look like it has been well cared for.

PHX31 Feb 1, 2023 6:42 PM

It's sad. Phoenix has precious little pre-war buildings let alone blocks left in their original state. From the street view I posted, it's easy to imagine how great it would be if just that half-block could have been preserved and not let fall into disrepair, or somehow be nicely restored/renovated. It's not a glitzy new tower, but it could have been a really cool area with perfect historic street presence.


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:29 PM.

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