Quote:
|
So based on the Metrocenter renderings it seems like that's the end of the line for the lightrail. Seems like a missed opportunity since the bridge was the most expensive part of the project. It just seems like it will be expensive to try and expand and snake the line through the development especially if they have to obtain rights of ways or eminent domain buildings to clear space for a future expansion.
|
I had originally posted this in the low to mid-rise thread, but it seems more appropriate here. I found more information looking at the Fire Dept's review of the project:
Description: KIVA#: 22-3033 Project Name 360 North Third Site Address 360 N 3rd Avenue, Phoenix AZ 85003 Zoning DTC ? Van Buren Site Area (net) 35,250 SF (0.81 acres) Site Area (gross) 44,650 SF (1.02 acres) Building Area (gross) Approximately 449,000 GSF Building Height 365-feet Number of Stories 31 Unit Count 375 Parking Count 210 Construction Type 1A, Fully Sprinklered Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I agree, California recently did away with minimum parking mandates near public transit as most urban cities such as San Francisco and San Jose were doing away with them. Great article below about California passing legislation to do away with parking minimums. Below are some snippets and a link to the full article. https://urbanland.uli.org/planning-d...nders-approve/ Michael Manville, associate professor of urban planning at the UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs, recently presented a paper to UCLA Ziman Center for Real Estate about the benefits of removing parking requirements. “A sizable [amount of] research literature suggests they undermine housing affordability, encourage driving, and discourage walking and public transit use,” states Manville. “Rolling these requirements back is thus a big change, and essential to meeting California’s affordability and sustainability goals.” On the front lines of possible pivots to new typologies is Mark Oberholzer, principal, AIA, LEED AP at the Los Angeles office of KTGY. He believes the new law “could become a holy grail of workforce housing near transit.” He notes that his office receives 20 to 25 inquiries a year from owners looking to develop small, mid-block parcels. For many of these, mandating parking also requires building a podium to support it, which is often prohibitively expensive. And as a designer, he’s excited about the prospect of creating “new people-centric buildings” that help revitalize neighborhoods. Previously, parking-structure podiums and subgrade parking tended to dominate design at the street level, often with a small lobby fronting the garage as the only human-oriented space. “This is not pedestrian-friendly. It doesn’t contribute to the neighborhood, and it’s simply not exciting. But if your ground floor is now free of parking, you can create welcoming ground-floor units, some facing the street. You can have courtyards accessible on the grade level rather than up in the air. In general, it makes the entire building more open, interesting, and inviting.” And what about those developers retaining parking? How might these designs change? “One solution is to decouple parking from the building and build more efficient parking in the neighborhood, perhaps down the street from the apartments and perhaps aggregating the needs of more than one building.” A lot of the historical typologies have a specific character. Prior to parking mandates, attractive California courtyard styles helped define neighborhoods at various scales. But it’s not the architectural style that’s important to unleashing new building types; it’s the freedom from imposed parking. |
Quote:
Nice roast. I'll have to remember that one. My take comes from my years in law enforcement. When I was younger, I loved the smell. It used to be so much sweeter. These days, the skunkish nature seems more prominent. But I'll take that smell all day, every day over the stench of urine and feces that also dominates around some downtown areas. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I wonder if all the commercial lenders will agree with the urban planistas and will finance projects without parking, bundled or otherwise.
Doubtful, but one can dream. That being said the 360 3rd Ave project above is already underparked for Phoenix like a lot of projects that are in the pipeline. The market doesn't need bureaucratic dictation about parking, it should build what it wants to build. |
Quote:
|
Parking requirements in Phoenix aren’t going anywhere keep dreaming
Best make your peace with it |
Quote:
|
^ Yeah I was trying to say the same thing.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
WE GOT A SHOUT OUT: https://azbex.com/planning-developme...be-growing-up/
"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." |
Anti Parking Fans
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?
|
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
|
Organized nimby groups are a big problem for developers here.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
The glass window walls are starting to go up on Palmtower: https://app.oxblue.com/open/clayco/palmtower
|
Quote:
|
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? |
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.
|
AZBEX literally using us as a source https://azbex.com/planning-developme...be-growing-up/
Quote:
|
Quote:
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.4492...7i16384!8i8192 |
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. |
Quote:
|
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.
|
Quote:
|
360 north 3rd
Here's the first renderings of the proposal at 360 N. 3rd Ave. Not sure what kind of colors we can really expect. Looks like lots of glass which will look good.
View all documents on my Google Drive: https://drive.google.com/drive/folde...usp=share_link https://i.imgur.com/yvEMf10.png https://i.imgur.com/OYRZP4R.png https://i.imgur.com/5ttHykK.png |
Nothing groundbreaking but it looks pretty good nonetheless. Also good to read that their is an emphasis to continue Taylor through this block. Also in the city emails, there was a mention of Taylor continuing through at "that project on 7th Avenue". Any idea what that could be?
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
If you want real misery, move to a gulf coast location where temps in the 90s are coupled with high humidity. You'll be wishing you were back in Phoenix's 100s real quick. I live and work downtown and friggin love it. I can go months without driving my personal vehicle anywhere even though it is parked on site. My wife and I walk to the grocery regardless of temperature. We walk multiple blocks to concerts, comedy shows, bars, and restaurants. I traded big city suburban life for this and LOVE IT. It sure seems like I'm surrounded by others who love it too. |
Quote:
As more people move into downtown, developers will start including major retail to handle the domestics and this will reduce large parking facilities. |
Quote:
Quote:
Friendship Inn? New Windsor Hotel? Neither are known for clientele that prefer valet parking. New hotel yet to be announced? |
Quote:
And on that topic, has there been any movement with this hotel? |
I'm actually kind of shocked that 360 3rd included that pedestrian pass through more or less in line with the current "paseo" alignment. I was a little worried about that not coming to fruition but it's such a nice touch when with the last few projects this has become a reality. This wouldn't have been done years ago.
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:54 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.