Phoenix Development News (3)

[locolife]

Originally Posted by CrestedSaguaro

Pre-App for 1st and Pierce. This one was originally a possible 402' tower. The new proposal is down to 381' 6". This still puts it on par with 44 Monroe, so I'll take it. Nice that we're steadily seeing taller developments getting proposed.

View documents on my Google Drive: https://drive.google.com/drive/folde...usp=share_link


West and South Elevations:


East and North Elevations:

This with Realm will really activate that area of downtown, would be great to see more pedestrian activity, bars, restaurants, etc to go with the strip that has Chambers.

[MMDelon]

Yeah it should really elevate that section of downtown and there are a couple more projects around the same area. Developers seem wanting to build around Roosevelt and McKinley streets. I am very interested in the RFP proposal for the ASU lot next to POMO.

[somethingfast]

i'm not a fan of all these podiums we're seeing but this looks pretty good and decent height. not sure why we can't breach 400' more often, zoning be damned (scratching head)

[TheSpud0]

I found this article about the art in Roosevelt row. Thought I post it here.

https://hyperallergic.com/793833/wha...arts-district/

[ASU Diablo]

Let's goooo!!

Some newer renderings I haven't seen before either...

https://azbigmedia.com/real-estate/d...redevelopment/

Concord Wilshire Capital and TLG Investment Partners (collectively, “Developer”), in partnership with Carl DeSantis’ CDS International Holdings Inc. (“CDS”), announced today that the acquisition of the Metrocenter Mall, including the Dillard’s Building and U-Haul Building (formerly Macy’s Building) has closed. The transaction was completed with no mortgage financing on the property and will pave the way for revitalization of one of Phoenix’s most iconic properties.

The development group has formed a strategic alliance with Hines, the international real estate firm, to redevelop and repurpose the Metrocenter Mall into a community-driven walkable village that will be home to a variety of residential apartment options including ownership and rental, curated boutiques, popular retail stores, restaurants, bars, a town-center park, and other commercial and entertainment venues. The new village will be situated on approximately 64.2 acres of prime land in a qualified Opportunity Zone. The plans for the village include over 2,600 multifamily units, 150,000 square feet of commercial and essential and service retail and 4,100 surface and garage-deck parking spaces. Total construction costs are expected to be over $850 million. The development team has also signed agreements with the City of Phoenix for a public private partnership for public improvements.

[combusean]

They partnered with Hines, who always delivers. Wow. It's even better than the original team.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by somethingfast

i'm not a fan of all these podiums we're seeing but this looks pretty good and decent height. not sure why we can't breach 400' more often, zoning be damned (scratching head)

I agree but remember not long ago we couldn't seem to get buildings over 19 stories

As the price of land downtown continues to become more expensive so will the projects

[somethingfast]

Originally Posted by Obadno

I agree but remember not long ago we couldn't seem to get buildings over 19 stories

As the price of land downtown continues to become more expensive so will the projects

Yeah I get that however other cities' downtown areas have land premiums also and they don't seem (could be wrong, just an impression) to get so many value-engineered podiums, at least not to the same magnitude.

[TJPHXskyscraperfan]

Originally Posted by somethingfast

i'm not a fan of all these podiums we're seeing but this looks pretty good and decent height. not sure why we can't breach 400' more often, zoning be damned (scratching head)

I’d like to see them at least try to have apartments on the front side of them like The Stewart. Also, a benefit is that they go up faster, rather than the amount of time it takes to build underground parking, think about Central Station, we probably won’t see it start rising out of the ground for another 6 months. Also, as a resident, you have to like the fact that getting a place on the lowest level to save money, you are probably already 8 stories up!!!

[exit2lef]

A true measure of productive building height would subtract floors devoted to parking podiums. Build a 20-story building with four levels of above ground parking? It'll count as a 16-story building. Parking podiums may be a quicker and less expensive way to boost height, but that comes at the expense of the street-level experience and the strength of the urban fabric. I'm all for height, but I'll take shorter buildings with less parking, no parking, or underground parking over any of these podiums.

[phoenixwillrise]

Originally Posted by exit2lef

A true measure of productive building height would subtract floors devoted to parking podiums. Build a 20-story building with four levels of above ground parking? It'll count as a 16-story building. Parking podiums may be a quicker and less expensive way to boost height, but that comes at the expense of the street-level experience and the strength of the urban fabric. I'm all for height, but I'll take shorter buildings with less parking, no parking, or underground parking over any of these podiums.

Why the hate for podiums? It's not like these apartment buildings are architectural marvels. Don't understand the angst. I would rather have the height as it looks better from a distance and creates more shade.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by phoenixwillrise

Why the hate for podiums? It's not like these apartment buildings are architectural marvels. Don't understand the angst. I would rather have the height as it looks better from a distance and creates more shade.

With a few exceptions, they're quite ugly. They usually involve monotonous blank walls that diminish the walk appeal of a neigbhorhood, dissuading pedestrian activity and street life.

They're cheaper to build, so they allow developers to include more parking than is absolutely necessary for a project. That surplus can induce more driving among people who might otherwise use other modes.

The entrances and exits to parking podiums interrupt sidewalks and bike lanes, creating a hostile environment for users of non-automotive modes of transport. Admittedly, this is also a problem with underground parking.

They take eyes off the street by eliminating dwelling units on lower levels. That makes the street outside less safe and less interesting. Ground floor retail can help, but only if actually leased. Vacant retail space hurts as much as blank walls.

[PHX31]

Originally Posted by exit2lef

With a few exceptions, they're quite ugly. They usually involve monotonous blank walls that diminish the walk appeal of a neigbhorhood, dissuading pedestrian activity and street life.

They take eyes off the street by eliminating dwelling units on lower levels. That makes the street outside less safe and less interesting. Ground floor retail can help, but only if actually leased. Vacant retail space hurts as much as blank walls.

Most if not all of these have ground floor retail or some sort of lobby space on the ground floor. I can't think of one that has the parking portion on the ground floor up against the street (perhaps on a side street or alley). I don't think unless someone looks up above the first or second floor that any difference is apparent between a building with a parking podium or underground parking. Certainly no one would feel less safe or be dissuaded from walking if there was a parking podium 2 stories up rather than not when both have similar ground floors. They aren't great looking from slightly afar compared to a building without a podium, but it's not that big of a deal. And the tradeoff is height (and other cost factors).

Central Station will certainly look nice without a parking podium. But I may trade the look with underground parking for a podium if it were to push the building over 400 feet (again, the ground floor or two would look the same either way)...

[ASU Diablo]

For all you nerds out there (myself included), Phoenix is now in the rotation for SEMICON which is a high profile conference. Pretty big news if you're in the industry. I expect the Phoenix market to attract similar conferences in the near future.

This announcement also reinforces the need for Phoenix to expand the convention center (South Building) and possibly build another convention hotel.

https://azbigmedia.com/business/semi...-with-phoenix/

A fixture in the San Francisco Bay Area for more than 50 years, SEMICON West is moving to Phoenix for a five-year annual rotation starting in 2025 and shifting from its longstanding July event dates to October beginning in 2024, SEMI announced today. The event, North America’s premier microelectronics exhibition and conference, will be held again in Arizona in 2027 and 2029, with all three appearances at the Phoenix Convention Center.

“SEMI is excited to bring SEMICON West to Phoenix, a booming semiconductor manufacturing hub, in October 2025,” said Joe Stockunas, president of SEMI Americas, host of the exhibition and conference. “Greater Phoenix is home to more than 75 semiconductor companies including SEMI members EMD Electronics, Intel and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC), and the sector employs more than 100,000 with more jobs on the way. As recent investments in chip manufacturing in the area have made abundantly clear, Phoenix embodies the drive by SEMI and the industry at large toward greater innovation.”

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by PHX31

Central Station will certainly look nice without a parking podium. But I may trade the look with underground parking for a podium if it were to push the building over 400 feet (again, the ground floor or two would look the same either way)...

I’ll always trade height for a better experience at street level, and I disagree about the look being the same either way. Parking podiums degrade the street level experience, even with ground floor retail.

[PHX31]

Originally Posted by exit2lef

I’ll always trade height for a better experience at street level, and I disagree about the look being the same either way. Parking podiums degrade the street level experience, even with ground floor retail.

How? Street level is the same for both.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by PHX31

How? Street level is the same for both.

It's not. Often, the ground floor retail space goes unleased, creating blight. Even if the ground floor space is leased, there are still cars coming and going out of the podium, creating conflicts on the sidewalk and the street. Also, the floors immediately above ground level influence the quality of life on the street below. If those floors have apartments, condominiums, or offices, then you have more people looking out windows, relaxing on balconies, and otherwise seeing what's going on below. That helps with safety. At the same time, variety and activity in the lower floors of a building provide a more interesting and inviting experience than the blank walls of a parking podium.

[PHX31]

Originally Posted by exit2lef

It's not. Often, the ground floor retail space goes unleased, creating blight. Even if the ground floor space is leased, there are still cars coming and going out of the podium, creating conflicts on the sidewalk and the street. Also, the floors immediately above ground level influence the quality of life on the street below. If those floors have apartments, condominiums, or offices, then you have more people looking out windows, relaxing on balconies, and otherwise seeing what's going on below. That helps with safety. At the same time, variety and activity in the lower floors of a building provide a more interesting and inviting experience than the blank walls of a parking podium.

I kind of understand and agree with the 2nd half of your argument here (several floors of things - above say level 2 - are better than a blank podium or even nicely-cladded podium), even if I think it's much less of a big deal than you make it out to be.

But I'm really having a hard time understanding your argument in the first couple of sentences... buildings with and without a podium can have ground floor retail (or lobbies or whatever). My argument is that either buildings' first couple of ground floors are the same, thus the street level and interaction is the same. Are you saying there should be no ground floor retail because it can be hard to lease so if a building with underground parking had just people's windows or balconies down to street level it would be "better"?

Also, no matter where the parking is (podium or underground), you're going to have the exact same conflicts with cars coming and going. Are you just saying buildings should be provided with zero parking? That's fine and dandy, but also impossible for the most part no matter how much you wish it.

Here are a couple examples of the street level of buildings with parking podiums. I'm really not understanding how this could be better or different if you put the parking underground (again, considering street level).

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.4555...7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.4503...7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.4524...7i16384!8i8192

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by PHX31

I kind of understand and agree with the 2nd half of your argument here (several floors of things - above say level 2 - are better than a blank podium or even nicely-cladded podium), even if I think it's much less of a big deal than you make it out to be.

But I'm really having a hard time understanding your argument in the first couple of sentences... buildings with and without a podium can have ground floor retail (or lobbies or whatever). My argument is that either buildings' first couple of ground floors are the same, thus the street level and interaction is the same. Are you saying there should be no ground floor retail because it can be hard to lease so if a building with underground parking had just people's windows or balconies down to street level it would be "better"?

Also, no matter where the parking is (podium or underground), you're going to have the exact same conflicts with cars coming and going. Are you just saying buildings should be provided with zero parking? That's fine and dandy, but also impossible for the most part no matter how much you wish it.

Here are a couple examples of the street level of buildings with parking podiums. I'm really not understanding how this could be better or different if you put the parking underground (again, considering street level).

Ground floor retail is great when there's genuine demand for it. Too often, though, it's mandated by cities in order to soften the impact of a garage or podium. The developer builds some to satisfy the requirement, but it never gets leased and ends up being a net negative for the neighborhood. Look at the biomedical campus garage as one of many examples. Ground floor residential is good, but not many people want to live below a parking podium, so it's viable only in buildings without that particular type of structure for car storage.

In terms of podiums vs. underground parking, both cause problems with conflicts due to entering and exiting cars. Nevertheless, underground parking avoids issues with dead floors above ground level. Reliance on street parking alone is the ideal situation, but it's unlikely in the short term due to misguided parking minimums imposed by cities, as well as the expectations of investors and developers. Nevertheless, this whole forum is aspirational in nature, so telling me something is impossible doesn't dissuade me from advocating for it.

[phoenixwillrise]

Originally Posted by PHX31

Most if not all of these have ground floor retail or some sort of lobby space on the ground floor. I can't think of one that has the parking portion on the ground floor up against the street (perhaps on a side street or alley). I don't think unless someone looks up above the first or second floor that any difference is apparent between a building with a parking podium or underground parking. Certainly no one would feel less safe or be dissuaded from walking if there was a parking podium 2 stories up rather than not when both have similar ground floors. They aren't great looking from slightly afar compared to a building without a podium, but it's not that big of a deal. And the tradeoff is height (and other cost factors).

Central Station will certainly look nice without a parking podium. But I may trade the look with underground parking for a podium if it were to push the building over 400 feet (again, the ground floor or two would look the same either way)...

Concur.