Phoenix Area Low- and Mid-Rise Development Thread

[sky51]

Pictures of Proxy 333 taken on Feb 27 2016.
It is so encouraging to see the LONG LONG empty lots in Downtown Phoenix being filled with productive uses.

[combusean]

Proxy's looking good, thanks!

[muertecaza]

Apartments planned for 3rd Ave/Indian School, re-using existing car dealership structure as leasing office/clubhouse.

http://azbigmedia.com/azre-magazine/...-reuse-project

[Jjs5056]

Proxy is one of the best projects downtown, but it isn't fair to say it will be filling in an empty lot, as a series of galleries/businesses were demo'd to make way for it. In this case, I'm not complaining at all. IDK if pricing has been released, but hopefully the 10 live/work spaces will be affordable enough that they'll be as successful as the ones at Skyline and Artisan Village. If one more (taller) project could just fill in the rest of that block, there'd be a great dense neighborhood long 4th Street from Roosevelt to Fillmore.

[Jjs5056]

Originally Posted by PHXFlyer11

Well said. It amounts to most developers building housing being residential developers. They know the economics of residential and have far less risk when they fill the first floor with something they know they can lease out. I'm all for ground retail, I'm just saying alot of developers only provide for that if they are forced as there is more risk in it for them.

Yea, I understand why developers do it and the risks, etc. But, other cities gentrified, as well, and did so with mixed-use buildings -- how were they able to do it? That's a real question.

I forgot that they are leaving some buildings on-site that could potentially house businesses in the future, but I guess I just feel like there has to at least be some sort of compromise that gets the City the bones it needs for a walkable environment. Roosevelt, parts of Central, etc. are literally going to be lined with leasing center after leasing center. The lobby for Alliance's project on Roosevelt is at least 8,000 square feet -- how do they not lose more on that than if they gave up 2,000 of that for a retail space that sat vacant for 6 months?

I just think certain streets should require at least enough space for a small cafe/restaurant/gallery. The entire appeal of Roosevelt Row was that it was one of the few true shopping-type streets. Vacancy has to be extremely low in the area right now, so I feel like the City had the upper hand in having Baron at least provide 5 live/work units or something? Likewise, I don't think every building in the govt. mall needs to have retail, but this one stood out to be because its adjacent to the only really nice space in the area which needs all the eyes it can get. And, I don't necessarily see the benefits of TOD if its all single-use as a principal.

Those are just my thoughts; they aren't demands of developers to spend extra money. But, I do think the City should at least fight for good design now and then.

[dtnphx]

Has this been posted before? This is directly behind Artisan Village.

Phoenix Planning & Development Team 10 held a Preapplication Meeting on 3/15/2016 for a seven story, 98,182 SF, 103 unit apartment building on 0.61 acres located at 536 E Portland St to replace a 32 unit apartment complex totaling 16,274 SF in five 2-story buildings, built in 1963.

[dtnphx]

What about this one?

Planning Notes

Labeled 1st Ave & Portanld Condominiums
Phoenix Planning & Development Team 4 held a Preapplication Meeting on 3/16/2016 for a seven story 131 unit condominium building on 1.61 acres located at the NEC of 1st & Portland Streets.

[PHX31]

Originally Posted by dtnphx

Has this been posted before? This is directly behind Artisan Village.

Phoenix Planning & Development Team 10 held a Preapplication Meeting on 3/15/2016 for a seven story, 98,182 SF, 103 unit apartment building on 0.61 acres located at 536 E Portland St to replace a 32 unit apartment complex totaling 16,274 SF in five 2-story buildings, built in 1963.

Cool but sigh. There couldn't possibly be more empty lots north of Roosevelt, any of them would be perfect for something like that. Yet, they're replacing a relatively nice 60s era apartment complex that fills the area with good density. Sure, it's not as nice as a new 7-story building, but why is it always replace existing in this the land of empty lots?

Are parcels with buildings already on them somehow cheaper than empty land??? Wouldn't the demo alone make things more expensive? (yes, i understand not everything is for sale and maybe this is the only lot that is, but generally speaking...)

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by PHX31

Cool but sigh. There couldn't possibly be more empty lots north of Roosevelt, any of them would be perfect for something like that. Yet, they're replacing a relatively nice 60s era apartment complex that fills the area with good density. Sure, it's not as nice as a new 7-story building, but why is it always replace existing in this the land of empty lots?

Are parcels with buildings already on them somehow cheaper than empty land??? Wouldn't the demo alone make things more expensive? (yes, i understand not everything is for sale and maybe this is the only lot that is, but generally speaking...)

I don't get it either there are plenty of empty lots within a few blocks of that neighborhood. why buys and demolish a healthy property?

[combusean]

Somebody posted about construction activity for Union @ Roosevelt picking way up with some concrete pouring and about 20 workers on site in the wrong thread, and in my haste to move posts around, I accidentally deleted it.

My bad.

[CrestedSaguaro]

Originally Posted by combusean

Somebody posted about construction activity for Union @ Roosevelt picking way up with some concrete pouring and about 20 workers on site in the wrong thread, and in my haste to move posts around, I accidentally deleted it.

My bad.

Suuuure. I see how it is!


But yea. Lots of activity this morning and I mentioned it looks like the elevator shafts will be 6 levels (roof access according to Biggus). But work definitely progressing.

[biggus diggus]

Originally Posted by Obadno

I don't get it either there are plenty of empty lots within a few blocks of that neighborhood. why buys and demolish a healthy property?

I can't tell if this question is serious, it matters which parcel is available and at what price. Just because you see a vacant parcel doesn't mean someone can buy it for an attractive price that makes development easy, often times guys will hold on to parcels because they do not have to pay taxes on any improvements.

One way the city could encourage development is to start assessing extra charges on vacant land.

[combusean]

Replacing that apartment complex is actually not a half-bad idea. The added visibility from the freeway exit seems like it would be leased up pretty quick.

[PHX31]

Originally Posted by biggus diggus

One way the city could encourage development is to start assessing extra charges on vacant land.

We've talked about this idea for years on this forum. Seems like a good idea, especially downtown. But I'm sure landowners would have (had) a sh!t fit and thus it never will happen.

[nickw252]

I agree. I'm not thrilled about losing that good example of mid-century architecture.

[PHX31]

Originally Posted by combusean

Replacing that apartment complex is actually not a half-bad idea. The added visibility from the freeway exit seems like it would be leased up pretty quick.

The existing isn't the best thing in the world, and a new building would provide better visibility, obviously, but it was recently updated with a fresh new look, new fencing, railings, paint (and who knows what interior upgrades, if any).

It just seems like a waste. Too bad it couldn't be that Papago Place hideous office building immediately to the north getting replaced. That would be even better visibility.

As it is, the whole block bounded by Portland, Moreland, 5th St, 7th St is sneaky cool with the new condos and the nice historic houses. That's what the entire area should be.

[biggus diggus]

Originally Posted by PHX31

We've talked about this idea for years on this forum. Seems like a good idea, especially downtown. But I'm sure landowners would have (had) a sh!t fit and thus it never will happen.

you're correct, it would be an incredibly long battle, I was just giving the other poster an idea of why someone would develop a piece of land requiring a tear-down before a vacant lot.

[combusean]

^ The most reasonable way to prevent demolitions and encourage building is a land-value tax, which only taxes the value of the land and not its improvements.

Right now, if you tear a building down, your taxes go down. In a land-value tax scenario, your taxes wouldn't go down.

Right now, if you construct a building; the bigger the building, the more your taxes. In a land-value tax scenario, you wouldn't be penalized for maximizing density.

With a land-value tax, you wouldn't be encouraging low density and acres of surface parking. In our current tax structure, parking lots have much, much less taxes than a garage that would park the same amount of cars because the structure is a multimillion dollar improvement. With a land-value tax, you can build a structure and compete on the same level as the suburbs with parking lots and cheaply-taxed "commercial yard improvements."

Libertarians call the land-value tax one of the most fair taxes, and I wonder if something like this would fly in Arizona. Nobody has seriously proposed it however.

[CrestedSaguaro]

They are assembling a crane similar to Illuminate's at the McDowell & 3rd St development. So we should see 2 tower cranes around McDowell soon.

Also, seen what looked like a sampling crew digging at the vacant lot at the SE corner of Cenral and Virginia. For sale signs appeared to be gone. Anyone have any insight to that corner?

[biggus diggus]

remediation currently, most likely to assist with the sale of the parcel.

edit: appears that a developer named Gordon Keig purchased it about a month ago, I'm not sure of his history but he has a company registered called Pennant Development which he purchased the parcel under.