Phoenix Development News (3)

[ASUSunDevil]

Would Downtown really have two major hotels in the works with an average occupancy of 60%?

Also, Hotel Monroe being completed by the Super Bowl has to be a pipe dream, right? Thats 10 months and some change...

http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/morning_call/2014/03/downtown-phoenix-sees-too-many-hotel.html

[Arquitect]

Originally Posted by ASUSunDevil

Would Downtown really have two major hotels in the works with an average occupancy of 60%?

Also, Hotel Monroe being completed by the Super Bowl has to be a pipe dream, right? Thats 10 months and some change...

http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/morning_call/2014/03/downtown-phoenix-sees-too-many-hotel.html

Not really. 10 months is definitely doable. Think about it, Roosevelt Point took 16 months to be completed from the ground up. This project requires much less prep-work and construction time. If we start to get under 6 months, then I'd worry a little, but it is definitely possible.

[gymratmanaz]

but isn't part of the reason for not having as many big conventions is because we do not have enough hotel rooms? Build it and they will come - kinda thing?????

[HooverDam]

Originally Posted by gymratmanaz

but isn't part of the reason for not having as many big conventions is because we do not have enough hotel rooms? Build it and they will come - kinda thing?????

Indeed. Downtown hotel rooms are WAY low in Phoenix compared to the markets we compete with for conventions like San Diego, Vegas (but we'll never match them), Denver, Silicon Valley, etc.

Things like SB1070, SB1062, etc don't help with conventions either. Even though SB1062 was eventually vetoed we had 1 convention cancel, and a few others have been considering cancelling.

Phoenix probably over built the suburban, resort style hotels, but is way under built on urban hotels. So when "industry experts" talk about their being little demand for new hotels here, they're failing to understand that by in large Phoenix only offers one hotel type product.

[Jjs5056]

Yes, exactly.

Like most statistics, the hotel occupancy rate for Phoenix is much more complicated for downtown, where there needs to be a wide range of variety to serve various needs, and a larger number in general to serve the next tier of conventions, which hopefully will happen with these two hotels in place.

Hotel Monroe will be the first boutique hotel down, for example. That's pretty insane for the 6th largest city. But, they'd better figure out a use for that 2-story building adjacent to it. Get creative!

Renderings for the Townhomes on 3rd, one of Metrowest's 3 projects on deck, along with Union and the 2nd ave restoration projects:
http://www.metrowestdevelopment.com/commercial/

And, Union, for the one who asked for a rendering: http://www.metrowestdevelopment.com/union/

[PHX31]

I finally figured out that the restaurant going in the 2828 n central building is called mod. Sounds familiar. It looked like they were having a very soft opening or something tonight.

[KevininPhx]

Originally Posted by ASUSunDevil

Would Downtown really have two major hotels in the works with an average occupancy of 60%?

60% occupancy is about the industry standard, maybe a few percentage points lower. It's the norm, not unusual or alarming. The average reflects times of the year when occupancy is close to 100% and times of the year when hotels barely crack 30%. You need the hotel rooms for those 100% times, and most hotels break even during those weeks/months. Hotels build for future occupancy not current occupancy - for things like population growth, job growth, events (conventions, etc.).

[WCArch]

Downtown Phoenix also doesn't host large events on a consistent basis. The problem lies in the fact that everything goes hand in hand. Large conventions and events won't come to Downtown because of the lack of hotel rooms, but on the other hand, Phoenix can't support lots of downtown hotels because there aren't enough conventions and large events to warrant their construction. I would assume that those hotel rooms probably fill up quickly when there is a large event scheduled in Downtown Phoenix (such as the MLB All Star Game for example).

There is plenty of space for unique urban hotels in Downtown Phoenix, and there seems to be enough public support for downtown hotels. However, there needs to be a healthy mixture of chain and executive hotels (like Hyatt, Hilton, Mariott, etc) for business people as well as individual hotels geared towards tourists and other visitors (Like Hotel Monroe).

At this point in time, Downtown just doesn't have enough going on on a regular basis to support lots of urban hotels yet, and tourists would much rather stay in resort-style hotels like those in Scottsdale when they visit because they are typically much closer to popular sights and tourist spots and offer much more to do (I.e. large pools, golf and recreation, proximity to mountains and wilderness, etc). But, as Downtown Phoenix continues to grow, I can certainly see greater demand for hotel rooms coming to Downtown.

[KevininPhx]

Originally Posted by WCArch

... tourists would much rather stay in resort-style hotels like those in Scottsdale when they visit because they are typically much closer to popular sights and tourist spots and offer much more to do ...

Not to get too crazy on this point, but this is incorrect. Tourists, especially first-time visitors, look for downtown hotels in any city. That's why you see tourists walking around alone in places like Boston and LA in parts of town where regulars disappear on weekends.

Downtown, in my opinion, could get away with an additional two, tall hotels - hundreds of rooms - and every one of the hotels would be fine.

[azsunsurfer]

Link to the new rendering of Metrowest's townhouses on McKinley...im honestly a fan! I'm glad there will be no ground floor retail, for a project like this that would just be silly.

http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/print...hird-infill-project.html?s=image_gallery

[pbenjamin]

Originally Posted by KevininPhx

Not to get too crazy on this point, but this is incorrect. Tourists, especially first-time visitors, look for downtown hotels in any city. That's why you see tourists walking around alone in places like Boston and LA in parts of town where regulars disappear on weekends.

Downtown, in my opinion, could get away with an additional two, tall hotels - hundreds of rooms - and every one of the hotels would be fine.

There are people like that but they aren't tourists who come to Arizona. The folks who come here are looking for golf, sunshine, hiking, "old town" Scottsdale, Sedona, Grand Canyon, etc. If you look on tripadvisor.com there is an occasional person who is interested in staying downtown but once the place is described to them they end up in Scottsdale or Tempe. The general view, even amongst ourselves, is that downtown Phoenix is not a destination worth considering. Two big hotels wouldn't change that.

[HooverDam]

Originally Posted by Jjs5056

Hotel Monroe will be the first boutique hotel down, for example. ]

San Carlos is a boutique hotel.

[KevininPhx]

Originally Posted by pbenjamin

There are people like that but they aren't tourists who come to Arizona. The folks who come here are looking for golf, sunshine, hiking, "old town" Scottsdale, Sedona, Grand Canyon, etc. If you look on tripadvisor.com there is an occasional person who is interested in staying downtown but once the place is described to them they end up in Scottsdale or Tempe. The general view, even amongst ourselves, is that downtown Phoenix is not a destination worth considering. Two big hotels wouldn't change that.

You're making an assumption. Sorry, it's incorrect. This is awesome source for hotel stats, if you ever get that insanely interested (it's part of my job, so ... groan). http://www.pkfhotels.com/ What you're saying is true of some people, maybe many, but not most. Most people want to be in downtown in any city, except for maybe NYC, which just happens to have their city center midtown.

[Classical in Phoenix]

Originally Posted by azsunsurfer

Link to the new rendering of Metrowest's townhouses on McKinley...im honestly a fan! I'm glad there will be no ground floor retail, for a project like this that would just be silly.

http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/print...hird-infill-project.html?s=image_gallery

Shouldn't the article read the Northeast Corner of the intersection instead of the Northwest Corner?

[WCArch]

Originally Posted by KevininPhx

You're making an assumption. Sorry, it's incorrect. This is awesome source for hotel stats, if you ever get that insanely interested (it's part of my job, so ... groan). http://www.pkfhotels.com/ What you're saying is true of some people, maybe many, but not most. Most people want to be in downtown in any city, except for maybe NYC, which just happens to have their city center midtown.

I think what pbenjamin and I are trying to say is that, in terms of tourism, the Phoenix area is best known for it's luxurious, sprawled out resorts, many with high profile golf courses, spas, huge pools (and some resorts even have water parks). I certainly wouldn't say that all people don't want to be downtown. However I would say that a good majority of non-business visitors to the Phoenix area would rather stay at a resort in Scottsdale rather than a hotel in downtown Phoenix.

You are right when you say most people would like to stay in a cities downtown area. However, if what you say is true for Phoenix, I would expect that there would be much higher demand for Downtown hotels because, as you say, most people want to be in downtown. Unfortunately, this isn't how it works in the Valley of the Sun. Another big reason we don't have a lot of demand for hotels in downtown is because tourists just don't want to stay there. We aren't New York, San Francisco, or Chicago where a good majority of everything there is to see for a first-time tourist is Downtown, or within walking distance. Phoenix is a unique city in that most of its sights and popular things to do are NOT in Downtown, making it virtually useless for many people to stay downtown when other areas offer so much more to do.

[poconoboy61]

Originally Posted by ASUSunDevil

Also, Hotel Monroe being completed by the Super Bowl has to be a pipe dream, right? Thats 10 months and some change...

Yes, it's a pipe dream. The hotel continues to sit empty, with no movement at all. There are still missing windows, windows that are tagged, and general disrepair. I would greatly question the quality of the remodel if in fact it is done by next February. The building has been vacant and exposed to the elements for how many years? Who knows what kind of problems constriction workers will run into if the building does eventually become something.

Originally Posted by WCArch

I think what pbenjamin and I are trying to say is that, in terms of tourism, the Phoenix area is best known for it's luxurious, sprawled out resorts, many with high profile golf courses, spas, huge pools (and some resorts even have water parks). I certainly wouldn't say that all people don't want to be downtown. However I would say that a good majority of non-business visitors to the Phoenix area would rather stay at a resort in Scottsdale rather than a hotel in downtown Phoenix.

You are right when you say most people would like to stay in a cities downtown area. However, if what you say is true for Phoenix, I would expect that there would be much higher demand for Downtown hotels because, as you say, most people want to be in downtown. Unfortunately, this isn't how it works in the Valley of the Sun. Another big reason we don't have a lot of demand for hotels in downtown is because tourists just don't want to stay there. We aren't New York, San Francisco, or Chicago where a good majority of everything there is to see for a first-time tourist is Downtown, or within walking distance. Phoenix is a unique city in that most of its sights and popular things to do are NOT in Downtown, making it virtually useless for many people to stay downtown when other areas offer so much more to do.

Agreed. However, DT Phoenix is not unique at all. DC, LA, San Diego, Las Vegas, Miami, and Denver are all cities in which the majority of attractions are located out of the downtown core. Phoenix's issue is that none of its true tourist attractions are downtown.

[WCArch]

Originally Posted by poconoboy61

Agreed. However, DT Phoenix is not unique at all. DC, LA, San Diego, Las Vegas, Miami, and Denver are all cities in which the majority of attractions are located out of the downtown core. Phoenix's issue is that none of its true tourist attractions are downtown.

Thank you! I do agree with your statement but perhaps i should have been clearer. I was referring to the city and metro area as a whole, and although Downtown is not unique among other cities of similar size, the city itself is so spread out that it is impossible to pick out one specific centralized area in which a large amount of tourist attractions can be found. They are spread out all across the valley and they aren't all easily accessible from Downtown (from a tourist's standpoint). Most of the cities you named have other centralized areas that, although they may not be called downtown, are just as important, popular, and urbanized, if not more. LA has Hollywood, Las Vegas has the Strip, Miami has Miami Beach/South Beach, and San Diego is focused around the beach (OB, PB, Mission beach, La Jolla).

Downtown San Diego, though, is full of attractions: it has the Embarcadero, which is the city's biggest attraction and is very close to Balboa Park and Old Town. Downtown Los Angeles also has many cultural attractions Downtown, and although it is not as publicized as Hollywood, plays a significant role in the region's entertainment market with the Walt Disney Concert Hall, the Fashion District, LA Live, etc.

Your right, Phoenix doesn't have any true attractions in Downtown. However, what makes Phoenix different from most of the cities you listed is that we don't centralize our attractions anywhere. Our biggest attractions are golf, the wilderness, the weather, recreation, and food, and those things together can't really be centralized anywhere.

[pbenjamin]

A major issue with tourists is the transportation system. I see many people coming here who would like not to rent a car. With the light rail we can now tell people that if they stay in a hotel along the rail they can get to places like the museums, Mill Avenue, etc. which is an improvement, but then they ask about nightlife and end up staying in Tempe to be near Mill Ave. In most cases they want to go to enough spread out locations that they do rent a car and then may as well stay at a resort in Scottsdale.

[Jjs5056]

Originally Posted by azsunsurfer

Link to the new rendering of Metrowest's townhouses on McKinley...im honestly a fan! I'm glad there will be no ground floor retail, for a project like this that would just be silly.

http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/print...hird-infill-project.html?s=image_gallery

Yes, I posted this rendering 3 posts above yours.

And, yes, ground floor retail isn't needed for a project like this, as they feature paths that connect directly to the townhomes' entries. Walkups on residential projects are a viable alternative to ground level retail, since they still make for a nice street scene, and encourage the owners to interact within their community via their front door.

[Jjs5056]

Is Urban Form dictating the design requirements downtown currently? Or, being used as the authoritative document for which proposals are design/reviewed against?

Just wondering, since I use that as a reference, and so many times get backlash, but if it is indeed intended to be in effect, then street fronting retail is "highly recommended/required" for areas like McDowell/Central, and Biomedical parking was "highly recommended/required" to interact with pedestrians at the ground level, etc.

I also haven't seen the city doing much in the way of adding/asking developers for public spaces and pedestrians linkages within the Evans Churchill or Biomedical projects.