Phoenix Development News (3)

[combusean]

Originally Posted by Spitfiredude

http://www.metrowestdevelopment.com/union/

I don't read this thread commonly, but have been keeping up to date recently. Weren't there two office projects planned a year or two back that were 250'+. I think one was tending toward the northwest end of downtown and was very criticized for its large podium parking garage. Are those projects down the drain or on hold? I'm beyond thankful that pin project is dead.

The office/parking garage thing on Van Buren, "200 W Monroe" was cancelled.

[combusean]

Commence jaw-dropping face-palm in 3, 2, 1 ...

This was the proposal that wasn't chosen for Central Station:

[rocksteady]

Originally Posted by combusean

Commence jaw-dropping face-palm in 3, 2, 1 ...

This was the proposal that wasn't chosen for Central Station:

OMG- what is wrong with Phoenix!?!

And that 200 Monroe parking garage?! My god! Thankfully that was cancelled, would have been nice to have just the building though.

[ASUSunDevil]

Originally Posted by combusean

Commence jaw-dropping face-palm in 3, 2, 1 ...

This was the proposal that wasn't chosen for Central Station:

Wow. That looks like an Optima development on steroids.

I had always anticipated moving to Downtown PHX, but I will stick to Downtown Tempe until Phoenix officials get their heads out of their asses.

[KEVINphx]

Our city leadership and those in decision-making roles are fucking morons - not as only demonstrated by this latest revelation.

I wouldn't doubt if MOST of these anuses live in areas of the Valley that would hardly be considered Phoenix-PHOENIX. I'm talking suburbanites obviously.

[dtnphx]

Holy crap!

[rocksteady]

Looks like the main building would have matched or surpassed the Chase building in height and still left another tower to match or surpass 44 Monroe.

What a shame.

[Freeway]

It's too much, too imposing. With the FAA's new height regulations, this would have been pushing the envelope. Who knows all the other missing details of why this proposal was turned down. Maybe the developer's financing was faulty. Anyway, right now we can't even get private developers to move forward with much smaller developments like the Union or Ballpark. What about the Knipe House and associated apartments? I have no idea why these massive structures are even brought to the table here when everyone knows that they will have next to no chance of ever becoming reality. Stop with the delusion.

[HX_Guy]

Yeah, you'd have to think it was something else that didn't pencil out with that project. I would hope they didn't pick it because they didn't like the design.

[PHXFlyer11]

Originally Posted by Freeway

It's too much, too imposing. With the FAA's new height regulations, this would have been pushing the envelope. Who knows all the other missing details of why this proposal was turned down. Maybe the developer's financing was faulty. Anyway, right now we can't even get private developers to move forward with much smaller developments like the Union or Ballpark. What about the Knipe House and associated apartments? I have no idea why these massive structures are even brought to the table here when everyone knows that they will have next to no chance of ever becoming reality. Stop with the delusion.

Agree 100%. We have no idea on the reputation and viability of the developer or this particular project. The way some of the buildings appear shaded or lacking the details of others makes me believe this was also a phased approach... And we all know how well that goes over in Phoenix.

While the selected proposal isn't ideal (hopefully we get more details and renderings), the influx of new residents is certainly a huge positive that can bring momentum and other projects.

[Jjs5056]

Originally Posted by PHXFlyer11

Agree 100%. We have no idea on the reputation and viability of the developer or this particular project. The way some of the buildings appear shaded or lacking the details of others makes me believe this was also a phased approach... And we all know how well that goes over in Phoenix.

While the selected proposal isn't ideal (hopefully we get more details and renderings), the influx of new residents is certainly a huge positive that can bring momentum and other projects.

Well, for a $12 CD, you can get all the details you want on the project logistics. But, even if this thing was phased out, just getting the base of the development + 1 tower would be an improvement over the project that was selected. This is a true transit hub, built out with multiple integrated uses; not a highrise apartment tower and dog park with metro offices thrown on top of a massive garage. I actually think it was probably mean to be built as shown - the tower closest to us is clearly residential, and is much more on trend than the one we are getting; very reminiscent of towers going up in NYC right now. Meanwhile, the shorter tower is likely office which was a specific requirement to house all MTA offices, etc.

How awesome would that signage have looked? It would be clear what the development was and on first glance fits the criteria of the RFP much more clearly than the winning one does/did - the RFP called specifically for an integrated mixed use project with transit functionality.

[Freeway]

Originally Posted by Jjs5056

Well, for a $12 CD, you can get all the details you want on the project logistics. But, even if this thing was phased out, just getting the base of the development + 1 tower would be an improvement over the project that was selected. This is a true transit hub, built out with multiple integrated uses; not a highrise apartment tower and dog park with metro offices thrown on top of a massive garage. I actually think it was probably mean to be built as shown - the tower closest to us is clearly residential, and is much more on trend than the one we are getting; very reminiscent of towers going up in NYC right now. Meanwhile, the shorter tower is likely office which was a specific requirement to house all MTA offices, etc.

How awesome would that signage have looked? It would be clear what the development was and on first glance fits the criteria of the RFP much more clearly than the winning one does/did - the RFP called specifically for an integrated mixed use project with transit functionality.

We don't need more office space downtown. Half of the space in our existing buildings is vacant. We don't have the professional jobs to warrant more office space. Minimum wage Circle K, Walmart and call center employees don't require a new high rise office building.

If this fit the RFP better than the proposal that was chosen, I'm pretty sure this would have been the proposal that was selected. There had to be some reasoning behind the city not going with this proposal.

[Jjs5056]

Originally Posted by Freeway

We don't need more office space downtown. Half of the space in our existing buildings is vacant. We don't have the professional jobs to warrant more office space. Minimum wage Circle K, Walmart and call center employees don't require a new high rise office building.

If this fit the RFP better than the proposal that was chosen, I'm pretty sure this would have been the proposal that was selected. There had to be some reasoning behind the city not going with this proposal.

The RFP required office space, and office space will be developed in the project that was chosen. Class A office space has been in demand downtown for quite some time; however, I agree that without any new major employers, creating additional inventory seems careless with the withering of Midtown and other submarkets. Even without the additional tower, this project is much more progressive and a better fit for the location.

The other was likely chosen because of the developer (SmithGroup) and probably the timetable for development/money in the city's pockets.

[PHXFlyer11]

Originally Posted by Jjs5056

The other was likely chosen because of the developer (SmithGroup) and probably the timetable for development/money in the city's pockets.

Agreed. We all complain on this board constantly about projects like the Union never getting off the ground. In this is it seems like the city is tired of RFPs that never see dirt moving as well and chose the more realistic proposal by a developer with a proven track record.

[pbenjamin]

Originally Posted by Freeway

We don't need more office space downtown. Half of the space in our existing buildings is vacant

Bullshit. Downtown vacancy is 16.1% at last count.

http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/n...main-high.html

[Freeway]

Originally Posted by pbenjamin

Bullshit. Downtown vacancy is 16.1% at last count.

http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/n...main-high.html

Oh, ok... So then, on average, one out of every six floors in downtown is vacant? Just up Central the vacancy rate is almost 32 percent. Sounds like there's a need for more office space.... What a joke.

[gymratmanaz]

Girls! Girls! You're all pretty!!!!

Curious, what is a normal vacancy percentage of big cities? I know someone has the percentage, and I am guessing we are probably near that? I assume no city waits until it has next to no vacancies to build more space.....!!!

[dtnphx]

Originally Posted by Freeway

We don't need more office space downtown. Half of the space in our existing buildings is vacant. We don't have the professional jobs to warrant more office space. Minimum wage Circle K, Walmart and call center employees don't require a new high rise office building.

If this fit the RFP better than the proposal that was chosen, I'm pretty sure this would have been the proposal that was selected. There had to be some reasoning behind the city not going with this proposal.

Class A office space downtown is at 15.1%. Considering large blocks of Class A space are mostly unavailable downtown, that percentage is moot for a big user who needs a large block of space. And what's happening further up Central has nothing to do with the demand downtown.

[rocksteady]

"In Phoenix, there is a lot of older Class B (25.2 percent) and Class C (29.1 percent) office space sitting empty. That’s not easy to fill and pushes up total vacancy rates."

Which is likely a big reason new, up and coming employers aren't relocating downtown and filling these vacancies because these old ass buildings don't have the modern touches and technology they require without a major retrofit. So again, new building construction is needed if we want to attract these employers. Look at Tempe.

[dtnphx]

Originally Posted by rocksteady

"In Phoenix, there is a lot of older Class B (25.2 percent) and Class C (29.1 percent) office space sitting empty. That’s not easy to fill and pushes up total vacancy rates."

Which is likely a big reason new, up and coming employers aren't relocating downtown and filling these vacancies because these old ass buildings don't have the modern touches and technology they require without a major retrofit. So again, new building construction is needed if we want to attract these employers. Look at Tempe.

You took Phoenix's overall vacancy numbers as proof of your argument? The city is over 500 square miles. Downtown B vacancy is only 13.3% and C is 16.3%. That's why there IS a demand for office space that can accommodate a large employer, not the other way around. The class A buildings in downtown are modern and can be upgraded easily to top standards, but space is available for small and mid-level users. Tempe is very little large blocks of available Class A space (5%) and that's why there's a building boom. It's also cheaper to build in Tempe. Assembling the parcel to build in Phoenix is much costlier and a more complicated process, but that doesn't mean projects aren't being considered.