HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Southwest

About The Ads  This week the ad company used in the forum will be monitoring activity and doing some tests to identify any problems which users may be experiencing. If at any time this week you get pop-ups, redirects, etc. as a result of ads please let us know by sending an email to forum@skyscraperpage.com or post in the ads complaint thread. Thank you for your participation.


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2009, 11:02 PM
PHX31's Avatar
PHX31 PHX31 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: PHX
Posts: 6,574
/\Tell Wallach so he can get to planning for when the economy turns around... condos + hotel + office = 542'.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2009, 11:06 PM
Leo the Dog Leo the Dog is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: The Lower-48
Posts: 4,789
Quote:
Originally Posted by TAZ4ate0 View Post
Don't ask me why, but I have a strong intuition or 'gut feeling' that a W Hotel is going to wind up on that block as part of the plan for a new tower. It is in an ideal location.

Realistically, it is probably just one of my hair-brained pipe dreams. But hey! I like to dream big. It could happen.
The description sounds too low-end of a hotel to be a W. W is pretty much a full service brand. I highly doubt it would be a W hotel.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2009, 12:41 AM
TAZ4ate0's Avatar
TAZ4ate0 TAZ4ate0 is offline
High Voltage
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Tempe, Arizona (Phoenix)
Posts: 758
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leo the Dog View Post
The description sounds too low-end of a hotel to be a W. W is pretty much a full service brand. I highly doubt it would be a W hotel.
I have the proposed taller tower in mind. (The one that could potentially be 514 ft or so.)

btw - and yes I know what W Hotels are...more upscale

Last edited by TAZ4ate0; Jun 26, 2009 at 1:37 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2009, 6:06 AM
HX_Guy HX_Guy is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,081
Here is the plan for the Luhrs block from this document with the City: http://recorder.maricopa.gov/recdocd...ec=20090117169



I cant believe the Luhrs Annex is being demolished too...they better not leave us with a damn parking lot.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2009, 7:19 AM
gymratmanaz gymratmanaz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,689
I wonder what kind of time frame the 315 room hotel is on? ... or is there a time frame already set?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2009, 3:50 PM
HX_Guy HX_Guy is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,081
The time frame is laid out in the above agreement with the city.

Quote:
Under the proposed business terms, the Developer shall pay a performance deposit, in the amount of $50,000, payable fifteen days after Council authorization (Authorization Date) of the terms. Within six months from the Authorization Date, the Developer shall enter into an RDA with the City. Within twelve months from the execution of the RDA, the Developer shall provide an executed franchise agreement with a major hotel brand. Developer will be required to commence construction on the Hotel Project within twenty-four months from the Authorization Date and obtain a Certificate of Occupancy (C of O) for the Hotel Project within twenty-four months from the commencement of construction. A twelve-month extension to commence construction may be granted upon City review and approval of a written request from the Developer that includes a current market study.
Basically...its pretty freaking drawn out...as in years and years.
They have 6 months to from the Authorization Date (whenever that is) to enter into an RDA (whatever that is) with the City. Once that is done, they have 12 months to get a Hotel to commit to the project. Once thats done, they have 24 months to start construction and once thats done, they have 24 months to finish construction.

So...add up all the months...and you're looking at a maximum time frame of 5.5 years. Oh yea...they may ask for a 1 year extension to start construction...so make that a maximum of 6.5 years.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #47  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2009, 3:56 PM
PHX31's Avatar
PHX31 PHX31 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: PHX
Posts: 6,574
...and they'll probably get the demolition permit tomorrow.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #48  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2009, 3:59 PM
HX_Guy HX_Guy is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,081
Quote:
Originally Posted by PHX31 View Post
...and they'll probably get the demolition permit tomorrow.
Exactly. Man, imagine if 75% of that block, thats fully packed in today, maximum density, ends up a parking lot. I don't think Id be able to believe it's happening...that even today, after we look around and see so many empty lots, its still going on.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #49  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2009, 4:09 PM
PHX31's Avatar
PHX31 PHX31 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: PHX
Posts: 6,574
Isn't there any way or anyone at the city that can stand up against this happening? Or did our previous city leaders just purposely make the demo/parking lot/sit forever cycle so easy and so beneficial to land owners for some reason.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #50  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2009, 4:11 PM
gymratmanaz gymratmanaz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,689
I wonder if it is the same in other cities?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #51  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2009, 4:15 PM
PHX31's Avatar
PHX31 PHX31 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: PHX
Posts: 6,574
Shit, I never really realized that the Luhr's annex was there (with a crappy bail bonds business), and didn't realize it was part of the demolition of the block... but that is a great little slice of building for tons of reasons. The discussion about Phoenix and our lack of history preservation is really appalling. Something like the Luhr's central or annex are a dime a dozen in other cities, but here they're a dying species. It would be like NY allowing the destruction of everything on the Empire State Building block and letting that sit for years as a parking lot (however, that wouldn't happen as there would be demand to instantly rebuild). The amount of great homes and buildings that have been demolished in Phoenix for either a)dirt lots, b) parking lots, or c) "newer" completely cheap useless buildings is so sad.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #52  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2009, 4:16 PM
AZ KID's Avatar
AZ KID AZ KID is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 440
the only other city that i can think of is houston but at least they are devoloping them at a quicker rate
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #53  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2009, 4:18 PM
HX_Guy HX_Guy is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,081
I dont get why they dont put it in the agreement terms that they cant demolish anything until they are set to start construction.

Instead of:

Sign agreement -> Demolish -> Get hotel brand onboard -> Get financing/permits -> Start construction

Why can't they require that the demolish part come after they get the financing/permits?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #54  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2009, 4:22 PM
AZ KID's Avatar
AZ KID AZ KID is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 440
because the city of phoenix is stupid! I dont blame the developers nearly as much as the city itself... They dont care about history. AT ALL!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #55  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2009, 5:17 PM
PHX31's Avatar
PHX31 PHX31 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: PHX
Posts: 6,574
Aren't taxes cheaper on land rather than land with buildings on it? So, a land owner or developer buys land (with the intention of speculating or developing), demolishes the structures on it, pays less in taxes, goes through the city processes to get all the entitlements to the land, then sits and waits for either the highest buyer (of his land that has magically become more valuable), or to eventually develop way down the road. And the city "laws" or processes or whatever they are that have been put in place long before not only allow this to happen, but actually encourage it. In the mean time the city looks like shit and functions like shit with pock marks of empty lots everywhere.

Is what I wrote above correct? Is anyone very familiar with the process and the reasons behind why Phoenix is the way it is?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #56  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2009, 6:30 PM
plinko's Avatar
plinko plinko is offline
them bones
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Santa Barbara adjacent
Posts: 6,918
^I can't cite specifics, but you have to be correct. Property taxes are based on accessed valuation by the County, and a parking lot is certainly worth alot less than a building.

From a developer standpoint it totally makes sense. Get rid of all the losing leases now, demolish the building, pay less in taxes, and parking, especially in Phoenix, is a given money maker (even if it isn't a huge money maker).

I'm not sure under what mechanism the city can prevent such a scenario, EXCEPT in the case of any city subsidies going to the project. That would seem like a no-brainer.

BTW HX, an RDA = Redevelopment Agreement

Are there city subsidies going to this project? If so it would seem like somebody would be able to at least find out why any agreements are being worked out this way? Contact your councilman?

If there aren't any subsidies and this is a purely spec project, then private property rights would seem to trump all.

It's just the tower, the arcade and the building that are landmarked right? Everything else on the block is expendable?
__________________
Even if you are 1 in a million, there are still 7,000 people just like you...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #57  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2009, 8:30 PM
combusean's Avatar
combusean combusean is offline
Skyriser
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The Alameda, San José, California
Posts: 5,559
The whole block is landmarked.

I had a long conversation with Barbra Stocklin about the Luhrs block under the insane pretense of subsidizing demolitions. They're getting somewhere on the order of $500,000 in subsidies for renovating the exterior of the two larger Luhrs buildings.

As I gathered, their hands were tied because of a prior 1994 development agreement that came with the block that allowed the demolition of the above assets. Tho I swear it sounded like they were trading the arcade for the postal annex, and now both are getting trampled.

Last edited by combusean; Jun 26, 2009 at 8:41 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #58  
Old Posted Jun 27, 2009, 8:12 AM
PhxPavilion's Avatar
PhxPavilion PhxPavilion is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 693
The day that site sees a 514' tower is the day I eat my hat for dinner.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #59  
Old Posted Jul 14, 2009, 6:19 AM
kingofleos's Avatar
kingofleos kingofleos is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Tempe
Posts: 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhxPavilion View Post
The day that site sees a 514' tower is the day I eat my hat for dinner.
I'll bring the salt.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #60  
Old Posted Jul 29, 2009, 12:28 AM
gymratmanaz gymratmanaz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,689
There is now a safety sidewalk tunnel on the NE corner of the Luhr's Building. Wonder why? I thought there was only window replacement going on above.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Southwest
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:14 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.