HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2011, 4:31 AM
combusean's Avatar
combusean combusean is offline
Skyriser
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Newark, California
Posts: 7,158
^ You can see them on Google on the NWC of 4th St and McKinley on the east half of the block. Weren't you arguing with me about whatever value they had when the rendering of this project was released?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2011, 5:19 AM
Vicelord John Vicelord John is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Eastlake, Phoenix, Arizona
Posts: 5,404
I was under re impression that project was Garfield to Roosevelt and 3rd to 4th. Definitely no buildings.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2011, 5:39 AM
combusean's Avatar
combusean combusean is offline
Skyriser
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Newark, California
Posts: 7,158
Glynnjamin posted the renderings on page 71/post 1774 courtesy of Sean Sweat.

Rehosting:











Last edited by combusean; Jun 11, 2011 at 7:51 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2011, 6:02 AM
Vicelord John Vicelord John is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Eastlake, Phoenix, Arizona
Posts: 5,404
Ah. Forgot about the south parcel.

And my comment must have been vodka fueled.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2011, 3:49 PM
PhxDowntowner's Avatar
PhxDowntowner PhxDowntowner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: #dtphx
Posts: 175
So does this mean no Taylor Place 2? Because I dig that 1200 beds/acre density. This Concord development is only 200 beds/acre which is cool for publicly available apartments, but student housing should get cozier than that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2011, 3:49 PM
PhxDowntowner's Avatar
PhxDowntowner PhxDowntowner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: #dtphx
Posts: 175
And why does student housing need so much parking?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #47  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2011, 6:29 PM
phxSUNSfan's Avatar
phxSUNSfan phxSUNSfan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 718
Yeah, similar to Taylor Place, if this is student housing then there should be zero parking incorporated into the design. That is one of the great things about Taylor Place.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #48  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2011, 6:44 PM
Vicelord John Vicelord John is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Eastlake, Phoenix, Arizona
Posts: 5,404
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhxDowntowner View Post
And why does student housing need so much parking?
One day a month they can sell the spaces to hipsters for parking their singlespeed bikes!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #49  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2011, 8:37 PM
HooverDam's Avatar
HooverDam HooverDam is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Country Club Park, Greater Coronado, Midtown, Phoenix, Az
Posts: 4,610
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhxDowntowner View Post
And why does student housing need so much parking?
I wonder if they're thinking condo conversion whenever the market picks back up.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #50  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2011, 12:54 AM
combusean's Avatar
combusean combusean is offline
Skyriser
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Newark, California
Posts: 7,158
Taylor Place doesn't have any parking because it wasn't required. The project exists in what was the Downtown Core zoning district (3rd Ave to 7th St, Fillmore to UPRR) district where parking wasn't required, but if you do provide spots you have to provide just as many as there would be in the 'burbs according to their standard formulas.

I don't know if urban form is the rule yet but I don't think they changed parking requirements that much. The Concord Eastridge project is well outside the core.

Of course, getting a zoning variance just tends to be an expensive formality. The market is what ultimately determines parking requirements.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #51  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2011, 1:23 AM
PhxDowntowner's Avatar
PhxDowntowner PhxDowntowner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: #dtphx
Posts: 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by combusean View Post
The market is what ultimately determines parking requirements.
Don't confuse financiers w/ "the market".
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #52  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2011, 1:36 AM
bwonger06 bwonger06 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 341
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhxDowntowner View Post
Don't confuse financiers w/ "the market".
Actually I think the market is extremely fickle when it comes to parking. I know plenty off buyers that wouldn't touch Orpheum lofts because of the whole parking situation.

Taylor Place doesnt have any parking because it is officially affiliated with ASU. None of the official ASU dorms have parking structures built alongside them.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #53  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2011, 1:38 AM
HX_Guy HX_Guy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,095
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwonger06 View Post
Actually I think the market is extremely fickle when it comes to parking. I know plenty off buyers that wouldn't touch Orpheum lofts because of the whole parking situation.
Yep...I wouldn't buy there because of that reason. Hell even 44 Monroe only gives you 1 parking spot, even with a 2 bedroom place...that sucks.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #54  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2011, 2:04 AM
combusean's Avatar
combusean combusean is offline
Skyriser
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Newark, California
Posts: 7,158
No, I go by what's built, and for the simple fact you'd have to have brass balls to build anything in this town without enough parking for anything commercial or residential.

I don't think anything else that's been built recently got by with a variance to reduce the number of spaces. I recall Central Park East went above its parking requirements, 44 monroe provided enough for its residential units, CityScape had thousands of spaces at their disposal, but got by with a variance to shave a foot off the width instead of any reduction in the number required. Metro 4twelve had tandem spaces but again didn't reduce the number.

The projects that struggled with parking like The Jet and that Mercury Development tower on 4th ave obviously didn't go anywhere. I'd go as far as to say a project that figures out its parking situation becomes far more likely.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #55  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2011, 2:49 AM
PHX31's Avatar
PHX31 PHX31 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: PHX
Posts: 7,159
Quote:
Originally Posted by combusean View Post
Taylor Place doesn't have any parking because it wasn't required. The project exists in what was the Downtown Core zoning district (3rd Ave to 7th St, Fillmore to UPRR) district where parking wasn't required, but if you do provide spots you have to provide just as many as there would be in the 'burbs according to their standard formulas.

I don't know if urban form is the rule yet but I don't think they changed parking requirements that much. The Concord Eastridge project is well outside the core.

Of course, getting a zoning variance just tends to be an expensive formality. The market is what ultimately determines parking requirements.
What the hell IS up with urban form? That's one thing I never followed or understood. Just another decent idea that takes work and effort by a lazy city gov't that only takes the easy way out?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #56  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2011, 8:19 AM
PhxDowntowner's Avatar
PhxDowntowner PhxDowntowner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: #dtphx
Posts: 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by combusean View Post
I recall Central Park East went above its parking requirements
My understanding is CPE designed & planned for much less parking than they have now. But their out-of-state financier required they increase their parking.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #57  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2011, 5:21 PM
MegaBass MegaBass is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 645
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwonger06 View Post
None of the official ASU dorms have parking structures built alongside them.
Hayden Hall and Irish Hall have Apache Structure alongside them. Same with Barrett and Hassayampa with Lemon Structure.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #58  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2011, 6:05 PM
bwonger06 bwonger06 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 341
Quote:
Originally Posted by MegaBass View Post
Hayden Hall and Irish Hall have Apache Structure alongside them. Same with Barrett and Hassayampa with Lemon Structure.
I meant to say those parking structures weren't built for the purpose of serving dorms. Structure 1 is/was basically for the business school and Rural Structure was built long before Hassayampa and Barrett.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #59  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2011, 6:18 PM
PhxER PhxER is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Mesa, Arizona
Posts: 106
http://www.asu.edu/parking/pdf/map_tempe.pdf

Rural and Apache parking structures do offer Residential parking tho
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #60  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2011, 6:54 PM
dtnphx dtnphx is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,057
ITEM 73
DISTRICT 8
ISSUE RFP FOR THE TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT OF A MULTIFAMILY/MIXED-USE PROJECT IN DOWNTOWN PHOENIX

Request to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) for the transit-oriented development of a multifamily/mixed-use project on a block and a half area bounded by Roosevelt, McKinley, 3rd and 4th Streets in downtown Phoenix and to begin conditional negotiations for such development with the recommended proposer.

Per the City Council adopted Downtown Strategic Plan, additional housing units are needed downtown to support existing and new businesses as well as cultural venues and the light rail system. With the growing entertainment and quality of life amenities downtown, as well as the expansion of academic institutions, there is demand for market-rate rental housing in the urban core.

This request will allow staff to solicit proposals for an appropriate multifamily/ mixed-use development downtown that will create jobs, increase the community's tax base, and meet the demand for dense, urban residential development that is in walking distance to a light rail station.

The recommended proposer and project would be presented to the Downtown, Aviation, and Economy Subcommittee and then to the full City Council prior to the City entering into any contracts.

Financial Impact

There is no cost to the City to issue the RFP and begin negotiations.

This item is recommended by Mr. Krietor and the Community and Economic Development Department
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Isn't part of this area supposed to be the student housing plan that's already been approved? Seems odd that they're including that portion at all. Hopefully it get's clarified some point in the future. Otherwise, good win for the area.
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 2:58 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.