PDA

You are viewing a trimmed-down version of the SkyscraperPage.com discussion forum.  For the full version follow the link below.

View Full Version : Phoenix CityScape Thread



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77

PHX31
Mar 28, 2008, 7:27 PM
/\While what he's saying is semi-true (obviously not totally... he's going to base everything on what a lady behid the counter said?) he still a dick. He's just trying to make his people back home feel better about themselves not being here and not enjoying the opportunities and weather.

Downtown_resident
Mar 28, 2008, 8:07 PM
Agreed. Vertical is nice, but ultimately density and walkabilty are more important to enhancing quality of life. Keep in mind, though, that the name of this forum probably says something about the interests of its participants. It's called "SkyscaperPage Forum" rather than "Neo-urbanist Forum." Usually, those interests align, but not always. No criticism intended toward anyone here -- just an observation that this forum will be more inclined to cheer for height than some others.

SB, totally agree on the density versus height issue, as I've said here many times before. Forced to choose, I'd rather live in a city in which I can walk around and experience than one with a lot of tall buildings that has little street life and just looks great on a postcard.

I would like to point out that the forum shouldn't just be judged by its name, however. Read the intent of Skyscraperpage forum at the top of every forum page:

"...global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics"

...it doesn't even mention building height.

http://downtownphoenix.blogspot.com

AZ KID
Mar 29, 2008, 11:31 PM
Ok now that the height has been reduced does that mean that the amount of residential units has been reduced also?

HX_Guy
Mar 30, 2008, 12:31 AM
I think originally there were supposed to be 200 condo units but that has been cut down to around 150.

Don B.
Mar 30, 2008, 3:30 PM
While it's not completely final, the condo/hotel tower will be 34-35 floors and 400'-425'. Cost seems to be the main driving force behind the reduction in height/floors. They have expanded the hotel portion outward (as can be seen in the renderings) which took away from the height...but apparently it is much more cost effective to build outward vs upward.

So my source that gave me an ultimate height of 375 feet wasn't so far off the mark after all. 400 to 425 feet is incredibly disappointing (especially for an "iconic tower"), but then again, Arizona is the lowest common denominator state and is proud to represent as "Mississippi of the West." Low goals, low aspirations and low taxes are the name of the game here.

Mayor Gordon has a LOT of work to do if he thinks Phoenix has any hope of large dreams and projects like Dubai.

The writer from Cincinnati is spot on with his comments about downtown Phoenix. We do have a pathetic downtown for a city with 4.2 million people. Nothing says it better than photos:

Kansas City, with 1.9 million people:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v22/don85259/Kansas%20City%20photos/IMG_4160pancopy.jpg

Phoenix, with 4.2 million people:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v22/don85259/Phoenix/Phoenix%20from%20Piestewa%20Peak/IMG_9798copy.jpg

We can and should do better - aspire to more, and demand real development from this city. Especially given the huge subsidy RED got from the city, we should get more than a ho hum suburban high-rise project that gets built in other major cities on nearly a daily basis. Houston has a 600' tower going up in the suburbs right now. Why we can't get one here is beyond me.

Yes, the ultimate height of our tallest building is only one factor of having a real downtown, but I think it is an important factor. I also think it is no mere coincidence that we have a shitty skyline (arguably the worst in North America) and a shitty downtown to go with it.

DO NOT ACCEPT MEDIOCRITY IN THE THINGS THAT WE WILL ACCEPT. As I said before, we can and should do better, aspire to more, and reach for the skies.

--don

AZ KID
Mar 30, 2008, 6:30 PM
I agree with you Don. We should shoot for the stars on everything and maybe one day we will get something great in return.

I do have to say that phoenix is taking steps in the right direction. You cant go from nothing to everything. Just look at the picture don posted of phoenix. Since that picture was taken The Summit, 44 monroe, and the sheraton have been topped out or completed. Ocpe is starting to rise, Cityscape is moving along, and ASU buildings have risen from the ground. Yes there have been disapointments along the way but it is a step.

I know it will never come close to a chicago or new york but considering phoenix's age we and what we had 10 years ago we are only moving forward.

combusean
Mar 30, 2008, 8:18 PM
I think the tradeoff in height might be worth it. There's a potential for a really nifty rising canyon effect on Jefferson:
- the Luhrs arcade across from the 3-story Block 77, which incidentally has a far better garage entry than PSP did, shuffling pedestrians under an arcade for utility space and sticking them back out as close to the ROW as possible.
- If the OWP hotel gets built (http://emvis.net/~sean/ssp/projects/owp_tower_1st_jefferson/1st_and_jefferson_high_rise_2.jpg) on the vacant lot next to the Police Museum building, you get a really good one along Block 22
- Along 23, USAC's circular plaza might actually get traffic on non-game nights. The wider, more human scaled hotel portion steps down to it from Block 22 which I think would look better than the shorter retail approach. Whatever gets built on 23 will permanently overlook the hotel on the approach from Jefferson.

I think

http://nitnelav.com/CityScapeConstruction/cityscapenew3.jpg

is a lot better than:

http://emvis.net/~sean/ssp/projects/cityscape/CityScapeNight.jpg

The street level is better without being too open in the air but it opens up on the ground where it's needed once you take into account USAC.

combusean
Mar 30, 2008, 9:07 PM
The writer from Cincinnati is spot on with his comments about downtown Phoenix. We do have a pathetic downtown for a city with 4.2 million people. Nothing says it better than photos:

Kansas City, with 1.9 million people:
...


Tall skyline != vibrant downtown. I don't think I've ever seen a 15' wide store in a high-rise before--it doesn't get much more pedestrian friendly than that in an actual building. In fact, tall buildings need to be designed super-well as to actually activate the street. Once you add building mechanics and parking and bullshit lobbies, there's not much left for anything for people.

How many towers in Kansas City were built within the last 30 years or so? I count about 3 that use glass the way more modern buildings do in that picture. KC has also lost 12% of its population since the 70's brutalistish monstrosities in that picture were built.

We also have Midtown, incidentally. If Phoenix weren't so overzoned for height the massing of buildings making up the Central Corridor would be far more relevant. Put together the huge space of where somebody can build tall today along Central alone and it's the size of lower Manhattan. Even as a foolish 60's relic of what we thought we could do, that's still our template today and we have no choice but to uphold it and gAp FilL it baby!

You are coming from a city long past its prime and complaining why Phoenix hasn't hit its own yet--what is the purpose of this again? Look instead at the unique position in history--there aren't many cities like this one where it's not "done." Many are a lot worse--stale.

There are a million other things that we can do to prepare ourselves to support that kind of growth rather than bitch about the skyline which is the direct result of a developer who doesn't respond so much to our cheerleading but rather to us not doing those million other things 20 and 40 and 60 years ago.

The recent investment in education and transit, for the downtown area at least, are paying early dividends. It almost makes up for them being way, way too late and still not enough. We're still dragging our feet on everything else which runs the gamut as evidenced in every city across the State.

AZ KID
Mar 30, 2008, 10:00 PM
Here is a comparison between cincinnati and phoenix's 25 tallest buildings. Info found here on Skyscraperpage.


Cincinnati's
Name | Height | Floors | Status | Year

• Carew Tower 201.0 m 49 built 1931

• PNC Tower 150.9 m 31 built 1913

• Scripps Center 142.7 m 26 built 1990

• Fifth Third Center 129.0 m 32 built 1969

• Chemed Center 125.0 m 32 built 1991

• Convergys Center 125.0 m 29 built 1984

• Hilton Cincinnati Netherland P... 113.4 m 31 built 1931

• Chiquita Center 112.2 m 29 built 1984

• PNC Center 108.0 m 27 built 1979

• Atrium Two 107.0 m 30 built 1984

• US Bank Tower - Westin Hotel 107.0 m 26 built 1981

• Millennium Hotel 106.7 m 32 built 1977

• URS Building 98.0 m 26 built 1989

• Kroger Building 97.5 m 25 built 1959

• Federated Building 97.0 m 21 built 1979

• Procter & Gamble World Headqua... 96.0 m 17 built 1985

• 525 Vine Center 94.0 m 23 built 1985

• 312 Elm 93.0 m 25 built 1992

• Hyatt Regency Cincinnati 85.0 m 23 built 1984

• Provident Tower 85.0 m 20 built 1968

• Cinergy Building 83.0 m 18 built 1929

• Crowne Plaza Cincinnati 82.9 m 19 built 1949

• One Lytle Place 82.0 m 26 built 1980

• Procter & Gamble Tower II 80.0 m 17 built 1885

• Edgecliff Point Condominiums 79.0 m 24 built 1990

Phoenix's
Name | Height | Floors | Status | Year | Drawings

• Chase Tower 148.1 m 40 built 1972

• US Bank Center 124.1 m 31 built 1976

• Wachovia Tower 122.0 m 26 construction

• 44 Monroe 121.9 m 34 construction

• Qwest Plaza 121.0 m 25 built 1989

• One Central Park East 116.7 m 26 construction

• Viad Corporate Center 114.0 m 24 built 1991

• Two Renaissance Square 113.4 m 28 built 1990

• Wells Fargo Plaza 113.4 m 26 built 1971

• Phoenix City Hall 20 built 1994

• Sheraton Phoenix 109.7 m 31 construction

• Bank of America Tower 109.7 m 23 built 2000

• 3300 Tower 108.5 m 29 built 1980

• One Renaissance Square 105.8 m 26 built 1986

• Phoenix Corporate Center 103.8 m 26 built 1964

• Phoenix Plaza Two 100.9 m 20 built 1990

• Phoenix Plaza One 100.9 m 20 built 1988

• Great American Tower 97.5 m 24 built 1985

• Hyatt Regency Phoenix 96.6 m 20 built 1976

• 4041 North Central Plaza 89.9 m 21 built 1981

• Phelps Dodge Corporate Headqua... 88.1 m 20 built 2001

• 2600 Tower 88.1 m 20 built 1982

• 4000 North Central 85.3 m 23 built 1964

• Two Arizona Center 79.2 m 20 built 1990

• 2800 Tower 78.6 m 20 built 1987

Combusean is right. Cincinnati has had 7 buildings built since 1985 and has no buildings built in the past 15 years. Phoenix on the other hand has had 11 built since 1985 and has 4 under construction right now. Cincinnati is dead and phoenix is just beginning.

HooverDam
Mar 31, 2008, 12:25 AM
gAp FilL .

Haha, oh man, thats great.

Don B.
Mar 31, 2008, 12:48 AM
Sean, Kansas City (which has about the same city population as Mesa) has 133 skyscrapers in our database here, compared to 81 for Phoenix. According to skyscrapers.com, the numbers are 199 and 118 respectively. You must also remember that K.C. has secondary skylines as well, especially in the Plaza area (about 3-4 miles south of the downtown shot I posted earlier) and in other cities (Overland Park and Kansas City, Kan., to name just a couple).

K.C. has three skyscrapers taller than Chase, including the two tallest 600-footers, built in 1986 and 1988. Phoenix has had nothing over 400 feet tall built since the early 1970s. In fact, Phoenix has only two towers over 400 feet. Kansas City has nine over 400 feet.

K.C. has under construction right now:

35-story W Hotel (we of course couldn't pull that off)

Recently completed:

26-story office tower (2003)
17-story H&R Block headquarters (2006)
16-story Federal Reserve Bank (2008)
13-story office building (2007)
13-story residential building (2005)
11-story office building (2004)
10-story Federal Courthouse (2000)

Regardless, we should not accept a 400' tower as good news. Nothing in the renderings posted convinces me that Cityscape will be much better than Arizona Center, and given the snarky economy here, I think we will be lucky to get two middling towers out of Cityscape.

Kansas City has a fair share of problems (which is why I'm here and not there), but we need to pay attention to what other people say and not just dismiss them as alien cranks who are pissy because they can't enjoy the Arizona sun like we do.

--don

HooverDam
Mar 31, 2008, 1:27 AM
How does Cityscape look anything like the AZ Center? Cityscape is wrapped on both the interior and exterior by retail, unlike the Arizona Center. CityScape has residential and hotel, AZ Center is only office. CityScape will have a grocery store, something downtown certainly needs, the Arizona Center doesn't have much of a draw outside of the movie theater. Cityscape is also in a better/more central part of downtown (i.e. within walking distance to people leaving sporting events and concerts).

Sure, its not 600 feet tall, but that doesn't mean its junk either. I'm fine w/ a new tallest not being at the 0'0' point, in fact, perhaps its for the best as far as an aesthetic point of view. If the tallest building in Phx was on the south side of the skyline, it may look a bit odd. If say Momentum gets built and is a new tallest, the south part of downtown will step up to it, and then from Chase on North the skyline will step down nicely. Hopefully the northern part of downtown will become more developed (to the Westward Ho and Northward, between the 3's) until the I-10, then it can start stepping back up in Midtown.

Don B.
Mar 31, 2008, 3:11 AM
^ So why are we subsidizing a ho hum 400' skyscraper or two?

I think that may be my biggest beef - we've shelled out money for an "iconic tower" and, if we're lucky, we are going to get another Qwest Tower. I'm not titillated.

--don

Daltnpapi4u
Mar 31, 2008, 5:07 AM
^ So why are we subsidizing a ho hum 400' skyscraper or two?

I think that may be my biggest beef - we've shelled out money for an "iconic tower" and, if we're lucky, we are going to get another Qwest Tower. I'm not titillated.

--don
Actually the city gave money for the project just to get built. It did not state it had to be a certain amount of floors or height to the buildings. If anything the amount of hotel rooms has increased which is a bigger benefit to the city then an additional 100ft on the tower

Kroney
Mar 31, 2008, 5:52 AM
^ So why are we subsidizing a ho hum 400' skyscraper or two?

Phoenix is obviously looking at this from an investment perspective. The city's participation in the project is (hopefully) the result of a well-trained financial analyst predicting that the future cash flows generated by this project will exceed the investment. I'd love to see this cost benefit analysis. I wonder if the future revenue estimates are based on Cityscape alone or if they expect Cityscape to be the catalyst for more revenue generating development down the road.

Plus, I don't consider the $96 million or whatever a subsidy. Yes, Phoenix is paying a ton of money for a new parking garage (and repair of the PSP garage). But when construction is finished, the garage becomes city property. So really, Phoenix is acting as an investor in this project.

Our only other option was to wait for a better development proposal to come along... which I don't think would have happened for a while [speculating]. Personally, I just want something on that site that I can enjoy/use while I'm still young. Granted, it's not what we all hoped for, but it's enough.

combusean
Mar 31, 2008, 7:41 AM
I agree with the subsidy on the basic principle that Phoenix will own the garage when it's done. The ore public ownership of parking and basic infrastructure the better.

Here's a list of most or just about every significantly tall city with their 20th tallest buildings. I like this metric because I think it gives a better overall picture of height.


500' +
1 NYC 1251 Ave of the Amer 750'
2 Chicago R.R. Donnelley Bldg 668'
3 Houston Marathon Oil Tower 562'
4 Los Angeles Union Bank Plaza 516'

400 - 500'
5 San Francisco 50 California St 487'
6 Miami Miami Center 484'
7 Boston 225 Franklin St 477'
8 Dallas San Jacinto Tower 456'
9 Atlanta One Park Tower 439'
10 Philadelphia 1835 Market St 425'
11 Las Vegas Palms Casino Hotel 423'
12 Seattle Westin Building 409'

300 - 400'
13 Minneapolis LaSalle Plaza 386'
14 Denver Denver Financial Ctr 374'
15 San Diego AT&T Building 348'
16 Detroit First National Bldg 341'
17 Pittsburgh Centre City Tower 341'
18 New Orleans Harrah's 327'

200 - 300'
19 Charlotte Westin Charlotte 293'
20 Cleveland Diamond Building 282'
21 St Louis 500 Broadway 282'
22 Phoenix Two Arizona Center 260'
23 Cincinnati Fourth and Walnut 255'
24 Milwaukee Arlington Court Apts 250'
25 Portland Benson Tower 250'
26 Kansas City, MO Hotel Philips 243'
27 Indianpolis 8888 Keystone Crossing 229'
28 Austin Hilton Garden Inn 219'
29 Nashville Centennial Tower 212'
30 Richmond Thomas Jefferson Bldg 200'

100 - 200'
31 Jersey City Montgomery Towers 199'
32 Jacksonville Cathedral Townhouse 185'
33 Louisville BellSouth Bldg 183'
34 San Antonio Westin Riverwalk 180'
35 Hartford YMCA Residential Tower 147'
36 Oklahoma City Three Twenty Four Bldg 136'
37 Memphis John S. Wilder Tower 120


So Phoenix is certainly in the bottom half but if our pace continues through the next couple years we should be right in the middle--or even in the bottom of the top half--which is right fine with me. Depending on what other cities get built, I don't think it's unfeasible we would be right alongside Denver and San Diego. Two Arizona Center could move down perhaps up to 10 notches in 3 years.

PHX31
Mar 31, 2008, 3:56 PM
/\ That table tells a lot about a city's skyline (and more). Very interesting.

admdavid
Mar 31, 2008, 5:01 PM
Right on, Don!

Phoenix is the 5th largest city in the US and we have a shittier skyline than just about any "big" city I can think of. And it all falls to the complete lack of vision by most of the movers and shakers in town. People lambaste Mesa for their backwards views (which is totally true), but until Phil's actions are in step with his words and he shows some true leadership, we'll continue to have a rep as having a lame downtown.

Buckeye Native 001
Mar 31, 2008, 5:39 PM
Combusean is right. Cincinnati has had 7 buildings built since 1985 and has no buildings built in the past 15 years. Phoenix on the other hand has had 11 built since 1985 and has 4 under construction right now. Cincinnati is dead and phoenix is just beginning.

I don't think that's entirely true. Cincinnati may have only built seven buildings since 1985, but each one of those has dramatically affected the skyline (Chemed, Scripps and the Atrium buildings, for example). Queen City Square is on track to be completed by 2011 and will be Cincinnati's new tallest. Not only that, but their downtown residential population is booming as many older buildings are being converted into condos or apartments, with more projects taking place in Over-the-Rhine and the West End.

Phoenix may be just beginning, but to say Cincinnati is "dead" doesn't take into consideration the scope of what's being built/renovated there. A collection of highrises is not the only component of a successful downtown.

andrewkfromaz
Mar 31, 2008, 7:12 PM
DO NOT ACCEPT MEDIOCRITY IN THE THINGS THAT WE WILL ACCEPT. As I said before, we can and should do better, aspire to more, and reach for the skies.

--don

I hate to add to the negativity, but how exactly do we "accept" or presumably reject urban development? It's a tall building. What influence do we have in deciding the design of this building, much less its height? The developer makes those decisions (particularly height) based on extensive market analysis. To think that we could somehow, by picketing or letter-writing (or even just making angsty posts on a message board), change the way a developer makes decisions is pretty far-fetched. RED and its partners want to build the iconic tower in Phoenix as much as we want them to, but they've done the research and found out that it's a bad decision. The alternative is no development.

Somewhat ironically, the way to effect change is to vote with your feet and live downtown and make the most of living downtown. Those of us who live in the suburbs and complain about Phoenix's lack of a truly urban environment are the very definition of hypocrites. If housing demand were greater downtown, we would be celebrating the expansion of Cityscape rather than whining about the downscaling of the project.

HX_Guy
Apr 1, 2008, 4:58 PM
Night crews begin this Sunday

By night crews, did he mean 3 guys doing utility work? Because at around 9:00 PM last night, that was all the action going on. Block 22 was completely dark except some utility work going on at the corner of 1st St and Washington.

gymratmanaz
Apr 1, 2008, 6:05 PM
Maybe they employed little gophers? They are hard to see and work for peanuts.

combusean
Apr 1, 2008, 6:09 PM
I wanted to add this picture to the discussion that I took from the plane--the last shot from my recent Boston/Manhattan trip.

http://emvis.net/~sean/ssp/midtown_phoenix_LS.png

Hardly a "secondary skyline" ... It's a skyline in and of itself.

PHX31
Apr 1, 2008, 9:55 PM
Certain angles to make the midtown skyline more impressive, and the gaps seem much less pronounced. Great shot.

Don B.
Apr 1, 2008, 10:37 PM
Sean, that's hardly a skyline, much less a "secondary skyline." More like a suburban office park on a good day. Most major American cities have secondary skylines more substantial than this.

A turd covered with frosting is still a turd. When smaller cities like San Diego, Kansas City and Denver have twice to three times the number (and height - with much taller scrapers) than Phoenix, we have a long ways to go. I'm just calling a spade a spade.

--don

CANUC
Apr 1, 2008, 11:19 PM
:whatthefuck: ^Jeez Don, what are you on some type of ‘take a shat on anything positive about downtown’ type of mood!? Are you applying for Soleri’s old job?

gymratmanaz
Apr 1, 2008, 11:30 PM
Or Vandercook's?

Vicelord John
Apr 1, 2008, 11:35 PM
Or Vandercook's?

I've been ousted?:shrug:

PHX31
Apr 2, 2008, 12:00 AM
:whatthefuck: ^Jeez Don, what are you on some type of ‘take a shat on anything positive about downtown’ type of mood!? Are you applying for Soleri’s old job?

He's currently feeling disenfranchised with Phoenix due to the current housing market and the problems it is causing him/his partner, which are no one's business yet he is keeping us all up to date on them.

It could be worse, though, don, you could live in a freezing cold portion of North Korea or something.

Don B.
Apr 2, 2008, 12:29 AM
^ Thanks for the ad hominem, since that apparently substitutes for real discussion on this forum.

I'm just tired of gilding the lily, or painting lipstick on a pig, or any other euphemism you might choose to apply to the situation. We aren't doing Phoenix any favors by pretending the things I'm pointing out don't exist.

If it were up to me, I would:

1. Narrow all major arterials in central Phoenix, and add shaded, treed medians and sidewalks. No more should pedestrians have to walk in the blazing sun. Build barriers between auto traffic and pedestrians or bicyclists. Add bicycle lanes wherever possible. Improve the canals (add walls, fences, SHADE, lighting, rubberized pavement, etc.) and build over/under passes to encourage alternative transportation and recreational uses.

2. Require all existing buildings and new developments to put in pedestrian-friendly shade structures, water features, and shade trees, possibly by rebating sales taxes (for a business) or property taxes (for homeowners).

3. Get the legislature to pass tax increment financing, which Arizona needs. Limit it to only central Phoenix.

4. Eliminate red tape and fees for permitting of mixed-use and high-rise developments. Eliminate building height limits, setback and parking space requirements.

5. Impose a modest car congestion-pollution tax for drivers that enter central Phoenix. Use the revenue to pay for the improvements described above.

6. Tax owners of vacant property higher than the present tax regime, to encourage them to sell or develop the property.

7. Immediately construct real bus stops with shade, seating, misters and free water fountains. A bus stop is not a steel sign on a pole in a dusty, hot, merciless location next to six lanes of roaring automobile traffic going 50 mph.

I can think of more but this is a start.

--don

PhxPavilion
Apr 2, 2008, 12:45 AM
After having just flown back from Vegas, I managed to get good looks at the strip and Central Phoenix, honestly, it gave me a greater respect for Phoenix. I, of course, would like taller towers and more of them and I do think it's a bit ridiculous that after nearly 40 years Chase still holds the crown for who knows how long but at the same time the real reason downtown is dead is not due to a lack of towers, it is due to a lack of substance to bring people downtown from their huge malls and surburban complexes outside of the city.

We really do need more unique attractions and urban development; a 600'+ tower would just be icing on the cake. I will say this, lots of tall and dense towers would be great to act as shade on the street for pedestrians during the rather hot periods.

SunDevil
Apr 2, 2008, 12:52 AM
It is what it is. Phoenix is not "there" and it may well never get "there". That's Phoenix. It's not going to have the kind of vibrancy found in Chicago, Boston, or other similar cities. Phoenix has grown and developed with drastically different views and circumstance on what makes a city function than most other great American cities. It's closest to being something like LA, multipolar. There is Downtown, Uptown, Biltmore, Old Town Scottsdale, Mill Ave, and now Westgate over in Glendale. If all of these areas were together it would shame most cities. There is a lot going on here and a lot to do, you just need to have a car to do it.

That's how it is.

I'm not saying that it should just be accepted, there is always room for improvement anywhere. A more walkable/livable downtown would be awesome, but is it really necessary? To me, it seems like there is some zealous desire to see Phoenix become a forest of tall buildings which will somehow create a vibrant community. Some of this is fueled by comments like: "lol phoenix looks like Dayton, OH." Well, you know what? maybe it does look like that and so what?

It's a car centered city and that isn't going to change.

combusean
Apr 2, 2008, 7:24 AM
Sean, that's hardly a skyline, much less a "secondary skyline." More like a suburban office park on a good day. Most major American cities have secondary skylines more substantial than this.

A turd covered with frosting is still a turd. When smaller cities like San Diego, Kansas City and Denver have twice to three times the number (and height - with much taller scrapers) than Phoenix, we have a long ways to go. I'm just calling a spade a spade.

--don

Name one that is in our league?

Don I also don't get why you always collude population of cities with skylines--Phoenix is in a very unique case as there really aren't that many major cities still annexing land. I doubt Phoenix will have the attention downtown as much as it's needed until it finally fills its britches.

Smaller, land-locked or otherwise cities have had a lot more time to focus on their downtown. I think Phoenix has had its hands full dealing with growth on the extreme north and south ends for way, way too long. District counsel representation probably doesn't help downtown either despite it being better for the city overall.

Re your list...

Tucson has TIF for the Rio Nuevo district. It's horrendously mis-managed and all the local developers reaching for the pot of money are not at all capitalized well enough to put their half of the bargain in. The best thing to have been proposed out of it, the Rainbow Bridge, was shot down so prematurely demonstrating a complete lack of vision. Phoenix needs to focus on better capitalized out-of-state/developers with whom they can hash together better incentive packages specifically catered to their development if necessary.

Gordon has been pretty good at this--Corus funded 44 Monroe, Mesirow Financial is building 1CPE, and David Wallach has Summit built--all of them are out of Chicago.

Moreover, if downtown Phoenix had a TIF district the DPP would most likely be in charge of doling the monies received from it, and they are absolutely incompetent at anything. I lay the blame for the lack of shade downtown on them--there is no reason paying 50% of and addition to the normal property tax bill shouldn't have seen tangible results besides guys in orange shirts and one pointless study after another.

I would fight you hand and foot on the second part of number 5. The lack of sensible zoning laid the framework for our insane multinodal sprawl by giving developers more and more entitlements further and further out. East Roosevelt was destroyed by overzoning for height. There are other parts of the city where it would be very bad planning to introduce those kinds of entitlements such as Lower Grand and West Roosevelt.

My list would probably be:

- Neighborhoodize the city. Eliminate the at-large Planning Commission and recreate it from regional boroughs.

- Double the bus system. Replace existing routes with streetcar service. If it's cheaper to do this long-term we should stop dicking around and pay the capital costs now.

- Plant as many trees as possible

- Replace the County Hospital grounds with a 4-year liberal arts college. Build the new hospital on the Pappas site as part of a new major mixed-use development.

- Get the Salt flowing again--whether this means dams come down up the river, huge pipes from the 99th Avenue treatment plant, closing canals, whatever--South Phoenix needs the scar fixed. Wealth needs to be radiating from it, not the other way around.

- Get serious about historic preservation. Extend significant renovation credits for those that rezone to it.

- All the pedestrian improvements you mentioned are spot on.

PHX31
Apr 2, 2008, 5:05 PM
I'm just tired of gilding the lily, or painting lipstick on a pig, or any other euphemism you might choose to apply to the situation. We aren't doing Phoenix any favors by pretending the things I'm pointing out don't exist. --don


What exactly are you pointing out? You're really not making any points about anything important, just talking about heights of tall buildings in cities or their office parks. Who cares about that stuff (we all do, but it really has no significance on any of our lives just our "hobbies".)?

Especially on this forum, and when talking about cities, the grass always seems greener on the other side, but really, it's just as brown everywhere. The reason the grass is brown, however, is different from city to city.

gymratmanaz
Apr 2, 2008, 5:53 PM
What Does Most Of This Have To Do With Cityscape??????

combusean
Apr 2, 2008, 7:15 PM
^ It has to do with CityScape because some people feel slighted because we're likely not going to get a new tallest out of it.

I think it's not so bad because we knew chopping the height down was a likelihood *before* they added the hotel rooms. The addition of hotel rooms creates a better street scene in my mind which I think is more important. The street scene and hotel rooms will add to downtown vibrancy far more than an additional 8 stories or so of condos.

In a perfect world we'd get both a new tallest and a significant slew of hotel rooms out of the first phase, but, well, the world's not perfect. :)

Still, I don't get that if the hotel scene is a good bet, wouldn't the condos be as well?

gymratmanaz
Apr 2, 2008, 8:04 PM
I agree!

HooverDam
Apr 2, 2008, 10:42 PM
- Replace the County Hospital grounds with a 4-year liberal arts college. Build the new hospital on the Pappas site as part of a new major mixed-use development.


I like all of your ideas Sean, except this one. Do you just mean the hospital itself? Or do you also mean the campus that houses the criminally insane? I suppose thats the Arizona State Hospital and is something different (but they're near each other), so I'm a bit confused. Having just the Hospital downtown would be fine by me, and it would add to the whole BioMed district, but I really wouldn't want the loony bin downtown, downtown is straddled with enough institutions like that.

I think the 'right' to have the Arizona Prison/Hospital for the Criminally Insane ought to be put up for bids. It seems like it would be a nice get for the economy of a small town, and being in a rural area, not under a flight path, in a noisy city, would be better for the people in the facility. Perhaps Florence would be a good place for it.

EDIT: Here's some neat photos of the Arizona State Hospital Chapel (from the site Waltlockley.com, is that Soleri? I thought his name is Walt)

http://waltlockley.com/azshchapel/azshp%20chapel%2001.jpg
http://waltlockley.com/azshchapel/azshp%20chapel%2002.jpg
http://waltlockley.com/azshchapel/azshp%20chapel%2003.jpg
http://waltlockley.com/azshchapel/azshp%20chapel%2004.jpg
http://waltlockley.com/azshchapel/azshp%20chapel%2005.jpg
http://waltlockley.com/azshchapel/azshp%20chapel%2006.jpg
http://waltlockley.com/azshchapel/azshp%20chapel%2007.jpg
http://waltlockley.com/azshchapel/azshp%20chapel%2008.jpg
http://waltlockley.com/azshchapel/azshp%20chapel%2009.jpg
http://waltlockley.com/azshchapel/azshp%20chapel%2010.jpg
http://waltlockley.com/azshchapel/azshp%20chapel%2011.jpg
http://waltlockley.com/azshchapel/azshp%20chapel%2012.jpg
http://waltlockley.com/azshchapel/azshp%20chapel%2013.jpg
http://waltlockley.com/azshchapel/azshp%20chapel%2014.jpg

HX_Guy
Apr 3, 2008, 12:17 AM
Back to Cityscape, digging continues...

http://nitnelav.com/downtownapril2/12.jpg
http://nitnelav.com/downtownapril2/14.jpg

sad face
Apr 3, 2008, 1:45 AM
Actually I'm from Phoenix I hurried up when I made an account and I didn't know how to change it .

HooverDam
Apr 3, 2008, 2:43 AM
All those men are just dancing they are nooot building:banana: It is taking too long.Don't be glad at all since it has been very slow there is a probability of the"great project" to be canceled.:(How long have they been doing this, before this thread started.:haha: Go to diagrams and you will see how many buildings have been canceled.Won't skyline Phoenix get better or taller!:hell:

This has got to be a gimmick account, right?

Tfom
Apr 3, 2008, 4:14 AM
This has got to be a gimmick account, right?

Hooverdam, why you pleasing to think this? For the person sad face to be stating this thoughts may be speaking for the truth.

jvbahn
Apr 3, 2008, 4:20 AM
Sad Face seems like a new version of ljbuild, but thank god without the fetish for large bolded fonts.

JimInCal
Apr 3, 2008, 1:54 PM
Sad Face seems like a new version of ljbuild, but thank god without the fetish for large bolded fonts.

It was just April 1st....and I have a feeling we've been Fooled :cool:

Just looked at his/her user profile and it states sad face is located in Austria.... ah ha. Land of the Governator!

jvbahn
Apr 3, 2008, 5:36 PM
:previous: Haha, wonderful, that means he's not far from me!

combusean
Apr 3, 2008, 11:31 PM
As I figured...he's 14 and English is likely a second language. Probably took a family vacation to the States and gave his two cents to the locals--nothing wrong with that.

The content and syntax of his posts isn't at all worse than the horror stories I've been hearing about kids his age in the public school system who are actual native speakers.

NIXPHX77
Apr 4, 2008, 12:01 AM
nice pix Hooverdam. i've never seen photos of that chapel - cool!
there are some neat historic bldgs on the State Hospital grounds
(thankfully i've only seen them from a distance!)

a liberal arts college (and a Catholic univ, which we are lacking
for now for a metro our size - i guess one will be coming to the west valley)
i'd rather see right downtown, or at least closer than the county hospital grounds and along light rail. perhaps that large vacant parcel north of indian school on the west side of Central could be good. a catholic univ would be great on North Central on that large vacant parcel across from Brophy/Xavier, site of the "Metropolitan" or "Brophy" tower project in Peloquin's dreams.

HX_Guy
Apr 5, 2008, 7:44 AM
Oops...

Due to unforseen construction-related circumstances, part of Washington Street between 1st Street and Central Avenue has collapsed. Through 6am Monday, April 7, one lane will be maintained on Washington in this area while crews work to repair the street. Currently, Central Avenue remains open, although may be restricted at a later time if necessary.

wissundevil06
Apr 5, 2008, 5:33 PM
I saw them working on the street after the sun's game. I'm asumming this was before the street collapsed.

PHX
Apr 8, 2008, 3:36 AM
Nothing really new here:

CityScape digging temporarily weakens Washington Street
Construction crews for the $900 million CityScape project downtown temporarily weakened Washington Street this weekend.

On Friday, workers were digging a 13-foot trench along Washington Street, between Central Avenue and First Street, said city spokeswoman Sina Matthes. As they dug, some of the dirt that supports Washington Street tumbled into the ditch.

The street didn't cave in, but crews closed a lane on Washington this weekend and stabilized the street to make it safe for cars, Matthes said. By Monday afternoon, the lane was re-opened for traffic.

Both Phoenix and CityScape officials downplayed the incident. It's a common problem with construction projects, Matthes said.

CityScape spokesman John Bacon called the incident "minor."

"We will do whatever it takes to make it safe," he said.

When it's complete, CityScape will span from First Avenue to Second Street and from Washington Street to Jefferson Street.

The first phase of the $900 million downtown development will be completed in late November, and construction on other phases is expected to continue through 2011.

The initial phase will include financial services firm Wachovia Corp., Kimpton Hotels, P.F. Chang's China Bistro and AJ's Fine Foods.

Phxbyrd211
Apr 9, 2008, 7:10 AM
There's no reason to mention the county hospital without mentioning the nearby state hospital which I by the way suggested last year.

renone
Apr 9, 2008, 6:09 PM
What is the first phase that is supposed to be done in November? They are a long way away from anything being done now. On another note, I park under patriots park every day. Anyone know when that parking garage will close and for how long?

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3002/2400757203_fde4c38440_b.jpg

HX_Guy
Apr 9, 2008, 7:38 PM
November of this year? Maybe the parking garage...no idea, but I don't remember them saying anything about it opening in 2008...I do remember 4th quarter 2009, which sounds more reasonable.

Thanks for the updated picture, looks like they have dug down quite a bit.

sad face
Apr 9, 2008, 11:37 PM
Actually I'm from Phoenix I hurried up when I made an account and I didn't know how to change it .

PhxPavilion
Apr 10, 2008, 2:32 AM
What is the first phase that is supposed to be done in November? They are a long way away from anything being done now.

The first tower should start rising in June. I don't think it will be finished by November although it seems to be Red's top priority and it is an office tower of similar size to OCPE so it may go up fairly fast.

AZ KID
Apr 10, 2008, 3:08 AM
I highly doubt that the office tower will be completed by november. Ocpe is moving extremely fast but that wont even be finished by november. The first phase must be retail or something like that.

HX_Guy
Apr 10, 2008, 5:49 AM
What is the first phase that is supposed to be done in November? They are a long way away from anything being done now.

Looking back on a post I made earlier after the meeting I went to, I wrote...

• By the end of 2008, block 22 should have the retail portions of the buildings in place (PF Changs, etc) as well as the office tower close to topping out. Build time for the office tower will be about 12 months (completion late summer 2009) while the condo/hotel will have a 24 month build time (completion late 2010).

If what I heard at the meeting is correct, then I guess some parts of the project will be completed at the end of 2008, although I can't imagine any of it being usable until the whole project is completed on that block.

HX_Guy
Apr 16, 2008, 1:38 AM
I wonder if this has any relation whatsoever with Cityscape...or if they are planning to open elsewhere, and if so...where in Central Phoenix, maybe Biltmore?

http://www.azcentral.com/ent/dining/articles/2008/04/15/20080415sauce0415.html

"Sauce, run by Phoenix-based Fox Restaurant Concepts with nine locations, also plans to open two additional eateries, in the East Valley and Central Phoenix, by early 2009."

PHX NATIVE 929
Apr 16, 2008, 3:28 AM
I wonder if this has any relation whatsoever with Cityscape...or if they are planning to open elsewhere, and if so...where in Central Phoenix, maybe Biltmore?

http://www.azcentral.com/ent/dining/articles/2008/04/15/20080415sauce0415.html

"Sauce, run by Phoenix-based Fox Restaurant Concepts with nine locations, also plans to open two additional eateries, in the East Valley and Central Phoenix, by early 2009."

Rumor has it... the old Eddie Matney's space at 24th/Camelback.

HX_Guy
Apr 16, 2008, 7:41 AM
I drove past the Cityscape site tonight at around 11:30 and there were three excavators going at it....the hole has gotten much deeper, I need to stop by during the day to snap some pictures.

HX_Guy
Apr 16, 2008, 8:48 PM
Hmm...why isn't Kimpton Hotels listed as one of the tenants for Cityscape anymore?

From www.reddevelopment.com

Grocery

AJ's Fine Foods
www.ajsfinefoods.com

Hospitality

TWELVE
www.twelvehotels.com

Office

Squire, Sanders & Dempsey L.L.P.
www.ssd.com

Wachovia Corporation
www.wachovia.com

Restaurants

P.F. Changs
www.pfchangs.com


Also, on Kimpton's website, there is no mention of a hotel in Phoenix under development and I think at one point, there was...wasn't there?

http://www.kimptonhotels.com/development_future.aspx

ljbuild
Apr 17, 2008, 7:10 AM
WACHOVIA HAS RECENTLY LAID PEOPLE OFF


Hopefully wachovia "" WONT LAYOFF THE HIGHRISE """ :(

Hopefully they will follow thru with initial highrise plans and not pull another

"C.P.E. "

Referring to the initial blueprint of CPE BEING 40 + STORIES that has now been narrowed to 26 stories.

HX_Guy
Apr 17, 2008, 7:15 AM
That is not completely true about CPE. The original plan was for two buildings, one at 40 stories and one shorter. We ended up getting the shorter part of the plan, and the taller tower has been put on hold for now.

neworleans
Apr 17, 2008, 8:52 AM
you mean put on hold permanently. it aint gonna get built, we already know this from past projects

HooverDam
Apr 17, 2008, 11:52 AM
Well I'm confused. Wasn't CityScape initially supposed to cover 3 blocks? I know they are going to do it in 'phases' (Phoenix developer speak for do phase 1 and never do anything else), but their website makes that sound like its not even going to happen now.

"CityScape encompasses three blocks in the Copper Square district of downtown Phoenix, Arizona. The boundaries are: 1st Avenue to the west, 1st Street to the east, Washington Street to the north, and Jefferson Street to the south. "

What happened to the block bounded by Washington/Jefferson/1st/2nd streets? Isn't that where the two condo towers were supposed to go?

Even if you look at this site map, it looks like they've totally shelved the idea of developing that block:
http://www.reddevelopment.com/post/prjimgs/Site%20Plan%20Aerial%202blocks.jpg

I hope its just poor phrasing and that they do still have some intent on developing that Easternmost block.

vwwolfe
Apr 17, 2008, 2:54 PM
Yeah, it's not looking good for the 3rd block of CityScape. Here's their quote from the FAQ page on their website.

Q: Where is CityScape located?

A: The project encompasses two lineal blocks in the Copper Square district of downtown Phoenix, Arizona. The boundaries are: 1st Avenue to the west, 1st Street to the east, Washington Street to the north, and Jefferson Street to the south. The project is adjacent to the US Airways Center and within two blocks of Chase Field. The Light Rail Transit System (LRT) runs on three sides of the project with two nearby rail stations providing convenient access.

AZ KID
Apr 17, 2008, 10:17 PM
What a bummer. It is starting to look like cityscape is going to be a failure. It wont have nearly the same impact on downtown and there isnt anything special about this project anymore either. I mean this year was supposed to be great for downtown. But now a bunch of projects (or portions of projects) might not even happen.

Don B.
Apr 17, 2008, 10:40 PM
So we are paying $100 million to get a couple of 25 or 30-story non-descript office towers that in any other city would be constructed in the suburbs with no governmental subsidy, not at the core of downtown?

Hosed comes to mind, but what else should we think?

--don

kaneui
Apr 17, 2008, 11:25 PM
^^The idea of CityScape now excluding the easternmost block is disconcerting, to say the least. Surely the city subsidies--including the PSP parking redo--are tied to RED developing the two towers on Block 23?

RED's own website contradicts itself--as of today, it describes CityScape as three city blocks, but bounded on the east by 1st St. Also, the project area circled on their aerial photo of the site is only two blocks, and their slideshow now excludes anything on Block 23, including previous renders of the two residential towers.

Does anyone know or have access to the details of the city's agreement with RED?

HX_Guy
Apr 18, 2008, 12:01 AM
^^The idea of CityScape now excluding the easternmost block is disconcerting, to say the least. Surely the city subsidies--including the PSP parking redo--are tied to RED developing the two towers on Block 23?



Yes and no.

The deal with the city is actually in phases, not one lump deal. I'll dig up the details in a minute...but basically RED get X amount of money for completing Phase I, and then X amount for Phase II and so forth.
Off the top of my head, the only requirement of Phase I is the underground parking, the 220,000 sq ft of retail, and the Wachovia office tower. That is what they need to complete to receive the initial "reward".

PhxPavilion
Apr 18, 2008, 12:45 AM
Not at all surprising.

HX_Guy
Apr 18, 2008, 1:06 AM
The worst would be if we only end up with one tower on block 22, the Wachovia tower. It would basically just be another Collier Center.
With Kimpton no longer coming up on the list of companies on board, this could be the case and it would be very disappointing. We need more people...RED needs more people...that are actually staying downtown (hotel or residential) to make this work...the grocery store, other retail...not just people who will come to the office and go back to the suburbs afterwards.

In either case, here is the latest update...

http://nitnelav.com/DowntownApril17/5.jpg

http://nitnelav.com/DowntownApril17/6.jpg

gymratmanaz
Apr 19, 2008, 6:12 PM
It's going to be one big hole!!! We know it will be 65 feet deep. So far, they are cemented down to 14 feet. When you look at how deep the 14 feet looks, now imagine almost 5 times as deep. Once the hole is dug, they will close off central and then dig it up to widen the hole to connect the two parking garages with a central wall.

AZ KID
Apr 19, 2008, 6:34 PM
I agree with Hx Guy that it would be a total bummer if we were to end up with just one tower. Although i dont find that very likely. It doesnt make sense to me that they would dig up the entire lot just for one building. Am i missing something here. Is the parking garage going to span all throughout that block?

HX_Guy
Apr 19, 2008, 6:43 PM
Is the parking garage going to span all throughout that block?

Yes, the parking garage is going to span the whole block, with entry/exit off of Central and also Jefferson.

AZ KID
Apr 19, 2008, 7:14 PM
Ha thanks Hx Guy. Guess i thought wrong. I guess we will only have to wait and see what this project holds for us. I sure am hoping for the best but starting to prepare for the worst.

BigBuilder
Apr 21, 2008, 7:13 PM
http://www.reddevelopment.com/ As of 4-17-2008 on RED's site!

AJ's Fine Foods, the Valley's leading specialty grocer, has committed to the project as has P.F. Chang's China Bistro. From a hostpitality standpoint, Kimpton Hotels & Restaurants will open a 250-room Hotel Palomar. Wachovia Corporation and Squire, Sanders & Dempsey L.L. P. will anchor the office tower.

I wish jealous kids from Tucson would stop posting B.S. on this thread and find another form of entertainment. i.e. someone above said there was no mention of Kimpton on the RED site.

It is more likely that Cityscape will be the new tallest. :worship:

HX_Guy
Apr 21, 2008, 7:47 PM
I'm guessing the "jealous kid from Tucson" must be me? Since I mentioned Kimpton not being mentioned?

I was going off their list of tenants, which reads...

Grocery

AJ's Fine Foods
www.ajsfinefoods.com

Hospitality

TWELVE
www.twelvehotels.com

Office

Squire, Sanders & Dempsey L.L.P.
www.ssd.com

Wachovia Corporation
www.wachovia.com

Restaurants

P.F. Changs
www.pfchangs.com

Do you see Kimpton on that list?

Listen, everyone here would love to see Cityscape become a reality in the biggest form possible...with all the residential, hotel, office, and retail initially shown, and we'd all love to see a new tallest. Why would there be any jealousy?

Don B.
Apr 21, 2008, 8:19 PM
http://www.reddevelopment.com/ As of 4-17-2008 on RED's site!

AJ's Fine Foods, the Valley's leading specialty grocer, has committed to the project as has P.F. Chang's China Bistro. From a hostpitality standpoint, Kimpton Hotels & Restaurants will open a 250-room Hotel Palomar. Wachovia Corporation and Squire, Sanders & Dempsey L.L. P. will anchor the office tower.

I wish jealous kids from Tucson would stop posting B.S. on this thread and find another form of entertainment. i.e. someone above said there was no mention of Kimpton on the RED site.

It is more likely that Cityscape will be the new tallest. :worship:

Nice.

--don

gymratmanaz
Apr 21, 2008, 9:47 PM
BigBuilder....What makes you say it looks like we will have a new tallest? Did i miss a new announcement. I hope you are right.....IS there something new I missed on the website?

renone
Apr 21, 2008, 11:09 PM
RED did a presentation at my office about CityScape last week. I should have had you all submit questions for me to ask, but I didn't think I was going to be able to make it. A couple of things:

1. The third block was not mentioned as something in the works at this time. The parking garage was supposed to span all three blocks, but apparently there were huge APS power lines under 1st street that were not on any of the city plans that could not be moved, so the parking garage will not go under 1st street. They are still planning on having the parking garage go under Central, unless something unforseen happens.

2. The building will not be the new tallest. I think he said it will be 410 feet. All of the FAA hurdles are clear.

3. Wachovia is slated to move in January of 2009, with Squire moving in March of 2009.

4. The parking garage below PSP will be given a "shave and a haricut". It will be waterproofed so it stops leaking and will get a paintjob and other needed maintenance. RED has already taken posession of the garage. The parking garage will be open with only one entrance and exit for the next 12 months and will not be closed at all during construction.

5. Kimpton hotels is on board. The structure above PSP is definitley still going forward. They are commited to getting a nice resturant to compliment PF Changs. Mike Ditka was in town to determine if this would be a good place to open a new "ditkas" restaurant. Whatever it is, it is going to be upscale.

6. The PF Changs will look simialr to all of the others, but will have a very large sushi bar that will be unique.

7. RED has been contacted by Walgreens, CVS, Osco etc. about leasing space, and RED is committed to not having anything like that at Cityscape. Upsclae only (i.e. Sauce).

8. The presenter ensured us that the new hotel would be much nicer than a certain hotel that was recently built.

9. The ped. bridge over central is back in the plans after being scrapped due to height concerns.

I actually left feeling pretty jazzed.

HX_Guy
Apr 21, 2008, 11:19 PM
Hmm, I didn't know that the ped. bridge was temporarily scrapped.
A bit weird that they turned down the Walgreens, etc...true those aren't destination places but they are definitely needed downtown, hopefully one will pop in the ground floor of the Aloft hotel, if that ends up being built.

Any word on the residential part of the project?

AZ KID
Apr 22, 2008, 12:29 AM
Thanks renone. :)
I still dont understand the height of the hotel residential tower. I mean downtown definitely needs more hotel rooms and the faa aproved the building to be 100' taller than that. It just puzzles me

PHX31
Apr 22, 2008, 1:44 AM
If Wachovia moves in in January 2009 I'll take everyone on this forum out for a drink at the Roosevelt. I'd be surprised if this thing is above ground level in January 2009.

renone
Apr 22, 2008, 1:51 AM
The residental portion is still going forward. He called it a "leap of faith". I don't remember the details, sorry.

HX_Guy
Apr 22, 2008, 2:32 AM
If Wachovia moves in in January 2009 I'll take everyone on this forum out for a drink at the Roosevelt. I'd be surprised if this thing is above ground level in January 2009.

Shit, you're right...I don't know why initially I thought that seems like so far off, but that is what, 8 months away? No way is that realistic, especially since the digging isn't even supposed to be finished until the end of May.

PHX NATIVE 929
Apr 22, 2008, 3:09 AM
Thanks for the update renone. This project excites me more than anything else downtown. I am surprised that RED is apparently straight-arming interest from drug stores. Seems like a natural fit to me. Hard to believe they're in a position to turn away tenants.

HooverDam
Apr 22, 2008, 4:02 AM
It is disappointing to hear that RED doesn't want to do a new tallest even though it would be approved by the FAA, ah well, just more lack of vision from Phoenix's 'leaders.'

Its also a bit strange that Drug stores want to open up downtown and RED doesn't want them.

I always thought the lot here:
http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/4445/downtownxb7.jpg

Would be good for a drug store. Its sort of in the epicenter of the downtown hotels and soon to open hotels, so it would be convenient for downtown tourists. I know that lot is limited in height to preserve views for the Phelps Dodge tower, so a drug store seems like a good fit.

I know thats the lot where some condos (CU2) where potentially going to go, I'm not sure if thats still in the works or not. If I had money and control of that what I'd do is put a drug store on the first floor (or perhaps 2, since its a smallish lot w/ an odd shape) and above it a row of 2 or 3 story condos (depending on what exactly the height limit is). Then I'd have the drug store include a soda fountain/diner on the ground floor like they used to, as it would be a great spot for people leaving clubs late at night to grab a 2AM burger and fries and sober up, keep visiting with friends, et cetera.

AZ KID
Apr 22, 2008, 4:38 AM
Yeah it doesnt make sense to me either. If cityscape is going to make an impact I dont see how only allowing really upscale places to be tenants is going to help. I think a variety of stores is needed.

admdavid
Apr 22, 2008, 5:00 AM
That's the lot where the Aloft hotel is supposed to go, I believe.

HX_Guy
Apr 22, 2008, 5:57 AM
Would be good for a drug store. Its sort of in the epicenter of the downtown hotels and soon to open hotels, so it would be convenient for downtown tourists. I know that lot is limited in height to preserve views for the Phelps Dodge tower, so a drug store seems like a good fit.

I know thats the lot where some condos (CU2) where potentially going to go, I'm not sure if thats still in the works or not. If I had money and control of that what I'd do is put a drug store on the first floor (or perhaps 2, since its a smallish lot w/ an odd shape) and above it a row of 2 or 3 story condos (depending on what exactly the height limit is). Then I'd have the drug store include a soda fountain/diner on the ground floor like they used to, as it would be a great spot for people leaving clubs late at night to grab a 2AM burger and fries and sober up, keep visiting with friends, et cetera.

CU2 has been scrapped but a new project, Aloft Hotel, is now on the drawing board. It will be a five story building with ground floor retail and they are trying to get a drug store to fill that spot.

I like your idea of a late night burger place in that area, seems like a great fit and I don't think anything like that exists right now.

HooverDam
Apr 22, 2008, 6:16 AM
CU2 has been scrapped but a new project, Aloft Hotel, is now on the drawing board. It will be a five story building with ground floor retail and they are trying to get a drug store to fill that spot.

I like your idea of a late night burger place in that area, seems like a great fit and I don't think anything like that exists right now.

Thats right, I had totally forgotten about the Aloft hotel! I guess there's just so much going on downtown I can keep it straight.

After hanging out at the Mill Ave Cue Club one night, I noticed at 2am everyone from all the clubs wandered around the corner to Slices and the other eateries right around there. Downtown Phoenix needs something like that for all the people who will be exiting Hannys, the new clubs along Washington, etc.

sundevilgrad
Apr 22, 2008, 3:22 PM
I wonder what this means for the current projects (i.e. Cityscape)...
http://www.baltimoresun.com/business/realestate/bal-re.harney20apr20,0,2345831.story

sundevilgrad
Apr 22, 2008, 3:25 PM
Shit, you're right...I don't know why initially I thought that seems like so far off, but that is what, 8 months away? No way is that realistic, especially since the digging isn't even supposed to be finished until the end of May.

Will Wachovia even be in business at that time?

Loveithigh
Apr 22, 2008, 7:28 PM
If Wachovia moves in in January 2009 I'll take everyone on this forum out for a drink at the Roosevelt. I'd be surprised if this thing is above ground level in January 2009.

Hey - I will share in the drinks if Wachovia actually moves in next January. If anything I will be good for the second round! :cheers:

PHX NATIVE 929
Apr 23, 2008, 6:30 AM
From Cityscape's website:

"CityScape has already attracted two of the most well-known businesses in the Valley - A.J.'s Fine Foods and P.F. Changs China Bistro. Wachovia Corporation will open a regional headqurters in early 2010. Squire, Sanders & Dempsey L.L.P is moving its Phoenix office to One East Washington. The world-renowned Kimpton Hotels & Restaurants will operate a Hotel Palomar within the project."

HX_Guy
Apr 24, 2008, 2:28 AM
Looks like RED fixed the tenant list...

Grocery

AJ's Fine Foods
www.ajsfinefoods.com

Hospitality

Kimpton - Hotel Palomar
www.kimptonhotels.com

TWELVE
www.twelvehotels.com

Office

Squire, Sanders & Dempsey L.L.P.
www.ssd.com

Wachovia Corporation
www.wachovia.com

Restaurants

P.F. Chang's
www.pfchangs.com

HX_Guy
Apr 24, 2008, 6:06 AM
I'm wondering...what other big tenant does Cityscape have lined up that they aren't releasing yet? If you look at the top of the residential/hotel tower...there is a logo/name that is filtered out.

The same was true for the renderings of the Wachovia tower and Hotel Palomar before they were announced...the names were already in the renderings but they weren't legible.

http://nitnelav.com/CityScapeConstruction/cityscapenew5.jpg

http://nitnelav.com/cityscapebillboard.jpg

PHX31
Apr 24, 2008, 3:56 PM
/\Doesn't that top rendering show CityScape spanning 3 blocks? Now it is only two... Excuse my lack of following of the wheelings and dealings of this project, but they have axed those other condo buildings, right? (they looked the coolest, imo).

gymratmanaz
Apr 24, 2008, 4:48 PM
first two blocks are phase one and two...third block to follow