Arizona Center: Why didn't it work out? [Archive]

HX_Guy

Jul 16, 2009, 11:05 PM

Plinko brought up the Arizona Center in the Cityscape thread and I was actually talking to gymratmanaz earlier about it...

I wasn't around when Arizona Center opened so I have no idea what sort of expectations there were to the project, how it was supposed to look/be built vs how it came out, and what eventually lead to it's demise.

According to critics, two main things are two blame. First, suburban-oriented wasn't ready for downtown development of this caliber and second, there were not enough permanent upscale apartments/condos in downtown at the time (Wikipedia).
It does not mention the inner oriented design of Arizona Center, which is personally why I wouldn't and don't go to it, it's not urban, and when I go downtown, I want an urban experience. That however may not have as much to do with it as I'd like to think because there are many downtowns that have full scale malls right in the middle of them and they thrive (thinking of San Diego as well as San Francisco).

So, for those of you who remember, what was Arizona Center like in it's early days? How was the buzz when it was being built and what was supposed to be built vs what actually was? How did it compare to how Cityscape is developing today and the buzz surrounding that?

PHX31

Jul 16, 2009, 11:22 PM

I think it was a success at first. I remember going there as a younger kid with my parents. We didn't go anywhere (save a game or two at AWA) downtown except the Arizona Center. We lived up in NW Phoenix, and we would make a trek specifically to the AZ Center (even Hooters sometimes!) every once in a while.

To me, I don't think it works now because there is nothing around it to feed it. The entire east and north side of it is a barren wasteland of empty lots. If the great historic neighborhoods that used to be there were still around and viable and feeding the AZ Center and it had a better design at its entranaces, ie, great entrances all around on all 4 sides, it might work better. As it is, only the southwest corner has a nice entrance (read: somewhat inviting) from the surrounding downtown. The east side is open, but not exactly welcoming, and the only other real entrance is just that from the parking garage. Can you even get in the place as a pedestrian from the northside??? Maybe if you walk through the parking ticket gates and through the garage.

I imagine if the neighborhoods on the north side were still around and healthy, as they should be (and as they are in most any other city), a "grand" entrance on the north would be and should be there. Once the central city became shit, and the AZ Center was given a bad design, it was destined to fail after its initial opening era.

plinko

Jul 16, 2009, 11:30 PM

Here's a picture of the original proposal:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v202/plinko923/PHOENIX%20CONSTRUCTION/PHX-AZCEN.jpg

I wonder where the model went?

I have to say that it's kind of hard for me to remember what it was like inside the place when it first opened. I was only 14 in 1990, but used to ride the bus (or bicycle) occasionally downtown from Tempe when I was staying there (I didn't live in Phoenix permanently at the time, just spent summers).

I do remember in like '92 or so there was a few national clothing boutiques in there (seems to me they were all chains like Arden B or something like that), there was a Waldenbooks, there was of course the food court. This stuff all coincided with the development of America West Arena and so Arizona Center sort of became the place to go before and after a Suns game.

I think that's why it so drastically changed over time in that there wasn't enough critical mass (i.e. residents) for mall type stores, but there were plenty of people there for Suns games. Remember that at that time, there wasn't much else in terms of restaurants in DT Phoenix and the city lagged greatly in terms of convention space.

After AWA went up, all the sudden there was competition for even restaurant business, with the opening of Majerle's and a few other places. The mid-90's accelerated this decline with some of the new destinations along Jackson Street (particularly the Jackson's on Third and Cooperstown). At that point, why would somebody park 6 blocks from the arena and go to Hooter's when there were much better restaurants available near the arena?

The opening of the BOB and Collier Center didn't help either.

I do recall that when the movie theater opened, there was much fanfare and AZ Center seemed much busier as a result.

So I don't know if that answered your question at all. When it was built, it was supposed to be THE destination point downtown. But at the time DT Phoenix was perceived as a rather dull and somewhat dangerous place. My guess is that this perception was part of the reason that the place isn't street friendly in any way. The demographic at the time said that people would drive there, park, enjoy the facility, and if they were walking anywhere, they would go SW toward the civic center, symphony hall, or the AWA. Why open the space to the west (parking lots), north (abandoned homes and parking lots), or east (the dilapitated Phoenix Union HS and more parking lots).

In a way, the design makes total sense for what DT Phoenix was at the time. I doubt they ever assumed there would be a 1000 room hotel across 3rd, or massive apartment complexes to the NW and North. Or that the PUHS would be redeveloped into the bio-tech campus.

I'd love to see Three Arizona Center (the office tower) built at some point, along with an apartment building (where the hotel was supposed to be), and then some retail (like a CVS and some neighborhood retail) along the north end of the site with some residential above. I think that AMC could lose 4-6 screens at the theater and re-orient the entry to the west (and open up to ASU). I also think the building along Third St should get re-worked and opened up to the west somehow. You have the whole 2-sided retail problem, but there's got to at least be a way to make it more friendly.

just my .02 for now...maybe I'll think of more later...

HooverDam

Jul 16, 2009, 11:34 PM

I remember when it opened it was heralded as a big deal. I was young at the time (I was 7 when it opened) so I obviously wasn't following development, but I recall excitement about it. We lived in Ahwautukee back when there was nothing there and we had to drive to Chandler or Mesa to do most our shopping. Sometimes as a 'treat' we'd get to go Downtown* to the Science Center or a few years later a Suns game and we'd always go to the AZ Center. Later on for school field trips and such we'd eat our sack lunches in the grassy area.

I think part of the reason it failed was maybe overly ambitious expectations. People thought it was going to be this awesome new thing unlike anything else in the Valley, and really went out of there way to go there at first and treat it as such. Then they realized it just had a Foot Locker and an ice cream place and whatever else their local mall had, there was no reason to drive to it.

Additionally 'retail follows rooftops' is always the phrase, and there was no one living downtown 20 years ago. The surrounding neighborhoods were even worse than they are now and downtown was far scarier to most folks. Really the retail components of the Center should've had at least 3 stories of apartments above them to help make it work. Nothing luxury (because selling luxury downtown would've been even tougher then than it is now) but workforce housing and people who could at the very least keep the center active.

*As an aside, I think this is why I fell in love with downtown in the first place. If we had to do ho hum grocery shopping it was in Mesa or Chandler. But if something special was happening, a field trip, a basketball game, a play, etc. it was downtown. It just seemed exciting and cosmopolitan to me, even though Downtown back then was eons lamer than it is now, I was pretty impressed as a kid.

EDIT: Just read Plinkos post and I totally agree that the AMC needs to downsize. It was built during a time when mega multiplexes were the trend, and thats long since passed. 24 theaters was and is too many theaters for the demand downtown and the place is always empty. It needs to be redone and reoriented so that it has a grand entrance facing Taylor St and being a nice endcap to the Taylor St Mall.

HX_Guy

Jul 16, 2009, 11:52 PM

My guess is that this perception was part of the reason that the place isn't street friendly in any way. The demographic at the time said that people would drive there, park, enjoy the facility, and if they were walking anywhere, they would go SW toward the civic center, symphony hall, or the AWA. Why open the space to the west (parking lots), north (abandoned homes and parking lots), or east (the dilapitated Phoenix Union HS and more parking lots).

In a way, the design makes total sense for what DT Phoenix was at the time. I doubt they ever assumed there would be a 1000 room hotel across 3rd, or massive apartment complexes to the NW and North. Or that the PUHS would be redeveloped into the bio-tech campus.

After reading what you said, and looking at the model again, it makes perfect sense and why they built the north side the way they did. It looks like they actually had plans to close down 3rd St and have a convention center and the hotel itself built right on top of 3rd St. The north side was designed to actually not be visible once the whole project was built out.

TAZ4ate0

Jul 16, 2009, 11:54 PM

I didn't realize that the Arizona Center is 20 years old. I was thinking maybe 10.

nickkoto

Jul 17, 2009, 12:03 AM

When I first lived here, I was stationed at Luke AFB from 93-95, and I thought Arizona Center wasn't a half-bad place. I don't think the retail was ever plentiful enough to draw anyone there more than once, but the restaurants and bars were pretty good.

After I got out and moved back here in 2000, it seemed like the upstairs retail was already converted to offices, the Little Ditties was closed soon after, and the Hooter's chain as a whole became so pussified that it's essentially just another Applebee's, but with worse food.

I don't know what happened in those 5 years that I was gone, but somehow it went from a decent place to a destination with no redeeming qualities for anyone who had to get there from more than a walking distance.

Teacher_AZ_84

Jul 17, 2009, 12:15 AM

I was 6 when it opened and remember nothing. I do remember being a teen and going to the movies and food court every once in awhile.

Like HooverDam, I thought DT PHX was an amazing place when I was a kid. I loved going to AWA for games or school trips to the science museum.

PhxPavilion

Jul 17, 2009, 12:31 AM

I remember going there at least once as a kid when it opened. It was really vibrant and doing well, with a band playing in the court yard. I think its failure really is a result of everything that has been mentioned, there simply wasn't enough demand around it. Downtown was an abysmal state and while the AZ Center was indeed grand it couldn't sustain itself without help from anything else other than the sporting events and occasional Symphony Hall concert. I think we're lucky it got built downtown at all rather than as some big mega development in north Phoenix or Scottsdale.

Vicelord John

Jul 17, 2009, 5:07 AM

it didnt work because it was ahead of its time.

Don B.

Jul 17, 2009, 2:08 PM

I'm not sure I would call Arizona Center a failure. The theatre is still there...I catch a movie there about once per month on average. Each time I'm there, everything seems to have a nice crowd, so it is working to some degree. Think of it this way, it could be boarded up.

I moved to Phoenix in 1993 but I don't have any memories of going downtown until my interest in photography took off in the late 90s. I didn't own a PC until 1996 so I couldn't have taken many photos beforehand. It wasn't until the advent of digital photography in the very late 90s that I started to take a real interest in photos and urban issues. A friend of mine told me about this website in 2001 and I joined for the first time shortly thereafter.

--don

Leo the Dog

Jul 17, 2009, 4:16 PM

Great topic. I can think of a number of things that contributed to the demise of the AZ Center.

The first time I lived here was in 1993. Then I left, came back many years later and it was dead. Back then, the AZ Center attracted decent crowds, similar to today's Tempe Marketplace. However, soon thereafter, "Power Centers" became the thing in the early 90's. Competition was pretty strong back then. 44th St./Thomas power center (E. Phx), Camelback Colanade (Central Phx), even AZ Mills with close Freeway access at what is considered an inner-location (S. Phx), Even Elliot Rd. in Tempe (Ahwatukee/Tempe/Chandler residents). "Big Box" stores were somewhat new to Phoenix and they were the places to shop. I remember when Best Buy came, and it was the coolest thing ever.

The 51 ended at Northern, the 202 didn't make it to Tempe, the 10 was a 4 lane rural interstate at the 60 transition in Tempe.

Why go downtown when one could go to any of these convenient locations to most Phx neighborhoods?

Again, if one didn't know about the AZ Center, how are they supposed to find it and see it? There very little signage, lighting or anything to attract a passer-by.

Back then, it made sense to have it inward facing, (even though I HATE this design) it wasn't exactly in a great part of dt, so the design needed to make people feel safe in an urban environment. The Garfield neighborhood was worse than it is today. What else was around it? Empty lots. 3rd St. was not pedestrian oriented, it went below grade and under the Civic Center plaza, along with Washington St. This was intentional to create a barrier from the rest of the area, somewhat of a Berlin Wall to keep the 'unwanted' out. E. Van Buren was one of the worst corridors of Phx in the 90's. 1/2 down the road was no-man's land. Even the workforce dt was far lower than it is today and once 5pm hit it was a mad rush to get out of dt. How is a retail center supposed to make any money when there is nobody there after 5pm.

With that said, DT has made a HUGE change in a short period of time. I'm not going to write off the AZC...yet. It has potential to make a comeback.

PHX31

Jul 17, 2009, 4:57 PM

They should have named it Phoenix Center.

The interior courtyards and gardens are really nice. I like the levels and water features (could do without the frogs) and tree canopies. These areas are typically used. On a nice night all of the benches are taken by people and couples hanging out. That's nice.

Vicelord John

Jul 17, 2009, 5:14 PM

looking at that plan reminds me of collier center and cityscape... hmmmm

is cityscape really azcenter v.3?

plinko

Jul 17, 2009, 7:17 PM

looking at that plan reminds me of collier center and cityscape... hmmmm

is cityscape really azcenter v.3?

You're about two years too late on that call...

Anyway, one of the most disppointing things about Collier Center is that they took all the retail and put it above street level. You can't see it from anywhere. They had all the advantages over AZ Center (particularly with location, the reworking of the Civic Plaza, Washington and Third) and took advantage of none of it.

Even the 2nd Collier block was going to make that same lousy mistake (see below):
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v202/plinko923/PHOENIX%20CONSTRUCTION/PHX-COLLIER002.jpg

Back to the Arizona Center, I don't know that I'd necessarily call it a failure. It's simply evolved from a DT mall into a DT restaurant and entertainment destination. At that it is marginally successful. The public spaces are fantastic in terms of design, despite how inward facing it is. All they need to do now is find a way to better engage the surroundings. As the surrounding blocks develop, I only see it getting better, whereas Collier will always suck with that cumbersome circulation.

kingofleos

Jul 17, 2009, 8:12 PM

[QUOTE=HX_Guy;4361794]
It does not mention the inner oriented design of Arizona Center, which is personally why I wouldn't and don't go to it, it's not urban, and when I go downtown, I want an urban experience. That however may not have as much to do with it as I'd like to think because there are many downtowns that have full scale malls right in the middle of them and they thrive (thinking of San Diego as well as San Francisco).QUOTE]

I hear you. Downtown San Diego and San Francisco were already nice to begin with, especially since San Diego has recently upgraded their gas lamp district area. People WANT to be down there. With Phoenix, when the Arizona Center opened, NOBODY had any real reason for being in downtown.

combusean

Jul 17, 2009, 9:03 PM

^ I don't know about Downtown San Diego being nice in its time. Horton Plaza was utterly revolutionary when it was built and sparked a significant reinvestment in the core there.

Downtown Phoenix looks today what Downtown San Diego and Denver did 20 years ago.

PHX31

Jul 17, 2009, 9:05 PM

/\Except Denver and San Diego had way more historic building stock to work with.

kingofleos

Jul 17, 2009, 10:14 PM

Yeah, San Diego and San Francisco among most other big cities, had more to work with than us.

However, I still feel if we can just get a few more mid-rise buildings to connect from our central mid-town to downtown, our skyline will VASTLY improve. It already looks great from various angles when you include mid-town.

Imagine if they connected?

plinko

Jul 17, 2009, 10:38 PM

kingofleos

Jul 17, 2009, 10:43 PM

^Even if just the lots between Van Buren and Hance Park (3rd to 3rd) got filled up with 3-7 story buildings, DT Phoenix would be a vastly different place.

I'd actually rather see that than more office 20-25 story office towers.

That or a mixture in between. As long as they continued with the trend of coffee shops, independent restaurants, etc, etc, I think it'd be fine. Honestly, I'd like to hope for that at this point than get my heart broke over things like CityScape.

PhxPavilion

Jul 18, 2009, 12:06 AM

That along with more affordable living.

PartyLine

Nov 9, 2009, 8:08 AM

I like going to the Hooters in Arizona center when i'm out there

BTinSF

Nov 9, 2009, 8:21 AM

Yeah, San Diego and San Francisco among most other big cities, had more to work with than us.

OK. Here's what San Francisco had to work with:

http://i.livescience.com/images/ig44_earthquake_1906_02_02.jpg
Source: http://www.livescience.com/php/multimedia/imagedisplay/img_display.php?pic=ig44_earthquake_1906_02_02.jpg&title=Post-Earthquake%20&cap=This+full+panorama+of+San+Francisco%2C+California%2C+was+taken+April+18%2C+1906%2C+within+hours+of+the+San+Francisco+Earthquake.+Click+to+enlarge.

HooverDam

Nov 9, 2009, 8:46 AM

OK. Here's what San Francisco had to work with:

SF population in 1940: 600,000
Phx population in 1940: 65,414

So I think its fair to say SF had a much larger stock of buildings built in the pre war, walkable, non auto dominated era. I hope your post was a joke, otherwise its retarded.

Don B.

Nov 9, 2009, 3:16 PM

^ I agree. San Francisco in 1906 (when that photo was taken) had around 350,000 people. Phoenix had something like 5,500 people. Phoenix was basically a dusty agricultural village in the middle of nowhere, in a place that was still a territory at the time (Arizona was not admitted as a state until six years later, in 1912). In fact, SF had about three times the population of the entire state of Arizona in 1906.

--don

Leo the Dog

Nov 9, 2009, 3:18 PM

BTinSF has a point.

Don B.

Nov 9, 2009, 3:52 PM

^ He does not. SF was a completely different, and much larger city, than Phoenix was back then. Yes, a good portion of the city was destroyed by the 1906 earthquake, but certainly not everything, and what was destroyed was quickly rebuilt in the next five years. Phoenix didn't start to grow on that scale until the 1950s, and let's face it, construction styles changed a lot between 1910 and 1950 in the United States. In 1910, hardly anything catered to the automobile. By 1950, the car was king, and development reflected that.

Geography also played a huge role in how the cities developed. SF sits on a tiny spit of land, surrounded by water on three sides, and is about the same size as the city of Tempe. Phoenix, on the other hand, sits in a broad flat plain. There are no natural barriers to sprawl in Phoenix.

--don

phoenixwillrise

Nov 10, 2009, 2:52 AM

I don't see it as it being over for Arizona Center if they can survive this downturn, with ASU started and potentially expanding downtown and more people living downtown in the future, it could still make it bigger then they have.
Initially if they had been able to get an exclusive on say the first Nordstrom,
the first Bloomingdales and Barney's New York it would have been an interesting social/economic thing to see what would have happened. I tend to think people who never came downtown before except for a sporting event would have made it a habit. Just one mans opinion.

glynnjamin

Nov 10, 2009, 3:38 PM

hahahaha ya I can just see a Nordstroms, Barney's, or Bloomingdales at AZ Center. LOL. There are people in Scottsdale who are afraid of the Biltmore area...I don't think they'll make it down to any of the President-streets

PHXguyinOKC

Nov 10, 2009, 9:58 PM

I went to the AZ Center today and there was a bunch of activity. It was at 1 pm so im sure it was a lot of office workers and ASU students. I bought something from there.

HooverDam

Nov 10, 2009, 10:47 PM

I went to the AZ Center today and there was a bunch of activity. It was at 1 pm so im sure it was a lot of office workers and ASU students. I bought something from there.

The Greenbuild Conference is in town and I think I read somewhere that they have like 25K attendees so its probably related to that too.

Vicelord John

Nov 10, 2009, 10:50 PM

I went to the AZ Center. I bought something from there.

So you now own a bottle of Arizona Gunslinger hot sauce? or a kokopelli? Maybe a shirt that says "I'll give up football after I give up breathing"?

PHXguyinOKC

Nov 10, 2009, 11:20 PM

So you now own a bottle of Arizona Gunslinger hot sauce? or a kokopelli? Maybe a shirt that says "I'll give up football after I give up breathing"?

well, a bottle of water and an AZ flag

PhxPavilion

Nov 11, 2009, 11:04 PM

There are people in Scottsdale who are afraid of the Biltmore area...I don't think they'll make it down to any of the President-streets

You must be joking. :koko:

Vicelord John

Nov 11, 2009, 11:10 PM

You must be joking. :koko:

unfortunately, he isn't. I deal with people every day that won't go anywhere that has a Phoenix address. I've almost started physical fights with people by telling them Kierland is in Phoenix. They just don't want to hear it and are scared of anything with Phoenix in it. I had a lady today tell me she doesn't go into Chicago because she doesn't want to get killed and stays near her home in Highland Park.

People are just.... stupid.

glynnjamin

Nov 11, 2009, 11:54 PM

^Thanks John. To be honest, there are people in the East Valley (middle class neighborhoods) who won't even go into Phx because they are terrified of it. All you had to do was ride the LRT during the first free week and listen to people's reactions as they went through... I actually have friends who lived in Greyhawk and moved to Carefree because of the "blight that was taking over North Scottsdale".

azliam

Nov 12, 2009, 12:10 AM

HooverDam

Nov 12, 2009, 7:29 AM

Obviously we're never going to see a Bloomingdales at the Az Center but I would love to see stores like JC Pennys, Kohls, Sears, etc at the AZ Center or downtown somewhere. The Urban Form plan zones for those type of stores on West Van Buren between 7th Ave and 3rd ave, so maybe thatll happen someday.

Id love to see a box department store replace that surface lot on Fillmore and 4th St, or perhaps one of the grassy area, or if the movie theater was scaled back in some of that space.

plinko

Nov 12, 2009, 6:35 PM

HooverDam

Nov 12, 2009, 7:21 PM

Still, all the wrong locations for big box. I have no problem with larger stores going into DT Phoenix, but they have to be located correctly. To me the best location is just south of the BOB. (I'm talking Target, Home Depot or Costco).

Van Buren is a commercial oriented street, but not that type.

Why not? Theres a lot of empty or underutilized lots along Van Buren that would be fine for department stores. Putting them South of Chase field means their further from most downtown residents for one.

Along Van Buren makes sense for a row of department/box stores as they could be on the bottom floor of office buildings like you traditionally saw downtown.

Leo the Dog

Nov 12, 2009, 7:30 PM

unfortunately, he isn't. I deal with people every day that won't go anywhere that has a Phoenix address. I've almost started physical fights with people by telling them Kierland is in Phoenix. They just don't want to hear it and are scared of anything with Phoenix in it. I had a lady today tell me she doesn't go into Chicago because she doesn't want to get killed and stays near her home in Highland Park.

People are just.... stupid.

Thats because PHX is the new Detroit. This isn't just a local notion, its pretty much nation wide thought. AKA #1 in kidnapping/illegal immigration/drug cartels...

It is the headline in the the housing meltdown, its on CNN pretty often. Its no wonder that people come to the "Valley" and try their best to avoid Phoenix.

Leo the Dog

Nov 12, 2009, 7:32 PM

Obviously we're never going to see a Bloomingdales at the Az Center

And the excuse for the city of PHX now is....??

plinko

Nov 12, 2009, 8:10 PM

Why not? Theres a lot of empty or underutilized lots along Van Buren that would be fine for department stores. Putting them South of Chase field means their further from most downtown residents for one.

Along Van Buren makes sense for a row of department/box stores as they could be on the bottom floor of office buildings like you traditionally saw downtown.

I know what you're getting at (a shopping street), but financial backers would never back singular developments similar to what you are talking about. There isn't enough critical mass. I think Phoenix is more likely to see something like this:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/AZMnJs5KS08&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/AZMnJs5KS08&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

or Atlantic Station in Atlanta.

Overall, a good development for the center city, but still catering to how MOST users will get there, by driving. And that's why I say that Van Buren is inappropriate, it still has a chance of being somewhat pedestrian oriented from 7th to 7th.

Like it or not, Phoenix isn't a traditional city, and I seriously doubt that there will ever be a 'shopping street' in DT Phoenix (something akin to Michigan Ave). It's a nice idea, but I don't see it happening, not there.

HooverDam

Nov 13, 2009, 9:09 AM

^I guess Im just not following your reasoning. Van Buren between 7th Ave and Central is the perfect place for something like a Michigan Avenue. Its strategically proximate to the current core of downtown buildings, downtown ASU (which is good as many of the students could get jobs at the retail outlets), the Captiol Mall area and the neighborhoods to the North (Roosevelt, Evans- Churchill, etc). It also has fairly wide sidewalks already which is good for large scale shopping.

It also links into the Lower Grand area which hopefully in the next 20 or so years will become a nice midrise area with a trolley running down it. And perhaps that trolley would also go down Van Buren to the Central Station, increasing Van Burens potential as a shopping street.

Its currently zoned (and will stay that way) for the highest buildings in the city which could mean large areas of floor space for big department stores. Van Buren is easy to access for suburban drivers coming off the 10 down 7th Ave. Theres also freeway access from 5th and 3rd avenues.

Its a big wide street thats easy for the automobile too. Unlike the warehouse area you proposed which has narrow streets and far less Phoenicians are familiar with. Garages underground or 'behind' retail fronting Van Buren would work out just fine. Its an area set up for people to either take transit to it, or drive, park once and then shop.

Currently along VB there's empty warehouses (between 5th and 6th), lots of surface lots, automotive shops, suburban style fast food joints and auto oriented motels that no longer really serve much of a purpose. A lot of that will likely be whipped out if Downtown is able to attract more large firms and thus towers and its really the ideal downtown area for a shopping street.

Theres also nothing about Phoenix that makes a shopping street impossible. Up until the 60s everyone went downtown to walk and shop, its not like our climate is so unbearable that its impossible. Its really the indoor mall thats the thing of the past, not shopping streets. Look at even the new suburban shopping developments, Desert Ridge, Tempe Marketplace, Westgate, Zanjero, CityNorth all of these areas encourage people to drive, park once and shop outdoors while walking. They may have served as trojan horses in a way to reintroducing people to shopping that way.

Finally, like I said, the Urban Form plan calls for the area on West VB to have large scale retail, so thats where its going to go if it comes, like it or not.

plinko

Nov 13, 2009, 11:38 AM

^Oh I actually agree with you that if DT Phoenix were ever to have a shopping street, Van Buren between the 7's should be it. (Boutique retail and maybe a small department store)

My point is that I don't think you'll see it on any sort of workable scale in the next 20 years.

More likely the case is that DT Phoenix (hopefully by getting and keeping a successful grocer at Cityscape) will show enough critical mass to get a larger type retail development downtown with Target, Home Depot and those type stores. That type of development is not inappropriate for the scale that the city will be trying to create for Van Buren. Too many cars. That's why I suggested along 7th immediately south of the Chase Field. All that's there now is parking lots (I'm not advocating tearing down anything in the warehouse district). The only other viable location DT I really see in near 7th Avenue and Jefferson, but that probably screws up somebody's plans for a DT-Capitol neighborhood link of some kind (talked about for 40 years, but nothing has been done).

That's just my opinion. I just don't see DT Phoenix as a major shopping destination ever for anyone other than the people living down there. There are finally enough (and maybe more importantly enough that are affluent) to need basic levels of retail (RE: grocery, hardware, household goods), but the notion that any department store or high-end clothier/boutique is going to open up on Van Buren anytime soon? Uhhh...probably not.

HooverDam

Nov 13, 2009, 5:28 PM

^Well if the city gets anywhere near its goal of 30K new jobs and 40K new residents (plus more in the hopefully gentrifying surrounding hoods) in the next 30 years I think the demand would be there. And Im not the one hoping for Bloomingdales, Nordstroms or whatever. Id just like to see a Kohls, JC Penney, Sears, Barnes & Noble/Borders, Office Max/Staples and a Target. I dont think thats hoping for anything ridiculous and most of those stores don't have locations in Downtown or Midtown so it certainly seems to me like there would be a market for them.

Id also like to see an Ace Hardware but I think thats a better fit up in the Roosevelt neighborhood somewhere that people can park on the street while they load lumber and what not into their vehicles.

glynnjamin

Nov 13, 2009, 7:31 PM

Unfortunately, I think downtown will always suffer from the same fate of years past - too close to better potential sites. Take Target, for example. They are already at one end of the LRT, just a few miles north of downtown. Unless they did a scaled back Target Marketplace concept, you couldn't justify another in downtown. Kohls already passed on their Town & Country Mervyns location. If they were going to consider the central city, Camelback makes the most sense. Most places that don't exist downtown either exist in midtown or don't exist at all within a 15mile radius of downtown. If you were going to construct a giant retail location and had to choose between downtown or midtown, I think the options are obvious. We would need at least 50k people living full time downtown before anyone considered another department store downtown.

PhxPavilion

Nov 14, 2009, 8:24 AM

unfortunately, he isn't. I deal with people every day that won't go anywhere that has a Phoenix address. I've almost started physical fights with people by telling them Kierland is in Phoenix. They just don't want to hear it and are scared of anything with Phoenix in it. I had a lady today tell me she doesn't go into Chicago because she doesn't want to get killed and stays near her home in Highland Park.

Incredible. I know some people have a general aversion to Phoenix but the Biltmore?! I just don't understand.

People are just.... stupid.

Definitely can't argue there.

glynnjamin

Nov 14, 2009, 9:11 PM

I may have to retract my previous statement about Target. Ben Bethel (owner of the Clarendon) just told me that Target was replacing AJs in CityScape

Tito714

Nov 14, 2009, 9:25 PM

Are you serious? Are you seroius!!!

HooverDam

Nov 14, 2009, 10:33 PM

I may have to retract my previous statement about Target. Ben Bethel (owner of the Clarendon) just told me that Target was replacing AJs in CityScape

Hm its way too small of a space for a normal Target so it would definitely have to be a Target Marketplace or whatever they call them. Id be happy to have a Target downtown, but that seems to me to mean we'd still be w/ out a grocery store.

Vicelord John

Nov 14, 2009, 11:08 PM

Are you serious? Are you seroius!!!

Yes, he is serious that he heard that, but no, it isn't true. Ben Bethel is a d o u c h e b a g. He will do anything to hype his failing hotel or anything nearby it.

Target will NOT be at shittyscape.

oliveurban

Nov 15, 2009, 10:19 PM

Unless it is a modified Target concept, I don't see the company opening up a location at Cityscape. I would imagine this is a bit of hearsay on Ben's part. He probably heard something from someone else, who heard something from someone else, etc., etc., all having been sourced from inaccurate information (or wishful thinking) to begin with. If it happens I'll gladly eat my words, but I just don't think it would or could happen at Cityscape. Elsewhere Downtown? Maybe. Someday.

Vicelord John

Nov 15, 2009, 10:47 PM

I heard they are building a huge six flags on the other side of the white tanks. they already own the land and are getting ready to start construction right now!!

soleri

Nov 16, 2009, 2:17 AM

Ben Bethel is fairly well connected so any scuttlebutt he has should be respected. With the Bashas' bankruptcy, AJ's seems even more of a mirage.

A few things about Arizona Center. Rouse Company, which is responsible for the concept and design, was used to building in city centers with other amenities and attractions. Quincy Marketplace in Boston, or Harborplace in Baltimore are examples. In Phoenix, they had to create everything from scratch since the urban texture was so burned over. They ended up manufacturing a "city in a park" ala Le Corbusier. These things seems enchanting in the abstract but usually fail the crucial litmus test of walkable urbanism that interweaves new development with existing uses.

There are much better downtowns than Phoenix's that have too little retail. Denver, Kansas City, LA, and Dallas come to mind. Adding a Target seems like a rather irrelevant wish since it's very unlikely to interface with the existing downtown. Cityscape's retail efforts will likely suffer the same fate as Arizona Center's since it cannot fully embrace downtown. This is being done for a reason since downtown shop owners are leery of derelicts hanging out and scaring off customers.

Arizona Center's retail mix at the outset was interesting but probably doomed to failure. Why drive downtown, park in a garage (which people hate) in order to shop at stores that you could probably find in a more convenient location closer to home? Once the novelty factor wore off, what would bring people back? As nice as the gardens are, they weren't quite extensive enough to become a destination in themselves.

The lesson here is that cities cannot be force-fed vitality. In LA, The Grove (in the mid-Wilshire area) is successful but it still feels artificial. In Denver, the Pavilions have been more successful than Arizona Center but still suffers from a similar syndrome where suburban shopping values put on urban drag but are otherwise the same old thing.

In my Melrose neighborhood, the interesting stores are still coming despite the economic downturn. Rents are low enough to attract creative entrepreneurs and the area's cachet has increased dramatically. The saddest thing about our downtown is that the old retail infrastructure is largely gone, and with it, the incubators for really interesting retail.

Don B.

Nov 16, 2009, 2:42 AM

Why is it drivers hate parking in garages? I happen to be one of those drivers, and I can't rationalize my dislike of this at all. If you think about it, my dislike really makes no sense at all.

--don

Vicelord John

Nov 16, 2009, 3:14 AM

How exactly is ben bethel connected? He is an idiot.

HooverDam

Nov 16, 2009, 4:26 AM

ala Le Corbusier.

And theres your problem right there. Anything that anyone designs that reminds the mof Corbusier ought to be immediately tossed in the trash can.

glynnjamin

Nov 16, 2009, 2:32 PM

I can tell you why I hate parking in the AZCenter garage - because the spaces are way too small! I drive a god damn hybrid compact car and find those angled parking spaces to be a tight fit. You might as well forget about it if anything bigger than a sedan is in the spot next to you.

The other garage I hate is the one just south of Nordstroms at Fashion Square. Watching giant SUVs try and maneuver those tight corners is terrifying when you're on the other side.

As far as target goes, I don't hold any more weight in Ben Bethel than I do in ljbuild, I was just passing along what I heard because he said it right after I said target would never build downtown. I guess we will all find out tomorrow at the State of Downtown event.

kaneui

Nov 16, 2009, 7:49 PM

I don't hold much hope for large retail businesses at CityScape being successful in the immediate future. AJ's and most of the others were signed when there was a promise of lots of new condos and apartments within the project, and 44 Monroe and Summit were still looking viable. Of course, all of that has changed, and most new residents downtown are ASU students and maybe a few more at the Alta Lofts.

As the adage goes, retail follows rooftops, and there just aren't the numbers to support much more of it at the moment (particularly if it's just another outpost of a suburban mall store.)

HX_Guy

Nov 16, 2009, 10:43 PM

People hate parking garage? Why?

I love parking garages, especially in Arizona, seeing how they provide shade for the car.

Vicelord John

Nov 16, 2009, 11:00 PM

what a silly thing to get worked up about... parking garages.

They allow lots of people to park their cars in a small area, i don't see why it's so evil.

plinko

Nov 17, 2009, 12:01 AM

^No kidding.

As someone who has designed several parking garages, I can tell you that I like them alot. Certainly better that a crappy asphalt lot (especially in 115 degrees)!

nickkoto

Nov 17, 2009, 7:37 AM

I'm not buying that most people hate parking garages either. Especially in Arizona. It's one thing if you're in Europe and the stalls were built to hold VWs and Fiat 500s, but they're plenty spacious here.

The one big thing is that garages tend to get built where one can charge for its use, where surface lots generally aren't (there are lots of exceptions of course, but generally that's true). But if you compare free lots vs free garages (I believe the McClintock garage is one of the more utilized Park & Ride spots on the light rail) or if you see how many people are willing to pay extra for the garage on any given day at the airport economy lots, I just don't buy that.

Leo the Dog

Nov 17, 2009, 3:42 PM

mwadswor

Nov 17, 2009, 5:08 PM

I don't know...here in AZ its still a strange concept for the locals to actually have to pay for parking in DT. Its mind-boggling for them.

"You mean I have to pay $5-10 to park my F150 for the day? Forget it, I'll stay in the burbs."

I agree, I don't think it's the garage that bothers people, it's the paying for parking that bothers people. Not enough free parking is one of the consistent complaints I hear about both DT Phoenix and Tempe.

The bad news is that it's just unrealistic (and annoying) for the city to continue to bend over backwards to provide enough parking, up to and including killing big projects because they won't fund enough garage space. Unfortunately, in a lot of situations the suburbanites are right. It's annoying from a promoting urbanism/densification perspective, but why should they pay to park downtown when they can probably find free parking for a similar (if not identical in the case of chains) store somewhere outside of downtown. There needs to be more unique downtown to force people to go there if you expect any substantial number of people to pay to park there.

On the other hand, the good news is that a lot of people would rather park for free and ride the light rail the last mile to their destination when they actually have to go somewhere where close free parking just isn't a possibility (sports, concerts, shows DT, etc.). I guess that just reenforces the idea that suburbanites will bend over backwards to avoid paying for parking, but it is nice for light rail ridership :D

NorthScottsdale

Nov 17, 2009, 5:44 PM

/\ I'm guilty of that one. haha. I park in the CVS lot on central and osborn and ride light rail into downtown. I hate paying for parking.

nickkoto

Nov 17, 2009, 5:59 PM

That's definitely a primary motive for ASU students to take light rail too. You save the $780/year on a parking permit and the University/Rural station is actually closer to most classrooms than half of the parking spaces on campus.

I would guess that alone probably accounts for a few thousand extra passengers a day.

scottkag

Nov 17, 2009, 7:25 PM

I have nothing against parking structures, but the one at AZ Center is crap. It is cramped for all but the smallest cars, takes a long time to navigate in and out of, and the automated payment system does not ever seem to work properly.

Or maybe I'm holding a grudge for the the time the exit gate ate my money, my ticket, and wouldn't let me out of the garage...

Leo the Dog

Nov 18, 2009, 5:23 PM

Time is money.

It amazes me that people will waste an hour of their time to ride the LR (roundtrip) than to pay $5-10 to park. Basically you're saying you are only worth $5-10/hour.

Oh well. There are a lot of things about this city that don't make too much sense.

glynnjamin

Nov 18, 2009, 5:56 PM

But it actually takes less time to use the LRT because of the gridlock after a game/event

NorthScottsdale

Nov 19, 2009, 1:13 AM

who gets paid every hour of the day? Time may be money if you're running late for work, but that's about it. If you take a twenty minute light rail ride to get into downtown, time is actually saving you money :)

PhxPavilion

Nov 19, 2009, 7:20 AM

Before the light rail opened and metered parking changed it was nearly impossible to find open spaces, now empty spaces are a dime a dozen.

People definitely don't like paying for parking, myself included.

glynnjamin

Nov 19, 2009, 2:57 PM

Ya, you know it is so nice now that I can actually run somewhere downtown in my car. I had to go to a meeting at District and then head out to the East Valley. Normally I'd walk but it would have added too much time and put me late to my next meeting in the EV so I drove. Found a meter, right across the street, paid using my debit card (no change needed), ate, hopped back in my car, and I was in Mesa in no time. I remember a time when I wouldn't even consider taking a car somewhere downtown because I'd end up having to park in front of my house to find a space. Glad they raised the rates. I wouldn't object to higher rates.

Leo the Dog

Nov 19, 2009, 5:06 PM

Very good points above about parking. (And I'm a huge supporter of LRT in Phx) I hate paying for parking also. The meter rates are a little steep. $1.50/hour?! Who carries that much coinage around?

It wouldn't be that bad if the meters turned off at 6pm though. I think that 8pm is too late.

HooverDam

May 20, 2011, 6:14 PM

...so being here in Boston and seeing an incredibly successful Festival Marketplace, Faneuil Hall/Quincy Market, thats always full of people has got me thinking more about the AZ Center and why it played out like it did. If you look at this list (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Festival_marketplace) of Festival Marketplace concepts what do most of the successful ones have in common that the Arizona Center doesn't have? A tie to historic buildings in the City and the Cities history.

I've now been to Atlanta Underground, Harborplace in Baltimore, Faneuil Hall in Boston & Union Station in St Louis and a huge part of their appeal is the historic element. People aren't really driving/commuting all the way to them for the Foot Locker, Hooters, Dicks Last Resort or whatever other cheezy chain may be renting space their. School groups head their for Field Trips centered around history, tourists and convention visitors visit to get a sense of the City, etc.

Looking back on the AZ Center it should've been "The Luhr's Center" bounded by Jefferson, Madison, 1st and 1st. Central Ave could've gone underground at Jefferson (and re-emerge south of the tracks like it still does) to create a safe pedestrian area between the two blocks.

The existing Luhr's Building & Tower could've been converted to boutique hotels (no hotel space really hurt the AZ Center) or lofts (no housing also hurt the AZ Center). The Barrister Building could've been restored to its former life as the Jefferson hotel. The parking garage could've had its bottom floor as well as the alley space between the two buildings converted into a tight, shaded, farmers/public market.

The space between the Luhr's Building and Tower could've been developed with a modern office tower above the existing historic street level retail. Office towers also could've filled out the remaining surface lots where the Barrister Building sits. The development could've also either spilt South to Madison where there's still some historic warehouses or North to the current lot where the CityScape tower & hotel are. If the project also included the current Cityscape Hotel/Office tower block it would've helped Patriots Square Park a ton as it would've been surrounded on all sides and felt like an outdoor urban 'room'.

This location would've made more sense as it would've fed into Patriots Square Park (which could've been redesigned/upkept better) and been directly adjacent to America West when it opened 2 years later. Designing Patriots Square and the Luhr's complex to play up Phoenix's history (with more historic plaques & signs, statues, markers, retro street lamps, etc) would've made the Arizona Center unique and not just another shopping mall.

Luckily, a lot of what I'm talking about here still could be done someday. Those 2 blocks with the Barrister & Luhr's buildings have some of the most potential in PHX. With our huge shortage of historic buildings they ought to be pretty valuable if redeveloped properly.