Freeport-McMoRan Center (One Central Park East) - Phoenix, AZ

[neworleans]

i agree w/ u hx guy... and what a perfect location it's in too. that lot was meant for a much taller building, i think.

[AZ KID]

I love seattle's skyline. I just think our skyline isnt developed enough to have that large of a building. Maybe if we had a couple of 500 footers but as of now we only have two 400 footers.

[Vicelord John]

Originally Posted by PhxPavilion

Was the compass room rotating? I can't remember the last time I've seen it moving.

Nice night pics.

what the fuck are you talking about?

There has never been any time that I can remember in my entire life that it hasn't rotated. The whole outside of it doesn't rotate, dummy, the inside moves.

[shakman]

Originally Posted by Vicelord John

what the fuck are you talking about?

There has never been any time that I can remember in my entire life that it hasn't rotated. The whole outside of it doesn't rotate, dummy, the inside moves.

Easy on the words.

The skin of this building looks better than what is shown on the renderings. (IMO)

[PhxPavilion]

Originally Posted by Vicelord John

what the fuck are you talking about?

There has never been any time that I can remember in my entire life that it hasn't rotated. The whole outside of it doesn't rotate, dummy, the inside moves.

Thanks for the oh so insightful response but PHX_PD beat you to it, by a week. I haven't been in it for many many years, forgot only the interior rotated.

Originally Posted by AZ KID

honestly I think that looks way out of place. Maybe at 510' or 525' but not that tall. Anyways wasnt the original plans to have a second tower?

Do you think the Sears tower looks out of place? Or the Empire State Building? I don't get how a modestly taller tower over Chase can look out of place.

[AZ KID]

Of course I dont think Sears or the Empire State Buildings look out of place but they have other 1000+ buildings along with them. I do think that the Sears building would look out of place if there were only 15 skyscrapers in all of Chicago. Also, New York City can handle the Empire State building even though it doesnt have many very tall buildings right in its vicinity. Its because It is New York City. In my opinion a 700 or 800 foot building in that location in Phoenix just doesnt work. Maybe in ten years but not now.

How can you compare this...

to this...

[Vicelord John]

hahahaha

seeing those two pictures made me chuckle. Fuck, phoenix sucks ass.

[combusean]

A building like the above makes the whole skyline bigger, and puts the size of the existing towers in proportion to each other. It's not that it's out of place, it's the existing ones are really that short. The 70' or whatever between Chase and US Bank disappears in its own insignificance--as it should be. Plus there's a good 'suspension bridge' effect going.

[Jsmscaleros]

I don't think Phoenix will or should ever look like Manhattan. Being in the desert, we've had the opportunity to really develop a city with a unique look and lifestyle that innovates in a hot climate... instead, however, we've taken the approach that every other city in the western United States has and built glass-and-steel boxes spread out around a grid and must be traversed by car.

The research in unique desert lifestyle and city planning has already been done by the likes of Paulo Soleri, Frank Lloyd Wright, and others. Rather than being indoctrinated as norms for city planning, however, their research communities of Arcosanti and Taliesin West have instead become tourist destinations that no one really takes seriously outside the design community.

Imagine the Phoenix-Metro area built around principles like these; we would have a distinctive city unlike any other in the world:

Arcosanti:


Taliesin West:

[HooverDam]

While FLW's individual house and building designs were pretty awesome, his ideas for city planning were quite poor. The Broadacre city he envisioned would make Phoenix an even bigger sprawlopolis than it already it. Every person being some sort of Jeffersonian wet dream agrarian is just silly. You'd have to take cars everywhere as every home would be so far apart.

It seems to me that in a lot of ways though we have built the exact opposite of what we should've for a desert. An ideal desert cities would have narrow streets with tall building lining it to provide shade. Instead we have wide streets and squat buildings. A well thought out desert city would have lots of basements, which stay cool in the summer, instead due to cost but more importantly speed, we rarely build basements. Any and all bodies of waters would be treated like the treasures that they are and being near them would be a privilege. Instead we turn our backs on the canals, and turn them into ugly scars across the city.

[Sonoran_Dweller]

We should be looking at the cities of the Middle East and North Africa to learn how a real desert city works and how it can truly be successful. Some things HooverDam mentioned above are very prominent in these cities. Also these cities are some of the first permanent settled communities in the world, and still to this day they are occupied. They must have done something right.

[neworleans]

regardless of whether a building of that height looks out of place or not, you have to start somewhere. Plus, if phoenix ever got a building that big, i'd be so excited i wouldn't even give a crap if it looked out of place.

[combusean]

Yeah ... looking out of place is such a prototypical NIMBY argument it's very odd to see it on here. I'm disappointed in y'all.

[PhxPavilion]

Originally Posted by AZ KID

Of course I dont think Sears or the Empire State Buildings look out of place but they have other 1000+ buildings along with them. I do think that the Sears building would look out of place if there were only 15 skyscrapers in all of Chicago. Also, New York City can handle the Empire State building even though it doesnt have many very tall buildings right in its vicinity. Its because It is New York City. In my opinion a 700 or 800 foot building in that location in Phoenix just doesnt work. Maybe in ten years but not now.

I still don't get it, Phoenix has to have a thousand buildings under 500' before it can get a 700 footer?

A supertall would do alot of good for Phoenix's skyline, the fact that it towers over everything else is what makes it unique and gives the city more character. I like them for their architecture and human ingenuity, not because when mashed together they create a concrete mountain.

[glynnjamin]

I think the subtext of the argument "it looks out of place" is really...

"why would we want one 700ft tower that stands out when we could have two 350ft towers that would not only create decent infill but also provide shade & fill in some of those dirt lots?"

By saying "it looks out of place" the reality is that the height difference isn't what stands out as much as the impractical-ness of it. We look at that photo with the giant gap between the "normal" buildings and the 700ft one and we say to ourselves, I'd rather see density than some generic box that is supposed to act as a statement. If we are going to try and add something iconic to our skyline, I would rather it be something that stood out on its own and wasn't just a building. To me, the greatest "skyline-makers" are non-buildings...Seattle Space Needle, St. Louis Arch, SF Golden Gate Bridge, Statue of Liberty in NYC. To me, I think you could show people a photo of downtown LA and downtown Chicago and not too many would be able to tell the difference or recognize them for what they are.

If we are going to build some tower that is supposed to represent the city, it needs to be something out of the Dubai playbook. Something that utilizes the elements and something that draws people to it. As beautiful a design as OCPE is, it is not that...not at 700ft and not at whatever height it finally tops out at.

[AZ KID]

All I am saying is that I would prefer a building in that location to be around 600 feet. Don't get me wrong I totally dislike that the tower is only 342 feet. I never meant I would be against a tower that tall just that it looks somewhat out of place. None of u are wrong it's just a preferance of mine

[bwonger06]

For comparison's sake, if we were to add a super tall building, we would look like LA.



IMO it doesnt look too bad.

[neworleans]

Originally Posted by PhxPavilion

I still don't get it, Phoenix has to have a thousand buildings under 500' before it can get a 700 footer?

look at mobile alabama, they have a tiny downtown and their tallest building is 745 ft. And their second tallest is only 424 ft. Why is a small city not aloud to have a tall building? why is a city with a small skyline not aloud to have a big skyscraper?

[ljbuild]

Originally Posted by AZ KID

Of course I dont think Sears or the Empire State Buildings look out of place but they have other 1000+ buildings along with them. I do think that the Sears building would look out of place if there were only 15 skyscrapers in all of Chicago. Also, New York City can handle the Empire State building even though it doesnt have many very tall buildings right in its vicinity. Its because It is New York City. In my opinion a 700 or 800 foot building in that location in Phoenix just doesnt work. Maybe in ten years but not now.

How can you compare this...

to this...

If you were to throw DOWNTOWN PHOENIX in the middle or even ANYWHERE in the New York Skyline, you will not be able to find it.

And as a matter of fact if you look in the

"INFO-PLEASE WORLD ALMANAC, which is a book that you can find in Borders, or Barnes & noble bookstore or even at Walmart, yes Walmart (thats where I bought mine).

But anyway in that book there a section called

"BUILDINGS TALL"
(which is near the back of the book)

This section shows the Height and the number of stories of different "skyscrapers" in selected U.S. cities. Kind of like the Emporis site, except, this is more of an "official" guide and focuses on buildings that are built and the ones that HAVE BROKEN GROUND vs proposed ones.

However what is unusual about this is that,

Phoenix Doesnt even have a column of skyscrapers listed

as many other cities do. Maybe because Dtwn Phoenix highrises are so insignificant that they (Info please) decided that its not worth wasting "paper space" to list them who knows.

Moreover: the column looks like this:

DENVER
______________

us bank building 700ft, 56 stories
Federal building 688 ft 53 "
1999 Broadway 559 ft 52 "
Anaconda bldg 505 ft 40 "
Marriot hotel 445 ft 39 "

Even cities that are way smaller than Phoenix like Oklahoma city & Portland have made the list.

I would like to see Phoenix get at least two 500- 600 ft towers just to change the skyline, instead of these "STEP STOOL TALL" highrises that dont even make a dent on the skyline.

[gymratmanaz]

the vertical fins are now going up on the garage portion of OCPE, on the west side.