HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2015, 8:26 PM
PHXFlyer11 PHXFlyer11 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,025
Quote:
Originally Posted by PHX31 View Post
No way it goes above Chase, but if it went slightly higher it may eclipse 400' which would be a pretty big achievement.

I don't have a problem with the devil's advocacy of Jjs. His own utopian view of what a city should be like and how projects should be designed in a vacuum is a little unrealistic (to me everything about project development is driven by the almighty dollar) and some posts are very long (but easily skipped if you don't feel like reading), however I think he has great ideas and the city and developers should be held as accountable as possible.
Oh okay. I thought Chase was right near 400'.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2015, 9:06 PM
RonnieFoos RonnieFoos is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 1,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by PHXFlyer11 View Post
Oh okay. I thought Chase was right near 400'.
I believe Central Station is proposed at 390'. So if even if a grocery pad is added and the current proposal is built on top of it, the height increase would be about 15 to 20' at best. Chase is at 483', still a good deal taller.
__________________
Ronnie Garrett
http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?memberID=205
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Jun 19, 2015, 5:18 AM
michael85225 michael85225 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 184
i can bet you anything that the project has been significantly redesigned from what we saw last year. Now I only hope it isn't worse than the original. The way things work in Phoenix, anything could go. That being said, I like being optimistic about these kind of things and don't want to be negative.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Jul 13, 2015, 10:07 PM
gymratmanaz gymratmanaz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,679
I'm heading to NYC at the end of the week for 2 weeks. Can someone make sure they get started on this before I return?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Jul 13, 2015, 10:34 PM
PHXFlyer11 PHXFlyer11 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,025
Quote:
Originally Posted by gymratmanaz View Post
I'm heading to NYC at the end of the week for 2 weeks. Can someone make sure they get started on this before I return?
I am getting concerned. I really hope it breaks ground soon.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Jul 13, 2015, 11:16 PM
combusean's Avatar
combusean combusean is offline
Skyriser
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Nob Hill, San Francisco, California
Posts: 5,354
^ They have till the end of May 2016 to commence construction. I wouldn't get too concerned about this one, considering they've been in review meetings recently just to get the the setbacks and massings right. Takes many months from there to finish designing the plans and finalize things with the contractors.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Jul 13, 2015, 11:25 PM
gymratmanaz gymratmanaz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,679
I think they were looking at a fall groundbreaking originally. That still looks right, I think.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Jul 14, 2015, 2:51 AM
poconoboy61 poconoboy61 is offline
skyscrapers!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by gymratmanaz View Post
I think they were looking at a fall groundbreaking originally. That still looks right, I think.
They were actually looking at a summer groundbreaking originally.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2015, 3:36 PM
Jjs5056 Jjs5056 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,706
Quote:
Originally Posted by PHXFlyer11 View Post
I agree with you in that I think the renderings are very out of date now. I think the ground level will be much better than we anticipated based off the first rendering. I also wonder if the increased retail could push this baby higher, above Chase? I wouldn't be shocked if that was a surprise announcement. Isn't it very close as proposed?
No, there is no retail underneath the apartment tower. All of the commercial space is contained within the ground level of the garage; the present plans show small spaces along 1st Ave and Central - one for the transit office, one for the incubator. Van Buren is just garage ramps. So, either the grocery store is the same kind of hype that every developer used during the boom to attract attention (and it really doesn't fit into the design), or they reconfigured the garage so that the commercial space extends beyond just the edges. Either way, any added height would be to the garage, not the tower.

It's cool if people want shiny towers and amenities and don't care less about creating an actual city (which is the sum of the connections made by buildings, interactions with pedestrians, etc.); I disagree and while I'll try to keep my points shorter, my opinion isn't any less valid than yours. 90% of what I defend/expect the City to defend is directly from the Urban Form which the City itself adopted years ago. If you disagree with those guidelines, you have that right, but why shouldn't I expect the City to follow its own rules?

Just 1-2 years ago, people went apeshit over this rendering, which would have replaced a parking lot with a major office development. The reasons were the blank facades on 2nd and 3rd Aves, and the monstrous presence of the parking structure. Why was this terrible for Phoenix, but Central Station - as proposed - a great thing? I am genuinely asking because I don't see the difference - except that this old project left room for future development, whereas Central Station takes up the whole lot.


Last edited by Jjs5056; Jul 15, 2015 at 4:41 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2015, 4:15 PM
Obadno Obadno is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,799
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jjs5056 View Post
. Just 1-2 years ago, people went apeshit over this rendering, which would have replaced a parking lot with a major office development.

That garage had nothing, this building has a grocery store, retail, a transit station and offices built into the base.

Its not even comparable.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2015, 4:48 PM
Jjs5056 Jjs5056 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,706
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obadno View Post
That garage had nothing, this building has a grocery store, retail, a transit station and offices built into the base.

Its not even comparable.
The project I posted had retail within the office tower, and like I mentioned, the other side of the garage was left open for future development. So, it had two edges of garage frontage compared to Central Station's one. The two potential towers vs. one should make up for that, no? Especially given that Van Buren is a much more important street than either 2nd Ave or 3rd Ave.

But, okay, if they aren't comparable then nevermind. I think they are almost identical aside from the potential for a 2nd tower in the older office project - or, at least close enough that some of the same concerns could apply.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2015, 4:57 PM
PHXFlyer11 PHXFlyer11 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,025
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jjs5056 View Post
The project I posted had retail within the office tower, and like I mentioned, the other side of the garage was left open for future development. So, it had two edges of garage frontage compared to Central Station's one. The two potential towers vs. one should make up for that, no? Especially given that Van Buren is a much more important street than either 2nd Ave or 3rd Ave.

But, okay, if they aren't comparable then nevermind. I think they are almost identical aside from the potential for a 2nd tower in the older office project - or, at least close enough that some of the same concerns could apply.
Central station is NOT a huge lot. The park and the historic buildings directly North actually make it fairly small. This is going to be an amazing project and I'm sick of hearing you bash it constantly.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2015, 5:14 PM
poconoboy61 poconoboy61 is offline
skyscrapers!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jjs5056 View Post
No, there is no retail underneath the apartment tower. All of the commercial space is contained within the ground level of the garage; the present plans show small spaces along 1st Ave and Central - one for the transit office, one for the incubator. Van Buren is just garage ramps. So, either the grocery store is the same kind of hype that every developer used during the boom to attract attention (and it really doesn't fit into the design), or they reconfigured the garage so that the commercial space extends beyond just the edges. Either way, any added height would be to the garage, not the tower.

It's cool if people want shiny towers and amenities and don't care less about creating an actual city (which is the sum of the connections made by buildings, interactions with pedestrians, etc.); I disagree and while I'll try to keep my points shorter, my opinion isn't any less valid than yours. 90% of what I defend/expect the City to defend is directly from the Urban Form which the City itself adopted years ago. If you disagree with those guidelines, you have that right, but why shouldn't I expect the City to follow its own rules?

Just 1-2 years ago, people went apeshit over this rendering, which would have replaced a parking lot with a major office development. The reasons were the blank facades on 2nd and 3rd Aves, and the monstrous presence of the parking structure. Why was this terrible for Phoenix, but Central Station - as proposed - a great thing? I am genuinely asking because I don't see the difference - except that this old project left room for future development, whereas Central Station takes up the whole lot.

Here we go again... I think you have made your point several times. You don't like this project. We get it. I don't see the point of your endless verbose diatribes. Again, for all you know the design of the building could have been completely changed. It seems pointless to gripe about a building that we haven't even seen final renderings for.

The building that was proposed across from Crescent is hideous. The building itself is ugly and the setback of the parking garage from Van Buren is odd. I'm pretty sure Central Station will look nothing like this.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2015, 5:17 PM
PHX31's Avatar
PHX31 PHX31 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: PHX
Posts: 6,523
Quote:
Originally Posted by PHXFlyer11 View Post
Central station is NOT a huge lot. The park and the historic buildings directly North actually make it fairly small.
They are both the same size.

I think we all should wait until more finalized plans are provided until loving or bashing Central Station.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2015, 10:43 PM
Jjs5056 Jjs5056 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,706
Quote:
Originally Posted by PHXFlyer11 View Post
Central station is NOT a huge lot. The park and the historic buildings directly North actually make it fairly small. This is going to be an amazing project and I'm sick of hearing you bash it constantly.
As someone mentioned, they are the exact same size. Polk-Van Buren, 1st Ave-Central Ave is an entire city block. But, of course, they are turning Polk into a private driveway, so it's easy to forget that it was once an actual city street. But, that's fine - who wants residential towers to open onto the street anyway?

And, I'm just as sick of hearing people acting like I'm the devil for mention the project's deficiencies. I accept everyone else's opinions and have never been nasty to anyone who disagreed with my views.

Last edited by Jjs5056; Jul 15, 2015 at 10:54 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2015, 1:50 AM
TakeFive's Avatar
TakeFive TakeFive is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,013
I suspect that Jjs5056 has gotten the message. He can be (more than) a little obtuse at times but he does add a lot of value IMO.

Quote:
Originally Posted by combusean View Post
^ They have till the end of May 2016 to commence construction. I wouldn't get too concerned about this one, considering they've been in review meetings recently just to get the the setbacks and massings right. Takes many months from there to finish designing the plans and finalize things with the contractors.
Does that mean there could be many changes/modifications that would be noticeable in a new rendering whenever that may be ready to be released?
__________________
Cool... Denver has reached puberty.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2015, 4:41 AM
Leo the Dog Leo the Dog is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: The Lower-48
Posts: 4,789
Why was vicelord banned anyways? And, is he on SSP today??

You guys should be thankful to have jjs5056 post here because he has such a passion for Phoenix develoment. He provides good points and perspectives on most Valley projects. You may not agree, (I don't at times) but isnt that what a discussion forum is all about?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2015, 2:02 PM
nickw252 nickw252 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: North Mesa
Posts: 1,594
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leo the Dog View Post
Why was vicelord banned anyways? And, is he on SSP today??

You guys should be thankful to have jjs5056 post here because he has such a passion for Phoenix develoment. He provides good points and perspectives on most Valley projects. You may not agree, (I don't at times) but isnt that what a discussion forum is all about?
Agreed
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2015, 2:28 PM
gymratmanaz gymratmanaz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,679
I love all that Vicelord AND jjs5056 add(ed), but sometimes they get on a high horse and pontificate too much in a negative way. I am very cool with opinions and disagreement, as they hold import to any conversation, but it gets old when it comes across 24/7. I hope they both continue to add (Vicelord come back) but just with some insight as to filter their vitriol a bit. They both add a ton to the forum and are important voices!!!!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2015, 4:03 PM
azsunsurfer azsunsurfer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 705
JJ has been nasty to me many a times in the past. I notice that overall he changes the environment of the forum. Agree or disagree...anyone can't help but notice how off tangent simple discussions on projects become. A simple forum for those with like minded interest in current economic development news transitions quickly into sometimes unnecessary vitriol. That language he used was utterly unacceptable and unprofessional.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

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

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


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:09 PM.

     

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