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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2016, 5:00 PM
exit2lef exit2lef is online now
self-important urbanista
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 2,065
Reading the AZ Central article a bit more, it looks like the application for a total demolition permit may also serve as a negotiating tactic.


"Plans for the development are still conceptual, said Larry Lazarus, a land-use attorney representing the project.

The team requested a demolition permit so the project can move forward, but additional meetings with community members are scheduled for next week, he said.

'We can always modify or withdraw (the permit),' Lazarus said."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2016, 5:17 PM
Obadno Obadno is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,436
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdpx View Post
You don't think it's special enough to be saved? Maybe others feel DIFFERENTLY. This Sim City fake reality where new is good and old is bad is so f8&king sad on a city forum. Can you imagine this conversation in a Chicago or NY forum? Let's tear down Tovrea Castle, it's kinda ugly, what about the Luhrs Building? Way too ornate-replace it will steel and glass.
No reason to engage in hyperbole. Comparing an Old Mill and record store to the Luhrs tower? Really? Is that what I said? No it isn't calm down.

Circles and the Mill aren't icons of history like Grand Central or the Wriggly building they don't have an architectural grandeur or importance (oh my god a circle window!!!) The developer could flatten circles and build a replica of the rotunda and nobody would know the difference.

The Mill is only worth saving because it has given Mill Ave the name, however if the street was called like Goldwater Ave, the mill would already be gone for a more useful development.

Buildings like circles wouldn't even be worth mentioning in Chicago or New York the only reason it is here is because people are desperate to pretend that it is some sort of iconic gem when it is at most a nice piece of nostalgia for children of the 60's and 70's

Im more interested in the Desoto Building, Westward Ho and Luhrs. The Hilton Garden Inn did a great job, But circles? Of all the buildings to care about? Circles? Really>???
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2016, 9:29 PM
mdpx's Avatar
mdpx mdpx is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 174
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obadno View Post
No reason to engage in hyperbole. Comparing an Old Mill and record store to the Luhrs tower? Really? Is that what I said? No it isn't calm down.

Circles and the Mill aren't icons of history like Grand Central or the Wriggly building they don't have an architectural grandeur or importance (oh my god a circle window!!!) The developer could flatten circles and build a replica of the rotunda and nobody would know the difference.

The Mill is only worth saving because it has given Mill Ave the name, however if the street was called like Goldwater Ave, the mill would already be gone for a more useful development.

Buildings like circles wouldn't even be worth mentioning in Chicago or New York the only reason it is here is because people are desperate to pretend that it is some sort of iconic gem when it is at most a nice piece of nostalgia for children of the 60's and 70's

Im more interested in the Desoto Building, Westward Ho and Luhrs. The Hilton Garden Inn did a great job, But circles? Of all the buildings to care about? Circles? Really>???
Hyberbole, sure, but your horrid or not worthy comments regarding projects you don't particularly like because they're not pretty, doesn't mean they shouldn't be saved for other reasons such as, oh, I don't know, history perhaps? They said that about the Orpheum Theater years ago when they were developing Phoenix City Hall. THe interior was a disaster and many thought it was not worth saving. Have you been inside since it's restoration? One of the most beautiful theaters I've ever been in and that includes Europe. So a little room for others who care about historic preservation (regardless of whether you think it's worth saving so it can be replaced by a non-descript high-rise building).
__________________
You want your mind blown? Seinfeld ended 21 years ago.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2016, 9:52 PM
pbenjamin's Avatar
pbenjamin pbenjamin is offline
METRO: Encanto
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 609
The reason that Circles is significant to so many people is that we have had so much of the past destroyed.

As to nostalgia for the record store, it was a lousy record store staffed with clueless people, at least in its later years.
__________________
Paul
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2016, 11:07 PM
Obadno Obadno is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,436
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdpx View Post
Hyberbole, sure, but your horrid or not worthy comments regarding projects you don't particularly like because they're not pretty, doesn't mean they shouldn't be saved for other reasons such as, oh, I don't know, history perhaps? They said that about the Orpheum Theater years ago when they were developing Phoenix City Hall. THe interior was a disaster and many thought it was not worth saving. Have you been inside since it's restoration? One of the most beautiful theaters I've ever been in and that includes Europe. So a little room for others who care about historic preservation (regardless of whether you think it's worth saving so it can be replaced by a non-descript high-rise building).
Right but once again, you are trying to equate real historically important and architecturally beautiful structures vrs. a 50's car dealer turned record store

Apples and oranges not comparable in my opinion.

That's like saying every hovel in Europe is just as important to preservation as cathedrals simply by their nature of being old.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2016, 6:31 AM
RonnieFoos RonnieFoos is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 2,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by combusean View Post
^ Preserve Phoenix has a copy of the permit available on their Facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/PreservePhoenix/?fref=photo

They also report that the Lescher and Mahoney-designed 1949 medical office building at 1313 N 2nd St will be demolished for an office building by Transwestern.

Also, the tower crane for Muse is now up.

No plan reviews for the above building have been posted.
Was at the Phoenix Lights festival tonight and noticed they have fencing up and already started interior demolition of said building! I walked by last week and there was nothing going on. Amazing how fast the demo of this and Circles are occurring when we have barely heard anything on these except a rough rendering of Circles.

Also, the crane for Muse is now up.
__________________
Ronnie Garrett
http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?memberID=205
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Apr 4, 2016, 5:14 PM
RonnieFoos RonnieFoos is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 2,228
Spoke with the supervisor of the demo team at Circles. He clarified that the work they are doing is "interior" only and the building is staying put as is. So, no building demolition at this time. Will be interesting to see what kind of changes we see proposed for the Circles development.

Also, a Rolbertos is going next door to Circles where the old Gyro restaurant used to be.
__________________
Ronnie Garrett
http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?memberID=205

Last edited by RonnieFoos; Apr 4, 2016 at 5:52 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Apr 8, 2016, 8:09 AM
Jjs5056 Jjs5056 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,712
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obadno View Post
No reason to engage in hyperbole. Comparing an Old Mill and record store to the Luhrs tower? Really? Is that what I said? No it isn't calm down.

Circles and the Mill aren't icons of history like Grand Central or the Wriggly building they don't have an architectural grandeur or importance (oh my god a circle window!!!) The developer could flatten circles and build a replica of the rotunda and nobody would know the difference.

The Mill is only worth saving because it has given Mill Ave the name, however if the street was called like Goldwater Ave, the mill would already be gone for a more useful development.

Buildings like circles wouldn't even be worth mentioning in Chicago or New York the only reason it is here is because people are desperate to pretend that it is some sort of iconic gem when it is at most a nice piece of nostalgia for children of the 60's and 70's

Im more interested in the Desoto Building, Westward Ho and Luhrs. The Hilton Garden Inn did a great job, But circles? Of all the buildings to care about? Circles? Really>???
First of all, why the hell are you being so nasty about this? I'm nasty, but at designers/developers, never at other posters. If you can't see why the continued handouts from the City without any compromises to the community is offensive to some, fine. Buildings like Circles aren't mentioned in NYC or Chicago because these cities haven't had their history erased. But, they also don't hand out GPLETs like candy to developers who then destroy meaningful structures. If you think there isn't preservation fights in NYC, you are quite mistaken.

"...because people are desperate to pretend is some iconic gem..." is really insulting and plain wrong. Your entire point is invalidated by the fact that you've somehow come to the conclusion that its use as a Record store has ANY part in this discussion. It was built as part of Phoenix's auto row, as was DeSoto's. Do you think now that DeSoto should've been leveled? It's the lack of knowledge re: Phoenix's history that comes as a result of wiping out buildings like this that make people inclined to save it. There's no Chinatown or Deuce left; your common Phoenician would have no idea that either existed. The same will happen as the last remnants of Auto Row are demolished. Every demolition erases a piece of downtown's past life as the retail center of Phoenix and feeds into the "but it's a NEW city!" line of thinking that has taken over as people migrated to AZ.

More importantly, the art scene is gradually shifting toward Grand Ave and as DeSoto and countless reuse projects have shown, Roosevelt Row is a great mix of eclectic buildings that together do form a story and provide affordable space. Losing Roosevelt Row as the premier place for artists downtown is a major loss, but is inevitable as the City refuses to ask developers for affordable housing or preservation in return for GPLETs. I don't want or expect the entire thing preserved. But I think a decent portion could be maintained beyond the window, and given that the tower has a giant hole in it, suggesting the tower be tightened up is obviously not that outrageous of an ask. I also think the tower itself is completely hideous and uninspired; again, a more modern tower with glass and curves that complemented the building's features would look much better than slapping a traditional box on top of a contemporary building.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Apr 8, 2016, 7:30 PM
Obadno Obadno is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,436
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jjs5056 View Post
First of all, why the hell are you being so nasty about this? I'm nasty, but at designers/developers, never at other posters. If you can't see why the continued handouts from the City without any compromises to the community is offensive to some, fine. Buildings like Circles aren't mentioned in NYC or Chicago because these cities haven't had their history erased. But, they also don't hand out GPLETs like candy to developers who then destroy meaningful structures. If you think there isn't preservation fights in NYC, you are quite mistaken.

"...because people are desperate to pretend is some iconic gem..." is really insulting and plain wrong. Your entire point is invalidated by the fact that you've somehow come to the conclusion that its use as a Record store has ANY part in this discussion. It was built as part of Phoenix's auto row, as was DeSoto's. Do you think now that DeSoto should've been leveled? It's the lack of knowledge re: Phoenix's history that comes as a result of wiping out buildings like this that make people inclined to save it. There's no Chinatown or Deuce left; your common Phoenician would have no idea that either existed. The same will happen as the last remnants of Auto Row are demolished. Every demolition erases a piece of downtown's past life as the retail center of Phoenix and feeds into the "but it's a NEW city!" line of thinking that has taken over as people migrated to AZ.

More importantly, the art scene is gradually shifting toward Grand Ave and as DeSoto and countless reuse projects have shown, Roosevelt Row is a great mix of eclectic buildings that together do form a story and provide affordable space. Losing Roosevelt Row as the premier place for artists downtown is a major loss, but is inevitable as the City refuses to ask developers for affordable housing or preservation in return for GPLETs. I don't want or expect the entire thing preserved. But I think a decent portion could be maintained beyond the window, and given that the tower has a giant hole in it, suggesting the tower be tightened up is obviously not that outrageous of an ask. I also think the tower itself is completely hideous and uninspired; again, a more modern tower with glass and curves that complemented the building's features would look much better than slapping a traditional box on top of a contemporary building.
DeSotot looks nice, Circles looks like shit
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Apr 8, 2016, 8:20 PM
RonnieFoos RonnieFoos is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 2,228
Quote:
DeSotot looks nice, Circles looks like shit
I'm not all that jazzed about the Circles design either. I think the North/South footprint is way to large and going to make the build look like a stump. And that cutout opening up to the East looks like an afterthought. I'm hoping this is just a first proposal and the final design will be much better.
__________________
Ronnie Garrett
http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?memberID=205
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Apr 8, 2016, 8:55 PM
BobMotleyArchitect BobMotleyArchitect is offline
Preservation Architect
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by RonnieFoos View Post
I'm not all that jazzed about the Circles design either. I think the North/South footprint is way to large and going to make the build look like a stump. And that cutout opening up to the East looks like an afterthought. I'm hoping this is just a first proposal and the final design will be much better.
I completely agree. I did an analysis that shows that, purely from a study of zoning, bulk, and physical arrangement, the Circle on Central could do a much better job of integrating the historic building without unduly sacrificing their program.

http://motleydesigngroup.com/wordpre...-Picture-2.jpg
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Apr 8, 2016, 8:56 PM
BobMotleyArchitect BobMotleyArchitect is offline
Preservation Architect
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obadno View Post
DeSotot looks nice, Circles looks like shit
Did you see DoSoto before it was rehabbed? Ten times as shitty as Circles.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Apr 8, 2016, 9:14 PM
biggus diggus biggus diggus is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 1,798
Thank you, it's like you're reading my mind. Desoto wasn't a nice building prior to its current usage.
__________________
Please excuse the brevity, auto corrected words, and occasionally incoherent sentences as I'm usually posting from my phone.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Apr 8, 2016, 9:50 PM
PHX31's Avatar
PHX31 PHX31 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: PHX
Posts: 6,566
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobMotleyArchitect View Post
I completely agree. I did an analysis that shows that, purely from a study of zoning, bulk, and physical arrangement, the Circle on Central could do a much better job of integrating the historic building without unduly sacrificing their program.

http://motleydesigngroup.com/wordpre...-Picture-2.jpg
How much more would your idea cost (building so much higher)? Assuming the rule of thumb holds that building higher increases your costs... If you were the owner and wanted to spend money to develop something, would you pay 20% more (for arguement's sake) just to save 70 feet of the original building's frontage (the crappier north half, not even the interior usable space of the north half) for architectural/posterity sake? This design is still unreasonable to me. I'd hope the developer would go for something like this, but it still seems highly unlikely they'd waste the money.

I'd also assume some other neighborhood watchdog group would then complain about the increased height being way too out of scale for the area. And then another person would bitch about a shadow. And then someone else would complain the higher building would block their view of the planes taking off and turning north over the western historic neighborhoods. There is always something ridiculous.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Apr 8, 2016, 10:19 PM
RonnieFoos RonnieFoos is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 2,228
Quote:
I'd also assume some other neighborhood watchdog group would then complain about the increased height being way too out of scale for the area. And then another person would bitch about a shadow. And then someone else would complain the higher building would block their view of the planes taking off and turning north over the western historic neighborhoods. There is always something ridiculous.
__________________
Ronnie Garrett
http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?memberID=205
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Apr 8, 2016, 10:55 PM
BobMotleyArchitect BobMotleyArchitect is offline
Preservation Architect
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by PHX31 View Post
How much more would your idea cost (building so much higher)? Assuming the rule of thumb holds that building higher increases your costs... If you were the owner and wanted to spend money to develop something, would you pay 20% more (for arguement's sake) just to save 70 feet of the original building's frontage (the crappier north half, not even the interior usable space of the north half) for architectural/posterity sake? This design is still unreasonable to me. I'd hope the developer would go for something like this, but it still seems highly unlikely they'd waste the money.

I'd also assume some other neighborhood watchdog group would then complain about the increased height being way too out of scale for the area. And then another person would bitch about a shadow. And then someone else would complain the higher building would block their view of the planes taking off and turning north over the western historic neighborhoods. There is always something ridiculous.
Tough to say exact numbers on such a preliminary plan - but I'd agree that it's more expensive because it would likely be less efficient and also taller. HOWEVER there are some potential sweeteners to make the preservation go down easier. Under the downtown code, if you acceptably preserve an historic building and allow it to have a preservation easements on it, you get 50 "sustainability bonus points" that increase your maximum allowable density by 60% and allowable height by 30%. Without any of the other credits you can claim, on this site that goes from 270 DU/250 ft to 431 DU/325 ft. It seems to me that should be worth it. I think you can do up to 400 DU in this footprint and still park it. (Proposed development is currently at 310 DU/220 ft)

Historic Preservation Tax Credits worth 20% of the rehabilitation investment in the historic building could also be available if you can talk the Park Service into ignoring that 30 story building next to it.

I would also point out that this plan also saves the bulk of the old service bay area in back, which is a big bowstring trussed space much like DeSoto.

As far as NIMBYs go (and I live 2 blocks from this site) what I am proposing is already entitled if you use the sustainability credits.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Apr 8, 2016, 11:02 PM
dtnphx dtnphx is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,039
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobMotleyArchitect View Post
Did you see DoSoto before it was rehabbed? Ten times as shitty as Circles.
Thought the same thing. Desoto was a dud. Now it's great. That's what happens when shit gets rehabbed. It's the unimaginative that can't see it. Tear it down it's ugly, build some generic POS in it's place.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2016, 8:58 PM
nickw252 nickw252 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: North Mesa
Posts: 1,603
Circles Building

I got this email from my neighborhood association:

Quote:
Meeting tonight regarding art moderne gem

Hello Preservation Advocates,
Tonight there will be a series of meetings regarding the historic 1947 Art Moderne Stewart Motors building. Built originally as a Studebaker dealership along North Central Avenue's Auto-Row the building was better known in recent years as Circles Discs and Tapes. The building has been purchased by a development company seeking to possible demolition some or all of the structure to build a residential tower.
The developer is having an open house tonight at 5:30 at the building (which is on the NW corner of McKinley & Central). The developer is slated to discuss which parts of the building they plan to demolish. At 6pm at the Native American Connections Urban Living 2 building (650 N 2nd Ave) there will be a community meeting to discuss the developers proposal and how the community should respond.
Next Monday, April 18th, there will be a follow up meeting at the Urban Living 2 (650 N 2nd Ave) building with the community and the development team. Thanks to our friends at the Roosevelt Action Association for setting this all up.

Schedule:
Monday, April 11th: 5:30pm. Developers show their proposal at Stewart Motors Building.
Monday, April 11th: 6pm. Community Discussion at Urban Living 2 (650 N 2nd Ave)
Monday, April 18th: 7pm. Community & Developer Discussion at Urban Living 2 (650 N 2nd Ave).

Here is a video of the construction of the building and its grand opening provided by local preservationist Michael Levine: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWLqOTgp-U0

Please note: Demolition permits have been pulled! Legally the developer can knock the building over at any time. Action needs to be taken immediately to find a solution to preserve this gorgeous art moderne treasure.
Although I think preservationists in Phoenix have had a very positive impact on the historic districts (i.e. they prevented the I10 from going through the historic districts above ground). However, their characterization in this email is a little dramatic. It's also annoying that nothing is said or done as a building is sitting empty deteriorating, and the second a developer wants to do something they're all up in arms. Personally, I'm all in favor of saving the curved glass section and integrating that into a residential building.


I'd love to go to the meeting but I won't be able to. Anyone else going?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2016, 9:10 PM
RonnieFoos RonnieFoos is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 2,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickw252 View Post
I got this email from my neighborhood association:



Although I think preservationists in Phoenix have had a very positive impact on the historic districts (i.e. they prevented the I10 from going through the historic districts above ground). However, their characterization in this email is a little dramatic. It's also annoying that nothing is said or done as a building is sitting empty deteriorating, and the second a developer wants to do something they're all up in arms. Personally, I'm all in favor of saving the curved glass section and integrating that into a residential building.


I'd love to go to the meeting but I won't be able to. Anyone else going?
I will be Downtown after work today. I may try to make this to see what the proposal is and if it's changed significantly since this was first annouced.
__________________
Ronnie Garrett
http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?memberID=205
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2016, 10:15 PM
PHX31's Avatar
PHX31 PHX31 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: PHX
Posts: 6,566
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickw252 View Post
I got this email from my neighborhood association:



Although I think preservationists in Phoenix have had a very positive impact on the historic districts (i.e. they prevented the I10 from going through the historic districts above ground). However, their characterization in this email is a little dramatic. It's also annoying that nothing is said or done as a building is sitting empty deteriorating, and the second a developer wants to do something they're all up in arms. Personally, I'm all in favor of saving the curved glass section and integrating that into a residential building.


I'd love to go to the meeting but I won't be able to. Anyone else going?
Holy shit that youtube video is amazing! The rotating neon Studebaker/Stewart Motor Company sign is simply incredible!!!! (go to approximately 9:00 of the video)

Can anyone going to the meeting tonight (Ronnie??) inquire about that sign and the developer's plan for potentially restoring it? Maybe it's still there under the "Circles" skin. The developer mentioned the ability to restore the rotating showroom floor, maybe the sign could be restored too, rotating and all.

If I were the vocal preservationists, I'd shift my focus from saving the entire building including the north half of the building (unlikely) to compromising with the developer and ask for the restoration of the sign to be included in their development. Imagine how amazing that sign would be restored!!! It's so breath-taking I can't imagine how awesome that would be.

To the vocal preservationists: please compromise, don't take an all-or-nothing stance, the developer could easily demolish everything. Save The Empire! Err, the Stewart Motor Company Sign and the south half!!
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 1:43 AM.

     

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