I never warmed to Jobot because of the smoking on the patio. Nevertheless, like you, I noticed it was a big gathering place. Not only is the area burgeoning with new development, but there's a lot more competition among coffeehouses with the more recent arrival of Be Coffee, Songbird, and Oliver's Sophisticated Bean in the area. I don't know what the owner of the Jobot property has in mind, but I hope it will be even better.

I, also, never enjoyed going into Jobot because of the smoking and also the general grunginess of the place but I did stop in there when I wanted coffee at times when nothing else was open so it definitely served a purpose, will be sad to see it go.

Flowers Beer + Wine is also relocating, he's not yet picked a new spot but the neighborhood is undergoing a lot of changes right now.

As of this morning, I'm seeing chatter on Facebook saying that Flowers will not be reopening despite earlier plans to do so.

I talked to him on Monday and he was pretty clear that he is re-opening but hadn't picked a location yet.

We'll see!

In all previous articles stated about Flowers, it's supposed reopen on the other end of the same building on Roosevelt St. if this is a new update then I would like know the source.

He told me as much but also said there's another possibility he doesn't want to let out of the bag.

This was posted this morning. I believe the author is a key employee at Flowers, although not the owner:

https://www.facebook.com/jasonayers/...54038072801921

Off the top of my head there is the infamous 44 Monroe, Summit at copper square, Portland on the park and One Lexington which is in midtown.and not too far from downtown.

On the issue of high-rise residential, others have done a good job of identifying towers that are truly high rise. Keep in mind, however, that the bulk of housing development in Downtown Phoenix right now is at the lower end of mid-rise -- in the range of 4-8 stories. This seems a more viable model given the abundance of vacant land in the city center. Unfortunately, many in Phoenix don't know the difference, so you'll see a lot of rhetoric decrying the loss of "historic buildings" (most are merely old buildings or vacant lots) for "high-rise" (most are mid-rise) "condos" (most are apartments). This inaccurate language had subsided in recent months but has experienced a revival over the past 24 hours with the announcement of Jobot's closure. As a result, some skepticism is needed if you are hearing discussion of high-rise development, especially in the Roosevelt Row area at the north end of Downtown.

Also some of the older highrises in midtown:
- Regency House (Central and Hoover),
- Landmark on Central (Central and Camelback),
- Phoenix Towers (Central and Monte Vista),
- Executive Towers (Clarendon and 3rd Ave), and
- BMO Harris tower at Central and Camelback that is allegedly being turned into residential.

One person's merely old building sometimes has a story that's worth preserving. I do not decry every older building coming down, but know not to write off their value when I don't know its history.

I've attended meetings of the Phoenix Historic Preservation Commission in which some of the buildings recently demolished on Roosevelt were systematically evaluated in terms of the established, legal criteria for historic preservation. None of them qualified, except perhaps the Circles / Stewart Motor Company building, which has been only partially demolished at this point.

I acknowledge that the some of the buildings held importance for people who knew them from prior uses (e.g. the role 222 Roosevelt played as a gay bar), but they still didn't meet the legal criteria required to limit an owner's property rights. Regardless, while the distinction between "historic" and "old" can be subjective, the distinctions of "condo" vs. "apartment" and "high-rise" vs. "mid-rise" are more objective.

I might be more sympathetic toward the Save Roosevelt Row movement if it used more accurate language and tried to educate its followers to do the same.

The hotel looks much better.

Portland on the Park doesn't look as good as its older sister. Looks more cheaply built.

I personally love seeing Portland on the Park. I'm no expert on the materials but I think it looks great.


On a development note, drove down Central yesterday and saw the structure on the NE corner of Central and Palm Lane (across from the Methodist Church) being gutted. The entire north facade of this building is gone and the interior is exposed. Any ideas of what's going on?

Also the 3300 Tower in Midtown looks to be extending the lobby to the sidewalk. I'm not sure, but the grass is gone and fencing is up from the sidewalk to the building itself.

There was a zoning change proposed a while back to allow a 5 story parking structure east of the corner. The plan shows the existing 7 story building and a proposed 3 story addition on the north side of the building. From what you described, it sounds like they are working on the addition. Is it only the lower floors of the north side where the facade is gone?

https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/420/30...55e95a92_b.jpg

That is correct the lower 3 floors of the north facade. I wonder if the addition intends to remain offices and why a 5 story parking garage is needed.

Well it is a much less high end product.

North Phoenix Baptist Senior Housing
 

North Phoenix Baptist Church, the huge facility at Central & Bethany, is surrounded by an ocean of parking. Even though the lot is sometimes used for other purposes such as the Uptown Farmers Market, it's still more than the church needs. Unfortunately, a proposal for senior housing on the site has been withdrawn due to neighborhood opposition:

http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/n...x-baptist.html

From what I have heard about the project and the tactics being used to promote it I am glad to hear that it has been withdrawn. There seems to be an attitude in this forum that suggests that all development is good and justified and that all opposition from neighborhoods is by definition bad. That's not the case in this one. It would be entirely reasonable for the church to do some development on this land, but not this project.