That's where my head went until I remembered how small that space is.

"Off Central" suggests within a block or two of Central but not necessarily directly on it. There's vacant land at 2nd St & Indianola.

I went to Maricopa County to look at ownership. The Blue outlined site is their current site and the red outlined area is a series of parcels they own which they'll relocated to. The old Fez is not in the parcels they own. Doesn't mean they'll develop the whole site as it looks like that would be too much for a restaurant.

http://pdf.leeazmail.com/pdfs/macayos.jpg

Macayo's dishes on plans for Central Avenue restaurant
 

Couple more updates, looks they are simply just taking over the building literally right across.

http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/b...al-avenue.html

That's correct, they own the parking lot on the south side of the street and the building where Toyota mechanics used to (maybe still) operate a shop. There would be some required cleanup of that site before they could build there.

They own the six parcels outlined in red, not just the parking lot and one building. My guess is development potential for them for other uses in the future.

Yes, I'm aware. I know how to read the assessor's website pretty well. I chose just to mention those two parcels, thank you for nitpicking.

When I joined this blog, my goal was to always stay positive with my comments. However I have noticed three things in the past few months that bother me so much that I have decided to break my rule:

1) The owners of the Biltmore Fashion have allowed the construction of permanent kiosks WITHIN the grassy park located just south of Saks Fifth Avenue thereby converting what was a beautiful park like setting into another place selling cheap trinkets. Along the same lines, the owners of Kierland Commons have allowed the construction of a cheap fast food restaurant called Shake Shack WITHIN the plaza (in the area directly north of Arhaus.) This also has resulted in the conversion of what was a great open park like setting with an awesome fountain into more cheap commercial space.

2) ADOT has placed blue signs along most of our Valley freeway advertising nearby commercial businesses such as fast food restaurants, gas stations, etc. On the southbound exit off the 51 freeway at Cactus I counted FOUR signs alone. This has caused our freeways to become more commercial, cluttered, and ugly. Rural freeways have long had such signs but those were justified as drivers most likely were not aware of local businesses; however in an urban setting most drivers are familiar with the local businesses. In addition with the proliferation of smart phones, the need for such signs is even less necessary. This is just a cheap money grab on the part of ADOT.

3) In the past Kierland Commons has had an excellent and appealing overall architectural theme to the whole complex. Stores would individualize their doorways, signs, and maybe a little more, but the overall architecture of the vertical space was left in tact. I noticed last year though that the owners of the mall now let stores individualize their ENTIRE vertical space thereby creating a hodge podge looking effect. This has resulted in the mall taking on a more cartoonish and low class look. Please see the pics below for reference.

https://imageshack.com/i/pljgzskaj

Fast food restaurant taking over what used to be a beautiful open plaza setting

https://imageshack.com/i/plpSkQ9Fj

Previous manner in which stores occupied the mall space: Talbots sign and iconic red front door are present, but the overall architecture of the mall is intact resulting in a tasteful and beautiful look.

https://imageshack.com/i/poqdf0DFj

New manner in which stores occupy mall space; they are now allowed to customize the whole vertical space they occupy resulting in a cheap, hodge podge, cartoonish effect

End of tirade :-)

^I don't spend much time at Kierland, but based on these photos, I've got to say I prefer the architectural variety of the new look. Kierland always feels like contrived urbanity, but the Pottery Barn Kids storefront in your photo breaks the monotony. As for Biltmore, two of the new structures in the courtyard will be homes for Royal Coffee and Short Leash, both food service establishments. I think the third spot might be for a sunglass store, so maybe that one comes closest to selling "cheap trinkets." That said, I do regret the loss of part of the grassy area. It provided a nice sort of central plaza at Biltmore and many children, including my own, have enjoyed playing there during family shopping trips. At least Biltmore is building around the mature trees rather than removing them.

I also strongly prefer the variation of storefronts and agree with exit 2 left's points. In my mind it looks less like a strip mall this way.

I like how Kierland looks now...it looked so bland before, so maybe you prefer bland tastes?

Also Shake Shack is not cheap...just overpriced :)

Anybody? This was about the Walgreen's plans for Tapestry.

I've just seen the "coming soon" signs in the windows but haven't seen any coverage in the local media. Doing some searching, I've found scattered articles about Walgreens experimenting with smaller formats in other cities. I don't know if the Phoenix store will be exactly like these, though.

http://drugtopics.modernmedicine.com...several-stores

https://www.ideo.com/work/community-pharmacy

The space at Tapestry is small, so I don't expect all the food, liquor, and other goods that are sold at a typical Walgreens.

Thanks. I was not aware of the signs in the windows.

Downtown Voices is reporting on their facebook page renderings for a new "Jefferson Place" to wrap around the Barrister Building.

Looks to be shy of 20 stories.

https://www.facebook.com/DowntownVoi...07631332630117

It looks pretty good although I would always appreciate taller.

Cool. Why would they not extend the building to 1st Street? Wish we could get our corners complete.

The Walgreens is already open. It's just a Pharmacy window. Nothing else.

I strongly disagree; those signs are very useful to tourists, and nobody should be using a smartphone while driving at freeway speeds. If they were really unnecessary due to smartphones, why would businesses even sign up? In fact in the past year I have noticed an increase in participation in the program statewide, thus smartphones have had little to no impact in the participation of the program. IMO it should be a felony to be opposed to these signs.

That's right. Let's build a new prison where freeway sign opponents can be housed in the same cells as people who dare to advocate against the South Mountain Freeway. I actually have no problems with the signs, but I also respect the First Amendment rights of those who don't like them.