HAHAHAHA! If they built that they can tear down that building tomorrow!

That's a huge IF thought. I think the city should only grant the teardown permit if they immediately tear down to start construction on the tower. They shouldn't be allowed to tear down and have it sit vacant.

Looks like CSM still owns that parcel. I wonder if they had issues selling it due to the potential problems with demoing the building. If they knock it down first, maybe they will have better luck selling it?

I think you are exactly right, its more marketable to sell as vacant than with a historic "building" on the site.

I am all for preservation, but unfortunately, I don't think much of the original building exists outside of the shell. I would bet everything remaining inside has been stripped, the facade has been ruined, and all that is left is one old brick wall that seems to be crumbling and would probably need to be redone.

Yes this is my fear. The rendering is so rough I think it's just to make it marketable. I say no to tearing it down until there is a real viable project that breaks ground immediately following the demolition.

If the relatively intact second oldest commercial building in Phoenix that's on the city and national registers isn't worth rehabbing, I don't know what is.

Just cause some yutz covered it in stucco means it should get the wrecking ball, and that's all you know about it. You haven't been inside there.

I'm no engineer, but I'm relatively certain there isn't enough room for a tower of that size on this parcel... between fire stairs, elevator shafts, etc. It cant be much more than 30ft wide?



But either way. I'm fine with them tearing this particular one down.

Just cause some yutz added it to the registrar's doesn't mean it shouldn't get the wrecking ball.

If it still looked like the picture fawd posted I’d agree but this is basically a stucco box.

And if I recall correctly... it's a building that had LITERALLY cracked in half... surrounded by a stucco box.

There was another proposal for this site years ago (Millennium?). It was a very narrow design. Since I have found a 2nd tower rendering for the site, someone must think it can be done.

My guess is this would be a zero parking development as I don't know how a garage could possibly be incorporated into a tower this narrow? If that is the case, I say tear down and build away!

The lot size is 50' wide. If a conceptual sliver tower or an actual plan can be proposed it's doable but very expensive. The sales prices or rents would be some of the highest in Arizona presuming they could park the thing somehow.

Uhh, the stucco can be removed and restore the original facade. The interior might have detail as well.

It's on the national and city registers for a reason, even after its original arcade was demolished. This is an odd thing to contest in my book.

This may be a question for anyone with experience w/ HP grants. I was reading some of the first pages from the "Hilton Garden Inn/Professional Building Renovation (15 E Monroe)" thread, some good history of the Steinneger Lodge there.

https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/sho...d.php?t=212416

Anyways, a poster brought up the fact that since CSM received HP grants to renovate the Professional Building, they couldn't use this money to then demo another historic building. Does this still apply? Or was there some finite date that has since expired?

Yeah, the new ER will have been open 3 years this coming September.

That single-story building has had more than one roof collapse secondary to monsoons. The worst flooded the bldg significantly somewhere around 15 years ago while it included the ER.

That is absolutely awful. I hope they were insured.

When CSM purchased the Professional Building, posters here celebrated that Hotel Monroe failed in hindsight because of the supposed preservation of the Lodge. Even in the absurdity of 2006, the Momentum Tower was never taken seriously. When every new skyscraper has a ghastly parking podium equal to the # of floors above, who'd waste $$ engineering anything to fit a lot with these constraints + deal with off-site parking?

That area has the most authentic urban design downtown. No modern block will ever be built in the form of Central from VB > Adams, with several mid-rises attached and ~100% contiguous ground-floor use. Redeveloped blocks get 4 different projects MAX, with 4 dedicated parking podiums, ramps, loading docks, and lobbies.

CSM promised "something special" for the Lodge during renovation of the Professional Building. "Special" isn't leaving it stucco'd + never marketing it. It's sad enough 3/4 spaces at the Hilton have failed to lease in a hot market, but there is 0% chance of this becoming anything except a parking lot forever. The Steinegger, even if only some of brick-work remains, allows for 3-4 continuous uses along Monroe and could be a great Hanny's /Duce type of establishment or Brewery. At least there'd still be potential to expand organically East of Central as in the other directions.

I guess 2 full clocks of 1 single tower surrounded by a moat + parking garage (Chase) across Monroe is preferred to adaptive reuse?

You’re fine with it? Well that’s a fucking relief if YOUR fine wit it. What other historic building need to be razed to keep your skyscraper hardon from going soft?

Gotta agree here and I do remember the history and promise made by CSM. Which is why I brought up the question for anyone in the know. With the HP grants received for the HGI, were they any stipulations attached in regards to the Steinegger Lodge?

And if at any point of the building's life the decision is made to indeed demo, it's because they have a committed developer to build something in its place rather than to sit as a parking lot to Jj's point.

One thing I discovered is there's an alley adjacent to the building. That would allow separate entrances for retail if possible and residential.

Brick buildings can be dismantled. Dismantle it, mark every brick, build the tower on stilts, replace the building. That'd be badass.