HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #17321  
Old Posted Jun 24, 2020, 11:54 PM
combusean's Avatar
combusean combusean is offline
Skyriser
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The Alameda, San José, California
Posts: 5,978
Quote:
Originally Posted by fawd
Only other thing I would add is: Jerry Colangelo. He is/was a major advocate for DT development - especially when downtown was at its most 'dead'. His fingerprints are all over the place.

IMO, he was just as instrumental to what downtown is today as the ASU/Biomedical campuses etc.
My attitude of Jerry has soured less over the years, I just wish he had a decent urbanist design chops, but then again literally nobody did in Phoenix until Post Roosevelt winded in. They actually created a new zoning district for that project which was groundbreaking for Downtown. Jerry did not inspire residential growth for downtown (in fact his Disney-esque proposal would have been a nightmare) but did provide some of the amenities that it needed to be a premium neighborhood compared to, eg, Scottsdale or the Biltmore.

FWIW, I'm kind of glad downtown's boom came after Urban Form zoning because all of these apartments would otherwise look like low-density crap--see the Met, amongst others. Downtown would be like everywhere else in Phoenix, just more hellish.

I can point to one of the weirder parts about downtown's was the failed creation of a French Quarter there in the late 1980s--St Croix village and the rehabbed ASU Nursing building--certainly nothing to write home about--were the only byproducts of that. And the Mercado and the corrupt influence of Symington--for a crummy two block retail building--will always be one of the weirder footnotes in Arizona history as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.RE
Not to get political, but that is something we can thank the current administration for Phoenix's revitalization!

Another big part of this is wage growth. Will we see taller buildings? perhaps but it really comes down to the developers feasibility to justify costs to rents or projected sales for condos to achieve a return. Areas like San Diego, Denver and Austin all have much higher wages - and rents therefore developers can build big beautiful skyscapers can charge a premium high enough to fill the building up. I hope to see that we can continue to attract top talent and 6-figure earners to the downtown phoenix workforce. As lots start to get filled in around the downtown area, the only place to go is up.
Downtown's boom started before then in 2014 thereabouts (curiously around when SF peaked and started sending their customer service reps out to the Valley) but sure it really kicked off since the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. The Act also accelerated gentrification and affordability and to some extent homelessness, the extent of which is unclear and the discussion largely academic and certainly not limited to Downtown.

Affordable housing and the Act aren't mutually exclusive, as downtown improves maybe the Council will grow some cajones and say no to projects that don't have community benefits--I don't really think 5 - 10% affordable/attainable in a new development or an in-lieu fee is too much to ask for. GPLETs will very likely be illegal by then and hopefully cities won't need them.

The city is not going to sacrifice Sky Harbor. Those buildings are going to be where the FAA is not going to complain too much so a 700ish footer on Thomas like what was originally proposed by Toll is probably most likely.

You also have to consider that Phoenix buildings are almost always built to be sold with one notable exception--Chase Tower. The developer, Valley National Bank, intended on staying there a while. Hitting height limits like a couple projects is a good thing tho.

I would really rather have a new tallest be an office building, with a semi-public use like an observation deck near or at the top, but all that is obviously going to Tempe midrises.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17322  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2020, 3:30 AM
fawd fawd is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 553
Quote:
Originally Posted by combusean View Post
My attitude of Jerry has soured less over the years
*gasp* you're committing blasphemy with that one
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17323  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2020, 3:48 AM
combusean's Avatar
combusean combusean is offline
Skyriser
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The Alameda, San José, California
Posts: 5,978
^ https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news...-world-6407135

This is a longread, but it details heavily about the unholy alliance of Colangelo, nearly unchecked taxpayer spending for private profits, the Downtown Phoenix Partnership, people like Mayor Rimsza, groups like the Phoenix Community Alliance vs pretty much everyone that could have provided meat for a revitalized downtown a generation ago, not just oversized femurs that meat was regrown on decades later a' la Fifth Element to make an obscure reference.

You'll notice that the one guy who actually had a good idea for the downtown, the biomedical district, was then-Vice Mayor Stanton, who is a congressman now when pretty much every other politician and honcho from the early 1990s - early 2000s has faded into obscurity to my knowledge.

And while I was trying to remember that Jerde partnership Main Street USA crap that almost nailed the coffin in downtown, I came across this.

https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news...theory-6406765

Another article that weaves back and forth between Phoenix's late 20th century and that we probably didn't get our money's worth with the convention center tripling as we ponder downsizing it 17 years after a rosy reports that said we should spend a billion dollars to do exactly what we did.

More on Jerde and Colangelo though:

https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news...-mouse-6406979

https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/thug-love-6396231

Last edited by combusean; Jun 25, 2020 at 4:10 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17324  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2020, 7:45 PM
Phxguy Phxguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Phoenix, Az
Posts: 1,002
Received some renderings and info on the Thunderbird Legacy project at Jackson and 1st St.

CrestedSaguaro feel free to add to your Thunderbird files

Two things struck me reading through the zoning/text amendment for this project (Z-26-20-7 and Z-TA-5-20-7 respectively if you're interested).

1) Text Amendment to maximize height from 80-140 ft to 285 ft. Someone has a good ole' height regulation map of downtown which, if I remember correctly for this area, is 1300-1325' ASL. It's good to see an upswing in amendments for density and height restrictions (i.e Garfield House, Asta) because it means developers are willing to push the narrative for more but it's also telling of the Downtown Zoning Code needing to be updated to reflect current trends.

2) Zoning Request to remove historic designation from property. OIC wants to knock down rear wall and roof from the structure, entailing that it will lose its HP status in order to move forward.

Renderings:


Looking SW from 1st St


Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17325  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2020, 8:42 PM
ASU Diablo ASU Diablo is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,403
These renderings look a whole lot better!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17326  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2020, 9:29 PM
Obadno Obadno is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,595
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phxguy View Post
Received some renderings and info on the Thunderbird Legacy project at Jackson and 1st St.

CrestedSaguaro feel free to add to your Thunderbird files

Two things struck me reading through the zoning/text amendment for this project (Z-26-20-7 and Z-TA-5-20-7 respectively if you're interested).

1) Text Amendment to maximize height from 80-140 ft to 285 ft. Someone has a good ole' height regulation map of downtown which, if I remember correctly for this area, is 1300-1325' ASL. It's good to see an upswing in amendments for density and height restrictions (i.e Garfield House, Asta) because it means developers are willing to push the narrative for more but it's also telling of the Downtown Zoning Code needing to be updated to reflect current trends.

2) Zoning Request to remove historic designation from property. OIC wants to knock down rear wall and roof from the structure, entailing that it will lose its HP status in order to move forward.

Renderings:


Looking SW from 1st St


Awesome im amazed that somebody took the punge.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17327  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2020, 10:06 PM
combusean's Avatar
combusean combusean is offline
Skyriser
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The Alameda, San José, California
Posts: 5,978
They would lose HP status by doing this anyways. I'm all for HP, but keeping the facade keeps a lot of the character and they're preserving the front portion which is more visible on the site plan.

And AFAICT, bringing this thing to code would be almost impossible or at least infeasible. I'm glad we're getting a high intensity, streetfront use rather than keeping an obsolete Class C office building. There are many, many cheap properties the current tenants can find.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17328  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2020, 10:59 PM
xymox xymox is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 829
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phxguy View Post
Received some renderings and info on the Thunderbird Legacy project at Jackson and 1st St.

CrestedSaguaro feel free to add to your Thunderbird files

Two things struck me reading through the zoning/text amendment for this project (Z-26-20-7 and Z-TA-5-20-7 respectively if you're interested).

1) Text Amendment to maximize height from 80-140 ft to 285 ft. Someone has a good ole' height regulation map of downtown which, if I remember correctly for this area, is 1300-1325' ASL. It's good to see an upswing in amendments for density and height restrictions (i.e Garfield House, Asta) because it means developers are willing to push the narrative for more but it's also telling of the Downtown Zoning Code needing to be updated to reflect current trends.

2) Zoning Request to remove historic designation from property. OIC wants to knock down rear wall and roof from the structure, entailing that it will lose its HP status in order to move forward.
Would FAA be ok with 285ft at this location? Seems like it’d line up with the runway more ...no?
__________________
mmmm skyscraper, I love you....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17329  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2020, 11:01 PM
azliam azliam is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 607
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phxguy View Post
Received some renderings and info on the Thunderbird Legacy project at Jackson and 1st St.

CrestedSaguaro feel free to add to your Thunderbird files

Two things struck me reading through the zoning/text amendment for this project (Z-26-20-7 and Z-TA-5-20-7 respectively if you're interested).

1) Text Amendment to maximize height from 80-140 ft to 285 ft. Someone has a good ole' height regulation map of downtown which, if I remember correctly for this area, is 1300-1325' ASL. It's good to see an upswing in amendments for density and height restrictions (i.e Garfield House, Asta) because it means developers are willing to push the narrative for more but it's also telling of the Downtown Zoning Code needing to be updated to reflect current trends.

2) Zoning Request to remove historic designation from property. OIC wants to knock down rear wall and roof from the structure, entailing that it will lose its HP status in order to move forward.

Renderings:


Looking SW from 1st St


That's sweet! Now, if we could only get Barrister to awaken from its coma and fill in some of that gap.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17330  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2020, 11:39 PM
combusean's Avatar
combusean combusean is offline
Skyriser
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The Alameda, San José, California
Posts: 5,978
Quote:
Originally Posted by xymox View Post
Would FAA be ok with 285ft at this location? Seems like it’d line up with the runway more ...no?
The site plan lists 275' as the FAA allowed maximum and the roof height. Not sure why they're asking for 285'.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17331  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2020, 11:44 PM
combusean's Avatar
combusean combusean is offline
Skyriser
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The Alameda, San José, California
Posts: 5,978
It also looks like this project has a name? That rear rendering has a large sign saying THE ... what?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17332  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2020, 5:28 PM
Mr.RE Mr.RE is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 529
Quote:
Originally Posted by combusean View Post
It also looks like this project has a name? That rear rendering has a large sign saying THE ... what?
Looks like the Dale?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17333  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2020, 6:04 PM
xymox xymox is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 829
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.RE View Post
Looks like the Dale?
The Blue
__________________
mmmm skyscraper, I love you....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17334  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2020, 7:02 PM
PHXflyer PHXflyer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 80
I think it says “The Duce”. You can see the C and E in the second picture. Nice homage To its locale


-probably just wishful thinking
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17335  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2020, 8:13 PM
Phxguy Phxguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Phoenix, Az
Posts: 1,002
It’s ‘The Blue’ but it would be an awesome homage if it were called ‘The Duce’ or ‘Deuce.’

Real talk though...can we just have Jackson Street become an entertainment district already??
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17336  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2020, 10:41 PM
combusean's Avatar
combusean combusean is offline
Skyriser
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The Alameda, San José, California
Posts: 5,978
I couldn't think of a worse name for this project than The Duce.

That was a scary, miserable place back in the day.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17337  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2020, 10:41 PM
combusean's Avatar
combusean combusean is offline
Skyriser
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The Alameda, San José, California
Posts: 5,978
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phxguy View Post
It’s ‘The Blue’ but it would be an awesome homage if it were called ‘The Duce’ or ‘Deuce.’

Real talk though...can we just have Jackson Street become an entertainment district already??
JSED is long dead.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17338  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2020, 11:45 PM
Phxguy Phxguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Phoenix, Az
Posts: 1,002
Quote:
Originally Posted by combusean View Post
JSED is long dead.
Sadly, but wasn’t one of its core components/anchors a hotel and residences?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17339  
Old Posted Jun 27, 2020, 6:30 PM
jajs21924 jajs21924 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by MMDelon View Post
Hey everyone I am new to the group and have been reading your post for awhile and decided to join. I am born and raised here in the Valley and it's pretty cool to see the development during the last 5 years. I am still a little confused on why Phoenix has such a small downtown with such a big population. I know some of it has to do with the airport and some due to height restrictions. Things like urban sprawl plays a part to but it's still very surprising when I visit cities like Austin, Denver, and Seattle to see the difference in the skyline and downtown development. What do y'all feel needs to happen for our downtown to catch up?
I'm also a native and I used to wonder the same thing. Then I learned that Phoenix used to have a vibrant downtown. A long series of bad decisions, lack of vision, outright civic vandalism, and just plain bad luck over the course of 50+ years left us with the huge redevelopment project we have now. Fortunately, things have turned around and downtown has come a long way in the past 20 years. It still has a long way to go but the trend is looking up.

Many people on this forum don't like this blog, but it's as complete a history as you'll find: https://www.roguecolumnist.com/rogue...wn-part-i.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17340  
Old Posted Jun 27, 2020, 6:58 PM
KenPhoenix222 KenPhoenix222 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2020
Posts: 1
For a City and Metropolitan Area the size of Phoenix, we seriously lack the quintessential, signature skyscraper exceeding 60 floors. Most large cities have many buildings over this size. I keep waiting for a major corporate relocation announcement or news of a major investment for such a tower, but it never comes. I realize that zoning plays a big part of that, especially in the Central Business District, along with associated restrictions imposed by FAA. However, the area to the north of Roosevelt, up to McDowell, between 7th Avenue and 7th Street - that zone, would be the perfect area for such new buildings. Also along Central Avenue to the north of McDowell. Essentially a "northern extension" of the Central Business District. It may in fact require the City to increase their height ceilings a little in some of the zoning districts in order to make a tall building happen. But to my knowledge, that area would not be subject to tight FAA height restrictions due to its distance away from the Sky Harbor flight path. While I am excited to watch downtown development and to watch the City grow, by the same token, a sea of 20 to 30 story buildings does not convey a "large city" feel or image to a visitor from another area. Phoenix needs taller buildings, but seriously lacks those kind of business investment opportunities. This is where the economic development professionals and their "attraction" models and efforts seem to be lacking. While they are doing a great job on small-scale tech job creation and small business startups, their efforts to attract major corporations with the promise of thousands of jobs are non-existent. Nonetheless, I keep waiting for the towers and the addition of corporate jobs. Phoenix is "very far behind" the norm in this category, especially given the fact that our City is about 1,750,000 people and the Metro is pushing 5,000,000 people. We should act like a large American City - we are not El Paso, Tucson or Albuquerque. We are larger than Philadelphia and Dallas. Its all in the attitude and vision for the future by those in a position of leadership - first politically, and also from a planning and economic development perspective. On the surface, this seems to be a combination of outdated, 1960's zoning without any foresight to allow the City to grow up to the next level, and a poor economic development effort on behalf of the City, which is evidenced by the fact that they are unable to attract "any" corporations into the downtown area. The numbers are there and Phoenix "looks big," but from a civic perspective, Phoenix is seriously lacking. City Hall and GPEC need to take a serious look at themselves.
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 9:56 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.