View Single Post
Old Posted Sep 4, 2019, 8:08 PM
pj3000's Avatar
pj3000 pj3000 is offline
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Pittsburgh & Miami
Posts: 4,827
Originally Posted by Shawn View Post
Just to get this out of the way, I’m neutral on the Phoenix skyline. I don’t have a height fetish, so the lack of tall towers doesn’t bother me, but I do love built form density, and it’s here I find Phoenix to be woefully lacking.

But I want to point this out: some economies don’t need towers. What types of companies rent large floor plates in 30+ floor office buildings? Finance, white collar head offices, service companies with the revenue to justify the overhead, etc. This isn’t Phoenix’s DNA.
Yeah, I'm not height crazy either... much more into human-scaled urban neighborhoods. Obviously, Phoenix, as you say, is "woefully lacking" in both though.

I think Phoenix is just young and doesn't possess the historic industrial and resultant financial prominence which produces the types of buildings that impressively define a skyline.

Originally Posted by JManc View Post
You can't really compare Phoenix to Cambridge either, even though Phoenix is huge; Cambridge is a major hub for pharma, education, tech and the start-up industry. I can't think of one thing Phoenix is known for other than University of Phoenix and call centers.
And Cambridge isn't the primary "CBD" of its region either obviously. It's the center of those exact industries which generally do not utilize very tall office buildings for their operations (like Shawn is suggesting).

Originally Posted by Jonboy1983 View Post
In terms of the city's skyline, while it is a bummer it hasn't gotten any proposed new buildings of 600 feet tall or more lately, it's still a rather impressive skyline for a city of roughly 300,000.
We all know that 300k city limits population number is totally irrelevant in terms of an indicator of skyline "impressiveness" though.
Reply With Quote