Freeport-McMoRan Center (One Central Park East) - Phoenix, AZ - Page 52

TonyAnderson · #**1021** Posted **Dec 24, 2009, 5:09 AM**

Woah, I never noticed that about FedEx!

PhxPavilion · #**1022** Posted **Dec 25, 2009, 9:01 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by PHX31

Although I'm not sure what the little blocks/steps in the Freeport-McMoran logo represent. Maybe stacked bars of gold?

I see a P and/or R

Vicelord John · #**1023** Posted **Dec 30, 2009, 5:25 AM**

combusean · #**1024** Posted **Jan 1, 2010, 12:48 AM**

The dichroic glass in this thing is a giant disappointment.

glynnjamin · #**1025** Posted **Feb 21, 2010, 3:15 PM**

Last night they were putting a big giant R on the north face of the crown. By the time I got out there with a camera, they had turned the crown lighting off. Im assuming they are going to spell out McMoRan....but the R is the only thing there right now.

CraftTeutonic · #**1026** Posted **Feb 23, 2010, 11:49 PM**

its actually a FR now

Vicelord John · #**1027** Posted **Feb 23, 2010, 11:52 PM**

My guess is that Freeport is going to take up the entire face of the building. My collegaue's husband is in charge of their accounting department and she said the company wants to really be noticed. Apparently the reason they wouldn't stay at the other building is it felt like it was Phelps Dodge's building. She said they strive for ostentatious.

arrogant pricks.

Jsmscaleros · #**1028** Posted **Feb 24, 2010, 1:21 AM**

If you got the green, why not be noticed more in your own building that has your company's name on top?

combusean · #**1029** Posted **Feb 24, 2010, 5:40 AM**

I find it hard to complain about new signage on a high-rise. While I'm never one for corporate logos I find them most fitting on the top of a high-rise--every one that's installed emerges downtown further as a center of a business.

Don B. · #**1030** Posted **Feb 24, 2010, 6:56 AM**

^ So long as it isn't Pink Taco Suites or something like that.

--don

Leo the Dog · #**1031** Posted **Feb 24, 2010, 11:20 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by combusean

I find it hard to complain about new signage on a high-rise. While I'm never one for corporate logos I find them most fitting on the top of a high-rise--every one that's installed emerges downtown further as a center of a business.

I don't have a problem with the signage either, however, would you be against the entire CBD have zero signage? Seems like some other cities don't have signs on their DT highrises, or if they do, perhaps grandfathered in on the older structures.

combusean · #**1032** Posted **Feb 24, 2010, 1:37 PM**

Yes, I would be opposed to a CBD being sign free. It limits freedom of expression. Moreover, why should the CBD be different from any other neighborhood with signs on top of buildings?

The suburbanization of downtown with lame-🞵🞵🞵 sign codes may have not been a significant factor in killing it, but some of those old photos of Phoenix were really cool and nothing approaching them could be done today.

I don't know of any CBD that has high-rise signs banned.

HooverDam · #**1033** Posted **Feb 24, 2010, 11:47 PM**

^Agreed, Ill never get why people are against signage in a CBD. Look at these historic pics of Downtown:

Doesnt it look cool and city-ish in part because of the signs? There's an older lady who shall remain nameless that attends a lot of Downtown type meetings who's always on about signage and clutter. She even specifically has complained about potential future signange in the warehouse/entertainment district because itll be bad for 'neighborhoods', people like that really confuse me.

Tfom · #**1034** Posted **Feb 25, 2010, 2:54 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by HooverDam

^Agreed, Ill never get why people are against signage in a CBD. Look at these historic pics of Downtown:

Doesnt it look cool and city-ish in part because of the signs? There's an older lady who shall remain nameless that attends a lot of Downtown type meetings who's always on about signage and clutter. She even specifically has complained about potential future signange in the warehouse/entertainment district because itll be bad for 'neighborhoods', people like that really confuse me.

If she's old maybe you should just jump out and scare her every so often.

Leo the Dog · #**1035** Posted **Feb 25, 2010, 2:55 PM**

I'm not against signs in the CBD, (as in the pictures posted above). I think DT would be better if we went back to that era. However, there is no point, from a pedestrian point of view, to post signs 30-40-50 stories above the street. If you can't find the Chase building, or any other DT high-rise, then you probably shouldn't leave your house.

Good example of sign free high-rises:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File

owntownBoston.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:SanFranciscoEmbarcadero.jpg

Good example of signage along the street level
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:NYC_diamond_district.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File

owntown_Crossing_2007.JPG

combusean · #**1036** Posted **Feb 25, 2010, 3:43 PM**

High-rise signs aren't important for the pedestrian so I barely know what the fuss is about them. They are important for dramatic aerial shots and driving by them on the freeway to make one's city look badass.

One of my first modern memories of downtown is getting lost on the way to Arizona Mills when I was in high school. Somewhere on the freeway did I spot the giant gold WELLS FARGO sign, a goose-bump inducing beacon that let me know I was somewhere very far away from home. After that night, my obsession with maps and cities started--I spent hours reading the Thomas Guide, becoming one with my city. =P

The Qwest logo on one of the tallest buildings in Denver had its own story. Used to be this bright-🞵🞵🞵 beacon you could see for 50 miles, and while it's still there it's been substantially dimmed, signifying the end of an era for both the company and its tower.

NorthScottsdale · #**1037** Posted **Feb 25, 2010, 4:44 PM**

It's not just for the image and it's not for pedestrian. Obviously these buildings have signs at the pedestrian level as well. To put a sign on top of a building is good marketing. To have the name of your company on top of a high rise tower is a sign of a big, powerful company. A good example of why this is good marketing, is that I'm sure everyone has seen the "Metlife" tower in New York. its in movies, you see it in arial NY shots, etc. A sign at the street level wouldn't get that sort of exposure.

Leo the Dog · #**1038** Posted **Feb 25, 2010, 4:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by combusean

The Qwest logo on one of the tallest buildings in Denver had its own story. Used to be this bright-🞵🞵🞵 beacon you could see for 50 miles, and while it's still there it's been substantially dimmed, signifying the end of an era for both the company and its tower.

It'd be nice to see buildings distinguish themselves from others through architecture/unique lighting instead of signage. The glowing crowns on top of cityscape and OCPE is a nice start, or the crown atop city hall. The Empire State building comes to mind when talking about glowing beacons. It is impossible to mistake that building at night from any other high rise in midtown manhattan.

plinko · #**1039** Posted **Feb 25, 2010, 7:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leo the Dog

It'd be nice to see buildings distinguish themselves from others through architecture/unique lighting instead of signage. The glowing crowns on top of cityscape and OCPE is a nice start, or the crown atop city hall. The Empire State building comes to mind when talking about glowing beacons. It is impossible to mistake that building at night from any other high rise in midtown manhattan.

As opposed to the fact that the ESB is 400-500' taller than most of the other towers in Midtown Manhattan and sits basically by itself? I agree that architecture and lighting should be first, but somebody has to pay for that.

I rarely have issue with logos on buildings, except in cases where the architecture doesn't lend itself (the most notable example being the Library Tower in LA).

In the 80s and early 90s there weren't any logos on towers in DT Phoenix (or Midtown). Then BankOne started the fun in about 93 and all of a sudden there was BofA on 101 Central, Wells Fargo, and Hyatt. Midtown got Qwest and BofA (on their Central Ave 15 story building). I actually think it added a layer of 'arrival' for downtown. AWA was open, the NBA all-star game came to town, and the arrival of MLB was imminent. All of a sudden downtown Phoenix becomes a place that's seen on TV due to sporting events. Once the BOB opened, all of sudden you have Ernst & Young, Arizona Center and APS plopping logos on their buildings (along with BofA moving to Collier). You can't underestimate the power of marketing when your building can be seen on TV.

The simple reality is that Phoenix really lacks a tower (other than City Hall) that is architecturally interesting enough (or lit well enough) to warrant NOT having a logo. As long as there is only one (I've seen towers in Latin America just festooned with corporate logos...talk about weird)

*edit* there was ONE logo on a Midtown tower that I remember at least as early as about 1989, which was First Interstate on the tower up at Columbus and Central (now Regions Bank?)

combusean · #**1040** Posted **Feb 25, 2010, 7:56 PM**

I don't think it was First Interstate. I think it's been Meridian Bank for as long as I can remember