Quote:
Originally Posted by somethingfast
Really? My buddies, who are also skyscraper fanatics, have visited some cities very much because of their skyscrapers. Chicago and New York obviously but even some smaller cities (much smaller than Phoenix) that flat-out have more impressive skylines (Louisville for example). And that's the rub. Whether you value what's going on at the street-level or what thrills you about the buildings, every single city I've been to that resonates has BOTH qualities. San Diego is just about the only city I can think of that is somewhat vertically-challenged like Phoenix (and how many buildings do they have now between 350' and 500'??? i dunno, but *considerably* more than Phoenix) that is still very dense and dynamic at the street level.
Here's my bottom line fear: there really is no reason that DT Phoenix should flourish. it's not situated near anything remarkable (body of water, etc.) and now that Tempe is establishing itself as not only the cultural focal point of the greater Phoenix area but in rapid fashion the business focal point as well...well, maybe we should simply be rooting for Tempe all the way and let Phoenix flounder. Floundering produces desperation and low economics costs...maybe then it would truly gain the traction it needs to become what all of us would like it to be. Does Tempe allow a 500'+ building anywhere near its core? If so, I would suggest that Tempe will build the next tallest in Arizona...
|
You realize geeks like us who like skyscrapers are the minority, right?
But, seriously, what soleri is true. The skyscrapers exist in those cities because a demand was cultivated by each of those downtowns becoming attractive places to live and do business. They became attractive because of the kind of urban activity that historic, pedestrian-scaled building stock fosters. The skyscrapers were/are a result of a healthy downtown; a healthy, vibrant downtown is not created by the building of skyscrapers.
Downtown Phoenix couldn't possibly 'flounder' further than where it is currently when it comes to private investment. No new companies have been attracted downtown in decades and the majority of residential proposals are the result of subsidies from government-issued RFPs and/or GPLETs. But, for a number of reasons, that isn't reason enough for the cost of doing business downtown to drop to levels that will all of a sudden start attracting en masse. Because of the poor decisions made by leaders in the past, many of the empty lots are overzoned and simply won't be able to turn a profit until there is demand for high rise development in areas that there likely never will be. In addition, both ASU and Phoenix own a great deal of these lots with plans for development far in the future. What downtown has going for it is that the few pockets that weren't demolished are thriving. It's no coincidence that the only proposals making progress are along Roosevelt Row. As long as the snobs of that community allow this progress to continue, there's hope that one day the momentum will catch on and spread.
As for Tempe, the city set a height limit of 300' so no, AZ's tallest will not be built in Tempe. And, Tempe is proof that skyscrapers aren't necessary to create an urban environment. In fact, their skyscraper district is the most anti-urban portion of its downtown. However, looking at Tempe Town Lake's success and calling for Phoenix to pursue a similar endeavor is exactly why downtown has become the hodge-podge of failed megadevelopments that it has. San Diego's downtown revitalized with the help of a downtown mall, and so Phoenix built Arizona Center. Denver was revitalized with the opening of its downtown baseball stadium, so Phoenix built Chase Field (which isn't a failure but spur nowhere near the adjacent development seen elsewhere). And, so on and so forth. Like these other cities, Tempe isn't succeeding because one singular asset - its lake. It is succeeding because its landlocked borders have forced the city to adopt smart growth planning policies that encourage mass transit, vertical development, and complete streets. It has a defined central core that is the cultural and business heart of the city. It has used public money to improve infrastructure and create amenities like the town lake pedestrian bridge, making downtown a livable environment. It's downtown is adjacent to the nation's largest pool of collegiate talent. All of these things created a vibrant downtown in Tempe long before the towers rose along Town Lake. Town Lake is just an added amenity that has attracted a new wave of development - but Tempe would still have a downtown with a soul even without it.
Thus, if Phoenix wants to follow in Tempe's footsteps, it needs to follow its lead in many more ways than just by emulating Tempe Town Lake. It needs to curb outward growth and focus on infill and vertical development in urban, transit-friendly centers. It needs to invest in complete streets, mass transit, and pedestrian amenities in its downtown. It needs to attract educational institutes that bring more talent to the core for businesses to take advantage of. In tandem with the organic growth occurring in Roosevelt, these initiatives could help create a vibrant, all-around downtown.
Also, while I think Tempe and Scottsdale are beneficial to the Valley as a whole and support their continued success at urbanization, the decentralized job sprawl within the Phoenix boundaries is certainly a major factor in downtown's inability to establish itself as the heart of the region. One major example is the mayor's continued support for a Biomedical Campus near Mayo, when the downtown Biomedical Campus is struggling to attract investment to the point that the city is now relying on an RFP to try and solicit bids. It's those areas that are sucking downtown's energy, not the Tempes and Scottsdales.
Prev
Linear Mode
