Phoenix | Central Station Towers 1 & 2 | 372 FT | 32 Floors & 230 FT | 22 Floors

[locolife]

Originally Posted by PHX-DUDE-MAN

I appreciate the optimistic perspective. I think long term through this century, Phoenix has a bright future. We might break 1000 foot towers this century who knows?

Hopefully along with multiple high rises in the 600-900’ range to go with anything at or around 1000’, so it doesn’t look so bizarre like OKC. An awesome and tall skyline is one thing but having good street level energy and activity is just as important. I’ve been to a few big cities and head to the high rise districts and find it’s pretty boring and dead at night. I’m liking the vibe Phoenix had going including around Roosevelt. The fact that so many of our downtown buildings are residential is making the area pretty active and growing quickly.

[PHX-DUDE-MAN]

Originally Posted by locolife

Hopefully along with multiple high rises in the 600-900’ range to go with anything at or around 1000’, so it doesn’t look so bizarre like OKC. An awesome and tall skyline is one thing but having good street level energy and activity is just as important. I’ve been to a few big cities and head to the high rise districts and find it’s pretty boring and dead at night. I’m liking the vibe Phoenix had going including around Roosevelt. The fact that so many of our downtown buildings are residential is making the area pretty active and growing quickly.

I agree! Good points.

[CrestedSaguaro]

Unfortunately, we won't ever get anything close to 1000' in downtown as the highest limits in downtown are along 7th Ave where it can go up to about 650'.

Anything taller than that would have to go up in Midtown unless Phoenix does a major overhaul of it's development/height code north of Fillmore and I don't think there is any push for that barring some major office space needed in downtown for a headquarters or something...and we all know how much office space is needed in downtown

Phoenix is forever doomed to be short...at least in my lifetime.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by CrestedSaguaro

Unfortunately, we won't ever get anything close to 1000' in downtown as the highest limits in downtown are along 7th Ave where it can go up to about 650'.

Anything taller than that would have to go up in Midtown unless Phoenix does a major overhaul of it's development/height code north of Fillmore and I don't think there is any push for that barring some major office space needed in downtown for a headquarters or something...and we all know how much office space is needed in downtown

Phoenix is forever doomed to be short...at least in my lifetime.

1. Isnt it like up to 800' north of van buren
2. The city needs to fight these height restrictions the core of downtown is a mile north of the north runway
3. Vertical lifting planes some day!

[CrestedSaguaro]

Originally Posted by Obadno

1. Isnt it like up to 800' north of van buren
2. The city needs to fight these height restrictions the core of downtown is a mile north of the north runway
3. Vertical lifting planes some day!

Nothing in downtown is 800. Remember that Empire had to get an approval on Astra just to go from 525' to 541'.

I have my height zoning map around somewhere. I'll dig it out and post it.

[CrestedSaguaro]

Here it is. I was wrong about 7th Ave being 650'. It's actually 600'

[Warren Peace]

Originally Posted by CrestedSaguaro

Nothing in downtown is 800. Remember that Empire had to get an approval on Astra just to go from 525' to 541'.

I have my height zoning map around somewhere. I'll dig it out and post it.

Thanks for posting that. This is the first I have seen of it. Are some of these odd discrepancies a reflection of variance-creep? I was expecting to see more uniform height restrictions similar to the middle of the map, and was not expecting to see a reduction in height limits north of McKinley. You may not know the answer, but I'm curious about the reason why buildings north of downtown are not permitted to be above 250 feet.

[CrestedSaguaro]

Originally Posted by Warren Peace

Thanks for posting that. This is the first I have seen of it. Are some of these odd discrepancies a reflection of variance-creep? I was expecting to see more uniform height restrictions similar to the middle of the map, and was not expecting to see a reduction in height limits north of McKinley. You may not know the answer, but I'm curious about the reason why buildings north of downtown are not permitted to be above 250 feet.

I am not sure, but I think it has to do with the locals around the Roosevelt area wanting a lower height limit or maybe that the city came up with it to try and keep the character of the area. But that's out the window with the influx of towers going up. Probably time for the city to consider raising the limits.

[ChaseM]

It would be nice to see downtown amend it's height limits in certain areas, really plan out how they want the skyline to grow going forward like San Francisco did, based on the current height plan the skyline would basically look like a bar graph if built that way.

[xymox]

Originally Posted by ChaseM

It would be nice to see downtown amend it's height limits in certain areas, really plan out how they want the skyline to grow going forward like San Francisco did, based on the current height plan the skyline would basically look like a bar graph if built that way.

Somehow fitting with our growth pattern over the past 30 years.

[MMDelon]

Are there any updates on when the crane will go up for Central Station?

[thespiandave]

Originally Posted by MMDelon

Are there any updates on when the crane will go up for Central Station?

No idea…but I snagged this today. Looks like they’re still doing a bit of digging. https://imgur.com/a/L4vweqW

[MiEncanto]

Originally Posted by thespiandave

No idea…but I snagged this today. Looks like they’re still doing a bit of digging. https://imgur.com/a/L4vweqW

As of this morning they are STILL in excavation, though it is VERY DEEP at this point, at least 40' down in some areas. They were actively working on it this AM.

[az_daniel]

Originally Posted by MiEncanto

As of this morning they are STILL in excavation, though it is VERY DEEP at this point, at least 40' down in some areas. They were actively working on it this AM.

Pardon my ignorance if this has already been discussed in the past - but is the parking for this project entirely underground? Hard to tell from the renderings.

[gymratmanaz]

If I recall correctly, there is no above-the-ground parking, just retail on the first 2 floors, then housing. Correct?

[IndyAZ]

Originally Posted by gymratmanaz

If I recall correctly, there is no above-the-ground parking, just retail on the first 2 floors, then housing. Correct?

All Underground Parking, Ground Floor Retail, Level 2-3 are Office, 4 is Amenity, 5+ is Residential.

[PHX31]

What goes in to a developer deciding to make parking above or below ground? Assuming it's not a requirement of the project by the City or for some other specific reason (and if it is a requirement.. why?).

It's better for our own height desires to have above ground parking, even if it can make a building look worse. But from a cost stand-point it seems like a waste of money to excavate to put the parking below ground.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by PHX31

What goes in to a developer deciding to make parking above or below ground? Assuming it's not a requirement of the project by the City or for some other specific reason (and if it is a requirement.. why?).

It's better for our own height desires to have above ground parking, even if it can make a building look worse. But from a cost stand-point it seems like a waste of money to excavate to put the parking below ground.

Underground parking is definitely more expensive, but it's better from an aesthetic point of view than parking podiums. It also allows all above-ground space to be used in more productive ways. Since it costs more, developers are more likely to build only as much parking as they absolutely need, which is a good thing in terms of encouraging transit use and walkability. For those reasons, I favor underground parking, but I'm not aware of any city requirement for it.

[phoenixwillrise]

Originally Posted by exit2lef

Underground parking is definitely more expensive, but it's better from an aesthetic point of view than parking podiums. It also allows all above-ground space to be used in more productive ways. Since it costs more, developers are more likely to build only as much parking as they absolutely need, which is a good thing in terms of encouraging transit use and walkability. For those reasons, I favor underground parking, but I'm not aware of any city requirement for it.

I for one am all in on above ground parking as long as they doll up the structure a bit. Simply because taller buildings make a downtown look more legit.

[dtphxguy]

the city mentioned that having no above ground parking did give this project more points in the RFP process.