Does Phoenix have an identity problem? (Scottsdale, Chandler: apartments, job market, place to live)

[Valley Native]

Originally Posted by locolife

Is that a real question? Of course they do. Mt. Rainer is literally on the Seattle Chamber of Commerce logo. It's nickname is the emerald city, a reference to it's natural scenery. The City of Seattle's newcomer page mentions the mountains and ocean in the first 2 sentences along with this gem of a benefit to Seattle life "Greater Seattle area features picture-perfect views and abundant recreational opportunities year-round."

Here is an image of the Portland relocation guide. Looks like they love to tout their mountains and natural environment as well. The Moving to Portland website also shows a small Portland skyline with a massive Mt. St. Helen in the background.... So yep, it's true there too.

You're right. Portland does have a rather small skyline, but then it's also quite a bit smaller in population than the metros of Seattle, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Phoenix. Also, the mountain scenery around Portland (and Seattle for that matter) is more majestic, and the natural landscape is much greener & prettier than the desert surrounding Phoenix. Big difference.

Showing off natural scapes to promote a city is perfectly fine to a certain limit. My point is that Phoenix goes overboard with it, especially when our desert & mountains really aren't all that attractive in comparison to the scenery around the west coast cities. Our downtown skyline is shown very minimally to the nation & world, just like it's something to be ashamed of ... and perhaps it is compared to many other cities.

[Hschlick84]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

You're right. Portland does have a rather small skyline, but then it's also quite a bit smaller in population than the metros of Seattle, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Phoenix. Also, the mountain scenery around Portland (and Seattle for that matter) is more majestic, and the natural landscape is much greener & prettier than the desert surrounding Phoenix. Big difference.

Showing off natural scapes to promote a city is perfectly fine to a certain limit. My point is that Phoenix goes overboard with it, especially when our desert & mountains really aren't all that attractive in comparison to the scenery around the west coast cities. Our downtown skyline is shown very minimally to the nation & world, just like it's something to be ashamed of ... and perhaps it is compared to many other cities.

Time to lax zoning laws in PHX if not get rid of them completely. Either go all out or bust when it comes to creating a skyline w/ tall skyscrapers.

[JGMotorsport64]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

You're right. Portland does have a rather small skyline, but then it's also quite a bit smaller in population than the metros of Seattle, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Phoenix. Also, the mountain scenery around Portland (and Seattle for that matter) is more majestic, and the natural landscape is much greener & prettier than the desert surrounding Phoenix. Big difference.

Showing off natural scapes to promote a city is perfectly fine to a certain limit. My point is that Phoenix goes overboard with it, especially when our desert & mountains really aren't all that attractive in comparison to the scenery around the west coast cities. Our downtown skyline is shown very minimally to the nation & world, just like it's something to be ashamed of ... and perhaps it is compared to many other cities.

This is moving goal posts

[OUgrad09]

I honestly never realized the level of insecurity that exists among some Phoenicians. Beverly Hills may be more famous than Scottsdale, but I’d take Scottsdale over Beverly Hills any day.

And let’s be clear, downtown LA sucks and the LA boards complain about its weak skyline all the time. I knew some Phoenicians are desperate to be LA, but I don’t think they realize they’d get sick of LA real quick.

[Valley Native]

Originally Posted by Hschlick84

Time to lax zoning laws in PHX if not get rid of them completely. Either go all out or bust when it comes to creating a skyline w/ tall skyscrapers.

I'd definitely be in favor of relaxing some zoning laws regarding height, but good luck getting the City Council & Mayor on board. Houston has no zoning, and they have a great downtown skyline. Houston even allows highrises adjacent to suburban shopping areas. Even the staunchest anti NIMBY types (you and I) would not want chemical plants or garbage dumps in residential neighborhoods, so that's where zoning has its benefits.

Originally Posted by OUgrad09

I honestly never realized the level of insecurity that exists among some Phoenicians. Beverly Hills may be more famous than Scottsdale, but I’d take Scottsdale over Beverly Hills any day.

And let’s be clear, downtown LA sucks and the LA boards complain about its weak skyline all the time. I knew some Phoenicians are desperate to be LA, but I don’t think they realize they’d get sick of LA real quick.

Believe me, most of us don't want Phoenix to be another L.A., but I think we're headed in that direction. What some of us want to see is Phoenix act its size. There are a fair share of older residents who prefer to cling to the Phoenix of the past, and oppose new ideas that would give us more status, and bring in more business & year round tourism. We can't be against these things so much with our growth rate and population the way it is now.

[Slater]

Most of Phoenix's ordinary working folks go to their jobs every day and probably don't think a lot about the skyline. Probably more about traffic, paying the bills, grocery shopping, etc.

[OUgrad09]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

I'd definitely be in favor of relaxing some zoning laws regarding height, but good luck getting the City Council & Mayor on board. Houston has no zoning, and they have a great downtown skyline. Houston even allows highrises adjacent to suburban shopping areas.

What has been the reasoning for this? Isn’t the City Council and Mayor’s office usually dominated by Democrats who theoretically are in favor or more urbanization. Is it an anti-gentrification attitude that has held sway over city leadership?

[locolife]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

You're right. Portland does have a rather small skyline, but then it's also quite a bit smaller in population than the metros of Seattle, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Phoenix. Also, the mountain scenery around Portland (and Seattle for that matter) is more majestic, and the natural landscape is much greener & prettier than the desert surrounding Phoenix. Big difference.

Showing off natural scapes to promote a city is perfectly fine to a certain limit. My point is that Phoenix goes overboard with it, especially when our desert & mountains really aren't all that attractive in comparison to the scenery around the west coast cities. Our downtown skyline is shown very minimally to the nation & world, just like it's something to be ashamed of ... and perhaps it is compared to many other cities.

This is mostly just your personal opinion now. The fact remains, many big cities promote their natural surroundings. Phoenix is actually pretty unique. A green city setting is not unique at all, to me it couldn't be more booorrrinnngggg and bland.

[locolife]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

I'd definitely be in favor of relaxing some zoning laws regarding height, but good luck getting the City Council & Mayor on board. Houston has no zoning, and they have a great downtown skyline. Houston even allows highrises adjacent to suburban shopping areas. Even the staunchest anti NIMBY types (you and I) would not want chemical plants or garbage dumps in residential neighborhoods, so that's where zoning has its benefits.

Have you spent much time in downtown Houston? It does have tall buildings but the street energy is pretty low, I've been there on work trips and stayed downtown, tall buildings are one thing but it has to be complemented by development which will be active after 5pm and on weekends. Downtown Houston needs a lot more of that.

The city council here does not really control our building height limits, it's mostly an issue with the FAA and Sky Harbor at least for areas south of Roosevelt or so. If a developer proposes something substantial North of Roosevelt or right around it, I'm guessing it could get still get approved. I believe that area allows for up to 600' or so now but I don't have the zoning height map memorized.

A critical mass is building downtown, it's becoming the spot to be in the valley, which is good for everything us urban lovers want to see happen. How long it may take before a 800' tower is built, I have no idea, but with more demand to be downtown and less and less land being available it's heading in that direction finally.

[locolife]

Originally Posted by JGMotorsport64

It feels good because it’s sparse. If it were frequent we’d be like everyone else wanting sunshine

Exactly, I tried living the other way around for a while, definitely not for me. I much prefer to love the rain as opposed to oversee it. It's been plenty cloudy/rainy enough here this winter for me, I'm really happy to see some 70s and sunshine again. I do love the wetter weather for the drought improvement help, which we definitely can use. But I still prefer a warm/sunny day 90% of the time.