Susan Krane
Former director, Scottsdale Museum of Contemporary Art
Oshman Executive Director, San Jose Museum of Art

Where, When, Why
The sprawling, panoramic suburbia of the metropolitan Phoenix area can feel numbingly generic to those who are accustomed to older cities, as it did to me when I first moved here. It took me some time to become accustomed to the uniform horizontality and decentralized retail grid that chugs, block by block, far off into the sunset. I slowly became used to shuttling among a multitude of small, often scrappy strip malls to find everything from a crusty loaf of bread to a dry cleaner to a good falafel. They all looked the same from the street. In fact, at first many of the main streets also looked the same to me: long, straight arterials marked with vintage commercial signage, fronted by vast strip-mall parking lots—behind which hid cozy subdivisions of ranch houses. Life was made convenient for the car-bound, yet eerily homogenized on the surface and virtually void of pedestrians.

Years after I had acclimated to the Valley of the Sun’s strip-mall ambiance, a friend who regularly (and enthusiastically) visits the area similarly complained about the dismal drive-by image of our streetscapes—so unexpected in a place sustained by winter resort tourism and known as a vibrant boom town. On an overland jaunt, for example, from Sky Harbor Airport to Taliesin West (Frank Lloyd Wright’s world-famous architectural landmark), the roadside façade metropolitan Phoenix presents to the world is pretty plain, if not downright ugly, for long stretches. The infrastructure of strip mall after strip mall seems anachronistically mundane and sadly dated: many look shabby, untouched for over a generation. It is hardly an uncommon scenario: the "dead mall" syndrome across the United States testifies to the battlefield of retail evolution and devolution. (See www.deadmalls.com, which has a cult following. Two of the three Arizona dead malls discussed are in Scottsdale.) Yet, ironically, this metro area boasts a rich legacy of visionary contemporary architecture, which started with the utopianism of Frank Lloyd Wright and Paolo Soleri and continues through today’s "Arizona School" of dynamic, innovative architects renowned for their environmental sensitivity.

And so, when we at the Scottsdale Museum of Contemporary Art began to discuss the idea of initiating an architectural competition that might be national in scope and application yet have core local significance, it seemed most fitting to address a building type that impacts our public sense of place(1). Strip malls, ever in our peripheral vision, immediately came to mind. The choice purposefully ran contrary to Arizona’s predominant recent reputation for high-style residential architecture. What could be farther toward the other end of the spectrum from luxurious mega-houses on desert hillsides than the strip mall in the flats? The everyday, work-a-day strip mall seemed so wanting of smart architectural attention, ripe and useful for reconsideration—in this community and in so many others across the country. This competition thus intended dually to take SMoCA’s architectural exhibitions to the next stage and to highlight the keen social awareness and the broad capacity of a new generation of architects working here and in other regional centers of design excellence.

At the time Flip a Strip began to take shape, in December 2006, the economy in Arizona was flourishing and developers were busy pitching ambitious building projects. New investment in downtown Scottsdale, a few blocks away from SMoCA, featured multistory, walkable residential developments (responding to an influx from the exurbs and enlisting planned-block zoning with higher density levels); the renovated mid-century chic Hotel Valley Ho; a distinctive restaurant district; and a W Hotel. Slightly south of this revivified downtown zone, feeder corridors are lined with aged strip malls that obviously have the potential to serve expanding populations and adjacent neighborhoods with shifting profiles. As the demographic and economic contexts change, as driving a long distance becomes less desirable, can these available, underused strip malls morph to support a new century with new needs? Could re-use efforts reach beyond superficial renovation or infill? Such factors encouraged the notion that an idea-generating competition such as Flip a Strip could indeed be an opportunity to inspire developers—here and elsewhere—who might subsequently take an interesting competition proposal forward into design development. Our hope was that the competition and exhibition (if accountable to financial and municipal issues), could in effect provide a rare research-and-development phase, taken into the public realm and staged in the forum of the museum, where innovative, speculative ideas are par for the course.

Thus, Flip a Strip straddles the usual models for an architectural competition. Most civic or museum-generated competitions are undertaken as part of an actual building campaign. Such design/build endeavors address a very detailed program and help brand an institution via architectural prominence (and draw crowds). In contrast, purely visionary competitions leapfrog over the hurdles imposed by conventional reality and invigorate the field with idealistic, unfettered innovation—and often a healthy dose of anti-establishment contrarianism. Nicolai Ouroussoff, architectural critic for The New York Times, recently lamented the decline over the past decade of architectural work that is "too radical, too bold for the cultural establishment"; "aesthetically inventive and piercing social commentaries” that indeed later prove widely influential. He writes: "By abandoning fantasy for the more pragmatic aspects of building, the profession has lost some of its capacity for self-criticism, not to mention one of its most valuable imaginative tools."(2) Flip a Strip admittedly aimed for a midpoint between these two poles, aspiring to interesting hybrids of vision and potential. The submissions to this competition display ample experimentation along the visionary range of the spectrum: few proposals were mundane.

Working with an amazing community advisory committee of architects, planners, developers and urban entrepreneurs, we decided that Flip a Strip should address small, one-to-three-acre, mid-block strip plazas—the most abundant and most vulnerable parcels that lack the anchor tenants of larger sites and missed out on the attention-grabbing positioning of intersections. Most of these strip malls date from the 1960s and 1970s and still yield reliable cash flow for the landowners, regardless of vacancies or disrepair. They provide affordable spaces for small businesses and often service vibrant new-immigrant communities. One can easily find malls around town with exclusively Korean or Spanish signage. In addition, several strips of this scale here have been given facelifts on shoestring budgets by adventurous small-time entrepreneurs: they quickly have been adopted as hip gathering spots for those drawn to impressive, locally owned concerns such as an alternative record store, a homey coffee-shop hangout or an artisanal patisserie. Such grassroots, lifestyle-oriented enterprises demonstrate the potential across the Phoenix area, which has precious few “third spaces” and little street life. What more, Flip a Strip asks, could be possible with good architecture in the mix? How might discrete efforts at such “suburban villages” be knit together to alter not just one parcel of land but the look and feel of cities’ prime corridors?

Rethinking the strip mall falls under the rubric of "retrofitting suburbia"—a subject today very much in the foreground of the fields of architecture and urban planning. It is the subject of the compelling summer 2005 issue of the journal Places (which includes texts by two finalists in Flip a Strip, Darren Petrucci and Roger Sherman).(3) As Ellen Dunham-Jones, a leading thinker on this topic, summarized the theme therein:

Suburban residents tend to contest any alteration to the original form and pattern of their communities. However, despite such intransigence, a number of factors—from aging buildings and infrastructure, to demographic change, to shifts in regional economies—are driving the retrofit of existing suburban development into more urban format.

. . . dead malls are being reborn as downtowns, commercial strips are being transformed into pedestrian-friendly boulevards, out-of-date office parks are finding new life as mixed-use business districts and traffic-choked edge cities are being infilled and linked to new transit systems. What largely typifies such transformations is that a once-generic, auto-dependent, single-use site will become more particular. As better designed places, they are generally also characterized by increased connectivity, walkability and density, a greater range of uses, an increased attention to public space, and a new concern for environmental performance.(4)

Most of these successful retrofits, however, were of dying big-box sites that, by virtue of scale, better validate grand investment efforts and risk-taking mixed-use concepts. As Christopher Leinberger notes, major real-estate projects are usually dependent on financing from Wall Street’s lending markets—which decidedly do not like "experiments."(5) It is no wonder that the change we have seen in strip malls in metropolitan Phoenix has been organic and instigated by small-scale, under-the-radar renovation.

Flip a Strip attempted to walk a line between pragmatism and pie-in-the-sky. The competition attracted one hundred and seventy-five registrants from eleven countries—a surprisingly strong result. Of these, fifteen firms from across the United States had been invited to participate; others responded to an open call via the competition website. The Museum received ninety-five completed proposals by teams from forty-six cities in six countries, (some attrition perhaps a reflection of the stiff time demands of a project that required both design and detailed economic attention).

Firms were asked to select for redesign—a tear-down missed the point—one of three strip malls put forth for the competition by the urban planners for the cities of Scottsdale, Tempe and Phoenix. Each municipality selected a site interesting in the context of its master planning. Firms were given zoning and planning information, traffic counts, lease rates, construction-cost estimates and demographic profiles. They were asked to submit technical specifications, ballpark costs, revenue estimates and any desired zoning accommodations alongside their design concepts.

This exhibition features mock-ups and finished presentations created especially for the occasion by a total of ten finalists in the competition. In addition, stellar proposals by 25 other firms are showcased as projections in the gallery. These architects generously devoted countless hours of otherwise billable time to Flip a Strip and shared the benefit of their innovative expertise. They urge us, as citizens, to think more synthetically—to consider better uses of valuable, existing built resources; to take advantage of alternative sources of energy; to embrace smart growth; to consolidate patterns of daily activity; to be healthier; to remember a place’s agricultural roots and be closer to our sources of food; to enjoy public spaces and a sense of community. Cumulatively, they engage viewers of Flip a Strip in a bold conversation about the possibilities of rethinking everyday architecture and urge us to set our sights much higher.

Flip a Strip is accompanied by a video, commissioned from artists Paul De Nigris and Mark Vinci, that conveys the present-day reality of local strip malls. The original design boards submitted for the competition are concurrently on view at the Civic Center Library, Scottsdale; City Hall, Phoenix; and City Hall (garden level), Tempe, to enable wide public exposure.

THANKS
This exhibition would not have been possible without the generous participation and collaboration of numerous individuals from many corners of the community. I am first and foremost grateful to all the participating architects, whose commitment as well as selfless contribution of time, ideas and design skills give this project both exciting content and a soul. My gratitude especially goes to the ten finalists, who worked within the difficult constraints of the museum’s exhibition budget, solicited in-kind donations and garnered other sponsorships to enable ambitious presentations for this exhibition.

From the beginning, Chuck Albright nurtured along the notion of a competition and served as a wise sounding board; Michael Medici, president, SmithGroup, and Scott O’Connor, principal, SteepleRock Ventures, were our first ad-hoc focus group as well as important partners in community networking. Casey Jones and Reed Kroloff (a Phoenix native), of Jones Kroloff, organized and promoted the competition, spent hours in conversation with all the players and kept the process in check. I am indebted to the expert Community Advisory Committee involved since the inception of this project, who never hesitated to argue alternatives and always kept the big picture in mind; special thanks go to Dr. Nan Ellin, director, Urban and Metropolitan Studies, School of Public Affairs, College of Public Programs, Arizona State University, Tempe: David Allen, partner, Jaburg & Wilk (former COO, Barness Papas Investments, LLC); Trevor Barger, founder, Espiritu Loci; David Barnett, managing director, Columbia West Capital; Geoff Beer, president, ForSite Improvement; George Bosworth, executive director, Urban Land Institute, Arizona; Chris Camberlango, principal, Vanguard City Home; Greg Esser, community entrepreneur and public- art network manager, Americans for the Arts; Jerry Foster, vice president and CFO, Insight Land and Investments; Grady Gammage, Jr., managing partner, Gammage & Burnham, PLC; Scott Lyon, partner, Westroc; Michael Medici, president, SmithGroup; Scott O’Connor, principal, SteepleRock Ventures; Amy Silverman, associate editor, Phoenix New Times; David Tyda, editor, Desert Living; Charles Walker, owner, Passage; and Cyd West, director of research and economic partnerships, Maricopa Partnership for Arts and Culture (MPAC).

Thanks also go to the Technical Jury, who spent hours scrutinizing the entries and analyzing the practical and financial side of the proposals: David Allen, partner, Jaburg & Wilk (former COO Barness Papas Investments, LLC); Lisa Collins, deputy development services manager, City of Tempe; Susan Conklu, planning specialist, City of Scottsdale; Michael Medici, president, SmithGroup; Alice and David Olsan; Daniel Pollack, vice president, Pollack Investments; Ali Salass, developer; Decima Sever, planning outreach coordinator, City of Tempe; Mike West, real-estate attorney; Bob Wood, urban-design studio planner, City of Scottsdale; and Mai Yahn, senior vice president, Nova Home Loans.

Flip a Strip would not have happened without the enthusiastic involvement of the municipal planning offices. We are most grateful to Debra Stark, director, and her staff members Aubrey Anaya, Diane Rogers and Jacob Zonn at the City of Phoenix; John Lusardi, advance planning director, and his staff members Susan Conklu, Jennifer Graves and Bob Wood at the City of Scottsdale; Lisa Collins, deputy development services manager, and her staff members Arlene Palisoc and Decima Sever at the City of Tempe. Cyd West of MPAC encouraged this project to snowball by enlisting her vast community contacts. Nan Ellin and Nancy Levinson, director, Phoenix Urban Research Laboratory, College of Design, Arizona State University, consulted on the related public programs.

I am most grateful to the excellent Design Jury, Aaron Betsky, director, Cincinnati Art Museum; Julie Eizenberg, of Konig Eizenberg Architecture in Santa Monica, California; Merrill Elam, of Mack Scogin Merrill Elam Architects in Atlanta; Richard A. Eribes, former dean of the College of Architecture, Planning and Landscape Architecture at the University of Arizona, Tucson; and Grady Gammage, Jr., managing partner, Gammage & Burnham, PLC, Phoenix. These extraordinarily busy and in-demand professionals dedicated undivided attention to thoroughly reviewing and rigorously discussing a large number of submissions during a very intense day, with very few Blackberry breaks. Their reputations preceded them and attracted an impressive pool of entrants. I thank them for very lively and engaging conversation and for their good humor when debating the tough decisions on the award winners.

SMoCA is what it is because of a wonderful and hard-working staff. Elizabeth Theisen, assistant to the director and special-project coordinator for Flip a Strip, managed a myriad of details, coordinated the websites, sponsorship proposals and jurying, as well as juggling the competition boards more times and for more purposes than she probably wants to remember. Lesley Oliver, public relations manager, did a superb job of disseminating competition information to countless list serves and media sources: the visibility of the project and strong coverage of this exhibition is to her credit. Claire Schneider, senior curator, graciously pitched in when my schedule became overloaded: she has carefully overseen the curatorial organization of five of the finalists’ presentations, about which she wrote most astutely. Alexandra Parker, director of development, and her staff, corralled by Valerie Ryan, development coordinator, have provided essential support for our fundraising efforts. Laura Spalding, exhibitions coordinator, and Wyl Reyes, preparator, worked their usual magic to facilitate, fabricate and install a very complex exhibition in an unusually condensed time frame. Pat Evans, registrar, accommodated the last-minute nature of this enterprise with aplomb and her typical witty haranguing. At SMoCA, which has a small staff, everyone’s energy contributes to the success of a project, particularly one of this magnitude. My humble thanks and respect for their skills, tenacity and goodwill go to Kenny Barrett, community outreach assistant; Janice Bartczak, director of retail operations; Claire Carter, curatorial coordinator; Lauren Chambers, education assistant; Cassandra Coblentz, associate curator; Laura Hales, associate curator of education; Leigh Hersey, development associate; Michelle Palazzolo, museum youth educator; Carolyn Robbins, director of education; and Thomas Villlegas, protection services manager.

The generosity and faith of our sponsors for this project and of SMoCA’s dedicated board members made it a reality. Without their civic engagement and philanthropic spirit, unusual ventures such as this would never happen. It has been my pleasure during my tenure at SMoCA to work with many free-thinking and dynamic individuals and organizations, including the Walter and Karla Goldschmidt Foundation; SmithGroup; Nargess Khosrowshahi and Ali Salass; Greg Sullivan; Kiera and David Allen; Pascal de Sarthe Fine Art; Alice and David Olsan; Rose & Allyn PR; Mai Yahn/Nova Home Loans; an anonymous donor; Maricopa Partnership for Arts and Culture; Pollack Investments; Jill and Jay Stein; and Linda and Michael West. In-kind support was generously provided by Hotel Valley Ho and Trader Vic’s. Education programs were made possible in part by Louise and Will Bruder.

(1) As competition consultant Casey Jones notes, strip malls are private commercial buildings with public concessions—one of their most interesting and challenging aspects.

(2) Nicolai Ouroussoff, "An Architect Unshackled by Limits of the Real World," The New York Times, August 25, 2008, p. E1.

(3) Places, Forum of Design for the Public Realm (Cambridge, Massachusetts) 17, no. 2 (summer 2005), with essays by Ellen Dunham-Jones, Michael Dobbins, Christopher B. Leinberger, Paul Mitchell Hess, Susan Rogers, Darren Petrucci, Lars Lerup, June Williamson, Renee Chow and Roger Sherman.

(4) Ellen Dunham-Jones, "Suburban Retrofits, Demographics, and Sustainability," in ibid., p. 8. Watch for the forthcoming publication by Dunham-Jones and June Williamson, Retrofitting Suburbia (New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.), to be released in December 2008.

(5) Christopher B. Leinberger, "Retrofitting Real Estate Finance: Alternatives to the Nineteen Standard Product Types," in Places, Forum of Design for the Public Realm, p. 26.