1900 Arch

[phillyaggie]

I just don't see how you can possibly think that when a group of three storey rowhomes gets demolished and is replaced by a fourteen storey building that is somehow evidence of "the city's anaemic property (and business) climate." I watched those brownstones come down, and they were rowhomes. You're talking about a fundamental change in character of an entire disctrict of the city, and you're complaining when there's pushback? What would you possibly expect? Why don't you propose a 14 storey building in Society Hill and see how the neighbors feel about it? This building wouldn't be allowed in the entire Capital District of this nation. I just don't see how a 14 storey building is somehow a trifle.

Society Hill is far removed from the skyscrapers district. And yet, it does have those 3 towers, plus the towers around Washington Sq if you count those. Hey, I have no problem with a tall building coming up at the weed lot otherwise known as Stamper Square area... if I had the voting rights or ability to ram through that hotel/condo project there, I would have done it...if for nothing else than to spite that selfserving lawyer in the Society Hill civic that always holds up projects there.

For the record, I'm also for razing the Dilworth House and letting the developer build something new; if they can fit in tall mixed-used building in that small lot, be my guest... if anything, the dilapidated house of the ex mayor is the smallest property on the square and looks very much out of place among other buildings beside it.

NIMBY's in a high rise tower have no right to complain about tall buildings in the city's tall building district. And I don't buy that 19th and Arch is somehow out of line from the tall building corridor. There are taller buildings further north from there, in fact and in the same vicinity.

Eldondre already told you that the nature of this city's development has changed; if anything, a 3-story rowhome district that close to the financial district...it's a wonder those buildings didn't get knocked down sooner.

And you want skyscrapers to go west along Market and JFK... get the El and RR to have at least one stop between 15th and 30th. As simple as that.


Hammer, thanks for that further explanation on how the FAR works in Philly. The 3-stepped configuration of this building still feels odd; they could probably go for one, bigger, open space/plaza that could be programmable to animate the street, and use the allowance to build taller, and with a more nuanced design.

Since they have made provision for underground parking and public art, it seems they're shooting for the new code.

[eldondre]

I feel that the reason that the Murano is so lonely is because the market has dictated that the skyscraper district go north instead of west. I don't think that anyone anticipated that the Bell Atlantic Tower, the Comcast Center, and the Logan Square towers would be built so far north. The plan was for them to be on Market or JFK. It's interesting how people want to be closer to City Hall than to 30th Street Station, in spite of the planners and their grand plans.

I think you're wrong, I think the plan was always for comcast center to be a skyscraper. at least since the lot was created by the removal of the chinese wall. I also fail to see how you're getting upset over a 14 story building when the sterling and kennedy houses are also midrises. the city levelled entire blocks of three story homes for the parkway with the intent of building midrises along it.

phillyaggie-I think a retail podium makes sense, I don't see the utlility of public space there. the excess of public plazas in the city are an example of FAR gone wrong. comcast did a decent jobs with their space but most are heavily underutilized. and why the FAR is five is beyond me, something like the wanamaker building would be perferct which hammer says is 12.

[hammersklavier]

If you look at the zoning overlay map, the Comcast Center is in a C-5 lot (oddly enough, the ACC proposal is on a C-4 lot). C-5 allows the densest construction in the city. C-4, notably, does not.

However, C-4 zones continue in a more-or-less coherent way up to Girard, and less coherently Cecil B. Moore, as well as down to Bainbridge (thence south C-3 takes over) with a C-5 island at Broad and Washington.

So yeah, there is deviation from the "plan" insofar as men like Bacon envisioned the city. But not as great as is being extrapolated.

[phillyaggie]

hate to harp on this, but I say it as I see it: one Commie block begets another. The awkward 3-tower design is pretty charmless and what riles me even more is it is done so just to please the folks a block south of there who are pretty much inconsolable as far as them wanting village-style open spaces all around them, nevermind that they chose to live in the CBD of a major American city.

A closer look at the building design, with several close-up/blown pics:

New highrise at 19th & Arch | philadelphiaheights

the write-up is quite positive and hopeful for that part of Center City... he brings up a good point about the soon-to-be-expected of the nearby Academy of Natural Sciences. If the ACC gets built with its hotel and potentially a glitzy shopping and multiplex theater, that area just south of Logan Square will really be hopping. Tack on the hotel development plans for the family court building north of Logan Sq, and you have more action and a gathering density around Logan Square, which, you'll suddenly find more people using.

Of course, many current residents of that area seem to hate density. where will they park?? oh, the shadows!!

[eldondre]

a plaza on 19th is completely unnecessary. i suppose its a requirement because the city is to cheap to pay for parks

[bryson662001]

Since residents on the south side of the new buiding on lower floors will be looking into the Kennedy House garage, where is the advantage of having the new garage below ground? I am guessing that adds to the cost? The new building could have their garage in the back on cuthbert St, above ground and across from Kennedy house garage and then it would be garage looking into garage. I wouldn't want to rent an expensive apartment with a view like that. Just a thought

[Scoats]

a plaza on 19th is completely unnecessary. i suppose its a requirement because the city is to cheap to pay for parks

They will be creating some serious denisty there, which is a great thing; it's what CBDs are all about. The people who live and work in that complex I'm sure will be glad to have a little outdoor space.

[BenDee]

The people who live and work in that complex I'm sure will be glad to have a little outdoor space.

Yeah, especially given that there are no public squares 2 blocks to the north, 3 blocks to the East, 3 Blocks to the South, and a riverfront five blocks West.

[Bleeper]

Since residents on the south side of the new buiding on lower floors will be looking into the Kennedy House garage, where is the advantage of having the new garage below ground? I am guessing that adds to the cost? The new building could have their garage in the back on cuthbert St, above ground and across from Kennedy house garage and then it would be garage looking into garage. I wouldn't want to rent an expensive apartment with a view like that. Just a thought

I would not want to live at that specific location. There really are no redeeming qualities about it from a residential aspect.

Philaldephia has somewhat of an uphill climb in comparison to its peers to entice people that it has the " It Factor". The place you need to be.

Chicago has the Lake Front,SF has the Bay,Mts,Pacific Ocean. Manhattan has Central Park. Iconic features that automatically draw you to a city.

Eh 19th + Arch? Not so much.

Philly had the right idea with the Squares/Parks( Rittenhouse Washington etc) Center City could use about 5 more of them.


One other thing is that Philly can't afford to be spreading its assets around too much.

Waterfront Square? Why? What was that all about? That area wasnt ready for development and it shows. The project on the Delaware pretty much flopped. Those 5 towers would have done wonders at 23rd + Arch along the Schuylkill.

Again the baseball ball park and Wachovia Wells Fargo arena should have been located in Center City where they could have added to the synergy of downtown. Leading to more investment and vibrancy.

And of course Northern Liberties happened 25 years premature.Make the core(Center City) as strong as possible then worry about tackling Northern Liberties,Fistown,Navy Yard.

[Bleeper]

Whats with the fascination in Philadlephia with these outdated stubby latitudinous Commie Boxes?

How about building some tall slender towers that are architecurally and visually appealing.

[eldondre]

They will be creating some serious denisty there, which is a great thing; it's what CBDs are all about. The people who live and work in that complex I'm sure will be glad to have a little outdoor space.

eh...most of these spaces are dead zones except for lunch. i think its a nice theory but in reality the city would be better with solid blocks of activity and putting more money into the actual park system which is supposed to offer public space. these rules do nothing more than increase cost of building and zap vitality. the city cant even be bothered to fund rittenhouse sq properly. why not offer these builders an option to donate to freinds of rittenhouse or logan sq, etc as a way to offset the need for open space on their given plot of land? it just seems the zoning requirements are written by reluctant city dwellers.

[billy ross]

Since residents on the south side of the new buiding on lower floors will be looking into the Kennedy House garage, where is the advantage of having the new garage below ground? I am guessing that adds to the cost? The new building could have their garage in the back on cuthbert St, above ground and across from Kennedy house garage and then it would be garage looking into garage. I wouldn't want to rent an expensive apartment with a view like that. Just a thought

Your thinking assumes that the Kennedy House will remain as-is. I would call that faulty logic.

[billy ross]

I would not want to live at that specific location. There really are no redeeming qualities about it from a residential aspect.

Philaldephia has somewhat of an uphill climb in comparison to its peers to entice people that it has the " It Factor". The place you need to be.

Chicago has the Lake Front,SF has the Bay,Mts,Pacific Ocean. Manhattan has Central Park. Iconic features that automatically draw you to a city.

Eh 19th + Arch? Not so much.

Philly had the right idea with the Squares/Parks( Rittenhouse Washington etc) Center City could use about 5 more of them.


One other thing is that Philly can't afford to be spreading its assets around too much.

Waterfront Square? Why? What was that all about? That area wasnt ready for development and it shows. The project on the Delaware pretty much flopped. Those 5 towers would have done wonders at 23rd + Arch along the Schuylkill.

Again the baseball ball park and Wachovia Wells Fargo arena should have been located in Center City where they could have added to the synergy of downtown. Leading to more investment and vibrancy.

And of course Northern Liberties happened 25 years premature.Make the core(Center City) as strong as possible then worry about tackling Northern Liberties,Fistown,Navy Yard.

The cool, happening parts of Manhattan aren't on Central Park. I don't think that you understand how cities really work. The view isn't the end all and be all.

[billy ross]

eh...most of these spaces are dead zones except for lunch. i think its a nice theory but in reality the city would be better with solid blocks of activity and putting more money into the actual park system which is supposed to offer public space. these rules do nothing more than increase cost of building and zap vitality. the city cant even be bothered to fund rittenhouse sq properly. why not offer these builders an option to donate to freinds of rittenhouse or logan sq, etc as a way to offset the need for open space on their given plot of land? it just seems the zoning requirements are written by reluctant city dwellers.

You can't have 100% lot coverage, not even in the most densely populated part of the city. There's got to be some open space, and hopefully public, concentrated, and useful, as opposed to just a buffer around the edges of the property. Too often these are raised up so that people don't want to use them. If they were at grade they'd be much more useful.

Think of these requirements as something like a requirement that a house have a backyard. Otherwise rowhouses would but up against each other and they'd be windowless caves. However, when dealing with a Center City highrise, the yards should be public, not isolated dead spots that end up being trash repositories.

[phillyaggie]

I think Bleeper would really enjoy a city like Dallas... the view of Dallas' downtown and the newly built-up uptown, from the Belmont Hotel rooftop a few miles away... it looks spectacular. Just check these pics out:

SkyscraperPage Forum - View Single Post - Dallas, Fort Worth lighting Downtowns for Superbowl

Then you actually go there, and you see how spread out and un-urban the place feels. And a lot of people feel let down. But hey, it's a spectacular looking place with all the lit skyscrapers...and with so many new mid- and high-rises in Uptown area the skyline feels seamlessly big and tall... more so than it actually is in reality.

[phillyaggie]

You can't have 100% lot coverage, not even in the most densely populated part of the city. There's got to be some open space, and hopefully public, concentrated, and useful, as opposed to just a buffer around the edges of the property. Too often these are raised up so that people don't want to use them. If they were at grade they'd be much more useful.

Think of these requirements as something like a requirement that a house have a backyard. Otherwise rowhouses would but up against each other and they'd be windowless caves. However, when dealing with a Center City highrise, the yards should be public, not isolated dead spots that end up being trash repositories.

some of the best buildings in Center City are the ones along S. Broad, and also Wanamakers and the Curtis... Wanamaker and Curtis are great examples of full-sacle, block-sized buildings. And they work just fine.

[billy ross]

some of the best buildings in Center City are the ones along S. Broad, and also Wanamakers and the Curtis... Wanamaker and Curtis are great examples of full-sacle, block-sized buildings. And they work just fine.

If a building fronts on open space the need for it to have its own open space becomes lessened. In addition, you can get away with some hulking buildings here and there. However, at some point you really do need to have windows which receive sunlight and space at the ground level too

[Gladys]

The cool, happening parts of Manhattan aren't on Central Park. I don't think that you understand how cities really work. The view isn't the end all and be all.

However the hottest real estate market in Manhattan is the Upperwest side. Not soho.

[eldondre]

some of the best buildings in Center City are the ones along S. Broad, and also Wanamakers and the Curtis... Wanamaker and Curtis are great examples of full-sacle, block-sized buildings. And they work just fine.

bingo. i also think billys idea that we need plazas everywhere and theyd only be used if they were atgrade to be somewhat fanciful. some of the best parts of the city dont have public plazas. how did symphony house get around these parochial requirements?

[Scoats]

Yeah, especially given that there are no public squares 2 blocks to the north, 3 blocks to the East, 3 Blocks to the South, and a riverfront five blocks West.

Two blocks is a bit to walk if just want some fresh air.