The Hole North of Ben Franklin Bridge wants to be filled, but....

**mixiboi** · 05-16-2012, 01:28 PM

"Old City Civic Association Developments Committee Chairman Richard Thom called the architecture “uninspired.” Old City submitted a letter to commissioners outlining other concerns. Among them: OCCA worries the current design looks like a parking garage, hides a significant part of the Ben Franklin Bridge, and doesn't do enough for pedestrians. "

I'm sorry, but hides a significant part of the bridge? These people are great at flinging **** at a wall and see what sticks...

**John Goodman** · 05-16-2012, 01:31 PM

these people just have no lives, it's pathetic

**OffenseTaken** · 05-16-2012, 01:41 PM

Originally Posted by mixiboi

I'm sorry, but hides a significant part of the bridge? These people are great at flinging **** at a wall and see what sticks...

Of course, they don't want the thriving Delaware waterfront to turn into a desolate no-man's land like Williamsburg. You can't see the bridge from every vantage point on every street corner, and that's why no one wants to live there.

**OffenseTaken** · 05-16-2012, 01:58 PM

Originally Posted by CountFunkula

I got creamed on Inga Saffron's facebook page for questioning the naysayers, but I feel like every time something gets proposed in this town - everyone wants to pile on. Not every building in this city has to be a 3 story brick building. And the Colonial Williamsburg vision that some have for the town is resulting in a lot of emptiness. This building is certainly not my favorite piece of architecture ever, but I ask those who complain - what is your vision for the spot - a big brick box? or the Taj Mahal along Columbus? I'd love to see what the naysayers come up with and then I'd love to see if they can make it economically viable. Otherwise, more empty lots and no action.

The bulk of the commenters on her page are complaining about the façade: it's not pretty enough, blah blah blah. It's a draught, you dolts: it's only there to give an idea of the dimensions. If Inga Saffron was a real journalist and a real architecture critic, she would have made this clearer.

I understand the argument that any development isn't necessarily better than nothing, but Jesus, these people are nuts. I hope the builders keep ignoring them.

**3rd&Brown** · 05-23-2012, 12:05 AM

Originally Posted by OffenseTaken

The bulk of the commenters on her page are complaining about the façade: it's not pretty enough, blah blah blah. It's a draught, you dolts: it's only there to give an idea of the dimensions. If Inga Saffron was a real journalist and a real architecture critic, she would have made this clearer.

I understand the argument that any development isn't necessarily better than nothing, but Jesus, these people are nuts. I hope the builders keep ignoring them.

To be fair, renders usually are drawn up to show best-case. They almost always look better on a paper than the buildings do in real life. So....if that's the case here, well, it does give me some pause.

**desolate** · 05-23-2012, 12:14 AM

Originally Posted by thoth

"Schiavo responded that he believes the proposal is “more dense” than what the Master Plan envisions in that area.

“That's what happens when you have a Master Plan, but you don't yet have an overlay or remapping,” noted CDAG Chairman Matt Ruben, who provided information about the property he received from Deputy Mayor for Development and Planning Commission Chairman Alan Greenberger."

Oh my god what is wrong with these people? Yeah we better be careful the giant desolate runway of Delaware Ave, with six current residents and a dave and busters, doesn't get too dense.

CITY. PHILADELPHIA IS A CITY YOU ****S

I've been crying for years that people like Ruben, Shaivo, and Paul Boni are the real enemies here.

Self righeos *******s who joined neighborhood groups years ago to fight projects and have basically made thier own groups up and then got them appointed to review everything.

Ruben pretty much hated casinos so much he was able to make himself chair of CDAG..

Which is now saing they want to hand desing every single parcel or they would rather have NOTHING.

Everyone thought I was a nut when I said that Praxis Waterfront Meetings and all this planning propoganda would end up being a bunch if NIMBY *******s demanding input paint colors. It has become this.

and Society Hill towers are the least "street friendly" things in this city. It's for rich people to be above the street and it feels that way when you go there and feel cut off.

**desolate** · 05-23-2012, 12:17 AM

Here's back when Matt Ruben was just a simple NIMBY idiot.

Now he's planning the waterfront for us!

Matt Ruben to planners: we will all be watching

He's whining in this video about stuff the demands of developers!

Full blown hypocrite!

and he's like in charge! Unelected!

**desolate** · 05-23-2012, 12:25 AM

Originally Posted by 3rd&Brown

To be fair, renders usually are drawn up to show best-case. They almost always look better on a paper than the buildings do in real life. So....if that's the case here, well, it does give me some pause.

Well here is waht it looks like now.

N Water St and N Columbus Blvd - Google Maps

Much like the Newmarket site in Old City, the Pincas site, the Casino sites.. and all the other sites... I'd rather just have the buildings, jobs, taxes.

Instead of just open lots.

BTW... whenis that supermarket going to open in the Piazza?

**supersupper** · 05-23-2012, 07:30 AM

It's been open for a while now. Another rant avenue at a dead end street.

**thoth** · 05-23-2012, 08:01 AM

Originally Posted by desolate

BTW... whenis that supermarket going to open in the Piazza?

I mean, I know you have been in your cryo-sleep tube for many moons now, but that **** opened a while ago. It's a Superfresh, you take an elevator up from street level.

I have my beefs with these characters from time to time, but I will say that the stewardship of NoLibs development has led to a nicer (aesthetically) overall neighborhood, albeit driving up building costs and slowing the overall pace of development. The end result seems favorable to the Gold Rush boomtown style of planning in Grad Hospital. Sometimes after walking through there I have nightmares of being smothered by stuccoed bay windows.

**OffenseTaken** · 08-10-2012, 04:07 PM

Changing Skyline: It's up to Historical Commission to reject unimaginative Columbus Blvd. apartment building

I think Saffron makes a convincing case for once. In a city that has a unique gift for putting the kibosh on good projects, there's an appeal in the argument that getting something built is always better than dicking around. But she explains pretty compellingly why this can be myopic.

**eldondre** · 08-10-2012, 04:19 PM

Originally Posted by OffenseTaken

Changing Skyline: It's up to Historical Commission to reject unimaginative Columbus Blvd. apartment building

I think Saffron makes a convincing case for once. In a city that has a unique gift for putting the kibosh on good projects, there's an appeal in the argument that getting something built is always better than dicking around. But she explains pretty compellingly why this can be myopic.

this project does seem pretty meh

**supersupper** · 08-10-2012, 08:43 PM

It all just comes down to money. Cracks me up when people whine on and on about how nimby's stopped a project when it was money that stopped the project ( and the developer blames Nimby's to save face ie 2nd and race, 4th and race, 3rd and arch, etc... ).

Today that location isn't very inspiring, so you are not going to find money that will support a good architect with an inspiring plan. People underestimate how few truly gifted architects are out there. Tons of mediocre architects, and a few who know how to make money despite that ( BLT for example ). It never ceases to amaze me how those posters on the Skyscraper Forum / philadelphia so easily discard taste to just to bow down to anything taller than a mole-hill.

This building highlights Philadelphia's craving for caviar on a pauper's budget. ( Except Symphony House, which was truly an abomination of poor taste without any excuse).

Sitting next to the BFB, this and the Comfort Inn highlights the fact that Philadelphia was in it's hey-day in the later 1800's.

**mixiboi** · 08-10-2012, 08:51 PM

Originally Posted by supersupper

Sitting next to the BFB, this and the Comfort Inn highlights the fact that Philadelphia was in it's hey-day in the later 1800's.

Whoa, whoa, whoa...that is going a bit far.....

The BFB wasn't even around then..lol

**supersupper** · 08-10-2012, 09:02 PM

Well, Philly's heyday was the late 1800's which allowed it to dream of the bridge, and to afford the bridge. It was all downhill from there. Back then it took a long time to realize anything of significance ( a fact lost on those who decry "Nimbys" trying to negotiate with developers to realize a good all-round plan).

You can go here for a more complete understanding.

http://www.phillyroads.com/crossings/benjamin-franklin/

**BarryG** · 08-10-2012, 09:22 PM

Originally Posted by supersupper

Well, Philly's heyday was the late 1800's which allowed it to dream of the bridge, and to afford the bridge. It was all downhill from there. Back then it took a long time to realize anything of significance ( a fact lost on those who decry "Nimbys" trying to negotiate with developers to realize a good all-round plan).

You can go here for a more complete understanding.

Benjamin Franklin Bridge (I-676 and US 30)

Seems a bit tyrannical that the bridge was paid for by government monies, no?

**OffenseTaken** · 08-11-2012, 03:26 AM

These cosmetic arguments are silly. First of all, we've all been to neighborhoods that function really well even though their architecture is butt ugly. Secondly, fashions change: neighborhood groups might love the renderings for a façade that will be as ugly in twelve years as translucent landline phones are now. A new paint job does magical things. Those issues really are skin-deep.

I'm much more interested in the arguments about function. What happens on the ground floor has much more bearing on the neighborhood than a supposedly "unimaginative" exterior. Concerns that the building doesn't reflect the waterfront master plan, which designates Columbus as a busy commercial corridor, are perfectly reasonable. (I don't understand it when someone views the Delaware waterfront with optimism, but I think it's sweet when people do.) We should have no patience for people who want to kill this project simply because they'd rather see a pièce de résistance by Koolhaas or something.

**boognish** · 08-11-2012, 11:32 AM

Ah yes, if we could only bring over thousands of desperate immigrants, repeal child labor laws and environmental standards, and make them live 20 to a row home while working 15 hours a day, Philadelphia would once again ascend to the grandeur that was the late 1800's.

**John Goodman** · 08-11-2012, 12:51 PM

Screw the Delaware riverfront plan... A bunch of academics theorizing over bs that will never happen

People with the capital make the plans... Get used to it

**OffenseTaken** · 08-11-2012, 02:41 PM

Originally Posted by John Goodman

Screw the Delaware riverfront plan... A bunch of academics theorizing over bs that will never happen

People with the capital make the plans... Get used to it

Houston sucks.

However, I do understand why the builders weren't interested in ground-floor retail. Nobody's walking down to Columbus to do window-shopping.