PHILADELPHIA | Schuylkill Yards Future Phases | 1,095 - 375 FT | 70 - 28 FLOORS

[Gonzo the Great]

Originally Posted by 1487

No. Nothing is close to finalized at this point. The renders are basically representations of future product. I would not presume what gets built will look anything like what we've seen so far.

Yikes ....

[Nova08]

Originally Posted by Gonzo the Great

Yikes ....

There's something like 700k+ sq of office space just with this project. I don't think the buildings with a commercial component will get off the ground until a few businesses commit to a considerable lease. Something like a Spark taking ~150k sq. Which we haven't heard much about their "move" recently.

There is also a sizeable residential component. I think they will want to see how Philadelphia truly absorbs all of the residential space built over the past 3-5 years and within the next 2-4 years.

[City Wide]

Originally Posted by Nova08

There's something like 700k+ sq of office space just with this project. I don't think the buildings with a commercial component will get off the ground until a few businesses commit to a considerable lease. Something like a Spark taking ~150k sq. Which we haven't heard much about their "move" recently.

There is also a sizeable residential component. I think they will want to see how Philadelphia truly absorbs all of the residential space built over the past 3-5 years and within the next 2-4 years.

My take on all this is, as you speculated, there won't be any new construction unless there is very significant lease commitments in hand. I'm alittle surprised by that since space is said to be tight and very much in demand in the UC area. But I also assume that simple office space, such as FMC, is a different animal and easier to market then labs and research type space.

If this is in fact true then design wouldn't even start until the space is somewhat spoken for. Which probably means that any new construction is a year or more away. I hope I'm wrong-----

I also wonder how the development of this area fits in with, or maybe even competes with the fairly new and very ambitious plans that the Science Center has for the UC High School site. Since Drexel is suppose to be one of the big players behind the SC it seems like they might be fighting themselves to find new tenants.

In terms of apartments----when one considers the number of commuters via train to points north and south, I've often wondered if an apartment building very close to the station wouldn't have a built in base of people who would be interested just based on the location

[Boku]

This says work on the park and the Bulletin building could start in "late summer."

http://www.philly.com/philly/busines...-20170627.html

[summersm343]

Schuylkill Yards is the latest Philly project with workforce-diversity aims

Read more here:
http://www.philly.com/philly/busines...-20170627.html

[summersm343]

Schuylkill Yards developer commits $5M to West Philly neighborhood initiative

Read more here:
https://philly.curbed.com/2017/6/27/...od-development

[jsbrook]

Originally Posted by summersm343

Schuylkill Yards is the latest Philly project with workforce-diversity aims

Read more here:
http://www.philly.com/philly/busines...-20170627.html

.1% penalty for failing to satisfy diversity standards is a complete joke. How about a 2% penalty? I do think the contractors should be able to avoid a larger penalty, that should be implemented, by making a showing that they attempted to meet the standards and qualified, minority applicants did not exist. And if that's the case, it demonstrates a failing on the part of the city and community groups with respect to job training and programs to facilitate skilled labor.

[summersm343]

Community leaders hopeful as Brandywine and Penn Medicine commit to local and minority hiring for upcoming projects

Read more here:
http://planphilly.com/articles/2017/...oming-projects

[eixample]

Originally Posted by jsbrook

I do think the contractors should be able to avoid a larger penalty, that should be implemented, by making a showing that they attempted to meet the standards and qualified, minority applicants did not exist. And if that's the case, it demonstrates a failing on the part of the city and community groups with respect to job training and programs to facilitate skilled labor.

I agree the penalty is too small but I find it interesting that you would pin the blame on the city and community groups for failing to find qualified minority groups and not the building trade unions (who have been excluding minority groups for centuries). It's not like the city and community groups are doing a lot for the white kids with family connections who find their way into the union system.

[jsbrook]

Originally Posted by eixample

I agree the penalty is too small but I find it interesting that you would pin the blame on the city and community groups for failing to find qualified minority groups and not the building trade unions (who have been excluding minority groups for centuries). It's not like the city and community groups are doing a lot for the white kids with family connections who find their way into the union system.

I didn't pin the blame on the city and community groups. I said IF there aren't qualified diversity applicants, that's something the city and community groups should work to fix. It doesn't just apply to minorities exclusively, though. We need to do more to facilitate skilled trades and job training. Take a page out of Germany's book. Not everyone is meant to go to University. It shouldn't be the only path to financial success or socially acceptable choice, but it's viewed that way in many circles. Here, Brandywine has actually pledged some of this money for job training and hiring of local residents, which is nice to see. This is discussed in Summers other link and other articles.

[Elevator1]

Originally Posted by eixample

I agree the penalty is too small but I find it interesting that you would pin the blame on the city and community groups for failing to find qualified minority groups and not the building trade unions (who have been excluding minority groups for centuries). It's not like the city and community groups are doing a lot for the white kids with family connections who find their way into the union system.

Back in the day when I was a trade contractor, when there were public funded projects that absolutely required MBE, WBE participation to a certain percentage, and those entities did not exist in real life, individuals would form companies that met MBE, WBE requirements and they would act as brokers, passing your purchase orders on to vendors (for a fee), thus they were the contracting entities and you met your requirements. Total fraud, but it satisfied the bureaucrats where reason could not prevail. Hopefully this training and real hiring will signal a better result.

[skyscraper]

Originally Posted by Elevator1

Back in the day when I was a trade contractor, when there were public funded projects that absolutely required MBE, WBE participation to a certain percentage, and those entities did not exist in real life, individuals would form companies that met MBE, WBE requirements and they would act as brokers, passing your purchase orders on to vendors (for a fee), thus they were the contracting entities and you met your requirements. Total fraud, but it satisfied the bureaucrats where reason could not prevail. Hopefully this training and real hiring will signal a better result.

I don't know that I would call it fraud, I would say it's dirty, I would say it's obeying the letter but not the spirit of the law, and it illustrates that you can't legislate diversity.

[Knight Hospitaller]

I wouldn't even call it "dirty." If there are no qualified entities, you have to make one up. It's a game that assuages political forces but bears little relation to reality. It's not like you can hand a hammer to any guy/gal on the street that meets a certain physical description and get the result that you want. I'm with MLK. Wouldn't it be nice if we simply judged contractors and workers by the quality and price of their work?

[Elevator1]

Originally Posted by Knight Hospitaller

I wouldn't even call it "dirty." If there are no qualified entities, you have to make one up. It's a game that assuages political forces but bears little relation to reality. It's not like you can hand a hammer to any guy/gal on the street that meets a certain physical description and get the result that you want. I'm with MLK. Wouldn't it be nice if we simply judged contractors and workers by the quality and price of their work?

You are 100% correct. The old affirmative action requirements were not really in anyone's best interest. I used a poor choice of words with Fraud. Sham is more like it. It would be nice if the best contractor for that project got the work regardless of other influences and requirements. Sorry we are getting way off Schuylkill Yards here. I guess it is a slow news day.

[Boku]

Lol, y'all are so ignorant, I can't even.

[Knight Hospitaller]

I suppose you "can't even" if your only response to whomever is "ignorant." At least I know enough Latin to know "ad hominem" argumentation when I see it.

[1487]

Originally Posted by Elevator1

Back in the day when I was a trade contractor, when there were public funded projects that absolutely required MBE, WBE participation to a certain percentage, and those entities did not exist in real life, individuals would form companies that met MBE, WBE requirements and they would act as brokers, passing your purchase orders on to vendors (for a fee), thus they were the contracting entities and you met your requirements. Total fraud, but it satisfied the bureaucrats where reason could not prevail. Hopefully this training and real hiring will signal a better result.

You are talking about 2 different things. MBE and WBE is an ownership thing, not a workforce diversity thing. Gov contracts have ranges for participation in which contractors are supposed to try to allocate a certain % to minority firms. In many cases there aren't a ton that provide services or materials that pertain to particular types of work.

Workforce diversity is a different issue that is largely related to the make-up of the trades in the area. Contractors do not hire labor directly if they are union. So the workers they get are reflective of what the union membership looks like.

[1487]

Originally Posted by Knight Hospitaller

I wouldn't even call it "dirty." If there are no qualified entities, you have to make one up. It's a game that assuages political forces but bears little relation to reality. It's not like you can hand a hammer to any guy/gal on the street that meets a certain physical description and get the result that you want. I'm with MLK. Wouldn't it be nice if we simply judged contractors and workers by the quality and price of their work?

first of all the idea that "non minority" contractors do good work for the government on a regular basis is a joke. Poor contractors come in all colors and many of the larger firms that gets lots of local gov work don't get it because they are good.

The rules exist for a reason, even though they are flawed. Contractors develop long time relationships with vendors and subs over the years. When the contractor fits into one group generally the firms he buys and hires from fall into the same group- it may not even all be based on low pricing- it just familiarity and habit. The ranges force these contractors to engage minority or female owned firms so that some of this public money gets into their pockets. Has nothing to do with "quality"- most public work is low bid so you aren't choosing a contractor based on quality, reliability, competence, etc.

[Philly-Drew]

Originally Posted by jsbrook

.1% penalty for failing to satisfy diversity standards is a complete joke. How about a 2% penalty? I do think the contractors should be able to avoid a larger penalty, that should be implemented, by making a showing that they attempted to meet the standards and qualified, minority applicants did not exist. And if that's the case, it demonstrates a failing on the part of the city and community groups with respect to job training and programs to facilitate skilled labor.

How about some of the big players provide on the job training? It would allow people to learn good skillsets, make connections, and build their resume at the same time.

This seems so simple.

[El Duderino]

i think the main point here is to try to make opportunities more plentiful for those who historically have had fewer. quoting mlk assumes a whole bunch of equality that the system/free market/geography/whatever hasn't quite nailed down; i'm sure he wouldn't be celebrating the demographic numbers of the area this is meant to help.