PHILADELPHIA | THE LAUREL @ 1911 Walnut | 604 FT | 48 FLOORS

[jjv007]

Originally Posted by Justin7

First, I generally agree with your view of community groups, but I am not sure how it's relevant. I strongly support height and density.

I think I've made my reasons for opposition to this project clear, but I will restate that

a) First and foremost I don't think historically designated buildings should be demolished. This is obviously not a hardship case and treating it as one would be a mistake. The city would be poorer if it let SLC destroy these buildings.

b) Under an circumstances, but for a driveway? That is an urban disaster better suited for, yup, Dallas. Massive curb cuts are not good urban design.

c) Lowrise development on Sansom. This is a separate lot also well suited for a high density building. That's not what we're getting.

d) Spanning Moravian St. There may be circumstances where allowing to a private company to essentially take control and build over a city street, but this isn't one of them.

e) SLC's track record. Again, compare the 3601 Market renderings to the actual building. Then look at the rest of their projects that are built in open fields somewhere.

Your last sentence is an obvious straw man setup. Actually, your entire post is nothing but. A project could have a thousand moving parts, 999 great and 1 terrible and still be an awful development.

Despite all of my objections, there are two private lots here that SLC controls (not including the protected buildings) and they have ever right to build on them. I certainly would not make an argument to the contrary. What they do not have a right to do is tear down protected buildings and take over a city street.

So again: Give up trying to demolish protected buildings, give up trying to connect to two lots spanning a city street. Build the tower on Walnut as the plan calls for an trash the rest. This would be a win for Philadelphia. SLC would still make a ton of money. Everyone wins.

I actually think these are very sensible points and agree with a lot of what you said. My only problem is that many members of the community groups can't think as rationally as you. They'll want the preservation you mentioned but unlike you they won't really want the development in any form either. So unfortunately it's gonna be a struggle to come to a compromise. Perhaps SLC is using their planned demolition of the designated historical buildings as somewhat of a bargaining chip.