PHILADELPHIA | One Riverside | 260 FT | 22 FLOORS

[summersm343]

F***ing NIMBYs

A resident of the neighborhood surrounding developer Carl Dranoff’s proposed One Riverside tower, a 21-story apartment complex at 25th and Locust, has appealed the developer’s conditional zoning permit.

The architect, Cecil Baker, says he took pains to design the building so that it would need no zoning relief, a rare feat for projects of that scale in Philadelphia. But according to L&I records, the appeal from resident Ted Reed claims that the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) bonus was overestimated.

Per the zoning code, developers can receive height, mass, and density bonuses for including certain elements in their designs.

In this case, the developer claimed a square-footage bonus for putting the building’s parking facilities underground. The parking garage is partially above-ground, however, and the appellant is arguing, according to the L&I record, “A bonus for [FAR] is not properly granted because the proposed parking is not sufficiently ‘underground.’”

http://planphilly.com/articles/2013/...-fitler-square

[MSFHQ]

I'd love for someone to post the text of the complaint. Should be public knowledge.


This will get squashed quickly. I will never understand people like this. Oh well.

[BuildItBigger]

Is this the same site that was suppose to have Mandeville Place?
I wonder with the boom of the Riverwalk and Center City Living, will they revisit those 07-08 plans.......

[summersm343]

Originally Posted by BuildItBigger

Is this the same site that was suppose to have Mandeville Place?
I wonder with the boom of the Riverwalk and Center City Living, will they revisit those 07-08 plans.......

No. Different sites.

[summersm343]

Article about why the parking garage complaint will get squashed

http://planphilly.com/articles/2013/...as-below-grade

[summersm343]

Zoning hearing pushed back one month

http://planphilly.com/articles/2013/...ng-rescheduled

[MSFHQ]

They made a cute little website. I can almost see their issue, but this is only being brought to light by a few obstructionist neighbors. Besides, even if their interpretation that this isn't below grade is upheld it will only take off 2 stories of the building. How that is going to make a difference is beyond me.

If this road block is upheld I hope Dranoff simply puts it fully below ground to shut them up and builds it at the intended height.

Blows my mind when people live in an urban environment and then complain about buildings being built. Go live in the suburbs.

Anyone have a way that we could counter their email campaign? I'd happily through my two cents in.

[Londonee]

This building is pretty ugly guys...and it's in a fairly prominent location. I wish we had a design commission that wouldn't tolerate this stuff--in Chicago, a comparably visible/important proposal would be laughed out of the room.

[MikeNigh]

If it's affordable I think they did a pretty great job. I'd rather philly find a better middle between affordable and aesthetic.

Plus it's all glass.. can't be too bad. Pretty good for philly standards.

[Jelly Roll]

Originally Posted by Londonee

This building is pretty ugly guys...and it's in a fairly prominent location. I wish we had a design commission that wouldn't tolerate this stuff--in Chicago, a comparably visible/important proposal would be laughed out of the room.

I am hoping that it looks better in person then in the rendering.

[alasi]

It's to bad the Mandeville was never built. It would have lessened the impact of this on the skyline.

[summersm343]

Zoning permits on site

[summersm343]

Article on this. Could be a few more weeks before the ZBA makes a decision

http://planphilly.com/articles/2013/...-dranoff-tower

[Lincolndrive]

Originally Posted by summersm343

Article on this. Could be a few more weeks before the ZBA makes a decision

http://planphilly.com/articles/2013/...-dranoff-tower

Great article that really explains the issues.

I went to the meeting yesterday and I'm a fan of this project and almost always more density but do not think they should be granted the bonus in this situation. Boni's point at the end was an excellent one. We want to promote the best possible waterfront development going forward and certainly should not be giving bonus's for parking that is above street level just because its in a flood plain (Philly actually has a lot of waterfront).

This particular street needs special attention with the dog park and the important main entrance to Schuylkill Banks. Staring at a huge parking wall the length of one city block while you walk down 25th street is not ideal, even if they pretty it up. And they have enough parking below grade to move forward without the ground level parking. I'm sure Dranoff wants this parking since it's worth a lot of money but we will all pay the price for it. Hate to be a NIMBY on this one (not that I live in fitler square) but I agree with the NIMBY's and think they are making the right call. Still hope the project moves forward, just without the ground level parking garage.

[SJPhillyBoy]

So this is definitely going to happen?



Rendering of One Riverside, Dranoff’s latest. Cecil Baker+Partners.
via phillymag.com



Rendering of One Riverside, Dranoff’s latest. Cecil Baker+Partners.
via phillymag.com

[Kidphilly]

Nice renders - wonder if this will take a back seat to SLS - seems like a high end arms race so-to-speak. This might be tabled a bit to focus on Dranoff's other property on Broad me thinks esp with 500 Walnut, the Capital Grille Building redo, and Toll speculation on 1900 Walnut

Think something will happen here though - nice location to market to UCity developments and the new Chop S Street location. Just may be slowed

[jakel]

The design has changed somewhat, less curb cuts, no aboveground parking, and one story added to the building http://www.philly.com/philly/home/20...high-rise.html

[apetrella802]

On Inga in general:

on Inga, ""Culture Grrl"(www.culturegrrl.com) gave her accolades for the Pulitzer prize. Remember when she wrote that the Barnes cut itself off from the Parkway? She was wrong on many accounts with this statement. If you remember the architects themselves said they wanted to present a somewhat monumental façade facing the Parkway but did not want people to enter directly off the Parkway. Instead they wanted people to move off the Parkway and through a carefully landscaped space that more and more removed them from the noise and activity of the street and create a contemplative mood before they enter the museum. How did she miss this since it was announced by the architects in the press and interviews? And she should have seen and understood their purpose here even if she never heard of their intent to do this. This design element that allowed the new space to retain something of the quiet contemplative feeling of the old Barnes' grounds was one of a handful of major issues with the design of the Barnes. Misunderstanding this is a major fault. It's this sort of thing that places her in the second tier of architectural critics.

Of course I'm glad she won the award for Philadelphia's sake.

[Insoluble]

This new design looks like a win for everyone. I was one of those who originally bemoaned the neighbor complaints as a classic case of NIMBYism, but it looks like both sides really worked together to improve the overall design here.

RE: Inga and the Barnes, I don't recall what she originally said, but if she complained that the new Barnes design does not connect well with the parkway she's not wrong. Who cares what the architects intent was? If they didn't want people to enter directly from the parkway in a misguided attempt to preserve the feel of the original it still makes for a lousy interaction with the urban environment. I'm sorry, but the overall connectivity of the city's urban fabric is way more important than the architects' "artistic vision" or preserving the feel of the original context of the building. Anyway, this is off topic for the thread.

[summersm343]

Looks like this is now 22 floors and 260 feet