PHILADELPHIA | Highrise Development Thread IX

[philly13]

In regards to your article josef (http://www.citylab.com/politics/2014...system/375980/), it's also easier to build a high speed rail network in smaller country with a high population density. England for example is about the size of Illinois, but has 52 million people, 1/6 the population of the US. So while England has a lot of federal tax money to cover a small area for a rail network, the US has a lot of land to cover and not a high population density to justify it nationally. (84 people per square mile vs 679 people per square mile.)

http://mapfight.appspot.com/gb-vs-us/united-kingdom-united-states-size-comparison

[Londonee]

Originally Posted by GarCastle

That makes sense about the elevators though more people would go to the other parts of PCAM since that pavilion only has a few floors, so anyone going to the towers would have to go through the atrium anyway unless their destinations were on those few floors. Which office - the eyeglass center? Or maybe there is one there I've never noticed.

It sounds like we are trying to get out of the Drexel buildings at the least (and/or Drexel wants us to - not sure which), so hopefully they will make the admin building big enough to grow into. Our dept alone is growing 10-20% each year and that will likely increase as we absorb more pockets of staff in other depts that do similar work. Though the standing joke is that by the time the building is ready in 2017, it will no longer be for us anyway. That it would be needed for more clinical folks LOL.

I wouldn't be surprised if they put all the corp depts across the bridge on the other side of the freight line all by ourselves which seems like possibly the last healthcare parcel. Hopefully we'd never be in the South Bend plot.

Cheers,
G.

Hey Gar, is there a practical reason why Penn doesn't just build taller buildings? They run out of space before each building is finished and have to immediately look to build additional facilities to contain the growth. Seems absurd to not build at least one or two towers with an extra 10-20 floors.

Is there something functional with what happens in these buildings that doesn't allow height?

[Kidphilly]

Originally Posted by Londonee

Hey Gar, is there a practical reason why Penn doesn't just build taller buildings? They run out of space before each building is finished and have to immediately look to build additional facilities to contain the growth. Seems absurd to not build at least one or two towers with an extra 10-20 floors.

Is there something functional with what happens in these buildings that doesn't allow height?

I think Penn has a more conservative master plan and campus vision. So taller is not their goal per se

Also they have an endowment out the wazoo and their expansion controls the neighborhood footprint. Drexel doe not have the same luxuary and Ivies are generally towers per se. So have been taller but don't see them going real tall ever really or at least in our lifetimes

[VikingDutchman]

Penn would love to annex as much land as possible... they'd rather BE the neighborhood than be part of one. more short buildings is more conducive to that than fewer tall ones.

One of these days Gutmann's going to suggest building a giant wall around all Penn's buildings, and the city will probably say ok.

[VikingDutchman]

Originally Posted by philly13

In regards to your article josef (http://www.citylab.com/politics/2014...system/375980/), it's also easier to build a high speed rail network in smaller country with a high population density. England for example is about the size of Illinois, but has 52 million people, 1/6 the population of the US. So while England has a lot of federal tax money to cover a small area for a rail network, the US has a lot of land to cover and not a high population density to justify it nationally. (84 people per square mile vs 679 people per square mile.)

http://mapfight.appspot.com/gb-vs-us/united-kingdom-united-states-size-comparison

While true at the national level, there are many regions of the US that are of comparable density to countries that have high speed rail. So this argument can't explain why even the Northeast, which is more dense than many HSR countries, is still only limping towards the possibility. It also doesnt account for the fact that the US is, again, wealthier than most countries with HSR (there are what, four countries wealthier than the US on per capita basis?). We should be able to do BETTER than the UK, for example.

[Philly Fan]

Originally Posted by VikingDutchman

One of these days Gutmann's going to suggest building a giant wall around all Penn's buildings, and the city will probably say ok.

That's actually the OPPOSITE of what Penn and Gutmann want. One of the main goals--if not THE main goal--of the "Penn Connects" program, as the name indicates, is to better connect the Penn campus to Center City and the surrounding University City neighborhood. And that's actually been a driving force and goal at least since Judith Rodin became Penn's President--and current Drexel President John Fry became Penn's Executive Vice President--in the 1990s. And most of Penn's development since that time--including the current Evo and FMC development on land that Penn owns and controls adjacent to its campus--bears witness to that.

[philly13]

Originally Posted by VikingDutchman

While true at the national level, there are many regions of the US that are of comparable density to countries that have high speed rail. So this argument can't explain why even the Northeast, which is more dense than many HSR countries, is still only limping towards the possibility. It also doesnt account for the fact that the US is, again, wealthier than most countries with HSR (there are what, four countries wealthier than the US on per capita basis?). We should be able to do BETTER than the UK, for example.

I definitely agree with you that the US lags in rail travel. I was just making a point that when the UK makes a HSR railway system that crosses the entire country, it is not even 1/10th the amount of rail/infrastructure that would need to span America. And I'm not sure wealth directly plays much of a factor in this though, it is more of the car culture. A lot of Americans travel by car, and states/federal DOT spending reflects that. Governments find it hard to justify spending money on big rail infrastructure projects when a lot of people have never been on a train in their entire life.

[GarCastle]

Originally Posted by Londonee

Hey Gar, is there a practical reason why Penn doesn't just build taller buildings? They run out of space before each building is finished and have to immediately look to build additional facilities to contain the growth. Seems absurd to not build at least one or two towers with an extra 10-20 floors.

Is there something functional with what happens in these buildings that doesn't allow height?

It seems like every VP and AVP I talk to seems to agree that we always run out of room. The "Board" has to approve all of the capital projects, which includes the bosses of the VPs and whatever other mysterious figures actually run things. I've been there over 10 years and have no idea who those people actually are. I'm curious, but I don't think I really want their attention by asking too many questions. I mean there is an easily seen list of 55+ trustees for Penn itself, Amy is one of them, but I have no idea if there is a mini-board for Penn Medicine. I would think big expenditures would be the trustees of the university itself. I've always wondered how one gets to be in that little club and what they really do. :^)

I know Penn never wants to over-extend itself and maybe that is why they do not build big. They have a piece of the Science Center so they can always fall back on leasing that space, but they would never want to be stuck with space and then hit hard times. I do believe they love to hop in at the most opportune time to lease space cheap like they keep doing at Centre Square. They probably also got a great deal on that 100k sf in FMC since they hopped on board early.

I'm also wondering when Jefferson and Abington health systems "merge", who makes that decision and who is getting cash in their pocket for agreeing to it? Beats me LOL.

Cheers,
G.

[Philly Fan]

Originally Posted by GarCastle

I mean there is an easily seen list of 55+ trustees for Penn itself, Amy is one of them, but I have no idea if there is a mini-board for Penn Medicine. I would think big expenditures would be the trustees of the university itself. I've always wondered how one gets to be in that little club and what they really do. :^)

That's easy enough to find out, with a little reading. There's actually a lot of interesting stuff in these minutes:

http://www.archives.upenn.edu/primdocs/upa/upa1_1/2010to19/tr2010to2019.html

Originally Posted by GarCastle

They probably also got a great deal on that 100k sf in FMC since they hopped on board early.

They did a helluva lot more than just hop on board early. They own the ground on which it's being built, and ultimately control what's built there and how it's used. As you're probably aware, Penn owns A LOT of land in University City that's not technically part of the campus proper, and thereby controls and influences much of what happens in the surrounding neighborhood--and has gotten some significant national media coverage for that:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/08/AR2006010801164.html

http://www.boston.com/news/education/higher/articles/2009/05/03/ivys_growth_transforms_a_city/

[VikingDutchman]

Originally Posted by philly13

And I'm not sure wealth directly plays much of a factor in this though, it is more of the car culture. A lot of Americans travel by car, and states/federal DOT spending reflects that. Governments find it hard to justify spending money on big rail infrastructure projects when a lot of people have never been on a train in their entire life.

I would argue that infrastructure spending is the ROOT of that culture... We tend to forget what a massive investment was required to create our car-based society. Not just in financial resources but in law changes to criminalize non-car uses for the street. Not to mention federally incentivized suburbanization, red lining, etc..... This was a massive effort. And these chooces have led to particular behavioral patterns. Most Americans are auto-dependent because they have no choices, or heavily biased ones. Other countries that didn't do this don't have different "cultures" they simply have different adaptive behaviors resultant from different historical public policy choices.

[VikingDutchman]

Originally Posted by Philly Fan

That's actually the OPPOSITE of what Penn and Gutmann want. One of the main goals--if not THE main goal--of the "Penn Connects" program, as the name indicates, is to better connect the Penn campus to Center City and the surrounding University City neighborhood. And that's actually been a driving force and goal at least since Judith Rodin became Penn's President--and current Drexel President John Fry became Penn's Executive Vice President--in the 1990s. And most of Penn's development since that time--including the current Evo and FMC development on land that Penn owns and controls adjacent to its campus--bears witness to that.

I guess I was a little harsh... Penn's asked me for money twice this week, which tends to sour my feelings on them

What I mean to say is that Penn is very much committed to crafting the neighborhood in its own image (did they ever manage to bully that McDonalds away from 40th street btw? I havent been out there in awhile). They're integrating yes, but only in so far as they can make sure the integrated neighborhood is theirs, so to speak

[Flyers2001]

Originally Posted by VikingDutchman

I guess I was a little harsh... Penn's asked me for money twice this week, which tends to sour my feelings on them

What I mean to say is that Penn is very much committed to crafting the neighborhood in its own image (did they ever manage to bully that McDonalds away from 40th street btw? I havent been out there in awhile). They're integrating yes, but only in so far as they can make sure the integrated neighborhood is theirs, so to speak

They are asking you for money to pay my OT and tuition. Give a little!

[VikingDutchman]

Originally Posted by Flyers2001

They are asking you for money to pay my OT and tuition. Give a little!

You really think that money goes to the students? Penn could always stop raising its tuition every year for largely spurious reasons, and then the students wouldnt need so much aid!

All that alumni cash just goes to fulfilling Gutmann's Scooge McDuck fantasies

Actually this covers pretty clearly why I don't give Penn money:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pj9XpUrrFIw#t=11

And I'm not talking about the students, I'm talking about the administration

[Philly Fan]

Originally Posted by VikingDutchman

You really think that money goes to the students? Penn could always stop raising its tuition every year for largely spurious reasons, and then the students wouldnt need so much aid!

All that alumni cash just goes to fulfilling Gutmann's Scooge McDuck fantasies

Actually this covers pretty clearly why I don't give Penn money:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pj9XpUrrFIw#t=11

And I'm not talking about the students, I'm talking about the administration

That's OK. I give Penn money, so at least someone from this forum does.

Drink a Highball!

[Flyers2001]

Originally Posted by VikingDutchman

You really think that money goes to the students? Penn could always stop raising its tuition every year for largely spurious reasons, and then the students wouldnt need so much aid!

All that alumni cash just goes to fulfilling Gutmann's Scooge McDuck fantasies

Actually this covers pretty clearly why I don't give Penn money:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pj9XpUrrFIw#t=11

And I'm not talking about the students, I'm talking about the administration

No literally they pay MY tuition. I don't know about the students that go there, but as an employee they give a little for tuition.

[VikingDutchman]

Is there a way to give folks like you money but not let any of it go to Gutmann and co? Because that would be more persuasive

[UPenn18]

Originally Posted by VikingDutchman

Is there a way to give folks like you money but not let any of it go to Gutmann and co? Because that would be more persuasive

Penn student. I'd be in support of this!

[ksb]

Originally Posted by VikingDutchman

Is there a way to give folks like you money but not let any of it go to Gutmann and co? Because that would be more persuasive

Sort of...you can designate the gift to a specific scholarship fund. You'll need to contact the Development or Institutional Advancement office to find out what fund name to use and how to make such a designated donation. All of my Drexel giving (save one specific gift) has been designated to specific scholarship funds.

[Philly Fan]

Originally Posted by ksb

Sort of...you can designate the gift to a specific scholarship fund. You'll need to contact the Development or Institutional Advancement office to find out what fund name to use and how to make such a designated donation. All of my Drexel giving (save one specific gift) has been designated to specific scholarship funds.

Or, in the case of Penn, you can donate through "The Penn Fund" web site, and specifically designate "Undergraduate Scholarships" for your donation:

https://giving.apps.upenn.edu/giving/jsp/fast.do?program=TPF&fund=342116

[VikingDutchman]

I hate to continue dragging this off-topic, but I have no interest in giving my money to support Penn undergrads. I do believe donating to causes that enable folks to go to college is important, and I actually donate quite a bit to some organizations that do that. However:

1- All but a vanishing small number of Penn students are fairly privileged already. At the very least, even if their family may not have much income, being a Penn student means you probably went to a decent quality high school, had at least mildly engaged and informed parents, etc... The really disadvantaged kids haven't a shot at getting into Penn because they're not getting a good enough pre-college education to get in to a place like Penn. My money is far more appropriately spent on things that will help those kinds of kids.

2- Donating money to Penn's financial aid (or the financial aid of a large swathe of private colleges) is enabling their brutal and largely unnecessary cost inflation. When the cost of college is so high that even the children of doctors and lawyers need financial aid (I knew quite a few such kids when I was at Penn), the correct conclusion isn't "Give money to the school" but "the way college is priced is irredeemably messed up." Penn doesn't have to raise its tuition every year. They certainly don't have to raise it as fast as they have in the last generation or so. And when you look a the accounting and finances of the schools and what goes into these fiscal decisions, one becomes very jaded very quickly. Yes I know any individual school essentially "has to" play the game this way because all their peers already are, but I'm under no obligation to take part in the madness.

3- It's Penn's fault really. If they hadn't educated me so well I probably wouldn't have been able to analyze them so critically.

So... buildings? development?