PHILADELPHIA | FMC Tower @ Cira Centre South | 736 FT | 49 FLOORS

[Philly Fan]

Originally Posted by mPhilly

Is there really no small ped bridge to the park from FMC? Seems like a waste.

There isn't one in any of the renderings:

http://ciracentresouth.com/

[Cro Burnham]

Originally Posted by mPhilly

Sooo can't wait for this! 2400 Chestnut is a serious bummer in this view isn't it?

Is there really no small ped bridge to the park from FMC? Seems like a waste.

2400: It's OK. Totally bland, but OK. I'd rather have it than not. What I don't get is this: with the riverwalk bustling, and the whole Penn/Center City nexus fusing, 2400 is a prime node. Instead of using that lot in front for cars, why not build a restaurant/retail pad with a river vista to capture the growing pedestrian/biking traffic going north/south and along Chestnut Street? They'd sacrifice maybe twenty parking spots for some very lucrative commercial space, plus increase the appeal of the base of their building; besides, they have a below grade garage under the building. That surface lot seems to me to be a total missed opportunity and misallocation of prime real estate.

FMC/Penn park access: I imagine that access will be granted at the basement level (at grade for the park) underneath Walnut St., rather than over Walnut via pedestrian bridge.

[Philly Fan]

Originally Posted by Cro Burnham

FMC/Penn park access: I imagine that access will be granted at the basement level (at grade for the park) underneath Walnut St., rather than over Walnut via pedestrian bridge.

mPhilly was actually asking about a bridge between FMC and Cira Green atop the garage (and not Penn Park)--there won't be a pedestrian bridge connecting them (according to the renderings).

[mPhilly]

Originally Posted by Philly Fan

mPhilly was actually asking about a bridge between FMC and Cira Green atop the garage (and not Penn Park)--there won't be a pedestrian bridge connecting them (according to the renderings).

Maybe its a security concern or something.

As for 2400, I think this has been discussed on the forum before, but usually river fronting buildings are elongated perpendicular to the river to reduce view obstruction. 2400 bothers me with its long structure parallel to the river.

Anyway, can't wait to catch some sun in the summer on top of this garage! Does anybody have any idea when the park itself will open? By this summer?

[tdawg]

This is a beautiful tower. Philly's skyline growth is on fire.

[Philly Fan]

Originally Posted by mPhilly

Maybe its a security concern or something.

I did find this in an October 2013 article on Naked Philly:

This one-acre green space will be connected to the tower by a skybridge, and will host outdoor events in this park in the sky.

http://www.ocfrealty.com/naked-philly/west-philly/third-cira-tower-go

But given that it doesn't appear in any of the current renderings, I guess it was either scrapped or deferred.

[Cro Burnham]

Originally Posted by mPhilly

Anyway, can't wait to catch some sun in the summer on top of this garage! Does anybody have any idea when the park itself will open? By this summer?

Won't this be a private park for the users of the complex?

Anyhow, I can see why there may not be a skybridge . . . why spend the extra money and waste rentable space in whatever random floor of the building it would be at when people can just access the elevator to the park from the first floor lobby? Building the skybridge would only really add slightly more convenience to the building residents, but would cost quite I bit probably and unnecessarily use up space for additional common areas, hallways, etc.

[domodeez]

From today at 1:30pm:

[Philly Fan]

Originally Posted by Cro Burnham

Won't this be a private park for the users of the complex?

"The one acre elevated park will be semi-accessible to the public and offer a green space that will hold events like outdoor movies and concerts."

http://philly.curbed.com/tags/cira-green-at-fmc-tower

Whatever "semi-accessible" means. Perhaps only at certain times?

[Plokoon11]

^^ You are the man! Thanks for the update!

[mPhilly]

Originally Posted by Philly Fan

Whatever "semi-accessible" means. Perhaps only at certain times?

Yeah I don't know. The bottom left certainly looks like a public access point to me:

Credit: http://philly.curbed.com/archives/2014/0...ra-centre-souths-elevated-park-space.php

Not sure how they would prevent the public from going up there but allow FMC residents/employees (maybe keycard access?).

Most of the early news articles referred to it as a "public space." Obviously it would be a privately owned public space, but it certainly seems the plan is to have it open to the public. I guess we'll find out soon enough. One thing is for sure, never going to get the foot traffic in the renderings without public access.

[Philly Fan]

Originally Posted by mPhilly

Most of the early news articles referred to it as a "public space." Obviously it would be a privately owned public space, but it certainly seems the plan is to have it open to the public. I guess we'll find out soon enough. One thing is for sure, never going to get the foot traffic in the renderings without public access.

I'm with you--I hope it IS accessible to the public. It certainly will be a unique space, and could be quite an attraction.

[MikeNigh]

I don't think it will get overly used unless they add more greenery or hold events there.

[jsbrook]

Originally Posted by mPhilly

Maybe its a security concern or something.

As for 2400, I think this has been discussed on the forum before, but usually river fronting buildings are elongated perpendicular to the river to reduce view obstruction. 2400 bothers me with its long structure parallel to the river.

Anyway, can't wait to catch some sun in the summer on top of this garage! Does anybody have any idea when the park itself will open? By this summer?

2400 Chestnut blocks the view of a lot of the skyline behind it that would otherwise be viewable from this green space. As will 2400 Market, albeit (hopefully) via a more aesthetic building:

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=214804

I think 2400 Market will be shorter than 2400 Chestnut so more behind it will hopefully be visible.

[hammersklavier]

Originally Posted by Cro Burnham

2400: What I don't get is this: with the riverwalk bustling, and the whole Penn/Center City nexus fusing, 2400 is a prime node. Instead of using that lot in front for cars, why not build a restaurant/retail pad with a river vista to capture the growing pedestrian/biking traffic going north/south and along Chestnut Street? They'd sacrifice maybe twenty parking spots for some very lucrative commercial space, plus increase the appeal of the base of their building; besides, they have a below grade garage under the building. That surface lot seems to me to be a total missed opportunity and misallocation of prime real estate.

You know, I walked by that building the other day and was thinking the same thing. Total wasted opportunity along Chestnut, especially now. Then I realized that the garage's only entrance is from Chestnut. So you'd have to make a new entrance to the garage (i.e. from 24th). Which would probably require a thorough new renovation of at least the lobby levels and lower. Wasn't the building last renovated a little less than a decade ago?

ETA: I'm pretty sure the loading dock faces 24th Street. That would mean that a new parking entrance could feasibly be made one of two ways:

1. Wipe some (revenue-earning) ground-floor office space. Their willingness to do that would probably be a function of how occupied that space is, and how much more they can get from commercial space facing Chestnut. In other words: not very high. (Unless they landed like a big box tenant or something.)

2. Get an shared easement with the owner of the parking lot next door. The basic idea is that one would enter the garage from that lot, and that the parking structure doubtless required for any redevelopment of that parcel (wasn't the last proposal on it a Richard Meyer building?) would be required to share an entrance with 2400 Chestnut's. Easement law does exist (it was largely developed to construct canals and, later, railroads), so this isn't such a farfectched idea from a purely legal perspective. But I don't think I've ever seen multiple developments share a garage entrance.

And a third option: Liquidate the parking spaces. (For what?)

[brenster]

[hammersklavier]

Originally Posted by brenster

Just as a heads-up, make sure you have the appropriate image file extension in the link when you post images.

[boxbot]

This thing is flying. Looking at the photo dates, it looks like the 2nd floor of the core started 1/24/15, the 3rd floor started 2/2/15, the 4th floor started 2/7/15 and now the 5th floor on 2/14 - averaging a week per floor or so.

[Cro Burnham]

Originally Posted by hammersklavier

You know, I walked by that building the other day and was thinking the same thing. Total wasted opportunity along Chestnut, especially now. Then I realized that the garage's only entrance is from Chestnut. So you'd have to make a new entrance to the garage (i.e. from 24th). Which would probably require a thorough new renovation of at least the lobby levels and lower. Wasn't the building last renovated a little less than a decade ago?

ETA: I'm pretty sure the loading dock faces 24th Street. That would mean that a new parking entrance could feasibly be made one of two ways:

1. Wipe some (revenue-earning) ground-floor office space. Their willingness to do that would probably be a function of how occupied that space is, and how much more they can get from commercial space facing Chestnut. In other words: not very high. (Unless they landed like a big box tenant or something.)

2. Get an shared easement with the owner of the parking lot next door. The basic idea is that one would enter the garage from that lot, and that the parking structure doubtless required for any redevelopment of that parcel (wasn't the last proposal on it a Richard Meyer building?) would be required to share an entrance with 2400 Chestnut's. Easement law does exist (it was largely developed to construct canals and, later, railroads), so this isn't such a farfectched idea from a purely legal perspective. But I don't think I've ever seen multiple developments share a garage entrance.

And a third option: Liquidate the parking spaces. (For what?)

You got to figure retail on chestnut would make more than basement office space on 24th.

[domodeez]

Nice update from today at 12:30pm: