PHILADELPHIA | Highrise Development Thread IX

[summersm343]

Originally Posted by 3rd&Brown

Honestly, I know we all love tall buildings, but the amount of mid-rise infill going in in UCity like this is astounding. It really is becoming an incredibly dynamic place...and generally the design is pretty good to great.

I'm excited to see what the next ten years brings. I think West Philly for intents and purposes, will obviously bridge the perceived gap with Center City, but become a force in it's own right and be talked about in the way Cambridge is talked about vis a vis Boston.

Agreed! I love the development happening in University City. I think it's urban, and well designed. I'm excited to see the transformation over the next 10 years. I mean, how could anyone hate a 10 story building at 41st and Walnut (all office space no less). Plus, these midrise and infill developments only create more demand for taller/highrise buildings.

[TechTalkGuy]

Originally Posted by summersm343

Agreed! I love the development happening in University City. I think it's urban, and well designed. I'm excited to see the transformation over the next 10 years.

What Philadelphia is doing right is encouraging development on both sides of both rivers.

When Camden and University City are further developed 30+ years from now, you will see a city that welcomes growth.

[Outta here]

Originally Posted by TechTalkGuy

What Philadelphia is doing right is encouraging development on both sides of both rivers.

When Camden and University City are further developed 30+ years from now, you will see a city that welcomes growth.

Holy Cardiac arrest Bat Man , 30+ years from now ?? While we won't ALL live to see the grandiose promises and plans that 30+ years
may bring , shit will happen and things will change until Charlie Sheen is elected President .... or elephants fly .
Personally , I hope to witness a cleaner , safer , more affluent , educated , artistic , diverse city that is the envy of other cities , both large
and small .
If may may be allowed to quote , " You will see a city that welcomes growth ". I thought that plan had already gotten underway .
......... Or maybe I have been paying too much attention to my friend Jack Daniels ......

[PhillySteaks]

Originally Posted by cafeguy

Two Liberty up for sale!
http://mobile.philly.com/beta?wss=/philly/business/real_estate/commercial&id=351171411

It'll be interesting to see who buys it, and for how much. Unfortunately the condo aspect deters many of the core buyers, but there is good term left - although 10% vacancy / not a terrible Value Add play. Shorenstein is a big Value add office player and has been making a big dive into Philly lately. We however, already passed on it - didn't even ask for the OM (albeit we don't own any office in Philly, so it's not unusual).

[jjv007]

Originally Posted by Daario

Haha, i feel like I might be the only one who likes 2400 chestnut. It always struck me as looming and intimidating, almost a NY feel

Funny you say that, because I actually really like the building in and of itself, but just it's location when viewing from University City is what's annoying because it largely blocks a beautiful view of the skyline.

[ILovePhilly]

Cecil Baker + Partners and a representative for Pearl Properties presented their 19th Street tower (Sansom) at a CCRA community meeting last night. Some images can be found here at this curbed link. The tower is now taller on a smaller footprint, 32 stories and just over 400' to the top of parapet (I think they said 405?).

CCRA zoning and CCRA board voted unanimously to non-oppose.

The project will be presented to the design review committee next week. If I can find their submission graphics for that meeting I'll post them.

[summersm343]

Council to vote on major zoning code amendments

Earlier this week, City Council’s Committee on Rules and the City Planning Commission both gave their approval to a 30-page bill making a host of changes to the zoning code.

The Planning Commission has prepared a few bills making “technical changes” to the zoning code over the past few years, aimed at cleaning up charts and clarifying definitions, and the current bill contains a few of those minor changes as well. But it also includes some more substantial amendments.

Among them:

The bill would cause any approval of a zoning variance or special exception to expire after three years if the applicant discontinues operations, modifies the property in ways that aren’t compatible with the approved use, allows building permits or other licenses to lapse, or fails to pay property taxes or other taxes related to the approved use. The change could theoretically cut down on some of the most egregious types of land speculation, wherein an owner takes a property through a zoning approval and then sits on it hoping to sell it for a higher price without having developed anything. At a City Council hearing on Monday, the Building Industry Association testified in favor of extending the expiration date for variances to five years.

It would require major planned developments to go through the Civic Design Review Committee, the group that weighs in on the public-realm impacts of large projects, before seeking master-plan approval from the City Planning Commission. This issue came to light most recently in relation to the planned demolition and redevelopment of Mt. Sinai hospital in South Philadelphia. Developers there are hoping to build around 100 townhomes with internal driveways and garages on one square block. But by time they brought the project to Civic Design Review, their plan had already been approved by the City Planning Commission, leading some CDR members to wonder whether their already-weak influence was totally meaningless. The change could empower the CDR committee to make recommendations that the Planning Commission could incorporate into its decision about whether to approve the master plan.

The bill splits the “household living” category of uses into three separate categories, for single-family, two-family, and multi-family living. Relatedly, it prohibits single-family and two-family living in CMX-4 and CMX-5, the two densest commercial zoning districts in the city. The goal here is to prevent low-rise development from being built in areas where dense commercial and residential activity is encouraged.

It also requires a special exception from the zoning board for developers who want to build nightclubs in areas designated CMX-3, a mid-density commercial category found along the Central Delaware waterfront and other would-be commercial corridors. Andrew Meloney, of the Planning Commission, said this amendment was included at the request of community groups worried that poorly placed nightclubs can have major negative impacts on neighborhoods.

Perhaps most significantly, the bill would prohibit front-loading garages in areas zoned CMX-3. The damage is already done on the 200 block of Arch Street, where developers are building three extra tall rowhouses across from the Betsy Ross House, each with a two-car garage facing the street. But the Planning Commission is hoping to prevent that type of development from occurring in those zones in the future.

http://planphilly.com/articles/2015/11/19/council-to-vote-on-major-zoning-code-amendments

[summersm343]

Originally Posted by ILovePhilly

Cecil Baker + Partners and a representative for Pearl Properties presented their 19th Street tower (Sansom) at a CCRA community meeting last night. Some images can be found here at this curbed link. The tower is now taller on a smaller footprint, 32 stories and just over 400' to the top of parapet (I think they said 405?).

CCRA zoning and CCRA board voted unanimously to non-oppose.

The project will be presented to the design review committee next week. If I can find their submission graphics for that meeting I'll post them.

I copied and reposted your comment in the appropriate thread for this project here:
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=211081&page=18

[MikeNigh]

Originally Posted by summersm343

eamong them:

The bill would cause any approval of a zoning variance or special exception to expire after three years if the applicant discontinues operations, modifies the property in ways that aren’t compatible with the approved use, allows building permits or other licenses to lapse, or fails to pay property taxes or other taxes related to the approved use. the change could theoretically cut down on some of the most egregious types of land speculation, wherein an owner takes a property through a zoning approval and then sits on it hoping to sell it for a higher price without having developed anything. at a city council hearing on monday, the building industry association testified in favor of extending the expiration date for variances to five years.

The bill splits the “household living” category of uses into three separate categories, for single-family, two-family, and multi-family living. relatedly, it prohibits single-family and two-family living in cmx-4 and cmx-5, the two densest commercial zoning districts in the city. the goal here is to prevent low-rise development from being built in areas where dense commercial and residential activity is encouraged.

NICEe!!!

[Tlphila]

I still can't get over that abomination they're building at 200 + Arch... Ugh!

[Londonee]

Originally Posted by Tlphila

I still can't get over that abomination they're building at 200 + Arch... Ugh!

I'm disappointed by the zero density projects along Walnut Street West as well (Van Pelt Mews and Walnut Estates). Multiple drive up garage Mansion single-family row homes for rich people (i.e. no additional pedestrian density) on what should be one of the cities densest and most desirable streets. Under new zoning, I'd have to assume that 21st and Walnut would be zoned CMX-4?

[Tlphila]

I'm disappointed by the zero density projects along Walnut Street West as well (Van Pelt Mews and Walnut Estates). Multiple drive up garage Mansion single-family row homes for rich people (i.e. no additional pedestrian density) on what should be one of the cities densest and most desirable streets. Under new zoning, I'd have to assume that 21st and Walnut would be zoned CMX-4?

Couldn't agree with you more Londonee. I mean in my mind it is so uninspiring to build low density projects in prime locations just make a quick buck. How about creating vibrant projects (retail, multi-unit density etc) that will make more people IN THE FUTURE want to live here, thereby increasing everyone's property values! So instead of having 50+ people living at a prime location we have 8, cool...

At least Walnut Estates has a retail portion fronting Walnut, unlike Van Pelts blank wall!

[summersm343]

Originally Posted by Londonee

I'm disappointed by the zero density projects along Walnut Street West as well (Van Pelt Mews and Walnut Estates). Multiple drive up garage Mansion single-family row homes for rich people (i.e. no additional pedestrian density) on what should be one of the cities densest and most desirable streets. Under new zoning, I'd have to assume that 21st and Walnut would be zoned CMX-4?

Walnut Estates is actually a nice project with retail fronting Walnut and garage entered behind on the little alleyway. I would like to see taller, but I'm not complaining. Van Pelt Mews on the other hand? Such a waste. I really hope there is not a parking entry off of Walnut. Even if they made the Walnut facing building a floor taller to add in ground floor retail I would've been happy.

Hoping the zoning code will correct this nonsense.

[Tlphila]

Check out this trailer for an upcoming Richard Gere release 'The Benefactor.' It has some amazing shots of the city.

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/enter...t-Richard-Gere-movie-The-Benefactor.html

[jsbrook]

I think you guys need to be realistic. It's a boon for the city that wealthy people with young families (making solid tax contributions) actually want to stick around and raise them in the city. It's something we haven't seen in a long time. You need to accept that many of them want to do it in townhomes (not condos) and in prime locations like Rittenhouse. It's not like we're not also getting a flood of towers that would have been unimaginable in number and height 10 years ago.

If this was New York, I doubt people would be calling for demolition of brownstones because they are taking up space where towers could be built. I know demolition is different than construction but the idea is the same. There is and should be room for townhomes in cities. In prime and non-prime locations. Along with towers.

[Tlphila]

Js I get what you're saying and agree in theory. I have no problem with all the townhouses being built, I like most of them (minus street facing garages and stucco etc). what I have issue with is them being built with no retail component on prime commercial streets. I just feel this kills the street energy that is attracting these affluent people to move to or stay in the city in the first place.

[Macedonia is Greek]

Hello to all on this forum. So Today at work I started talking to a customer of mine that happens to be a Foreman for pouring concrete cores, the technology they have is amazing he explains. His latest projects where at the summit , the part of FMC with all the steel structure and now has moved to the chop project . Really cool guy and easy to talk to . So I asked if has heard anything about Cira II and he said he found out a year ago . And I in turn asked him about details, like height and if his company would get the bid? So his response was that they where really hush because one of there goals was to build higher then Comcast and that was the reason they are so quite about details . Summers I want to ask you if you think there is any merit to this ? And if so when would we find out more details .

[Plokoon11]

^ Higher than Comcast? :O

[UPenn18]

I really appreciate the change that requires proposals to go before the CDR before going before the Planning Commission. Hopefully this will empower the CDR to be a little more demanding when asking for more gravitas.

[jsbrook]

Originally Posted by Tlphila

Js I get what you're saying and agree in theory. I have no problem with all the townhouses being built, I like most of them (minus street facing garages and stucco etc). what I have issue with is them being built with no retail component on prime commercial streets. I just feel this kills the street energy that is attracting these affluent people to move to or stay in the city in the first place.

Yes, I think that's a fair point. We should be hoping and striving for a retail component on most or all projects fronting a street like Walnut in Center City.