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

[ePlanningPhila]

Looking at the detailed renderings I have to say. This project is perhaps the GREATEST of all the recent Condo/Apartment residential high rises we have coming on line. Great architecture and great use of the land, imo. What makes it even more impressive is that this is a relatively new real estate developer entrant in the regional market. As the city continues to attract national investors, I see the quality of projects will only elevate, and the pressure/competition from the regional players will force them to start putting design first!

I also have to say, she is sure going to look great from an East/West perspective when looking at the skyline, as it will draw the eye more toward the south!

[McBane]

This tower is way nicer than the 2100 Chestnut (Buck), a boring glass box sitting atop a boring brick box. 1911 Walnut is not as beautiful as Mandeville Place or as bold as The Bridge but it's still a very nice tower, not too dissimilar from 500 Walnut. I'd disagree that something like 2100 Market would look out of place. But I like the design.

Only thing - there doesn't seem to be much or any retail along Walnut. I would have liked to see the shopping area extended west on Walnut.

My feelings on the Warwick: if it meant the difference between this happening and not, I could live without the Warwick with one exception: I can't accept the Warwick being demolished to make way for a driveway. It would need to be replaced with a structure that contributes to the surrounding urban fabric, like ground floor retail or restaurant space. In a black and white world, I want to see the Warwick preserved (building or facade).

Also, I may not agree with everyone but at least the discussion is intelligent. Let's hope the community discussions don't focus solely on height and parking. Agreed with Summers, preserve the Warwick and build as high as you want - most sensible compromise.

[MikeNigh]

It seems that the warwick facade isn't asking much. I wouldn't even care if what was behind it was a parking garage.

[Philadelcago]

This. A great bookend to the square, and gives Rittenhouse a more visual identifier from afar. Definitely (as Summers put it) Chicago-esque, in a great way.

[MikeNigh]

Originally Posted by 3rd&Brown

Sheesh. Everyone needs to calm down.

I am as excited by the height as the next guy, but come on y'all, this is hardly a groundbreaking design. It is handsome and generic. In my mind, it is just a bigger version of the Buck building on Chestnut (which I like) but so many have decried as boring.

I would say every all glass design is at least a 7/10 from the outside however from the inside it's pretty hard to beat. It's the only all glass building that would be on the park so that is pretty awesome.

As far as exteriors greater than a 7 I would say this was like a 8-9 -



I think what is great about this building though is it has a lot of balconies, the roof spaces and mid way up deck are pretty awesome, and the street level floors are all awesome. This place looks like serious luxury.

[Cro Burnham]

I think the ground level detailing is really very good. Unusually good for Philadelphia. It will add some much at street level in that area.

[jjv007]

Sheesh, so many complainers on here, no wonder Philly development was held back for so many decades. The tower looks great and I hope it can get through without too much hassle. Hopeful that the Warwick and coffeehouse can stay, at least in part, but development > "history" in this case because of the magnitude of the development and the relative insignificance of the historical structures.

[Justin7]

Where is the "motor court" in these renderings? Is it a really nice motor court? It's not like history is important to Philadelphia right?

[Jawnadelphia]

You won't hear any complaints from me - this is terrific. It's been a long time coming going back to those Castleway plans. I walk by here all the time, the last 5-6 years-- shaking my fist! at this empty lot. Now finally, Rittenhouse will get its shiny, glass trophy. I agree with earlier comments - very Cecil Baker/500 Walnut like ...but much bigger. So happy SLC got that Chicago firm--Solomon Cordwell Buenz--on board for this one.

I see influences of the The Legacy at Millennium Park with this one -- a prior SCB project:




Anyone up for showing how this tower will look in the skyline - in particular, from the south, and University City??

Thanks guys, and a very Happy Thanksgiving for the skyscraper enthusiasts in Philadelphia.

[3rd&Brown]

Originally Posted by summersm343

Fair enough

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for preservation that makes sense, and I certainly don't think demolishing these structures for a drive isle makes sense. But, as another poster said, sometimes it's just time to move on, let go, and not let preservation get in the way of progress.

That's what they said in Lower Manhattan. Now there is nothing left.

[Arch+Eng]

After further review of the renderings (Particularly the one with the Warwick building Visible), Notice the ~100' Cantilever over the Warwick building.

There is no way that they actually intend on building that as shown. I think leaving the warwick in the renders was a PR move to help get this project approved. The demo drawings (which a layman or nimbyer is probably not going to read) clearly show the warwick being demolished.

It just wouldn't make financial sense when they could just put (2) columns at the corner of the building and save millions in the steel design. The cantilever is a "cartoon" and in no way reflects what they really intend to do.

So again, I think a lot of us are for this project. Once it comes to review, I think the things we should fight over are:

1. Moravian Street Alternate Plan (Which shows moravian street remaining open to the public)
2. Not demolishing the Warwick building, and at the very LEAST, reusing the facade.

Trust me, the Warwick building will NOT stop them from developing this site. Way too much money to be made.

[1487]

Lets hope this gets built and it actually will be as tall as planned. With a new mayor coming in I think they are going to have a hard time winning approval of taking down the other 2 buildings. Since there is a lot of buzz out there about Nutter admin people being pro development I think you will see a little more resistance from whomever Kenney puts in charge of these things. I expect major uproar (led my Inga) against this demo and there will be pressure on the developer to make concessions. They should've pushed this through earlier before Nutter left office. Maybe that wasn't ever feasible.

[Larry King]

Originally Posted by Arch+Eng

Trust me, the Warwick building will NOT stop them from developing this site. Way too much money to be made.

I agree.

At least 2 of 3 buildings should be preserved, city needs to push back on this sort of thing... and get used to pushing back. It's important

[Zoot]

Originally Posted by Justin7

Where is the "motor court" in these renderings? Is it a really nice motor court? It's not like history is important to Philadelphia right?

From what I can tell by reading the plans, it is not a "motor court" in terms of what was built in historic NYC apartments and now gaining popularity in Manhattan's new IT buildings (15 CPW, etc.) http://www.wsj.com/articles/new-manhattan-condos-offer-old-world-motor-courts-1421863310

Instead, it looks like an interior vehicle staging area. I believe those are vehicle elevators on the east side of the "court." I am guessing a valet would take it from the motor court, into the elevator and park below (or above?).

[Arch+Eng]

Originally Posted by Zoot

From what I can tell by reading the plans, it is not a "motor court" in terms of what was built in historic NYC apartments and now gaining popularity in Manhattan's new IT buildings (15 CPW, etc.) http://www.wsj.com/articles/new-manhattan-condos-offer-old-world-motor-courts-1421863310

Instead, it looks like an interior vehicle staging area. I believe those are vehicle elevators on the east side of the "court." I am guessing a valet would take it from the motor court, into the elevator and park below (or above?).

There is two floors of Parking below ground.

[McBane]

Originally Posted by 1487

Lets hope this gets built and it actually will be as tall as planned. With a new mayor coming in I think they are going to have a hard time winning approval of taking down the other 2 buildings. Since there is a lot of buzz out there about Nutter admin people being pro development I think you will see a little more resistance from whomever Kenney puts in charge of these things. I expect major uproar (led my Inga) against this demo and there will be pressure on the developer to make concessions. They should've pushed this through earlier before Nutter left office. Maybe that wasn't ever feasible.

I don't want to derail this thread but I'd actually argue that Kenney will be just as pro-development as Nutter, if not more. Kenney is very cozy with the unions to whom development = jobs.

[Zoot]

Originally Posted by McBane

I don't want to derail this thread but I'd actually argue that Kenney will be just as pro-development as Nutter, if not more. Kenney is very cozy with the unions to whom development = jobs.

That's a shame. Let's hope Kenney sees both sides. Preservation should not KILL a project - especially one that had its challenges clearly laid out when they bought the site. We should not allow an out of towner to come here and bully us into changing laws (especially without a valid reason). We are not the desperate city we once were. We CAN push back.

[Bariscos]

Jumping out of my lurking mode for a moment. When I saw these renderings, I can't tell you how excited I was. I walk around the city nearly every week and check up on most of our great projects. I'd post my photos, but I just don't have time in my life to figure out the complicated methods of posting (which I'm sure aren't as complicated once you figure it out). So, for the time being, they are for my enjoyment only.

Anyway, I love coming on here and feeling excited about the development, then walking our great city to keep an eye on our future. But when I miss 24 hours of these forums and come back to over 4 pages of debate, I just want to stay off the forums longer.

These are development forums, right? Isn't there a way we can just create a debate board for all you people that love to fight over the "internets" to go quibble and squabble about? I mean, we Philadelphians have few to no buildings like this. And if you want to fight for/against preservation (which I have my opinions on, but won't add to the debate), go to the m-f'ing public meetings.

[BenKatzPhillytoParis]

Originally Posted by Zoot

That's a shame. Let's hope Kenney sees both sides. Preservation should not KILL a project - especially one that had its challenges clearly laid out when they bought the site. We should not allow an out of towner to come here and bully us into changing laws (especially without a valid reason). We are not the desperate city we once were. We CAN push back.

Yeah, I think the problem when you bend for certain projects and not for others is it is completely arbitrary. Historic designations should mean something. If they don't the law is unpredictable and such uncertainty is actually bad for development long term. When someone wants to develop something that historically designated, they should know exactly what that entails, what specific conditions may exist for any compromise (in exceptional situations), and have a plan to work around or integrate such historical assets in their plan. Otherwise, you'll have developers thinking it's meaningless in the future, then be surprised when they run into litigation. Predictability!

[BenKatzPhillytoParis]

Edit delete