PHILADELPHIA | Highrise Development Thread IX

[jsbrook]

Wow. Right on, summers. Would love to see a megaplex on East Market. This picture deserve reposting again!

Originally Posted by summersm343

Following up on the article and Center City retail report above^^

There is a full hi-res image of the Gallery redevelopment in the report:



Man, I really hope this full project comes to fruition looking at this again. I hope all three towers get built. Also, looking in between Aramark and the two towers atop the Gallery in the report, the portion in between them says 'Theater.' I really hope they bring a full fledged 24 screen movie theater to Center City. Would like to see an AMC or United Artists here.

[1487]

There has been very little about the Gallery renovation in the news for last 2 months. Originally the closure of the lower level pedestrian walkway was supposed to happen in October. There was mention of delays related to permitting and then nothing. I wonder what is going on. Nothing has been closed down as of yet.

[Outta here]

Originally Posted by PhilliesPhan

Also, it would be amazing if the parking lots at 8th and Market and 13th and Market could be filled in. The parking lot at 8th and Market could fit multiple towers, while the lot at 13th and Market would be excellent for a mixed-use tower within the 600-700' range.

One good looking rendering isn't it ! Nothing from nothing but back in post #9612 , I mentioned
what " I " thought would be a real good fit for 8th.& Market . Yes , I know I'm being redundant
with my failed attempt to motivate , generate , activate a success story for this wasted space , but
I would ride a flying Hypo through a shit storm to witness the conclusion of this project , including my
favorite 670'er at 8th.& Market .

[ScreamShatter]

Originally Posted by jsbrook

Is Temple asking the city to kick in money? Maybe they are. I don't know. But if not, Kenney (and everyone else not directly involved) should shut up about it. If done right, it could be a big draw for Temple (and the city).

It's hard to believe that a $100m stadium could be "done right." Additionally,it wouldn't bring any new people to the city overall as Temple already plays in the city -- it would bring new people to North Philly though. The problem being that's not an easy location to drive to as it isn't near an interstate and has small road surrounding it.

Back when they started discussing the stadium, there were rumors of street front retail, dorm space, classrooms, and a football stadium -- completely multi-use. I'd def be interested to see a proposal like that, but my fear is that $100m isn't going to buy much of anything impressive or good, from an urban planning standpoint.

[blorkishdork]

Market East is definetly seeing a rejuvination. I like seeing that Brickstone bought that parking garage across from their current development at 12th and Chestnut. I hope that development is similar to the one they are building now (6+ stories), that development has really given the area a European feeling. Any way enough rambling, with all these residents, what Market East really needs is one more office tower to help sustain retail development on that side of Broad Street. In 10 years or so I really think that Market East is going to be one great looking stretch that mimics Orchard road in Singapore. For those that have no idea what I'm talking about, there are about 20 malls of various sizes, mostly smaller than the gallery, and the outside is decorated with neon lights.

As for the Temple Football Stadium issues. I feel similarly to Kenney, and I believe the main reason he is against it is the State (and i believe the city as well?) footed a part of the bill to build the Linc under the condition that Temple would use it. The contract with Temple may have only been mandatory for 10 years, but still that was tax payer money and it is ridiculous that you have a huge hulking stadium only be used 12 times a year + 1 or 2 special events in the summer. If temple builds one, that would be 2 hulking stadiums sitting empty most of the year.

[Knight Hospitaller]

Originally Posted by ScreamShatter

It's hard to believe that a $100m stadium could be "done right." Additionally,it wouldn't bring any new people to the city overall as Temple already plays in the city -- it would bring new people to North Philly though. The problem being that's not an easy location to drive to as it isn't near an interstate and has small road surrounding it.

Back when they started discussing the stadium, there were rumors of street front retail, dorm space, classrooms, and a football stadium -- completely multi-use. I'd def be interested to see a proposal like that, but my fear is that $100m isn't going to buy much of anything impressive or good, from an urban planning standpoint.

I'm glad to hear that they may have something in mind like the Notre Dame Campus Crossroads project (http://crossroads.nd.edu) that I mentioned elsewhere, which consists of academic and student services building additions to the existing stadium. In fact, I think that it makes much more sense in an urban environment than it does at Notre Dame. Given that the ND project costs $400 million for the additions alone, one has to wonder what $100 million will buy for Temple. However, Campus Crossroads is probably the most ambitious project in ND's history and the additions are quite massive despite their appearance. There are also some engineering challenges that wouldn't be present in from-scratch construction. Perhaps something more modest, but highly suitable for the area, is feasible for $100 Mil.

[vur102]

Originally Posted by jsbrook

Wow. Right on, summers. Would love to see a megaplex on East Market. This picture deserve reposting again!

Is this what is being built? While this may be sufficient for that area, can't they at least spruce up the design a little bit? Maybe add some brick to the overall design? I think a great idea would be to place a green roof over the large area that is covered by the center portion of the gallery. Make it like the Cira Green, and publicly accessible, as well as to the apartments that are being built around it. Come on, do something here!

[Knight Hospitaller]

Originally Posted by vur102

Is this what is being built? While this may be sufficient for that area, can't they at least spruce up the design a little bit? Maybe add some brick to the overall design? I think a great idea would be to place a green roof over the large area that is covered by the center portion of the gallery. Make it like the Cira Green, and publicly accessible, as well as to the apartments that are being built around it. Come on, do something here!

It's all conceptual at this point.

[br323206]

There is lots of planning research that says that stadiums do nothing to spur economic development. They are typically boondoggles. Kenney knows that. He's an urbanist.

[Knight Hospitaller]

Originally Posted by br323206

There is lots of planning research that says that stadiums do nothing to spur economic development. They are typically boondoggles. Kenney knows that. He's an urbanist.

"Nothing" is a bit too broad, but "little" to justify the expense is probably accurate. This is especially true of football, with its limited schedule, as opposed to other sports that generate traffic multiple times per week. If they can integrate a field and seating into a (Notre Dame) Campus Crossroads-like project that is more mixed-use from an academic and/or commercial perspective, that's probably the way to go. Otherwise, I agree that they should spend a fraction of that $100M on renting the Linc.

[Larry King]

Hope Kenney leans on lurie to make a deal to keep temple at the linc. The city must have some leverage here

[br323206]

Originally Posted by Knight Hospitaller

"Nothing" is a bit too broad, but "little" to justify the expense is probably accurate. This is especially true of football, with its limited schedule, as opposed to other sports that generate traffic multiple times per week. If they can integrate a field and seating into a (Notre Dame) Campus Crossroads-like project that is more mixed-use from an academic and/or commercial perspective, that's probably the way to go. Otherwise, I agree that they should spend a fraction of that $100M on renting the Linc.

True. I should've said usually do nothing. I can think of a few successful examples with ballparks (Baltimore, Cincy both come to mind) and arenas (Houston, Columbus). Football stadiums are much more risky, for the reason you mentioned.

[iheartphilly]

Does Temple have any national brand hotel on campus to service the school? Is the proposed stadium being built close to a subway line? This stadium will be part of the urban fabric and not in some remote location. I'm sure residents will object to traffic, noise, lighting, etc. But, the net benefit will outweigh those concerns. The only issue is whether Temple has the money for it or not. Their athletic department was bleeding money so for them to do it, they need to make sure they can be profitable in the short and long term.

[Arch+Eng]

Originally Posted by PhilliesPhan

Also, it would be amazing if the parking lots at 8th and Market and 13th and Market could be filled in. The parking lot at 8th and Market could fit multiple towers, while the lot at 13th and Market would be excellent for a mixed-use tower within the 600-700' range.

...or one Disney Quest

[Knight Hospitaller]

Originally Posted by iheartphilly

Does Temple have any national brand hotel on campus to service the school? Is the proposed stadium being built close to a subway line? This stadium will be part of the urban fabric and not in some remote location. I'm sure residents will object to traffic, noise, lighting, etc. But, the net benefit will outweigh those concerns. The only issue is whether Temple has the money for it or not. Their athletic department was bleeding money so for them to do it, they need to make sure they can be profitable in the short and long term.

I'm not sure whether your questions are rhetorical or not. Is a hotel expected to be part of the project? I'm not aware of any national brands up there, but I defer to folks who better know that area. The proposed stadium site is certainly close to Broad Street and a block or two from the nearest BSL stop. For there to be a benefit that goes beyond a handful of Saturdays per year (plus whatever special events they can book) - and for true "urban integration" - it needs to be a mixed use project with other academic and commercial activities surrounding the playing field. A hotel would be a good component. I know that I'm a broken record, but Notre Dame is trying to make its massive stadium more than a six Saturday per year (plus graduation) venue by adding academic buildings and student amenities. Something along those lines, that's got more to it than football, might sell.

[jsbrook]

Originally Posted by ScreamShatter

It's hard to believe that a $100m stadium could be "done right." Additionally,it wouldn't bring any new people to the city overall as Temple already plays in the city -- it would bring new people to North Philly though. The problem being that's not an easy location to drive to as it isn't near an interstate and has small road surrounding it.

Back when they started discussing the stadium, there were rumors of street front retail, dorm space, classrooms, and a football stadium -- completely multi-use. I'd def be interested to see a proposal like that, but my fear is that $100m isn't going to buy much of anything impressive or good, from an urban planning standpoint.

Temple has historically been a commuter school and has started to shed that status in recent years. But there's a long way to go. I could see becoming a Power Five college football school being very good for Temple as well as the city, changing the whole dimension of the school and the students it attracts. Of the 4 great cities on I-95 in the mid-Atlantic region, Philly is the only one without a major collegiate sports conference. I don't think getting a stadium will automatically make Temple the counterpart of Maryland, Rutgers and BC or garner an offer from the ACC. But it can't hurt. I can't see how we couldn't find some solid uses for the stadium outside football with some foresight and intelligent design. For example, starting in 2010, Cleveland turned Progressive Field into an enormous winter playground. They laid an ice track around the field for skaters and built a snow-tubing hill from the bleachers onto the outfield. “Snow Days” drew about 50,000 to downtown Cleveland in 2010. 50,000 people who otherwise would have been bundled up inside. Progressive Field is in the thick of the city’s downtown, so the the event fed into the surrounding entertainment district and restaurants. They cancelled it in 2012 after poor attendance the second winter (2011) caused by the warmest winter on record and because the Indians didn't want to bother with it. But the concept is good and I think we should be able to figure out something. An optimal project would be larger than just the stadium, too,

I recognize that it would need to be done in a way that is a real draw for Temple and the city to be an actual economic driver given that stadiums, as a general matter, don't generate significant economic growth.

[iheartphilly]

Originally Posted by Knight Hospitaller

I'm not sure whether your questions are rhetorical or not. Is a hotel expected to be part of the project? I'm not aware of any national brands up there, but I defer to folks who better know that area. The proposed stadium site is certainly close to Broad Street and a block or two from the nearest BSL stop. For there to be a benefit that goes beyond a handful of Saturdays per year (plus whatever special events they can book) - and for true "urban integration" - it needs to be a mixed use project with other academic and commercial activities surrounding the playing field. A hotel would be a good component. I know that I'm a broken record, but Notre Dame is trying to make its massive stadium more than a six Saturday per year (plus graduation) venue by adding academic buildings and student amenities. Something along those lines, that's got more to it than football, might sell.

Yes, I was being rhetorical. And, I agree with you the best chance for success will be to design the stadium for "mixed-use" or multiple use. That would be their selling point and best chance for broad support.

[hammersklavier]

W/r/t the stadium:

While I agree about the effects of stadia on urban environments, I will also note that this would be a college stadium on a college campus -- the effect would be less like the Linc and more like these examples:

Exhibit A: Penn's very own Franklin Field. This stadium blends into a quiet corner of campus.

Exhibit B: Nippert Stadium, University of Cincinnati. Here we can see that Nippert is right smack dab in the middle of campus. Some of the school's most important centers, such as "UC Main Street" and the new student recreation center, abut it.

Exhibit C: Tulane's Yulman Stadium. Tulane University is almost the exact same size as Temple University, and Yulman Stadium directly abuts a residential neighborhood. It was also built just last year for $75 million.

Exhibit D: Gerald J. Ford Stadium, SMU. Another example of a college stadium on a tight urban campus, surrounded by a residential neighborhood.

You can, of course, keep going with this. But my point is: College stadia are not necessarily the same animal as pro stadia. College stadia have a ready-made hyper-local fanbase (i.e. the students) which ameliorates much of the need for parking, and can be made to work in significantly more urban situations than pro stadia. That does not, mean, of course, that they get a pass in terms of public money -- they should be built and maintained by the school, using the school's own money -- but colleges are significantly less mobile than professional organizations, usually have better things to do with campus grounds than devote acres of parking, and in general are much better able to absorb the negative externalities of stadia than a pro field plopped in the middle of a neighborhood, due to their dense transient population (i.e. the students)...

As long as Temple does not request public assistance it does not intend to pay back (that would be grants and other direct subsidies; requesting a loan is fine) and agrees to mitigate the stadium's negative externalities inasmuch as is possible, I do not see any strong reason to oppose them attempting to build a stadium. And it's not like we don't already have an example of a college football stadium done well in this town.

[Knight Hospitaller]

Originally Posted by hammersklavier

W/r/t the stadium:

While I agree about the effects of stadia on urban environments, I will also note that this would be a college stadium on a college campus -- the effect would be less like the Linc and more like these examples:

Exhibit A: Penn's very own Franklin Field. This stadium blends into a quiet corner of campus.

Exhibit B: Nippert Stadium, University of Cincinnati. Here we can see that Nippert is right smack dab in the middle of campus. Some of the school's most important centers, such as "UC Main Street" and the new student recreation center, abut it.

Exhibit C: Tulane's Yulman Stadium. Tulane University is almost the exact same size as Temple University, and Yulman Stadium directly abuts a residential neighborhood. It was also built just last year for $75 million.

Exhibit D: Gerald J. Ford Stadium, SMU. Another example of a college stadium on a tight urban campus, surrounded by a residential neighborhood.

You can, of course, keep going with this. But my point is: College stadia are not necessarily the same animal as pro stadia. College stadia have a ready-made hyper-local fanbase (i.e. the students) which ameliorates much of the need for parking, and can be made to work in significantly more urban situations than pro stadia. That does not, mean, of course, that they get a pass in terms of public money -- they should be built and maintained by the school, using the school's own money -- but colleges are significantly less mobile than professional organizations, usually have better things to do with campus grounds than devote acres of parking, and in general are much better able to absorb the negative externalities of stadia than a pro field plopped in the middle of a neighborhood, due to their dense transient population (i.e. the students)...

As long as Temple does not request public assistance it does not intend to pay back (that would be grants and other direct subsidies; requesting a loan is fine) and agrees to mitigate the stadium's negative externalities inasmuch as is possible, I do not see any strong reason to oppose them attempting to build a stadium. And it's not like we don't already have an example of a college football stadium done well in this town.

Thanks for using "stadia." A pet peeve of mine is "stadiums."

[Kidphilly]

Originally Posted by hammersklavier

W/r/t the stadium:

While I agree about the effects of stadia on urban environments, I will also note that this would be a college stadium on a college campus -- the effect would be less like the Linc and more like these examples:

Exhibit A: Penn's very own Franklin Field. This stadium blends into a quiet corner of campus.

Exhibit B: Nippert Stadium, University of Cincinnati. Here we can see that Nippert is right smack dab in the middle of campus. Some of the school's most important centers, such as "UC Main Street" and the new student recreation center, abut it.

Exhibit C: Tulane's Yulman Stadium. Tulane University is almost the exact same size as Temple University, and Yulman Stadium directly abuts a residential neighborhood. It was also built just last year for $75 million.

Exhibit D: Gerald J. Ford Stadium, SMU. Another example of a college stadium on a tight urban campus, surrounded by a residential neighborhood.

You can, of course, keep going with this. But my point is: College stadia are not necessarily the same animal as pro stadia. College stadia have a ready-made hyper-local fanbase (i.e. the students) which ameliorates much of the need for parking, and can be made to work in significantly more urban situations than pro stadia. That does not, mean, of course, that they get a pass in terms of public money -- they should be built and maintained by the school, using the school's own money -- but colleges are significantly less mobile than professional organizations, usually have better things to do with campus grounds than devote acres of parking, and in general are much better able to absorb the negative externalities of stadia than a pro field plopped in the middle of a neighborhood, due to their dense transient population (i.e. the students)...

As long as Temple does not request public assistance it does not intend to pay back (that would be grants and other direct subsidies; requesting a loan is fine) and agrees to mitigate the stadium's negative externalities inasmuch as is possible, I do not see any strong reason to oppose them attempting to build a stadium. And it's not like we don't already have an example of a college football stadium done well in this town.

agree but I an see the city wanting to position that they dont have to foot any bill

If Temple want to build it so be it; it probably wont have any huge impact one way or another on urbanity. It could be a plus for Temple and their football team.

North Broad needs other things more like jobs and businesses than anything else. It would be great if there was someway to foster/incubate money for startups on North Broad from SG to Temple or even med reaserch from Temple to Temple Med (UCity light) and could be centered on TOD at North Broad - if only there was a way to get employers or money there to do so...