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

[Justin7]

Originally Posted by TempleGuy1000

Disagree! The there is little to nothing unique about the Warwick building.

Not that "uniqueness" is really the bar here (you fail to understand the post you're disagreeing with), but care to post some similar early 20th century buildings?

[TempleGuy1000]

Originally Posted by Justin7

Not that "uniqueness" is really the bar here (you fail to understand the post you're disagreeing with), but care to post some similar early 20th century buildings?

The fact you think that Philadelphia is on it's way to becoming Dallas (Fun fact Dallas was named after a Philadelphia Mayor) by knocking the Warwick building is borderline ignorant. I think you should travel a bit outside of Center City if you think Philadelphia as a whole is losing it's historical character that makes it special. I don't even think by knocking it down it is removing character from Rittenhouse. It is removing a blighted building, with a slightly Gothic style, that has sat vacant for quite awhile.

As has been explained, the building is in awful shape and would cost an enormous amount of money on a lot that already costed an enormous amount of money. In my opinion that combined with a clear plan of what the future plans would be, could justify the need to go back and reassess the historical value the Warwick and Funeral home has to the city.

I already answered the questions that are the ones supposedly used by the Historical Commission with my opinion in another post.

So we will probably just have to agree to disagree.

[Knight Hospitaller]

Originally Posted by TempleGuy1000

The fact you think that Philadelphia is on it's way to becoming Dallas (Fun fact Dallas was named after a Philadelphia Mayor) by knocking the Warwick building is borderline ignorant. I think you should travel a bit outside of Center City if you think Philadelphia as a whole is losing it's historical character that makes it special. I don't even think by knocking it down it is removing character from Rittenhouse. It is removing a blighted building, with a slightly Gothic style, that has sat vacant for quite awhile.

As has been explained, the building is in awful shape and would cost an enormous amount of money on a lot that already costed an enormous amount of money. In my opinion that combined with a clear plan of what the future plans would be, could justify the need to go back and reassess the historical value the Warwick and Funeral home has to the city.

I already answered the questions that are the ones supposedly used by the Historical Commission with my opinion in another post.

So we will probably just have to agree to disagree.

Personal foul: ad hominem argument. Agreeing to disagree does not require accusing your opponent of "borderline ignorance." There's a law that doesn't rely on your interpretation of what is special or worth saving. This will be dealt with according to law and rational argument, not subjective feelings.

[TechTalkGuy]

Three awesome views

1911 Walnut Street

[TempleGuy1000]

Originally Posted by Knight Hospitaller

Personal foul: ad hominem argument. Agreeing to disagree does not require accusing your opponent of "borderline ignorance." There's a law that doesn't rely on your interpretation of what is special or worth saving. This will be dealt with according to law and rational argument, not subjective feelings.

While I should not have brought the Dallas comment back up, I just didn't appreciate the notion that since I didn't agree with his view point I lacked the understanding to see it. I really don't feel like writing out why.

And forgive me also, but does the Historical Commission not make a subjective decision in terms of allowing new construction? I already posted the list of questions that I found on their website.

So my point is the buildings along Walnut street and around the square are a very important record of the history of Philadelphia in the post Civil Ware period and into the early 20th c. You have to make room for the present as the city grows and ages but (IMHO) NYC is an example of too much success that like a sunami has(in many cases) erased any record of the past. When you come serendipitously upon a street of quirky picturesque building from the past which can happen often in Philadelphia you will tend to interpret that as charming and see the city as a unique place with it's own character.

While I agree with the overall concept of not destroying streets, the Warwick and funeral home, in my opinion, aren't worth the fight.

[Jawnadelphia]

In case anyone is reading, enjoying, or nauseated over these debates --and doesn't know what these buildings look like, I thought I'd post some pics of the buildings in question -- visuals are always nice.

[IMG]Untitled

[IMG]Untitled

[IMG]Untitled
----------------------

Walking thru Rittenhouse Sq during these festive times ...wow, this tower would look amazing in this setting.

[IMG]Untitled

[IMG]Untitled

[IMG]Untitled

[IMG]Untitled

Happy Holidays !!!

[Philly-Drew]

Thanks TallCoolOne, I was wondering what the buildings look like, and now I know. I have thoughts on the subject for sure but will keep my opinion to myself on this one.

[1487]

A little bit of new info here. It would be nice to think this project is going to be able to progress through the pre-construction process quickly and start next year, but I have a feeling this is going to be a contentious process for many reasons. Between the proposed demolition of the old buildings and the height I foresee lots of issues and delays and potential legal action because a lot of folks won't be happy. Typical Philly stuff- we will get to look at this vacant lot for a a few extra months (or years) while people battle over what should be allowed here.

http://www.bizjournals.com/philadelphia/...ll-residentialbuilding-proposed-for.html

[McBane]

Preserving the Warwick gives the base of the Sansom Street side some nice contrast in materials and height, giving it less of a "super-block" type feel that is so pervasive in cities like Dallas (lol!). (No, I don't buy the argument that demolishing even all three historic buildings would turn us into a sunbelt-esque city).

On the other hand, preserving the Warwick would mean less retail space, lessening the amount of street level activity along Samson. And while it would provide the base with some nice contrast, the building itself is not anything spectacular.

Other than that, I'm very pleased with this design and of course the height is awesome. Driving down 76 this weekend, I was getting goosebumps envisioning this tower next to the Rittenhouse - it will be very visible.

Bottom line: I'd like to see the Warwick preserved, I think it would make the base along Samsom more interesting; but if I had to choose between the Warwick and the current 600 ft design, I'd knock down the Warwick myself.

[Knight Hospitaller]

Originally Posted by McBane

Preserving the Warwick gives the base of the Sansom Street side some nice contrast in materials and height, giving it less of a "super-block" type feel that is so pervasive in cities like Dallas (lol!). (No, I don't buy the argument that demolishing even all three historic buildings would turn us into a sunbelt-esque city).

On the other hand, preserving the Warwick would mean less retail space, lessening the amount of street level activity along Samson. And while it would provide the base with some nice contrast, the building itself is not anything spectacular.

Other than that, I'm very pleased with this design and of course the height is awesome. Driving down 76 this weekend, I was getting goosebumps envisioning this tower next to the Rittenhouse - it will be very visible.

Bottom line: I'd like to see the Warwick preserved, I think it would make the base along Samsom more interesting; but if I had to choose between the Warwick and the current 600 ft design, I'd knock down the Warwick myself.

I don't get to decide what's historic, but I agree with an earlier comment that they're most interesting at ground level and not much to behold above that. The facades are what matter most to me, so maybe they can be integrated into the Sansom Street structure. I don't think that they'll take too much, if any, of the retail away as the Bair building is supposed to become the motor court entrance.

[maru2501]

height isn't the end all, be all

[techchallenger]

Originally Posted by pay homage

We need to make sure the dates and times for the community meetings are published so there can be a sane voice against the preservation zealots and NIMBYs who come out of the woodwork.

I'm a preservation zealot who also loves density and skyscrapers, so yeah, make sure you post the dates of the community meeting.

Originally Posted by pay homage

It would be a shame if this project died or was scaled back because a small but vocal group of people want some derelict buildings to remain intact...

It would also be a shame if a development company knowingly purchased property that included protected structures then threatened to make dead a bold and attractive project unless they could demolish those structures. That would be disingenuous and tactical fear-mongering.

Originally Posted by pay homage

The focus should be on adding density (to create a tax base to pay NIMBY pensions) quality building materials and engaging the street level with retail/restaurants etc - let's not live in the past.

I agree. Why can't the facades of the protected buildings that just happen to be made of quality building materials and engage the street level be a part of it? Also, I wish I had a pension.

[techchallenger]

Originally Posted by TempleGuy1000

with a slightly Gothic style

Gothic?

[TempleGuy1000]

Originally Posted by techchallenger

Gothic?

Yeah I don't know why I wrote Gothic, I meant more Georgian revival in terms of the entrance.

[summersm343]

Article from Naked Philly

http://www.ocfrealty.com/naked-philly/rittenhouse/slightly-updated-renderings-for-1911-walnut

[boxbot]

Originally Posted by summersm343

Article from Naked Philly

http://www.ocfrealty.com/naked-philly/rittenhouse/slightly-updated-renderings-for-1911-walnut

From the comments, the parapet wall of the Warwick was repointed and a new roof and framing were put on in 2007.

[Cro Burnham]

Originally Posted by TempleGuy1000

Yeah I don't know why I wrote Gothic, I meant more Georgian revival in terms of the entrance.

I think there's a little Romanesque revival in there too, maybe. I wonder what the lobby looks like.

[Justin7]

I didn't expect the Dallas comment to hit such a nerve (typical Philadelphia insecurity?). I'm not sure how anyone could argue that tearing down historic buildings does not bring the city one step closer to losing what makes it special. You're all getting some Jane Jacobs for Christmas.

[Arch+Eng]

Originally Posted by Justin7

I didn't expect the Dallas comment to hit such a nerve (typical Philadelphia insecurity?). I'm not sure how anyone could argue that tearing down historic buildings does not bring the city one step closer to losing what makes it special. You're all getting some Jane Jacobs for Christmas.

I for one, welcome the fact that I now live in lil' dallas

[cafeguy]

Originally Posted by Arch+Eng

I for one, welcome the fact that I now live in lil' dallas

actually... i think we truly are "lil' Dallas"....

https://twitter.com/zeromeanerror/status/676457698783809536