PHILADELPHIA | Highrise Development Thread IX

[jjv007]

Originally Posted by Guipos08

Hopefully with additions to 1911 Walnut and maybe Cira II would put us around the 12,000 foot range putting us in 3rd and making city hall our 15th tallest building.

We probably wouldn't be 3rd even then because other cities also have projects under construction, some even more than us. Regardless, there are so many ways of measuring skylines (number of buildings over 150 m or 400 ft., number of high rise buildings, avg. height of 10 tallest buildings, etc.) and that doesn't even include taking into account the aesthetic quality of a skyline, which is of course highly subjective. For example, Miami according to some metrics may have a larger (not taller) skyline than Philly, but many don't find its skyline aesthetically appealing due to the perceived cheapness and blandness of a large number of their buildings. On the contrary, Seattle rates highly in skyline polls due to its picturesque nature, despite the fact that it is relatively small. It's impossible to come up with a formula to judge a skyline qualitatively, but I've been working on a formula to quantitatively rank skylines based on a variety of factors. When I've refined it some more, I'll post it on here and see what you guys think.

[iheartphilly]

Originally Posted by jjv007

We probably wouldn't be 3rd even then because other cities also have projects under construction, some even more than us. Regardless, there are so many ways of measuring skylines (number of buildings over 150 m or 400 ft., number of high rise buildings, avg. height of 10 tallest buildings, etc.) and that doesn't even include taking into account the aesthetic quality of a skyline, which is of course highly subjective. For example, Miami according to some metrics may have a larger (not taller) skyline than Philly, but many don't find its skyline aesthetically appealing due to the perceived cheapness and blandness of a large number of their buildings. On the contrary, Seattle rates highly in skyline polls due to its picturesque nature, despite the fact that it is relatively small. It's impossible to come up with a formula to judge a skyline qualitatively, but I've been working on a formula to quantitatively rank skylines based on a variety of factors. When I've refined it some more, I'll post it on here and see what you guys think.

If interested try these for starter-

Qualitatively in terms of appearance:
1) design quality
2) form-mass/shape quality
2) material quality
3) placement in the overall skyline-relative impact on overall skyline.

[br323206]

Originally Posted by jjv007

We probably wouldn't be 3rd even then because other cities also have projects under construction, some even more than us. Regardless, there are so many ways of measuring skylines (number of buildings over 150 m or 400 ft., number of high rise buildings, avg. height of 10 tallest buildings, etc.) and that doesn't even include taking into account the aesthetic quality of a skyline, which is of course highly subjective. For example, Miami according to some metrics may have a larger (not taller) skyline than Philly, but many don't find its skyline aesthetically appealing due to the perceived cheapness and blandness of a large number of their buildings. On the contrary, Seattle rates highly in skyline polls due to its picturesque nature, despite the fact that it is relatively small. It's impossible to come up with a formula to judge a skyline qualitatively, but I've been working on a formula to quantitatively rank skylines based on a variety of factors. When I've refined it some more, I'll post it on here and see what you guys think.

Yes, this was just one fun way to compare the skylines. Obviously there are a million other ways to compare them. But my chart actually includes all of the under construction buildings in all of those cities that I could find. Also, we compared very favorably. We had the second most new "top 15" buildings under construction behind NYC I believe. I'll check for sure tomorrow, the spreadsheet is at work.

[iheartphilly]

This is really cool for the Linc. Anyone else see it and any real intentions of it getting built?http://www.meisstudio.com/lincoln-financial-field-roof

[Guipos08]

Originally Posted by iheartphilly

This is really cool for the Linc. Anyone else see it and any real intentions of it getting built?http://www.meisstudio.com/lincoln-financial-field-roof

Pretty cool, def would help in getting a chance to host a Super Bowl

[wanderer34]

Originally Posted by TallCoolOne

Partial capping project around the Parkway continues:

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

Why doesn't the city just fully cap Vine St??? Especially from 10th St to 20th St (Pkwy)???

And in the process, create a park/greenway similar to what Boston has downtown???

[skyscraper]

Originally Posted by iheartphilly

This is really cool for the Linc. Anyone else see it and any real intentions of it getting built?http://www.meisstudio.com/lincoln-financial-field-roof

It's kind of cool looking but no way in hell it gets built.
This looks like one guy's portfolio website. Seems he used to work at NBBJ which designed the Linc, and he probably did drawings for a roof that was value engineered out early on. He is just showing off his design skills, not seriously proposing this, I don't think.
As far as increasing the chance of a super bowl, remember that they had one at the meadowlands without a roof, no reason to think we'd need one here. Not worth the money.

[br323206]

Originally Posted by wanderer34

Why doesn't the city just fully cap Vine St??? Especially from 10th St to 20th St (Pkwy)???

And in the process, create a park/greenway similar to what Boston has downtown???

You mean besides the hundred of millions (billions?) of dollars we don't have?

[br323206]

Here is the height data with the buildings that are under construction highlighted. As you can see, we have the second most new entries behind NYC.

Height Data_UnderConstruction by bruddflicks, on Flickr

[Kidphilly]

Originally Posted by hammersklavier

I actually think my favorite part about this plan is the greenspace. It's actually really well organized: Drexel Park has a strong connection to the river (something which I pointed out would be a good organizational feature in the previous round of meetings), the park down by the Innovation Neighborhood is an excellent use of what is guaranteed to be the hardest-to-develop portion of the site (the hillock caused by the station approaches), and the riverfront greenspace offers an iconic viewshed.

Another other good thing about this proposal is the street network. Look closely at the north-south streets: One runs along the edge between the SEPTA tracks and the maintenance facilities; the other, alongside the High Line. The other north-south streets to the east match the pattern established by these axes. Meanwhile, the east-west streets are an extension of the streets that meet 32nd. You can see Cherry, Summer, Winter, and Hamilton streets in the site, all clearly aligned to their sections to the west.

I'm also pleased by all the proposed pedestrian bridges across the Schuylkill. There would be ones at Arch and Race streets, and another directly linking Drexel and Paine's parks. The benefit to pedestrian traffic of all these crossings (more than I would have dared hope) can't be understated. Hopefully they'll be well-designed, too, with one iconic span and two timeless ones.

Concerns:
- Landing the ped crossing in Paine's Park without excessively disturbing it.
- That long building cutting off the 3000 block of Race. What's it for? Would it have an internal easement for Race Street pedestrian traffic? Does it create a superblock (which would go against what is otherwise the manifest spirit of the plan)?

The elephant in the room is leaving the SEPTA tracks open. In part, this is to be expected: the middle section is over open ground, while a large chunk of the Amtrak yard would be covered for municipal uses. Even if development were shown over the Powelton yards, it would have been the final phase, simply due to the expense of it relative to the sites immediately to the east.

I find myself wondering...

I think this is a good plan, but at the same time I would like to see some sort of statement to the effect that the open sections over Powelton Yards are to be considered future development options, once land values to do so exceed construction costs. I'd also like to see street easements for Cherry, Summer, Winter, and Hamilton secured through the air rights. Doing these things now, I suspect, will prevent future headaches some 50-75 years down the line when the parcels above the SEPTA yards proper actually get eyed for development.

great post

I thought about transit and hope it comes to fruition and uses the Pennsy cut and then down the 23rd street viaduct

https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=zNG4WyRIq_Oo.k1JXjX9gyItI&usp=sharing


I also agree on the green space and pedestrian bridges, this does a great job of creating easy walking paths

If only one bridge gets built I would argue for the Race connector as the Arch is much closer to JFK

[jjv007]

Originally Posted by br323206

Here is the height data with the buildings that are under construction highlighted. As you can see, we have the second most new entries behind NYC.

Height Data_UnderConstruction by bruddflicks, on Flickr

Thanks for the chart, some of the other proposed projects should make it to the list as well if they get approved and begin work, although they might take some time (1900 Walnut and Cira 2).

[br323206]

Originally Posted by jjv007

Thanks for the chart, some of the other proposed projects should make it to the list as well if they get approved and begin work, although they might take some time (1900 Walnut and Cira 2).

Yep! I'll update the chart as projects here and elsewhere get under construction and re-post it periodically!

[PhillySteaks]

Originally Posted by br323206

You mean besides the hundred of millions (billions?) of dollars we don't have?

Yea - we should use that money we don't have to plan a pie in the sky capping of the Schuylkill Rail Yards. That makes SOOO much more sense. (Actually I 100% agree with capping Vine street because the land would become that much more valuable and doesn't come anywhere near the cost of capping the yards. Not to mention actually connecting portions of the city that should of been connected all along.

Someone please fill me in - because I definitely don't know all the details, I've been skipping over a lot of the articles lately, but who exactly will be paying for this capping of the rail yards? Most of my math is back of the napkin, but why exactly is it being done? Are we tight on space for offices or MF developments? Last I checked there were 9-10 surface lots around 30th street station. Considering Philly is consistently listed as one of the THEE most affordable cities I find it doubtful that were really in need of single family homes. Isn't there currently a plan to pay a few million to have a "feasibility study" to figure out a budget/timelines/phase/etc. which is currently in the works? What is the use for this? Look - I'm as big a philly cheerleader and pro-development as the next guy, but you have to be realistic to understand that the economics of such a project would be MASSIVE and the property values and rents simply DO NOT JUSTIFY building over the rail yards. Office vacancy in the downtown area is around 10% (yea pretty decent) - but rents range from $24 - 41 PSF. How the hell does $41 PSF (not to mention all the concessions needed to backfill that level of office space, I'd expect your NER would be somewhere in the $20s - it's not like we have an extreme tenant pipeline to fill this space up) cover the cost of capping the rail yards? Didn't the last Ucity report state that like 80% of the jobs there are literally 2 companies? That's just god awful diversification and incredible risk to build ANYTHING on spec.

So what else goes there? Green space? Why the hell would we BUILD green space next to NATURAL green space .5 miles away in Fairmount Park?

Are we just trying to compete with New York for some reason? Look - NY is a different beast and should never be compared to this city. Office rents in Midtown are somewhere near $75 - $80 for class A product. They are building over Hudson due to complete LACK of space. Costs associated with Related's total investment are around $15B for the total complete neighborhood. I work on the JV for 10 Hudson - do you know how far behind in delivery that building is? Its been ungodly expensive to build.

"The public favored capping the rail yard, although engineering issues means 10 fewer acres will be covered than preferred, and exposed areas will have parks and pedestrian bridges to link the two sections of the city, Philly.com said." Everyone does realize that this means they realized the costs associated with capping the entire space. It's 2015 - engineering can be accomplished for just about anything, just takes plenty of $. I suspect "engineering issues" will pop up again shrinking the coverage in the future.

So why are we capping ares? To build some green space? why, there is some like half a mile away. For houses? why, there are affordable houses all over the city. For MF / Office projects? Why, the rents really don't justify considering the vacant land close by. You could offer a way above market bid for one of those lots close by and still keep your costs below whats needed to cover the yards. If philly decides to push this thing through with a half baked scheme we are going to end up with a park that only covers about 1/3 of the total acreage - you'll see holes everywhere because reality of the costs will set in as the construction moves forward.

PLEASE don't take this rant the wrong way - people should just be realistic about this, and it frustrates the hell out of me when I see that millions are being spent on a feasibility study (whether it'd be public or private $s). I'd LOVE to see the yards capped I really would, but from an economic standpoint it really makes ZERO sense. It would take 30+ years for it to make sense (and I'm being very bullish), and a LOT of things would need to change. For it to be done right, it needs to be done by a solidly financed investor - I don't see this happening because returns associated with the outlay don't justify. So what's the next option? Having a quaisi public-private relationship to build over the yards? If that's the case you can damn near guarantee that only a small portion will be covered, it will most likely be 1 or 2 buildings, and on top will sit the worlds most expensive park (directly next to the worlds largest urban landscaped park).

[UPenn18]

Originally Posted by PhillySteaks

Why exactly is it being done?

I think the idea here is to focus growth in urban areas that are accessible to mass transit. If real estate experts really believe that urban living will be considered preferable for a long time coming, then development around 30th street station makes a lot of sense. If it's the landing point of high speed rail in Philadelphia to the rest of the northeast corridor, there is really no reason to believe there wouldn't be huge demand for space near the station given that its also connected to regional rail and the subway system. That in addition to the presence of Universities nearby and proximity to one of the most urban and walkable downtowns in the country. That area has huge potential. Also keep in mind that this development is looking 30+ years into the future, so there's plenty of time for infill to build on the many empty lots left in CC and UCity. So when the time comes for capping to begin, there could very well be scarcity. Also, in order to get those nice urban development grants, you need to have a plan. So they had might as well come up with a plan now so they can be ready to apply for grants when they need them.

As the development framework currently exists, I'm a little concerned about the lack of connectivity to nearby neighborhoods. It states that building over the Powelton Yards is difficult and costly, so it leaves part of it uncovered and a greenspace over the rest. There are no street connections at arch and race streets. I'm afraid that huge gap between development will become a dead space - I cant imagine it being very pedestrian friendly. Even a small row home neighborhood would be better than nothing to increase the connectivity. The grid needs to be carried over to the fullest extent possible IMO. Otherwise I see it being about as lively as Market West as it currently exists.

[PhillySteaks]

UPENN18 (I don't want to repeat long quotes so this is a response)

Makes sense, I get what you're saying in terms of transit and location - I agree. My big questions are 1.) Who is paying for this? 1 or 2 massive developers like Hudson Yards? Related is paying for most of the platform of Hudson yards and paying the city on a ground lease with an extended abatement. Or is it going to be massively subsidized via the public. IF it's the latter - I'm seriously frightened about the outcome and suspect lots of "engineering issues" to come up. The last time the city tried to force the development of a neighborhood we got Franklintown Blvd which still hasn't actually materialized fully - and that was decades and decades ago.

If this is infact built in phases by a group of public/private partnerships (Amtrak, Septa, Philly, Drexel, BRT) what happens when the first phase gets built, we hit a recession, and the project stalls out for another 10yrs? This is a very likely scenario, and what often happens when the full project isn't fully financed and committed from the get go.

2.) Is it really a good idea to spend a few million on a feasibility study for something that may happen 30-40yrs out? I hope they are accounting for inflation, as well as a historical surge in MF and office rents. They also should be assuming that all comparable land costs in philly are going to skyrocket. Again bringing me full circle - kinda pie in the sky, because even IF costs get too high to build anymore in West Philly due to density and lack of available land - developers will look to the next low cost alternative which would be the navy yard or possibly even the DE riverfront near fishtown (which is also served by public transit).

Also, I'm not saying that this couldn't happen one day - just that many many stars would need to perfectly align.

[Knight Hospitaller]

Originally Posted by UPenn18

As the development framework currently exists, I'm a little concerned about the lack of connectivity to nearby neighborhoods. It states that building over the Powelton Yards is difficult and costly, so it leaves part of it uncovered and a greenspace over the rest. There are no street connections at arch and race streets. I'm afraid that huge gap between development will become a dead space - I cant imagine it being very pedestrian friendly. Even a small row home neighborhood would be better than nothing to increase the connectivity. The grid needs to be carried over to the fullest extent possible IMO. Otherwise I see it being about as lively as Market West as it currently exists.

My sentiments exactly.

[Knight Hospitaller]

Originally Posted by PhillySteaks

UPENN18 (I don't want to repeat long quotes so this is a response)

Makes sense, I get what you're saying in terms of transit and location - I agree. My big questions are 1.) Who is paying for this? 1 or 2 massive developers like Hudson Yards? Related is paying for most of the platform of Hudson yards and paying the city on a ground lease with an extended abatement. Or is it going to be massively subsidized via the public. IF it's the latter - I'm seriously frightened about the outcome and suspect lots of "engineering issues" to come up. The last time the city tried to force the development of a neighborhood we got Franklintown Blvd which still hasn't actually materialized fully - and that was decades and decades ago.

2.) Is it really a good idea to spend a few million on a feasibility study for something that may happen 30-40yrs out? I hope they are accounting for inflation, as well as a historical surge in MF and office rents. They also should be assuming that all comparable land costs in philly are going to skyrocket. Again bringing me full circle - kinda pie in the sky, because even IF costs get too high to build anymore in West Philly due to density and lack of available land - developers will look to the next low cost alternative which would be the navy yard or possibly even the DE riverfront near fishtown (which is also served by public transit).

Also, I'm not saying that this couldn't happen one day - just that many many stars would need to perfectly align.

Without doing an in depth comparison, it seems to me that most of the actual development in this plan actually involves very little capping per se. Over the years a huge piece of ground has been cleared in the middle of the project area between Powelton Yards and the Highline. Much of the proposed development is supposed to fit in there. The only area to be covered with anything major that is not already cleared is a rail yard between the Highline and the Cira garage. I believe that Amtrak also wants part of that reserved for a maintenance facility. It seems to me that there are few obstacles to building over that. The only true capping being proposed is placing a green veneer over portions of the SEPTA tracks leading to Powelton Yards and a bit more over part of the Amtrak NE corridor tracks N. of the Station. I can only assume that much of what is built is going to have entrances above actual ground level. Extending that elevated entrance level into capped areas, will likely be rolled into the overall project costs, because a product with better connections is going to fetch more than one with poor connections to the rest of town. Creating a park like atmosphere leading up to the river banks seems about as good as any other way to do that on the one side. I'm most concerned about the huge chasm created by leaving the Powelton rail yards uncovered, but they've already determined that is cost-prohibitive (at least).

[BenKatzPhillytoParis]

Originally Posted by Knight Hospitaller

My sentiments exactly.

I think connectivity is actually their main goal here. Instead of the rail yards acting as a huge void near the center of the city and a break in the grid, per the plan they re-establish the grid in many places including three pedestrian crossings over the Schuylkill. I really think that is key for having Center City continue relatively seamlessly and meld into West Philly.

[Knight Hospitaller]

Originally Posted by BenKatzPhillytoParis

I think connectivity is actually their main goal here. Instead of the rail yards acting as a huge void near the center of the city and a break in the grid, per the plan they re-establish the grid in many places including three pedestrian crossings over the Schuylkill. I really think that is key for having Center City continue relatively seamlessly and meld into West Philly.

I know that's the goal, but I think footbridges only at the SW corner of the project are the big weak spot in the project.

[PhillySteaks]

(Knight response)

Okay - so you are saying they were only going to cover the tracks next to and under the cira centre? Am I understanding that correctly? That's a pretty big grade differential between ground and elevated isn't it? I wish I could google street view it, but isn't that section of land significantly lower than the street level that cira & 32nd street are on?