PHILADELPHIA | Highrise Development Thread IX - Page 492

Arch+Eng · #**9821** Posted **Dec 18, 2015, 3:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larry King

none of it will happen in the next 2 decades anyway so who cares, its all fantasy

I will only be in my late 40s. And at that point maybe I will be able to afford a one bedroom studio in this area.

MetaldDeth81 · #**9822** Posted **Dec 18, 2015, 3:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arch+Eng

but the elimination of the drexel innovation neighborhood should have negated that.

I believe Drexel Innovation Neighborhood is still in the plans, at least along the JFK Blvd corridor.

http://static1.squarespace.com/static/53..._Draft+Framework+Report_Dec+2015_Web.pdf
(see section 8.1), pages 42

PhillySteaks · #**9823** Posted **Dec 18, 2015, 3:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arch+Eng

Did you guys notice that the Center Business District #2 plan for the capped railyards did not get approved?

We are getting a reduced version of the Schuylkill Crossings design, which will feature mostly Mixed Use properties and alot of parks. It will also leave 30% of the rail yards uncapped.

I have to say I am disappointed.

Also, Drexel's innovation neighbor is no longer planned.

Looks like someone finally ran the numbers lol. (see post 9773 - pg 489)

Arch+Eng · #**9824** Posted **Dec 18, 2015, 3:51 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhillySteaks

Looks like someone finally ran the numbers lol. (see post 9773 - pg 489)

Yea, someone horrible at math. The project is still a go, so why reduce the earning potential of it? I would think more density here would make it more economically feasible.

..and I do not know if that guy from that post ever got his answer but, while philadelphia could definitely not afford this project...I'm pretty sure the two multi billion dollar universities plus multi billion dollar companies Penn, Drexel, Amtrak & SEPTA respectively can.

skyscraper · #**9825** Posted **Dec 18, 2015, 4:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larry King

I like the symphony house, maybe I'm the only one.. it reminds me of Miami. I don't like southstar lofts

As far as I know you are the only one. Symphony House stinks. What's worse is that when I was doing my thesis project in architecture school, I designed a skyscraper for that site (it was still a surface parking lot at the time) that would have been over 1100 feet tall, mixed use (office, hotel, residential, tv studio, retail). Maybe I'm not exactly objective about it but I like my design much better than what they put up.
Oh, and one of my jurors was one of the architects who designed SH. Unfortunately he did not incorporate any of my designs into his.

phillyheights · #**9826** Posted **Dec 18, 2015, 4:14 PM**

i like Symphony House as well, I see people deride it all the time. What's the gripe with it? I especially like that its a color you don't see a lot on buildings. Is it the height that people hate?

Boku · #**9827** Posted **Dec 18, 2015, 4:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by skyscraper

As far as I know you are the only one. Symphony House stinks. What's worse is that when I was doing my thesis project in architecture school, I designed a skyscraper for that site (it was still a surface parking lot at the time) that would have been over 1100 feet tall, mixed use (office, hotel, residential, tv studio, retail). Maybe I'm not exactly objective about it but I like my design much better than what they put up.
Oh, and one of my jurors was one of the architects who designed SH. Unfortunately he did not incorporate any of my designs into his.

Pics or it didn't happen.

br323206 · #**9828** Posted **Dec 18, 2015, 4:26 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by skyscraper

As far as I know you are the only one. Symphony House stinks. What's worse is that when I was doing my thesis project in architecture school, I designed a skyscraper for that site (it was still a surface parking lot at the time) that would have been over 1100 feet tall, mixed use (office, hotel, residential, tv studio, retail). Maybe I'm not exactly objective about it but I like my design much better than what they put up.
Oh, and one of my jurors was one of the architects who designed SH. Unfortunately he did not incorporate any of my designs into his.

We've had this discussion a million times but I also like SH. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

1487 · #**9829** Posted **Dec 18, 2015, 4:41 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by br323206

We've had this discussion a million times but I also like SH. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

exactly. Its not the greatest, but I hardly find it to be nearly as objectionable as many do- especially because it's engagement with the street is relatively well done.

PhillySteaks · #**9830** Posted **Dec 18, 2015, 5:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arch+Eng

Yea, someone horrible at math. The project is still a go, so why reduce the earning potential of it? I would think more density here would make it more economically feasible.

..and I do not know if that guy from that post ever got his answer but, while philadelphia could definitely not afford this project...I'm pretty sure the two multi billion dollar universities plus multi billion dollar companies Penn, Drexel, Amtrak & SEPTA respectively can.

Yea, I can tell you have a lot of experience in this arena. Can you please provide your math so we can all take a look? Public/Private developments are always waaaay better funded throughout the lifespan of a major project such as this. It's not like septa or amtrak would EVER pull money and leave big gaping holes in the platform if something in government or their revenue stream were to change.

Pie. In. The. Sky.

Just because Penn/Drexel can afford it, doesn't mean they'll pay super high premiums - they aren't idiots. Like I said, last I counted there were 9-10 surface parking lots around 30th street station...plenty of room to build.

Knight Hospitaller · #**9831** Posted **Dec 18, 2015, 5:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhillySteaks

Like I said, last I counted there were 9-10 surface parking lots around 30th street station...plenty of room to build.

That's not a small point. High cost and minimal connections to its surroundings leaves this a distant dream (if not an outright dud). I do hope that the changes to the station happen along with the surrounding transportation improvements. However, those are just the sort of things that are least likely to happen since they'll most likely require government spending to get done -- at least until the commercial potential of the project (such as it is) is realized and Amtrak/SEPTA could redirect some capital to such projects.

McBane · #**9832** Posted **Dec 18, 2015, 5:35 PM**

Symphony House to me is the epitomy of the bad mix of using cheap materials on a traditional design. It's neighbors along South Broad are actual historic buildings made with quality stone, which only serves to make SH's exterior look even more obviously cheap. The pinkish color is not doing anyone any favors either. It does engage the street well though, I'll give you that. The height is fine.

Southstar is horrific, I don't think anyone can deny that. 777 South Broad is pretty decent and One Riverside is shaping up to be quite nice. SLS - if built - would be by far his best work.

The designs of his projects seem to be improving.

1487 · #**9833** Posted **Dec 18, 2015, 7:08 PM**

I personally don't think the developers have that much to do with the actual building design or material choices.

Cro Burnham · #**9834** Posted **Dec 18, 2015, 8:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1487

I personally don't think the developers have that much to do with the actual building design or material choices.

That would be an incorrect thought.

1487 · #**9835** Posted **Dec 18, 2015, 8:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cro Burnham

That would be an incorrect thought.

But of course. Wouldn't be the first time I've had one. I would ask you to enlighten us, but I'm sure I don't need to ask.

Knight Hospitaller · #**9836** Posted **Dec 18, 2015, 8:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cro Burnham

That would be an incorrect thought.

Yeah, I wasn't sure how to respond to that. I'm sure that various developers give more or less of a **** about what their project looks like, but they all care about how much it costs. Design and materials don't (and necessarily cannot) escape their notice.

Philly-Drew · #**9837** Posted **Dec 18, 2015, 8:47 PM**

Cloudy day today but managed to get one decent shot anyway. 12/17/2015

It will look real cool when CITC, W, and 1601 Vine are complete.

1487 · #**9838** Posted **Dec 18, 2015, 8:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knight Hospitaller

Yeah, I wasn't sure how to respond to that. I'm sure that various developers give more or less of a **** about what their project looks like, but they all care about how much it costs. Design and materials don't (and necessarily cannot) escape their notice.

Labor costs are biggest factor in most construction projects. Many of the things that critics focus on in relation to final appearance are a fraction of the total project budget. Time is more important than materials when it comes to saving money. Im not suggesting the folks financially backing a project don't review or approve what is built, I'm saying that the ideas that become reality come from architects, and to a lesser extent engineers. Whatever is blessed originates in their minds. I would think corporate entities that develop a huge number of buildings rarely get bogged down in the design details.

Philly-Drew · #**9839** Posted **Dec 18, 2015, 8:57 PM**

Count me in with the group who likes the Symphony House.

UrbanRevival · #**9840** Posted **Dec 18, 2015, 9:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by McBane

The designs of his projects seem to be improving.

I would agree that Dranoff is definitely embracing much more forward-thinking and modern design, although opinions are of course always a matter of personal taste.

As for Symphony House, I can understand when certain projects do not jibe with someone's design sensibilities, but when it comes to materials, I think the term "cheap" is tossed around way too liberally. Synthetic stucco (i.e., Dryvit) I can definitely see objections to, but both SH and Southstar used precast concrete and CarbonCast, which doesn't come "cheap."

http://www.highconcrete.com/projects/applications/multiunit/condo/SymphonyHouse.cfm

The fact of the matter is we'll likely never see a full, traditionally-built masonry building constructed again, but that doesn't make precast buildings with solid materials any less durable or desirable. Now, I'd agree that they do not necessarily exude the same charm, but this is just the world we live in now.

If there are any cities anywhere in the world that are somehow bucking the trend and eschewing precast building methods, I'd love someone to point them out, but I think we've collectively moved on from that era.