Posted Dec 22, 2015, 3:07 PM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 3,707
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by wanderer34
You know, after criticizing the scale and the scope of this project, it's not a bad building, after all!!! Of course, we want this to be a little taller than what it is, but the building fits the scope of the waterfront. It doesn't always have to be 600+ft tall to be a good building.
I believe the reason why the developers didn't build it taller has to be because the developers didn't want the building to be the primary focus of the waterfront, especially considering how close One Water St is to the Benjamin Franklin Bridge. I would've loved it if Bridgeman's View and the Philly WTC, which were high-scale proposals, had been built instead,but then again, you can't please everybody!!!
|
The waterfront has a height limit because the city knows only so many units will be built along the waterfront. They'd rather see a dozen mid-rise buildings than one or two super block high rises. And I agree with this logic 100%. There is a large supply of available land and only so much demand (because, let's face it, most city dwellers would prefer to be on the other side of 95). I know I'd rather have a continuous string of "One Water Streets" than a Bridgeman's View surrounded by all that vacant land.
|