PHILADELPHIA | Highrise Development Thread IX - Page 647

summersm343 · #**12921** Posted **Dec 21, 2016, 7:51 PM**

Please no more politics.

Gonzo the Great · #**12922** Posted **Dec 21, 2016, 8:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by summersm343

Please no more politics.

Just want to get this in before it's too late

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpcUxwpOQ_A

Merry Christmas and a great Gonzo new year

summersm343 · #**12923** Posted **Dec 21, 2016, 8:16 PM**

^^Hahaha. I'll allow

summersm343 · #**12924** Posted **Dec 21, 2016, 8:20 PM**

Democratic lawmakers tout Philly, Pa. unity with $300M Port investment

Quote:

More than a dozen Pennsylvania officials gathered in South Philadelphia Wednesday morning to extol the previously announced investment of more than $300 million into the Port of Philadelphia's infrastructure, describing the initiative as a way to invest in not only the city's economy, but that of the entire state.

"This is the only port that is in Pennsylvania," said Gov. Tom Wolf during a press conference at the Sheet Metal Workers offices on South Columbus Boulevard.

Wolf, like Mayor Jim Kenney, several U.S. Congressman, and other Pennsylvania politicians, spoke about how Philadelphia's geographic location gave it the ability to serve as a "keystone" to the rest of the state and the East Coast.

"This is the only port that can claim to be the gateway to that rich market. This is the only port that has the capacity and potential to do great things for that market and Pennsylvania," Wolf said.

According to the Governor's Office, roughly $200 million of the Capital Investment Program will go towards the Packer Avenue Marine Terminal. The money will be used to add four new electric post-Panamax container cranes, relocate warehouses to support future container growth and the construction of additional containers, and deepen the terminal’s marginal berths so it works better with the 45-foot depth Delaware River main channel.

The $300 million investment will begin in 2017 and last at least three years. Officials have said the project will create thousands of jobs and set the city up for more financial growth in the long run.

In a statement last month, officials said the Port expects a "total direct job increase of 70 percent is projected from the current level of 3,124 to a projected 5,378 direct jobs. Total employment at the Port will also increase, from 10,341 to 17,020, and state and local tax revenues generated will increase from the current $69.6 million to $108.4 million annually."

To those who criticize the state for spending too much time focusing on the city, over the rest of the Commonwealth, U.S. Sen. Bob Casey reiterated the same sentiments as the governor.

"This is about our commonwealth. This isn't about one city or one region," he said. "We are one state and this is the gateway to economic growth."

http://www.bizjournals.com/philadelphia/...philadelphia-300-million-investment.html

1487 · #**12925** Posted **Dec 21, 2016, 8:57 PM**

^careful with that link, some might be offended thinking it's partisan in nature because of the headline.

Knight Hospitaller · #**12926** Posted **Dec 21, 2016, 9:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gonzo the Great

Just want to get this in before it's too late

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpcUxwpOQ_A

Merry Christmas and a great Gonzo new year

Sore Brexit loser! ;-)

Gonzo the Great · #**12927** Posted **Dec 21, 2016, 10:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knight Hospitaller

Sore Brexit loser! ;-)

People of Earth, do not be alarmed!

........... And now , back to the intent of this web site ...........................

hammersklavier · #**12928** Posted **Dec 22, 2016, 7:48 AM**

So as a Temple alum, I want to point out that several of the arguments against a Temple stadium, esp w/r/t parking, just fall flat. A lot of people completely forget that Temple still has a large commuter contingent and already has adequate parking for a 35k seat stadium scattered around campus simply due to its day-to-day operations. Is it really that inconvenient to tailgate in e.g. the 12th & Norris lot and head over to the stadium game time?

You can counterargue that commuters use those spots, of course ... but look at the game times! Evenings and Saturdays, when the only classes being offered are night classes and one-day-a-week seminars and most of that parking space goes unused anyway.

You guys are also complaining about the Liacouras's attendance numbers, but I'd also point out a big part of that is due to the declining on-court product. Schools often struggle to get good football and basketball programs at the same time; Cincy's beating us in shootyhoops while we're beating them in handegg. A consistently good program gets asses in seats, nothing more, nothing less.

Finally, the idea that filling half of a pro stadium is fine and dandy is frankly a crock of bull. Nearly every school that shares its home field with a pro stadium struggles at filling seats. Of course, some of this because several of these programs, like Georgia State and Umass, are indescribably awful, but Temple has had similar success lately as USF or SDSU or Miami (all of which were ranked at some point this season) and they each struggle just as much to get asses in excess seating capacity as we do. Heck, even Pitt's student body -- the most successful college-pro stadium-sharing in the country -- is a bit restive about going all the way to Heinz Field on game day.

There are a lot of misunderstandings about college stadia that float around this board, and I think a large part of that is our experience with extortionate pro teams. Look at it this way -- whenever Eagles or Phillies ownership wants something, they can threaten to move, but what's Temple gonna do? Move an entire 100+ ac campus? The only critique I have heard about this proposal that has any real merit is Temple's ability to finance it, but c'mon guys, they're at least trying to self-finance it and not trying to extract inordinate tax breaks.

Finally: College stadiums, once built, stay built. Many of the most successful college stadiums, like Bryant-Denny or Michigan Stadium or Tiger Stadium or Beaver Stadium and so on are essentially piles of accreted grandstands from playing in the same damn place for half a century or more. They're a lot more like pro soccer stadiums in Europe than any pro facility you see stateside.

Arenas: We really don't need a downtown arena here. MSG works partly because NYC is heavily under-arena'ed for its size. Even in San Francisco, the Warriors are talking about moving to an arena in Mission Bay, around 1.5 miles south of their downtown. I am in full agreement with Summers: It's much better to put effort into developing an urban environment around the arenas we already have than to move it.

I'll also note that major urban arenas are often sustained by having a lot of programs call it home. The Pistons are moving to the new Red Wings arena; St. John's calls MSG home in addition to the Knicks and Rangers; Georgetown the Verizon; and Nova plays home games at WFC at least as often as they play them at the Pavilion as a few examples. I personally think we, as a city, are just about arena-saturated as it is.

Philamigo · #**12929** Posted **Dec 22, 2016, 11:13 AM**

"This is the only port in Pennsylvania ..." - Gov. Wolf

Erie doesn't have a port? You learn something new every day.

skyscraper · #**12930** Posted **Dec 22, 2016, 1:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Philamigo

"This is the only port in Pennsylvania ..." - Gov. Wolf

Erie doesn't have a port? You learn something new every day.

deleted

crackpinky · #**12931** Posted **Dec 22, 2016, 1:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sgalla04

http://www.ocfrealty.com/naked-philly/market-east/tower-would-be-nice-at-13th-market

"The proposed tower would be 38 stories tall and would include office, retail, and tenant amenities, totaling 840K sqft."

Is there a thread for this?

jsbrook · #**12932** Posted **Dec 22, 2016, 2:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by crackpinky

Is there a thread for this?

Here it is:

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?p=7655757#post7655757

Admin needs to tag it correctly before it will generally show up in Philly projects.

mmikeyphilly · #**12933** Posted **Dec 22, 2016, 6:21 PM**

I was just searching on Google, 1301 Market Street, and I found an older article from 2013. Interesting Read:
I was trying to see if I could find a photo of what was there before now. (Parking Lot)...
anyway, just something to read:
http://www.precouncil.org/precouncil/mem...1st%20Jessica%20Abel%20Market%20East.pdf

EastSideHBG · #**12934** Posted **Dec 22, 2016, 6:29 PM**

Sky-high billboard is part of apartment plan at South Philly meat plant
Updated: DECEMBER 21, 2016 — 5:24 PM EST
http://www.philly.com/philly/business/Sk...artments-at-South-Philly-meat-plant.html

Frontst17 · #**12935** Posted **Dec 22, 2016, 6:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by EastSideHBG

Sky-high billboard is part of apartment plan at South Philly meat plant
Updated: DECEMBER 21, 2016 — 5:24 PM EST
http://www.philly.com/philly/business/Sk...artments-at-South-Philly-meat-plant.html

"Billboard mogul".... leaves a bad taste in my mouth

Philly-Drew · #**12936** Posted **Dec 22, 2016, 6:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by EastSideHBG

Sky-high billboard is part of apartment plan at South Philly meat plant
Updated: DECEMBER 21, 2016 — 5:24 PM EST
http://www.philly.com/philly/business/Sk...artments-at-South-Philly-meat-plant.html

I'm not liking this idea, one bit. If this gets approved, what's there to stop more and more people following the lead? Yikes!

Regarding the billboard being partially obscured due to the sound barrier on 95, too bad. Things happen. People get their views obscured all the time as different projects materialize. I hope the developer doesn't leverage that as a hardship, imposed by the city/state because a sound barrier was put in place on 95.

iheartphilly · #**12937** Posted **Dec 22, 2016, 7:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Philly-Drew

I'm not liking this idea, one bit. If this gets approved, what's there to stop more and more people following the lead? Yikes!

Regarding the billboard being partially obscured due to the sound barrier on 95, too bad. Things happen. People get their views obscured all the time as different projects materialize. I hope the developer doesn't leverage that as a hardship, imposed by the city/state because a sound barrier was put in place on 95.

In the digital age, I can't believe one dimension billboards are still relevant.

SEFTA · #**12938** Posted **Dec 22, 2016, 7:47 PM**

"How Chicago Became the 'City of Spectacle'
A new book examines how Mayor Richard M. Daley transformed the city into a destination.
City of Spectacle was secured, once again, at the end of the century when Richard M. Daley began his several terms as the city’s mayor. In the first decade of Daley’s leadership, the development of Navy Pier and the Museum Campus brought renewed energy to Chicago’s lakefront, and within a few years the lakefront and its nearby areas had become a virtual playground, attracting tens of millions of visitors each year. Chicago’s image came to revolve around its status as a tourist city and cultural hotspot, and its economy became increasingly dependent upon tourism. In building the $7 billion infrastructure that made all of this possible, Daley was keenly aware that he was borrowing from the template established by Burnham, and he often invoked Burnham’s name on behalf of his projects. "

http://www.citylab.com/politics/2016/12/...ard-m-daley/511040/?utm_source=SFTwitter

jjv007 · #**12939** Posted **Dec 22, 2016, 8:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by hammersklavier

So as a Temple alum, I want to point out that several of the arguments against a Temple stadium, esp w/r/t parking, just fall flat. A lot of people completely forget that Temple still has a large commuter contingent and already has adequate parking for a 35k seat stadium scattered around campus simply due to its day-to-day operations. Is it really that inconvenient to tailgate in e.g. the 12th & Norris lot and head over to the stadium game time?

You can counterargue that commuters use those spots, of course ... but look at the game times! Evenings and Saturdays, when the only classes being offered are night classes and one-day-a-week seminars and most of that parking space goes unused anyway.

You guys are also complaining about the Liacouras's attendance numbers, but I'd also point out a big part of that is due to the declining on-court product. Schools often struggle to get good football and basketball programs at the same time; Cincy's beating us in shootyhoops while we're beating them in handegg. A consistently good program gets asses in seats, nothing more, nothing less.

Finally, the idea that filling half of a pro stadium is fine and dandy is frankly a crock of bull. Nearly every school that shares its home field with a pro stadium struggles at filling seats. Of course, some of this because several of these programs, like Georgia State and Umass, are indescribably awful, but Temple has had similar success lately as USF or SDSU or Miami (all of which were ranked at some point this season) and they each struggle just as much to get asses in excess seating capacity as we do. Heck, even Pitt's student body -- the most successful college-pro stadium-sharing in the country -- is a bit restive about going all the way to Heinz Field on game day.

There are a lot of misunderstandings about college stadia that float around this board, and I think a large part of that is our experience with extortionate pro teams. Look at it this way -- whenever Eagles or Phillies ownership wants something, they can threaten to move, but what's Temple gonna do? Move an entire 100+ ac campus? The only critique I have heard about this proposal that has any real merit is Temple's ability to finance it, but c'mon guys, they're at least trying to self-finance it and not trying to extract inordinate tax breaks.

Finally: College stadiums, once built, stay built. Many of the most successful college stadiums, like Bryant-Denny or Michigan Stadium or Tiger Stadium or Beaver Stadium and so on are essentially piles of accreted grandstands from playing in the same damn place for half a century or more. They're a lot more like pro soccer stadiums in Europe than any pro facility you see stateside.

Honestly I think Temple can get the financing if they really set their eyes on that goal. So many students and faculty though, resist the idea because of "community concerns." Yes, this should be fully taken into consideration but the stadium displaces no one and if done right can be integrated well. Temple is still a very liberal university though so there is an incredible amount of opposition due to worries about the community. I think that might be the greatest obstacle.

jsbrook · #**12940** Posted **Dec 23, 2016, 12:05 AM**

A stadium would be so great for Temple. Having gone to a big football school for law school (U of M), I know how great it is for the school experience and recruiting. It could help complete Temple's transformation from a commuter school and really be great for the city at large. And maybe it's the impetus needed to further bolster the football program and get let into the Big 10...

I can appreciate community concerns, but we're not talking about bulldozing houses to make way for a stadium at Broad & Norris. And it's not analogous to putting a Phillies stadium, with baseball's 6 month season and 162 total games (a good chunk home games), at Broad and Callowhill. I don't think 8 home games a year on Saturdays is really that disruptive to the lives of neighbors. Outside game days, it didn't "disrupt" anything in Ann Arbor. I'm a football fan and loved it, but even professors and others in the area that didn't were not bothered.

Granted, Ann Arbor is not a "city" per se the way larger, more urban cites are, but has anyone polled the neighbors at Yulman Stadium, Gerald Ford Stadium, and Nippert stadium as part of the efforts to get this off the ground? I'd like to see how neighbors actually feel about city stadiums where they exist...