PHILADELPHIA | River Walk | Two Towers | 363 FT & 315 FT | 32 FLOORS & 28 FLOORS

[1487]

Originally Posted by Redddog

+2. Let's not get too greedy, here.

yeah Im not a fan of this "Id rather look at a parking lot for another 10 years rather than have a design I don't love" mentality. This is one of Inga's oft repeated stances- that Philly is hot and thus we shouldn't settle for less than near perfect projects. Philly is much hotter than it used to be, but demand and pricing have a major impact on what developers can and will do. We still have parking lots in and near the heart of the CBD. We have areas such as this one that are still lack much in the way of pedestrian density. It's hard to expect a project at this location to reflect what you would see at say 18th and Walnut. Anyone who has seen the residential buildings in this area now would know there isn't much in the way of ground floor activity or retail.

[City Wide]

Originally Posted by Redddog

+2. Let's not get too greedy, here.

I hate to say this, but that is such a Philly type of answer.
I don't know if you mean it this way, but too often I think the general school of thought for those who are born and bred here is not to aim too high and to be very grateful to come in second or third.

[iheartphilly]

Originally Posted by City Wide

I hate to say this, but that is such a Philly type of answer.
I don't know if you mean it this way, but too often I think the general school of thought for those who are born and bred here is not to aim too high and to be very grateful to come in second or third.

^
Expectations vs. Reality. Philly should be its own brand and we should work to raise the poverty levels and get high paying jobs here. I've said it before, we really can't compare ourselves to NYC-Manhattan. Manhattan attracts obscene amounts of money in real estate from all over the world and buyers too. The reality is that Philly is still pretty poor. Take a look at all the rowhomes that surround the CBD and you will understand. We do have small pockets of neighborhood that are rich/wealth, but nothing like NYC.

[El Duderino]

Originally Posted by City Wide

I hate to say this, but that is such a Philly type of answer.
I don't know if you mean it this way, but too often I think the general school of thought for those who are born and bred here is not to aim too high and to be very grateful to come in second or third.

nice over-generalization! being realistic is different than being defeatist.

unless a developer is banking on amazon definitely choosing Philly, this seems like a pretty good project given the location, no? These towers seem like a major step up from what PMC has done in the past (the architect of record is Gensler, who is no second-rate hire). I think most of us are disappointed by the amount of parking/lack of retail, but to cut off our nose off to spite our face (the “i’d rather have a parking lot” mentality) doesn’t seem like a good response. I don’t know how much walking around you’ve done in that area at different times of day/night, but this will be a massive benefit and hopefully will trigger further development that is more worthy of the high-esteem to which we seem to all hold this amazing city.

[SEFTA]

What is this obsession with NY and why are we to be like them?

[jjv007]

Originally Posted by City Wide

I hate to say this, but that is such a Philly type of answer.
I don't know if you mean it this way, but too often I think the general school of thought for those who are born and bred here is not to aim too high and to be very grateful to come in second or third.

funny you say this coz I’m interpreting this completely differently. I’ll be the first to say Philly has historically “settled” too often but in this case griping about design is just pointless, it’s not about settling. Major cities are chock full of generic but decent towers like these. They add density and do their job. We aren’t shooting for the Eiffel Tower here.

[City Wide]

Originally Posted by iheartphilly

^
Expectations vs. Reality. Philly should be its own brand and we should work to raise the poverty levels and get high paying jobs here. I've said it before, we really can't compare ourselves to NYC-Manhattan. Manhattan attracts obscene amounts of money in real estate from all over the world and buyers too. The reality is that Philly is still pretty poor. Take a look at all the rowhomes that surround the CBD and you will understand. We do have small pockets of neighborhood that are rich/wealth, but nothing like NYC.

Who said anything about NYC? (bad boy, no city vs city) To me its a matter of a second or third rate design at a location that should have received something much better. Once this is built, the City will be stuck with it for a long, long time. And again, IMO, being stuck with it is the correct term. If all PMC wants is a empty lot, then there's certainly other parking lots in the area where building another one of their C+ buildings wouldn't be so noticeable.

I know this is not really a fair comparison but if a copy of 2400 Chestnut St. was being proposed for the lot just to the south, which is basically at the end of Sansom St., would people still be saying 'go for it'? I don't think so, because I think its well acknowledged that that building at that location is a terrible match. If it was sited 3 or 4 blocks to the east it still wouldn't be a better building but it wouldn't be on the river, where for good or ill, its going to stand out.

And this is a perfect example that good design, IMO, is not arrived at just by hiring a 'name' architect.

But, one issue that hasn't come up in this discussion is supply and demand; as long as PMC and others can build off the rack buildings and they are successful then I'm not surprised that they continue to stay with their same boring program. I will be the first to acknowledge that they do get buildings built, and generally that's better then not getting something built.

I really hope "the Bridge" fills up overnight and shows that there is a market for something that's more then just same old, same old.

[Redddog]

Originally Posted by City Wide

.......

I really hope "the Bridge" fills up overnight and shows that there is a market for something that's more then just same old, same old.

I know someone in the Bridge who was saying that they're having a very difficult time filling that up and are airbnb'ing rooms like crazy. Super transient and not at all the vibe they signed up for.

[1487]

Originally Posted by City Wide

I hate to say this, but that is such a Philly type of answer.
I don't know if you mean it this way, but too often I think the general school of thought for those who are born and bred here is not to aim too high and to be very grateful to come in second or third.

I cant stand patronizing remarks like that. How long has this lot been vacant? At some point people need to accept reality- this is a challenging site that is relatively isolated for various reasons. It is NOT Rittenhouse or Washington Square. PMC brought in a big name architectural firm that works worldwide and designed a pretty decent, but not perfect project that is probably going to cost them $150M+ to build. So accepting two towers and 500+ units and a grocery store designed by a well known major firm on what has been a parking lot for decades isn't "settling" in my book. Saying we should be OK with a parking lot here for the foreseeable future because we are too sophisticated and "progressive" to tolerate anything but world class budget busting architecture is settling. We've been settling for that crappy parking lot for 30 years or more.

[1487]

Originally Posted by El Duderino

nice over-generalization! being realistic is different than being defeatist.

unless a developer is banking on amazon definitely choosing Philly, this seems like a pretty good project given the location, no? These towers seem like a major step up from what PMC has done in the past (the architect of record is Gensler, who is no second-rate hire). I think most of us are disappointed by the amount of parking/lack of retail, but to cut off our nose off to spite our face (the “i’d rather have a parking lot” mentality) doesn’t seem like a good response. I don’t know how much walking around you’ve done in that area at different times of day/night, but this will be a massive benefit and hopefully will trigger further development that is more worthy of the high-esteem to which we seem to all hold this amazing city.

I'm not disappointed or concerned about the parking- when you look at the location and the lack of a nearby subway station and relative isolation I think it's a good bet that folks with cars will like this project. I think it's unrealistic to expect something here NOT to have a decent amount of parking. I mean the MUrano has a huge parking garage element and it's right on Market street 2 blocks from the trolley.

[Justin7]

I'm amazed that people are OK with putting up a large dead wall cutting here. No, no one wants a parking lot here, but at least the empty lot has potential. As soon as this thing is built you're stuck with it.

[Jawnadelphia]

Isolation? Yeah, no transit super close... but we're talking about 4 blocks from the city's only supertall.... and quick walk to basically everywhere--Art Museum, Logan Sq, Rittenhouse, 30th Street station, next door to the extremely popular trail ...why are we acting like this is North Philly?

My issue is the east banks of the river here has maybe 3 big development areas left-- this, the odd triangular plot over the septa tracks next to this, and the lot where Mandeville was going to go. Yeah PMC builds things, cool -- you're telling me they couldn't do better than those 2 squares .... ppppplease. Let's demand more.

[McBane]

I don't want to be on "Team Good Enough" but in my opinion, this pair of buildings is decent. And of course, we should be demanding more (we should always be demanding more). And I wholeheartedly agree that it's silly that there is no integration with the trail. That's like putting a building on the AC Boardwalk and then not having an entrance on the Boardwalk.

But anyway, I've seen a lot worse. 1919 Market is a glaring example. I just don't think THIS proposal reaches a level that we should rise up and chain ourselves to the site until a better design is realized.

Is this any worse than One Riverside or the CHOP research tower? I don't recall this level of heated discussion for those sites, both of which suffer the same exact issues (mediocre design, lack of integration with the trail, no retail). And when you think about that - that two other developers were unable to find a way to integrate their buildings with the trail, maybe there IS more to it than PMC just being too cheap?

I know that there's a lot of hostility towards PMC on this board (a lot of that is of its own doing) but had this been designed by a different developer and the result was the same, would the reaction be the same?

[Knight Hospitaller]

Originally Posted by TallCoolOne

Isolation? Yeah, no transit super close... but we're talking about 4 blocks from the city's only supertall.... and quick walk to basically everywhere--Art Museum, Logan Sq, Rittenhouse, 30th Street station, next door to the extremely popular trail ...why are we acting like this is North Philly?

My issue is the east banks of the river here has maybe 3 big development areas left-- this, the odd triangular plot over the septa tracks next to this, and the lot where Mandeville was going to go. Yeah PMC builds things, cool -- you're telling me they couldn't do better than those 2 squares .... ppppplease. Let's demand more.

It's possible to want more and accept what's happening. I'm fine with griping about the design, like I do with 1919, until the end of time, but I wouldn't rather have a vacant lot there or here. This could be the northern version of "the lot where Mandeville was going to go" for a very long time. I had a job at 22nd & Arch over a decade ago (and used that ugly lot when I could find my 3 hour space near the Parkway - since it was a long hike from regional rail). That there are now two Comcast towers several blocks away may make things appear less disconnected than they are, but this is about as remote a corner as one could find in the LS neighborhood. It is not "settling" to realize that one should not make "perfect" the enemy of "good." The zoning and CDR processes have run their course. At least discussions with LSNA are apparently ongoing.

[iheartphilly]

Not for nothing, but our views of the designs approved by PMC is about as popular as the reviews they get from Yelp and Google. Just saying.

[Londonee]

Originally Posted by 1487

I cant stand patronizing remarks like that. How long has this lot been vacant? At some point people need to accept reality- this is a challenging site that is relatively isolated for various reasons. It is NOT Rittenhouse or Washington Square.

This point only makes sense if you assume that all owners of properties are operating opportunistically and interested in developing their and to its highest and best use. But that's often rarely the case as we've seen with countless lots around Old City and literally the entire business model of Samuel Rappaport. Good owners, build good stuff. Bad owners, squat on properties indifferently from Boca Raton. Without knowing the specifics, my guess in this properties case is it's the latter.

So who knows what could have been built here. The time line is we've had a shitty owner squatting on it for decades who sold it to a cutrate developer who's now proposing a subpar complex.

And i agree with the folks who are pointing out the absurdity of the notion that this is somehow in the middle of nowhere...

[Knight Hospitaller]

^ Proximity is in the eye of the beholder (and "far away" in Philly tends to be perceived differently than in Manhattan). Don't forget the two failed project development proposals that preceded this. Nobody was happy with the prospects for inspirational architecture when PMC bought it, but we figured it was more likely to get done than the more exciting prior proposals. That's where we are. I would've bought it and hired Duncan Stroik to do his first high rise, but $5 down wasn't enough.

[Milksteak]

Originally Posted by iheartphilly

Not for nothing, but our views of the designs approved by PMC is about as popular as the reviews they get from Yelp and Google. Just saying.

I have never reviewed any company or business online, under any platform, ever. But oh man, if I opened that door...I could write a book on my experience renting in a PMC property. It goes beyond the occasional hot water issues or broken elevators. While I hold an extremely low opinion of them, I try to separate it from their proposals....almost all of which I have found to be the bare minimum and 'lazy'.

[City Wide]

Originally Posted by Knight Hospitaller

It's possible to want more and accept what's happening. I'm fine with griping about the design, like I do with 1919, until the end of time, but I wouldn't rather have a vacant lot there or here. This could be the northern version of "the lot where Mandeville was going to go" for a very long time. I had a job at 22nd & Arch over a decade ago (and used that ugly lot when I could find my 3 hour space near the Parkway - since it was a long hike from regional rail). That there are now two Comcast towers several blocks away may make things appear less disconnected than they are, but this is about as remote a corner as one could find in the LS neighborhood. It is not "settling" to realize that one should not make "perfect" the enemy of "good." The zoning and CDR processes have run their course. At least discussions with LSNA are apparently ongoing.

I am, and I would imagine most of the readers of this forum are likewise, certainly aware that this platform is one where opinions get expressed and sometimes backup info on where and why those opinions come from is shared, and for myself I sometimes learn and grow from being a reader. But I don't kid myself into thinking that my views or the collected opinions on this site rarely if ever actually change anything in the real world. So, for me this generally good discussion about this proposal isn't happening with the view that suddenly PMC is going to read what you or I say and see the light and change the way they do business, as much as it is a pure discussion format (and a platform for sharing hard, or soft, data and news).

I agree that "perfect" shouldn't get in the way of "good", but likewise "good" shouldn't get in the way of "better". But those word games can go on forever----- My biggest complaint is that this project, which at best might be called "good", is being built at this site. Build part of this project at 23th and Cherry or at 22th and JFK and my concerns go down a great deal. But as this is the largest and almost the last large river side site in CC I wanted something much better then "good" at this location and wish the City (down 1487!) and the neighbors would have pushed much harder to improve the final results.

The past plans started with the pie in the sky concept of River City, that only Ed Rendell liked (he who never saw a set of plans he didn't like!) and I don't think ANYONE had any expectation of those actually leading to anything being built. The last plans, before PMC, by NP International back in 2014 looked like a very serious offering by a less then first line developer. I'd love to know what happened to make that proposal never see the light of day/the shovels of dirt being turned over.

[PHL10]

I’m not making the argument that this site is in the middle of nowhere but we do need to see that the area isn’t prime either. Just look to the south at what should be prime real estate at 22nd and Market. It’s a disaster on par with some of the worst intersections in downtown Detroit. We need to fill some lots and then when they become scarce, we’ll see some higher uses.