PHILADELPHIA | Highrise Development Thread IX

[City Wide]

Originally Posted by jsbrook

Ridiculous. With the exception of things like PHA's old headquarters, I think it would be a shame to see most of the low and midrise buildings on these blocks demoed. But there is no reason why taller towers should not rise on vacant lots and parking lots throughout these blocks. And, no, they would not turn them into "deep canyons." Some overbuilds are not things to avoid at all costs here either. Better approach would be to designate some of the more significant buildings. Some are on the Philly register I believe, like the Stotesbury Mansions and buildings around the forthcoming 1911 Walnut.

Agree^^^^The article was talking about zoning and I think that's because spot zoning is not allowed (but City Council seems to do it) one can't take half the properties on a block and zone them differently then the rest. But a City based historic district can offer some protection, but still not include every building.
I wish taller buildings were allowed on the corners then on mid block, but----. Also, I'd be fine with losing that white office tower on Walnut just east of 19th. probably built in the late 60's, that would clear out a big space for residential right on the park. But in general as long as there are surface parking lots are available, like on Chestnut across from Boyd's, demo should be a very hard option to exercise.
BTW, does zoning effect whether commercial or housing is built on a site? Like 1911 Walnut, if the proposed condos cover 200K sq.ft. could the developer tried to build the same size building but with offices not condos (realizing that other factors, such as height, are a consideration)?

[MidTenn1]

Originally Posted by TK2001

Those are my photos, thanks for sharing. But please credit

Sorry. I scrolled through dozens of pages trying to find where I first saw them, but gave up and posted them anyway. Nice pictures, BTW,

[Jayfar]

Originally Posted by City Wide

BTW, does zoning effect whether commercial or housing is built on a site? Like 1911 Walnut, if the proposed condos cover 200K sq.ft. could the developer tried to build the same size building but with offices not condos (realizing that other factors, such as height, are a consideration)?

It can, but the CMX classifications allow for both (though no single-family in the higher number variants). Here's the definitive guide from the Planning Commission:

https://www.phila.gov/CityPlanning/resou...ng%20Code_Quick%20Reference%20Manual.pdf

Also of interest is the Planning Commission's Philadelphia 2035 plan for the Central District. From this page you can download PDFs of the plan, plus Central Zoning Appendix and other related docs, including submitted comments from organizations and other interested parties. Also reference atlas.phila.gov to see current zoning and reference links to applicable overlays for any particular address.

https://www.phila2035.org/central

http://www.phila.gov/CityPlanning/plans/District%20Plans%20Library/Central_DP_FINAL.pdf

https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/32cb1b_41783fdeeaf54d6a86300e0e8e4c1463.pdf

http://www.phila.gov/CityPlanning/plans/District%20Plans%20Library/Central_DP_ZoneAppend.pdf

https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/32cb1b_bead55d4791f492f911034346d4b4107.pdf

[Jayfar]

Originally Posted by Jayfar

http://www.phila.gov/CityPlanning/plans/District%20Plans%20Library/Central_DP_FINAL.pdf

Found an interesting map in the Central District Philadelphia 2035 document linked above. Note there are 2 major historic districts in Center City West - The Rittenhouse Fitler Residential Historic District, which is on both the Philadelphia Register and the National Register, and the Center City West Commercial Historic District, which is on the National Register ONLY (so doesn't provide real protection from demolition). Additionally the purple dots are individually listed on the Philadelphia Register. Within the Philadelphia Register Historic Districts (within the red hash lines) buildings are inventoried as significant, contributing or non-contributing; the significant and contributing buildings are protected and require a hardship finding to demolish or to make major alterations.

[jsbrook]

Originally Posted by Jayfar

Found an interesting map in the Central District Philadelphia 2035 document linked above. Note there are 2 major historic districts in Center City West - The Rittenhouse Fitler Residential Historic District, which is on both the Philadelphia Register and the National Register, and the Center City West Commercial Historic District, which is on the National Register ONLY (so doesn't provide real protection from demolition). Additionally the purple dots are individually listed on the Philadelphia Register. Within the Philadelphia Register Historic Districts (within the red hash lines) buildings are inventoried as significant, contributing or non-contributing; the significant and contributing buildings are protected and require a hardship finding to demolish or to make major alterations.

Page 3: https://www.phila.gov/historical/PDF/Rittenhouse_Fitler_Manual.pdf This is a pretty big district. In my opinion, the only thing that would be appropriate is to extend this district down Chestnut and Walnut to 15th and designate deserving buildings as significant or contributing. Not downzoning and not preclusion of building taller towers in other spots on these blocks, particularly vacant or surface lots. CityWide, Eixample, and Allovertown, agree with your points.

[mcgrath618]

These stupid fake Amazon “CONGRATULATIONS!” ads have to disappear. They are the most annoying thing I have ever encountered on this website.

[Larry King]

Originally Posted by jsbrook

Page 3: https://www.phila.gov/historical/PDF/Rittenhouse_Fitler_Manual.pdf This is a pretty big district. In my opinion, the only thing that would be appropriate is to extend this district down Chestnut and Walnut to 15th and designate deserving buildings as significant or contributing. Not downzoning and not preclusion of building taller towers in other spots on these blocks, particularly vacant or surface lots. CityWide, Eixample, and Allovertown, agree with your points.

For the life of me I do not understand why the historic commission can't take an inventory of every building in center city and do a mass designation of the significant ones. What do architectural historians do all day? This should be a priority. The districts are too big and results in the commission wasting their time with non-significant buildings and lots.

[Aaamazarite]

523 North Broad-- rendering being shown with retail listings



https://images2.loopnet.com/d2/Gd5ZN3I55-W3TIx9n1zsSwkZfH6uo0WKktiUy1l1Hds/document.pdf

[Knight Hospitaller]

^A crude rendering, but I like the lines. This will be a nice companion to what's planned across Broad.

[Larry King]

Originally Posted by Aaamazarite

523 North Broad-- rendering being shown with retail listings

https://images2.loopnet.com/d2/Gd5ZN3I55-W3TIx9n1zsSwkZfH6uo0WKktiUy1l1Hds/document.pdf

Who’s the developer on this?

[Urbanthusiat]

Originally Posted by Larry King

Who’s the developer on this?

EB Realty. The address on the property record is their address and they own the Mural Lofts building next door. Love what their doing for North Broad. It makes sense for them to capitalize on the new retail additions at Tower Place apartments across the street and the Aldi coming up the street at 1300 Fairmount.

[MichaelScottsOffice]

Originally Posted by Urbanthusiat

EB Realty. The address on the property record is their address and they own the Mural Lofts building next door. Love what their doing for North Broad. It makes sense for them to capitalize on the new retail additions at Tower Place apartments across the street and the Aldi coming up the street at 1300 Fairmount.

Yea, and a good thing it’s the same developer. Looks like the building was angled and has a courtyard so that the mural can still be showcased. He’s really doing a lot of great things in that area.

[SEFTA]

Spring Garden 9-4-18

[Frontst17]

prime example of why we can protect those blocks in rittenhouse and be ok with CMX-3. Theres plenty of other "non-traditional" areas of greater center city that can start from scratch so to speak. I think thats becoming more of an attractive option for developers rather than litigating with NIMBYS. I think we'll start to see more 500 walnuts popping up. Not scraping any skies but amenity loaded and complimentary to the neighborhood. The Laurel may be a flash in the pan

[City Wide]

This is what purposed for the other side of Broad ST, back in Jan. 2017
http://www.ocfrealty.com/naked-philly/sp...ressive-buildings-at-broad-spring-garden

[AbortedWalrus]

Originally Posted by Urbanthusiat

EB Realty. The address on the property record is their address and they own the Mural Lofts building next door. Love what their doing for North Broad. It makes sense for them to capitalize on the new retail additions at Tower Place apartments across the street and the Aldi coming up the street at 1300 Fairmount.

He also is responsible for the Lofts 640 and 600 N Broad developments, but I think he sold them. Also he did the Studebarker building and is doing the Metropolitan Opera House. He's been pretty instrumental in making N Broad what it now is.

The design of the building is very good, and very respectful of the Meg Saligman "Common Threads" mural on the Mural Lofts building.

[JohnIII]

When I look at the view of North Broad Street now and see the projects being developed a few things come to mind

For starters North Broad Street beginning to have a more integrated feel with the rest of downtown; when one looks at a map of downtown Philadelphia the area in question is apart of downtown and the area is increasing looking like it and feeling like it. When one stands at City Hall and looks north on Broad Street and takes in the view now and then imagines the view of what is planned it will have a more cosmopolitan feel even with the limited height of the structures planned.

When I look at OFC Reality several images are given for the sight of 510 Broad; I don't know if the images will change or the target date of the project but 2 things stand out to me. 510 Broad Street will have letters on top lit at night which will reflect those on the Divine Lorraine and along with 1300 Fairmount will redefine Spring Garden and Broad Street. At the same time when it comes to 510 Broad Street a few things question arise; the second image is suppose to have multiple images that can be scrolled through but it seems I can do that; not sure why and also in the same image there seems to be a visualization of a taller structure that can be built north of 510 Broad Street so it makes me ask, is there another project in the works that hasn't been mentioned?

Now seems a good time to enter the CMX-3 debate I suppose. I don't see why smaller chunks of property can be assigned CMX-3 status and others can be kept CMX-5. This push for CMX-3 status won't have any baring on the Laurel; am I assuming correctly because its already approved?

On thing that the CMX-3 debate could do is this; it can force future CMX-5 to other areas that be more beneficial such as 8th and Market, 22nd and Market, or Schuylkill Yards. I'm trying to ponder as a lover of Skyscrapers how a move to save 15th to 18 and Walnut can affect the skyline overall by spreading it out; not affecting The Laurel?

[summersm343]

Nice new tower on Broad! Someone create a thread!

[mcgrath618]

Already on it.

[McBane]

Originally Posted by Frontst17

prime example of why we can protect those blocks in rittenhouse and be ok with CMX-3. Theres plenty of other "non-traditional" areas of greater center city that can start from scratch so to speak. I think thats becoming more of an attractive option for developers rather than litigating with NIMBYS. I think we'll start to see more 500 walnuts popping up. Not scraping any skies but amenity loaded and complimentary to the neighborhood. The Laurel may be a flash in the pan

Why would anyone think that downzoning the three busiest streets in the neighborhood (and arguably in all of Center City) is a good idea? You don't want a high rise on Spruce or Locust? I disagree but I understand. But Walnut, Sansom, and Chestnut? That's ridiculous.