PHILADELPHIA | THE LAUREL @ 1911 Walnut | 604 FT | 48 FLOORS - Page 113

jsbrook · #**2241** Posted **Jul 21, 2019, 5:59 PM**

Am told the retail will be announced this fall. Not sure exactly when in the fall.

Lincolnlover2005 · #**2242** Posted **Jul 22, 2019, 6:33 PM**

Is it the Laurel, or the Yanny?

boxbot · #**2243** Posted **Jul 23, 2019, 4:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcgrath618

I’m still seething that this isn’t 1’ taller.

599' was an arbitrary compromise made with Rittenhouse NIMBYs to create less wind pollution or whatever. OTOH, the original plan from the prior developer back in 2008 was 525', which we all thought was amazing at the time. So, you know ... progress.

Jayfar · #**2244** Posted **Jul 23, 2019, 5:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by boxbot

599' was an arbitrary compromise made with Rittenhouse NIMBYs to create less wind pollution or whatever. OTOH, the original plan from the prior developer back in 2008 was 525', which we all thought was amazing at the time. So, you know ... progress.

Pretty sure you're making that up. There was a major recession in the interim. Castleway didn't have the wherewithal to build anything. Toll Bros took a look and decided against it.

https://www.phillymag.com/property/2014/07/21/new-tower-rise-rittenhouse-square/

Knight Hospitaller · #**2245** Posted **Jul 23, 2019, 6:16 PM**

599 feet is like a 99 cent cheeseburger. Does it really matter that your are not one extra penny out of pocket? For the terminally picky, yes, I'm ignoring sales tax.

boxbot · #**2246** Posted **Jul 23, 2019, 10:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jayfar

Pretty sure you're making that up. There was a major recession in the interim. Castleway didn't have the wherewithal to build anything. Toll Bros took a look and decided against it.

https://www.phillymag.com/property/2014/07/21/new-tower-rise-rittenhouse-square/

No clue what you're talking about.

The article you cite actually lists a proposed height of 525' in the Castleway proposal.

The original SLC proposal was north of 600'. Maybe read about a topic before accusing someone of making things up. It was reduced in pertinent part because of meetings with locals who felt it would be out of scope and character with the neighborhood, not because of a major recession.

jsbrook · #**2247** Posted **Jul 23, 2019, 11:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by boxbot

No clue what you're talking about.

The article you cite actually lists a proposed height of 525' in the Castleway proposal.

The original SLC proposal was north of 600'. Maybe read about a topic before accusing someone of making things up. It was reduced in pertinent part because of meetings with locals who felt it would be out of scope and character with the neighborhood, not because of a major recession.

Neighbors objected to the design and were successful in improving the design as well as achieving preservation goals and securing affordable housing. As I understand it from those involved in the project, the modest height reduction as well as the apartment/condo breakdown is a function of SLC's assessment of the market and demand at the time they finally had the pieces in place to make this a reality. Anyway, here are some pictures. It's looking good.

Jayfar · #**2248** Posted **Jul 24, 2019, 2:15 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by boxbot

No clue what you're talking about.

The article you cite actually lists a proposed height of 525' in the Castleway proposal.

The original SLC proposal was north of 600'. Maybe read about a topic before accusing someone of making things up. It was reduced in pertinent part because of meetings with locals who felt it would be out of scope and character with the neighborhood, not because of a major recession.

Meh. It's all a blur, but you're still merely speculating on how Southern Land came to settle on the final height, unless you were sitting in on their executive sessions. There were much bigger market factors in play besides the CCRA input.

I stand by my original remarks. I tend to discount obviously silly exaggerated statements such as: "599' was an arbitrary compromise made with Rittenhouse NIMBYs to create less wind pollution or whatever."

boxbot · #**2249** Posted **Jul 24, 2019, 4:02 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jayfar

Meh. It's all a blur, but you're still merely speculating on how Southern Land came to settle on the final height, unless you were sitting in on their executive sessions. There were much bigger market factors in play besides the CCRA input.

I stand by my original remarks. I tend to discount obviously silly exaggerated statements such as: "599' was an arbitrary compromise made with Rittenhouse NIMBYs to create less wind pollution or whatever."

I mean, here's another article that supports my statement (offered in a tongue and cheek manner but factually accurate), but do go on.

"Earlier this month, Philadelphia Business Journal indicated that months of negotiations between the developer and members of the community would result in changes to the project, including shrinking the building ... " Id.

jsbrook · #**2250** Posted **Jul 24, 2019, 11:05 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by boxbot

I mean, here's another article that supports my statement (offered in a tongue and cheek manner but factually accurate), but do go on.

"Earlier this month, Philadelphia Business Journal indicated that months of negotiations between the developer and members of the community would result in changes to the project, including shrinking the building ... " Id.

Easier to pawn off market-based decisions on a community group when they are demanding other changes...and for press to muddy things together. A height reduction was requested. It was not a sticking point in negotiations. The final product is what SLC thought was best positioned to sell and rent well. Can you fix your article link too?

JMKeynes · #**2251** Posted **Jul 24, 2019, 12:42 PM**

Nice.

Philly is one of my favorite cities.

PhilliesPhan · #**2252** Posted **Jul 30, 2019, 7:32 PM**

From today, 7/30:

Is this shoring or caisson work?

iheartphilly · #**2253** Posted **Jul 30, 2019, 7:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilliesPhan

From today, 7/30:

Is this shoring or caisson work?

Looks like it will be shoring. They cut away 8-10 ft of earth adjacent to that bldg and need to drive down some steel beams and add horizontal wood slats afterwards in place of the removed earth.

jsbrook · #**2254** Posted **Jul 31, 2019, 1:54 PM**

7.31.2019 below. Also, the Laurel is paying Year 1 fees for a jet hailing service. https://www.phillymag.com/property/2019/...cwrpzeB4YRl6p4uN3FRY7JFdN_sjmLz7US8gFi4k This really just means a $5K-25K putative reduction to purchase price that is probably already considered and offset in the condo pricing. That’s really all it is. It's not like the building has a helipad (Scannipieco, if you're reading this...) But people will still be impressed...site is looking good, though!

Jawnadelphia · #**2255** Posted **Aug 8, 2019, 6:33 PM**

New construction update video explaining the under-pinning pits, and what not:
https://www.instagram.com/p/B06ZEbRj6rL/

And another promo video:
https://www.instagram.com/p/B04JbytDv6o/

gjrip · #**2256** Posted **Aug 12, 2019, 11:51 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lincolnlover2005

Is it the Laurel, or the Yanny?

Underrated post

jsbrook · #**2257** Posted **Aug 12, 2019, 12:04 PM**

I'm told by someone I trust that the retail will actually be an Equinox even though Eva Walker had told me it won't be. I think we should find out for sure soon. Walker told me via email last month that it would be announced in the fall. I would not put Equinox in the "revolutionary" category, but I'd be pretty happy with it.