PHILADELPHIA | The Alexander | 370 FT | 32 FLOORS

[BenKatzPhillytoParis]

Originally Posted by japmes

I believe that area is schedule to undergo significant park improvements, not development. Personally, I like the green space in that location. My question is, what happens to the soon-to-be-old Whole Foods? That block is an eye sore and could be used much better than it is.

Ya, gotta second that. Besides the ball field being an immensely successful public space in terms of use/usefulness to community, the parkway shouldn't be the Champs Elysées. Regardless of the boulevard's mystique and amazing sightlines, the actual feel of it is crappy (I live here ;-). It's just a bunch of big stores you find in every big city in the world, with no space to stroll, and chock full of fast food joints. The fact that the Parkway between Logan Square and PMA has green on either side I think is pretty critical to its charm and identity. Mid-rises meeting the street would just make it a big street. That being said, I definitely think more density should be added just beyond the green space on all sides.

[McBane]

Originally Posted by joemustardo

I know this off topic but after looking at the images, why are they tearing down part of the cap on I-676 in front of the Family Court building? Are they trying to cap it together in 1 or what? I remember hearing how that was the 1st area that was going to get capped.

I noticed that construction area when I was in Sister Cities Park the other weekend. Is that concrete area in front of 676 (facing Logan Square) just a staging area?

[RonnieStevens]

It would be awesome for what looks like the PPA lot to get developed in front of the Granary and also the grass field to the East of Granary. Hopefully after Museum Towers II is wrapping up it will be the next one to go.

[techchallenger]

Originally Posted by TallCoolOne

Any chance that ball field across the street from The Parkway House apt building (and soon to be Dalian) gets developed?

I can guarantee that we'll all be in the ground before anything is built on that ball field.

[apetrella802]

Originally Posted by BenKatzPhillytoParis

Ya, gotta second that. Besides the ball field being an immensely successful public space in terms of use/usefulness to community, the parkway shouldn't be the Champs Elysées. Regardless of the boulevard's mystique and amazing sightlines, the actual feel of it is crappy (I live here ;-). It's just a bunch of big stores you find in every big city in the world, with no space to stroll, and chock full of fast food joints. The fact that the Parkway between Logan Square and PMA has green on either side I think is pretty critical to its charm and identity. Mid-rises meeting the street would just make it a big street. That being said, I definitely think more density should be added just beyond the green space on all sides.

The BFP was designed to make a transition from the dense commercial core to Fairmount Park. So it is not meant to be like the Champs Elysées which is fully inside the urban core of Paris. The BFP was inspired by what came to be called the City Beautiful Movement that came out of the World Colombian Exposition of 1893 in Chicago. But this in turn was inspired by the reshaping of central Paris under Napoleon III in mid 19thc. So it is French in its origin.

The part of the BFP from City Hall to Logan Square was meant to be lined with commercial buildings, around Logan Square there were to be educational buildings and from Logan Square there were to be cultural buildings that ended at the beginning of Fairmount Park. So you would have a transition from urban landscape to park land. This is a unique way of interpreting the civic boulevard based on the 1893 fair and Hausemann's redesign of central Paris for Napoleon III. So it was well thought out before it was built and has remained faithful to that plan ever since. So when someone says 'I think it should be this or I think it should be that', they should understand why it is the way it is!

[Jawnadelphia]

^^^ Fair, I get it, and enjoy the history.

All I was expressing is the aerial shows this line of -Mormon complex (which I think will be A+), The old Family Court - great building - needs a little TLC (hopefully from Kimpton Hotels), the Free Library - great, The Barnes, the Rodin....

and then a sort of run down little league/softball field. Oh and then the Oval, beautiful Philly Art Museum. Which one doesn't make sense?!

Even if not developed, maybe some better green use - I dunno, I'm just tossing out some observations/ideas. When I become a billionaire I'll make a few alterations.

[summersm343]

Update from Building Philly





More photos here:
https://www.facebook.com/BuildingPhilly

[summersm343]

Thank god for the Mormons and their deep pockets. I'm not sure anyone else would have put up with this site for an apartment building. They're using controlled explosives right now to remove rock from the site. I was just by there when they set one off and the entire ground shook

[Londonee]

Originally Posted by apetrella802

The BFP was designed to make a transition from the dense commercial core to Fairmount Park. So it is not meant to be like the Champs Elysées which is fully inside the urban core of Paris. The BFP was inspired by what came to be called the City Beautiful Movement that came out of the World Colombian Exposition of 1893 in Chicago. But this in turn was inspired by the reshaping of central Paris under Napoleon III in mid 19thc. So it is French in its origin.

The part of the BFP from City Hall to Logan Square was meant to be lined with commercial buildings, around Logan Square there were to be educational buildings and from Logan Square there were to be cultural buildings that ended at the beginning of Fairmount Park. So you would have a transition from urban landscape to park land. This is a unique way of interpreting the civic boulevard based on the 1893 fair and Hausemann's redesign of central Paris for Napoleon III. So it was well thought out before it was built and has remained faithful to that plan ever since. So when someone says 'I think it should be this or I think it should be that', they should understand why it is the way it is!

While this is all true, the failure of the parkway is not in CONCEPT, but in EXECUTION. It's a highway with a few cultural institutions splattered along a full MILE dotted with some of the ugliest residential architecture this side of the Iron Curtain.

[McBane]

Very off topic but I can't resist b/c I was just on the Parkway a bit ago and came away from very frustrated.

First and foremost, the Parkway must be changed from an auto-oriented highway into a pedestrian-focused parkway. Here are a few easy, low cost steps that the city can take to achieve that objective:

1. Stake out the route from the Art Museum to Logan Circle to City Hall and post clear signage that gives pedestrians the most direct route to these and other landmarks. There are places along the Parkway where the sidewalk just ends and there's no obvious answer for where a pedestrian should go to get back on track. This traffic island is great example: https://goo.gl/maps/kJ7ar

2. Fix the crosswalks to make them convenient for pedestrians, not cars. The issue is with these types of intersections: https://goo.gl/maps/un8Rn and the fact that the crossing signals are not long enough to allow pedestrians to cross the entire intersection. Using the example above, pedestrians have to wait two cycles to cross from the Art Museum steps to Eakins Oval. You end up with jaywalkers playing chicken with cars speeding upwards of 50 mph.

3. Fix the clusterfuck intersection of 20th/Parkway/Vine. The route from the Parkway walkways (@ 20th) to Logan Circle requires pedestrians to take a meandering and totally indirect route through a series of approximately 6 or 7 crosswalks/signals. Some of the signals (like the one crossing Vine and Winter) were so short relative to the length of the crosswalk that we had to run(!) to safely get to the other side.

[summersm343]

7/7/2015

Right after they set off a controlled explosive

[Insoluble]

Originally Posted by McBane

Very off topic but I can't resist b/c I was just on the Parkway a bit ago and came away from very frustrated.

First and foremost, the Parkway must be changed from an auto-oriented highway into a pedestrian-focused parkway. Here are a few easy, low cost steps that the city can take to achieve that objective:

1. Stake out the route from the Art Museum to Logan Circle to City Hall and post clear signage that gives pedestrians the most direct route to these and other landmarks. There are places along the Parkway where the sidewalk just ends and there's no obvious answer for where a pedestrian should go to get back on track. This traffic island is great example: https://goo.gl/maps/kJ7ar

2. Fix the crosswalks to make them convenient for pedestrians, not cars. The issue is with these types of intersections: https://goo.gl/maps/un8Rn and the fact that the crossing signals are not long enough to allow pedestrians to cross the entire intersection. Using the example above, pedestrians have to wait two cycles to cross from the Art Museum steps to Eakins Oval. You end up with jaywalkers playing chicken with cars speeding upwards of 50 mph.

3. Fix the clusterfuck intersection of 20th/Parkway/Vine. The route from the Parkway walkways (@ 20th) to Logan Circle requires pedestrians to take a meandering and totally indirect route through a series of approximately 6 or 7 crosswalks/signals. Some of the signals (like the one crossing Vine and Winter) were so short relative to the length of the crosswalk that we had to run(!) to safely get to the other side.

100% agreed. The biggest problem with the parkway isn't the uses surrounding it, it's the awful car centered design of the street itself. I know there's been talk about removing lanes or converting lanes to bike lanes (the current bike lane passing through it is ridiculous by the way. I don't even bike, but it terrifies me to see what bikers are expected to do in order to cross the intersection.) But I think your ideas are probably more cost effective.

I would add traffic light timing to that mix. Time the lights so that cars pretty much have to stop at almost every intersection and maybe they won't treat it as a highway anymore. Sure people will b!tch and complain about the fact that it takes a whole 3 extra minutes to get to work, but in the long run it will be a much better experience for everyone.

In an ideal world, we'd also convert Logan Circle back into a square. Some of the worst intersections and crosswalks are the ones surrounding the Circle. Turn it back into a square and those intersections will pretty much fix themselves. The pedestrian approaches to the art museum are also pretty terrible. The fact that there's pretty much no direct way to get to the art museum from the parkway as a pedestrian is ridiculous.

[MikeNigh]

Originally Posted by Insoluble

100% agreed. The biggest problem with the parkway isn't the uses surrounding it, it's the awful car centered design of the street itself. I know there's been talk about removing lanes or converting lanes to bike lanes (the current bike lane passing through it is ridiculous by the way. I don't even bike, but it terrifies me to see what bikers are expected to do in order to cross the intersection.) But I think your ideas are probably more cost effective.

I would add traffic light timing to that mix. Time the lights so that cars pretty much have to stop at almost every intersection and maybe they won't treat it as a highway anymore. Sure people will b!tch and complain about the fact that it takes a whole 3 extra minutes to get to work, but in the long run it will be a much better experience for everyone.

In an ideal world, we'd also convert Logan Circle back into a square. Some of the worst intersections and crosswalks are the ones surrounding the Circle. Turn it back into a square and those intersections will pretty much fix themselves. The pedestrian approaches to the art museum are also pretty terrible. The fact that there's pretty much no direct way to get to the art museum from the parkway as a pedestrian is ridiculous.

The parkway is clearly meant for cars. The park area isn't that great for walking, it's just some trees lining the roads and otherwise grass.

[hammersklavier]

Originally Posted by MikeNigh

The parkway is clearly meant for cars. The park area isn't that great for walking, it's just some trees lining the roads and otherwise grass.

That's a bug, not a feature.

[apetrella802]

Originally Posted by hammersklavier

That's a bug, not a feature.

http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/about/ne...h-Philadelphia

goes back to al least 2008, some of these plans have come to fruition by now

[1487]

Originally Posted by apetrella802

http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/about/ne...h-Philadelphia

goes back to al least 2008, some of these plans have come to fruition by now

exactly, all of the changes that have been made as part of the steetscape upgrades have also helped the pedestrian and biking experience along the parkway. The changes that will be made as a result of the Vine Street x-way project will aslo address some of the issues around the parkway and enhance the pedestrian experience. while closing off lanes are making the parkway almost impassable sounds good to many the reality is that its the main conduit from CC to Kely drive which is very important. If you choke off the parkway that traffic will end up flowing through the more residential areas around the parkway which wouldn't be good news for the people in those areas. It's the most direct route and the best one between City Hall and the river drives.

[McBane]

If all these grand plans to make the Parkway easier for pedestrians came to fruition, I didn't notice them. Probably the most annoying aspect of walking the Parkway is having to cross an intersection, wait at a traffic island for another light cycle, and then cross to the other side. It should not take two light cycles to cross a street. The solution is so simple - just make the crossing signals long enough for pedestrians to walk THRU the islands and get to the other side. It's not rocket science.

[br323206]

Originally Posted by McBane

If all these grand plans to make the Parkway easier for pedestrians came to fruition, I didn't notice them. Probably the most annoying aspect of walking the Parkway is having to cross an intersection, wait at a traffic island for another light cycle, and then cross to the other side. It should not take two light cycles to cross a street. The solution is so simple - just make the crossing signals long enough for pedestrians to walk THRU the islands and get to the other side. It's not rocket science.

While it still sucks, it is better than it was just a few years ago. They have expanded some of the refuges for example.

[Mappy]

How do we get the Mormons to chip in for 1 or 2 of these highway caps?

[1487]

Originally Posted by McBane

If all these grand plans to make the Parkway easier for pedestrians came to fruition, I didn't notice them. Probably the most annoying aspect of walking the Parkway is having to cross an intersection, wait at a traffic island for another light cycle, and then cross to the other side. It should not take two light cycles to cross a street. The solution is so simple - just make the crossing signals long enough for pedestrians to walk THRU the islands and get to the other side. It's not rocket science.

everything involves compromise- there is science behind timing of signals. The parkway is NOT a normal street in terms of width. Having signals that would allow slow movers to cross without the medians would mean traffic would back up at that intersection causing a chain reaction of problems in both directions. You arent going to find a lot of avenues of that width that have signal timing set up to allow a slow walker to make it all the way across easily.