PHILADELPHIA | The Ryland @ One Dock Street | 380 FT | 31 FLOORS - Page 2

mcgrath618 · #21 Posted **Jan 18, 2019, 4:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larry King

The developer is LCOR, not Buccini Pollin. BPG will own/operate the hotel which is being renovated and rebranded as a Marriott, LCOR will own/operate the apartment building. There will be some shared amenities between the buildings, which is apparently still being negotiated between the companies.

Thanks. Will update in the OP.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mja

I'm not getting some of the reactions to this. This is a handsome building and I'd be happy to see it built.

I get the feeling that some would like every new tower to be some futuristic gleeming glass shard or something.

I agree. The building uses ample use of grid and axis and plays around with the Society Hill Towers very nicely.
I think people's biggest reservation is the overuse of glass nowadays. A lot of people want everything to look like the Alexander, or even the Harper. And I don't entirely disagree. However, I think this building breaks up its use of glass cleverly. Once it goes up I think that people will be able to appreciate it.

McBane · #22 Posted **Jan 18, 2019, 5:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mja

I'm not getting some of the reactions to this. This is a handsome building and I'd be happy to see it built.

I get the feeling that some would like every new tower to be some futuristic gleeming glass shard or something.

You're right in that it's not realistic to expect that every building be a world class masterpiece. But why should we lower our standards and willingly accept mediocrity, which is what this building is. It's not an ugly eyesore but it's really nothing special either. For a luxury building in a high end neighborhood in a top tier city, is it so unreasonable to be disappointed by a generic glass box?

For those who like this design, here's a question: would you steal this building from another city? If not, then can you honestly say you "like" the design?

And remember, criticizing a building's design doesn't have to diminish your enthusiasm for the project overall. Even if the design remained the same, I'm all for this project happening.

mcgrath618 · #23 Posted **Jan 18, 2019, 5:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by McBane

You're right in that it's not realistic to expect that every building be a world class masterpiece. But why should we lower our standards and willingly accept mediocrity, which is what this building is. It's not an ugly eyesore but it's really nothing special either. For a luxury building in a high end neighborhood in a top tier city, is it so unreasonable to be disappointed by a generic glass box?

For those who like this design, here's a question: would you steal this building from another city? If not, then can you honestly say you "like" the design?

And remember, criticizing a building's design doesn't have to diminish your enthusiasm for the project overall. Even if the design remained the same, I'm all for this project happening.

Honestly? Yes, I would. If this was going up in Chicago in an area comparable to Society Hill I would be jealous.
I'm not the biggest fan of contemporary or postmodern architecture, but I really like how this building incorporates axis into its design. The SHTs were built from a very 60s postmodern viewpoint and as such really only focus on axis. This project incorporates some more contemporary design influences with a hint of the projects that came before it.
I just had to read an excruciatingly long essay on why the site matters in a particular project, and I like how this project incorporates context into its design.

That being said, I would far prefer something akin to the Alexander here.

jsbrook · #24 Posted **Jan 18, 2019, 6:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larry King

The developer is LCOR, not Buccini Pollin. BPG will own/operate the hotel which is being renovated and rebranded as a Marriott, LCOR will own/operate the apartment building. There will be some shared amenities between the buildings, which is apparently still being negotiated between the companies.

Not rental apartments or some of those too? There will be some condos, right?

Larry King · #25 Posted **Jan 18, 2019, 6:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsbrook

Not rental apartments or some of those too? There will be some condos, right?

No condos, it's 100% rental according to LCOR. Mostly 1's and studio's, some 2's and the higher 'penthouse' floors are entirely 2's and 3's. It's going to have a rooftop deck facing south, should be pretty cool from that height.

jsbrook · #26 Posted **Jan 18, 2019, 7:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larry King

No condos, it's 100% rental according to LCOR. Mostly 1's and studio's, some 2's and the higher 'penthouse' floors are entirely 2's and 3's. It's going to have a rooftop deck facing south, should be pretty cool from that height.

Seems like a big missed opportunity to me. I suppose a full or partial condo conversion is possible one day. It’s certainly been done before. Happened with Society Hill Towers in fact. Perhaps it is actually a bit premature to have some condos here. But I would think they could command good prices in a conversion 5 years after launch. I wonder if Scannapieco’s project will actually happen down the street since it seems like he’s not part of this.

mcgrath618 · #27 Posted **Jan 18, 2019, 8:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsbrook

Seems like a big missed opportunity to me. I suppose a full or partial condo conversion is possible one day. It’s certainly been done before. Happened with Society Hill Towers in fact. Perhaps it is actually a bit premature to have some condos here. But I would think they could command good prices in a conversion 5 years after launch. I wonder if Dranoff’s project will actually happen down the street since it seems like he’s not part of this.

Dranoff has an old city project? Or do you mean SLS?
I personally think we need more rentals in the city. Young people who are moving here for jobs can't necessarily afford to buy their own condo.

jsbrook · #28 Posted **Jan 18, 2019, 8:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcgrath618

Dranoff has an old city project? Or do you mean SLS?
I personally think we need more rentals in the city. Young people who are moving here for jobs can't necessarily afford to buy their own condo.

Sorry, I meant Scannapieco at 2nd and Walnut. Was typing rushed. I have edited. We need more condos too, but there is also good pipeline of a lot of what is planned comes to fruition.

mcgrath618 · #29 Posted **Jan 18, 2019, 9:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsbrook

Sorry, I meant Scannapieco at 2nd and Walnut. Was typing rushed. I have edited. We need more condos too, but there is also good pipeline of a lot of what is planned comes to fruition.

I forgot about that project entirely. I think, knowing Scannapieco, that those are probably going to be condos.

jsbrook · #30 Posted **Jan 18, 2019, 9:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcgrath618

I forgot about that project entirely. I think, knowing Scannapieco, that those are probably going to be condos.

They are supposed to be condos, yes. When a realtor was showing me a property the other week, she insisted that Scannapieco pulled out and would instead be developing the Sheraton Tower (instead of BP) rather than the Ritz site. Looks like she was wrong, so I’m hoping the Scannapieco condos are still going to happen (and not be stymied by that asshat Boni).

McBane · #31 Posted **Jan 22, 2019, 3:00 PM**

Scannapieco might be wise to get his project going now. Even if his project is "by right", he can expect a fight for anything over 3 floors. Better to push forward now since Society Hill NIMBYs are busy fighting One Dock Street. Not that the Scannapieco project would slip by unnoticed, but I'd imagine that fighting two towers at the same time would be all the more difficult, even for the uber wealthy SH NIMBYs. Of course, two high rises in SH could spell that neighborhood's doom - might as well rename it Manhattan now

And given that One Dock Street are going in as rentals and Scannapieco develops condos, the two projects aren't really competing head to head.

mja · #32 Posted **Jan 22, 2019, 3:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by McBane

You're right in that it's not realistic to expect that every building be a world class masterpiece. But why should we lower our standards and willingly accept mediocrity, which is what this building is. It's not an ugly eyesore but it's really nothing special either. For a luxury building in a high end neighborhood in a top tier city, is it so unreasonable to be disappointed by a generic glass box?

For those who like this design, here's a question: would you steal this building from another city? If not, then can you honestly say you "like" the design?

And remember, criticizing a building's design doesn't have to diminish your enthusiasm for the project overall. Even if the design remained the same, I'm all for this project happening.

Yes, I honestly and actively LIKE this design. I find it to be anything but boring. It's restrained, yes, but it's sophisticated. The facade treatment is texturally interesting. I like the nod to the existing towers and just in general am a fan of the vibe of the building, almost a little bit modernist and a little bit neo-industrial. I'm legitimately puzzled by people not liking the building, and can only chalk it up to a difference in taste.

Urbanthusiat · #33 Posted **Jan 23, 2019, 6:04 PM**

CDR submission: https://www.phila.gov/CityPlanning/p...ge_reduced.pdf

374 feet.

mcgrath618 · #34 Posted **Jan 23, 2019, 8:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urbanthusiat

CDR submission: https://www.phila.gov/CityPlanning/p...ge_reduced.pdf

374 feet.

Drat, just beat me to the punch.
I think CDR will like this one.

jsbrook · #35 Posted **Jan 23, 2019, 9:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urbanthusiat

CDR submission: https://www.phila.gov/CityPlanning/p...ge_reduced.pdf

374 feet.

I love this project (even though it's apartments and even though the design is just ok). Must build! I really hope to see the Penn's Landing cap extended to Dock Street eventually. I think it's easier from an engineering perspective than extending to Market.

By the way, I'm not sure this thread is properly tagged with Philadelphia code. I have to search for it.

Jawnadelphia · #36 Posted **Jan 24, 2019, 12:52 PM**

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bs89L1DDV7v/

^this one will look nice from Camden for sure.

mcgrath618 · #37 Posted **Feb 2, 2019, 6:19 PM**

Could a mod please tag this as Philadelphia?

Jawnadelphia · #38 Posted **Feb 4, 2019, 9:03 PM**

https://www.phila.gov/li/pages/Appealscalendar.aspx

L&I Review Board of Appeal Public Hearings - on the docket for tomorrow.

gjrip · #39 Posted **Feb 5, 2019, 7:39 PM**

Holy shit some of you will complain about literally anything.

Nice project.

jsbrook · #40 Posted **Feb 6, 2019, 1:13 PM**

Society Hill assholes lost at ZBA but may go to court: http://planphilly.com/articles/2019/...c0qO4EeLVm9yNE Other interesting nugget, it said Cecil Baker recused "because he may be working on another tower proposal in Society Hill soon." That's got to be Scannapieco 3.0 he is being consulted about or courted for. I suppose Dilworth is also possible, but I'd think Scannapieco at the Ritz given his work on 500 Walnut and their past relationship.