PHILADELPHIA | Lowrise/General Developments Thread

[allovertown]

Originally Posted by Cro Burnham

Your project is nice. But Landmark has done alot of really awful stuff, a particularly egregious example being the garage-fronted townhouses across from the Betsy Ross house.

Their older pre-subprime meltdown townhouses are about as ugly as you will find in Philly.

Glad to see their style has improved in the past few years.

The garages on the Betsy Ross townhouses are terrible but as summers pointed out, that's not a choice landmark is making. Setting aside the first floor garages I actually think they look great.

[Parkway]

My understanding is that the Gallery renovation is moving so slowly because they are having problems getting any tenants to sign onto the project. The problem is that retail and fashion are very time sensitive industries and the last time I checked the reopening date was "2018 or 2019". Retailers who are looking for space in Philadelphia want it now not 3 years from now. Hell, Michael Kors as a brand exploded and became passe in the space of 3 years.

I think this is why the current focus has been on chain restaurants.

[Cro Burnham]

Originally Posted by allovertown

The garages on the Betsy Ross townhouses are terrible but as summers pointed out, that's not a choice landmark is making. Setting aside the first floor garages I actually think they look great.

I realize that. But if you look at some of Landmark's prior work, it is evident why the Arch St. developers chose Landmark and not a more reputable firm that would never put its stamp on such a gross project unless faced with starvation.

Here are representative examples of what, to my knowledge, are some of Landmark's prior Philly jobs:
15th & Passyunk

http://www.mulhernkulp.com/uploads/image...architectural-design-pretzel-factory.jpg
11th & Christian

http://photos2.zillowstatic.com/p_e/ISvt4lf3mh37oj.jpg
Looks far worse in person than in this photo.

Larry's project is a big improvement over this dreck. So I am glad about that. But he said they do nice work. For several years their design has been uninspired at best (IMO), so I wanted to give a counter opinion.

No big deal, though. They did a nice job for Larry, and hopefully that is indicative of an overall improvement in their design going forward.

[Arch+Eng]

Originally Posted by 3rd&Brown

I put an offer on a house on the 2200 block of N Howard last year. It was a multiple offer situation and it just ended up for selling for more than it was worth, given how much work it needed.

That being said, I think you do good work.

One suggestion though. Though I'm a huge fan of modern development and one of the first people to decry those who complain about buildings that "don't fit in" (i.e. contextualists), I do worry that new buildings, particularly infill in this city, are starting to look too monotonous.

I don't mean one off per se, but when there are groups or blocks of homes being built. I'm thinking of where my first property is...Northern Liberties. The new houses are most block after block of monotonous "modern" houses. Within each development, there is literally *zero* variety in facades. Not a single variation in roofline, window placement, etc.

Natural cities are not built like that. My ask, for any developer building in this way (including you), would be to adopt some sort of format (A*B*A, or A*A*B*B*A*A, or A*B*C*C*B*A) in which each letter represents a variant in the facade, floorplan, or both. There are ways to do this so that 1. the entire group of homes are still harmonious and clearly of the same "development" and 2. not cost prohibitive. It would also mimic the natural variety seen in the best organic urban neighborhoods. I worry that these blocks of "modern" homes, without variety or variants, are the future, monotonous superblocks akin to the housing you see in Northeast Philly, which I'd argue, have in part not held their value as well as other parts of the city IN PART (not wholely) because of the lack of variety in building typology. Simply put, neighborhoods with such housing simply aren't as interesting or desireable, in part due to their lack of architectural variety. Of course, the latter criticism is one meant to be applied over time, and not in the short term. Neighborhoods that hold or increase in value over time, in comparison to urban neighborhoods that don't, have more building variety, not less.

I think the juxtaposition of the older rowhomes with the new CONTEMPORARY rowhomes provides a lot of interest and beauty.

It's not like developers are demolishing entire blocks and replacing them with contemporary row homes. They are usually infill.

There are tons of streets with the same old house design, they don't all look quite the same because the owners of the houses have customized them over the years. What makes you think that that won't happen in the future with these contemporary houses.

Plus, different developers/architects all have slightly different takes on the contemporary design.

[3rd&Brown]

Originally Posted by Arch+Eng

I think the juxtaposition of the older rowhomes with the new CONTEMPORARY rowhomes provides a lot of interest and beauty.

It's not like developers are demolishing entire blocks and replacing them with contemporary row homes. They are usually infill.

There are tons of streets with the same old house design, they don't all look quite the same because the owners of the houses have customized them over the years. What makes you think that that won't happen in the future with these contemporary houses.

Plus, different developers/architects all have slightly different takes on the contemporary design.

There are plenty of blocks in Northern Liberties, South Kensington, and Graduate Hospital...where the entire block is the same house. Plenty. I can think of at least 15 examples.

[domodeez]

Originally Posted by shadowbat2

I'd be cool with leaving the concrete walls exposed like that, at least in some areas, and especially if there were some light cast on it. Looks great IMO.

[shadowbat2]

Those walls are faced with Travertine stone, popular in the 70's. I agree it looks great inside.

Also, I have to admit that as awful as the gallery's exterior was, I really liked the interior of gallery I. For a 70's design it was not *too* dated and was quite easy on the eye (though it was a much better atmosphere when the plants were still hanging off the balconies). All surfaces were clad in durable materials throughout that held up to the test of time with little to no viable wear or tear. No cheap ceiling tile or drywall here. None of those putrid "earthtone" greens, blues or oranges that were the craze during that period....

Probably not:

Quote:
In 1973, EPA banned spray-applied surfacing asbestos-containing material for fireproofing/insulating purposes.
https://www.epa.gov/asbestos/us-fede...sbestos#banned

Gallery construction began in '74 or '75.

Thanks for that link. I was inder the impression that it was not until the early 80's that asbestos was outlawed. (Read somewhere that homes built prior to 1985 had a chance of having that stuff.)

[Philly Fan]

Originally Posted by shadowbat2

Read somewhere that homes built prior to 1985 had a chance of having that stuff.

More like 1975-78 or so for home insulation, etc. My understanding is that what was banned in 1973 was the spray-on fireproofing asbestos such as the kind about which you were originally asking (I assume because that stuff presented the most obvious danger of being inhaled).

And here's that EPA link for anyone who may be interested (for some reason, your copy/pasted link doesn't seem to get you to the right page on the EPA web site):

https://www.epa.gov/asbestos/us-federal-bans-asbestos#banned

[1487]

Originally Posted by Parkway

My understanding is that the Gallery renovation is moving so slowly because they are having problems getting any tenants to sign onto the project. The problem is that retail and fashion are very time sensitive industries and the last time I checked the reopening date was "2018 or 2019". Retailers who are looking for space in Philadelphia want it now not 3 years from now. Hell, Michael Kors as a brand exploded and became passe in the space of 3 years.

I think this is why the current focus has been on chain restaurants.

regardless of any timing issues the concentration on eateries was always going to be the case. Restaurants are not seen as vulnerable to e-commerce competition. Ive read articles describing how successful malls are increasingly reliant on restaurants and other attractions to draw patrons. I think the gallery should look to add some other non traditional tenants that will offer something other than generic mall retail. I'd like to see an upscale theater in the project but I doubt that will happen.

[Larry King]

Those movie taverns are opening everywhere, maybe there's room in the gallery for one of those- not that the food is any good

[1487]

Originally Posted by Larry King

Those movie taverns are opening everywhere, maybe there's room in the gallery for one of those- not that the food is any good

I'd like to see something like what used to be known as the Bridge at 40th and walnut in Center City. Gallery has the space to make it happen. Based on how the box office is doing it appears that we are a long way from theaters being made obsolete by streaming services and on demand options.

[summersm343]

Worn Out Garage Turning to Apartments at 142 North Broad

About a year ago, developers came before the Logan Square Neighborhood Association with plans to build an addition at 142 N. Broad St., a rough looking building that sits in between a Parkway Garage (which is also their headquarters) and the Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts.

The developers took some time to reexamine their plan and came back to the community in April with a revised plan with only 101 units and no digital sign. When they presented the plan the first time around, they indicated that the digital sign was a crucial financial aspect of the project, so we're not sure how they're able to make it work with no sign and fewer units. But that's, frankly, none of our business! Apparently they see this as a viable project and we'll be pleased as punch to see it come to fruition. BLT Architects have done the design work for the project, and meeting minutes indicate that their plan will entail a four-story glass box on top of the existing building. Has anyone seen any renderings?

The project went to the ZBA this morning. We have to imagine it will get support this time around, though you never can be completely sure with this sort of thing.

http://www.ocfrealty.com/naked-philly/lo...age-turning-to-apartments-on-north-broad

[summersm343]

Reading Viaduct Rail Park Aims for Fall 2016 Groundbreaking

http://philly.curbed.com/2016/5/10/11648340/reading-viaduct-rail-park-groundbreaking

[summersm343]

$42M Children's Hospital of Philadelphia Combined Health, Literacy, And Rec Center Opens On South Broad



http://www.philly.com/philly/health/2016...mbines_health__literacy__recreation.html

[Jawnadelphia]

Anyone know why this little old, colonial era house was torn down, and what is replacing it? (house and garage on the side).
Located behind the Municipal Services Building parking lot, just off 16th and Cherry - I remember there was once a proposal for a building across the street, where the lot is, not sure what is going on here (--the across the street proposal, 1528 Cherry St., still a thread for it on here, ...totally forgot about it).

[IMG]Untitled b


Love Park re-do, did not see anyone working yesterday:

[IMG]Untitled

[PHL10]

^Bummer. I love that little enclave of those few blocks of homes that somehow survived the 1950s and 1960s. Unfortunately between that demo and the one across the street, they seem to be in full 1960s style urban renewal style assault.

[Yurkek]

Originally Posted by TallCoolOne

Love Park re-do, did not see anyone working yesterday:

I am wondering what is the timeline for the planned Love park renovation? There is almost no one onsite most of the days.

[Noam215]

Spoke with someone from EB Realty today at the Divine Lorraine tour and they said that their plan for the lot on the NE corner of Broad & Spring Garden is low rise commercial (probably Bank of America & Wawa).
Kind of disappointing for such a prominent corner.
He didn't seem 100% certain and I'm sure the timeline is pretty far out so there's always the possibility that plans change.

[summersm343]

Originally Posted by Noam215

Spoke with someone from EB Realty today at the Divine Lorraine tour and they said that their plan for the lot on the NE corner of Broad & Spring Garden is low rise commercial (probably Bank of America & Wawa).
Kind of disappointing for such a prominent corner.
He didn't seem 100% certain and I'm sure the timeline is pretty far out so there's always the possibility that plans change.

Lame. Original plans called for mixed-use 14-story building. Hopefully plans change or the ZBA shoots down their plan. This stretch of Broad from City Hall up to Temple Main needs more density.

[philatonian]

Originally Posted by TallCoolOne

Anyone know why this little old, colonial era house was torn down, and what is replacing it? (house and garage on the side).
Located behind the Municipal Services Building parking lot, just off 16th and Cherry - I remember there was once a proposal for a building across the street, where the lot is, not sure what is going on here (--the across the street proposal, 1528 Cherry St., still a thread for it on here, ...totally forgot about it).

[IMG]Untitled b

I walk by there every day. I was hoping it was being renovated, then BAM, it was gone. I love that little strip of survivors, but I'm not sure how secure they are. Two other row houses on Cherry Street were torn down for speculative development a couple years ago.

I don't know much about that strip, but I think they're all rentals and I wouldn't be surprised if they're owned by one person.

EZ Park has been having a field-day razing nearby buildings behind the convention center, I assume to cash-in on the upcoming DNC. I really hope this demolition here isn't just a first step in demolishing more.

We don't need more surface parking north of Broad. In fact, we need a friggin moratorium on it. It's turning into South Philly style stadium parking for the PCC, and we don't want that in Center City. It's going to cost a fortune to find developers willing to shell out the cash to develop these lots.