PHILADELPHIA | Highrise Development Thread IX

[1487]

Originally Posted by summersm343

CHOP Buerger Center for Advanced Pediatric Care

Tower crane erected on the roof. Steel going up? Anybody have any idea what's going on?

I posted a while ago that permits indicate they are adding one more floor for mechanical spaces as well as some elevator equipment. It must have something to do with whatever the actual fit out will be for the current upper floors of the building.

[tsarstruck]

Originally Posted by 1487

I posted a while ago that permits indicate they are adding one more floor for mechanical spaces as well as some elevator equipment. It must have something to do with whatever the actual fit out will be for the current upper floors of the building.

That's probably the reason, although I suppose there's also some chance that they're adding the planned phase II as well:

"The 12-story, multi-phase building will allow the potential addition of another four floors for a total of 875,000 square feet, if called for in the future."

-http://www.chop.edu/news/chop-announces-buerger-center-advanced-pediatric-care

[McBane]

Originally Posted by summersm343

Philly Council members propose plan to boost development near transit stops

Read more here:
http://www.philly.com/philly/business/re...oost-development-near-transit-stops.html

Here's the rub: the law doesn't designate specific stations. So while the intentions are good, it lacks specifics and leaves too much room for NIMBYs to demand that their transit stop be excluded from the new zoning. You know that's coming unless the law is amended. But it won't because that would create angry constituents that Councilmembers don't want to deal with. Which goes back to what I've said all along - City Council should NOT be involved in zoning matters ever. What happens is that politics gets in the way.

[1487]

Originally Posted by McBane

Here's the rub: the law doesn't designate specific stations. So while the intentions are good, it lacks specifics and leaves too much room for NIMBYs to demand that their transit stop be excluded from the new zoning. You know that's coming unless the law is amended. But it won't because that would create angry constituents that Councilmembers don't want to deal with. Which goes back to what I've said all along - City Council should NOT be involved in zoning matters ever. What happens is that politics gets in the way.

how can you speak specifically about a bill that hasn't even been passed yet? How can a neighborhood group ask that their nearest subway/EL stop not be counted as a stop with regards to this legislation? If elected officials don't regulate zoning who do you propose should be responsible for such legal matters?

[cafeguy]

Originally Posted by McBane

Here's the rub: the law doesn't designate specific stations. So while the intentions are good, it lacks specifics and leaves too much room for NIMBYs to demand that their transit stop be excluded from the new zoning. You know that's coming unless the law is amended. But it won't because that would create angry constituents that Councilmembers don't want to deal with. Which goes back to what I've said all along - City Council should NOT be involved in zoning matters ever. What happens is that politics gets in the way.

Pretty sure TOD was recommended at certain stations in the 2035 plan, but no one did anything about it. I don't know whats in this bill, but doesn't look like it has realistic teeth in there to make it happen either.

[McBane]

Originally Posted by 1487

how can you speak specifically about a bill that hasn't even been passed yet? How can a neighborhood group ask that their nearest subway/EL stop not be counted as a stop with regards to this legislation?

The article makes it very clear that the stops to be selected and rezoned will be up for negotiation.

Philadelphia's proposed ordinance does not identify which stations would be surrounded by TOD Districts, so that they can be designated in consultation with the Council members in whose districts they would be located, said Reynolds Brown, an at-large councilwoman not tied to any district.

Do you really think that NIMBYs will not push back on this?

Originally Posted by 1487

If elected officials don't regulate zoning who do you propose should be responsible for such legal matters?

To clarify, I understand that laws must be passed by council. But that doesn't mean council should be writing new zoning ordinances. That should be left up to professional planners who can draft zoning ordinances based on best practices and not by elected officials based on politics.

[br323206]

Originally Posted by McBane

To clarify, I understand that laws must be passed by council. But that doesn't mean council should be writing new zoning ordinances. That should be left up to professional planners who can draft zoning ordinances based on best practices and not by elected officials based on politics.

I highly doubt that council wrote the ordinance. I would venture a guess that the council members approached the planning commission with their ideas (or vice versa) and the planning commission drafted the actual ordinance using their expertise.

[br323206]

Originally Posted by cafeguy

Pretty sure TOD was recommended at certain stations in the 2035 plan, but no one did anything about it. I don't know whats in this bill, but doesn't look like it has realistic teeth in there to make it happen either.

This seems like a step toward actually implementing the plan. When deciding on stations I would assume they will reference the plan in their decision-making process.

[1487]

Originally Posted by br323206

I highly doubt that council wrote the ordinance. I would venture a guess that the council members approached the planning commission with their ideas (or vice versa) and the planning commission drafted the actual ordinance using their expertise.

exactly. They don't even know enough about the technical aspects of zoning to really write a zoning bill. Just like they didn't rewrite the zoning code even though they ultimately passed it. Council people are supposed to represent the neighborhoods and sometimes to respond to what neighbors want or don't want zoning changes are necessary. That's a fact of life.

[skyscraper]

Originally Posted by 1487

how can you speak specifically about a bill that hasn't even been passed yet?

they have to pass it to know what's in it, right?

[Urbanthusiat]

Fun Fact, Philadelphia is among the U.S. leaders for foreign real estate investment.

[EastSideHBG]

Originally Posted by Londonee

Jesus, really, the Plymouth Meeting Mall? Talk about the least inspiring location choices...

This would have been a great 3rd floor tenant of the Gallery.

Originally Posted by reparcsyks

I couldn't care less about Legos, but this is actually a huge Lego World or whatever they call it. It's definitely not a Lego Store on the 3rd floor of a mall. With that said, I agree with you that this should have been a street-front anchor tenant in the Gallery, but Lego wants to appeal to suburban moms.

I disagree, the PM Mall has made some great strides outside of its walls over the years and this will help to make it better inside its walls...and the location makes a lot of sense for Lego.

But with that being said CC could have one or something similar too, why not?

[Knight Hospitaller]

^ To the best of my knowledge, it simply is not LEGO's M.O. to locate LEGOland theme parks/"discovery centers" in city centers. See:https://www.legoland.com. PM has great highway access for a target customer base that goes beyond Philadelphia. Well situated for the minivan crowd. What CC does lack is a LEGO store, which would be a great fit. The one in KOP is surprisingly small.

American Girl is a destination type shoppe as well. I think KOP just got one, sans the tea service that's a hit in NYC. Something like that in CC would be a nice draw for the disposable income crowd.

[jsbrook]

Originally Posted by Knight Hospitaller

^ To the best of my knowledge, it simply is not LEGO's M.O. to locate LEGOland theme parks/"discovery centers" in city centers. See:https://www.legoland.com. PM has great highway access for a target customer base that goes beyond Philadelphia. Well situated for the minivan crowd. What CC does lack is a LEGO store, which would be a great fit. The one in KOP is surprisingly small.

American Girl is a destination type shoppe as well. I think KOP just got one, sans the tea service that's a hit in NYC. Something like that in CC would be a nice draw for the disposable income crowd.

We should absolutely get an American Girl in the city WITH the tea service. Perfect for suburban grandmothers to take their granddaughters to in conjunction with a larger outing in the city. Like to see something at the Academy of Music or a show. I know my mother would love it. With one at KOP, not sure they'd ever do it. But there are certainly other brands with dual presence in the City and KOP. Also, I think the one in KOP is a pop-up store. When its time ends, they should set permanent store in Philly.

LEGOland makes sense where it is, but I'd also like to see a LEGO store in the city.

[OslPhlWasChi]

Originally Posted by summersm343

Philly Council members propose plan to boost development near transit stops

Read more here:
http://www.philly.com/philly/business/re...oost-development-near-transit-stops.html

While it is too soon to judge the implementation at this stage, the content of the bill is spot on. My only criticism would be the limit of 500 feet. TOD in many places is considered within 1/4 mile or almost 1,300 feet. And since Philly's rapid transit system is not as robust as other cities (particularly outside the CBD), the impact while good will not be as big as other cities have seen from enabling similar TOD measures.

Regarding the concern about NIMBY's standing in the way of designating TOD zones, the article's statement here should be considered: "Philly is not reinventing the wheel here," he said. "It's following the playbook we see in other markets, and that's a good thing. " This is not a novel concept and measurable impacts can be seen in other cities. NIMBY's have no leverage in arguing this except for reasons where legal/zoning precedent is against them. If such a conflict arises, let is be educational for constituents to learn the true worthiness of their council members as well as the true motives of NIMBYs. Nevertheless, lets just hope appropriate zones are easily designated without conflict.

[Hrytsyu]

Originally Posted by 3rd&Brown

Good god that's ugly.

I appreciate the visual motion generated by programmatic balcony shifts and projection. Try to imagine how structure appears without that function. This otherwise static building, moves.

Furthermore, I truly hope this project happens as that area appears desperate for a focus and density.

[tsarstruck]

The long-blighted Beury Building at Broad Street and Erie Avenue could be reborn as an apartment house with downstairs shops and offices, under a revitalization plan now gathering steam.

Artist´s rendering of rehabbed Beury Building, with new annex under consideration for adjacent lot. Slideshow icon SLIDESHOW
Blighted Beury Building may be the next North Broad Street comeback tale
Philadelphia-based Shift Capital is readying crews to rid the building of asbestos and other environmental hazards as it closes in on a package of redevelopment aid and low-income-housing tax credits to help pay for most of the $33 million project.
...
If the funding materializes, work could begin late this year and finish in mid-2019, he said, adding that a later stage of development could include new construction on an adjacent empty lot.

[IMG]http://media.philly.com/images/1200*850/RS_galleryImages_1200x800_20170227_beuryhighres.jpg[/IMG]

I'll take the serious OVER on 10 years for that second phase new construction, but getting that building re-done would be amazing.

http://www.philly.com/philly/business/re...t-North-Broad-Street-comeback-story.html

[Londonee]

Originally Posted by cafeguy

Pretty sure TOD was recommended at certain stations in the 2035 plan, but no one did anything about it. I don't know whats in this bill, but doesn't look like it has realistic teeth in there to make it happen either.

I think largely b/c the plans (like 2035plan, etc) aren't actually, ya know, plans. They are common sense recommendations that come at great expense. In a nutshell these "plans" are a microcosm of the city's inertia - lotsa talk, little action.

Personally looking forward to the 2020 Penn's Landing Plan - which will say, after a million dollar expenditure paid to some multi-lateral crack squad of brilliant consultants - that we should probably do a little bit more to tie PL into the city.

[Gonzo the Great]

Ok , I'm sure someone has either asked this question before or knows the answer .
I looked at PHI and FAA regulations . I also tried to find any restrictions the city or
state might have regarding the height of super tall buildings in the city .
Is there such a restriction that limits height due to flight patterns over Philly . If so ,
what is it ........

[Groundhog]

Originally Posted by Gonzo the Great

Ok , I'm sure someone has either asked this question before or knows the answer .
I looked at PHI and FAA regulations . I also tried to find any restrictions the city or
state might have regarding the height of super tall buildings in the city .
Is there such a restriction that limits height due to flight patterns over Philly . If so ,
what is it ........

I don't know the specifics but I believe in Philly, only the stadiums and Navy Yard are really impacted by whatever high limitations are due to flight patterns.