PHILADELPHIA | Schuylkill Yards Future Phases | 1,095 - 375 FT | 70 - 28 FLOORS

[JohnIII]

All 3 statements you gave are very intriguing. I will allow myself to be bias not as a result of putting other cities down because this is not a city to city comparison as much as an observation.

The 1st statement speaks to the city selection process being in a city that is walkable; a pedestrian friendly city; most cities on the final 20 list are not. I can only think of 7 cities that are pedestrian.

The 2nd statement really gives Philadelphia a huge advantage because Amazon wants an more urban site with over a million people; I may be wrong but the only cities I really have a truly urban feel on the list are Boston, Philadelphia, New York, Chicago, and to a much lesser extent due to there size Newark and Washington DC. However I ponder these words and consider them well; they want a city that can handle growth or a development of this size and Philadelphia is the only city that can in terms of City Planning that has already be done; mass transit; and the ability to absorb the impact of such a project. Boston and Washington have sites but congestion may be a problem; Newark doesn't seem to have the infrastructure for it which leaves only Philadelphia, New York City and Chicago. Chicago isn't on the East Coast; and if its between Philadelphia and New York; Philadelphia has much more real estate to develop and a cheaper price close to the city center; much of which is reflected in the 3rd statement.

I believe Philadelphia is looking very good in the process; especially being the city that attracts more Millennials then any other city; the fact that its North America's only World Heritage Site City.

Friends, Philadelphia being a World Heritage Site is huge; its huge because of a few reason I won't say right now but globally funds can be made available to build in this city and no other city in North America can count on Global Funds to assist in this (except maybe Quebec and San Antonio but they aren't on Amazon's list); they have to preserve the city to a degree but they can also build an add to infrastructure and business while preserving it. Philadelphia doesn't just get funding as a World Heritage Site; the image of the city is marked as being distinct and purely unequal when it comes to it characteristics (I'm not just saying this because I live here but this just happens to be the truth with World Heritage Sites) and that brings tourism; you can bring talent not just from those who live in Philadelphia or from colleges and universities; no, no, any major city can do that; but when you have a World Heritage Site then its become global overnight without needing an inner city population of over 5 million or being the site of national trade and entertainment. Friends even if a World War were to break out; (and I know this is a very morbid topic) Philadelphia as a World Heritage Site is protected by the United Nations. If Amazon sees this and I don't know if they do; but if they do; then its looking good for Philadelphia.

[Milksteak]

There has to be a massive appeal to be able to put your name on what could be the country's tallest skyscraper in the birth place of the USA that also happens to be its only World Heritage Site.

[iheartphilly]

^
It's a nice marketing tool to be called a World Heritage Site, but it's not like it comes up in regular convos all the time. People were visiting Philly way before we gain this status. If we get more people to visit, good for the tourism industry in Philly. But, let's not overhype or oversell it. It's not like we put a man on Mars yet...LOL.

[jsbrook]

We are not a real World Heritage City. It's a meaningless designation that has no connection to UNESCO, which Trump withdrew us from anyway. And our approach to preservation is awful and we have designated less of our built environment than most cities despite having more historically significant buildings than many. It's a nice soundbite created by a non-profit whose primary goal is to drive tourism, but that is about it.The only citywide UNESCO World Heritage designated city in the United States is the ancient town of Taos Pueblo, New Mexico. With that, comes funding and other benefits. There, the U.N. provides funding for the restoration and maintenance of Taos’s historic earthen structures. Here, not so much...

[Gonzo the Great]

Originally Posted by jsbrook

We are not a real World Heritage City. It's a meaningless designation that has no connection to UNESCO, which Trump withdrew us from anyway. And our approach to preservation is awful and we have designated less of our built environment than most cities despite having more historically significant buildings than many. It's a nice soundbite created by a non-profit whose primary goal is to drive tourism, but that is about it.The only citywide UNESCO World Heritage designated city in the United States is the ancient town of Taos Pueblo, New Mexico. With that, comes funding and other benefits. There, the U.N. provides funding for the restoration and maintenance of Taos’s historic earthen structures. Here, not so much...

[allovertown]

Originally Posted by jsbrook

We are not a real World Heritage City. It's a meaningless designation that has no connection to UNESCO, which Trump withdrew us from anyway. And our approach to preservation is awful and we have designated less of our built environment than most cities despite having more historically significant buildings than many. It's a nice soundbite created by a non-profit whose primary goal is to drive tourism, but that is about it.The only citywide UNESCO World Heritage designated city in the United States is the ancient town of Taos Pueblo, New Mexico. With that, comes funding and other benefits. There, the U.N. provides funding for the restoration and maintenance of Taos’s historic earthen structures. Here, not so much...

There is no such thing as a real "UNESCO World Heritage City." UNESCO designates World Heritage Sites, some of which encompass an entire city, though it is not as though they receive some type of special title. Historic sites are listed the same way on the UNESCO list whether it's an entire city like Taos Pueblo or an individual building like Independence Hall. The only distinction UNESCO makes is whether sites are man-made or natural. Besides calling Taos Pueblo a "city" is beyond misleading.

Think of the Organization of World Heritage Cities what you will, but it is a real organization that is tied to UNESCO in the sense that there is no member city that does not contain a UNESCO site.

https://www.ovpm.org/en/presentation

I totally agree that being a World Heritage City doesn't hold the cache that JohnIII seems to assume and Philly's status as a World Heritage City will play no role in Amazon's decision, I'm sure. But regardless of whatever Trump does, we are absolutely an actual World Heritage City which is absolutely a very real and fairly unique distinction.

[jsbrook]

Originally Posted by allovertown

There is no such thing as a real "UNESCO World Heritage City." UNESCO designates World Heritage Sites, some of which encompass an entire city, though it is not as though they receive some type of special title. Historic sites are listed the same way on the UNESCO list whether it's an entire city like Taos Pueblo or an individual building like Independence Hall. The only distinction UNESCO makes is whether sites are man-made or natural. Besides calling Taos Pueblo a "city" is beyond misleading.

Think of the Organization of World Heritage Cities what you will, but it is a real organization that is tied to UNESCO in the sense that there is no member city that does not contain a UNESCO site.

https://www.ovpm.org/en/presentation

I totally agree that being a World Heritage City doesn't hold the cache that JohnIII seems to assume and Philly's status as a World Heritage City will play no role in Amazon's decision, I'm sure. But regardless of whatever Trump does, we are absolutely an actual World Heritage City which is absolutely a very real and fairly unique distinction.

Well, yes, I guess it is not fair to call Taos a city, but it is a 19 acre settlement where 150 people live that has its own governing body, the Native American tribal government, which is comprised of a tribal governor and Tribal Counsel (among other things). Its entirety is a UNESCO World Heritage site. I'm not slamming the OWHRC, but there are some 19 other U.S. cites and states that have UNESCO designated sites, and worldwide there are 250 World Heritage Cities. I'm proud of Philly and our history and Independence Hall, but I don't think it's a hugely meaningful distinction. A lot of cities in this country (Boston for one) have hugely significant historic site, and I think the OWHRC just hasn't got around to designate them yet.

We're getting far afield, I guess, from the main topics. So I'll move on.

[PHL10]

Originally Posted by jsbrook

A lot of cities in this country (Boston for one) have hugely significant historic site, and I think the OWHRC just hasn't got around to designate them yet.

The criteria is not simply age as your post may suggest. If that were the criteria everyplace in the world over 250 years old would be one and it would lose all meaning. Here's the general criteria:

"...as having cultural, historical, scientific or other form of significance, and is legally protected by international treaties. The sites are judged important to the collective interests of humanity."

It's what happened at Independence Hall, the documents that were produced there (Declaration and Constitution) and how that impacted the entire world to this day.

[jsbrook]

Originally Posted by PHL10

The criteria is not simply age as your post may suggest. If that were the criteria everyplace in the world over 250 years old would be one and it would lose all meaning. Here's the general criteria:

"...as having cultural, historical, scientific or other form of significance, and is legally protected by international treaties. The sites are judged important to the collective interests of humanity."

It's what happened at Independence Hall, the documents that were produced there (Declaration and Constitution) and how that impacted the entire world to this day.

I wasn't suggesting age alone was the criteria. Sorry for being precise. "hugely significant" was my shorthand. Here are the current and proposed World Heritage sites in the United States. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._United_States

By the way, the wiki sentence you quote from is a bit confusing on the treaty point. Protection by treaty is not a criterion to become a UNESCO site. That's actually the result of UNESCO designation for selected sites under the Geneva Convention (or rather prima facie evidence; if a site is designated by UNESCO, it is presumed to protected by international treaties)

Does anyone know if the site with the April Fool's renders for a basketball arena is earmarked for a Schuylkill Yards tower? Somehow I though it was. It currently houses Slainte bar and restaurant.

[PHL10]

I’m not trying to nitpick your point but I am refuting that Boston and a host of other US Cities have a significance equivalent to Independence Hall – that point is one that you did precisely specifically make. With that, I strongly disagree.

Originally Posted by jsbrook

WI'm proud of Philly and our history and Independence Hall, but I don't think it's a hugely meaningful distinction. A lot of cities in this country (Boston for one) have hugely significant historic site, and I think the OWHRC just hasn't got around to designate them yet.

[JohnIII]

Originally Posted by jsbrook

We are not a real World Heritage City. It's a meaningless designation that has no connection to UNESCO, which Trump withdrew us from anyway. And our approach to preservation is awful and we have designated less of our built environment than most cities despite having more historically significant buildings than many. It's a nice soundbite created by a non-profit whose primary goal is to drive tourism, but that is about it.The only citywide UNESCO World Heritage designated city in the United States is the ancient town of Taos Pueblo, New Mexico. With that, comes funding and other benefits. There, the U.N. provides funding for the restoration and maintenance of Taos’s historic earthen structures. Here, not so much...

Philadelphia is a World Heritage City; whatever value it hold. We're on their website

https://www.ovpm.org/

[JohnIII]

I am not sure if Philadelphia being a World Heritage City can help with Amazon; but it is something interesting to bounce around which is why I brought it up and according to the requirements and inner workings money can be involved.

As far as Philadelphia being a World Heritage City; I'll leave that argument to them; they have us on their website; they know the requirements more then any of us down on here probably (unless we're privately involved which I won't divulge.) The Organization of World Heritage Cities deals with the topic very good.

As far as Amazon with respect to the topic; Mr. Bezos thinks global minded I think so he would know probably; city leaders would probably share it with him as a marketing tool especially when the area is being marketed by things like the World Trade Organization it also comes up.

I encourage everyone to check this out; look at it; see that Philadelphia, San Antonio, and I think Quebec are consider World Heritage cities for what its worth and even though this doesn't come up often in typical conversation; one thing that does come up is the topic of money. Money brings skyscrapers and money brings jobs; so if they are offering money to pull this off then hey roll with it if it helps right folks!

https://www.ovpm.org/

I'm mostly looking at the money aspect; sometimes you have to use what works because if we market this; bring more tourists; that plays into Amazon's hands pretty good because they want a global range and what better way to do it then to put a location in a city that can draw people globally; especially when people visit globally plus there may be other benefits which is what I'm really getting at. Look at these sites and tell me what you think.

https://whc.unesco.org/en/funding/

https://www.bizjournals.com/philadel...ity-money.html

[iheartphilly]

Originally Posted by JohnIII

I am not sure if Philadelphia being a World Heritage City can help with Amazon; but it is something interesting to bounce around which is why I brought it up and according to the requirements and inner workings money can be involved.

As far as Philadelphia being a World Heritage City; I'll leave that argument to them; they have us on their website; they know the requirements more then any of us down on here probably (unless we're privately involved which I won't divulge.) The Organization of World Heritage Cities deals with the topic very good.

As far as Amazon with respect to the topic; Mr. Bezos thinks global minded I think so he would know probably; city leaders would probably share it with him as a marketing tool especially when the area is being marketed by things like the World Trade Organization it also comes up.

I encourage everyone to check this out; look at it; see that Philadelphia, San Antonio, and I think Quebec are consider World Heritage cities for what its worth and even though this doesn't come up often in typical conversation; one thing that does come up is the topic of money. Money brings skyscrapers and money brings jobs; so if they are offering money to pull this off then hey roll with it if it helps right folks!

https://www.ovpm.org/

I'm mostly looking at the money aspect; sometimes you have to use what works because if we market this; bring more tourists; that plays into Amazon's hands pretty good because they want a global range and what better way to do it then to put a location in a city that can draw people globally; especially when people visit globally plus there may be other benefits which is what I'm really getting at. Look at these sites and tell me what you think.

https://whc.unesco.org/en/funding/

https://www.bizjournals.com/philadel...ity-money.html

Again, Independence Hall is the site that qualifies the city as a World Heritage City. Hundreds of thousands of people come visit Philly to see Independence Hall and our other historic landmarks way before we gained this status. Great as great goes for a status and label, but sightseeing people have and will continue to see Independece Hall and other historic landmarks in our city with or without the knowledge of this designation. And, I'm glad we have it but it won't build any more new skyscrapers for us just because of this designation.

[jsbrook]

Originally Posted by PHL10

I’m not trying to nitpick your point but I am refuting that Boston and a host of other US Cities have a significance equivalent to Independence Hall – that point is one that you did precisely specifically make. With that, I strongly disagree.

Perhaps Independence Hall is the most significant site in the U.S. I probably wouldn't disagree with that. After all, the location of the signing of the Declaration of Independence and our Constitution is the birthplace of our country. But there are other highly significant sites, and that is why UNESCO has designated them. Certainly, I think there are other U.S. cities with UNESCO sites that should rise to the level of being designated World Heritage Cities by OWHC like the many cities it has designated in other countries. Probably time for us to move off this...

[McBane]

Beyond marketing, someone please tell me the tangible benefits of being a World Heritage City. Can anyone tell me one company that has relocated here b/c of that? Are we expecting a huge uptick in tourism b/c of this designation? Who here has even heard of the World Heritage City designation prior to Philadelphia being added to this list? Can anyone name another World Heritage City? Keep in mind this designation is not the same as UNESCO's World Heritage Site program, which most people have heard of.

[jsbrook]

Originally Posted by McBane

Beyond marketing, someone please tell me the tangible benefits of being a World Heritage City. Can anyone tell me one company that has relocated here b/c of that? Are we expecting a huge uptick in tourism b/c of this designation? Who here has even heard of the World Heritage City designation prior to Philadelphia being added to this list? Can anyone name another World Heritage City? Keep in mind this designation is not the same as UNESCO's World Heritage Site program, which most people have heard of.

I can definitely see it being helpful as part of a tourism pitch and peaking interest. "The United States' only World Heritage City. See designated UNESCO cite Independence Hall, the birthplace of our country, and [describe historic cites]" The actual increase attributable to it, hard to assess.

[Milksteak]

Originally Posted by McBane

Beyond marketing, someone please tell me the tangible benefits of being a World Heritage City. Can anyone tell me one company that has relocated here b/c of that?

I can answer this; zero businesses have relocated to Philly because of the designated World Heritage City designation. BUT...it is certainly an added appeal. Half of the promo videos made for the Amazon bid highlighted Philly's history. If you start a company in Philly, it's a great marketing talk piece to say Company XYZ was founded in America's birthplace and now America's only designated World Heritage City.

TL;DR: No, but it highlights our unique history even more...and it's a cool bragging point.

[Londonee]

Originally Posted by McBane

Beyond marketing, someone please tell me the tangible benefits of being a World Heritage City. Can anyone tell me one company that has relocated here b/c of that? Are we expecting a huge uptick in tourism b/c of this designation? Who here has even heard of the World Heritage City designation prior to Philadelphia being added to this list? Can anyone name another World Heritage City? Keep in mind this designation is not the same as UNESCO's World Heritage Site program, which most people have heard of.

FWIW, the designation is a much bigger and more covered thing in Europe. I actually had more than one friend overseas send me a link to a news story about Philly's designation that they pulled from their particular country's news media.

[JohnIII]

I like Independence Hall; haven't been there is so long.

If they ever slate the land north between Callowhill and Spring Garden Street for office towers or highrise condos; say 500' and up; will people mind that when it comes to the view on the Mall. So many people in Philly fight against tall buildings it seems

[Mr Saturn64]

Originally Posted by JohnIII

I like Independence Hall; haven't been there is so long.

If they ever slate the land north between Callowhill and Spring Garden Street for office towers or highrise condos; say 500' and up; will people mind that when it comes to the view on the Mall. So many people in Philly fight against tall buildings it seems

Given that that's north of the Constitution Center and the highway, I doubt it. Honestly, I think more resistance would come from the neighbors north of there rather than south. There are some skyscrapers, nothing too tall, in Old City, but you never know. Was there any backlash to 500 Walnut?