HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Never Built & Visionary Projects > Cancelled Project Threads Archive


 

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted May 13, 2019, 6:36 PM
volguus zildrohar's Avatar
volguus zildrohar volguus zildrohar is offline
I Couldn't Tell Anyone
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: The City Of Philadelphia
Posts: 15,988
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanthusiat View Post
Its not - this would be right across the street from the lower right corner of this site plan.
The parking lot that the person was asking about is part of the Archdiocese proposal - it's on their land.
__________________
je suis phillytrax sur FLICKR, y'all
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted May 13, 2019, 7:06 PM
Jayfar's Avatar
Jayfar Jayfar is offline
Midrise
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,535
Loopnet listing which also links a brochure with more renderings and details:

https://www.loopnet.com/Listing/1700...a-PA/15941708/

Brochure:
https://images1.loopnet.com/d2/Lm0RR...g/document.pdf
__________________
Philadelphia Industrial & Commercial Heritage
A public Facebook group to promote appreciation of Greater Philadelphia's industrial and commercial history and advocate for historic preservation and adaptive re-use.
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted May 13, 2019, 8:09 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 21,375
Definitely would be sad to see Philly lose that handsome building for a tower like this.
__________________
Supercar Adventures is my YouTube channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4W...lUKB1w8ED5bV2Q
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted May 13, 2019, 11:42 PM
City Wide City Wide is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,623
the owner/developer is quoted as having already gotten the nec. zoning. Can anyone verify that? Re the school's lease, it could very well include a buy out clause.

As others have mentioned, the lose of these perfectly servable buildings would be a set back for the City. This is a another case that shows there is a great need for more then one type of historic certification. Its these type of buildings mixed amount the rest of CC which add so much character.
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted May 14, 2019, 1:44 PM
SEFTA's Avatar
SEFTA SEFTA is offline
Philly Pholly
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 1,246
The horror
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted May 21, 2019, 2:12 AM
mcgrath618's Avatar
mcgrath618 mcgrath618 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Clark Park, Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 3,622
Glad to see this finally tagged in the right place.

I honestly have to say: I'm not lamenting the loss of these two buildings that heavily. It's not like they're entirely unique, and one is even being preserved, according to the renderings. They're nice, and I would rather have this building on any of the parking lots along this stretch of Race, but I'll take what I can get. The tower also isn't terrible.
__________________
Philadelphia Transportation Thread: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=164129
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted May 21, 2019, 2:22 AM
GtownFriend GtownFriend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Boulder CO
Posts: 600
I'm not happy about loosing well maintain buildings, but on the plus side the first floor retail, especially if it is a resturant/cafe would be a positive addition.
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted May 21, 2019, 4:15 AM
Philly-Drew's Avatar
Philly-Drew Philly-Drew is offline
Φιλαδέλφεια
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: NoLibs
Posts: 1,395
Count me out on this one.

Why destroy something that will never get built again for something that should never get built In the first place?

Makes no sense. I bet Londonee hit it on the head.
__________________
"Imagine all the people, living life in peace." :Lennon
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted May 21, 2019, 2:33 PM
Skintreesnail Skintreesnail is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 526
I can't help but feel a little bummed out by projects like this. It'd be different if it's on a vacant lot or replacing something less aesthetically pleasing. I don't think the design of the proposed building is that bad, just when you take into account what we would give up. To me cities are more interesting when they have new mixed in with the old and when some attempt is made to maintain the history of the place.
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted May 21, 2019, 2:52 PM
Knight Hospitaller's Avatar
Knight Hospitaller Knight Hospitaller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Greater Philadelphia
Posts: 2,858
^ Agreed. There are empty lots very close by, including ones made by tearing down perfectly fine 19th century structures. This won’t do a thing for the skyline or the neighborhood.
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Jun 22, 2019, 4:34 AM
mcgrath618's Avatar
mcgrath618 mcgrath618 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Clark Park, Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 3,622
This will be 190 ft, according to a permit issued on 5/9:

Quote:
FOR THE CONDITIONAL APPROVAL FOR THE LOT ADJUSTMENT TO CREATE ONE (1) LOT FROM THREE (3) OPA ACCOUNTS (1700-02 RACE ST, 1704 RACE ST AND 1706 RACE STREET) FOR THE COMPLETER DEMOLITION OF EXISTING STRUCTURE; FOR THE ERECTION OF A DETACHED STRUCTURE ( 190 FT HIGH); ROOF DECKS WITH ROOF ACCESSES STRUCTURE AND BALCONIES FOR A VACANT COMMERCIAL SPACE AT FIRST FLOOR AND AT SECOND FLOOR IN THE SAME BUILDING WITH MULTI-FAMILY HOUSEHOLD LIVING( 28 DWELLING UNITS) FROM THIRD FLOOR THROUGH SEVETEEN(17TH) FLOORS INCLUDING WITH TWENTY-EIGHT( 28) ACCESSORY MECHANICAL ACCESS AUTOMATED VALET-TYPE PARKING SPACES PARKING SPACES INCLUDING WITH TWO(2) RESERVOI SPACES, ONE(1) ELECTRIC VAN SPACE, AND TEN(10) BICYCLE SPACES IN AN ACCESSIBLE ROUTE.
https://li.phila.gov/#details?entity...06%20RACE%20ST

I'm getting better with my estimates. I was 15 off for the Revival Hotel, and 10 ft off for this one. Therefore I predict that the Schuylkill Yards tower will be 1105 ft tall
__________________
Philadelphia Transportation Thread: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=164129
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Jun 22, 2019, 7:51 AM
PurpleWhiteOut PurpleWhiteOut is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 697
Honestly, I'm still kind of bumbed by this, but it is a changing city and there are more old row homes to go around in center city. I wish it werent on a nice corner building, but change is OK.
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Jun 22, 2019, 10:12 PM
UrbanRevival UrbanRevival is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 421
Quote:
Originally Posted by PurpleWhiteOut View Post
Honestly, I'm still kind of bumbed by this, but it is a changing city and there are more old row homes to go around in center city. I wish it werent on a nice corner building, but change is OK.
I think it's critical to recognize, though, that change and historic preservation aren't mutually exclusive.

Philadelphia is pretty clearly at a turning point now that it's entering a more ambitious era of revitalization and investment. That's very exciting for the city overall, and should continued to be encouraged.

But the city should exercise much more leverage over its historical assets, like its low-rise, charming and human scaled architecture that is in perfect condition. Keep in mind it's precisely that kind of urban environment that attracts people to Philadelphia in the first place (I mean, really, we all fawn over tall glass towers, but people tend to feel the most intimate connection with Philly's tightknit rowhome neighborhoods and historic low-rise buildings).

Philly is still blessed with a lot of it, but it's still very finite (and keep in mind that once you set the precedent of allowing this kind of demo/rebuild development, it becomes much harder, on a legal basis, to turn it down in future scenarios).

Basically, it's definitely time to get much tougher on developers in terms of expectations and standards for preservation for Philly's highest-quality historic fabric (especially, as pointed out by several folks, there's still a good number of empty/underutilized parcels in Center City). Either make it an adaptive re-use overbuild (as is now becoming standard, per several recent proposals), or don't bother making an application to the city.
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Jun 23, 2019, 6:31 AM
PurpleWhiteOut PurpleWhiteOut is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 697
I'm very pro-preservation so I agree with all of that. Just currently at the acceptance stage of grief I guess lol.
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Jun 24, 2019, 2:52 AM
jsbrook jsbrook is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Bala Cynwyd
Posts: 3,658
Quote:
Originally Posted by UrbanRevival View Post
I think it's critical to recognize, though, that change and historic preservation aren't mutually exclusive.

Philadelphia is pretty clearly at a turning point now that it's entering a more ambitious era of revitalization and investment. That's very exciting for the city overall, and should continued to be encouraged.

But the city should exercise much more leverage over its historical assets, like its low-rise, charming and human scaled architecture that is in perfect condition. Keep in mind it's precisely that kind of urban environment that attracts people to Philadelphia in the first place (I mean, really, we all fawn over tall glass towers, but people tend to feel the most intimate connection with Philly's tightknit rowhome neighborhoods and historic low-rise buildings).

Philly is still blessed with a lot of it, but it's still very finite (and keep in mind that once you set the precedent of allowing this kind of demo/rebuild development, it becomes much harder, on a legal basis, to turn it down in future scenarios).

Basically, it's definitely time to get much tougher on developers in terms of expectations and standards for preservation for Philly's highest-quality historic fabric (especially, as pointed out by several folks, there's still a good number of empty/underutilized parcels in Center City). Either make it an adaptive re-use overbuild (as is now becoming standard, per several recent proposals), or don't bother making an application to the city.
100% Build, build, build! BUT make it difficult to demo our precious historic architecture, which is not going to be replicated. And impose quality controls within the full limits of the the law. This means design oversight in historic districts and for overbuilds and other projects trying to incorporate designated buildings. Philadelphia, at this time, retains its unique and distinctive architecture. I do not want want to see it become generic and hard to pick out of a lineup from scores of other cities throughout the country.
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2019, 7:38 PM
summersm343's Avatar
summersm343 summersm343 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 18,362
Sort-of an update on this:

Quote:
1700-1706 Race Street
There was no presentation material submitted to the PDC for this ‘as-of-right’ proposed project. The content discussed was gleaned from the official filings with the City. This is a project that will rise on the southwest corner of 17th and Race Street with the demolition of - mostly three-story structures - at 1700, 1702, 1704, and 1706 Race Street. The proposal calls for the erection of a 190-foot 17-story building that will house 28 units (roughly two units
per floor) with mechanized parking and ground floor commercial use. It appears the units will be owned and not rented or leased. Because of the location and the size, the proposal will come under a CDR - Community Design Review - process, at which point the neighborhood’s voice will be heard in the course of a required public meeting. Consistent with the neighborhood’s preference in situations like this, we would push for underground parking, retail at the street level, and design amenities that contribute to the neighborhood. The PDC regrets the loss of buildings with historic heritage, as will be the case with this project.
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&p...mNlMzIyZjgzNjI
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2019, 12:23 PM
SJPhillyBoy's Avatar
SJPhillyBoy SJPhillyBoy is offline
Hello
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: SJ to Philly
Posts: 2,631
Philadelphia is losing part of itself with this project.



While the building they propose is nice, this new building is a dime a dozen across all of the "new" cities. Places like Vancouver are lined with them. If this type of thing continues, Philadelphia could become a generic place.
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2019, 3:40 PM
Justin7 Justin7 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 820
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcgrath618 View Post
I honestly have to say: I'm not lamenting the loss of these two buildings that heavily. It's not like they're entirely unique, and one is even being preserved, according to the renderings. They're nice, and I would rather have this building on any of the parking lots along this stretch of Race, but I'll take what I can get. The tower also isn't terrible.
I'd be interested to hear what makes a good city in your opinion. I'm having a very hard time understanding your priorities.
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2019, 3:58 PM
iheartphilly's Avatar
iheartphilly iheartphilly is offline
Philly Rising Up!
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: motherEarth
Posts: 3,257
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJPhillyBoy View Post
Philadelphia is losing part of itself with this project.



While the building they propose is nice, this new building is a dime a dozen across all of the "new" cities. Places like Vancouver are lined with them. If this type of thing continues, Philadelphia could become a generic place.
Agreed. The picture of this bldg is definitely worth preserving, along with the adjacent bldgs in the picture. The new highrises/mid-rises/low-rises built show the economic growth and vibrancy of the city in current times, but it's these kinds of bldg that show philly cultural history/craftsmanship/materials, etc. that will be lost and never replicated if torn down.
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2019, 6:22 PM
3rd&Brown 3rd&Brown is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,333
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcgrath618 View Post
This will be 190 ft, according to a permit issued on 5/9:


https://li.phila.gov/#details?entity...06%20RACE%20ST

I'm getting better with my estimates. I was 15 off for the Revival Hotel, and 10 ft off for this one. Therefore I predict that the Schuylkill Yards tower will be 1105 ft tall
Can't the LSNA stop this? They've shown they're infinitely reasonable and fair when it comes to high rise development in the neighborhood (i.e. I don't consider them NIMBYs).

But this is a dog. It must be stopped.
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
 

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Never Built & Visionary Projects > Cancelled Project Threads Archive
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:59 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.