PHILADELPHIA | THE LAUREL @ 1911 Walnut | 604 FT | 48 FLOORS

[jsbrook]

Originally Posted by iheartphilly

Is the glass half empty or half full? I just had a short work trip and came back to Philly by way of Amtrak. With the CITC, FMC, Evo, One Riverside all visible from the train station, it felt like Philly was a city on the move (tons of people moving in/out of train station, cars everywhere, FMC and CTC standing out, especially FMC with it letters lit up. Things were getting done here. I can now see why they want to build up the 30th Street Station District. Be proud Philly-things have changed and will keep changing for the better. Business leaders and others want to make the city reach its full potential.

Half full. This project notwithstanding, we're on a big upswing.

[Palms]

Originally Posted by TallCoolOne

“It’s still relatively tall but it’s become less modern and more fitting with Philadelphia,” he said, declining to disclose how many stories it would stand.

^ LAME.

Yes Philly and its Nimbys are lame.

Perfect shot by Dustin Downey.

[Mr Saturn64]

Aw, $@#% (am I allowed to curse on this forum?)

This was my favorite building U/C or proposed in Philly, and it gets scaled down. Philly is a "boom city," all there is to it. There's CITC, FMC, Schuylkill Yards, 30th Street District, W Hotel, and smaller projects like Cathedral Campus, 2100 Market, hell even the Bridge in Old City. We've also got all of this development in the Lower North, and Temple keeps on getting bigger and taller. 10 years ago, the population started rising again.

And the "less modern, more fitting part?" Screw you, man! Do they not see that FMC Tower right down the street? Is that some sort of freak misfit? No, they see Rittenhouse Square as a place that never left the days of Beaux Arts and Art Deco architecture. While Beaux Arts and Art Deco are great things, that era has ended. This building is a perfect example of the architecture of the "boom city" that they claim Philadelphia isn't.

Nice job, NIMBYs.

[Knight Hospitaller]

So much for those new improved renderings that briefly showed up on their website. CCRA may be exercising undue influence over this, but didn't the site need a zoning variance to build as proposed?

[jjv007]

Philly is a boom city compared to the Philly of the past, not its peers. It's simply not up to speed with cities like Boston and San Fran and others are right on its tail and catching up. That being said, I shouldn't have digressed and this will be my last related post on this thread.

[39.95n]

Let's all just take a breath, and see what happens. None of us have seen the revised proposals, so maybe just hold fire.

This may be the most valuable development site in the city, but it is probably also the most difficult. While previous posters' comments regarding CCRA's legal authority are correct (it has none) its influence here is almost unlimited. The developers are looking for a zoning variance or legislation to change the zoning, and permission to demolish a historic structure.
Both represent significant hurdles.

With regard to the former, council will not pass rezoning legislation while a powerful local civic like CCRA is baying for blood. If the developers tried for rezoning via the ZBA they might fail at the board level (in which case they are frozen out for, I think, 2 years) or they might luck out and get their way. Such a decision would inevitably be appealed, setting off an interminable process, the outcome of which would be best described as uncertain. The current zoning does not clearly represent a "hardship".

Assuming all that went well they still have the historical commission to deal with, followed by the further possibility of interminable litigation.

The only way this site will get developed is by a grand compromise, with a plan announced only once everyone is happy. I am not sure this is the right thing, but it's the truth. If Southern can produce an attractive building with respectable height that meets the street well and fills all the vacant land, they will have done very well. Anything else is just a pipe dream.

On the plus side anyone else looking to produce salable high rise condos has just been handed an early Holiday present. Dranoff's proposal on south Broad is suddenly looking a lot more solid with or without a hotel, and for good or ill Toll's Jeweler's Row development just became next to a certainty.

I agree with everyone else that a truly transformational project would have been nice here, but that will have to wait for a less encumbered site. Available spaces in desirable spots are becoming rarer and rarer, an unalloyed good for those of us who hate surface parking lots and underutilized space. The economics of this city will eventually produce the projects we all want to see, just not here.

[domodeez]

I'm wondering if the new apartment-only proposal is merely a negotiating tactic, i.e., an effort to demonstrate to CCRA what could be done by-right that the group would probably not be in favor of.

I get the impression that CCRA is generally anti-renter and would prefer condos over apartments wherever possible. On the other hand, I suppose it's also possible that this is being driven by existing condo onwers who don't want to see their investment returns flatline in the face of a newer/better condo building. Who knows.

[jsbrook]

Originally Posted by domodeez

I'm wondering if the new apartment-only proposal is merely a negotiating tactic, i.e., an effort to demonstrate to CCRA what could be done by-right that the group would probably not be in favor of.

I get the impression that CCRA is generally anti-renter and would prefer condos over apartments wherever possible. On the other hand, I suppose it's also possible that this is being driven by existing condo onwers who don't want to see their investment returns flatline in the face of a newer/better condo building. Who knows.

That's exactly why we need condos here! The new, modern luxury condo stock is limited in this area, though some of interiors in the older buildings on the Square are beautiful. I'd like to see The Alison turn into condos too. Perhaps this building will one day be converted into condos (if it ends up built as a rental) after serving as a rental for a spell.

But you're right that this could be, in part, driven by self-interested neighbors. I think 10 Rittenhouse has hurt the value of condos in The Rittenhouse Hotel, Plaza and Parc Rittenhouse.

[SEFTA]

Very disappointing, but not surprising. When a proposal towers over the surroundings to such a degree, makes it vulnerable to opposition. Perhaps if they proposed a narrower, more of a "pencil tower" they could keep the height. Wait and see. There should be a lot more pencil towers in Philly considering it's density and small empty lots.

[Johnland]

Originally Posted by SEFTA

Very disappointing, but not surprising. When a proposal towers over the surroundings to such a degree, makes it vulnerable to opposition. Perhaps if they proposed a narrower, more of a "pencil tower" they could keep the height. Wait and see. There should be a lot more pencil towers in Philly considering it's density and small empty lots.

Good point. I won't hold my breath, but I think this would be a smart way to go.

[jsbrook]

Originally Posted by 39.95n

Let's all just take a breath, and see what happens. None of us have seen the revised proposals, so maybe just hold fire.

This may be the most valuable development site in the city, but it is probably also the most difficult. While previous posters' comments regarding CCRA's legal authority are correct (it has none) its influence here is almost unlimited. The developers are looking for a zoning variance or legislation to change the zoning, and permission to demolish a historic structure.
Both represent significant hurdles.

With regard to the former, council will not pass rezoning legislation while a powerful local civic like CCRA is baying for blood. If the developers tried for rezoning via the ZBA they might fail at the board level (in which case they are frozen out for, I think, 2 years) or they might luck out and get their way. Such a decision would inevitably be appealed, setting off an interminable process, the outcome of which would be best described as uncertain. The current zoning does not clearly represent a "hardship".

Assuming all that went well they still have the historical commission to deal with, followed by the further possibility of interminable litigation.

The only way this site will get developed is by a grand compromise, with a plan announced only once everyone is happy. I am not sure this is the right thing, but it's the truth. If Southern can produce an attractive building with respectable height that meets the street well and fills all the vacant land, they will have done very well. Anything else is just a pipe dream.

On the plus side anyone else looking to produce salable high rise condos has just been handed an early Holiday present. Dranoff's proposal on south Broad is suddenly looking a lot more solid with or without a hotel, and for good or ill Toll's Jeweler's Row development just became next to a certainty.

I agree with everyone else that a truly transformational project would have been nice here, but that will have to wait for a less encumbered site. Available spaces in desirable spots are becoming rarer and rarer, an unalloyed good for those of us who hate surface parking lots and underutilized space. The economics of this city will eventually produce the projects we all want to see, just not here.

I tend to agree and was chatting at a party today with an area real estate developer who said much the same things. In retrospect, with everything you note and the preservation issues, this was a dubious location for a very ambitious project. That does not mean every location is. Or that people aren't justifiably disappointed in the result here. I hope we get a well-designed, "relatively tall" apartment complex as SLC is now on record as saying they think will proceed without too much hoopla. It's time this stops being an overgrown grass lot...

[1487]

Originally Posted by mville1

Does anybody else have a sinking feeling in the pit of their stomachs that this will turn out to look like 10 Rittenhouse Square?

yes. That's what i envision. Or it might look like The Alexander- which isn't a bad thing. I'm definitely foreseeing brick and faux masonry facade. I hope it's at least 30 floors though. Why are the neighborhood people opposed to a taller building?

[jsbrook]

Originally Posted by 1487

yes. That's what i envision. Or it might look like The Alexander- which isn't a bad thing. I'm definitely foreseeing brick and faux masonry facade. I hope it's at least 30 floors though. Why are the neighborhood people opposed to a taller building?

I hope it looks like the Alexander...I love 10 Rittenhouse inside, but the exterior is blah, blah, blah; almost to the point of being bad. I will say, though, that a big part of that is the size, placement and arrangement of windows. But the broad, sweeping views this allows is one of its big draws. It takes some thought and intelligent design to provide views like that in a faux masonry, non-glass building and still have the building look good. Haven't seen the interior renders at the Alexander to know if they achieved it, but I tend to doubt sweeping, floor-to-ceiling views.

[Philly Fan]

There's always something along the lines of this long-forsaken golden oldie (since Pearl Properties no longer needs it):

[boxbot]

You all are so optimistic. I'm pretty sure it's going to be worse than any of us can imagine.

[boxbot]

Originally Posted by Justin7

Really hope Southern Land Company sells the site and moves on. This property needs a quality builder who understands Philadelphia. They are out of their depth. http://southernland.com/community-developments/

Originally Posted by boxbot

You don't really believe this.

I apologize. You were right.

[thisisforreal]

Originally Posted by boxbot

You all are so optimistic. I'm pretty sure it's going to be worse than any of us can imagine.

Dustin sent me a picture of the redesign and it's definitely a Philly Special:

[boxbot]

Originally Posted by thisisforreal

Dustin sent me a picture of the redesign and it's definitely a Philly Special:

Let's chop five stories off that design and the stacked stone will have to be value engineered out in favor of poured concrete.

[jsbrook]

Originally Posted by boxbot

You all are so optimistic. I'm pretty sure it's going to be worse than any of us can imagine.

If it happens at all...I would just like to see something decent here. The problem is this site -- a very difficult one to develop -- has now changed hands so many times, and it's driven the acquisition price way up. If SLC wants to unload it, I think they will need to take a loss to find a buyer...

[City Wide]

Originally Posted by Philly Fan

There's always something along the lines of this long-forsaken golden oldie (since Pearl Properties no longer needs it):

that would have been a great addition to the City. IMHO it would have 'fit in' very well.
Nothing wrong with being tall, but there's a lot to be said with being well designed. After all, that's why architects are usually hired (except by PMC!). And when you can get tall and well designed, that's a real plus.
It has always seemed to me that Southern wanted to do something good here; and I say that acknowledging I was completely against their demo plans on Sansom St. Hopefully they won't give up, sell out, and give the City another 1919 Market St. (may we never speak its name)