PHILADELPHIA | One Cathedral Square | 245 FT | 24 FLOORS

[iheartphilly]

Originally Posted by thoughtcriminal

I posted this question in the main philly thread, but this is probably the better place:
does anyone know whether both phases are being designed by the same architect?

According to the CDR package above for this proposal, the architect is by Solomon Cordwell Buenz. You can scroll back up on the thread to see the package for any further info.

[summersm343]

Originally Posted by iheartphilly

^
Time to cap VSE adjacent to Phase 1 now as further incentive for Phase 1 to go big or go home...LOL.

Do you mean the height? Phase 1 can't be taller. There's a 250 foot height limit within 250 feet of the Parkway. That's why the Phase I tower is 245 feet tall, and the Phase II tower is set back from the park/18th Street.

[iheartphilly]

Originally Posted by summersm343

Do you mean the height? Phase 1 can't be taller. There's a 250 foot height limit within 250 feet of the Parkway. That's why the Phase I tower is 245 feet tall, and the Phase II tower is set back from the park/18th Street.

Yeah, I had it flip-flopped. Meant Phase II because that's the phase adjacent to the VSE. And, yes for the full height on Phase II. Phase I is limited as you mentioned. Good catch on that.

[Knight Hospitaller]

Taking another look at it, I can live with the glass tower, although it could be so much better. The brick box at ground level, however, should not be allowed to see the light of day. They can do way better than something that resembles a suburban CVS with a glass shaft sticking out of it. God forbid that should be the inspiration for its taller sibling. The original conceptual renderings were better overall (if shorter for phase two).

[Boku]

Inga is already ripping this on Twitter, lol

[JohnIII]

I'll reserve my ruling on the project because we haven't see the complete work yet; its hard to judge somethings if we haven't seen the complete work.

Based on what I can see the tower that is 245 feet isn't overwhelming but in the scope of the setting I'm not sure it should be; if its viewed from the west you have the Cathedral with its Corinthian design like the Church of San Carlo al Corse in Rome. Any views of the project from the south would allow the shorter tower to reflect the cathedral and the taller tower to rise high dramatically so that the smaller tower isn't really noticed. From the east the smaller tower won't really stand out; it'll fit like the tower across the street and when the taller tower is constructed it'll fill in the area so its presences will be nice but not really dramatic; not a negative in any real way. From the north you'll have the taller tower so the smaller tower isn't a factor to make much fuss over.

My main concern is the taller tower at 685 feet; what will its design be? What will its crown be like? What's it night lighting because at that location it'll stand out really big; you'll see it from New Jersey, its right on the Vine Street Expressway. This project can cement the skyline very well north of Vine Street so we have connectivity to what is The Alexander and the promising project at Broad and Spring Garden

[mcgrath618]

685 Foot & 245 Foot Towers Proposed Next to Cathedral in Logan Square

The Archdiocese of Philadelphia has been exploring developing the parking lots surrounding the Cathedral Basilica of Saints Peter and Paul next to Logan Square since 2016. The Archdiocese has been working with Exeter Property Group and its subsidiary, EPG Urban, to determine the best use of the land and to source capital for the project.

Details about the project have slowly been made public over the last several years, but the most concrete information about the development was made public today when the Civic Design Review (CDR) presentation for phase 1 of the plan was published.

Phase 1 of the project will entail a 245 foot tall, 23-story building at the corner of 17th and Race with 273 residential units, nearly 3,000 square feet of ground floor retail, and 18 underground parking spaces. The building is planned to be 265,849 square feet total.

In the CDR packet for phase 1, building massings for phase 2 were provided. Phase 2 is preliminarily planned to be a 685 foot tower between 17th St. and 18th St. fronting Vine St. No details about the makeup of the 685 foot tower were provided. We imagine that the massing of the building will change as the design and overall project evolves. However, it looks like the Archdiocese of Philadelphia and Exeter have big plans for this lot.

One interesting thing we noticed in the CDR packet is that the existing office building between Race and Vine on 17th St. is left in place. Initial plans for the Cathedral development called for this building to be demolished.

We like the aspirations and residential density of this project and are fans of the height of phase 2. This is a trophy development site for Philadelphia and it deserves to have the highest quality project possible. We look forward to seeing these parking lots developed and hope that the project moves forward without delay. There have been no announcements about capital partnerships for the project, so no timeline is currently set or definite. However, the CDR presentation is a good sign that the ball is still rolling on this development.

http://www.rising.realestate/685-foo...-logan-square/

[3rd&Brown]

Originally Posted by JohnIII

I'll reserve my ruling on the project because we haven't see the complete work yet; its hard to judge somethings if we haven't seen the complete work.

Based on what I can see the tower that is 245 feet isn't overwhelming but in the scope of the setting I'm not sure it should be; if its viewed from the west you have the Cathedral with its Corinthian design like the Church of San Carlo al Corse in Rome. Any views of the project from the south would allow the shorter tower to reflect the cathedral and the taller tower to rise high dramatically so that the smaller tower isn't really noticed. From the east the smaller tower won't really stand out; it'll fit like the tower across the street and when the taller tower is constructed it'll fill in the area so its presences will be nice but not really dramatic; not a negative in any real way. From the north you'll have the taller tower so the smaller tower isn't a factor to make much fuss over.

My main concern is the taller tower at 685 feet; what will its design be? What will its crown be like? What's it night lighting because at that location it'll stand out really big; you'll see it from New Jersey, its right on the Vine Street Expressway. This project can cement the skyline very well north of Vine Street so we have connectivity to what is The Alexander and the promising project at Broad and Spring Garden

You think Phase II is going to be any better?

"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."

[mcgrath618]

Originally Posted by 3rd&Brown

You think Phase II is going to be any better?

"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."

Again, other than the base, why all the fuss? It's not a Chinatown Tower or anything. It's about as attractive as 1213 Walnut.

[iheartphilly]

It's Logan Square and not Chinatown either...

Phase 2 will get so much visibility-be nice if the developer consider this fact and the trophy location. They should be able to command higher rent to give us an amazing design, which the current is NOT. Woof.

[summersm343]

I don't get the fuss either. It's a nice looking 24-story glass apartment tower.

Depending on the use of the Phase II tower - like for instance, if there is office space included - could allow for a bigger budget and better design/facade... but it's all relative.

Hard to work out the numbers for a ton of money towards design and facade when the use is going to be rental apartments. The Alexander is a completely different animal - built by the deep-pocketed Mormons.

[mcgrath618]

Originally Posted by summersm343

I don't get the fuss either. It's a nice looking 24-story glass apartment tower.

Depending on the use of the Phase II tower - like for instance, if there is office space included - could allow for a bigger budget and better design/facade... but it's all relative.

Hard to work out the numbers for a ton of money towards design and facade when the use is going to be rental apartments. The Alexander is a completely different animal - built by the deep-pocketed Mormons.

To be fair, Catholics are historically rich as well.

[jsbrook]

It's ok. I feel like it would have looked good if they incorporated the brick in the main structure as ribbons. Like done all the "slab edge covers" in red brick as well. Pages 17, 27-34 Cool re the 685 foot Phase 2! I hope THAT is well designed.

[jsbrook]

Originally Posted by iheartphilly

It's Logan Square and not Chinatown either...

Phase 2 will get so much visibility-be nice if the developer consider this fact and the trophy location. They should be able to command higher rent to give us an amazing design, which the current is NOT. Woof.

Phase 2 should be a luxury mixed use building with top notch design after Vinestreet expressway is capped by a park. We can dream!

[jsbrook]

Originally Posted by Knight Hospitaller

Taking another look at it, I can live with the glass tower, although it could be so much better. The brick box at ground level, however, should not be allowed to see the light of day. They can do way better than something that resembles a suburban CVS with a glass shaft sticking out of it. God forbid that should be the inspiration for its taller sibling. The original conceptual renderings were better overall (if shorter for phase two).

There's absolutely nothing wrong with the brick itself. It looks good. But I agree this is a half-assed attempt to relate to surrounding buildings without integrating the base and the tower to EACH OTHER in any aesthetic way. If they incorporated brick work up to the top (could still be a mostly glassy endeavor), I think the whole thing would work.

[Knight Hospitaller]

^ I have nothing against brick — in fact I love brick. Your comment about the various aspects of the building not being integrated was the point I was trying to make. It’s also a bland featureless base. Covering it in brick doesn’t do anything to improve the fact.

[iheartphilly]

I think some of us are confusing the excitement of getting this project from the developer that was picked vs. a world-class design from someone experience like solomon cordwell buenz where we expect a better design than what is shown in the packet. go to SCD website to see what they are capable of. And, this goes back to the discussion that jsbrook, myself and maybe a few others had about having an architect design something striking with boldness and creativity and that the design budget shouldn't diminish that objective. Since this is a preliminary design (fingers crossed), and not sure if it will go through a few iterations, but hoping clearer minds will see that something more bold and striking should go here in this prime and visible location and ask SCD to have a do-over.

remember, philly is not a second class city...we are well established in architectural design in many of our buildings and it's the 2nd decade of the 2nd millennium....stop shortchanging Philly in these designs.

[Urbanthusiat]

The owner is the Church... now I'm Catholic myself so I'm not trying to trash the Church or anything but the Church isn't a developer - they're just trying to get money. I have no doubt that what they've proposed will be a financial success. But that's the sad reality. I just don't have the faith that the Church really cares all that much about design. Now I do like this project - I think it's just about as good as anything you'd expect from a private developer. I just don't understand why people were expecting the Church to go above and beyond. It's just not in their DNA. I never had high expectations for this project.

[iheartphilly]

Originally Posted by Urbanthusiat

The owner is the Church... now I'm Catholic myself so I'm not trying to trash the Church or anything but the Church isn't a developer - they're just trying to get money. I have no doubt that what they've proposed will be a financial success. But that's the sad reality. I just don't have the faith that the Church really cares all that much about design. Now I do like this project - I think it's just about as good as anything you'd expect from a private developer. I just don't understand why people were expecting the Church to go above and beyond. It's just not in their DNA. I never had high expectations for this project.

Ok. But, just remember this:

http://www.sitioau.com/pagest

The church has a choice to work with the developer to pick designs. Why they settle on the current one is anyone's guess. I'm glad there's progress with this lot, but disappointed with the design. And just an observation, they pick Exeter as the developer who specialty isn't really in high-rise construction building.

[Knight Hospitaller]

Originally Posted by Urbanthusiat

The owner is the Church... now I'm Catholic myself so I'm not trying to trash the Church or anything but the Church isn't a developer - they're just trying to get money. I have no doubt that what they've proposed will be a financial success. But that's the sad reality. I just don't have the faith that the Church really cares all that much about design. Now I do like this project - I think it's just about as good as anything you'd expect from a private developer. I just don't understand why people were expecting the Church to go above and beyond. It's just not in their DNA. I never had high expectations for this project.

Considering the Church's contribution to Western art and architecture, it sure used to be in their DNA, but something went awry in the second half of the Twentieth Century.