PHILADELPHIA | 222 Walnut Street | 252 FT | 20 FLOORS
 

"A residential skyscraper? In my neighborhood of Society Hill! GASP! Won't someone think of my views?"

Title: 222 Walnut Street
Project: Residential
Architect: Cecil Baker
Developer: 230 Walnut St, LLC
Location: 222 Walnut St
Neighborhood: Society Hill
District: Old City
Floors: 20 Floors (19 residential, one mechanical)
Height: 252 Ft

https://i.imgur.com/RSArDtr.png

https://i.imgur.com/uRNJJ2j.png

Submission to Historical Council:
https://www.phila.gov/media/20190618...r57Hcm4oiMlH8U

More luxury condos east of Broad. Build it!!! :notacrook:

Here is the application, and the Historical Commission recommends denial:

https://www.phila.gov/media/20190618...5ZVPn2QX-Ekk1o

I much preferred Scannapieco's proposal taking down the Ritz and leaving the historic buildings unaltered. I'm also very concerned with the quality of these towers. I like Astoban generally, but the facade at 2110 Walnut is the worst I've seen in new construction without metal bays. Flimsy paneling that literally looks nailed to the underbuilding material with many visible, external nails.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/21...7!4d-75.176442

I was sure it was some kind of preparation for something else to go on top of it when it first started going up, but it seems to be the final product. I hope the neighborhood association gets involved here. Not to kill the tower, but to demand better design as was done with the Laurel and the Harper.

The Ritz wouldn't move. The wouldn't sell. This was Scannapieco's alternate plan as well... to put the tower here.

Astoban didn't change the location of the tower. They just purchase the site and plans from Scannapieco.

Scannapieco is looking at another site in the area now instead, because he found the near neighbors (Society Hill towers in particular) unbearable to deal with.

Looks like the Historical Commission doesn't quite like this one, but their word isn't binding:


‘Overbuild’ projects planned to turn historic Freeman’s auction house and Nelson Building into condos

https://www.inquirer.com/real-estate...-20190619.html

19-story overlay project planned behind historic Society Hill buildings


https://philly.curbed.com/2019/6/20/...-hill-historic


I don't understand the commission's logic here. There are plenty of sizable buildings around. I'm pretty sure the Society Hill Towers are taller than this. Why wouldn't it fit into the surroundings?

Are you sure they bought/own the Nelson Building? Like the 1810 Chestnut one, this application is designated as "Review in Concept"/an "in concept application", and Astoban has not (at this time,anyway) purchased all 3 of the buildings that are needed for the Chestnut project.

Not binding in what sense for a project that will incorporate a historically designated building? Who can overrule it outside a judicial appeal? What is the process? Or do you mean the staff recommendation is not binding? That is true. This will be considered at the Architectural Committee meeting on June 25, and by the full Historical Commission in July. Still seems to be an in-concept application, and I'm not sure what the ownership status by Astoban is on this one. But he next month or so will definitely inform its decisions and path.

Correct, I meant the latter.

This house next door is sale for $12,000,000. https://www.phillymag.com/property/2...bcBSsYmnKaDg-o That is actually a $5MM drop from the last listing, but it is still way overpriced. Considering that one of two townhomes left remaining directly on Rittenhouse Square Park is listed for under $6MM, it is still way overpriced for a single family home of this size. The Cerrones must be out of their mind to think they will sell it for anything close to that. On the other hand, it is perfect for Astoban or another developer to purchase the lot to build a tower.

If I had to choose between an overbuild of the Nelson Building or a tower build on this plot of land, I'd choose this plot in a heartbeat even if it meant total demolition of this house.

That house is one of the strangest in the city. The 5 car (!!!!) garage in the back is bonkers. I think you're right on the money that they're not listing that house with the thought that someone is going to buy it and move in. Definitely being sold as a development opportunity.

Even though a house right on Rittenhouse is far more desirable, the property this house is on is huge, it has a front yard (who has one of those in Philly?) a giant courtyard in the back and that enormous garage. It's probably 5 times the size of the rittenhouse lot conservatively. I think you could absolutely put a tower there.

And as unique as the home is, it's kind of a gaudy waste of space. Wouldn't mind at all if it was torn down. Not at all historic either.

Yeah, the outdoor space is amazing. Even so, I just don't think a house of this size in Philly is likely to sell for near $12MM. It's not impossible, but a true unicorn buyer would have to come along. Bring on the tower here instead!

It would take a down-to-the-studs remodel to get that house livable.

double post.....

I walk past it often. Built like a fortress. 5 car garage is unheard of in the city. Amazing that there is only 2 bedrooms in the entire Mansion.

Truth. I guess their kids are in the city, but we will still occasionally stay at my parents even though nearby, and their grandkids do too. Odd that a house of this size only has 1 guest room. More generally, I agree with Reddog that this house needs a lot of work to reconfigure it into a desirable living space for the way most would want to live. High quality design and materials, but awkward. Tower, please!

I remember the house being built, and from the window arrangements and dimensions, I thought that the owners must not be big art collectors. From the pics in the link jsbrook provided, my impression was right. Might collect cars though...

Architecture Committee of the Historical Commission rejected the in-concept proposal. The head of the INHP was there and hammered it for its proximity to the Merchant's Exchange Building, bought up the old "shadows, NOOO!" excuse. Society Hill Towers Condo Assn was unsurprisingly against it, as was the Society Hill Civic.

In the end, the committee rejected it on logical grounds in that the plan violates Standard 9 of the Dept of the Interior's standards for the treatment of historic properties, but right after the decision was made, one of the committee members threw in a "and it's too tall for the area!!" just to talk trash.

Good. It didn't meet Standard 9 as far as I am considered, looked junky from the very basic renders, and the cladding on 2110 Walnut is atrocious. But I would still love to see a tower of quality design replace the Cerrone's house. Given that, I don't like the Merchant's exchange proximity argument from the INHP head,. This indicates an uphill battle for a tower on a different plot in this area. Who cares? Just make sure the design is strong. The Merchant's Exchange building will still be visible from nearly every angle it currently is visible from even if a tower goes up on the Cerrones's lot. There are towers right around Independence Hall. I don't get it...

They may not like it if a tower replaced that bizzare mansion but the mansion isn't historically protected so this review process that sunk the tower at this location would be irrelevant no? Or does it still have to go through this review process simply by being located in society hill?