PHILADELPHIA | THE LAUREL @ 1911 Walnut | 604 FT | 48 FLOORS - Page 85

Knight Hospitaller · #**1681** Posted **Apr 2, 2018, 12:09 PM**

Laws reflect public policy.

jsbrook · #**1682** Posted **Apr 2, 2018, 1:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knight Hospitaller

Laws reflect public policy.

Right.

Anyway, I trust that none of these complaints from near neighbors will derail anything here.

Knight Hospitaller · #**1683** Posted **Apr 2, 2018, 2:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsbrook

Right.

Anyway, I trust that none of these complaints from near neighbors will derail anything here.

I agree with your earlier observation that their complaints are without merit. I wonder what they said when the Rittenhouse went up on the other side?

Parkway · #**1684** Posted **Apr 2, 2018, 7:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knight Hospitaller

I agree with your earlier observation that their complaints are without merit. I wonder what they said when the Rittenhouse went up on the other side?

My memory is that SOS played it fast and loose with their astronomy and claimed the building would cast shadows on the square. If that was ever the case a shadow is definitely not our biggest concern.

Jayfar · #**1685** Posted **Apr 12, 2018, 6:03 AM**

A treasure trove of renderings and drawings in the .pdf of Southern Land's submission to the Historical Commission. Final approval at Friday's meeting is most likely.

http://www.phila.gov/historical/meet...4-40Sansom.pdf

AGENDA
668TH STATED MEETING OF THE
PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION
FRIDAY, 13 APRIL 2018, 9:00 A.M.
1515 ARCH STREET, ROOM 18-029
ADDRESS: 1907-15 WALNUT ST AND 1904-40 SANSOM ST – ON CONSENT AGENDA
Proposal: Construct mixed-use building; alter existing buildings
Type of Review Requested: Final Approval
Owner: 1911 Walnut Street, LLC
Applicant: David Gest, Ballard Spahr LLP
History: 1907-15 Walnut Street, vacant
1904 Sansom Street, c. 1855, altered by Clarence Wunder, architect, 1923
1906-16 Sansom Street, Warwick Apartments, Chester H. Kirk, architect, 1902
1918-40 Sansom Street, vacant
Individual Designation: none
District Designation: Rittenhouse Fitler Residential Historic District, various, 2/8/1995
Staff Contact: Jon Farnham, jon.farnham@phila.gov, 215-686-7660

GtownFriend · #**1686** Posted **Apr 12, 2018, 6:34 AM**

I notice that in the design package the overall height is given as 599'!
565' is the top of the inhabited floors.

mcgrath618 · #**1687** Posted **Apr 12, 2018, 12:29 PM**

Why not another foot!!?!?!?!?!?

mcgrath618 · #**1688** Posted **Apr 12, 2018, 12:41 PM**

Also, damn, limestone at the base? The entire base of this building is gorgeous, and the rest itself isn't half bad either.
I just want this to start already

Edit:
And an addition on the top of 1904 Sansom!

Knight Hospitaller · #**1689** Posted **Apr 12, 2018, 1:40 PM**

Very nice. They’ve achieved some “lightness” in the revised design of the Sansom structure. More appropriate to the scale of that street.

Jawnadelphia · #**1690** Posted **Apr 12, 2018, 1:43 PM**

Looks awesome, the best package for this site going back to 2008. Now lets get this thing built asap. The limestone and glass facing the Square looks luxurious, but modern, very handsome. The more traditional Philly brick on the Sansom side... all good, no complaints from me. And at 599ft will make a solid impact on the skyline, especially from the south.

Thanks for finding and posting Jayfar.

McBane · #**1691** Posted **Apr 12, 2018, 1:49 PM**

I like the Walnut Street facade - it's very elegant. I just wish they would have used that style all the way around instead of going for red brick on Sansom Street. Yes it's nice and yes, it "matches the scale and building materials of its neighbors" but that strategy is just soooooooo overplayed in this city. It's boring and there's no connection to the rest of the tower. I don't know why developers/architects are so obsessed with matching the red brick and height of neighboring buildings.

In the grand scheme of things however, it's not a huge deal. Love the height, the tower design, and the Walnut Street side of it.

Knight Hospitaller · #**1692** Posted **Apr 12, 2018, 1:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by McBane

I like the Walnut Street facade - it's very elegant. I just wish they would have used that style all the way around instead of going for red brick on Sansom Street. Yes it's nice and yes, it "matches the scale and building materials of its neighbors" but that strategy is just soooooooo overplayed in this city. It's boring and there's no connection to the rest of the tower. I don't know why developers/architects are so obsessed with matching the red brick and height of neighboring buildings.

In the grand scheme of things however, it's not a huge deal. Love the height, the tower design, and the Walnut Street side of it.

I would think the newest Sansom design more to your liking then the prior ones. It’s mostly metal with brick as an accent to tie it in.

McBane · #**1693** Posted **Apr 12, 2018, 2:11 PM**

Yea I get it that they're using red brick in a modern way as opposed to trying to mimic the design of its older neighbors. But my issue isn't just that the red brick strategy is overused. It's that I genuinely really like the Walnut Street facade; so much so that I find it unfortunate that it's only limited to Walnut Street and not used all the way around. Not only is it much nicer, but doing that would give the building a more cohesive look. If you look at the first image of the packet (page 6), can you honestly tell that the tower and Sansom Street facade are the same building? It looks disjointed and that's something that personally I don't love.

But again, in the grand scheme of things, it's nothing to get too worked up over. Overall, I like this building and hope it gets built.

Knight Hospitaller · #**1694** Posted **Apr 12, 2018, 2:22 PM**

^ I agree with respect to the lack of integration. Unfortunately, I don’t think any prior rendering made any effort at integration.

jsbrook · #**1695** Posted **Apr 12, 2018, 2:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by McBane

Yea I get it that they're using red brick in a modern way as opposed to trying to mimic the design of its older neighbors. But my issue isn't just that the red brick strategy is overused. It's that I genuinely really like the Walnut Street facade; so much so that I find it unfortunate that it's only limited to Walnut Street and not used all the way around. Not only is it much nicer, but doing that would give the building a more cohesive look. If you look at the first image of the packet (page 6), can you honestly tell that the tower and Sansom Street facade are the same building? It looks disjointed and that's something that personally I don't love.

But again, in the grand scheme of things, it's nothing to get too worked up over. Overall, I like this building and hope it gets built.

It's a lot more expensive to do that facade on the length of Sansom too. Oh well. Glad this seems to be happening.