PHILADELPHIA | The Harper | 272 FT | 24 FLOORS

[Gonzo the Great]

Originally Posted by 1487

It appears this project has shrunk- perhaps that's why it's been delayed- redesign. Zoning permit has been issued for new structure with height of 271ft. I would assume that is about 24-25 floors. Looks like it it moving forward. Another zoning permit was recently issued for unity of use of 4 parcels.

Wow , down from 407' . What a kick in the nuts

[1487]

Originally Posted by Gonzo the Great

Wow , down from 407' . What a kick in the nuts

Indeed- my guess is this is a reflection of what developer sees as possible saturation of apt market in CC in coming years. Recent report I posted noted vacancy was 8% even though rents hadn't been affected yet. I believe the PR said over 1100 units came on line in 2016, the most in their records.

[jsbrook]

Originally Posted by 1487

Indeed- my guess is this is a reflection of what developer sees as possible saturation of apt market in CC in coming years. Recent report I posted noted vacancy was 8% even though rents hadn't been affected yet. I believe the PR said over 1100 units came on line in 2016, the most in their records.

Could be the smart move. I hope 1911 Walnut still happens and still happens at over 500 ft, though...

[1487]

Originally Posted by jsbrook

Could be the smart move. I hope 1911 Walnut still happens and still happens at over 500 ft, though...

at least that has some condos

[TempleGuy1000]

Originally Posted by 1487

Indeed- my guess is this is a reflection of what developer sees as possible saturation of apt market in CC in coming years. Recent report I posted noted vacancy was 8% even though rents hadn't been affected yet. I believe the PR said over 1100 units came on line in 2016, the most in their records.

There are quite a few apartments coming onto the market in a pretty small area.

But the effect of the additional 4,167 rental units now under con-
struction clearly will be more significant. If one assumes that 50%
of the new supply will be delivered in 2017 and 50% in 2018, that will
represent a 14% increase in new supply over 2016 levels, coming
on-line in each of the next two years. But, based on announced
completion dates, 3,127, or 75%, of these apartments are scheduled
for delivery in 2017, representing a 71% increase in new supply over
2016 levels and nearly three times as many apartments to fill than
the annual average since 2010

[Mr Saturn64]

Originally Posted by Gonzo the Great

Wow , down from 407' . What a kick in the nuts

Dammit.

[summersm343]

VERY disappointing news. I was looking forward to another 400 footer. It could be the saturation in the rental market which caused them to downsize. Part of me makes me think this was the ultimate bait and switch though. The originally building they proposed was 294 feet tall... did they "propose" a larger building to get approvals to demolish the theater, then revert back to the smaller structure?

Still, I guess we can't be too pissed at Pearl... they do a lot of great projects in Philly. At least they're still moving forward with the project. Most other developers would just abandoned the project altogether and leave us with the empty dirt lot.

[allovertown]

Wow! Terrible news. I knew that ugly facade mock up was a bad omen. It looked cheap and cheap is apparently their new MO here. Who wants to bet this whole tower is going to be clad in that garbage?

So happy they demolished the Boyd for this short stack of shit.

[iheartphilly]

...and we thought 1919 Market had a height problem. LOL.

[jjv007]

Erectile dysfunction is defined as the "inability of a [building] to maintain an [height] sufficient for satisfying [viewing] activity."
(words in brackets may have been altered)

[1487]

This isn't good, but it's made more palatable by the fact that 1911 is advancing. Plus we will eventually get another tower on the PHA property nearby. That's 3 hi rises in a very compact area of western CC.

[McBane]

Originally Posted by iheartphilly

...and we thought 1919 Market had a height problem. LOL.

Not the same. While 400 feet is clearly better than 270 feet, the typical building on Chestnut is still just 3-4 stories and the street is narrower than Market, making a sub 300 building perfectly acceptable here. Market Street is a whole 'nother animal. I wouldn't put these two in the same category. Whereas with 1919, I would have been fine with the empty lot until a better proposal came along, I would prefer 270 feet than nothing at all.

Put it this way - if the original proposal had been 270 feet, would you still feel so underwhelmed?

[Milksteak]

Originally Posted by jjv007

Erectile dysfunction is defined as the "inability of a [building] to maintain an [height] sufficient for satisfying [viewing] activity."
(words in brackets may have been altered)

Shrinkage is a real problem.

[boxbot]

Originally Posted by summersm343

VERY disappointing news. I was looking forward to another 400 footer. It could be the saturation in the rental market which caused them to downsize. Part of me makes me think this was the ultimate bait and switch though. The originally building they proposed was 294 feet tall... did they "propose" a larger building to get approvals to demolish the theater, then revert back to the smaller structure?

Still, I guess we can't be too pissed at Pearl... they do a lot of great projects in Philly. At least they're still moving forward with the project. Most other developers would just abandoned the project altogether and leave us with the empty dirt lot.

Be patient. That's Phase III.

[iheartphilly]

Originally Posted by McBane

Not the same. While 400 feet is clearly better than 270 feet, the typical building on Chestnut is still just 3-4 stories and the street is narrower than Market, making a sub 300 building perfectly acceptable here. Market Street is a whole 'nother animal. I wouldn't put these two in the same category. Whereas with 1919, I would have been fine with the empty lot until a better proposal came along, I would prefer 270 feet than nothing at all.

Put it this way - if the original proposal had been 270 feet, would you still feel so underwhelmed?

That's your opinion and you're entitled to it. For me, this is the core of Center City. As far as I'm concern, Market, Chestnut, Walnut, JFK Blvd should all be lined with very tall buildings, especially if the parcel can handle it (i.e., anything over 400ft qualifies meets that criteria).

[jsbrook]

Originally Posted by iheartphilly

That's your opinion and you're entitled to it. For me, this is the core of Center City. As far as I'm concern, Market, Chestnut, Walnut, JFK Blvd should all be lined with very tall buildings, especially if the parcel can handle it (i.e., anything over 400ft qualifies meets that criteria).

Disagree strongly! And hope it does not happen for a long time or never! I love skyscrapers but I also love the low-rise character and interesting small footprint of storefronts on many of the blocks of Chestnut, Walnut, Locust and Samson between 15th and the River. It would be a real shame to lose this. I would be happy to see lines of skyscrapers all along Market and JFK. Maybe even Arch, and that seems to be the trend with the 23rd street project and potential other towers by Comcast.

I do think Corner lots on Walnut and Chestnut streets that are generally low or mid-rise can handle taller buildings and that such buildings look nice. Like bookends.

[iheartphilly]

Originally Posted by jsbrook

Disagree strongly! And hope it does not happen for a long time or never! I love skyscrapers but I also love the low-rise character and interesting small footprint of storefronts on many of the blocks of Chestnut, Walnut, Locust and Samson between 15th and the River. It would be a real shame to lose this. I would be happy to see lines of skyscrapers all along Market and JFK. Maybe even Arch, and that seems to be the trend with the 23rd street project and potential other towers by Comcast.

I do think Corner lots on Walnut and Chestnut streets that are generally low or mid-rise can handle taller buildings and that such buildings look nice. Like bookends.

I love how folks say strongly disagree with an exclamation point as if they are absolutely right on the issue and being closed minded to varying opinions, when it is just their opinion. Anyways, in the context of what I was saying and in response to McBane's post, I didn't say every building on the streets that I named be demolish and replace with 400+ ft buildings. We have enough stock of low-rise buildings with and without character, so when an opportunity comes along to build a new building, I think we should shoot for taller building/more density on those streets I mentioned because that's the core of Center City. For the record, I think cities with different building designs and height from different era keeps it interesting and tells of the history of the city. Obviously, if a city thrives economically and there is demand for taller buildings, developers will build to meet those demands.

[allovertown]

Originally Posted by McBane

Not the same. While 400 feet is clearly better than 270 feet, the typical building on Chestnut is still just 3-4 stories and the street is narrower than Market, making a sub 300 building perfectly acceptable here. Market Street is a whole 'nother animal. I wouldn't put these two in the same category. Whereas with 1919, I would have been fine with the empty lot until a better proposal came along, I would prefer 270 feet than nothing at all.

Put it this way - if the original proposal had been 270 feet, would you still feel so underwhelmed?

Remember though, this wasn't always an empty lot like 1919 market. Just a year ago this was the last grand movie house left in Philadelphia. I understand the market can change. But that's why I think you shouldn't be able to knock down a historic building until a definitive plan is in place with secured financing that is ready to start as soon as the historic building is gone.

That grass lot on market no one is shedding tears over. But to lose the Boyd for this? It's beyond disappointing.

[jsbrook]

Originally Posted by iheartphilly

I love how folks say strongly disagree with an exclamation point as if they are absolutely right on the issue and being closed minded to varying opinions, when it is just their opinion. Anyways, in the context of what I was saying and in response to McBane's post, I didn't say every building on the streets that I named be demolish and replace with 400+ ft buildings. We have enough stock of low-rise buildings with and without character, so when an opportunity comes along to build a new building, I think we should shoot for taller building/more density on those streets I mentioned because that's the core of Center City. For the record, I think cities with different building designs and height from different era keeps it interesting and tells of the history of the city. Obviously, if a city thrives economically and there is demand for taller buildings, developers will build to meet those demands.

Um, I didn't at all suggest I was expressing anything but an opinion. I was reacting to your use of the phrase "lined with very tall buildings." For the record - not that it particularly matters - I was a fan of the original height and think Chestnut and Walnut can and certainly should support SOME tall towers and highrises. And already does. But it would be a damn shame if these streets turn into another West Market. But I do not see that happening.

[volguus zildrohar]

Crying over lost height isn't something that I get into anymore but the way that this particular case has played out is hopelessly depressing.

The demolition of The Boyd is the true sad aspect. It was possible to salve the loss of that unique building with the fact that something a bit more than average schlock was going up in its place. Now it seems that that is no longer the case due to current market forces. What's ironic is that the project spent so much time being kicked around in development hell (due to the reaction to the initial POS concept) that by the time shovels are ready to hit the dirt the envisioned project may no longer be viable.

If 1910 becomes an understated, plain or - worse yet and most likely - ugly box - it will be a perfect monument to the state of large scale development in this city. There is no demand for real ingenuity or striking design in our civic DNA because collectively we don't care much about that here. The powers that be are happy as long as their boat isn't rocked or their palms are properly greased. Magnificent old buildings (of which our supply is appallingly shrinking) that actually carry value are razed and those pieces of our civic fabric get replaced with...whatever the hell.

I'll wait until the official word comes down about the downsizing but if it is truth then it will be the latest and among the saddest in a long line of disappointing downgrades, cancellations or bait-and-switches for a city that readily swallows them because the final product doesn't matter - this is Philly...as long as there's union hours amirite?