__________________ Philadelphia Industrial & Commercial Heritage A public Facebook group to promote appreciation of Greater Philadelphia's industrial and commercial history and advocate for historic preservation and adaptive re-use.
Looking and sounding good. Let's get the show on the road! Getting ever closer. I still don't know why, in the redesign however many months back, they left the little nub abutting the Rittenhouse Plaza. Instead of demolishing it and building the base flush to the Plaza as in the original renders. Pretty sure that land is part of the acquisition and now owned by SLC. But a small detail. I do hope that little nub is activated with retail.
Last edited by summersm343; Jun 15, 2017 at 12:02 PM.
Looking and sounding good. Let's get the show on the road! Getting ever closer. I still don't know why, in the redesign however many months back, they left the little nub abutting the Rittenhouse Plaza. Instead of demolishing it and building the base flush to the Plaza as in the original renders. Pretty sure that land is part of the acquisition and now owned by SLC. But a small detail. I do hope that little nub is activated with retail.
Actually, SLC doesn't own it, and the owners (who also own Rittenhouse Plaza) would not sell it to them.
Im not complaing, but seriously...comcast 1, comcast 2, and this thing. They all look like giant thumbdrives with that box on top. I guess its fitting given our obsession with public clip-art (clothespin, paint brush, etc)
__________________ Philadelphia Industrial & Commercial Heritage A public Facebook group to promote appreciation of Greater Philadelphia's industrial and commercial history and advocate for historic preservation and adaptive re-use.
If that's true, that's a significant chop and would place it about the height of the setback in the renderings. It'd be smaller than The Rittenhouse to the south, which stands at 314'.
Is it really going to be 290'? If so, the renderings are widely inaccurate. Or was this zoning application what they could do by-right, which will be modified once they get a variance?
If that's true, that's a significant chop and would place it about the height of the setback in the renderings. It'd be smaller than The Rittenhouse to the south, which stands at 314'.
Is it really going to be 290'? If so, the renderings are widely inaccurate. Or was this zoning application what they could do by-right, which will be modified once they get a variance?
no one has seen renderings of the updated project. Very little has been said publicly about what is going on with this project.
no one has seen renderings of the updated project. Very little has been said publicly about what is going on with this project.
Looking back at it, it seems there's some confusion in this thread. 1910 Chestnut is the Boyd project, which has a height of 271', while the 1911 Walnut project doesn't have a zoning permit yet.
Looking back at it, it seems there's some confusion in this thread. 1910 Chestnut is the Boyd project, which has a height of 271', while the 1911 Walnut project doesn't have a zoning permit yet.
We shot an aerial panorama at 600 feet elevation, where the original architectural renderings placed the top of the building (Now I think it is around 550 feet elevation). Check it out at http://www.phillybydrone.com/panoram...lnut/tour.html.
We shot an aerial panorama at 600 feet elevation, where the original architectural renderings placed the top of the building (Now I think it is around 550 feet elevation). Check it out at http://www.phillybydrone.com/panoram...lnut/tour.html.
Thank you so much, that was awesome.
Didn't realize how little there is in this area by way of tall buildings, especially to the direct northwest.
Prev
Guess that explains it, then. When the original renders were done, they must have thought they'd be able to acquire it. Oh well.
Linear Mode
