PHILADELPHIA | 1706 Rittenhouse | 401 FT / 122 M | 31 FLOORS | T/O - Page 2

bryson662001 · #21 Posted: **May 23, 2007, 12:09 AM**

While I tend to agree with you that this project won't happen and that Philly buyers in this price range are few and far between (and more often found in the suburbs) I believe 1706 was always more viable then Mandeville. They simply "missed the market" and it could have made it a year or two earlier.

On the other hand Mandeville at the proposed price points never made sense because of it's inferior location.

McBane · #22 Posted: **May 26, 2007, 1:39 PM**

Obviously nobody on these forums are millionaires who actually can purchase one of these multi million dollar condos. As an outsider, we tend to look at price and design.

If you're really that rich and you want to buy a condo,

1. money won't matter that much so it's of no consequence that Mandeville Place is less expensive and

2. you have to understand that people actually have to live in these condos they buy. And when that happens, people revert to the old adage - location, location, location.

When push comes to shove, design takes a backseat to a host of other characteristics, most notably the location. And, while 24th and Walnut is a fine location, its cetainly no 17th and Locust. Also, 1706 has a sales office, Mandeville does not.

Johnland · #23 Posted: **May 26, 2007, 5:48 PM**

I like this building alot. I know it's not stupendus, but the location is perfect and I like the scale and shape.

sharkfood · #24 Posted: **May 31, 2007, 9:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by McBane

Obviously nobody on these forums are millionaires who actually can purchase one of these multi million dollar condos. As an outsider, we tend to look at price and design.

If you're really that rich and you want to buy a condo,

1. money won't matter that much so it's of no consequence that Mandeville Place is less expensive and

2. you have to understand that people actually have to live in these condos they buy. And when that happens, people revert to the old adage - location, location, location.

When push comes to shove, design takes a backseat to a host of other characteristics, most notably the location. And, while 24th and Walnut is a fine location, its cetainly no 17th and Locust. Also, 1706 has a sales office, Mandeville does not.

I agree. Proximity to Rittenhouse Square means a lot at the top of the market. And, yes, Philly has plenty of these buyers. Look at the number of multimillion dollars sales in Rittenhouse Square, Society Hill, and Gladwyne.

theWatusi · #25 Posted: **Jun 4, 2007, 2:22 PM**

still 26 active listings on the MLS...pricing remains the same.

Parkway · #26 Posted: **Nov 9, 2007, 7:12 PM**

What gives with this project, it seems like over on Philly VII it would be breaking ground in the spring and about 30% of the units are sold.

bryson662001 · #27 Posted: **Nov 9, 2007, 7:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Parkway

What gives with this project, it seems like over on Philly VII it would be breaking ground in the spring and about 30% of the units are sold.

If you really want an answer, just read this thread. All the clues are there as to why it hasn't broken ground yet. On top of that the slump in housing sales is having an impact on higher priced properties. Plus there is more competition every day.

Plompy Lfeata · #28 Posted: **Nov 10, 2007, 1:04 AM**

maybe this is why it isnt breaking ground?
also, 30% usually isnt enough, right?

starting at 3 million!
i think that is why it hasnt gotten started.
that is around 10 times more expensive than murano, correct?
i know there are rich people out there that can afford this, but are there enough to make a tower exclusivly for the very affulent?
personally, i like the idea, but i just dont think it is practical.

bryson662001 · #29 Posted: **Nov 10, 2007, 5:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Plompy Lfeata

maybe this is why it isnt breaking ground?
also, 30% usually isnt enough, right?

starting at 3 million!
i think that is why it hasnt gotten started.
that is around 10 times more expensive than murano, correct?
i know there are rich people out there that can afford this, but are there enough to make a tower exclusivly for the very affulent?
personally, i like the idea, but i just dont think it is practical.

I think part of the problem is that you just don't have to spend that much to live really well in Philadelphia. Better they should put the money into their New York, California and Florida abodes. And if you do want to throw that kind of money around here you can choose a penthouse in one of the other buildings instead of a low floor at 1706.
Just my 2 cents.

Lecom · #30 Posted: **Nov 10, 2007, 8:15 PM**

Great news! Philly has plenty of gentrification going on (thanks to its plentiful old building stock), but some brand new condo towers (like St. James) are a welcome change.

Philly-Drew · #31 Posted: **Nov 13, 2007, 2:00 AM**

I think you can chalk this one up as one of the casualties of the current housing slump.

SJPhillyBoy · #32 Posted: **Nov 13, 2007, 1:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Philly-Drew

I think you can chalk this one up as one of the casualties of the current housing slump.

You would imagine that the housing slump would effect this one, but I am not counting it dead yet as the developer has not given up yet. There is always advertisements for this tower in The Philadelphia Inquirer (this weekend) and Philadelphia Magazine. They are still trying to sell it. I wonder how many units have been sold.

skellergroup · #33 Posted: **Nov 13, 2007, 2:24 PM**

They also have ads for this guy posted inside the academy of music.

McBane · #34 Posted: **Nov 13, 2007, 6:19 PM**

The one thing going for it is that they only need to sell what, 29 units? Plus it has a great location.

Then again, as someone else alluded, prices START at $3 million (meaning lower floor). $3 million can get you a lot in other buildings - new and old. Generally, people who want to live in a building and are prepared to spend over $1 million want views. Those who prefer townhomes, don't want to be bothered by buildings, even if the units are bigger than most townhomes. Furthermore, there are new multi million dollar townhomes for sale and they have roofdecks with decent views (of course they're not being built that close to Rittenhouse).

Bottom line: The developers may be hardpressed trying to find a millionaire who wants to live in the lower floor of a building - regardless of the unit's size, location, total number of units, and the fact that the building is new.

I believe prices for Liberty Place start at $1 million. There, you get the exclusiveness of 1706 but also unparalleled views and the ability to see your building from very very far away.

But I don't wanna be negative. I wanna see this sucka built!

CondoGuru · #35 Posted: **Nov 13, 2007, 9:00 PM**

I think they would move more of these if they reconfigured the unit mix and offered smaller units at lower prices. They'd have a broader appeal that way and probably be more likely to get built. Someone else hit the nail on the head that people here don't have to spend that much to get equal or greater square footage, so why would they buy something there on a low floor? 2,200 sf units at $1.5M sounds better than 4,400sf at $3.5M....or at least offer the smaller units on lower floors where the lower price is more enticing, then offer the uber-luxury full floor units on the higher floors where the higher prices are justified.

Pennsgrant · #36 Posted: **Nov 17, 2007, 1:03 AM**

Lot was completely empty the past couple days.Fencing in place, and some type of excavating has taken place. Not saying the project is underway but there is a 4 foot ditch in that parking lot.

skellergroup · #37 Posted: **Nov 17, 2007, 2:55 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pennsgrant

Lot was completely empty the past couple days.Fencing in place, and some type of excavating has taken place. Not saying the project is underway but there is a 4 foot ditch in that parking lot.

That's pretty exciting. I was convinced that this was dead depite the heavy media buy? Maybe not.

If only this was Mandelville or better yet BVT......good news none the less.

bryson662001 · #38 Posted: **Nov 17, 2007, 4:29 AM**

Yes that sounds signifigant. They don't want to cut off all that parking revenue with out a very good reason. It is also possible that the developer is willing to sit on a mostly empty building for a few years. Some developers are really gamblers at heart.

SJPhillyBoy · #39 Posted: **Nov 17, 2007, 4:41 PM**

Once again this weekend, 1706 Rittenhouse is advertised on the front page of the Philadelphia Inquirer Real Estate section. More indication that they are still trying and this tower may happen.

skellergroup · #40 Posted: **Nov 17, 2007, 4:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bryson662001

Yes that sounds signifigant. They don't want to cut off all that parking revenue with out a very good reason. It is also possible that the developer is willing to sit on a mostly empty building for a few years. Some developers are really gamblers at heart.

Agreed. I can't imagine somebody losing that revenue of full parking lot unless something is in the works.