Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
AAA (The add-on one you referenced) at 20th and Market in the CBD (Market West)
21st and Walnut - The 40 story in Rittenhouse
Cira South (The two glass towers in the earlier image) - Technically UCity but one block from Center City
Robert Morris Rehab - CBD (Market West)
2000 Chestnut CBD (Market West) 11 story condo
This Quarter
Avenue of the Arts - South Broad (Technically Wash West)
1900 Arch (Market West/Logan Sq Border)
Projected to start in 2012
Edgewater - New tower on top of their parking deck (25 stories Logan Sq)
2100 Chestnut - New Brandywine 35 story tower (CBD Market West)
Fergies Tower 480 ft Apt/Mixed use tower (Washington West)
Navel Sq II (Fitler Sq)
The largest planned one prob wont start until 2013 is Blatsteins new North Broad complex (He has bought up ~4 sq blocks) at Spring Garden and Broad and the builder of the Piazza in No Libs; this could be over 1,000 units alone and many mixed use areas. Am interested to see what he does with the old Inquirer building part of the anticipated complex he recently closed on for purchase. (Inquirer building is the clock tower building in the center below)
I love Philly and I'm glad it's getting new buildings--I'm just a bit sad that the buildings are so dull and ugly (and ugly in a dull way).
Yeah, nothing too earth-shattering in terms of design, but I feel like that's the case in terms of new development everywhere these days, especially in the US. There's modern but boring cement and glass boxes going up everywhere. The same handful of designs are basically just being replicated over and over.
I don't know why we've become so conservative with our architecture, considering how bold most historic architecture used to be. I think it's mostly because the vast majority of developers are more concerned with making a profit than making an architectural statement.
Much better than empty or underutilized lots, however.
Yeah, nothing too earth-shattering in terms of design, but I feel like that's the case in terms of new development everywhere these days, especially in the US. There's modern but boring cement and glass boxes going up everywhere. The same handful of designs are basically just being replicated over and over.
I don't know why we've become so conservative with our architecture, considering how bold most historic architecture used to be. I think it's mostly because the vast majority of developers are more concerned with making a profit than making an architectural statement.
Much better than empty or underutilized lots, however.
Indeed.
When the great cities of Europe and even the early US cities were built and designed the thought process was more society and community oriented.The people lived in the city and took pride in their city.
Today you have union carpenters,electricians,masons living out in the suburbs making $80 + an hour that drive into the city in their $50,000 dollar Silverado's and Dodge Ram 3500 with the hemi engine. Throw up a square glass box and go home to their $500,000 mcmansion.
When the great cities of Europe and even the early US cities were built and designed the thought process was more society and community oriented.The people lived in the city and took pride in their city.
Today you have union carpenters,electricians,masons living out in the suburbs making $80 + an hour that drive into the city in their $50,000 dollar Silverado's and Dodge Ram 3500 with the hemi engine. Throw up a square glass box and go home to their $500,000 mcmansion.
Boring cities, boring life. Tis the american way.
I think it probably has more to do with the advent of automobile culture and the urban migration than union carpenters. It used to be that people actually lived *in* cities--that's how you got cities that were "community oriented". When the great urban exodus occured in the middle of the 20th century, older established cities were left to rot while newer cities (particularly those in the sun belt) developed with the assumption that nearly everyone would be living outside the city's core.
I think it probably has more to do with the advent of automobile culture and the urban migration than union carpenters. It used to be that people actually lived *in* cities--that's how you got cities that were "community oriented". When the great urban exodus occured in the middle of the 20th century, older established cities were left to rot while newer cities (particularly those in the sun belt) developed with the assumption that nearly everyone would be living outside the city's core.
yup. when people exclusively lived in cities, there was need for all the wares - clothes, food/drink, all amenities
even if you live in philly, why shop downtown when you can drive to KOP and Cherry Hill Mall? with the exception of some cool independent stores, they have a lot of the same downtown stores, but its cleaner, larger without the panhandlers
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This image has been resized. Click this bar to view the full image. The original image is sized 1280$sx864$s and weights 135$sKB.
