For decades,
Philadelphians heard barely a word about serious planning for the Delaware
waterfront. Then Mayor Nutter took office and promised to transform the city's
big river. Now it seems we never stop hearing about waterfront planning.
The agency that
oversees Penn's Landing held another major event last week to present its latest
ideas for the failed entertainment area between Market and South Streets, but
you could be forgiven for wondering what was new. All the rituals - peppy
speeches, colorful renderings, free pretzels - were the same. So was the plan.
The presentation -
held, as usual, in the Festival Pier tent - was billed by the Delaware River
Waterfront Corp. as an interim report from its newest consultant, Hargreaves
Associates. Six months ago, the firm's San Francisco office was hired, at a
cost of $425,000, to refine the proposals for Penn's Landing that had been
enshrined in the 2011 Central Delaware master plan. With an experienced
designer like Hargreaves on board, we were told, the city was finally getting
down to the nitty-gritty of designing a project that would reunite Center City
with its stranded waterfront.
So it was a
surprise to see that Hargreaves' "design" is really just more
planning-think, much of it a rehash of the ground plowed two years ago in the
master plan, a joint effort by Cooper Robertson, Kieran Timberlake, and Olin.
Sure, Hargreaves'
proposals contain a few fresh nuggets, like suggestions for a modern Tuileries
Garden on the I-95 cap and a squiggly, Gehry-esque pedestrian bridge at South
Street. But given that the basic outlines for those particular projects were
already laid out in the master plan, Hargreaves' contribution amounts to little
more than fancy icing on an existing cake. Even their renderings look fuzzier
and less developed than those that accompanied the master plan.
That mammoth
planning document capped a long public discussion that began in 2003, during
the Street administration, and marked a real turning point in Philadelphia's
approach to the Delaware waterfront. By clarifying the possibilities for the
6.5-mile-long Central Delaware, the master plan put an end to any lingering
fantasies of turning the river's edge into a parade of high-rise towers, on the
order of Manhattan's Battery Park City.
What the plan
offered instead was a realistic road map for development. It called for midrise
housing instead of skyscrapers, generous public spaces, and a traditional
street grid, along with a rough timeline for completing each phase.
Sadly, the plan
put the kibosh on the dream of burying I-95 and stretching the city grid down
to the waterfront. But as compensation, the master planners came up with an
alternative: Extend the cap that now covers I-95 between Chestnut and Walnut
Streets to the water's edge with an angled platform that would make it easier
to walk to the river.
It was Hargreaves'
job to explain how such a complex engineering feat could be accomplished.
How would the
existing roof over the interstate (which is now partly sunken) make the leap
over Columbus Boulevard? Once that roof is extended, will the new structure be
an elevated platform that hovers many feet above the water? Or, could it be
designed so the structure slopes gradually down to the lapping banks of the
river? How much would construction of this giant concrete platform cost? And
what strategies could the city use to pay for the sloped park?
Not one of those
questions was answered last week.
Instead,
Hargreaves principal Mary Margaret Jones spent much of her time describing how
the cap could be landscaped as a series of "outdoor rooms," a phrase
used so much in landscape architecture these days that it has become a cliche.
There were other
baffling elements in the Hargreaves presentation.
For starters,
Hargreaves deleted the housing that had been targeted for the Chart House pier
site, near the foot of South Street. The renderings show the space as a dull,
flat park. Jones says the pier would be used for a concert venue once Festival
Pier at Spring Garden Street is developed as housing.
But that decision
sets off a series of unfortunate changes. To provide easy parking for
concertgoers at the pier venue, the designers had to eliminate the housing that
was proposed for the surface lot across the street, on Columbus Boulevard.
Great: more vaguely programmed, occasionally used, open space at Penn's
Landing.
As it is, the
sloping park between Walnut and Chestnut is quite large, almost 10 acres -
three times bigger than Rittenhouse Square. In the Hargreaves version, a
2,500-seat amphitheater would be embedded into the slope, with grassy terraces.
That makes sense as a concert venue. So, why add another one at the pier just
two blocks away? What the waterfront needs now is more permanent residents.
The pier and the
land facing the boat basin have always been considered the most desirable real
estate at Penn's Landing because of the seamless, at-grade connection at Spruce
Street to Society Hill. The people who live in the housing around the boat
basin are seen as an advance guard that would help establish the new waterfront
neighborhood. But if the city operates a concert venue on the Chart House pier,
who will want to live next door?
When Hargreaves
was selected in April, the choice generated a great deal of excitement in
Philadelphia. The firm has a reputation for clever solutions to difficult
waterfront conditions. I've always admired its work in Louisville, Ky., where
they shaved off riverbank under an elevated highway to create a visual
connection with the city's downtown. Perhaps they will come up with something
just as innovative for their final presentation in January.
But time is
running out. Nutter, who is the first mayor to take the waterfront seriously,
has less than two years left in office. His successor is unlikely to show much
love for his signature project. Unless funding is secured and contracts signed
soon, the next mayor will be able to ignore the waterfront. And a decade of
hope and effort will be dashed.
Source: Philly.com
No comments:
Post a Comment