PHILADELPHIA | Lowrise/General Developments Thread

[McBane]

Originally Posted by AnEmperorPenguin

As far as I know everything with historic value was protected decades ago, trying to expand that just leads to trash like that building sticking around to haunt us for who knows how long

I used to think like this so I know where you're coming from. But a few things to unpack here:

1) In many neighborhoods, the historical value is more the sum of its parts than any one individual building. So there is value in blanket preservation, even if none of the buildings are historically significant; together, they are what makes Philadelphia unique.

2) Part of the problem is that there are so many restrictions and arcane NIMBY groups to appease so developers tend to build what they can, where they can. I'd much prefer to see certain blocks blanketly preserved while giving developers more leeway in other areas as a sort of trade off. Over here, it's going to be very strict but here, you can do whatever you want. Something like that.

3) This particular building that replaced the old homes is extremely ugly. How many of us are pissed that these homes were demolished and how many are simply disappointed in the design of its replacement? If a midrise version of the Alexander got built here instead, would we care as much?

[PHLtoNYC]

Great tech news!

Fast-growing Swedish software company chooses Philadelphia for U.S. headquarters
https://www.bizjournals.com/philadel...ladelphia.html

The company's software helps manage various aspects of subscription-based businesses like invoices and billing, financial reporting and data insights. Younium currently has some 50 employees located across the globe, and expects its Philadelphia office to have a staff of five to start. The office is located in Cira Centre at 2929 Arch St.

He named a number of advantages that he saw in Philadelphia that are echoed by other business leaders. Its locality to other major cities, a tech scene that continues to grow and accessibility to talent from local universities were a few of the factors that pushed Philadelphia to the top of its potential sites for its U.S. headquarters. The company also considered Boston, New York and Austin, Lilja said.

Younium's move follows a broader trend companies choosing to plant their roots in Philadelphia. The region saw the largest increase in tech salaries across the U.S., Canada and the United Kingdom over the past year. Recruiting platform Hired issued the report and its CEO Josh Brenner said that as companies exit traditional tech hubs for cities like Philadelphia or Denver for example, salaries rise.

[PHLtoNYC]

Small update, but no movement expected for 2 years.

Walnut Street Theatre could offer building's naming rights to fund $42M expansion

https://www.bizjournals.com/philadel...Pos=3#cxrecs_s

The theater, located at 825 Walnut St., has raised $30 million so far in its campaign and is looking for more donors, Havard said.

Expansion plans, announced in 2017 and detailed in 2019, include a 400-seat theater-in-the-round, a renovated lobby and box office, two rehearsal halls, a ground-floor restaurant and three classrooms. Havard said the theater is now looking to add a rooftop restaurant to the original design, if funds allow.

The Walnut Street Theatre bought adjacent parcels at 805-813 and 815-823 Walnut St. almost 20 years ago. Parts of the theater's expansion, such as the theater-in-the-round, new lobby and rehearsal halls, will be built on the current lot at 815-823 Walnut.

In 2019, Walnut Street Theatre sold the 10,000-square-foot lot at 805-813 Walnut to parking lot owner Parkway Corp. for $7.5 million to fund the expansion.Parkway CEO Rob Zuritsky said the company is always looking for developers for its sites but has no current deals in place for the property. Havard said he wants Parkway to find a developer for its lot who would also contribute to the theater's expansion.

Havard, who is in his 40th season with the Walnut Street Theatre, said he hopes the groundbreaking will occur in two years but that it depends entirely on when the theater is able to raise the money needed.

[mcgrath618]

Originally Posted by McBane

3) This particular building that replaced the old homes is extremely ugly. How many of us are pissed that these homes were demolished and how many are simply disappointed in the design of its replacement? If a midrise version of the Alexander got built here instead, would we care as much?

If what replaces what was lost is better than what was lost (your midrise Alexander would fulfill this), I have significantly less of an issue with demolition.

[DeltaNerd]

Originally Posted by PHLtoNYC

Great tech news!

Fast-growing Swedish software company chooses Philadelphia for U.S. headquarters
https://www.bizjournals.com/philadel...ladelphia.html

The company's software helps manage various aspects of subscription-based businesses like invoices and billing, financial reporting and data insights. Younium currently has some 50 employees located across the globe, and expects its Philadelphia office to have a staff of five to start. The office is located in Cira Centre at 2929 Arch St.

He named a number of advantages that he saw in Philadelphia that are echoed by other business leaders. Its locality to other major cities, a tech scene that continues to grow and accessibility to talent from local universities were a few of the factors that pushed Philadelphia to the top of its potential sites for its U.S. headquarters. The company also considered Boston, New York and Austin, Lilja said.

Younium's move follows a broader trend companies choosing to plant their roots in Philadelphia. The region saw the largest increase in tech salaries across the U.S., Canada and the United Kingdom over the past year. Recruiting platform Hired issued the report and its CEO Josh Brenner said that as companies exit traditional tech hubs for cities like Philadelphia or Denver for example, salaries rise.

Finally Philadelphia is embracing New Sweden! Also helps that gf is Swedish
I love more software jobs coming to the Philadelphia area. Giving me reason to stay.

[Busy Bee]

Philly so hot.


___

[Phillyguy215]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

Philly so hot.


___

She is a sexy city

[AnEmperorPenguin]

Originally Posted by McBane

I used to think like this so I know where you're coming from. But a few things to unpack here:

1) In many neighborhoods, the historical value is more the sum of its parts than any one individual building. So there is value in blanket preservation, even if none of the buildings are historically significant; together, they are what makes Philadelphia unique.

2) Part of the problem is that there are so many restrictions and arcane NIMBY groups to appease so developers tend to build what they can, where they can. I'd much prefer to see certain blocks blanketly preserved while giving developers more leeway in other areas as a sort of trade off. Over here, it's going to be very strict but here, you can do whatever you want. Something like that.

3) This particular building that replaced the old homes is extremely ugly. How many of us are pissed that these homes were demolished and how many are simply disappointed in the design of its replacement? If a midrise version of the Alexander got built here instead, would we care as much?

1 is not really true and 2 is already a big problem, wealthy neighborhoods can convince city officials into declaring fake historic districts like Black Doctors Row to inflate their house prices, and council members abuse it like Clarke creating fake historic overlays for Girard and Yorktown so that their historic forms cannot be rebuilt. It makes the city worse and turbocharges gentrification, eventually those other areas that are "supposed" to get developed will have enough NIMBYs to put their foot down and demand they don't get developed.

3 can be defeated very simply: I think the new building looks fine. So who decides what they don't like to look at is illegal to build? What if they disagree with you? It's a dead end argument

The bottom line to me is that bricks and mortar are not more important than people. This conversation really reminds me of how the parts of London destroyed in the Blitz are better off today. How so? Because blanket preservations like they do keep everyone poorer

[TonyTone]

I also want to point out that I'm sure everyone on this forum wants well built good looking structures in the city.

My only objection to survivor bias on these properties is the fact that they have many problems, and some even deadly.

I see comments saying nothing is better about new construction, lets put aside the fact that there will never be stone or brick townhomes built in that Manner like they did in the past without a lot of money going into the project, new construction brings everything to updated standards, No asbestos, no lead, no dust or gas issues in the basements, the layouts of homes are better and built to suit todays people.

I lived in, and fixed up a circa 1945 home in Oxford circle off the blvd last year, now while the home wasn't as old as many of the rowhomes in Philly and actually the last generation of rowhomes really. it had issues that cannot be addressed by a rehab, rooms were an ok size and lacking actually closets, outlets are sparse unless more are added, the living and kitchen area were ok, its only so much you can do with a rectangle, 1 bathroom in the house which in todays standards with a family is an issue, and the basement was not habitable it would have to have a full rehab and it wasn't even finished, the basements of that time were not meant to have people living in them and even with a rehab you'll have issues because it was more of a storage/celler compared to a living basement. The only plus with that property would be an alley and 2 car parking spots in the back which 95% of homes in Philadelphia do not have.

I am for saving structures and promoting history as much as the next person, but you're not gonna tell me that a home from 1800-1945 fits the need of people today.

Seriously look at these two properties

New

Old

[Busy Bee]

^ You just described like 90% of British homes. They seem to be doing just fine.

[McBane]

Originally Posted by TonyTone

I lived in, and fixed up a circa 1945 home in Oxford circle off the blvd last year, now while the home wasn't as old as many of the rowhomes in Philly and actually the last generation of rowhomes really. it had issues that cannot be addressed by a rehab, rooms were an ok size and lacking actually closets, outlets are sparse unless more are added, the living and kitchen area were ok, its only so much you can do with a rectangle, 1 bathroom in the house which in todays standards with a family is an issue, and the basement was not habitable it would have to have a full rehab and it wasn't even finished, the basements of that time were not meant to have people living in them and even with a rehab you'll have issues because it was more of a storage/celler compared to a living basement. The only plus with that property would be an alley and 2 car parking spots in the back which 95% of homes in Philadelphia do not have.

I am for saving structures and promoting history as much as the next person, but you're not gonna tell me that a home from 1800-1945 fits the need of people today.

I agree with a lot of this. I lived in one of these houses, too and ran into the same issues. Tiny bedrooms, small closets, no master bathroom, etc. These 1950's airlites were built for the middle class of their day but today, these don't fit the needs of the average middle class family.

[iheartphilly]

^^
Ever visited the Edgar Allen Poe house here in Philly. Try going up and down the stairs to the 2nd floor. There's a right sizing of a home base on the average height of a man/woman, and family size and need. Things that one considers nowadays when buying or even renting but yes some of the very old homes obviously weren't built to today's square footage and standards that we are accustomed to.

[cardeza]

Originally Posted by McBane

I agree with a lot of this. I lived in one of these houses, too and ran into the same issues. Tiny bedrooms, small closets, no master bathroom, etc. These 1950's airlites were built for the middle class of their day but today, these don't fit the needs of the average middle class family.

Outside of Center city and adjacent neighborhoods tear downs are not common. In my part of the city (and many others) rehabs are relatively common. You cannot change the overall footprint or sf of the house but you can most certainly make a 60 year old house modern. The houses in my area were built in the early 1950s and are commonly flipped and given central AC, open floorplan kitchens, new windows and finished basements. They all have at least 2 bathrooms as well. And the best part about it is there exteriors are totally in tact so you get masonry instead of metal panels or stucco. Now these houses are not going to be 2500sf nor are they going to have roof decks with pilot houses, but they are certainly livable- especially the twin houses that are usually around 1600sf not including finished basements. Almost every house in my immediate area has rear driveway off street parking as well.

In parts of NOrth Philly and in much of West or SW philly many of the old houses are actually a decent size- if you gut a house you can make a lot of upgrades to modernize it while keeping the high quality exterior in place.

In addition, I dont know that it makese sense to compare the size of 1950s rowhouses to modern construction- of course a brand new single family home is much larger- but what % of Philadelphians live in such housing? When you compare a modest sized (and presumably priced) older home to an apartment the size difference isn't that signicant- in fact in most cases you are probably getting more space and more bedrooms in an older SFH vs an apartment that would cost you the same or even more per month.

[Justin7]

Originally Posted by TonyTone

Seriously look at these two properties

New

Old

The place that costs over twice as much looks nicer.

[TonyTone]

delete

[Mayormccheese]

People are definitely too hard on new construction. Sure the old homes look better in most cases I won’t argue that but they’re way less functional for modern living with a family. After living in various old apartments and old rowhomes(some renovated) my partner and I decided to buy a home when we got married. We knew we were having at least one child so we kept that in mind. Initially all we looked at were traditional rowhomes, some renovated and some fixer uppers. We kept in mind room sizes, number of bathrooms and sizes, closets etc. we tried to think about our parents staying over and having that extra space. The old homes couldn’t compare to newer. We bought a new construction home and have a finished basement, decent sized rooms with closets, 3 full baths, a kitchen with actual counter and cabinet space(you’re lying to yourself if you think a traditional row home has this). Sure we paid more but it’s worth it considering we were able to stay in the city which is what we wanted. Living in the city with children is already way harder than in the burbs. Having home that functional for that helps. The city try to make things easier where possible for families to encourage growth.

[cardeza]

Originally Posted by Mayormccheese

People are definitely too hard on new construction. Sure the old homes look better in most cases I won’t argue that but they’re way less functional for modern living with a family. After living in various old apartments and old rowhomes(some renovated) my partner and I decided to buy a home when we got married. We knew we were having at least one child so we kept that in mind. Initially all we looked at were traditional rowhomes, some renovated and some fixer uppers. We kept in mind room sizes, number of bathrooms and sizes, closets etc. we tried to think about our parents staying over and having that extra space. The old homes couldn’t compare to newer. We bought a new construction home and have a finished basement, decent sized rooms with closets, 3 full baths, a kitchen with actual counter and cabinet space(you’re lying to yourself if you think a traditional row home has this). Sure we paid more but it’s worth it considering we were able to stay in the city which is what we wanted. Living in the city with children is already way harder than in the burbs. Having home that functional for that helps. The city try to make things easier where possible for families to encourage growth.

I think its interesting that people on here are acting like a $600k+ NC home is an option for most philadelphians. If money is no object than sure, I suppose most people would prefer to live in a brand new 4 BR 3BA new construction townhouse with 2500sf or more and huge bedrooms and closets. That's not feasible for most people nor is that the type of housing available in 80% of the city. Larger, more expensive homes are almost better than their smaller and cheaper counterparts. And considering the cost of a new construction home, you can likely find a decent sized older home in Philly for the same money- in some cases with better parking, outdoor space, etc.

[Mayormccheese]

Originally Posted by cardeza

I think its interesting that people on here are acting like a $600k+ NC home is an option for most philadelphians. If money is no object than sure, I suppose most people would prefer to live in a brand new 4 BR 3BA new construction townhouse with 2500sf or more and huge bedrooms and closets. That's not feasible for most people nor is that the type of housing available in 80% of the city. Larger, more expensive homes are almost better than their smaller and cheaper counterparts. And considering the cost of a new construction home, you can likely find a decent sized older home in Philly for the same money- in some cases with better parking, outdoor space, etc.

I didn’t pay anywhere close to $600+ and couldn’t have afforded a home that much. But in all honesty the tax abatement did go a long way to making my home affordable. My story is also obviously my own. I don’t expect everyone to be able to afford new construction and am all for rehabbing as many houses as possible but the hate new construction gets is wild to me. It’s needed to grow. This board gets a little dramatic on the subject.

[cardeza]

Originally Posted by Mayormccheese

I didn’t pay anywhere close to $600+ and couldn’t have afforded a home that much. But in all honesty the tax abatement did go a long way to making my home affordable. My story is also obviously my own. I don’t expect everyone to be able to afford new construction and am all for rehabbing as many houses as possible but the hate new construction gets is wild to me. It’s needed to grow. This board gets a little dramatic on the subject.

on a development site I would have to say most people are NOT against new construction. I think people are saying that not enough is done to incentivize preserving quality older buildings that are increasingly being leveled and replaced by very generic townhomes or multifamily buildings. To be honest much of this stuff is not an improvement aesthetically speaking. There is plenty of vacant and underutilized land in Philly and everyone would take NC over a vacant lot- this isnt the same as saying NC is what we should hope to see everywhere in the city. Some people are slaves to density and new structures- i.e. if you can every get either of those you should be thrilled because by default its an improvement. They are not always improvements- sometimes their only benefit is to the developer.

600k may not be the cheapest you can get NC, but new product that is under that threshold isn't too common these days. New homes in manayunk are over $700k at this stage. Its funny when people make claims about the key to affordability is new construction- and yet I'm not seeing much NC priced for working class people nor have ever seen any neighborhood where lots of NC makes the overall cost of living decline.

[cardeza]

Article about Wawa and displeasure with crime wave in Philly

https://www.bizjournals.com/philadel...hia-plans.html