Quote:
Originally Posted by PurpleWhiteOut
Honestly, I'm still kind of bumbed by this, but it is a changing city and there are more old row homes to go around in center city. I wish it werent on a nice corner building, but change is OK.
|
I think it's critical to recognize, though, that change and historic preservation aren't mutually exclusive.
Philadelphia is pretty clearly at a turning point now that it's entering a more ambitious era of revitalization and investment. That's very exciting for the city overall, and should continued to be encouraged.
But the city should exercise
much more leverage over its historical assets, like its low-rise, charming and human scaled architecture that is in perfect condition. Keep in mind it's precisely that kind of urban environment that attracts people to Philadelphia in the first place (I mean, really, we all fawn over tall glass towers, but people tend to feel the most intimate connection with Philly's tightknit rowhome neighborhoods and historic low-rise buildings).
Philly is still blessed with a lot of it, but it's still very finite (and keep in mind that once you set the precedent of allowing this kind of demo/rebuild development, it becomes much harder, on a legal basis, to turn it down in future scenarios).
Basically, it's definitely time to get much tougher on developers in terms of expectations and standards for preservation for Philly's highest-quality historic fabric (especially, as pointed out by several folks, there's still a good number of empty/underutilized parcels in Center City). Either make it an adaptive re-use overbuild (as is now becoming standard, per several recent proposals), or don't bother making an application to the city.