PHILADELPHIA | Lowrise/General Developments Thread

[allovertown]

Originally Posted by mcgrath618

I would contest that residents of densifying neighborhoods would be suddenly onboard with new construction if rent control was implemented. I think a large part of their unhappiness comes not only from the pecuniary changes that gentrification would bring, but the demographic and aesthetic changes as well. People who have lived in the same neighborhood for 20+ years are not going to jump at the chance to suddenly have 5 over 1s built everywhere, for the reasons I mentioned above: the majority of new residents are chasing the white collar, well paying jobs that are currently on offer in American cities today (as opposed to the blue collar working class jobs of the early 1900s) and potentially have different cultures, tastes, habits, etc. I think you'd also be hard pressed to argue that most of what is built nowadays is in any way more aesthetically pleasing than the surrounding neighborhood. This isn't a slash at contemporary architecture styling, rather a slash at how cheap construction looks and feels in a neighborhood. You could show me a new Second-Empire building, but if it uses concrete panels instead of bricks, plastic siding, etc I would still say it looks out of place.

I understand what you're saying, and I'm happy that both of us see that the ultimate solution here to ensure that Chinatown residents stay where they are is to build more housing. However, instead of city-wide rent control, why not require the developer of the Stadium to build well-constructed, below market-rate homes on some of the vast sea of parking lots currently in Chinatown? Sell them to the existing Chinese diaspora and you've just ensured that they'll stay there for at least a generation.

Whatever the true motivations in people's hearts, gentrification and fear of displacement are what we tend to hear during these fights because "I'm afraid I'll lose my home" tends to be a lot more sympathetic than "I don't want a bunch of new people and ugly buildings in my neighborhood." Even if people are still against development, it would be a lot more difficult for them to advocate against it in an effective way. I also think it creates a passion gap. While the number of people against a new development may not change that much after rent control, when people are fearful of losing their home there's a lot they will be willing to do to stop a development. If you take away that fear or losing their home, they may still be against a new development, but are they still going to use their personal time to attend zoning board meetings and fight against it?

Besides, the goal would be that the whims of current residents would have a lot less to do with what you're allowed to build so it really doesn't matter if people still don't want development if you make it a lot easier for developers to build and ignore these objections.

Robust rent control would be an enormous win for people in these advocacy groups, so you tie its passage to also passing upzoning and deregulation. Rent control to ensure current residents can't be pushed out and upzoning to ensure that there's room for everyone who wants to move in should be a winning message.

[Frontst17]

Just want to say building a stadium in any neighborhood would get this kind of feedback. It’s a large hulking structure that is going to be mostly empty. It’s not anti development to be cautious about this being built. Im sure Chinatown residents want the gallery to F off back to hell as much as the rest of us but being told this is the only other option and they have to like it isn’t really going to help. The only way this will work is if the development incorporates Chinatown as much as it does a new arena. Regardless of people’s opinions it has to be stitched into the fabric that’s already there.

[BroadandMarket]

But this isn't just any neighborhood in Philadelphia. It's not a rowhome community of single family homes in East Passyunk or Strawberry Mansion or Cobbs Creek, it is the densest area in one of the densest cities in America at the most public transit connected intersection in the country outside of New York and Chicago. 15 regional rail lines, 5 El stops within a 10 minute walk, Patco, Broad Street Line 2 blocks away and BSL Ridge spur at 8th and Market. And then walkable to hundreds of thousands of people.

Chinatown fought the Phillies stadium at 12th and Vine and it's still a dump. But ironically they are for capping 676 which would gentrify Chinatown almost immediately. To be clear, 676 should be capped. I just find it to be hypocritical.

[TempleGuy1000]

Originally Posted by BroadandMarket

But this isn't just any neighborhood in Philadelphia. It's not a rowhome community of single family homes in East Passyunk or Strawberry Mansion or Cobbs Creek, it is the densest area in one of the densest cities in America at the most public transit connected intersection in the country outside of New York and Chicago. 15 regional rail lines, 5 El stops within a 10 minute walk, Patco, Broad Street Line 2 blocks away and BSL Ridge spur at 8th and Market. And then walkable to hundreds of thousands of people.

Chinatown fought the Phillies stadium at 12th and Vine and it's still a dump. But ironically they are for capping 676 which would gentrify Chinatown almost immediately. To be clear, 676 should be capped. I just find it to be hypocritical.

The whole thing is. Philadelphia, has been held hostage, for decades, by people who will do anything to defend the status quo. Once you understand that, everything else makes perfect sense.

[PHLtoNYC]

Originally Posted by Frontst17

Just want to say building a stadium in any neighborhood would get this kind of feedback. It’s a large hulking structure that is going to be mostly empty. It’s not anti development to be cautious about this being built. Im sure Chinatown residents want the gallery to F off back to hell as much as the rest of us but being told this is the only other option and they have to like it isn’t really going to help. The only way this will work is if the development incorporates Chinatown as much as it does a new arena. Regardless of people’s opinions it has to be stitched into the fabric that’s already there.

Fair. And I see why Chinatown residents are sensitive to large projects because they got shafted with the convention center and 676.

However, this arena is just outside of Chinatown and the scale appears similar to the Fashion District. But from what I'm reading, many are looking to stop the plan and leave Market Street as is. And this stretch of Market Street is shabby, dreary, and anchored by a hulking mall with increasing vacancies. A change is needed, a plan is on the table, why not work for a equitable outcome instead of blocking the plan altogether?

And don't get me wrong, I understand hesitation, criticism, wanting to be involved, etc., but the reaction and reporting is becoming theatrical, and reminiscent of the U City Townhomes mess (I often reference that project).

And to answer Cardeza, yes the Inquirer is doing more than reporting. Biases and preferences clearly show in the writing for this project and others. Fine for opinion pieces, but that seems to be all the Inquirer is anymore...

Hypothetical... A developer plans to demolish the Fashion District and nearby blocks of Market Street and construct a luxury hotel, luxury apartments, offices, and luxury retail, (my preferred plan and by-right). Would that affect Chinatown?

[TonyTone]

People do realize Chinatown never went North of Vine St even before 676 right? it was a whole other neighborhood.

Do people also realize that if 10 years of a Tax Abatement could only get a handful of projects done in Chinatown why would an Arena 2 blocks on Market St do that as well?

-Multiple Rail Lines didn't gentrify Chinatown
-A Multi block convention Center didn't gentrify Chinatown
-New development on Market St didn't gentrify Chinatown
-And a Rehabbed mall didn't Gentrify Chinatown

Also I Believe from the renders ground-floor store fronts will be available for lease so it 100% will be more active in the day and night then the gallery which has no street level function except for a few store and mall entrances.

The arena would 100% be better on Market St then the rectangle block building.

I'm all for criticism about projects but lets have all our facts together.

[thoughtcriminal]

Originally Posted by TempleGuy1000

The whole thing is. Philadelphia, has been held hostage, for decades, by people who will do anything to defend the status quo. Once you understand that, everything else makes perfect sense.

I'll take an even more cynical viewpoint: they are not defending the status quo as much as they are looking to get a payout to stop their objections.

[Redddog]

My bad for calling it "by right." I gues I didn't realize that they wanted to absorb Filbert. Even still, the Chinatown opposition isn't making that decision. The city is. I understand that absorbing a street will require the city being fully on-board.

My point was, I think the Chinatown opposition can make any demand they want and ultimately, their demands are worthless. They're not the ones controlling the discussion. And as Tony pointed out, their case for this project killing Chinatown are ridiculous. It will only help.

[chimpskibot]

Originally Posted by Redddog

My bad for calling it "by right." I gues I didn't realize that they wanted to absorb Filbert. Even still, the Chinatown opposition isn't making that decision. The city is. I understand that absorbing a street will require the city being fully on-board.

My point was, I think the Chinatown opposition can make any demand they want and ultimately, their demands are worthless. They're not the ones controlling the discussion. And as Tony pointed out, their case for this project killing Chinatown are ridiculous. It will only help.

I dont understand why they need to remove filbert from the grid and instead build over it. Similar to the skybridge over reading terminal (Arch St). This seems like some pretty engineering and cantilever systems.

[3rd&Brown]

Originally Posted by TonyTone

People do realize Chinatown never went North of Vine St even before 676 right? it was a whole other neighborhood.

Do people also realize that if 10 years of a Tax Abatement could only get a handful of projects done in Chinatown why would an Arena 2 blocks on Market St do that as well?

-Multiple Rail Lines didn't gentrify Chinatown
-A Multi block convention Center didn't gentrify Chinatown
-New development on Market St didn't gentrify Chinatown
-And a Rehabbed mall didn't Gentrify Chinatown

Also I Believe from the renders ground-floor store fronts will be available for lease so it 100% will be more active in the day and night then the gallery which has no street level function except for a few store and mall entrances.

The arena would 100% be better on Market St then the rectangle block building.

I'm all for criticism about projects but lets have all our facts together.

All very good points. When you flip the script, none of the gentrification in Center City in the history of gentrification has gentrified Chinatown so let's stop talking about it.

[Gatorade_Jim]

Originally Posted by cardeza

I do wonder how people have so much information on the performance of the fashion district. I'm sure its doing worse than projected since it was planned pre-covid, but I don't know if we have enough data to say it is a total failure and 50% should be torn down ASAP for a stadium. I was in Primark last week and it was pretty busy. The mall looks better inside and out vs what was there before the the north side of Market street is far better than it was during the gallery days. I am struggling to understand how people expect daytime life to be significantly better with an empty stadium during work hours. Nights will be better for sure, but there is a decent amount of daytime traffic into the FDP during the day.

My impression is that people who don't like the FD and never did and never will buy a single item from there feel their personal views on it equal it being a total failure and having no value.

For the record I think both sides are overstating their cases. I don't think it will destroy chinatown and I also dont think its going to be silver bullet for east market street nor do I buy the idea that all the businesses in the to be torn down section of the FDP will remain in the area. The one thing is will do is make the sixers a more valuable franchise.

East market from 7th to 12th is the only area of the CC core that I feel uncomfortable going. My girlfriend wouldn't even visit DSW alone because of how uncomfortable that mall is at times. Just ask the employees. We went to Arie one day and I was talking to the people that work there and it was pretty eye opening.

[Gatorade_Jim]

Originally Posted by TonyTone

People do realize Chinatown never went North of Vine St even before 676 right? it was a whole other neighborhood.

Do people also realize that if 10 years of a Tax Abatement could only get a handful of projects done in Chinatown why would an Arena 2 blocks on Market St do that as well?

-Multiple Rail Lines didn't gentrify Chinatown
-A Multi block convention Center didn't gentrify Chinatown
-New development on Market St didn't gentrify Chinatown
-And a Rehabbed mall didn't Gentrify Chinatown

Also I Believe from the renders ground-floor store fronts will be available for lease so it 100% will be more active in the day and night then the gallery which has no street level function except for a few store and mall entrances.

The arena would 100% be better on Market St then the rectangle block building.

I'm all for criticism about projects but lets have all our facts together.

100% agree.

[mcgrath618]

Originally Posted by TonyTone

People do realize Chinatown never went North of Vine St even before 676 right? it was a whole other neighborhood.

Do people also realize that if 10 years of a Tax Abatement could only get a handful of projects done in Chinatown why would an Arena 2 blocks on Market St do that as well?

-Multiple Rail Lines didn't gentrify Chinatown
-A Multi block convention Center didn't gentrify Chinatown
-New development on Market St didn't gentrify Chinatown
-And a Rehabbed mall didn't Gentrify Chinatown

Also I Believe from the renders ground-floor store fronts will be available for lease so it 100% will be more active in the day and night then the gallery which has no street level function except for a few store and mall entrances.

The arena would 100% be better on Market St then the rectangle block building.

I'm all for criticism about projects but lets have all our facts together.

Well put.

[PurpleWhiteOut]

Originally Posted by chimpskibot

I dont understand why they need to remove filbert from the grid and instead build over it. Similar to the skybridge over reading terminal (Arch St). This seems like some pretty engineering and cantilever systems.

The last thing this area needs are more buildings built over streets. Underneath the convention center and the convention center garage are already enough weird vibes

[AnEmperorPenguin]

Originally Posted by PurpleWhiteOut

The last thing this area needs are more buildings built over streets. Underneath the convention center and the convention center garage are already enough weird vibes

yeah basically homeless shelters that most people take a long walk around rather then go through, I think it would be very intentional if they are removing the street instead

Originally Posted by allovertown

More supply would be great, but you're ignoring the benefits of rent control in helping to make creating that supply possible.

?????

Rent control destroys supply it doesn't create it, you can't get free money out of for profit landlords/developers by limiting how much they can charge. You avoid displacing people today and the trade off is that you end up with a worse housing crisis a few years later.

[nemesisinphilly]

I would be interested to see the residential population trends in Chinatown. In my experience in real estate in Philly the Chinese buyers and renters are going to Mayfair and NE Philly in general, not Chinatown.

What happened in NYC a long time ago when most Chinese immigrants moved out of Chinatown to Queens and Brooklyn is happening here now.

Another thing is that the Chinatown RE community is pretty insular. The landlords and property owners here are Chinese. If rents go up due to the Arena or whatever else it would be Chinese Landlords raising the rents on Chinese tenants. Same if these properties get sold due to increasing values.

[The 700 Block]

Originally Posted by PhilliesPhan

Has anyone else who commutes by Regional Rail noticed an uptick in ridership recently? I take #6249, the morning express on the R6 Manayunk/Norristown Line, into work. I sat in the fifth car this morning, taking a two-seater. By the time we reached Wissahickon, it seemed like most seats in my car were taken. After East Falls, quite a few people were standing. This is in stark contrast to taking 6249 prior to September 2022 (when Comcast compelled its workers to come back to the office three days a week), when I could reasonably expect to find a seat in the first car. I also use this line pretty frequently on the weekends and have noticed a ridership uptick then as well.

I don't have the numbers off-hand, but I wouldn't be surprised if the Manayunk/Norristown Line is close to or beyond 60% of its pre-pandemic ridership.

I was wondering the same thing as my rides on Chestnut Hill West seem to be more full. Unfortunately the data shows that we are still stuck at 47-49% of pre pandemic ridership on RR going back to March. Here's to hoping that changes in 2023...



Data source: https://planning.septa.org/tracking-progress/

[mcgrath618]

Originally Posted by The 700 Block

I was wondering the same thing as my rides on Chestnut Hill West seem to be more full. Unfortunately the data shows that we are still stuck at 47-49% of pre pandemic ridership on RR going back to March. Here's to hoping that changes in 2023...



Data source: https://planning.septa.org/tracking-progress/

That data is from November though. Methinks the data for Jan. 2023 will be much higher, because I've noticed the same thing.

[cardeza]

Originally Posted by BroadandMarket

But this isn't just any neighborhood in Philadelphia. It's not a rowhome community of single family homes in East Passyunk or Strawberry Mansion or Cobbs Creek, it is the densest area in one of the densest cities in America at the most public transit connected intersection in the country outside of New York and Chicago. 15 regional rail lines, 5 El stops within a 10 minute walk, Patco, Broad Street Line 2 blocks away and BSL Ridge spur at 8th and Market. And then walkable to hundreds of thousands of people.

Chinatown fought the Phillies stadium at 12th and Vine and it's still a dump. But ironically they are for capping 676 which would gentrify Chinatown almost immediately. To be clear, 676 should be capped. I just find it to be hypocritical.

a little revisionist history there I see. The Phillies NEVER wanted a downtown stadium and ultimately never put any serious effort into the idea. Other boosters pushed the idea of a stadium downtown or near 30th street but the Phillies were never on board due to cost. It wasn't all about Chinatown NIMBY.

Go try to build a stadium on the main line and see what sort of response you get- hell people in the suburbs are stopping wawas from being built these days.

Having good transit connections doesn't automatically make a particular use the right use. If excellent public transit connectivity is the key to success the FDP should be successful- it's far better connected to mass transit than any other major shopping venue in the region.

[Justin7]

Originally Posted by cardeza

They played it all wrong- they should have started with chinatown and tried to get them on board before announcing it to the world as if its a done deal. Stupid.

I've heard this suggested before, but how do you imagine this happening? It seems to me that if they had "started with chinatown" the plans would have immediately been made public by opposition and done so in a very negative light.