SkyscraperPage Forum - Philadelphia Councilman Pushes Ban On Bay Windows To Curtail Gentrification

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)

- City Discussions (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=24)

- - Philadelphia Councilman Pushes Ban On Bay Windows To Curtail Gentrification (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=239226)

Philadelphia Councilman Pushes Ban On Bay Windows To Curtail Gentrification

Councilman Kenyatta Johnson Pushes Ban On Bay Windows, Seen As A Symbol Of Gentrification, In His South Philly District

May 28, 2019

By Caitlin McCabe

Read More: https://www.inquirer.com/real-estate...-20190528.html

Quote:

.....

Johnson, who represents much of South Philadelphia, introduced a bill during City Council’s May 23 session that would ban balconies and bay windows across Point Breeze and Grays Ferry. The two architectural features would still be allowed outside of those two neighborhoods, but according to the bill, the distance from which they can project from a building would continue to be regulated.

- Johnson’s legislation comes amid unprecedented change in his district, which stretches from the fast-gentrifying neighborhoods of Graduate Hospital and Point Breeze, to areas farther south and west, including the Navy Yard and Eastwick. Thousands of new rowhouses have been built, adding taller and showier structures to older and modest rowhouse blocks. — The boxy, bump-out bay windows that Johnson aims to legislate have become a well-known architectural feature of Philadelphia’s construction boom, just as aluminum siding and roof decks have. For some homeowners in the market for newly constructed homes, balconies and bump-out bay windows offer two things that a traditional rowhouse can’t: additional space and light.

- Historically known for their curved outward projection, bay windows have long been a defining characteristic of Philadelphia architecture, often appearing in West Philadelphia Victorians, for example, or South Philadelphia rowhouses. (In the latter neighborhood, bay windows are well-known for their holiday displays.) — Johnson’s legislation is instead more likely targeted at the large, boxy bay windows that have appeared citywide in recent years, jutting out from the sides of new rowhouses built in South Philadelphia, the River Wards, West Philadelphia, and elsewhere. Development tensions have become especially pronounced in South Philadelphia, where the population has grown wealthier and whiter in recent years.

- “Some developers are putting bay windows past the property line [and] encroaching on the sidewalk/streets space," Johnson said in the emailed statement. “This practice is inconsistent with the character of many of South Philadelphia’s historic rowhouse blocks, so the legislation is designed to ensure the historical preservation of the facades and character of the residential blocks.” — His legislation, if passed as is, would take effect immediately and would apply across Point Breeze and Grays Ferry. Outside of those designated neighborhood boundaries, all existing rules surrounding balconies and bay windows stand. For example, outside of those neighborhoods, a developer could build a balcony or bay window that extends four feet, but only if that building is set back from its property line.

.....

A trinity home (center) is pictured beside new construction on the right. The new home was built with a bay window.

https://i.imgur.com/AIjDzsr.jpg?1

Newly built townhouses appear along Front Street between Sansom Walk and Walnut Street. The townhouses include bay windows, with balconies on top of them.

https://i.imgur.com/LuSsNCp.jpg?1

https://i.imgur.com/g339v2V.jpg?1

The aluminum siding as a far bigger offender than the bay windows, IMO

This is the dumbest shit I've ever heard.

Those new bay windows do look extremely ugly though so, meh.

Just stupid honestly. Doubt it will pass. He put this bill in front of City Council during the re-election period. This was just a ploy to please his constituents to get re-elected.

Now that he's been re-elected, this will get denied in City Council, and we'll never see the likes of it again.

Welcome to Philadelphia City Government 101.

Wow. This is in the same political idiocy of "we can't impeach because it will take too long"

Politicians should stay out of any type of design recommendations.

These people are the most egotistical in the world. They think they are experts in everything.

So preventing more attractive houses that also have more amenities and features would keep richer people out to prevent gentrifying then.

Philly has some of the most backward city council-members in the country.

Here's something many people don't seem to get: Legislation is often proposed to make a point, even though they know it'll never pass.

I don't know anything about this case. But maybe it's in that category.

Quote:

Originally Posted by summersm343 (Post 8592022)

No, but the San Francisco Board of Supervisors will read about it, think it's a great idea, and pass it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mhays (Post 8592505)

Maybe in Philadelphia, but in SF outfits like the Mission Anti-Displacement Coalition really think like this and have the political clout to matter. They've previously opposed at least one project claiming it looked "too rich" because of a mostly glass facade.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The North One (Post 8592004)

This is the dumbest shit I've ever heard.

Those new bay windows do look extremely ugly though so, meh.

Toadally.

Philadelphia should toughen up its design prerequisites. Even working class areas should benefit from historic preservation measures when owners want enhancements that fuck up the city. Enough damage has been done without having more crap piled on top of it.

Bay windows are fine, those things are repulsive whatever you call them.

Instead of pushing for denser zoning, they go for bay windows instead. :shrug:

#priorities

Apparently, white parents in gentrifying neighbourhoods don't send their children to local public schools. Instead they send to private schools or schools located outside of the neighbourhood. Public schools in black neighbourhoods are even getting underfunded and closed to further drive black people out. That's what Chicago did,and it's happening across the country, and Philadelphia is doing the same thing. Gentrification is nothing more the continuation fo a long history of discrimination, and blacks are right to fight it, by any means necessary.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doady (Post 8593499)

Huh? If you live in a neighborhood, aren't your property taxes going to the local school? If a rich parent sends their kids to a private school, everyone should be THANKING them. They are still paying taxes while not using the service, where am I going wrong here?

Quote:

Originally Posted by montréaliste (Post 8592542)

Definitely agree with the sentiment, although in Philly's defense, those images are among the more stark contrasts of existing housing stock versus new infill (the multi-colored bays and drastic changes in building height in particular definitely don't do any favors for "blending in").

I've also yet to come across a city where modern architecture is historically sensitive as the norm. It's hard in any city, but in a city where the urban fabric is so tight at the street level, as in Philly, the contrast tends to be more "in your face."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doady (Post 8593499)

Most Black families/parents are sending their kids to charter schools too. The public schools are terrible not because of underfunding, but because of mismanagement.

Don't forget, Philadelphia passed that soda tax to help pay for the public schools. Of course, to no one's surprise, the money didn't go to public schools, but rather into the general fund.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jtown,man (Post 8593644)

Yes, a portion of those property taxes are going to the local school district. But unfortunately, it's a lot more complex than that. The formula in which Pennsylvania funds public schools is so stupidly counterproductive and inequitable, it should be declared unconstitutional. It's the most unfair public education funding by a state in the country... with wealthy districts receiving 33% more state funding per pupil than the poor districts receive (that's more than double the discrepancy of the next worst state). A thread topic of its own.

Simplified PA school funding example:

Poor school district budget needed for basic operations: $10
Local tax funding: $7
State funding: $2
Budget shortfall/surplus: -$1

Wealthy school district budget needed for basic operations: $10
Local tax funding: $20
State funding: $20
Budget shortfall/surplus: +$30

And no one should be THANKED for paying taxes and not using the schools. No one is forcing them to send their kids to a private school. If they actually cared about the neighborhood, their neighbors, and their property values, they would send their kids to the local district and be engaged with the school like they are in "good" districts and private schools... which would thus vastly improve the quality of education offered there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by xzmattzx (Post 8594092)

Underfunding by the state is a major problem in Pennsylvania. To claim otherwise is a gross lack of understanding of how the situation.

The fact that something as ludicrous as a soda tax was ever even being proposed to fund public education is a very clear indicator of how fucked up Pennsylvania is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by UrbanRevival (Post 8594013)

Yes, I could have applied the same comments to Montreal's new "cagey" developments. There are a number of massive co-op projects that are very coop indeed. Ten and Fifteen story tall aluminum-clad orange and grey two-tones in all their exquisite glory.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pj3000 (Post 8594340)

Poor school district budget needed for basic operations: $10
Local tax funding: $7
State funding: $2
Budget shortfall/surplus: -$1

Wealthy school district budget needed for basic operations: $10
Local tax funding: $20
State funding: $20
Budget shortfall/surplus: +$30

Appreciate the informed response on the local situation. I do, however, still think people who pay a lot in taxes and not use the services should be thanked. You make a good point about community involvement etc., but at the end of the day the dollar is king. If a parent is saving the school district 7-10k a year by not using their services while paying more into the district than most people, that's a win for everyone involved.