PHILADELPHIA-CAMDEN-WILMINGTON-ATLANTIC CITY-READING | Metro Development Thread

[chris08876]

Spotted this the other day. Forgot to post it.

= = =

Church Conversion Plan Could Add Over 1,000 Housing Units Across Greater Philly: https://www.bisnow.com/philadelphia/news...e-residential-conversion-michaels-133594
March 10, 2026

[...]

The Episcopal Diocese of Pennsylvania plans to convert 26 underutilized properties across greater Philadelphia into apartments.

[3rd&Brown]

Originally Posted by PHLtoNYC

And suburban NIMBYs wonder why the housing and rental market in the burbs is so expensive and competitive...

It's one thing if a developer wants to cut down woodlands or open space, but this is a previously developed impervious site beyond its useful lifespan... This is exactly the type of property developers and townships should be capitalizing on... Old malls, office buildings, parking lots, etc.

Developer plans gas station after Plymouth Township rejects apartment proposal
https://www.bizjournals.com/philadelphia...cx_testVariant=cx_8&cx_artPos=1#cxrecs_s

After Plymouth Township turned down a previous proposal for a mixed-use redevelopment of a Conshohocken office park, developer BET Investments shifted gears and is now planning a 24-hour convenience store and gas station for the site.

“We presented a great plan to the Plymouth Board of Commissioners and they told us they weren’t inclined to adopt a text amendment to allow it,” BET President Michael Markman said. “They told us to look at current zoning uses on the site. That’s what we did.”

BET initially planned to overhaul a portion of the Conshohocken Ridge Corporate Center with up to 200 apartments and retail. The Dresher-based developer is now planning a 6,500-square-foot convenience store with eight gas pumps.

This is what happens when Boomers run zoning.

Plymouth Township is rapidly upscaling. There are tear downs happening all over the township where modest nothingburger ranch homes with 2 bedrooms on good lots are being replaced by $1MM+ homes. You would think they'd want to capitalize on their good fortune and location by maybe trying to build something akin to a walkable commercial strip and not just be known as the turnpike interchange?

If ever there was a place that could benefit from a master plan, it's Plymouth Township, Pennsylvania.

[el don]

Originally Posted by 3rd&Brown

This is what happens when Boomers run zoning.

Plymouth Township is rapidly upscaling. There are tear downs happening all over the township where modest nothingburger ranch homes with 2 bedrooms on good lots are being replaced by $1MM+ homes. You would think they'd want to capitalize on their good fortune and location by maybe trying to build something akin to a walkable commercial strip and not just be known as the turnpike interchange?

If ever there was a place that could benefit from a master plan, it's Plymouth Township, Pennsylvania.

Do you think they are hurting for money? They already have a great school district, YMCA, collect good money from all the businesses already there etc.. I also don't think they (the people who live there) care with Conshohocken right around the corner.

They can also shoot into Norristown for all their vice needs, and Mexican food.

[3rd&Brown]

Originally Posted by el don

Do you think they are hurting for money? They already have a great school district, YMCA, collect good money from all the businesses already there etc.. I also don't think they (the people who live there) care with Conshohocken right around the corner.

They can also shoot into Norristown for all their vice needs, and Mexican food.

Hit a nerve? Or just proving my point?

Regardless, all boomers and (some) suburbanites seemingly care about is home equity, so regardless of what people prioritize in a community, their homes would be worth that much more if there was actually a "there there" and they weren't simply choosing their location based on proximity but an actual draw. Let's be honest, most people in Plymouth Township are choosing proximity (and schools) and if they had the money, would probably rather live in Lafayette Hill or directly on the Main Line. I guess adjacent is good enough, but why not aim higher?

Gone are the days where having a walkable dense corridor was considered "uban" and undesireable. So this idea that everything is perfectly fine as is is actually preposterous.

[el don]

Originally Posted by 3rd&Brown

Hit a nerve? Or just proving my point?

Regardless, all boomers and (some) suburbanites seemingly care about is home equity, so regardless of what people prioritize in a community, their homes would be worth that much more if there was actually a "there there" and they weren't simply choosing their location based on proximity but an actual draw. Let's be honest, most people in Plymouth Township are choosing proximity (and schools) and if they had the money, would probably rather live in Lafayette Hill or directly on the Main Line. I guess adjacent is good enough, but why not aim higher?

Gone are the days where having a walkable dense corridor was considered "uban" and undesireable. So this idea that everything is perfectly fine as is is actually preposterous.

I'm born and raised from the slums of Norristown. I currently live in Northeast Philly. I've lived in every part of Philly, from the badlands, to Chestnut Hill to Center City. The people who live in Plymouth Township (the ones who have lived there for a long time) want their home equity to raise like any homeowner does, but not at the cost of increased traffic. There's family that have been living in those areas for generations Gallos, Gambones, Corbos, etc) that don't want it to change too much. I can see your point for the new people maybe, but not those who have lived there their whole lives.

You're making it seem like it's bad to have upper middle class suburbs.

[mcgrath618]

Originally Posted by el don

You're making it seem like it's bad to have upper middle class suburbs.

The manner in which we've been doing it as a region and as a nation for the last 70 years? Absolutely.

This isn't sustainable. Never has been. 3rd and Brown is 100% correct.

[PHLtoNYC]

Originally Posted by el don

...want their home equity to raise like any homeowner does, but not at the cost of increased traffic.

I don't mean to sound combative, but that is such a tired counterargument...

The addition of a 200 residential units is unlikely to generate more traffic than what historically existed in Plymouth Meeting. This argument is raised for every redevelopment of former malls or office sites, despite the fact that active commercial properties (malls, offices, etc.) typically produce similar or more traffic than mixed-use residential communities (apartments + grocery). A convenience store with gas pumps (i.e., Wawa), doesn't exactly reduce congestion.

I struggle to understand the push back against new housing on already impervious sites past their useful lifespan (old office parks, malls, etc.). These are exactly the types of locations where denser housing should be prioritized. If this were undeveloped land or forest, I would feel differently. As the region becomes more expensive, it’s imperative to build denser housing in places that can support it, not just $1M+ SFHs.

[EastSideHBG]

Originally Posted by 3rd&Brown

Let's be honest, most people in Plymouth Township are choosing proximity (and schools) and if they had the money, would probably rather live in Lafayette Hill or directly on the Main Line. I guess adjacent is good enough, but why not aim higher?

Huh? The area offers a lot and that's an odd take.

Originally Posted by PHLtoNYC

I don't mean to sound combative, but that is such a tired counterargument...

The addition of a 200 residential units is unlikely to generate more traffic than what historically existed in Plymouth Meeting. This argument is raised for every redevelopment of former malls or office sites, despite the fact that active commercial properties (malls, offices, etc.) typically produce similar or more traffic than mixed-use residential communities (apartments + grocery). A convenience store with gas pumps (i.e., Wawa), doesn't exactly reduce congestion.

I struggle to understand the push back against new housing on already impervious sites past their useful lifespan (old office parks, malls, etc.). These are exactly the types of locations where denser housing should be prioritized. If this were undeveloped land or forest, I would feel differently. As the region becomes more expensive, it’s imperative to build denser housing in places that can support it, not just $1M+ SFHs.

On the surface you are correct. But PA's structure doesn't address the basics anymore so in turn you get pushback from the people who have to deal with it every day. That intersection and the surrounding areas are a traffic nightmare and 200-300 extra people would make it even more unbearable. The current strain on emergency services is a big issue also and any large scale project would just create further strain.

And I am not anti this project either and it's a huge missed opportunity but it's also not as easy as dismissing residents' concerns either.

[3rd&Brown]

Originally Posted by PHLtoNYC

I don't mean to sound combative, but that is such a tired counterargument...

The addition of a 200 residential units is unlikely to generate more traffic than what historically existed in Plymouth Meeting. This argument is raised for every redevelopment of former malls or office sites, despite the fact that active commercial properties (malls, offices, etc.) typically produce similar or more traffic than mixed-use residential communities (apartments + grocery). A convenience store with gas pumps (i.e., Wawa), doesn't exactly reduce congestion.

I struggle to understand the push back against new housing on already impervious sites past their useful lifespan (old office parks, malls, etc.). These are exactly the types of locations where denser housing should be prioritized. If this were undeveloped land or forest, I would feel differently. As the region becomes more expensive, it’s imperative to build denser housing in places that can support it, not just $1M+ SFHs.

Exactly. Housing doesn't lead to the traffic people proclaim it does. Jesus, I live in a new neighborhood with 600+ homes and at any given point when I leave in my car there are no more than 3 vehicles at any time at the light near the entrance of my neighborhood. And that would be rush hour. Most times of the day it's 0-1 car.

Not to mention, more people work from home more often and if you build *mixed use* communities you don't have to get in your car for every single trip.

No way a gas station DOES NOT result in more traffic than a residential complex. To think otherwise is preposterous.

[el don]

Originally Posted by 3rd&Brown

Exactly. Housing doesn't lead to the traffic people proclaim it does. Jesus, I live in a new neighborhood with 600+ homes and at any given point when I leave in my car there are no more than 3 vehicles at any time at the light near the entrance of my neighborhood. And that would be rush hour. Most times of the day it's 0-1 car.

Not to mention, more people work from home more often and if you build *mixed use* communities you don't have to get in your car for every single trip.

No way a gas station DOES NOT result in more traffic than a residential complex. To think otherwise is preposterous.

Go to that site where the project was proposed during rush hour and report back.

[mcgrath618]

Originally Posted by el don

Go to that site where the project was proposed during rush hour and report back.

You ever wonder if it’s like that because Wawas are being built instead of a place people can live and not have to drive?

[el don]

Originally Posted by mcgrath618

You ever wonder if it’s like that because Wawas are being built instead of a place people can live and not have to drive?

So your saying if they built housing there that the people who live there would not drive? Is this an alternate reality we are taking about here, or the real world?

Some places don't want to densify, you can not like it all you want, that's your prerogative.

[mcgrath618]

Originally Posted by el don

So your saying if they built housing there that the people who live there would not drive? Is this an alternate reality we are taking about here, or the real world?

I'm not saying they wouldn't drive at all, that would be naive. What 3rd and I are saying is that they'd drive less if the community that they lived in had places they could actually walk to. How many people do you know who walk to a gas station?

Some places don't want to densify, you can not like it all you want, that's your prerogative.

The longer that we keep collectively thinking like this, the harder it will be to actually avoid densifying. If we continue to build sprawl, especially in places like this within Philadelphia's ring road, it will only serve to:

1. Artificially inflate housing prices owing to induced scarcity
2. Which will in turn push more people out of home ownership and into apartment buildings
3. Which will inevitably lead to suburbs "densifying" but in a way that is neither desirable nor sustainable.

We don't need to reinvent the wheel here. We can look at models of cities that have done this well in Europe (and even domestically!), and improve on the mistakes that they made. Suburbs serve an important place in a city's environment, but if they are built in a way that is inherently unsustainable, everyone loses.

Long story short, we need towns. Places like Ardmore, Ambler, Lansdale, Doylestown, Newtown, Media, Swarthmore. These are sustainable.

[Jawnadelphia]

Not a surprise, when BPG bought the Bracebridge building on Rodney Square that Incyte left in the dust ... everyone knew apartments were on the way. 202 of them, to be exact.

At least the design from DIGSAU looks sharp and sleek. (I still wish Incyte would've moved all those good jobs downtown).



https://www.bizjournals.com/philadelphia...ollin-office-residential-conversion.html

[el don]

Originally Posted by mcgrath618

I'm not saying they wouldn't drive at all, that would be naive. What 3rd and I are saying is that they'd drive less if the community that they lived in had places they could actually walk to. How many people do you know who walk to a gas station?



The longer that we keep collectively thinking like this, the harder it will be to actually avoid densifying. If we continue to build sprawl, especially in places like this within Philadelphia's ring road, it will only serve to:

1. Artificially inflate housing prices owing to induced scarcity
2. Which will in turn push more people out of home ownership and into apartment buildings
3. Which will inevitably lead to suburbs "densifying" but in a way that is neither desirable nor sustainable.

We don't need to reinvent the wheel here. We can look at models of cities that have done this well in Europe (and even domestically!), and improve on the mistakes that they made. Suburbs serve an important place in a city's environment, but if they are built in a way that is inherently unsustainable, everyone loses.

Long story short, we need towns. Places like Ardmore, Ambler, Lansdale, Doylestown, Newtown, Media, Swarthmore. These are sustainable.

I'm not against what your saying, I'm just trying to tell you that: 1. With this particular site, no one is walking anywhere, and it will increase traffic in that area that is already horrendous. 2. Your urban mindset planning, is not what the suburban minded people who actually live there want. You can yell at the clouds all you want, it's not going to change what the actually residents that have to deal with that area want.

[OSJ825]

Originally Posted by Jawnadelphia

Not a surprise, when BPG bought the Bracebridge building on Rodney Square that Incyte left in the dust ... everyone knew apartments were on the way. 202 of them, to be exact.

At least the design from DIGSAU looks sharp and sleek. (I still wish Incyte would've moved all those good jobs downtown).



https://www.bizjournals.com/philadelphia...ollin-office-residential-conversion.html

Hi Jawn — I’m with you. The architecture really nails that blend of old and new. The lower levels keep that traditional feel, while floors 5 through 10 rise into a sleek, modern glass tower. It’s a sharp look. The project is definitely shaping up to be mixed‑use. Incyte has already committed to about 80,000 square feet for roughly 200 employees, and there’s retail planned for the ground floor. Widener University Delaware Law School is also planning to move right across the street from the two Buccini Pollin properties, which adds even more energy to the area. All of that should help support the retail at Bracebridge I, where they’re expecting somewhere between 10,000 and 20,000 square feet of space. Buccini mentioned they’re anticipating a coffee shop or something similar — the kind of spot that would naturally draw residents, office workers, and students in the neighborhood.

[TK2001]

There's a tower crane currently in the Camden skyline I presume for a future Cooper hospital. Apparently the crane was installed on Sunday, based on photographs from my mother

[Nova08]

Originally Posted by el don

I'm not against what your saying, I'm just trying to tell you that: 1. With this particular site, no one is walking anywhere, and it will increase traffic in that area that is already horrendous. 2. Your urban mindset planning, is not what the suburban minded people who actually live there want. You can yell at the clouds all you want, it's not going to change what the actually residents that have to deal with that area want.

This x100.

The site is at the far, far, far corner of the area bounded by 476, Ridge Pike, Butler Pike and the river. It's not in realistic walking distance to downtown Conshohocken, you put your life at risk to walk to anything along Ridge and there aren't any fields, playgrounds, parks, etc. in walking distance either. It's a loud, complex, busy, dangerous intersection. I'm all for density but whatever housing could be built here would essentially be it's own island.

Originally Posted by mcgrath618

SEPTA abandoned everything outside of the 5 county area in 1981 because the State slashed funding for said service. Bethlehem and Newtown saw good enough ridership that I'm confident they'd still be around today had it not been for that.

You can blame SEPTA for the rails-to-trails of the Ivy Ridge Line, the Newtown Line, and the Bethlehem Branch, and there is some blame indeed deserved, but you must realize that said projects had immense political backing behind them that SEPTA could not afford to stand up against in the face of poor funding.

Nothing is impossible. SEPTA still owns the right of way for Bethlehem as far as High Street in Hellertown, and maintains trackage rights over Norfolk Southern in perpetuity.

Who owns the ROW north of 78? You'd have to wind your way through the industrial / intermodal area to hit NS trackage and theoretically have a terminal around the old LV Bethlehem Station and in a perfect world continue further to Allentown. At this point I feel like you need to get to downtowns (not High street) for this to gain ridership

[srahman75]

Originally Posted by Nova08

This x100.

Who owns the ROW north of 78? You'd have to wind your way through the industrial / intermodal area to hit NS trackage and theoretically have a terminal around the old LV Bethlehem Station and in a perfect world continue further to Allentown. At this point I feel like you need to get to downtowns (not High street) for this to gain ridership

The entire approach north of 78 is a trail, and it will be very difficult to turn it back into rails north of 4th street without getting rid of the trail. However, building a station under the 4th street bridge by Daly Ave is a possibility (40.611469, -75.351935). Having a station there will place you in or very close to the southside core within walking distance of Wind Creek Casino, ArtsQuest, and SteelStacks.

[summersm343]

Originally Posted by TK2001

There's a tower crane currently in the Camden skyline I presume for a future Cooper hospital. Apparently the crane was installed on Sunday, based on photographs from my mother

Confirmed. Saw it this morning from the Philly side. Definitely looks like it’s for a new Cooper building.

Edit: looks like it's their new 10-story patient tower.

Cooper University Health Care Breaks Ground on First Phase of $3 Billion “Project Imagine” Expansion in Camden



The first phase of the project is a 10-story, 345,000 square foot hospital tower on the corner of MLK and Haddon Avenue directly across from the MD Anderson Cancer Center at Cooper. The new building will be linked to the cancer center with a bridge over Haddon Avenue and is slated for completion by 2028.

Tower A will include:

125 acuity-adaptable private rooms incorporating advanced technology to meet diverse patient needs.
Expanded women’s services featuring labor and delivery rooms and a new neonatal intensive care unit (NICU).
Additional operating rooms, increasing surgical capacity to meet growing demand.
Education and research spaces with a modern medical library and learner-focused spaces to support Cooper’s academic mission.
Emergency preparedness infrastructure including a state-of-the-art medical command center to serve the region.

https://blogs.cooperhealth.org/news/2025...ion-project-imagine-expansion-in-camden/