PHILADELPHIA | Highrise Development Thread IX

[GtownFriend]

Originally Posted by summersm343

and 1726-50 Germantown ave on the back of the site


https://www.flow.gives/development.html

Would love to see this built!
However, I think this was about that property:
http://www.ocfrealty.com/naked-philly/so...e-planned-street-art-central-5th-cecil-b
Perhaps its all changed and we get the one you found? please!

[jsbrook]

Originally Posted by mcgrath618

That's the next block over. This development implies that they tear down those god awful townhomes. No complaints here.

Oooh...well, I feel bad that we're losing public housing in a good location,but I can't be too upset. They really look horrendous and out-of-place on what that stretch Market is becoming. I hope they are replaced in the same number somewhere more appropriate.

[City Wide]

Originally Posted by mcgrath618

That's the next block over. This development implies that they tear down those god awful townhomes. No complaints here.

Those 'god awful townhomes' were cutting edge when they were built 25/30?years ago. Several local architects worked for years to get them built. The model that had used before these were based on suburban living, meaning the car was a important part of the design. These started a much more urban based design in public housing. I wonder if some of them will get tagged with being 'historic', not for the design but for how significant the project was.
Personally, I don't mind them that much, although they always seemed out of place.

[Jayfar]

Originally Posted by mcgrath618

That's the next block over. This development implies that they tear down those god awful townhomes. No complaints here.

Originally Posted by jsbrook

Oooh...well, I feel bad that we're losing public housing in a good location,but I can't be too upset. They really look horrendous and out-of-place on what that stretch Market is becoming. I hope they are replaced in the same number somewhere more appropriate.

Originally Posted by City Wide

Those 'god awful townhomes' were cutting edge when they were built 25/30?years ago. Several local architects worked for years to get them built. The model that had used before these were based on suburban living, meaning the car was a important part of the design. These started a much more urban based design in public housing. I wonder if some of them will get tagged with being 'historic', not for the design but for how significant the project was.
Personally, I don't mind them that much, although they always seemed out of place.

We're not talking about the Lucien Blackwell Homes (PHA) are we? Because I can't imagine Jannie B. allowing that unless the replacement is also named after her late husband.

[mcgrath618]

Originally Posted by City Wide

Those 'god awful townhomes' were cutting edge when they were built 25/30?years ago. Several local architects worked for years to get them built. The model that had used before these were based on suburban living, meaning the car was a important part of the design. These started a much more urban based design in public housing. I wonder if some of them will get tagged with being 'historic', not for the design but for how significant the project was.
Personally, I don't mind them that much, although they always seemed out of place.

I understand that in their time, they served a purpose, and I can respect that. Maybe out of reverence we could even keep a few. However, like with the Gallery, the mindset of Americans towards the city has changed once again. Those townhomes, while interesting, are entirely out of place on one of the main thoroughfares in the city. If they were somewhere in, say, south philly I don’t think anyone would mind preserving them but when the purpose they served is gone (There is a subway stop abutting the property), I don’t think they should be allowed to stand.

[jsbrook]

Originally Posted by Jayfar

We're not talking about the Lucien Blackwell Homes (PHA) are we? Because I can't imagine Jannie B. allowing that unless the replacement is also named after her late husband.

I mean, if that’s what it takes, sure...Here’s to the Lucien Blackwell Innovation Tower...I don’t think these are the same townhomes, though. I think the ones named after him are on Markoe. Not Market.

[Parkway]

Originally Posted by jsbrook

I mean, if that’s what it takes, sure...Here’s to the Lucien Blackwell Innovation Tower...I don’t think these are the same townhomes, though. I think the ones named after him are on Markoe. Not Market.

Yeah, I think the ones named after him are what replaced the Mill Creek homes up around 46th and Aspen. The buildings in question are called "The University City Townhomes" and appear to be privately owned and managed low income housing. That doesn't mean that there won't be some serious backlash to tearing them down.

[Urbanthusiat]

I think the only plan Summers shared above that has a decent shot of getting built as shown is the NRIA plan for the pier. Those Flow plans seem unrealistic and they don't have a track record. I doubt Durst would work with them on the Delaware Ave site (which doesn't match what Durst has described anyway) which then calls into question their Germantown Ave proposal which appears to be the same thing in a different shape.

As for the Platinum corridor, I see that as the next most likely, but I'm skeptical of that plan as well, though I'd love to be wrong. That's a lot of commercial space west of 40th, and I think the developer would have serious political pushback on demoing the affordable housing site at 39th and Market. Then of course there's competition with the Science Center.

[City Wide]

Originally Posted by jsbrook

I mean, if that’s what it takes, sure...Here’s to the Lucien Blackwell Innovation Tower...I don’t think these are the same townhomes, though. I think the ones named after him are on Markoe. Not Market.

What a concept. I can't tell if it's a terrible idea or truly inspired. There's that nice (meaning terrible) parking lot at 38th & Market that would be the perfect site for The Blackwell Permanent Memorial Extra Special Tower. If given a blank canvas just think of what Janie could come up with. We need to get the UC Science Center to back this idea, give it traction.

[PhilliesPhan]

I'm completely fine with getting rid of the townhomes at 39th and Market. Suburban-style housing should have no place in most areas of the city; in fact, the only area of the city where something like this would reasonably fit in is in the Northeast. West Philly deserves better than low-slung, cheap looking, suburban-style housing at such a prime location. I hope the Platinum Corridor comes to fruition, and that the complex at 39th and Market is the first to go.

I feel the exact same way about the PHA housing in West Poplar, as well as a slew of tract homes surrounding Temple's campus. Allowances for suburban-style housing should be removed from the zoning code (except in the Northeast, parts of the Northwest, and neighborhoods in North and West Philly), and the PHA should be ashamed of developing such homes when they have a 5+ year long waiting list for housing.

[cardeza]

Originally Posted by PhilliesPhan

I'm completely fine with getting rid of the townhomes at 39th and Market. Suburban-style housing should have no place in most areas of the city; in fact, the only area of the city where something like this would reasonably fit in is in the Northeast. West Philly deserves better than low-slung, cheap looking, suburban-style housing at such a prime location. I hope the Platinum Corridor comes to fruition, and that the complex at 39th and Market is the first to go.

I feel the exact same way about the PHA housing in West Poplar, as well as a slew of tract homes surrounding Temple's campus. Allowances for suburban-style housing should be removed from the zoning code (except in the Northeast, parts of the Northwest, and neighborhoods in North and West Philly), and the PHA should be ashamed of developing such homes when they have a 5+ year long waiting list for housing.

what about the occupants? People do actually live there.

[Larry King]

Originally Posted by Urbanthusiat

I think the only plan Summers shared above that has a decent shot of getting built as shown is the NRIA plan for the pier. Those Flow plans seem unrealistic and they don't have a track record. I doubt Durst would work with them on the Delaware Ave site (which doesn't match what Durst has described anyway) which then calls into question their Germantown Ave proposal which appears to be the same thing in a different shape.

As for the Platinum corridor, I see that as the next most likely, but I'm skeptical of that plan as well, though I'd love to be wrong. That's a lot of commercial space west of 40th, and I think the developer would have serious political pushback on demoing the affordable housing site at 39th and Market. Then of course there's competition with the Science Center.

The pier project will definitely be developed, they are very active builders in the city and NJ/NY. The germantown ave project is just total fantasy, even if zoning allowed it, the economics would never support a high rise at that location... the group recently built a seemingly (?) public park at the site last year for some reason.

[Knight Hospitaller]

Originally Posted by PhilliesPhan

I'm completely fine with getting rid of the townhomes at 39th and Market. Suburban-style housing should have no place in most areas of the city; in fact, the only area of the city where something like this would reasonably fit in is in the Northeast. West Philly deserves better than low-slung, cheap looking, suburban-style housing at such a prime location. I hope the Platinum Corridor comes to fruition, and that the complex at 39th and Market is the first to go.

I feel the exact same way about the PHA housing in West Poplar, as well as a slew of tract homes surrounding Temple's campus. Allowances for suburban-style housing should be removed from the zoning code (except in the Northeast, parts of the Northwest, and neighborhoods in North and West Philly), and the PHA should be ashamed of developing such homes when they have a 5+ year long waiting list for housing.

I too am not happy with the suburban model in an urban setting. It has been a LONG time since I took "Sociology of Urban Planning" as an elective, but I remember studying the serious social and other problems occasioned by the "warehousing" model at places like Robert Taylor homes and Cabrini Green (Chicago was the nearest big metro area to my school). They checked the density "box," but were a failure on many other levels, leading to demolition. I think the suburban model is, at least in part, a pendulum swing reaction against that. Depending upon the context, townhomes and modestly sized multi family structures are a better option. I think even better are housing vouchers that don't concentrate poverty and attendant social problems in a brick and mortar "encampment," but that runs into NIMBY resistance and landlord hostility/apathy.

[Aaamazarite]

Here's he history of the 70 units at 3900 Market

http://www.ocfrealty.com/naked-philly/west-philly/delorean-time-machine-3900-market-street

[Boku]

Originally Posted by cardeza

what about the occupants? People do actually live there.

Actual people, their wants and needs, and how development may affect them are oftentimes casually cast aside here.

[Urbanthusiat]

Originally Posted by Boku

Actual people, their wants and needs, and how development may affect them are oftentimes casually cast aside here.

It's unfortunate when people have to move when they don't want to, but unless you'd be okay with a law that says renters can hold their landlords hostage and stay as long as they want, preventing them from improving their property, I'm not sure what else could be done. Obviously the developer would have to give the residents sufficient notice, and it'd be better for them to offer relocation assistance, but ultimately it's a question of whether or not you believe renters have a right to rent in one place forever, and if they do, whether that right supplants a property owner's right to develop their property as they see fit within the zoning code.

[McBane]

Sorry it sounds callous, but it's not wrong to favor a project that will produce high wage jobs at the expense of housing projects (the fact that they are ugly is not really relevant). Gentrification has winners and losers. But one of the winners is the city itself, which benefits financially from commercial office buildings much more so than public housing. This in turn affords the city to fund libraries, parks, roads, police, and other things that benefit all city residents. Sure some renters will need to find a new place to live but in the grand scheme of things the city and its residents are better off with an office building than public housing.

[summersm343]

I have absolutely no problem with low income housing at this location, I only have a problem with the style and low-density of it at this location. 39th and Market should be a mixed-use high rise - no question.

They should propose a mixed use development here that incorporates office space, ground floor retail, and residential units. Within those residential units, incorporate the total amount of low income housing units as what would be lost by demolishing these. ON TOP OF THAT, they should rebuild more low income townhomes at 47th and Aspen, or somewhere else nearby where there is a lot of open land.

This would accomplish multiple things, including putting a size and use appropriate development at 39th and Market, as well as replace these aging low income housing units with double the amount of brand new low income housing units in the area.

[Leviathant]

Originally Posted by Urbanthusiat

Those Flow plans seem unrealistic and they don't have a track record. I doubt Durst would work with them on the Delaware Ave site (which doesn't match what Durst has described anyway) which then calls into question their Germantown Ave proposal which appears to be the same thing in a different shape.

Yeah, the press release specifically stated:

The Durst Organization has retained the services of leading architectural firm Handel Architects to develop a design that will bring new and exciting active uses to the area and enliven the Columbus Boulevard corridor.

The plans up on the Flow website for the PPA lot next to One Water Street are absurd, and are frankly pretty ignorant of the location they're building on and around.

[brenster]

I saw a video on Twitter tonight showing construction stuff being delivered at the Comcast 3 site. Anyone know anything?