PHILADELPHIA | Highrise Development Thread IX

[3rd&Brown]

Originally Posted by Milksteak

You don't just decide to not hire 25k people, so either they are going to put it all in Crystal City, they are going to spread those employees out across the US, or they are going to choose another location. They are not re-opening the search, but I'd be willing to bet they are speaking with the other finalist cities.

But man, those dolts who raised a big stink about this in NY really screwed this up.

Did they?

NY is completely unlivable due to the COL at this point. It has enough and it was wise for people to complain.

Amazon can go somewhere else where it will have more of an effect.

Also, an "average" job in NYC that pays $150K is just that. Average. In almost any other metro, it provides an incredible quality of life.

[Urbanthusiat]

Originally Posted by 3rd&Brown

Did they?

NY is completely unlivable due to the COL at this point.

This is a common myth. If NYC was completely unlivable due to COL then it wouldn't be the most populated city in the country and there wouldn't be any (for a lack of a better word) poor people to complain about Amazon moving there. There is tons of cheap housing in Brookyln, Queens, Bronx, Staten Island, and even parts of Manhattan. Housing is expensive in Midtown and along 5th avenue, sure, but why would we expect otherwise?

[iheartphilly]

^
If you qualify for rent control, it might be more livable. But if you don't, a single income of 200k in a nice neighborhood doesn't go far. Market rate rent is desirable neighborhoods of manhattan and including brooklyn are incredible expensive. And the apartments are small for what you pay. Plus all the taxes reduce your income by half. Plus dining, groceries, entertainment is expensive. NYC is one of the most expensive city in the US.

[3rd&Brown]

Originally Posted by Urbanthusiat

This is a common myth. If NYC was completely unlivable due to COL then it wouldn't be the most populated city in the country and there wouldn't be any (for a lack of a better word) poor people to complain about Amazon moving there. There is tons of cheap housing in Brookyln, Queens, Bronx, Staten Island, and even parts of Manhattan. Housing is expensive in Midtown and along 5th avenue, sure, but why would we expect otherwise?

Define "cheap" and tons?

Brooklyn is the most expensive county in the country.

[City Wide]

Originally Posted by eixample;8473697
Society hill may have been sparsely populated then BUT it is even more sparsely populated now AND with almost zero chance of becoming much more dense in the future. (7,000 in 1950, 6,000 in 2010 - [URL="https://philadelphiaencyclopedia.org/archive/society-hill/"

source[/URL].) Society Hill is extremely undense considering where it is in a major city, largely because of automotive uses and the desires of a wealthy class that has entrenched its preferred planning style. The neighborhood is not pulling its weight to absorb new population in a growing urban core and anyone who is upset with gentrification in Point Breeze and Kensington (not me really) should lay part of the blame on the Society Hill neighborhood organization. These apartment buildings do a tiny bit to change that (smaller units would do even more).

what's wrong with a long established neighborhood preferring it's current 'planning style'? I agree that the fuss against the height of this proposed Dock St. tower is misdirected and extremely self serving, especially so since it can (more or less) be built 'by right'. But I have nothing against a neighborhood resisting change.

[City Wide]

Originally Posted by allovertown

25,000 jobs added spread across like 10 years. the few thousand they add every year would barely register as a blip on New York's radar. I don't think it is ridiculous to question giving so many tax breaks and allowances to the world's richest company, owned by the world's richest man, when you're a city that has no issue at all bringing in jobs.

Amazon looks clueless here. They had this big long contest waving their jobs in front of everyone's faces to get tax breaks, and then they settled in basically the one city in America where no one really gives a 🞵🞵🞵🞵 about adding jobs and is in fact in the midst of a housing crisis with overflowing public transit to the point where there is a significant contingent of people that are openly hostile to adding these tops of jobs in large numbers.

Them opening up a headquarters here, even if it was for less the 25,000 would make all the sense in the world. But then again, based on what they said they wanted, it made 10 times as much sense to come here instead of NYC in the first place, so I'm not optimistic.

Regardless I still think it is good news for Philadelphia. Setting aside whether or not people were smart to fight against Amazon coming to NYC, the very fact that they did and won really demonstrates that the New York is starting to turn a corner in terms of public sentiment. People are getting fed up with the never ending expansion and ever rising costs, clearly. There will still be tons of jobs heading to NYC, but if Amazon couldn't make a go of it, there will be others. If we can just peel off a small percentage of that run off we'll be in good shape.

Very well said. I doubt that there was much of a contest. If anything is was just a method to justify Amazon's blackmail of their pre-selected cities.

[cardeza]

Originally Posted by Urbanthusiat

This is a common myth. If NYC was completely unlivable due to COL then it wouldn't be the most populated city in the country and there wouldn't be any (for a lack of a better word) poor people to complain about Amazon moving there. There is tons of cheap housing in Brookyln, Queens, Bronx, Staten Island, and even parts of Manhattan. Housing is expensive in Midtown and along 5th avenue, sure, but why would we expect otherwise?

I dont believe that is accurate at all. NYC has a big time affordability issue. Median home price is $400k+ and rent on per sf basis is definitely highest on east coast and probably top 2 in the US.

[allovertown]

Originally Posted by Urbanthusiat

This is a common myth. If NYC was completely unlivable due to COL then it wouldn't be the most populated city in the country and there wouldn't be any (for a lack of a better word) poor people to complain about Amazon moving there. There is tons of cheap housing in Brookyln, Queens, Bronx, Staten Island, and even parts of Manhattan. Housing is expensive in Midtown and along 5th avenue, sure, but why would we expect otherwise?

Sorry, but this is simply not the case. Where are you getting this?

[eixample]

Originally Posted by City Wide

what's wrong with a long established neighborhood preferring it's current 'planning style'? I agree that the fuss against the height of this proposed Dock St. tower is misdirected and extremely self serving, especially so since it can (more or less) be built 'by right'. But I have nothing against a neighborhood resisting change.

My rant didn't have much to do with the Dilworth House or the Dock Street proposal, but I strongly feel that we need more checks on neighborhood influence in planning, especially well heeled neighborhoods. They should have a right to make their voice heard, but not unilateral control over planning decisions, which is effectively what happens in Philadelphia with councilmanic prerogative. It's especially bad in Society Hill which is full of 2 story 50 year old historical houses with parking (which to me are not all that special anyway). This is also a neighborhood that just went through a recent downzoning or one that was at least proposed. Even if you disagree with my views on Society Hill though, the main problem with neighborhoods influencing development is that they all want to keep the neighborhood how it is today. We are not building enough units as it is so unless we pick up the pace we'll be guaranteeing an affordability crisis throughout large swaths of the city and region in the future.

[Radio5]

Originally Posted by allovertown

Sorry, but this is simply not the case. Where are you getting this?

I have to say, I kind of agree. Perhaps not so much myth, it's of course the 2nd most expensive place to live in the US (after SF), but I was worried looking for an apartment in Brooklyn, and compared to LA at least, I found it wasn't too much of a difference in price. You definitely get more space in LA, but if you're single or a couple, price wise, you can get a decent place. Now compared to philly, yeah, it's a lot.

[allovertown]

Originally Posted by Radio5

I have to say, I kind of agree. Perhaps not so much myth, it's of course the 2nd most expensive place to live in the US (after SF), but I was worried looking for an apartment in Brooklyn, and compared to LA at least, I found it wasn't too much of a difference in price. You definitely get more space in LA, but if you're single or a couple, price wise, you can get a decent place. Now compared to philly, yeah, it's a lot.

Is the housing crisis perhaps slightly exaggerated? Sure. Is the perception that you need to be a millionaire and spend a fortune to live in a nice place that is bigger than a closet well overblown? Sure. But, Urbanthusiat claimed there was "tons of cheap housing" for "poor people."

I mean that's obviously not true. The poverty line is like 12 grand a year. There is hardly any housing in NYC that is for the truly poor.

[wanderer34]

Originally Posted by 3rd&Brown

Define "cheap" and tons?

Brooklyn is the most expensive county in the country.

Where's the figure for that??? I was always under the assumption (not that I am trying to assume, but still) that New York County was probably the most expensive county when it comes to real estate prices.

[Justin7]

Originally Posted by skyscraper

Well as I said, it's very revealing. It's like when you know someone cheats on their significant other, then you start dating them thinking "it'll be different when they're with *me*."

It is literally nothing like that.

[skyscraper]

Originally Posted by Justin7

It is literally nothing like that.

literally?

[Redddog]

Originally Posted by Urbanthusiat

This is a common myth. If NYC was completely unlivable due to COL then it wouldn't be the most populated city in the country and there wouldn't be any (for a lack of a better word) poor people to complain about Amazon moving there. There is tons of cheap housing in Brookyln, Queens, Bronx, Staten Island, and even parts of Manhattan. Housing is expensive in Midtown and along 5th avenue, sure, but why would we expect otherwise?

Not to pile on here, but have you ever lived in NYC?

It's insultingly expensive.

[Londonee]

Originally Posted by Radio5

I have to say, I kind of agree. Perhaps not so much myth, it's of course the 2nd most expensive place to live in the US (after SF), but I was worried looking for an apartment in Brooklyn, and compared to LA at least, I found it wasn't too much of a difference in price. You definitely get more space in LA, but if you're single or a couple, price wise, you can get a decent place. Now compared to philly, yeah, it's a lot.

One point. I'm in my mid-30s with a family and generally price "affordability" based on how much a house would cost for a family of three/four who needs ~ 3brs and 2bathrooms - in a minimum of ~1200sf of space. Ya know, like, for living life like real people. And how does that price point change from neighborhood to neighborhood.

No one is saying a 20 something can't shack up with 3 or 4 other people in a 5th floor walkup in Ft. Greene for a relatively affordable price.

The larger discussion about affordability - especially as it relates to Amazon and by extension Philly - is can people make careers in NYC, raise families, afford enough space to do so, have a decent QOL, etc. Affordability isn't just raw access to how many places you can get for $2k/month regardless of quality and condition.

[3rd&Brown]

Originally Posted by Radio5

I have to say, I kind of agree. Perhaps not so much myth, it's of course the 2nd most expensive place to live in the US (after SF), but I was worried looking for an apartment in Brooklyn, and compared to LA at least, I found it wasn't too much of a difference in price. You definitely get more space in LA, but if you're single or a couple, price wise, you can get a decent place. Now compared to philly, yeah, it's a lot.

Here the thing. In SF you get a proper apartment. In NYC, for the same price, you get a closet.

https://www.renthop.com/studies/nyc/new-york-city-subway-median-rent

These are ONE BEDROOM rents at various subway stops in NYC.

One Bedroom Rent Prices For Major NYC Subway Hubs
Union Square 14th St (4,5,6,L,N,Q,R,W Trains) – $5,265 (+9.1% YoY)
Times Square 42nd St (1,2,3,7,N,Q,R,S,W Trains) – $3,468 (-3.7% YoY)
West 4th St (A,B,C,D,E,F,M Trains) – $3,395 (-15.1% YoY)
Herald Square 34th St (B,D,F,M,N,Q,R,W Trains) – $3,350 (+3.1% YoY)
Fulton St (A,C,J,Z,2,3,4,5 Trains) – $3,346 (-0.2% YoY)
Atlantic Ave – Barclay’s Center (2,3,4,5,B,D,N,R,Q) – $3,040 (+13.4% YoY)
Broadway Junction (A,C,J,L,Z) – $2,035 (+16.3% YoY)

Broadway Junction is literally far east Brooklyn. Like Cyprus Hills/East New York. Takes an hour+ to get to Midtown during rush hour from Broadway Junction. You can get to Midtown as fast from 30th Street Station.

[3rd&Brown]

Originally Posted by Redddog

Not to pile on here, but have you ever lived in NYC?

It's insultingly expensive.

Like a bar of Arm & Hammer deodorant is $7.99 at Duane Reade expensive.

He has literally no clue.

An uber ride that costs $12 in Philadelphia costs $25 in NYC.

[City Wide]

Originally Posted by eixample

My rant didn't have much to do with the Dilworth House or the Dock Street proposal, but I strongly feel that we need more checks on neighborhood influence in planning, especially well heeled neighborhoods. They should have a right to make their voice heard, but not unilateral control over planning decisions, which is effectively what happens in Philadelphia with councilmanic prerogative. It's especially bad in Society Hill which is full of 2 story 50 year old historical houses with parking (which to me are not all that special anyway). This is also a neighborhood that just went through a recent downzoning or one that was at least proposed. Even if you disagree with my views on Society Hill though, the main problem with neighborhoods influencing development is that they all want to keep the neighborhood how it is today. We are not building enough units as it is so unless we pick up the pace we'll be guaranteeing an affordability crisis throughout large swaths of the city and region in the future.

How would dropping even 4 or 5 highrise apartment/condo towers into SH or any place in CC help affordability. I live in UC which is generally a expensive area in which to buy, but nearly everything (85%?) that has been built in the last 10 years is junk apartments marketed to the transient student population, and all this building has not lowered prices at all, although that is always one of the claims that is promised by those that want greater density. Most builders aren't stupid, they want to maximize returns by building as little quality as possible in ways that give them the largest return. Zoning doesn't effect that calculus. I live 1 block away from the largest plot of empty land in the area and something is going to be happening there soon (as the dog park just got kicked out after over 15 successful years) and I have absolutely zero confidence that something good will be proposed for that site, good meaning fitting in well with the neighborhood. To me the quality of the build is as important as what gets built, but quality is next to impossible to guarantee through the City's zoning or permit process. But in general owner occupied buildings that go for half a mil sound like a better bet then a 4 story 150 unit apartment block, even if a handful of 'affordable' units were thrown in.

Look at Northern Liberties and the surrounding where there were/are larger plots of empty land and what gets built is $400K+ townhouses or apartments where a small studio goes for $1250. Is that affordable in your context? If not, what could have made it different?

I agree that there is a pricing problem in housing in much of the city. But it also seems that the construction boom of the last 6 to 9 years has made the problem or certainly made it much worse. I don't think any on this forum would be for slowing construction as a way to slowing the increase costs for housing.

So, I guess what I'm saying is if more construction in a area doesn't help control housing cost increases, then why push SH residents to change? Who does that change help----I'd say the developers first and foremost and then down the list I guess one could say the City benefits from a increase tax base, but unfortunately in this City I think you'd be hard pressed to find a room full of people who think the City gov't does even just a 'ok' job with the funds that we the people turn over to them. The City seems to be very good at finding expensive ways of not doing very much (thank you J. Blackwell). I wish the answer was as simple as opening up zoning, but I don't think the evidence shows that at all.

[El Duderino]

Originally Posted by Londonee

One point. I'm in my mid-30s with a family and generally price "affordability" based on how much a house would cost for a family of three/four who needs ~ 3brs and 2bathrooms - in a minimum of ~1200sf of space. Ya know, like, for living life like real people. And how does that price point change from neighborhood to neighborhood.

No one is saying a 20 something can't shack up with 3 or 4 other people in a 5th floor walkup in Ft. Greene for a relatively affordable price.

The larger discussion about affordability - especially as it relates to Amazon and by extension Philly - is can people make careers in NYC, raise families, afford enough space to do so, have a decent QOL, etc. Affordability isn't just raw access to how many places you can get for $2k/month regardless of quality and condition.

Yep to this 100x. NYC requires a reexamination of basically every other life choice if the first decision in the queue is “i want to live in NYC” since the implication of that decision is perhaps greater than choosing any other location in the country. while the following comparison was not part of the comment that originally started this whole conversation, the cost of living comfortably in NYC is drastically higher than the cost of living luxuriously in Philadelphia if we are looking at somewhat comparable neighborhoods (and i understand such a comparison can be a stretch). It’s even more the case when adding the non-housing needs of a family to the equation - childcare/transit/etc prices pose even more barriers for those looking to have a fam in NYC.