PHILADELPHIA | Lowrise/General Developments Thread

[City Wide]

Originally Posted by Larry King

Pretty typical for student neighborhoods, not a high brow clientele

But 3 blocks away from this pile of bankers turds, an old single family house recently sold for $825K, in less then 3 weeks. So people who think of UC as just student housing are wrong, big time. I'll admit building anything of value on Walnut or Chestnut would be a challenge.

[McBane]

Absolutely. Once you cross Locust, it gets very nice, very quickly. But that's Philly for you.

[summersm343]

Addition and Condos For the 2100 Block of Walnut Street?

Developers have their eye on an old brownstone at 2108 Walnut St. and the vacant lot next door which has been used as a surface parking lot for many decades. We actually covered this building at one point a few years ago after a spa moved out of the first floor retail space, wondering when a new business would take over. So far nobody has taken over the space, but zoning notices on the property suggest that bigger plans are in store.

The zoning notices indicate that developers are looking to combine the two lots in question, build a five-story addition above the existing building and construct a nine-story addition on the lot next door. This project went to the Historical Commission last fall because it falls within the Rittenhouse Fitler Residential Historic District, though the building itself has not been designated as historic. As the HC meeting, the developers and architects Cecil Baker + Partners described their plan for a glass box addition at 2108 Walnut St. and a new building next door with stone veneer on the lower floors and glass above. The project, from what we can tell, would entail nine high-end residential units, a single retail space which would stretch across the width of the first floor, and eleven parking spots in the rear.

The project got approval from the Historical Commission, and then it went before CCRA in March. CCRA opposed the project. In addition, it appears that a neighbor has filed an appeal to the Board of Building standards, objecting to the approval of the project by Historic. With all of this on the table, the developers withdrew their application to the ZBA last week. It's unclear exactly what will happen next, we'd guess that the developers will either alter their plans to satisfy the community and/or the appealing neighbor, or they might just abandon the project entirely.

http://www.ocfrealty.com/naked-phill...-walnut-street

[summersm343]

First Center City Target Scheduled to Open on July 20th

Target’s first Center City location has an opening date.

A spokesperson for the retail giant confirmed today to Philadelphia magazine that the Target at 1128 Chestnut Street is scheduled to open on July 20th. Target’s second downtown location, at 1900 Chestnut Street, is projected to open on October 5th.

The store is approximately 19,000 square feet. Per Target’s website, it will feature “apparel, home, health and beauty items, fresh groceries (with grab-and-go offerings), toys, sporting goods and tech.” There will also be an in-store Starbucks and CVS Pharmacy. The 1900 Chestnut location, which will be about 22,000 square feet, will have “apparel, home, tech and beauty items, and fresh groceries.”

Target is also planning a location at 20th and Callowhill, in the current Whole Foods. The supermarket is moving to Rodin Square when that is completed.

The two Center City stores are part of Target’s new “flexible format” stores — smaller than usual stand-alone stores. The company had originally called them CityTarget and TargetExpress before settling on the same branding. The stores will have more items for immediate use — such as grab-and-go food at the Washington Square West/Market East location — than a traditional Target.

Brickstone Co. broke ground on the redevelopment of the 1100 block of Chestnut Street in 2014. The street previously featured a mishmash of electronics and cell phone shops, a Samsun sneaker store and the House of Beauty (now on the 1200 block of Chestnut). Brickstone’s redevelopment, which reveloped the Oppenheim building at the corner of 12th and Chestnut but demolished Louis Kahn’s Coward shoe store, features about 80,000 square feet of retail with 95 luxury apartments above.

Read more at http://www.phillymag.com/property/20...6qEE8kKuYbA.99

[Cro Burnham]

Originally Posted by hammersklavier

While I heartily disagree with your analysis of emergence and planning (to begin with, understanding the city as an emergent entity does not obviate the need to plan),

Not trying to be a smart-ass, but I don't follow what you are saying here.

I was not suggesting that planning is unnecessary in any setting, but exactly the opposite. I was simply pointing out that the folks who say of developers of junk like this "hey, it's their property, they can build what they want" have a valid POV if they want a city that looks like Houston. This is Houston style development: build whatever the fcuk makes the most money right now because no planning requires the builder to do any different. That may work in Houston, but it doesn't work here. Unfortunately, that's what NW University City is devolving into.

[Cro Burnham]

Originally Posted by Larry King

Pretty typical for student neighborhoods, not a high brow clientele

Seems like a pretty cynical mindset. I think - hope - you hold your own projects to a higher standard. Anybody who builds embarrassing junk like this should be strongly considering a new career.

[shadowbat2]

Funny you all are talking about those student housing shitboxes....

I got shots of this gem near 40th and Chestnut:
004 by tehshadowbat, on Flickr

Didn't I read somewhere that the whole block is about to be replaced like this?
005 by tehshadowbat, on Flickr

[Larry King]

Originally Posted by Cro Burnham

Seems like a pretty cynical mindset. I think - hope - you hold your own projects to a higher standard. Anybody who builds embarrassing junk like this should be strongly considering a new career.

I do but you see the same stuff around temple.. Best way to stop may be to historically designate the old brownstones/small apartment buildings in the area tbh

[br323206]

Originally Posted by Cro Burnham

Not trying to be a smart-ass, but I don't follow what you are saying here.

I was not suggesting that planning is unnecessary in any setting, but exactly the opposite. I was simply pointing out that the folks who say of developers of junk like this "hey, it's their property, they can build what they want" have a valid POV if they want a city that looks like Houston. This is Houston style development: build whatever the fcuk makes the most money right now because no planning requires the builder to do any different. That may work in Houston, but it doesn't work here. Unfortunately, that's what NW University City is devolving into.

It's a common trope that Houston doesn't have planning or zoning. That's not really true. They don't have traditional Euclidean zoning with a colorful map depicting uses, but they absolutely have land use controls. They have ordinances that restrict height, bulk, density, and dictate design. They also have restrictive covenants that control use and historic designation. If anything, their regulatory scheme works better than what we have here--where everyone needs a variance so they have to beg at the feet of their district councilperson.

[donoteat]

Originally Posted by shadowbat2

Funny you all are talking about those student housing shitboxes....

I got shots of this gem near 40th and Chestnut:
004 by tehshadowbat, on Flickr

Didn't I read somewhere that the whole block is about to be replaced like this?
005 by tehshadowbat, on Flickr

Yes, one of those is my house. Yes, they want to tear it down and put up a student cube.

A historic nomination was filed though, so we'll find out if they actually can do it June 15...

[Cro Burnham]

Originally Posted by br323206

It's a common trope that Houston doesn't have planning or zoning. That's not really true. They don't have traditional Euclidean zoning with a colorful map depicting uses, but they absolutely have land use controls. They have ordinances that restrict height, bulk, density, and dictate design. They also have restrictive covenants that control use and historic designation. If anything, their regulatory scheme works better than what we have here--where everyone needs a variance so they have to beg at the feet of their district councilperson.

Yeah, I should have been more specific in saying I was talking about 80s boom Houston, when a builder could put up a 40 story building in a neighborhood of ranch houses. Really citing "Houston" as a metaphor for unregulated development gone awry.

Not that anyone (least of all 1487) would be shocked, I am not so up to speed on the latest in Houston planning. But what you are saying is depressing but not surprising: Houston's planning regime is more effective than our own in generating sound development.

Which goes to my point. It is so sad that our personality/politician-driven development approach is so bad, even Houston has figured out how to do it better. One would imagine a city with Philadelphia's deep urban planning and architectural heritage would be at the forefront, yet it is falling further and further behind in terms of facilitating quality urban design. Now, apparently, even Houston is better at it than we are.

Larry King's comment, however offhanded, captures the resignation so many Philadelphian's have about this situation: "well, it's just a student ghetto, we can't expect an better . . . .". Sleazy, visionless entrenched politicians like Jannie Blackwell and Darrell Clarke thrive when citizens feel powerless and resigned to a dismal status quo.

[Cro Burnham]

Originally Posted by donoteat

Yes, one of those is my house. Yes, they want to tear it down and put up a student cube.

A historic nomination was filed though, so we'll find out if they actually can do it June 15...

Thanks, Jannie Blackwell, for your incredible leadership on this issue.

[Cro Burnham]

Originally Posted by Larry King

Best way to stop may be to historically designate the old brownstones/small apartment buildings in the area tbh

That would be at least one way of helping stem this rampant development of garbage.

[donoteat]

Originally Posted by Larry King

I do but you see the same stuff around temple.. Best way to stop may be to historically designate the old brownstones/small apartment buildings in the area tbh

Ain't the good councilwoman vetoed the Spruce Hill/Cedar Park Historic District twice?

EDIT: Ha, University Realty just cut off my water. I guess they're getting serious about trying to kick us out.

[Knight Hospitaller]

Originally Posted by donoteat

Yes, one of those is my house. Yes, they want to tear it down and put up a student cube.

A historic nomination was filed though, so we'll find out if they actually can do it June 15...

Rooting for you. Those are lovely and are the sort of thing that make our city unique.

[Frontst17]

It seems that this shouldn't be painted with such a broad stroke. As much as im against these shoddy developments, it puts people in housing and pedestrians on the streets spending money. Developers are more likely to then to create retail and grocery spaces. These students move out, many into the surrounding neighborhood in existing housing, reducing vacancies and creating value. You see it in Temple and especially I'd say Drexel. This isnt always true but more often than not. Id agree with Larry that making sure these buildings remain and are reused somehow would be best, but putting people on these blocks in paramount.

[donoteat]

Originally Posted by Frontst17

but putting people on these blocks in paramount.

All these houses were fully occupied - mostly by long term tenants...

[Cro Burnham]

Originally Posted by Frontst17

It seems that this shouldn't be painted with such a broad stroke. As much as im against these shoddy developments, it puts people in housing and pedestrians on the streets spending money. Developers are more likely to then to create retail and grocery spaces.

edit

[Cro Burnham]

In other news . . . . Old City happenings:

http://www.philly.com/philly/busines...t_project.html

[Frontst17]

Well again your stating that for this specific example, which i agree with you on, but it not the same across the city. Residents with an eye for pleasant architecture may have a problem but i think this is exactly what other developers look for to get into a market. New development, in a forward moving neighborhood, near young people with money to spend. Again not this particular example, its stupid and ugly and the current buildings are beautiful. I mean you guys hate every new town home or small apartment building that goes up but they serve a purpose other than aesthetics that you seem to be ignoring. Theres a lot of love/hate give/take with these, love the density, hate the look, give an empty lot somewhere, you'll take the density. Just because there isnt a retail or mixed use element, doesnt mean people are going to lock themselves in their apartment, they're part of the neighborhood now, they can walk a block and a half to the store. Its not Houston, instead its sustainable