PHILADELPHIA | Highrise Development Thread IX

[allovertown]

Originally Posted by Philly-Drew

I sure hope you're right! I can't help but to feel, "been there, done that." Looking back, we've seen mayoral plans for capping 95 come and go.


I'm not a negadelphi, but a realistadelphian.

Every mayor has had an I95 capping plan. Not every mayor has committed $90 million to an I-95 plan that is already thoroughly researched and at a time when existing caps need to be replaced anyway. This feels different to me.

[hammersklavier]

Originally Posted by mcgrath618

Hm, if the renderings are anything to go by, it seems some towers are planned with this project. If it's still early in design, there's still hope for something of some size. I think it'd be nice to have something more on the waterfront in the 400 ft range, but I'm not sure if that's a realistic desire.

It isn't quite so simple. The Hargreaves Penn's Landing plan is supposed to be a framework for leveraging public investment into private investment. The green spaces are public investments; the "towers" you see mark available space for private investment.

Of course, Penn's Landing has been a money sink for generations. But I am somewhat hopeful that this thing can happen -- complete the caps and release parcels for private development one by one. Master-planned neighborhoods often take a long time to execute (they're still working on Hudson Yards, Mission Bay, DC's Navy Yard, and similar).

[Larry King]

I live in the area and very much like the idea of the Delaware river park.. but that said there are already 3 parks/memorials that cap 95 between pine and chestnut that don't see a ton of foot traffic or recreation. Should keep that in mind when designing, i think the park will need to have a lot of programming like Franklin square to get a critical mass of people.

[pwp]

Originally Posted by Kfmcshan

Read More at Spirit News

Anyone have any other info on this?

Interesting! Which parcel does this refer to: The vacant lot immediately adjacent/south of Penn Treaty or the lot adjacent/north of Sugar House and is currently a warehouse?

I wonder if this is Sugar House's own hotel too? I thought their initial plans placed the hotel to the south of the casino

[Kidphilly]

Originally Posted by Larry King

I live in the area and very much like the idea of the Delaware river park.. but that said there are already 3 parks/memorials that cap 95 between pine and chestnut that don't see a ton of foot traffic or recreation. Should keep that in mind when designing, i think the park will need to have a lot of programming like Franklin square to get a critical mass of people.

or extend the actual neighborhood so there I something to create the connection other then sporadic events. Ultimately the Penns Landing area needs more mixed use so the connection actually has something on both ends

[cafeguy]

Originally Posted by pwp

Interesting! Which parcel does this refer to: The vacant lot immediately adjacent/south of Penn Treaty or the lot adjacent/north of Sugar House and is currently a warehouse?

I wonder if this is Sugar House's own hotel too? I thought their initial plans placed the hotel to the south of the casino

Pretty sure Sugarhouse's hotel is on hold. This hotel is planned for between sugarhouse and penn treaty...but given the hotel that is RIGHT spack dab in the middle of fishtown life (frankford ave and girardish) is still just a big fenced off abandoned building...I can't see how an even larger hotel out there would work. Although... i mean...hotels are built in rural areas, so maybe they think the time is right?

[McBane]

Kenny's capping plan seems rather modest. Only a small portion of 95 and only to support a park atop, not buildings. And given that he's ready to commit $90m, this does feel different.

However, as it has been alluded to, I'm not sure how much more green space the Delaware Riverfront needs. Creating more green space without a massive influx of residents is just going to create more dead zones.

The zoning requires small scale development but face it - there's just not that much demand to live on the waterfront. It's not a cohesive neighborhood yet. So to argue about allowing high rises or not is sort of a moot point. In my view, all of these high rise proposals for the waterfront seem like pipe dreams.

The only realistic project here seems to be Kenny's capping plan.

[summersm343]

Pepsi to lay off 80 to 100, blames soda tax

Time to get rid of the tax? No sense in losing hundreds of jobs over this.

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/Pepsi-announces-80-100-layoffs-blames-soda-tax.html

[br323206]

Originally Posted by summersm343

Pepsi to lay off 80 to 100, blames soda tax

Time to get rid of the tax? No sense in losing hundreds of jobs over this.

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/Pepsi-announces-80-100-layoffs-blames-soda-tax.html

What about the hundreds of jobs created for pre-K teachers and constructions workers?

[summersm343]

Entercom CEO says CBS Radio deal means more local jobs

David Field, CEO of Bala Cynwyd-based Entercom Communications Corp., has suddenly become one of the most important figures in U.S. media after his company agreed to acquire CBS Radio last month for an undisclosed price.

Field, 53, will lead the second-largest radio company in the nation when the deal closes later this year. In an exclusive interview with the Philadelphia Business Journal, Field discussed how the combination will mean more local jobs, where the company might be headquartered, and what the deal means for Philadelphia and the radio industry in general.

What attracted you to the CBS deal?

We think the radio industry is very undervalued and we’ve always coveted CBS and felt it was a perfect fit for our platform. We think we will be able to take the best parts of both companies and create something special.

Why did you think CBS was a perfect fit?

CBS has outstanding brands across the country. They share the passion for local as well. They have great local brands, content, personalities and markets and the cultures are compatible as well.

Some industry insiders have said CBS has a higher percentage of stations with news, talk and sports formats than Entercom. Those stations has more overhead than music stations. How might that affect your infrastructure with the combined company?

We are big believers in the news, sports and talk formats and we are looking forward to combining theirs with ours. We will be home to 45 professional sports teams and many college teams. We have 100 of the top rated sports talk shows in the country. We are going to take the best from both companies. We will also have well over $100 million in digital revenue and 5,000 events ranging from concerts to small scale events and we expect that to increase.

But I don’t see any problems [bringing in those stations]. We have done over two dozen acquisitions, we’ve grown dramatically and they have been seamless transitions. We have a lot of sports stations in cities like New Orleans, Kansas City, Boston... and Buffalo. So we are familiar with that format and with news and talk. And we’re excited about it.

What do you think it will mean to have the second-largest radio company in the U.S. headquartered in the Philadelphia region?

We love Philadelphia as a place to live and work and raise a family. We expect that secret to get out and see more companies located here in the future. And we expect [Entercom] to add jobs to the region.

How many jobs and what type of positions?

I cannot get into specifics but we expect to add a significant number [to our corporate] offices.

Is there are possibility you might relocate the combined company form Bala Cynwyd into Philadelphia?

We will look at all of our options but the headquarters will remain in the Philadelphia region. A decision will be made in the coming months [about exactly where it will be located].

http://www.bizjournals.com/philadelphia/...-field-cbs-radio-deal-hiring-philly.html

[1487]

Originally Posted by summersm343

Pepsi to lay off 80 to 100, blames soda tax

Time to get rid of the tax? No sense in losing hundreds of jobs over this.

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/Pepsi-announces-80-100-layoffs-blames-soda-tax.html

not going to happen. The soda companies are still engaged in PR battle to send a message to the rest of the country and stop future taxes. They could care less about the layoffs.

[Knight Hospitaller]

I think one reason the current park is something of a dead zone is that it's elevated and hemmed in. The renderings suggest a "great lawn" sloping down to the river. More connection and less isolation. That's much more likely to see traffic and be suited to programming that will keep the area active. Think Grant Park in Chicago.

[Milksteak]

Originally Posted by br323206

What about the hundreds of jobs created for pre-K teachers and constructions workers?

Replacing free market jobs with government sponsored jobs is hardly an even trade in my book...and this is not to offend any teachers out there, it just isn't the same thing.

Originally Posted by 1487

not going to happen. The soda companies are still engaged in PR battle to send a message to the rest of the country and stop future taxes. They could care less about the layoffs.

Compassion doesn't play into this, so I agree that they don't care about the layoffs. The point is that a lot of people are losing their jobs from a company that attributes the layoffs to the soda tax...so whoever you want to point the blame towards, the wheels started spinning because this tax led to less profits.

I would be genuinely curious to see if people have stopped drinking soda altogether or if a number of them are going outside the city for their grocery shopping. I'm sure it's a mix, so are any of these jobs going to be re-instated outside of the city?

[tsarstruck]

Originally Posted by Milksteak

Replacing free market jobs with government sponsored jobs is hardly an even trade in my book...and this is not to offend any teachers out there, it just isn't the same thing.

Eyeroll. Yes, let's measure of good to the economy, our society, and our citizens done by pre-school teachers versus that done to those distributing sugar drinks.

[Milksteak]

Originally Posted by tsarstruck

Eyeroll. Yes, let's measure of good to the economy, our society, and our citizens done by pre-school teachers versus that done to those distributing sugar drinks.

That wasn't my point. I think pre-k is a great thing, you have no argument from me there, and if the government has the $$ in their coffers to implement it, even better...but jacking up the price of sugar water under the guise of trying to make people healthier is a ruse, and it clearly resulted in the loss of jobs.

[iheartphilly]

Originally Posted by Milksteak

That wasn't my point. I think pre-k is a great thing, you have no argument from me there, and if the government has the $$ in their coffers to implement it, even better...but jacking up the price of sugar water under the guise of trying to make people healthier is a ruse, and it clearly resulted in the loss of jobs.

Tax and spend, baby!

[1487]

Originally Posted by Milksteak

Replacing free market jobs with government sponsored jobs is hardly an even trade in my book...and this is not to offend any teachers out there, it just isn't the same thing.




Compassion doesn't play into this, so I agree that they don't care about the layoffs. The point is that a lot of people are losing their jobs from a company that attributes the layoffs to the soda tax...so whoever you want to point the blame towards, the wheels started spinning because this tax led to less profits.

I would be genuinely curious to see if people have stopped drinking soda altogether or if a number of them are going outside the city for their grocery shopping. I'm sure it's a mix, so are any of these jobs going to be re-instated outside of the city?

The figures don't make much sense to me. One of the main arguments has been that people will buy soda outside of the city- if that is the case then trucks still have to deliver the same amount of soda, just with a different distribution pattern. Laying off people infers people have abandoned soda and all other bottled drinks that are delivered by these truck drivers. Doesn't add up to me, but perhaps it does to others. Essentially they are claiming that people have given up soda and other soft drinks cold turkey and the demand has vanished overnight. Guess everyone is drinking water and orange juice instead.

[1487]

Originally Posted by Milksteak

That wasn't my point. I think pre-k is a great thing, you have no argument from me there, and if the government has the $$ in their coffers to implement it, even better...but jacking up the price of sugar water under the guise of trying to make people healthier is a ruse, and it clearly resulted in the loss of jobs.

1. It wasn't advertised as a tax to make people healthy- no ruse- he told you exactly what is was for
2. Other jobs were created and will be created once the rec center projects launch- we can't establish there is a net loss in jobs at this point
3. Government gets money in the coffers by taxing so the argument "if they have money they should pay for it but not tax anyone to raise the money" is absurd. Not sure where you think gov revenue comes from

[skyscraper]

There are a great many absurd things here, not the least of which is that taxes like this are used in a way that encourages a certain behavior. But then the revenue generated is used for something else entirely when it should be used, if you are going to do this at all, to combat the problem on a different front. For example, if you want people to stop smoking, you tax tobacco products and then use the money for smoking cessation programs.
In this case, what the government is doing is saying they want people to stop drinking sugary drinks, but instead of using that revenue to fund health insurance or something, they are using it for pre-k education. So what they are saying is that they want either healthy or educated people, but not both.

[Londonee]

Originally Posted by Larry King

I live in the area and very much like the idea of the Delaware river park.. but that said there are already 3 parks/memorials that cap 95 between pine and chestnut that don't see a ton of foot traffic or recreation. Should keep that in mind when designing, i think the park will need to have a lot of programming like Franklin square to get a critical mass of people.

As another poster alluded to Grant Park should be our aspiration here. Agreed on programming. A few things I'd love to see: our own version of the London Eye, a few cafes, a seasonal beer garden, and a performance stage.

Originally Posted by 1487

The figures don't make much sense to me. One of the main arguments has been that people will buy soda outside of the city- if that is the case then trucks still have to deliver the same amount of soda, just with a different distribution pattern. Laying off people infers people have abandoned soda and all other bottled drinks that are delivered by these truck drivers. Doesn't add up to me, but perhaps it does to others. Essentially they are claiming that people have given up soda and other soft drinks cold turkey and the demand has vanished overnight. Guess everyone is drinking water and orange juice instead.

I totally agree, it's a complete PR move on the part of the soda industry. "See, we were forced to lay off 100 people in Philadelphia - so it's a terrible, job-sucking idea, Portland."

Also, the math seems odd. An article just came out that the Soda Tax produced way more revenue than the city was actually expecting. My guess is they looked at average soda sales/month - then reduced it marginally to account for the hit in demand and came up with an expected figure for budgeting and forecast reasons. Since the revenue from the tax far exceeded that figure, my bet is that sales were barely affected.

On personal levels, has this tax really shaped anyone's buying decisions on here? Like, has anyone looked at the $1.89 20oz CocaCola at WaWa and gone...ya know what, since it's now going to be $2.09 I'm going to grab a Dasani instead.