U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Philadelphia
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-29-2018, 06:56 AM
 
Location: Vineland, NJ
8,428 posts, read 10,100,252 times
Reputation: 5281

Advertisements

I guess it wouldn't hurt to have some more but they shoudn't try to make too many colonial style rowhouses in the other sections of the city because Center City neighborhoods like Society Hill and Old City would start to lose its appeal given that people will have more options for colonial style neighborhoods to live in.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-29-2018, 07:53 AM
 
2,532 posts, read 1,176,969 times
Reputation: 1788
Quote:
Originally Posted by selhars View Post
And all of that of course is your opinion which you're entitled too.
But none of what you're talking about is holding and neighborhoods back or has anything to do with people moving there or not.
If people what the kind of exterior esthetic you're talking about there are neighborhoods that have that, where they can get that.

I'm sorry but to me your comments are like me saying the Carolinas should have more "walkable neighborhoods," or wondering why California doesn't have more row houses. Because of how they were founded and developed that's why. Same with Philadelphia. Whatever.
Yes, history of choices a city made. SF has much though in attached housing. I just don't see it as the typical rows here in the east. Mere like homes butted up as built.

Walkable is best in shaded concrete and brick with greens and flowers too IMO. I clearly do know gentrification isn't going to take any suggestions from me.

That is all they were. A WONDERING. But you do see aspects of the this more Colonial look in neighborhoods anyway. But less of whole blocks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by southbound_295 View Post
If someone wants a tree, they cannot jackhammer the sidewalk and plant it in front of their house. Do you understand that?
New trees were planted here. Honestly, gentrification can add many 10s of thousands $ to old rows. They could do trees if desired, required more with new infill in a ordinance maybe if not etc.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9444...7i13312!8i6656

I guess you can choose another area of the city or move , or to the Carolinas then for more trees.
Quote:
Originally Posted by car0401 View Post
I think changing buildings to a Colonial style is too difficult given how most row homes are built. Also the Colonial style is very rare in the city. The buildings op showed in Northern Liberties are actually a mix of Victorian and Federal styles, not Colonial. Focusing on returning buildings to their original Victorian style or something similar to Federal is much more feasible and can look just as good.

Other poster's pointed out that trees would significantly improve the streetscape. Philadelphia has one of the lowest amounts of tree coverage on the east coast and the entire country. Getting more trees planted would significantly beautify the streetscape and would be affordable.

Buildings built after the Victorian era, such as the one mentioned from 1920s, almost never had the aesthetic properties that are associated with Colonial, Federal, and Victorian styles. Post-Victorian buildings probably shouldn't be re-styled because it's pretty much impossible to change them to meet older styles because of their structure and materials.

As long as there isn't a consensus among neighbors to restore or change the style of a block its probably not going to happen. Taking small steps in beautifying a block, such as planting trees, may get more people interested in "upgrading" or restoring the exteriors of their homes. Colonial is certainly a beautiful style but its one of the most expensive, so it would be more feasible to change blocks in ways that already suite the existing structure of the block. Victorian architecture and Federal architecture can be just as beautiful, so restoring a block of those styles may be a more inexpensive way to beautify an area. This is just my opinion and I may be wrong
I understand your point. But plainer rows whether Victorian-age or Federal..... really have little features I'd see as Victorian in common perceptions.

You see a building or home it stand-out true Victorian attributes? You know it. Like you say.... it is a opinion to thought on Colonial not matter how authentic in limited actual looks. Yet you find these plain blocks of rows where you see they could add common exterior aspects to give them that look. You do see some around CC as gentrification is spreading. They are not authentic Colonials.

Block after block more lacking color, trees ... are a blank slate.
Doesn't matter what era or style you call it.

Simple block.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9750...7i13312!8i6656

But in above block. One bold homeowner did this.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9750...7i13312!8i6656

Just Plain Janes to me. Just everywhere.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9779...7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9755...7i13312!8i6656

Here were 3-simple rows that did it. But they used pained brick.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9417...7i13312!8i6656

I get a kick out of opening up to this scene. COULD JUST BE STRIP MALLS IN TEXAS.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9756...7i13312!8i6656

But the homes you go home to are this around it .....

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9747...7i13312!8i6656

But it is aspects of Philly that ARE PHILLY. No one is saying terrible or hating. But it does define the city more then its Northwest side much more suburban.

Ok too long and will get no luv. Just opinions in the end.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2018, 09:36 AM
 
8,481 posts, read 4,604,644 times
Reputation: 2837
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwillyfromphilly View Post
I guess it wouldn't hurt to have some more but they shoudn't try to make too many colonial style rowhouses in the other sections of the city because Center City neighborhoods like Society Hill and Old City would start to lose its appeal given that people will have more options for colonial style neighborhoods to live in.


Why should there EVER be any suggestion of colonialism in neighborhoods where there was none?

And I agree keep the colonial stuff in Old City, Society Hill or very eastern Wash West to 7th or 8th.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2018, 09:47 AM
 
8,481 posts, read 4,604,644 times
Reputation: 2837
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavePa View Post
Yes, history of choices a city made. SF has much though in attached housing. I just don't see it as the typical rows here in the east. Mere like homes butted up as built.

Walkable is best in shaded concrete and brick with greens and flowers too IMO. I clearly do know gentrification isn't going to take any suggestions from me.

That is all they were. A WONDERING. But you do see aspects of the this more Colonial look in neighborhoods anyway. But less of whole blocks.


New trees were planted here. Honestly, gentrification can add many 10s of thousands $ to old rows. They could do trees if desired, required more with new infill in a ordinance maybe if not etc.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9444...7i13312!8i6656

I guess you can choose another area of the city or move , or to the Carolinas then for more trees.

I understand your point. But plainer rows whether Victorian-age or Federal..... really have little features I'd see as Victorian in common perceptions.

You see a building or home it stand-out true Victorian attributes? You know it. Like you say.... it is a opinion to thought on Colonial not matter how authentic in limited actual looks. Yet you find these plain blocks of rows where you see they could add common exterior aspects to give them that look. You do see some around CC as gentrification is spreading. They are not authentic Colonials.

Block after block more lacking color, trees ... are a blank slate.
Doesn't matter what era or style you call it.

Simple block.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9750...7i13312!8i6656

But in above block. One bold homeowner did this.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9750...7i13312!8i6656

Just Plain Janes to me. Just everywhere.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9779...7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9755...7i13312!8i6656

Here were 3-simple rows that did it. But they used pained brick.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9417...7i13312!8i6656

I get a kick out of opening up to this scene. COULD JUST BE STRIP MALLS IN TEXAS.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9756...7i13312!8i6656

But the homes you go home to are this around it .....

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9747...7i13312!8i6656

But it is aspects of Philly that ARE PHILLY. No one is saying terrible or hating. But it does define the city more then its Northwest side much more suburban.

Ok too long and will get no luv. Just opinions in the end.
Dave, for the love of God, you are hating it. You started with comparing our row houses with Chicago bungalows and how inferior row houses are. Now you want to pollute the rest of city with "colonialism" or your view of how it should be.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2018, 11:41 AM
 
6,299 posts, read 6,716,731 times
Reputation: 8763
Quote:
Why should there EVER be any suggestion of colonialism in neighborhoods where there was none?
Exactly.

Houses all over this city have some of the esthetics that have been suggested.
Even in the worst area of some not so nice areas you might see a window box, or a sidewalk tree.
Do more neighborhoods need to look like Old City or Society Hill -- or even Queen Village, Packer Park, or Girard Estates? No. They can have their own "gentrification style."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2018, 02:47 PM
 
313 posts, read 311,746 times
Reputation: 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patmcpsu View Post
The disparity I see on this thread are people simultaneously saying:
  • "I take pride in my house"
  • "I won't improve my house unless somebody else ultimately pays for it (either by subsidies or resale value)"

If the improvement was free, everyone would do it regardless of pride. If you personally can't afford the improvement, that's understandable, but I believe the thread focused-on the richer residents moving-in (on a macro-scale).

In short, if you have the money and the you have the pride, the improvements should be happening. If the improvements aren't happening and you have the money, you must lack the pride.

After further thought, I don't know why I would ever expect the home-flippers to be the ones with pride - they're the only ones who should truly care 100% about dollars-and-cents. The people who should be blamed more than anyone are the yuppies who 1) buy the flipped house without the exterior upgrades and 2) refrain from upgrading the exterior themselves after they buy it.

And finally, the "best house on a bad block" phenomenon should be mentioned. If the entire street has crummy exteriors, and one house gets its exterior upgraded, those improvements will be minimal (less than the cost of the work itself). However, if all the houses upgrade their exteriors, the block suddenly becomes "charming", "up and coming", or whatever other buzz-words realtors use, and the value of all the houses go up substantially (more than the cost of the work itself). This is exactly why the pro-upgraders are focusing on neighborhoods while the anti-upgraders are focusing on individual houses.
But, what was proposed aren't "improvements," they're pointless replacements of, or additions to, perfectly fine structural details that were present at the time of original development. I'm not sure where you are from, but the majority of Philadelphia rowhomes are solid vertical walls of brick. To suggest that, because I literally can't address the basic structure and foundation of my home, that I should raze my steps and railing and replace them with more "aesthetically pleasing" materials is a bit annoying.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2018, 07:02 PM
 
6,299 posts, read 6,716,731 times
Reputation: 8763
^^Exactly what Pennsport said. I think some people were also saying or hinting that exterior esthetics can drive demand, and I don't think that's true except in rare cases, such as a person who just has to have a SF Gingerbread house, or a wrap-around porch. Well, then that person needs to buy where those esthetics are. If you want a twin with a side driveway...you need to buy where those houses are. And it's not most of Phila. Sure, I suppose every home could have different steps, or added window boxes and shutters. But window boxes and shutters, as has been said, are not "improvements." They are decor/style elements.

Quote:
and the value of all the houses go up substantially (more than the cost of the work itself).
What increases value is demand and appreciation over time. (Unless a neighborhood goes downhill altogether., obviously.)

-- Depending on the neighborhood.... you could put window boxes, shutters, sidewalk trees, and new steps on every house for blocks -- and I doubt demand would drive values up. You'd have window boxes and shutters on houses where no one still wants to buy.

-- Most realtors will tell you: you don't even get dollar-for-dollar return on even a kitchen or bathroom remodel. I doubt new steps and shutters will increase value more than the cost of the work (assuming you pay someone market labor rates, which most owners would have to do.) Without time/appreciation no one's paying 25K more for a house next door to another, just because it has a new 25K kitchen.

No one, I don't think, has said that owners absolutely can't make the changes (not improvements) that the OP first suggested. My question has been why would they. And it seems the answer boils down to because the house would "look" better. And even then, that would only be the opinion of people who prefer that "look."

On the VERY rare occasions I drive through parts of north or west Philly and see satellite dishes on houses where windows are boarded or punches are leaning, do I think....uh, "I think I'd fix the porch before I got a satellite dish?" Sure, I think that. But even if that house had a NEW porch...heck every house on that block could have a new porch and a tree in front....and I doubt that would drive up demand as some people have intimated.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2018, 08:37 PM
 
2,532 posts, read 1,176,969 times
Reputation: 1788
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pennsport View Post
But, what was proposed aren't "improvements," they're pointless replacements of, or additions to, perfectly fine structural details that were present at the time of original development. I'm not sure where you are from, but the majority of Philadelphia rowhomes are solid vertical walls of brick. To suggest that, because I literally can't address the basic structure and foundation of my home, that I should raze my steps and railing and replace them with more "aesthetically pleasing" materials is a bit annoying.
No one is saying to alter structural integrity, change original window openings or stonework or the doorway.

I am not the one who spoke of STEPS or raising them. You called the majority of Philly - Sold verticals brick. Not I. But I did say many plain brick walls are a clean slate also. Cosmetic improvements for aesthetics and personal touches are not pointless either. They help in neighborhood vibe and pride.

Yes, once outed as a OUTSIDER. Attitudes Change. But still very interesting post from NON-REGULARS SO FAR. Of course, some HATED SOME AGREEMENT. But it's Philly. I did not mock things or belittle, but GUESS IT MATTERS IF A OUTSIDER and changes everything.

I'm in the in the Susquehanna River Valley near where the two river branches become one. For general location.


But still some opinions on things mentioned.....

This more mention of colonial TRIMMINGS is mostly cosmetic. Heck, FOR MANY DECADES ....

Philly residents added;
- porches
- awnings
- painted brick

No one is griping bout that? But it did add INDIVIDULITY and a PERSONAL touch to otherwise plainer common fronts. But Colonial trimmings.... Merely a thought I always had. Nothing more.

Here multi-color painted brick, awnings and some shutters of individual touches NOT in modern gentrification in Brewerytown.
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9810...7i13312!8i6656

Another in Brewerytown. Must have been a thing here to add COLOR, awnings siding etc. Looks QUAINT .... EUROPEAN EVEN. Just add some greens .... and a village effect.
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9793...7i13312!8i6656

Another
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9798...7i13312!8i6656

More .... sadly seen better days. But love the diversity, individuality. THEY ADD COLOR AND PAINTED BRICK EVEN THRU EUROPE. But somehow lost in Philly more today.
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9773...7i13312!8i6656

ANOTHER PAINTED BRICK. Some looked rehabbed ..... I LIKE THESE PAINTED BRICK ONES. Not Colonial either .... Quaint and bright.
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9761...7i13312!8i6656


3 connected rows here added back shutters and window flower boxes a Colonial touch. Couple others did not.
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9679...7i13312!8i6656

Next block fully gentrified. Looks clean and like new brick again. I'm not saying every back do a Colonial look...... This blocks looks fine to me. Some did flower boxes, some shutters and others neither. Clean like new looking brick again with trees. Looks clean and cared for.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9687...7i13312!8i6656

Later 20th century rows. Color diversity. Cannot Colonialize these LOL.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9760...7i13312!8i6656

BREWERYTOWN IS A MIXED BAG in blight and good parts and rehabbed parts spreading. I'd say it has interesting more diverse architecture to have a interesting future when all renewed again.

Last edited by DavePa; 12-29-2018 at 08:54 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 07:09 AM
 
8,481 posts, read 4,604,644 times
Reputation: 2837
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavePa View Post
No one is saying to alter structural integrity, change original window openings or stonework or the doorway.

I am not the one who spoke of STEPS or raising them. You called the majority of Philly - Sold verticals brick. Not I. But I did say many plain brick walls are a clean slate also. Cosmetic improvements for aesthetics and personal touches are not pointless either. They help in neighborhood vibe and pride.

Yes, once outed as a OUTSIDER. Attitudes Change. But still very interesting post from NON-REGULARS SO FAR. Of course, some HATED SOME AGREEMENT. But it's Philly. I did not mock things or belittle, but GUESS IT MATTERS IF A OUTSIDER and changes everything.

I'm in the in the Susquehanna River Valley near where the two river branches become one. For general location.

[blah, blah, blah deleted]

BREWERYTOWN IS A MIXED BAG in blight and good parts and rehabbed parts spreading. I'd say it has interesting more diverse architecture to have a interesting future when all renewed again.
Question. Since you have probably never put a toe in Brewerytown why do you believe that making remarks about it are relevant from google maps photos?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 08:07 AM
 
Location: Philadelphia/South Jersey area
2,536 posts, read 1,160,463 times
Reputation: 8521
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patmcpsu View Post
Alright, "nobody wants to live there" is a figure of speech that I should have chosen my words more carefully on. I should have said "there is a decreased demand". There would be a greater demand in Philadelphia's neighborhoods if the houses were better-looking. I didn't mean to say that there are zero people moving-into the city, and bless your heart if that was your honest interpretation.

I'm not saying the houses should look "new". I'm saying there would be greater demand for the Philadelphia neighborhoods if the homeowners showed more pride in their home's exteriors. You're saying homeowners decide whatever upgrades they do-or-down't want on their house. We're going to keep talking past each-other forever until you respond to what I'm actually saying.
So who gets to judge "better" looking??

I do get to decide what upgrades I do to my house. It's my house and I bear the cost, I am sure as hell ain't doing it to please someone who "might" be thinking of moving into my neighborhood.

some one mention repointing brick.

this is my house, I had some brick work done this summer, price?? 7500 bucks. now I don't know your financial situation but that ain't sneezing money in my life
Attached Thumbnails
I often wondered why simpler plain row-house blocks ... didn't do more a Colonial makeover in gentrification?-20181230_085319-2-.jpg  
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Philadelphia
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top