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.
That's GREAT news! Personally, I think that all of CC (I would have said Spring Garden to South if you would have asked me before reading your post, but Bainbridge works just fine!) should be zoned CMX-5. This would make it easier for developers to build tall and dense without fighting for height variances. Some people who live in CC have a fear of tall buildings with little to no parking, but seem to forget that they live in the 5th largest city in the US with one of the best public transportation systems in SEPTA.
Also, I agree. A strong N. Broad (at least from City Hall to Temple) will make a stronger Philadelphia. N. Broad has a strong asset: the 4-track Broad Street Line. 5 stops exist between CC and Temple: Race-Vine, Spring Garden, Fairmount, Girard, and Cecil B. Moore. Out of those 5, 3 of them (Race-Vine, Spring Garden, and Girard) offer express service to Walnut-Locust, while the Broad-Ridge Spur offers quick service to 8th and Market from Girard and Fairmount.
The Divine Lorraine and 1300 Fairmount developments will help utilize the Fairmount station to a greater capacity. When it comes to Spring Garden and Girard, there should be TOD credits and CMX-5 zoning. Spring Garden and Girard should allow for some of the densest, tallest development on N. Broad Street. Other than that, the development happening at Broad and Callowhill could potentially utilize Spring Garden station. Also, I don't see how surface parking lots could exist at Broad and Race. There is so much potential where a surface parking lot currently sits.
The parking lot and garage at Broad and Race are used almost exclusively by Hahnemann and, now, probably Family Court.
One issue with higher density in CC is our old infrastructure. Can more/higher buildings be built without more infrastructure investments?
I don't think most CC residents are ignorant of Septa, they just don't, let's be frank, care for some of the people using parts of it.
That's GREAT news! Personally, I think that all of CC (I would have said Spring Garden to South if you would have asked me before reading your post, but Bainbridge works just fine!) should be zoned CMX-5. This would make it easier for developers to build tall and dense without fighting for height variances. Some people who live in CC have a fear of tall buildings with little to no parking, but seem to forget that they live in the 5th largest city in the US with one of the best public transportation systems in SEPTA.
Are you sure you really want this? Do you want developers purchasing SH townhomes, tearing them down and building 40 story buildings in the middle of varous blocks? How about a 25 story condo overlooking Fitler Square?
I lived in Houston, which believe it or not, has no zoning despite being the 4th largest city in the US. I really don't want to see Philly become a city in which developers have the deck stacked in their favor. Slowing down growth so that the city can be deliberate and catch its breath is a good thing.
That's GREAT news! Personally, I think that all of CC (I would have said Spring Garden to South if you would have asked me before reading your post, but Bainbridge works just fine!) should be zoned CMX-5. This would make it easier for developers to build tall and dense without fighting for height variances. Some people who live in CC have a fear of tall buildings with little to no parking, but seem to forget that they live in the 5th largest city in the US with one of the best public transportation systems in SEPTA.
This doesn't quite make sense to me. Adequate parking is a necessary piece of infrastructure. Is your point that the other 4 largest cities have cripplingly inadequate parking, and so Philly should too? Is that a fact?
Many on this forum seem to want Philly to aspire to Manhattanization (ie: Density! Density! Tall Buildings!), but...in addition to having very good public transit, there are TONS of parking lots in Manhattan, both public and private. And even with its density, Manhattan is already easier to park in than present-day Center City. And in Philly, where many more people per capita rely on cars for commuting and reverse-commuting, and parking is already very difficult, deliberately failing to increase parking infrastructure would IMO be a hugely negligent mistake for the well-being of the city. Developers don't care about those things, they care about closing deals and getting $$. But the city and its residents absolutely should care.
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
23,814 posts, read 34,666,340 times
Reputation: 10256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pine to Vine
Are you sure you really want this? Do you want developers purchasing SH townhomes, tearing them down and building 40 story buildings in the middle of varous blocks? How about a 25 story condo overlooking Fitler Square?
I lived in Houston, which believe it or not, has no zoning despite being the 4th largest city in the US. I really don't want to see Philly become a city in which developers have the deck stacked in their favor. Slowing down growth so that the city can be deliberate and catch its breath is a good thing.
I agree. Lax &/or no zoning has allowed builders to do great harm in southern cities & metros. Just because something can be built doesn't always mean that it should be built. Very strict zoning allowed Society Hill to be saved when other cities bulldozed their history. Any structure that didn't have the structural integrity to be rehabbed had to be replaced with something that blended.
Are you sure you really want this? Do you want developers purchasing SH townhomes, tearing them down and building 40 story buildings in the middle of varous blocks? How about a 25 story condo overlooking Fitler Square?
I lived in Houston, which believe it or not, has no zoning despite being the 4th largest city in the US. I really don't want to see Philly become a city in which developers have the deck stacked in their favor. Slowing down growth so that the city can be deliberate and catch its breath is a good thing.
Well, there's going to be one of those tall condos overlooking Independence Hall. And, remember, Phila had very little growth for years. We're trying to catch up.
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
23,814 posts, read 34,666,340 times
Reputation: 10256
Quote:
Originally Posted by rotodome
This doesn't quite make sense to me. Adequate parking is a necessary piece of infrastructure. Is your point that the other 4 largest cities have cripplingly inadequate parking, and so Philly should too? Is that a fact?
Many on this forum seem to want Philly to aspire to Manhattanization (ie: Density! Density! Tall Buildings!), but...in addition to having very good public transit, there are TONS of parking lots in Manhattan, both public and private. And even with its density, Manhattan is already easier to park in than present-day Center City. And in Philly, where many more people per capita rely on cars for commuting and reverse-commuting, and parking is already very difficult, deliberately failing to increase parking infrastructure would IMO be a hugely negligent mistake for the well-being of the city. Developers don't care about those things, they care about closing deals and getting $$. But the city and its residents absolutely should care.
Totally true. Not everyone can live 100% car-free. Too much density can push people out of the city if they need a car & parking becomes a burden. Philadelphians were perfectly happy to not be Manhattan.
Tearing down the old to build tall buildings is not necessarily an asset. Look to the South. You can find plenty of cities that tore down their history to build new & tall & they have little soul. They are anywhere cities. There's a fine line that shouldn't be crossed.
Totally true. Not everyone can live 100% car-free. Too much density can push people out of the city if they need a car & parking becomes a burden. Philadelphians were perfectly happy to not be Manhattan.
Tearing down the old to build tall buildings is not necessarily an asset. Look to the South. You can find plenty of cities that tore down their history to build new & tall & they have little soul. They are anywhere cities. There's a fine line that shouldn't be crossed.
There are places in greater CC that would not require any tear-downs. There are 5 surface parking lots, I can think of, between Arch and Spring Garden on Broad. At least 2 on 13th St at Vine. And much of S. Broad between Bainbridge and Washington Ave is still screaming for development.
Well, there's going to be one of those tall condos overlooking Independence Hall. And, remember, Phila had very little growth for years. We're trying to catch up.
Yes, I'm aware. But Philly has strong zoning and historical preservation ordinances in place than outher cities I've lived in. And those checks and balances have delivered what I consider an appriatively designed building for that vacant lot. Others will no doubt disagree. Regardless, it is not something that slipped in over night based solely on the handshake of a developer and a single, well-connected politician. Instead, smart growth permits the city to consider each new proposal as it arises so that the rest of us aren't left holding the bag when developers have cashed their final checks and moved onto the next block. Lots of "see through" buildings are created in that way: A Way with Words | see-through building
Most of us on the Philly forum (except the occasional troll who surfaces) seem to be very appreciative of the city we live in. I'm not exactly clear on how a faster pace of growth the past few years would have improved our appreciation. If it's a competition, I have no wish to claim title to the "fastest growing city." I'd prefer to live in the "smartest growing city."
Are you sure you really want this? Do you want developers purchasing SH townhomes, tearing them down and building 40 story buildings in the middle of varous blocks? How about a 25 story condo overlooking Fitler Square?
I lived in Houston, which believe it or not, has no zoning despite being the 4th largest city in the US. I really don't want to see Philly become a city in which developers have the deck stacked in their favor. Slowing down growth so that the city can be deliberate and catch its breath is a good thing.
I agree and disagree. Most blocks in CC have a ton of historically designated structures anyway, so its not like a developer could swoop in, level Pine St and building 40 story building. However, I think many people in Center City (older residents) are so scared of growth and I guess "Manhattanization"
A recent example was the former parking lot at 22nd and Walnut, prime space for a 20-40 story highrise in one of the densest parts of the city. The developer presented a plan for a 7 story building (already disappointing) and I believe and was shot down by neighbors for too much height/density and parking concerns, and now we have another 4 story blob being build.
I don't think every part of Center City needs to be tall buildings, but certain corridors and thoroughfares have had so many missed opportunities, due to overly concerned neighbors, poorly planned/designed projects, and the city standing around as these projects either go through or get denied.
1706 Ritt and the Medical Arts Building across the street are great examples of integrating a sleek highise into a developed rowhome block. One Riverside in Fitler is a little to hulking for that location IMO.
We will never be like Houston, thats not a worry I have.
Speaking of North Broad, anyone remember this large project covering the two lots at Broad and Callowhill? Being developed by Parkway Corp. and and Hanover Co. with retail and 339 apartments. The project has a large parking garage regrettably, though it seems to be well wrapped and covered by the building. I guess that's what you can only expect for this part of town though. Still, looks awesome and will add the momentum along that corridor. Can't wait for the Divine Lorraine and the 1300 Fairmount project.
As for the discussion about zoning, I'd say that Philly has plenty of undeveloped/underutilized land and buildings that can absorb a lot of growth before we have to worry about tearing things down. I think the city could revamp the zoning code to allow higher densities on currently undeveloped lots (or parking lots). I also agree that there have been many missed opportunities however due to neighborhood opposition, like at 22nd and Walnut. If you want to live in a major city, you have to deal with highrises and density, and maybe even parking issues. Period. That's what you sign up for. It's equivalent to "coming to the nuisance."
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.
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.
