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.
Of course. But there was discussion after the original post which, along with the preponderance of posting on this forum, was the context for my remarks (which you only partially quoted up there).
I lifted this line out of your post because I thought it was the most relevant to the thread topic (my view). Does it impact what I said? I will quote the entire post now:
Quote:
Originally Posted by rotodome
I'll never understand why folks are in such an ardent rush to have places they love change and/or be obliterated by development. Being slow to change is one of my personal favorite aspects of Philadelphia.*
*although in the case of vacant lots I typically make an exception. However, even vacant lots can add a lot to a city. Vacant lots and underutilized spaces are often magnets for creativity. They are largely responsible for the development of the mural arts program in Philly, for example. They are the sites for things like flea markets and other organic forms of urbanism. FDR skatepark came about because skaters reclaimed a space that noone wanted and made it unique and amazing. Commercial development of vacant lots can really kill some of that kind of energy in a city - it's not always a pure win.
I agree with much of what you say - especially the appreciation of Philly's slow pace of change. I came from Houston - a city where developers would put their own mothers out of their homes if they thought there was a buck to be made with a high-rise or strip center in its place. And . . . all of this would be uncritically cheered on by the local eleted officials and the press to boot. As a result, Houston is a hodgepodge of a outstanding and horrible architecture and development side-by-side. The developers don't care - they are off to hunt their next buck. The residents of the city are forced to live with what they built however. I am really appreciate that Philly takes its time and views development as something we all have some investment in once it's completed. If developers were permitted to run willy-nilly Philly, putting up whatever would make them the biggest buck, I can pretty much assure you we would not have re-located here. It wasn't random that we Houston and moved here.
Back to this thread however: Do you see any of the vacant lots being spotlighted in this thread for development as magnets for creativity and/or do you see commercial activity on any of them killing the energy of the city? Not trying to be a smarta$$ 'cause I find you an informative and insightful poster. The lots under discussion include 15th and Chestnut, 8th and Market and other black holes in CC. Just wondering what energy will be killed should we convert such spots into commercial space? My guess is you would see development on such lots as positive, based on your posting history.
Am I being a negadelphian by asking this, however?
Last edited by Pine to Vine; 07-24-2014 at 04:03 PM..
I lifted this line out of your post because I thought it was the most relevant to the thread topic (my view). Does it impact what I said? I will quote the entire post now:
I agree with much of what you say - especially the appreciation of Philly's slow pace of change. I came from Houston - a city where developers would put their own mothers out of their homes if they thought there was a buck to be made with a high-rise or strip center in its place. And . . . all of this would be uncritically cheered on by the local eleted officials and the press to boot. As a result, Houston is a hodgepodge of a outstanding and horrible architecture and development side-by-side. The developers don't care - they are off to hunt their next buck. The residents of the city are forced to live with what they built however. I am really appreciate that Philly takes its time and views development as something we all have some investment in once it's completed. If developers were permitted to run willy-nilly Philly, putting up whatever would make them the biggest buck, I can pretty much assure you we would not have re-located here. It wasn't random that we Houston and moved here.
Back to this thread however: Do you see any of the vacant lots being spotlighted in this thread for development as magnets for creativity and/or do you see commercial activity on any of them killing the energy of the city? Not trying to be a smarta$$ 'cause I find you an informative and insightful poster. The lots under discussion include 15th and Chestnut, 8th and Market and other black holes in CC. Just wondering what energy will be killed should we convert such spots into commercial space? My guess is you would see development on such lots as positive, based on your posting history.
Am I being a negadelphian by asking this, however?
Well, you will have to ask the arbiters of negadelphiology on this forum for the answer to that, but I don't think you are one!
My comment was not to deny that these sites could use redevelopment, as I acknowledged that I usually do think that vacated lots in the city core should be infilled, but more to counter any notion that some urban vacancy is a necessarily negative problem, that must necessarily be solved ASAP by commercial development. So many of the great cultural things that have come out of our cities have been precipitated by undeveloped spaces.
In a roundabout answer to your question: I think that it almost goes without saying that lots like 8th & Market, where the Gimbels building was torn down and never replaced, which is in close visible proximity to the mouth of Convention activity, the basket in which Philadelphia placed SO many eggs in recent years, at great financial and physical cost, is in dire need some intelligent development. What exists on that site now is a mere placeholder that was intended to be filled decades ago - long before the infamous DisneyQuest debacle (which ironically actually improved the site from what was there immediately before).
Or the site of the skyscraper that burned across the street from city hall. A tragic void, and key location in Phladelphia, connecting City Hall & Penn Center to Center City's premier shopping district. Both of these are no-brainer prime opportunities for new great things to be built. Do they have to be skyscrapers, per se? In my opinion, not necessarily. But they are fantastic opportunities for great urban design in the city.
The other side of the coin is instances such as when the old original I.Goldberg building (which was a true Philly institution)at 9th & Chestnut, along with the rest of that entire block was unceremoniously razed not so many years ago so that Jefferson could build a new 5 level parking facility with a splash of new ground level retail, and some extra surface parking to boot. That block is so much more stale, lifeless and forgettable now than before.
Development is not by nature a good thing for anyone except those who directly profit from it. And bad development, once built, is something that everyone is stuck with for a long long time. I don't personally think that development needs cheerleaders. Do I think that Philadelphia absolutely needs more!, more!, more! highrises? Well, actually no, personally I don't - just my opinion but I don't think that developers should be the drivers of urban form. But I especially don't think we need them if they are more terrible poop like, say, the Symphony House that will (dis)grace south broad street for many years to come. I'd rather have a vacant lot, which at least remains an opportunity, than opportunistic bad development, any day.
I am optimistic about the improving level of design in recent in recent years, as well as the fact that there are some legitimate forces driving the need for more real estate right now, which had not necessarily been the case for much of Philly's recent (ie last 30 year) history of highrise building.
A tragic void, and key location in Phladelphia, connecting City Hall & Penn Center to Center City's premier shopping district. Both of these are no-brainer prime opportunities for new great things to be built. Do they have to be skyscrapers, per se? In my opinion, not necessarily. But they are fantastic opportunities for great urban design in the city.
I would love to see more new development in Center City be low-rise (~10 - 12 stories) and more creative. It can be old worldish or futuristic, but either way, I'd love to see it promote pedestrian activity differently than a lot of newer development.
There was a pretty cool article on This Old City about re-purposing alleys:
It would be great to see some development with narrow-ish retail with smaller spaces. Something where you can cut to the next block by walking through a pedestrian walkway rather than having just another traditional tower with street-facing retail on the first floor. Why not carry forward the little streets concept into new development where appropriate. Although I do know $$$ is a big factor.
I fully agree with you and jm02 that it's a great thing that Philly takes its time with development. 10 years from now, the city is going to have a lot of new development that will look truly great.
Honestly, the parking lots I would like to see go are the ones on Market Street: the big one on Market & 8th, or the smaller one on Market & 22nd, for example.
I consider Market Street Philly's "Main Street" and a city of this size and importance should not have parking lots on it's main street. You don't see parking lots on NYC's Fifth Ave. or on Boston's Commonwealth Ave.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJNEOA
There was a pretty cool article on This Old City about re-purposing alleys:
It would be great to see some development with narrow-ish retail with smaller spaces. Something where you can cut to the next block by walking through a pedestrian walkway rather than having just another traditional tower with street-facing retail on the first floor. Why not carry forward the little streets concept into new development where appropriate ...
There are some really great narrow side streets in Center City's Washington Square West neighborhood that could benefit from this type of makeover, such as Camac St. and Quince St. I'm not talking about the pretty stretches with early 19th century townhouse, but rather the more commercial blocks nearer to Walnut and Locust.
Well, you will have to ask the arbiters of negadelphiology on this forum for the answer to that, but I don't think you are one!
My comment was not to deny that these sites could use redevelopment, as I acknowledged that I usually do think that vacated lots in the city core should be infilled, but more to counter any notion that some urban vacancy is a necessarily negative problem, that must necessarily be solved ASAP by commercial development. So many of the great cultural things that have come out of our cities have been precipitated by undeveloped spaces.
In a roundabout answer to your question: I think that it almost goes without saying that lots like 8th & Market, where the Gimbels building was torn down and never replaced, which is in close visible proximity to the mouth of Convention activity, the basket in which Philadelphia placed SO many eggs in recent years, at great financial and physical cost, is in dire need some intelligent development. What exists on that site now is a mere placeholder that was intended to be filled decades ago - long before the infamous DisneyQuest debacle (which ironically actually improved the site from what was there immediately before).
Or the site of the skyscraper that burned across the street from city hall. A tragic void, and key location in Phladelphia, connecting City Hall & Penn Center to Center City's premier shopping district. Both of these are no-brainer prime opportunities for new great things to be built. Do they have to be skyscrapers, per se? In my opinion, not necessarily. But they are fantastic opportunities for great urban design in the city.
The other side of the coin is instances such as when the old original I.Goldberg building (which was a true Philly institution)at 9th & Chestnut, along with the rest of that entire block was unceremoniously razed not so many years ago so that Jefferson could build a new 5 level parking facility with a splash of new ground level retail, and some extra surface parking to boot. That block is so much more stale, lifeless and forgettable now than before.
Development is not by nature a good thing for anyone except those who directly profit from it. And bad development, once built, is something that everyone is stuck with for a long long time. I don't personally think that development needs cheerleaders. Do I think that Philadelphia absolutely needs more!, more!, more! highrises? Well, actually no, personally I don't - just my opinion but I don't think that developers should be the drivers of urban form. But I especially don't think we need them if they are more terrible poop like, say, the Symphony House that will (dis)grace south broad street for many years to come. I'd rather have a vacant lot, which at least remains an opportunity, than opportunistic bad development, any day.
I am optimistic about the improving level of design in recent in recent years, as well as the fact that there are some legitimate forces driving the need for more real estate right now, which had not necessarily been the case for much of Philly's recent (ie last 30 year) history of highrise building.
rotodome - Thanks for taking the time to respond. As I suspected based on reading your posts through the past few years, we are pretty aligned in most of our views around urban development. As for high-rises, I am not against them, but in and of themselves, I don't think they do much to improve a city's QOL. It depends on their function, location, and most importantly to me - how they engage with the street (this goes for low- and mid-rise development, as well, btw). I know I sometimes harp on Houston (a city I actually do like very much), but it offers a nice counterpoint to observations I sometimes have about Philly. While Houston's glistening skyline makes for a nice postcard shot from Buffalo Bayou, the streets themselves give off a soulless vibe and are pretty empty after 6 and on weekends. I see folks in the city-v-city forum bragging about this or that new high-rise going up in their hometown, but a skyline means nothing when it comes to a city's QOL. London, Paris and Rome, for example, don't boast impressive skylines, but I don't think anyone would argue that they rank among the most vibrant cities in the world. I do get a bit more excited when I read about high-rises going up here in Philly however, because they reflect new jobs (office towers), residents (condo/apts) or visitors (hotels), all of which pump needed funds into our city's thirsty coffers. The devil is in the details however - are they going to be developed and built out in way that add to the life of the city or suck life out of the city?
Funny how you mentioned Gimbels. My husband and I struck out on a beautiful day last weekend to explore Old City just to poke around and window shop. On the way back west, we decided to walk down Market for a change, just to check out the old Strawbridge site and try to envision what it might look like once Century 21 opens. I saw Lit Brothers and wondered aloud where the old Gimbels used to be. I speculated it was razed for the Gallery, but even worse - it's where that parking lot is now. One of the reasons I like CD is because of what I learn. I had never heard of DisneyQuest so googled it. Looks like a dogged bullet that it didn't progress any further than it did. On a positive note, further down Market, the tenants in the sad and depressing 1100 block across from Reading Terminal have all vacated, so I see this as a good sign that the new development announced for that block may start moving soon (1100 Market to Be Demolished, New East Market Project Planned). This is a step forward not just for the city, but may provide another sorely needed boost to the Convention Center you mentioned. Now we just need to decide where Eataly goes. The old Kmart site, anyone?
As for the loss of buildings like Gimbels and I Goldberg (and the Boyd Theatre), it is sad. On the positive, Philadelphia has done an amazing job of preserving its history and architecture, along with the soul of the city. A lot of natives focus on what is lost. As an outsider who has lived other places, I see all that has been preserved. I realize that doesn't temper people's sense of loss for those particular spots that are no longer here, but I really feel Philadelphians should not lose site of their impressive record of preservation.
[PS: Yes, it me - jm02. As usual, pls forgive any typos and misspellings - some things never change.]
I have emails from the developer of the W Hotel that I can share with you guys when I get back from my vacation if you guys would like. He never said early in the year. He originally said summer. And then narrowed it down to the month of August. But then project went through a redesign and it set is back a few weeks. Project will break ground by September.
The Waldorf Astoria was killed by the recession. So was the original W Hotel proposal and the majority of major projects across the United States.
You guys need to have a little more patience. These things take a long time. You can't compare Philly to New York City because it's not. NYC is one of the hottest cities for real estate in the world.
There are a ton of major projects happening in Philly right include a new tallest building. Philly is in a better position now to grow and for more to be built than it has been in decades. More projects will break ground. There is A LOT coming down the pipeline. If you don't think a lot of construction is happening in Philly take a stroll over to university city.
Stop being negadelphians.
I laughed out loud, totally, when I read "You guys need to have a little more patience".
The thing is, IMO, we've HAD patience. Years and years of it.
One reason, I believe, that some people are showing less patience is because visible projects ,that are happening now like those in UC, have raised expectations.
And, yes, that would great if you are able to share email from the W Hotel developer.
Also, I don't know why we are getting the "negadelphian" label. I personally want my hometown to thrive. I doubt anyone contributing to this thread feels any differently.
Back to this thread however: Do you see any of the vacant lots being spotlighted in this thread for development as magnets for creativity and/or do you see commercial activity on any of them killing the energy of the city? Not trying to be a smarta$$ 'cause I find you an informative and insightful poster. The lots under discussion include 15th and Chestnut, 8th and Market and other black holes in CC. Just wondering what energy will be killed should we convert such spots into commercial space? My guess is you would see development on such lots as positive, based on your posting history.
Am I being a negadelphian by asking this, however?
Both of those lots were being used commercially before. Years ago.
15th and Chestnut included the One Meridian Bldg plus a set of retail stores.
8th and Market was the site of the Gimbels department store.
If you do a search on phillyhistory.org you can, more than likely, view what was in this spots before.
The issue you raise about appreciating Philly slow growth mentality, I do understand. But it was more like "no growth".
Both of those lots were being used commercially before. Years ago.
15th and Chestnut included the One Meridian Bldg plus a set of retail stores.
8th and Market was the site of the Gimbels department store.
If you do a search on phillyhistory.org you can, more than likely, view what was in this spots before.
The issue you raise about appreciating Philly slow growth mentality, I do understand. But it was more like "no growth".
I guess the thing is, that just building things doesn't create anything more than the illusion of growth.
A lot of skyscrapers were built in Center city when there really was "no" real growth in demand for new commercial real estate. When many of those towers were built, they were done so with a plan to pull their anchor tenants from existing buildings into new tax-abated digs. And then the old (and sometimes not that old) buildings which were no longer commercially viable as a result of no new office tenants to fill the spaces, were converted fully or partially into things like condos and hotels. IMO it's best when things are built to respond to real needs for space. Developers and builders may disagree, of course.
But what's going on recently (nationwide) is that the low mortgage rates, declining crime rates, retiring babyboomers, and changing sensibilities are creating lots new of demand for downtown condominiums. Which is great. And Comcast filling their new building at least in part with new jobs coming from elsewhere is even better. More people living and/or working downtown (whether or not they are retired or commuting to the burbs even) by itself creates a really productive synergy that in turn creates new opportunities for real growth in retail and services. It all bodes well for the city.
I would love to see more new development in Center City be low-rise (~10 - 12 stories) and more creative. It can be old worldish or futuristic, but either way, I'd love to see it promote pedestrian activity differently than a lot of newer development.
There was a pretty cool article on This Old City about re-purposing alleys:
It would be great to see some development with narrow-ish retail with smaller spaces. Something where you can cut to the next block by walking through a pedestrian walkway rather than having just another traditional tower with street-facing retail on the first floor. Why not carry forward the little streets concept into new development where appropriate. Although I do know $$$ is a big factor.
I fully agree with you and jm02 that it's a great thing that Philly takes its time with development. 10 years from now, the city is going to have a lot of new development that will look truly great.
I think that where that sort of thing was done in NoLibs it was pretty successful (though don't know how those businesses are doing).
I remember when Tony Goldman was first buying all of those properties in the vicinity of 13th & Chestnut/Sansom, he spoke of being really excited by the development opportunities presented by some of the narrow alleys around there.
It's great continuance of the Philadelphia tradition of cutting through the major grid with narrow alleys.
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.
