HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Skyscraper & Highrise Construction


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #241  
Old Posted May 6, 2016, 12:51 AM
eixample eixample is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 439
I am not sure this Kenyatta Johnson bill will fly legally, if challenged. But what are the odds Bart will build this monstrosity or is this whole thing just a bait and switch so he can build something equally unpalatable, but more likely to get tenants and financing?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #242  
Old Posted May 6, 2016, 12:57 AM
Randomguy34's Avatar
Randomguy34 Randomguy34 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Chicago & Philly
Posts: 2,372
I'm expecting a shit storm from both the city council and Blatstein over the next couple of weeks. Make sure to bring your umbrellas everyone
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #243  
Old Posted May 6, 2016, 1:55 AM
summersm343's Avatar
summersm343 summersm343 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 18,367
Kenyatta Johnson continues to prove time after time how much of an idiot he is. There is no way this will get approved in City Council. Purposely holding up a projects construction, creating construction jobs, and creating tax dollars, and more jobs upon the developments completion?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #244  
Old Posted May 6, 2016, 2:10 AM
Cro Burnham's Avatar
Cro Burnham Cro Burnham is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: delco
Posts: 2,396
Can't be bothered by any of this.

Blatstein essentially wants to build a multistory garage here and need variances (rightly) to do so. Pretends he's going to build some adjacent highrises.

Gets shot down by a moronic councilman.

Who cares?

If he had just proposed something reasonable with in the very permissive zoning envelope the site comes with, none of this would have been a problem.

He proposes something offensive and arouses offensive responses.

What's surprising about all this.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #245  
Old Posted May 6, 2016, 2:11 AM
philatonian's Avatar
philatonian philatonian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 596
Ugh, I never liked Blatstein's Monolith and Tiny Town, but this isn't the way to block it.
__________________
Philly Bricks
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #246  
Old Posted May 6, 2016, 11:39 AM
eixample eixample is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 439
Many of these community groups get upset over stupid stuff like density and high rises, but I understand (some of) their complaints here. The high rise seems like it was specifically placed to keep CAPA and the public pool behind it in the shade and the super block will likely have an awful effect on Carpenter. I am sure some are just pissed there is not enough parking, which is ridiculous because there is too much. I hope they appeal but if it was only special exceptions Blatstein needed (the media reports have also mentioned variances but they might just be confusing the two terms) then it is unlikely they will prevail.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #247  
Old Posted May 6, 2016, 1:18 PM
McBane McBane is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 3,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by summersm343 View Post
Kenyatta Johnson continues to prove time after time how much of an idiot he is. There is no way this will get approved in City Council. Purposely holding up a projects construction, creating construction jobs, and creating tax dollars, and more jobs upon the developments completion?
I don't think so. Johnson is using his councilmanic pejorative, that no councilperson is going to upend. Anyone voting against it will be seen as a traitor to a fellow colleague and, more importantly, the longstanding tradition of councilmanic pejorative. Voting against his bill would put the tradition in jeopardy and significantly diminish one of council's most powerful tools. Why would any councilperson want to do that?

If there is a majority in support of Blatstein (and surely he has political connections), Johnson will be pressured in backroom dealings to withdraw the bill to avoid embarrassment and to keep the tradition intact.

Also, how is a one year moratorium going to resolve anything? What incentive does that give either side to compromise and move forward? And how does that help the city's finances? It's just a awful idea and another example of why city council and zoning/development must be kept far away from each other.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #248  
Old Posted May 6, 2016, 1:32 PM
Larry King Larry King is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 976
Either way I'm sure Kenney would veto this
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #249  
Old Posted May 6, 2016, 1:47 PM
McBane McBane is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 3,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry King View Post
Either way I'm sure Kenney would veto this
Again, why would Kenny poison his relationship with council so early into his term and disrupt this longstanding council tradition? Over a (relatively) trivial development matter? While he's trying to get his soda tax passed and needs votes? Kenney witnessed first hand the toxic relationship with council that doomed Nutter. Why would he want to go down that path?

Johnson's bill will be dealt with in private. Not by a floor vote or a veto.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #250  
Old Posted May 6, 2016, 2:13 PM
Insoluble Insoluble is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 655
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cro Burnham View Post
Who cares?

If he had just proposed something reasonable with in the very permissive zoning envelope the site comes with, none of this would have been a problem.

He proposes something offensive and arouses offensive responses.

What's surprising about all this.
There are two separate issues here. I agree with you completely that Blatstein's proposal is a pile of crap and I also hope for an outcome in which he's either required to build something good here or sells the property. But the legislation being proposed is not the way to go about doing that. This legislation sets a horrible precedent and could have a negative impact on development in Philly on the whole. This is exactly the type of thing that zoning code reform was supposed to get rid of. This legislation is essentially giving a council-member the power to completely stop a development he doesn't like. To make matters worse, this is a council-member who has a vested interest in blocking new market-rate developments in his district since that's essentially what he needs to do to maintain power.

Quote:
Originally Posted by McBane View Post
I don't think so. Johnson is using his councilmanic pejorative, that no councilperson is going to upend. Anyone voting against it will be seen as a traitor to a fellow colleague and, more importantly, the longstanding tradition of councilmanic pejorative. Voting against his bill would put the tradition in jeopardy and significantly diminish one of council's most powerful tools. Why would any councilperson want to do that?
I have hope, albeit slight, that some of the new blood on the council might push back. One of our new council members, Allan Domb, was a major developer before joining council after all.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #251  
Old Posted May 6, 2016, 2:42 PM
allovertown allovertown is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Insoluble View Post
There are two separate issues here. I agree with you completely that Blatstein's proposal is a pile of crap and I also hope for an outcome in which he's either required to build something good here or sells the property. But the legislation being proposed is not the way to go about doing that. This legislation sets a horrible precedent and could have a negative impact on development in Philly on the whole. This is exactly the type of thing that zoning code reform was supposed to get rid of. This legislation is essentially giving a council-member the power to completely stop a development he doesn't like. To make matters worse, this is a council-member who has a vested interest in blocking new market-rate developments in his district since that's essentially what he needs to do to maintain power.



I have hope, albeit slight, that some of the new blood on the council might push back. One of our new council members, Allan Domb, was a major developer before joining council after all.
Yea this sets a terrible precedent. Even if a development follows all regulations and receives all necessary approvals, a city councilman could just bar you from building anyway? Just because?

Huge property rights issue and could scare away developers considering building here. The simple solution to this problem is to give the CDR some teeth. The CDR ripped this stupid development to shreds and yet Blatstein moves forward without hardly changing a thing. Design standards should be set and the CDR should have the authority to enforce, if that was the case this project never what have progressed to this point.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #252  
Old Posted May 6, 2016, 4:14 PM
Knight Hospitaller's Avatar
Knight Hospitaller Knight Hospitaller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Greater Philadelphia
Posts: 2,868
Quote:
Originally Posted by summersm343 View Post
Kenyatta Johnson continues to prove time after time how much of an idiot he is. There is no way this will get approved in City Council. Purposely holding up a projects construction, creating construction jobs, and creating tax dollars, and more jobs upon the developments completion?
That and it's nigh unto a bill of attainder. You can't basically declare Blatstein an outlaw because you don't like his crap project.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #253  
Old Posted May 6, 2016, 5:53 PM
Larry King Larry King is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 976
Quote:
Originally Posted by McBane View Post
Again, why would Kenny poison his relationship with council so early into his term and disrupt this longstanding council tradition? Over a (relatively) trivial development matter? While he's trying to get his soda tax passed and needs votes? Kenney witnessed first hand the toxic relationship with council that doomed Nutter. Why would he want to go down that path?

Johnson's bill will be dealt with in private. Not by a floor vote or a veto.
Just a gut feeling, there's a ton of political will behind getting big projects approved and under construction. I personally don't think the Soda tax makes it either way... maybe gets negotiated down but wouldn't be surprised if it's killed outright.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #254  
Old Posted May 6, 2016, 10:47 PM
hammersklavier's Avatar
hammersklavier hammersklavier is offline
Philly -> Osaka -> Tokyo
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The biggest city on earth. Literally
Posts: 5,863
Quote:
Originally Posted by McBane View Post
I don't think so. Johnson is using his councilmanic pejorative, that no councilperson is going to upend. Anyone voting against it will be seen as a traitor to a fellow colleague and, more importantly, the longstanding tradition of councilmanic pejorative. Voting against his bill would put the tradition in jeopardy and significantly diminish one of council's most powerful tools. Why would any councilperson want to do that?

If there is a majority in support of Blatstein (and surely he has political connections), Johnson will be pressured in backroom dealings to withdraw the bill to avoid embarrassment and to keep the tradition intact.

Also, how is a one year moratorium going to resolve anything? What incentive does that give either side to compromise and move forward? And how does that help the city's finances? It's just a awful idea and another example of why city council and zoning/development must be kept far away from each other.
I'm not quite as cynical as you about this yet. It doesn't happen often, but popular backlashes can and do defeat councilmanic prerogative. The trick is that you have to get the media to make the councilman look like an idiot for introducing it, to the point where all the other councilmen look just as foolish if they allow it to go through anyway. See, councilpeople are sensitive about their image (even if not in the same way you or I might be), and they are aware that if they do enough embarrassing stuff they might eventually face a backlash in their own constituencies.

Essentially, the trick is to stick your hand on the optics lever. Politicians are really sensitive to media optics, so much so that it can be used to override councilmanic prerogative.
__________________
Urban Rambles | Hidden City

Who knows but that, on the lower levels, I speak for you?’ (Ralph Ellison, Invisible Man)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #255  
Old Posted May 10, 2016, 6:21 PM
Flyers2001 Flyers2001 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 856
City make its own rules as it goes along. Similar to Sheriff Green creating his own moratorium on Foreclosures several years ago. That office was an utter disgrace.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #256  
Old Posted May 10, 2016, 7:57 PM
City Wide City Wide is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cro Burnham View Post
Can't be bothered by any of this.

Blatstein essentially wants to build a multistory garage here and need variances (rightly) to do so. Pretends he's going to build some adjacent highrises.

Gets shot down by a moronic councilman.

Who cares?

If he had just proposed something reasonable with in the very permissive zoning envelope the site comes with, none of this would have been a problem.

He proposes something offensive and arouses offensive responses.

What's surprising about all this.
I would generally agree with you in thinking Blatstein doesn't either plan on or have the stones to build the whole project in one go, but the high rise part of this project is not what he needs the City's OK to build, so why bother with even showing any thing beyond the big boxes and his roof top village.

The surrounding neighbors might be more approving if the high rise parts weren't part of the plan

Sure some of us in the public get teased by the idea of a big development but I don't think the zoning board of adjustment, or whoever has to sign off on his plans, is going to either agree or disagree with his request based on some drawings showing a tower or two (esp. since its not even a particularly creative or special tower).

So, I really don't know what he is up to. But I certainly don't think the present plans are what we will see built there hopefully in the near term future.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #257  
Old Posted May 11, 2016, 5:11 PM
Kidphilly Kidphilly is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 923
I have heard from a pretty reliable source that this property is now being marketed for sale
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #258  
Old Posted May 11, 2016, 5:30 PM
Knight Hospitaller's Avatar
Knight Hospitaller Knight Hospitaller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Greater Philadelphia
Posts: 2,868
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kidphilly View Post
I have heard from a pretty reliable source that this property is now being marketed for sale
Please God, and let Pearl be the buyer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #259  
Old Posted May 11, 2016, 5:39 PM
boxbot's Avatar
boxbot boxbot is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Delco., Pa.
Posts: 842
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kidphilly View Post
I have heard from a pretty reliable source that this property is now being marketed for sale
Cripes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #260  
Old Posted May 11, 2016, 5:53 PM
Philly Kid Philly Kid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 63
I knew Bart was never serious about building on this site, this is his modus operandi. Buys a parcel of land, gets zoning in place, puts out a stacking diagram of the site, sells land and realizes the gain in value for the site being zoned appropriately.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Skyscraper & Highrise Construction
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:32 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.