Trump Tower is actively advertising on Philly.com with the original design, including what looks like a four story parking podium that meets the street with little to no activity.

The Praxis plan calls for pedestrian oriented design, with parking that does not interfere with the landscape. Clearly, Trump's current design does not fit that description.

My question is, what is going to happen with a project like this, where the developer is actively selling based on a design that does not fit the plan- because he was given the go by council to do so- and you have an angry mob of 10,000 people who don't want the waterfront to be a series of endless parking podiums and have the force of the mayor behind them saying they are a bad idea?

It was exactly this kind of issue that was not really addressed at the Praxis action plan forum last week. Matt Ruben from Northern Liberties Neighborhood Assoc seemed to hint at the remaining problems with these kinds of developments, and asked what support the city would provide the neighborhoods in these battles, given all the words of good faith. The answer he seemed to get from Altman & Dicicco is that from now on, the planners are in charge, and the community should just relax.

While it may be true at some point in the future when the zoning overlay is complete, and other praxis recommendations are actually implemented as policy, that the planners will be in charge. But in the mean time, there is a lot of bad design left over from the Street years that is legally cleared, and seems to be in process.

Clearly there are projects already being developed that do not fit the plan and there really is nothing to be done at this point- I'm thinking primarily here of waterfront square- But I can't believe that there is not some control that the city can exercise to get better design on a 45 story tower that has not yet broken ground.

With casinos- Praxis and the mayor are taking a strong-armed approach against bad design- essentially saying that these things will not get built as is. What makes the trump tower any different??

Thoughts?

Hasn't Trump Tower already been approved? Meaning, just like Waterfront Square it won't be subject to whatever new ordinances come out of these recent talks.

Besides, I kind of think Trump is advertising just to see what, if any, interest there still is out there for his building.

__________________
The idealistic are no longer concerned with influencing public opinion and creating a free world of responsible and ethical social choices, but rather imposing opinion through legislation, mandating these ethics, and outlawing choice in what the loudest sample finds offensive.

Ban the Bans. It's a slippery slope between Idealism and Fascism.

Yes, Trump is already approved, and yes, currently there is nothing stopping them with going ahead with the design.

The point I was trying to make is- why? What can be done? Since we all spent 2+ years coming to an agreement that this type of development is bad design, the mayor has said it, Dicicco says it- and it hasnt been built yet.

I realize that Trump in all likelyhood will not drum up enough sales on this project to break ground for years, given the current market, and that is why I am saying we should have some system in place for bringing projects like his, that were already greenlighted by council, up to date with what are now the agreed upon standards. There is time to do this- its not like he is in some rush with the project.

In all thought about this- I'm not sure why Dicicco had to give Trump permission to build in the first place. Now I wanna know what he is gonna do about this little problem he created.

You can't retroactively enforce new laws on projects that have already passed approval. I don't think it's a matter of finding a way to continually scruitinize projects that have been greenlighted. If you do that you open up a whole can of worms and ultimately nothing will ever get built. We just need to make sure that in the future, we approve the best possible plans and professional attention has been paid to the design. Unfortunately Trump Tower was approved when the planning process was a speedy, who-you-know, pay-to-play game. It's how Waterfront Square got built. Fortunately all signs are pointing to a better waterfront. And luckily for the river, Trump's tower-o-suburbia probably won't happen, and if it's ever resurrected will do so long after his approval has expired.

__________________
The idealistic are no longer concerned with influencing public opinion and creating a free world of responsible and ethical social choices, but rather imposing opinion through legislation, mandating these ethics, and outlawing choice in what the loudest sample finds offensive.

Ban the Bans. It's a slippery slope between Idealism and Fascism.

Something can be always be done or at least encouraged by leadership(which in my opinion is a matter of political will, given the special circumstance of the waterfront, and not ability) to change past mistakes.

Regardless, I was under the impression that council rezoning approval for large projects prior to the recent project in society hill, did not have expirations on their approval, essentially allowing developers to sit on their designs as long as they want, change design virtually at will, or sell the land off to another developer for a higher price after the approval was granted.

If you do happen to know of the expiration for Trump Towers rezoning- please post it. I tried searching myself to no avail.

And while we are at it. What other project have already been approved: Brigman's View, others?

I really like your well-reasoned arguments. There's no way of rating people's comments on here unlike some other forums so I just wanted to comment positively about it.

__________________
New term of the day 1/24:
Electile Dysfunction: The inability to become aroused over any of the choices for President put forth by either of only parties in the 2008 election year.
http://www.votenader.org/index.html


5/22, because i'm feeling punny:
As the great Jedi English teacher was quoted in saying, "metaphors be with you."

The problem is that all the ideals that drive praxis are fundamentally opposite to the things casinos bring

Late breaking news on that front from a 9pm Thursday news conference. In the video, Fumo says Rendell is now on board as well.

http://www.planphilly.com/node/3467

__________________
Cheers,
Jayfar
--
“I am indeed well aware of the history of Conventional (sic) Hall, both globally and locally, and can assure you that we are carefully exploring avenues for its future.” -- Penn President Amy Gutmann 5 days before demolition began.

My understanding is construction on the initial waterfront bike/running trail will start in 3 months or so. I am eager to buy a trailer for my bike to take my son biking over there.

I looked at that slide presentation for this "interim" trail. I wonder what they'll do to make it more finished or "final." The Schuylkill Banks trail works because it's so separated from the traffic and provides a sense of calm. This one...I don't know. You have to cross a major interstate highway just to get to it, and then what? You're riding along on bikes or walking or jogging just as multi-lane traffic wizzes on by on the Columbus Blvd?


Meanwhile, I'm surprised nobody is talking about the coup that Rendell engineered regarding dredging the Delaware. A giant middle finger to New Joisy for stalling it for the past 15 years! hehe Hopefully that project moves ahead. That also means the Delaware's continued and perhaps increased industrial use, by even larger ships. And that's in the face of all this new residential-focused development planned for the river.

How you keep the two goals together is going to be important. That's why I liked what CityMaps had to say about the casinos perhaps being able to serve as buffer zones between the industrial parts of the river and the more residential parts...the current sites for the casinos could be like book-ends, allowing the central riverfront to be much more residential.

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/busin...ging_deal.html

Corzine decries Delaware River dredging deal

By Henry J. Holcomb
Inquirer Staff Writer
Gov. Corzine threatened yesterday to delay the Delaware River ship channel deepening project, saying the deal signed Monday violated his 2007 peace treaty with Gov. Rendell. On Monday, port officials said the $379 million dredging project could begin within 10 months.

__________________
New term of the day 1/24:
Electile Dysfunction: The inability to become aroused over any of the choices for President put forth by either of only parties in the 2008 election year.
http://www.votenader.org/index.html


5/22, because i'm feeling punny:
As the great Jedi English teacher was quoted in saying, "metaphors be with you."