PhillyBlog - Philadelphia  

Go Back   PhillyBlog - Philadelphia > Where We Are > The Burbs
Blogs Map Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read
Google
 
Web www.phillyblog.com

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 11-16-2004, 09:27 AM
Brian P Brian P is offline
Water Ice Vendor
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Montco.
Posts: 907
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eldondre
actually, they do the opposite. o'neill's proposal in great valley almost didn;t get approval b/c they felt that 700 units was too urban. they wanted 500, compromised on 600 "too urban" nobody friggin lives there! to urban for what? for us to see on our drive home? some planners have their heads firmly planted between their buttocks.
I think it's usually at the county and state level that these dense projects have their most support. People at the county level can see how much land is being wasted by McMansions on one acre lots, and as a way to slow the speed that land is being wasted, they look for high-density projects to support. Of course the people in the townships often don't support these big projects. I can see their point about schools. They don't want another 200 kids in their over-burdened schools. I can see that point, but like you say, what's the difference between 500 or 600 units, especially when there's nothing but highway and office parks there to begin with?
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 11-16-2004, 10:14 AM
chrissayer chrissayer is offline
Cheesesteak GURU! Wiz with
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Overbrook Farms
Posts: 8,542
Default

One of the problems with the township regulations (in many, if not most of our suburban townships) is their rules on density per acre.

Some time ago, an enlightened developer in Delaware or Chester Counties sought to to build a really decent community, with single family (small plot) homes, two-families, a few low-rise apartments, etc. The population density would have been the same as if he had put people on one-acre plots, but most of the land was set aside for public use (running.walking trails, playgrounds, green space, etc.

While most people agreed that this was a terrific project, it was voted down because township zoning regulations required each house to be built on a proscribed amount of land - an acre, acre and a quarter, or something.

Very stupid.
__________________
“Cities have the capability of providing something for everybody, only because, and only when, they are created by everybody.” - Jane Jacobs
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 11-16-2004, 11:34 AM
Brian P Brian P is offline
Water Ice Vendor
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Montco.
Posts: 907
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrissayer
Very stupid.
Very stupid indeed. For whatever reason, planned communities are not well received in PA. Which is kind of funny, considering other regions of this country are trying to build, from scratch, towns that are very much like the ones we already have (Ambler, Glenside, Ardmore, New Hope, etc).
Reply With Quote

Advertisement

   
     
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 11-16-2004, 11:34 AM
Brian P Brian P is offline
Water Ice Vendor
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Montco.
Posts: 907
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrissayer
Very stupid.
Very stupid indeed. For whatever reason, planned communities are not well received in PA. Which is kind of funny, considering other regions of this country are trying to build, from scratch, suburban towns that are very much like the ones we already have (Ambler, Glenside, Ardmore, New Hope, etc).
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 11-16-2004, 07:05 PM
eldondre's Avatar
eldondre eldondre is offline
El Destructor II
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: 11th& Sansom
Posts: 22,517
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian P
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrissayer
Very stupid.
Very stupid indeed. For whatever reason, planned communities are not well received in PA. Which is kind of funny, considering other regions of this country are trying to build, from scratch, towns that are very much like the ones we already have (Ambler, Glenside, Ardmore, New Hope, etc).
well, after visiting levittown and chesterbrook I have an aversion to them as well. and the concerns about schools are probably overhyped since the likely tenants will be younger folk whin the nearby corp ctr. not to mention the schools are extremely well funded.
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 11-18-2004, 10:32 AM
gap27's Avatar
gap27 gap27 is offline
Resident Optimist
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Powelton Village
Posts: 1,109
Default

Ick, after looking at the renderings of those high rise buildings, my head hurts. Seriously, that stuff is bad architecture no matter how you look at it. I hope for Conshy's sake that they do not get built as proposed and that someone prevents a suburban disaster from occuring. The top photo is the one that really bothers me. Look how out of place and disrespectful they are to the surroundings. Plus, they are all identical, just rotated at different degrees. The whole thing just doesn't relate at all to the site or the river.

So what you are looking at is a way to make a quick buck, and an architectural monstrosity in 20 years.
__________________
- George -

http://www.nutter2007.com
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 11-18-2004, 10:58 AM
Dave's Avatar
Dave Dave is offline
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxy
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: <-- over there
Posts: 10,071
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gap27
Ick, after looking at the renderings of those high rise buildings, my head hurts.
Looks like a random large city in an Andean nation in South America. With some Montgomery Co, MD thrown in for good measure (the lower-down picture)

Actually this is the kind of thing I wish they'd built in West Poplar (preferably on top of those fugly strip malls along Broad, with retail on the ground floor). Can you imagine the ridership increase on the BSL? Only problem is I suspect the job market in Philly wouldn't support that kind of development. Building something like this in Conshy's just going to cause more of a traffic nightmare on the schuylkill.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gap27
So what you are looking at is a way to make a quick buck, and an architectural monstrosity in 20 years.
Unfortunately, that seem to be all anyone is trying to do in Philly as far as real estate nowdays. We need some developers that really care about the area.
__________________
Your representatives on Philadelphia's City Council are at odds with our new mayor over whether many reforms he has proposed should become law. Please write to them and tell them what your priorities are.

Indict State Senator Vince Fumo into The Crooked Pol Hall of Fame.
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 11-18-2004, 03:50 PM
chrissayer chrissayer is offline
Cheesesteak GURU! Wiz with
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Overbrook Farms
Posts: 8,542
Default

Dave begeth:

Quote:
We need some developers that really care about the area
An oxymoron if I ever heard one.
__________________
“Cities have the capability of providing something for everybody, only because, and only when, they are created by everybody.” - Jane Jacobs
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ambler and Conshy Developments emckelvy The Burbs 56 09-09-2006 11:48 PM
Conshohocken area ohiotophilly Ask a PhillyFriend 11 03-20-2004 11:19 PM
Help us find a Neighborhood Please~ tgirl General Discussion 43 03-11-2004 11:00 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.