PENN'S LANDING IS DEAD . . . LONG LIVE PENN'S LANDING - Page 2 - PhillyBlog

Malloy · #11 (**permalink**) 10-18-2004, 11:24 AM

dyuter: thanks for the link.

Jayfar · #12 (**permalink**) 10-18-2004, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyuter

My husband and I are realestate investors and we are constantly reading about the developments in Philly. Here is something we found that I wanted to share with everyone here...

http://www.philadelphiaweekly.com/view.php?id=8261

Be sure to scroll down towards the bottom of the article for the correct story.

I almost like the new Bart, but he really needs to get away from the synthetic stucco. Isn't that the stuff that has given rise to so many lawsuits against Toll Brothers and a four part investigative series in the Boston Globe? [checks google] Well, yes indeed it is, including the very brand of EIFS (Exterior Insulation and Finish System) product cited in the PW article.

http://www.tollbrothersinreview.com/..._2001_may1.htm

I think the synthetic stucco products can be used successfully, but to avoid water seepage and subsequent rotting of wood-framed structures requires adhering to very exacting construction workmanship standards.

But what was the correct story you were pointing out (many of us did read the entire article last week I'm sure)?

Also, just for reference, here's an earlier Blatstein thread, "Blatstein does North Philly":

http://phillyblog.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5312

Professor Dave · #13 (**permalink**) 10-19-2004, 09:34 AM

No one has gotten it right for what needs to be at Penn's Landing. There are so many infrastructure chanllenges that it is my educated opinion that the only viable solution is either a public space or a federally funded facility like a museum or center of some kind to anchor the other side of the city.

Philadelphia will always be a second tier city with regards to international tourism. Until Philadelphia can get some icon that will be recognized throughout the world, then it just won't compete. And, yes, the Liberty Bell is a great icon, but it is not getting the job done.

The absolute worst idea is any sort of gaming, just look at Detroit and you can see why.

SurfDog · #14 (**permalink**) 10-19-2004, 12:35 PM

I know that Alan Greenberger of MGA Partners has talked about a 'crescent' of development stretching from the Camden Waterfront to Fairmount Park and the zoo.

I've posted this in another forum, but think it's worthy of posting again.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bgandersen

There is a great report on the devlopment of Center City:

http://www.mgapartners.com/forum/atwork/

CENTER CITY STRATEGIC PLAN
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Completion 2004

Developed in conjunction with the Center City District and the Philadelphia Convention and Visitors Bureau, the plan recommends concentrating development and filling in the gaps in a large, 'Y' shaped area that forms the heart of visitor destinations in Center City. Supported by a property-by-property analysis of the major streets of the downtown, the report argues that continuity of the urban streetscape is critical to visitors' comfort and willingness to navigate the city on foot.

To read the full text of the report follow the link below:

http://www.mgapartners.com/forum/atwork/PCVB_Report.pdf

Dave · #15 (**permalink**) 10-19-2004, 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Professor Dave

The absolute worst idea is any sort of gaming, just look at Detroit and you can see why.

I agree. You don't even have to go to Detroit, Atlantic City's far enough.

At this point I'm all for just making it a big park. Philly needs more open space, especially on the east side of the city.

chrissayer · #16 (**permalink**) 10-19-2004, 04:39 PM

http://phillyblog.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=57450#57450

The prior thread on this subject. There are others, as well.

chrissayer · #17 (**permalink**) 02-25-2005, 07:13 PM

Penns Landing development process was being used (abused) as a campaign conduit to extort money into campaigns.

Inga's column is must reading:

Quote:

Changing Skyline | Waterfront needs policy, not politics

By Inga Saffron
Inquirer Architecture Critic

This time, Mayor Street told Philadelphians, the city was going to do Penn's Landing right. This time, the city was going to select a waterfront developer through an open, deliberative, professional process - not by mayoral fiat or a backroom deal. This time, policy was going to trump politics.

What dopes - we convinced ourselves it was true.

Throughout the long developer competition that began in December 2002 and ended in October 2004 with the thud of no decision, Philadelphians threw themselves into the debate over the Delaware waterfront's future with a civic vigor that surprised hardened pols. Hundreds of people came out for evening meetings. They detailed their ideas in passionate e-mails on a city-sponsored Web site. Architects and planners sketched waterfront scenarios late into the night. Inspired by the public's enthusiasm, some developers spent six figures on full-scale color proposals.

But thanks to the wiretap transcripts released last week in the federal corruption probe, we can no longer ignore the obvious: We were all scammed.

The public, the participants and, yes, even the developers. And let's not forget the city employees who worked on waterfront development. They, too, were scammed.

Based on conversations recorded by the FBI, the Penn's Landing competition appears to have been nothing more than a big-time heist pulled off in broad daylight. The process was apparently drawn out to extract campaign contributions from the hopeful developers. The legacy of that sham stares us in the face every time we pass by the forlorn Delaware River parking lot at the foot of Market Street, a spot that should be Philadelphia's pride.

The transcripts - which come from a conversation between Leonard Ross, head of Mayor Street's Penn's Landing developer-selection committee, and Ronald A. White, an important Street campaign fund-raiser - suggest the so-called competition was used to generate contributions in advance of the November 2003 mayoral election. The original group of nine developers was slowly winnowed to seven, then four, and finally two in what must be the longest selection process in municipal history - 22 months.

"I wanna make sure all these other guys [developer candidates]... are gonna come to a few of our fund-raisers... " Ross explained in a taped conversation on April 1, 2003. "If we eliminate them too soon, then we don't get their... "

Ross didn't finish, but it's a good guess that the next word was going to be money.

"Right," White interrupted. "Yeah, I got you. Yeah."

It's not like we don't know how sausage gets made. But watching the grinder with our own eyes still isn't pretty.

Not only does the competition appear to have been purposely protracted, but also the transcript raises the possibility that one developer had an inside track.

Bart Blatstein "was gonna be OK," Ross told White, who was also a member of Blatstein's Penn's Landing development team. That suggests the head of the selection committee had made a decision about the developer's role at the waterfront even before the competition was off the ground.

This week, Blatstein said he knew nothing about this conversation: "It's news to me."

Ross isn't a mere nobody who happened to gum up the works. He and Street practiced law together for eight years before the mayor's election in 2000. Street appointed Ross to the board of Penn's Landing Corp. and then to the developer-selection committee. Despite the suggestion of impropriety in the FBI transcripts, first reported in The Inquirer last week, there has been no call for Ross to resign from the Penn's Landing Corp. board.

Street has often reminded us that he was the first city leader in three decades to include the public in a discussion about the waterfront's future. But what good is a seat at the table when the conversation is taking place in another room?

From the start, many people - including this writer - suspected the Penn's Landing competition was a charade. For reasons that were never adequately explained, Street refused to prepare a city plan for Penn's Landing before launching the competition. Even though the nation's largest retail developer, Simon Property Group, had failed to realize a major project at Penn's Landing in 2002, Street rushed to find a replacement. He insisted there was no reason to conduct a planning postmortem on the problematic, 13-acre site.

Yet Simon's exit was no fluke: It was the sixth major developer to abandon Penn's Landing since 1973.

During the same period, other American cities were conducting painstaking development studies and improving infrastructure along their waterfronts. Now even small cities from Yonkers to Tacoma are able to offer their residents pleasant walking paths, cultural amenities, housing and cafes along the water's edge. The heart of Penn's Landing remains a crumbled expanse of asphalt.

That's not Street's fault, but his aversion to planning has set waterfront development back years.

We don't know the extent, if any, of Street's involvement with Ross and White in this case. Street has said he has done nothing wrong, and federal investigators have said repeatedly that the mayor is not likely to be charged with any illegality.

But you don't have to commit a crime to govern badly. It is pretty clear that the kind of pay-to-play culture that exists in Philadelphia has discouraged serious policy-making and planning. The problem with planning is that it hems politicians in and inhibits them from the kind of shoot-from-the-hip Penn's Landing deal that former Mayor Ed Rendell did with Simon. If Street had agreed to a master plan for Penn's Landing, it would have been harder to use it as a political poker chip.

The federal corruption investigation will continue for a long time, and so will the fallout on the waterfront. And the stakes are bigger than just Penn's Landing. Private developers have been busy divvying up the 18-mile-long Delaware waterfront for everything from 1,000-unit townhouse developments to gated apartment complexes to sprawling casinos.

The Street administration points to these projects as success stories. But unless the city comes up with a waterfront policy that protects public access to the river, the average Philadelphian isn't going to benefit much from these isolated building projects. Without a plan, Philadelphians risk losing the right to bike and stroll along the lush green edge of their historic riverfront.

Prepare to be scammed again.

http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/10985372.htm

wilreynolds · #18 (**permalink**) 02-25-2005, 07:22 PM

ouch, I feel like a fool. This probe will probably uncover all kids of crap. Not to say that what happened here isn't how politics is done all over, but manyof us read about this attended meetings, etc, and basically wasted our time. I can only imagine how the developers feel.

chrissayer · #19 (**permalink**) 02-25-2005, 07:28 PM

Sorry Wil. I have no sympathy for the developers. They knew what they were doing and they tried to buy the development (or at least their access). That they may have been facing a stacked deck is another question.

But I'll shed nary a tear for them.

And maybe Blatstein will go to jail, as well. Oh, he didn't know anything about the money. Huh, he hired Ron White to be part of his development package.

On the good side, check out the piece on Zack Stallberg taking over at Committee of 70. Maybe there will be hope!

http://phillyblog.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=94820#94820

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Old City Development Projects	chrissayer	Old City/Society Hill	114	01-27-2007 12:11 PM
Penns Landing on Hold Again	chrissayer	Old City/Society Hill	39	07-29-2005 03:39 PM
Penns Landing	Concerned	Old City/Society Hill	1	01-07-2005 02:10 PM
Penn's Landing redevelopment	JenniferKronstain	Old City/Society Hill	63	11-29-2004 01:15 PM
Penns Landing, the neglected part of the rivers	Resident12	Center City	7	07-22-2004 10:29 AM