Philadelphia 2035 (Harrisburg, Republic, Houston: housing projects, charges, lowest)

[rotodome]

Originally Posted by RightonWalnut

Where do you see parking? There is no parking at all involved in his project.

just a crappy rendering then, I guess

[AJNEOA]

Originally Posted by cpomp

Office, residential tower to rise at Marketplace Design Center site

Great that this barren stretch is being developed, but I personally am not a fan at of this rendering. Too short and blocky, looks similar to the ugly municipal services building.

Why can't we just build tall and sleek...

I have to imagine we're getting very close to a saturation for residential and retail with all the projects listed ahead of this one. If I could trade one tall skyscraper on a vacant lot for four separate projects of medium/low height on four separate vacant lots, I'd take that all day. Street vibrancy and cohesiveness over skyline all day. And I wish that this project would be at 8th and Market over this lot TBH.

Unless this city grows in jobs, these projects will start to bubble.

[cpomp]

Originally Posted by AJNEOA

I have to imagine we're getting very close to a saturation for residential and retail with all the projects listed ahead of this one. If I could trade one tall skyscraper on a vacant lot for four separate projects of medium/low height on four separate vacant lots, I'd take that all day. Street vibrancy and cohesiveness over skyline all day. And I wish that this project would be at 8th and Market over this lot TBH.

Unless this city grows in jobs, these projects will start to bubble.

I am worried about saturation too, there are over a dozen huge projects either in the works or ready to begin this year.

However, I disagree about the choosing 4 over 1. Philadelphia is a world class city and deserves world class projects. This rendering is another blob shoe-box tower, adds absolutely nothing but bad design to the city. Reminds me of all the tragic buildings found in Penn Center.

I am not always pro height, for example 205 Race a midrise apartment tower in old city is one the finest new buildings to hit the market in decades, will stand at 197'.

But I'll take 1 Murano or St James and parking lots over 10 1900 Arch St projects and no parking lots any day.

[kyb01]

Originally Posted by cpomp

I am worried about saturation too, there are over a dozen huge projects either in the works or ready to begin this year.

However, I disagree about the choosing 4 over 1. Philadelphia is a world class city and deserves world class projects. This rendering is another blob shoe-box tower, adds absolutely nothing but bad design to the city. Reminds me of all the tragic buildings found in Penn Center.

I am not always pro height, for example 205 Race a midrise apartment tower in old city is one the finest new buildings to hit the market in decades, will stand at 197'.

But I'll take 1 Murano or St James and parking lots over 10 1900 Arch St projects and no parking lots any day.

Those tragic buildings replaced the "Chinese Wall" which was, decidedly, more tragic. But I do agree with you.

[Pine to Vine]

Originally Posted by cpomp

I am worried about saturation too, there are over a dozen huge projects either in the works or ready to begin this year.

I with you guys. An article in the Inquirer reports this concern, as well: New housing projects may lead to oversupply, study says. I lived in Houston in the 1980s and am very wary of this proliferation of projects. Several years of commercial and residential real estate supply sat vacant for years in Houston in those years and foreclosures were rampant. It was ugly.

I'd like to think that developers and bankers here are playing the long game and aren't out for the quick buck. Fingers crossed?

[AJNEOA]

Originally Posted by cpomp

I am worried about saturation too, there are over a dozen huge projects either in the works or ready to begin this year.

However, I disagree about the choosing 4 over 1. Philadelphia is a world class city and deserves world class projects. This rendering is another blob shoe-box tower, adds absolutely nothing but bad design to the city. Reminds me of all the tragic buildings found in Penn Center.

I am not always pro height, for example 205 Race a midrise apartment tower in old city is one the finest new buildings to hit the market in decades, will stand at 197'.

But I'll take 1 Murano or St James and parking lots over 10 1900 Arch St projects and no parking lots any day.

I'm not suggesting that we build low and mid rise bland buildings. Some of the best architecture in the world is lower rise construction. I just feel Americans get too caught up in height. In terms of quality architecture, the culture of America and making the largest profit possible is more the crux than anything. Making a statement is less of a priority here unfortunately.

[rotodome]

Originally Posted by Pine to Vine

I'd like to think that developers and bankers here are playing the long game and aren't out for the quick buck. Fingers crossed?

I highly doubt this.
All the residential development is the same pattern happening in every city lately, as it's the quickest path to a buck in the current market. I just read about a proposal for a supertall skyscraper in Brooklyn right now that's all residential and rental.

[Duderino]

Originally Posted by rotodome

I highly doubt this.
All the residential development is the same pattern happening in every city lately, as it's the quickest path to a buck in the current market. I just read about a proposal for a supertall skyscraper in Brooklyn right now that's all residential and rental.

Yes, the rental market is definitely the most robust right now for developers, but, overall, I don't really think it's a "quick buck" scheme (although I'm sure there are exceptions).

The fact of the matter is the cost of homeownership is just out of reach for many people, as acquiring the amount of money for a down payment is basically a pipe dream for young, otherwise first-time home-buyers. This is particularly true in the most expensive cities.

I also think there's a bit of a societal shift going on in that more people just don't think owning a home is worth the time and investment (the idea of taking care of a home/property is definitely daunting to many people).

Not to mention, you have a confluence of relatively cash-poor Millennials and a large cadre of baby boomers who continue to want to downsize and give up the need to maintain their empty nests, and a more mobile society in general that doesn't necessarily want to be locked into buying a home.

All of these are major factors driving that will continue to drive and grow the rental market, but even if trends change, many of these new developnents can easily be converted to owner-occupied units. The one thing about housing is that there is always going to be a demand for it.

[Pine to Vine]

Originally Posted by rotodome

I highly doubt this.
All the residential development is the same pattern happening in every city lately, as it's the quickest path to a buck in the current market. I just read about a proposal for a supertall skyscraper in Brooklyn right now that's all residential and rental.

Yes - I was being optimistic. I'm not sure I've recall a case of cautious restraint by developers and bankers.

I hope Duderino is right in his assessment of the housing market in the post above. Actually, the good news is that an over-build in the apartment supply will/may not impact the homeowing portion of the housing market. Lower rents could actually be good for the city. Potential apartment residents who are priced out of today's market due to high rents would find opportunity if rents were more affordable due to competition. And anyone who lives in the city will be paying wage tax. We all know the city needs as much cash as it can get its hands on.

I guess since these projects all seem a "go," we'll find out in a few years.

[rotodome]

Originally Posted by Duderino

Yes, the rental market is definitely the most robust right now for developers, but, overall, I don't really think it's a "quick buck" scheme (although I'm sure there are exceptions).

The fact of the matter is the cost of homeownership is just out of reach for many people, as acquiring the amount of money for a down payment is basically a pipe dream for young, otherwise first-time home-buyers. This is particularly true in the most expensive cities.

I also think there's a bit of a societal shift going on in that more people just don't think owning a home is worth the time and investment (the idea of taking care of a home/property is definitely daunting to many people).

Not to mention, you have a confluence of relatively cash-poor Millennials and a large cadre of baby boomers who continue to want to downsize and give up the need to maintain their empty nests, and a more mobile society in general that doesn't necessarily want to be locked into buying a home.

All of these are major factors driving that will continue to drive and grow the rental market, but even if trends change, many of these new developnents can easily be converted to owner-occupied units. The one thing about housing is that there is always going to be a demand for it.

The societal shift you describe has most certainly been "helped along" by the extreme run-up in real estate over the last 12-15 years, which was in turn helped along by artificially low interest rates. And now, international funds and conglomerates are becoming increasingly interested in adding real estate to their portfolios, which is more cash flooding into the rental development market. It's also put more pressure on homebuyers competing with cash offers from corporations. This stuff is a bigger problem in NY right now than in Philly, but the writing seems to be on the wall.
99% of developers though, are not philanthropists. They are in it for the money, and they like to close deals as fast as possible.