Dan and I wrote posts within two minutes of each other containing the exact same sentiment from two totally opposite angles: Philly is tough, Philly can survive, but we can't take anything for granted.

I know I am terrible in the way I discriminate against non-natives, but if you were not here 10 years ago, it's probably hard to understand how dead on Dan's post is. It really was amazing that ANYone would do ANYthing new in Philadelphia--like build on the waterfront.

I think I read somewhere that the there hasn't been as much new construction in Philadelphia as there has been in the past two years since the WPA. That's crazy.

That being said, i just want to say "amen" to Dan's points: we do not have to keep doing what we have been doing if it becomes counterintuitive.

the news reports and most of the articles i read drooled over River City and po-pooed "the opposition." Those crazy cooks who live in the neighborhood and actually looked at the design. Inga's was the only mainstream piece that seemed to get it.

Atlanta I think is another example of big development creating a soulless space.

Shoe leather and concrete pavement make up so much of the soul of this wonderful city that feels so warm and walkable in so many places, a city of small town Main Streets, places like Baltimore Avenue, Germantown Avenue, Lancaster when you're lucky, South Street, 2nd Street, Girard and Passyunk, and most of all so much of Center City on both sides of Broad. That walkable quality really defines us (I've never had or really desired a car in my entire adult life), and Dan's skyway description (I'd only known them from the Replacements song) convinces me that the River City project is anathema to who we are.

I am pro-development by nature. I think people in general, and Philadelphians specifically, hold onto the past way too long (we used to have 2 million people, the Earle, the Met, the A's, the National Capital), so I'd hoped something could be salvaged from a design so uh, if not grand, LARGE. I want us to be ever-changing, like life itself since there's really only one alternative to life.

But Inga, Dan, and Aaeron convince me that there's nothing but trouble in River City.

And by the way, Jetsons AND retro-Calvin and Hobbes graphics in one morning? You guys going through a little holiday season nostalgia?

"Its not a done deal", which Saffron drops in the first few lines of this article is the language NABR has been using for months on the casinos. Yet Saffron refused to be critical of whether or not casinos even belong on the riverfront or in dense residential communities. She instead decided to drool over Pinnacle (come on, it is still a slots parlor!) Additionally, Councilman Clark has decided to advocate for the neighbors of the "new river city" project - meanwhile staying nearly silent while his gerrymandered constituents to the east get destroyed.
I think this project fits into a much larger problem - our city has no plan, no vision for its own development. If we actually take the time to put a plan in place, we may be able to avoid these fights more often. Who's running this ship anyhow?
On a similar note I just found out that the streets department is starting on new curbcuts from Front to Susquehanna on Girard. They are also putting in reverse angle parking, taking Girard down to one lane in each direction for cars. This is on the same street that carries the 15 Trolley.. Also the same street that will carry all of the new casino traffic... Plan, plan, plan. Does anybody talk to anybody else in this city??

http://nabrhood.org | Neighbors Allied for the Best Riverfront

Dan, great post. Philadelphia has not understood or cared for planning for decades. Planning means looking to the future and long-term impacts; looking at the big picture; focusing on details; having public inclusion in the decision making process; and recognizing that not all development is good development. Most importantly planning means having a comprehensive plan, a real zoning code, and a fair and reasonable process that respects developers and citizens. Planning means to understand that each decision and each new building will have an impact for decades to come and that each project that receives a variance sets a precedent for future proposals. Planning means looking beyond the next election and realizing that development decisions have long-term and wide-ranging impacts. Planning understands that no building is an island (sorry John Donne). Planning should encourage developers to work with and understand the needs and goals of neighbors and the city (assuming the city had some development goals other than almost all development is welcome and appropriate). Planning should reward developers that provide public amenities.

Planning should not mean letting City Council members treat their districts like they are fiefdoms and allowing them to bless or end projects based on their power trips, whims and myopic views. Planning should not mean accepting any development and treating all development the same. Planning also should not mean making developers work with a building code, zoning code, and permit process that is like something from the film Brazil. Planning should not be reactive or inactive, but procactive. Planning should not have a clueless and untrained Zoning Board of Adjustment that makes decisions on the fly and that makes up their own rules. Planning should not include ignoring laws like the Center City parking code or the billboard laws because government does not care for those laws or their supporters have deep pockets.

On to Girard Avenue. The plans and decisions for Girard Avenue, including the reverse angled parking were made several years ago, before the gaming was approved by Pennsylvania or the proposed and winning sites were known. A goal of having the reverse angled parking was to make Girard Avenue less of a throughway from I-95 to I-76 and more of a street focusing on the adjacent communities. In other words, slowing down traffic and bringing some order to traffic were objectives in the planning process for Girard Avenue.

Since the casino proposals followed the approved plans for Girard Avenue, it would have been nice if the casinos, the state, and the city had done some real traffic analysis and planning, but apparently those were not factors that were considered important by the designers of the casino process and the people that carried out the review and approval process. Why you ask? The answer is in the first paragraph.

River City and the casinos will be stopped through smart strategy that incorporates direct action, legal hurdles, advocacy and planning. For any of us that know planners in this city, including architects, urban designers, etc. I encourage you to reach out to them and get them involved. Let's start creating plans through community based planning, holding our own charettes, planning initiatives and bringing ideas forward. As an organizer in Boston I was schooled in the Fenway neighborhood, one of the most adept communities I know for how to use planning as a weapon against bad development. After years of getting shit on, the Fenway was able to stop both a 60 story skyscraper and a new Red Sox stadium (that would have necessitated the taking of 25 acres of land through eminent domain as well as the destruction of Fenway Park) by using planning, organizing and advocacy. Big box developers, the real estate community and the City often have plans for neighborhoods that are not shared with the public. It is the public's role to develop plans transparently with maximum resident input. Doing so will enable us to implement sound, sustainable development that does not lead to displacement and that keeps those that like to plan in the dark and in secret from ever getting their ideas to the table.