Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

dotcom-jillionaire t1_j6mu21a wrote

oh boy 52 underground parking spaces right on the banks of the schuylkill

240

LFKhael t1_j6mw9ik wrote

🎶 History shows again and again

How nature points out the folly of men🎶

54

ParallelPeterParker t1_j6mwdy8 wrote

A surface lot is going to be flooded maybe half a second after the subsurface lot. Plus, there's less imperviable surfacing which improves flooding issues on a regular basis.

21

Cobey1 t1_j6my6si wrote

You know insurance is going up!

2

PhillyAccount t1_j6n25q5 wrote

When you disallow construction on desirable lots, development gets pushed to floodplains.

80

pasnow t1_j6nclhp wrote

There's hardly a plot of land available in Manayunk. They're buidling triplexes there like its the Jersey Shore.

There's already about 5 or 6 of these complexes along the water, this one will add very little. A cool extension of the SRT so people don't have to dart onto Main Street for a bit would be a nice tradeoff. But seriously all this does is add more traffic. Its outta control the last 10+ years with all these new things that've gone up.

44

T_J_S_ t1_j6nddmx wrote

And all those new $900k condos had their first floor flooded with canal water twice in 2020.

29

Hoyarugby t1_j6o920a wrote

> There's hardly a plot of land available in Manayunk

Most of Manayunk is zoned for rowhomes only, with height limits. Developers would love the ability to build up on existing rowhome lots, with apartments, but cannot do that because zoning bans them from doing so. But as there is high development in the neighborhood, the developers still want to build, and thus are forced to do it on the only place it is legal to build apartments

18

Hoyarugby t1_j6o81qc wrote

Related, all of Manayunk is zoned exclusively for rowhomes, apartments are banned in most of the neighborhood

11

jimsinspace t1_j6mwv40 wrote

Please revise plans to show docks and boat parking instead.

58

justisjuice t1_j6n3fvo wrote

No against developing and renewal but How are these people getting in and out of Manayunk/Roxborough? Seriously, how many years does the Green Lane Bridge have? Definitely wasn’t designed for the amount of traffic

54

Cold_and_Composed t1_j6n4goz wrote

I would imagine these people would be going to the city ave exit

27

justisjuice t1_j6n5t41 wrote

I see what you mean but I was referring to the 10-20 development projects in area over the past 5 - 10 years or so. But units=more traffic. Are city planners thinking about the increased volume at rush hours? Are they thinking everyone is working in CC and catching SEPTA?

13

pasnow t1_j6ncu7t wrote

Developers sell it with the myth of 'Millenials moving in who don't own cars'.

14

rednib t1_j6ndnxx wrote

lol city planners, lmao, if you were even able to find an office in city hall, behind that door would be a brick wall.

4

Cold_and_Composed t1_j6nu5uq wrote

Realistically they could improve the green lane bridge by reducing the side walks' size and adding a dedicated right-turning lane to get onto 76 West. That would increase throughput significantly.

−5

Marko_Ramius1 t1_j6n5xoi wrote

Hopefully a lot are WFH/taking the train into the city. When I lived there (moved in 2020) and had to commute to KOP it was awful, can't imagine how bad it is now with all the new construction

18

Genkiotoko t1_j6nl7uc wrote

The city needs to purchase Pencoyd bridge by the Regal and turn it into a public access bridge. Green lane to Belmont needs to be expanded to include a right turn lane only to access 76 West. I really believe a large chunk of rush hour traffic is created because a third of the people want to turn right and get stuck behind a single car going straight.

13

BlondeOnBicycle t1_j6p7mok wrote

It's public access for bikes and pedestrians. I use it all the time - great access to the cemetery!

10

thercbandit t1_j6ouxu2 wrote

That bridge could not support traffic. Its single lane and as it stands is not structurally in its best years. Its jointly owned by the Penn Group and CSX I think.

6

Genkiotoko t1_j6p1oap wrote

Repairs would absolutely be needed to allow for heavier traffic, no doubt. I'd be happy with a split direction bridge, either a light that takes turns for direction or a direction that changes based on time of the day. (morning out evening in)

−1

Toastwaver t1_j6n6uw1 wrote

And how many more stools will Barry's Steaks have to install?

11

Animalmother172 t1_j6nbxuz wrote

Philly deserves better than OCF Realty housing.

36

PurpleWhiteOut t1_j6nu6p4 wrote

I don't think they're involved (thankfully. I had a bad experience renting from them) this is just their development news blog

12

BlondeOnBicycle t1_j6p87n1 wrote

OMG. I am 100% in favor of all the housing everywhere all the time -- but not here. From Shurs to Ridge there's almost nothing left but empty lots and sad damaged buildings because it all floods! Regularly! It took MONTHS to clean up after 2022 flooding! Does each unit come with a kayak and a window-attachable launch?

28

kingintheyunk t1_j6mvo81 wrote

It’s just a proposal at this point. City still needs to approve the plans.

10

ThreePointsPhilly t1_j6nmnb7 wrote

Are they serious with this line?

As you can see in the video below, this 100-year flood completely covered the area where this project is proposed, so we hope that folks have good flood insurance if they’re planning on keeping their car in the underground parking area.

9

TumblingDice82 t1_j6nr70r wrote

I'm all for more mixed-use development in this part of town to strengthen the connection between the heart of Main Street & Wissahickon, but underground parking & ground floor retail on that plot sounds like a recipe for disaster with the inevitable continuing flood problems. That CVS next-door, which was totally flooded out back in 2021, only just reopened in the last few weeks! I guess the only practical other development solution is to have surface parking & an elevated building, but that would be awful from a community/urbanist perspective. 🤷‍♂️

7

jambomyhombre t1_j6ng5nb wrote

Lmao you mean the area of Manayunk prone to the worst of the flooding from the Schuylkill? Also heard they're developing more apartments on Venice Island. I'm all for more housing in the city but these lots don't have a lot of forethought going into them besides 🤑

5

hungryhummushead t1_j6n3mcz wrote

I think more housing and development there is a good thing, but the underground parking is no bueno. I think instead they need to have surface parking and the first floor of the complex starts elevated up above the surface parking. So flooding which is bound to happen would instead only affect the surface parking. I've seen a few other apartment buildings along the Schuylkill doing this type of build, which makes sense. However I'm not sure how they could really handle retail space with a design like that.

Development combined with extending the bike path to some extent would be amazing.

1

TumblingDice82 t1_j6nusrx wrote

Even with the inevitable flooding issues, from a community perspective, I'd rather have ground floor retail space there rather than a surface parking lot.

4

frickensweet t1_j6pgsec wrote

Theres a decent amount of empty store fronts on main street already.

To be fair, there isn't much of anything near where they are looking to build this now though. Apart from the liquor store i never travel that far down main street.

0

rednib t1_j6nced0 wrote

Ah, just what the area needs, more cars and congestion. Everything that made this area unique and desirable has been destroyed by developers in the past decade. Between the development here and the new developments near Belmont, the entire area is just a constant cacophony of noise and jammed traffic virtually any time of the day.

1

erbster31 t1_j6pbdti wrote

The same old Philly development play book: “commercially” zoned property with crappy coffee place on ground floor leads to parking-less 100-unit building

0