Using SEPTA to Redevelop Philadelphia and to control Sprawl

Here's a couple of ideas on how to make SEPTA become a driving force in developing and growing the region, along with the Revival of Philadelphia:

Idea 1: Inner-City "Commuter suburbs"

The fact is, Philadelphia is too large to start redevloping all across the city. In NY and Chicago, their comebacks started when small sections of the city started seeing redevelopment. I think the same thing could save Philadelphia. So, I have devised a plan to help create middle and upper class "enclaves" of high-density housing and developed Transit, Schools, Police and Fire coverage, and Retail/Commercial development.

Here are some areas that would make extremely good "Inner-city suburbs":

Far Northeast (everything north of Pennypack Park)
Frankford-Mayfair
Kensington
Germantown
Olney
South Philadelphia
Overbrook-City line

Also, why not encourage high-density development along Regional Rail corridors for the suburbs?

It works for Phoenix, it will work for us.

The taxbase is different in Phoenix than it is in Philly. Look at property taxes and local wage taxes and compare. The city would need to trim the proprty and wage tax base to bring back corporations. Then maybe the city could compete.

Philadelphia is already seeing redevelopment, at least in the Center City and West Philadelphia areas. Some examples of this include the Cira Centre, the Comcast tower, and the many new condo developments. Manayunk saw a lot of redevelopment in the 1990s, and it is a stop on the R6 Norristown line.

Outside of the city limits, the good news is that several township planning commissions are starting to seriously consider Transit Oriented Development and higher density zoning along transit corridors. For example, Radnor Township has enacted a new zoning code to allow higher density development in some areas near train stations. Lower Merion is trying to redevelop Ardmore into a transit hub.

The bad news is that the suburbs still have a long way to go before attaining the density that is found within city limits, and the people living there are wary of change. I think most people on this forum would agree that higher density is good. Higher density leads to more transit usage, which should lead to better service levels and system expansion. But most people would be concerned about increased traffic and the quality of schools, police, and other services. It's still a tough sell since issues such as zoning and transit aren't high priorities to most people.

As for the city wage tax, this is a major reason for companies to move out of the city, and sometimes out of the metro region altogether. The City gets almost half of its tax revenue from the wage tax, so they can't just zero it out. It has been reduced in the past few years, but it still high (4.5% resident, 3.9127% non-resident). Consider the non-resident wage tax. If you work in the city but live in the suburbs, you don't get to vote for the mayor or any councilmembers, yet the city gets 3.9% of your wages. This seems like "taxation without representation." The city is getting your money but you can't tell them how they should spend it. That is something I don't understand.

One point for Lucius mentioning the regional affect of the wage tax.
Unless I'm way wrong, if your local municipality has a wage tax, it gets the moneys collected before the city does.
It's in effect a tax shadow. Township X can raise "a wage tax" up to the city's level and really not raise taxes on those residents working in the city. For some near in townships that number can be as high as 60, 70% of residents.
It's taxation with representation however. You just think someone ELSE is screwing you!
It's a win-win for the local munis.

AlexC wrote:Unless I'm way wrong, if your local municipality has a wage tax, it gets the moneys collected before the city does.
It's in effect a tax shadow. Township X can raise "a wage tax" up to the city's level and really not raise taxes on those residents working in the city. For some near in townships that number can be as high as 60, 70% of residents.

You are indeed "way wrong" (sorry). The Philadelphia wage tax has precedence over the Pennsylvania suburban income taxes. The suburban townships get nothing from residents working in Philadelphia.

Lucius Kwok wrote:Philadelphia is already seeing redevelopment, at least in the Center City and West Philadelphia areas. Some examples of this include the Cira Centre, the Comcast tower, and the many new condo developments. Manayunk saw a lot of redevelopment in the 1990s, and it is a stop on the R6 Norristown line.
.

Actually re-development in Philadelphia goes back to the 1960's or 1970's. There was significant re-developent in Eastwick in the 1970's and the Society Hill projects even pre-date Eastwick.

Historically, though, development has followed transit, not preceeded it. The 69th Street Terminal is a prime local example. When that facility was built, it was built in a cow pasture, but within 20 years of its opening the 69th Street area had seen the first manefestation of the major early 20th century Delaware County real estate boom.

In my area ( Balto- DC Corridor), which is fast becoming over-developed, there is significant development at DC Metro Stations, but most of this did not occur until after particular lines were at least under construction.

And the "City of Southern California" ( the L.A. region) sprawls as it does because development followed the lines of the Pacific Electric Railway. If it had the mind to, SEPTA could almost dictate where re-development would occur simply by extending existing service or adding new service into areas not presently served. Development would inevitably follow.

More on the wage tax:

- The City of Philadelphia derives about 56% of its local tax revenue from the wage tax. No other city in the nation comes close to that.
- The state limit for wage tax is 1% in the surrounding townships, if they choose to enact one.
- In 2000, the city collected $314 million in taxes from workers living in suburban counties.

(data from The Fight for Metropolitan Philadelphia - Penna. Economy League.pdf


Walt,

Do you know about Edmund Bacon? He was an influential city planner and worked for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission (PCPC) from 1949 to 1970. He was involved in the design of the Penn Center complex that replaced the old PRR Broad St Station. He was also involved in the redevelopment of the Society Hill area, and is the author of Design of Cities (1967).

He also drew up plans for many projects that never happened, including a much more ambitious Market East complex, with a large bus terminal, parking garage, sunken plazas with shops (similar to the Gallery mall), and office/condo towers rising above. This was in the 1960s and early 70s, before popular opinion turned against large urban renewal projects, especially if they contained expressways.

Lucius Kwok wrote:Philadelphia is already seeing redevelopment, at least in the Center City and West Philadelphia areas. Some examples of this include the Cira Centre, the Comcast tower, and the many new condo developments. Manayunk saw a lot of redevelopment in the 1990s, and it is a stop on the R6 Norristown line.

Outside of the city limits, the good news is that several township planning commissions are starting to seriously consider Transit Oriented Development and higher density zoning along transit corridors. For example, Radnor Township has enacted a new zoning code to allow higher density development in some areas near train stations. Lower Merion is trying to redevelop Ardmore into a transit hub.

The bad news is that the suburbs still have a long way to go before attaining the density that is found within city limits, and the people living there are wary of change. I think most people on this forum would agree that higher density is good. Higher density leads to more transit usage, which should lead to better service levels and system expansion. But most people would be concerned about increased traffic and the quality of schools, police, and other services. It's still a tough sell since issues such as zoning and transit aren't high priorities to most people.

As for the city wage tax, this is a major reason for companies to move out of the city, and sometimes out of the metro region altogether. The City gets almost half of its tax revenue from the wage tax, so they can't just zero it out. It has been reduced in the past few years, but it still high (4.5% resident, 3.9127% non-resident). Consider the non-resident wage tax. If you work in the city but live in the suburbs, you don't get to vote for the mayor or any councilmembers, yet the city gets 3.9% of your wages. This seems like "taxation without representation." The city is getting your money but you can't tell them how they should spend it. That is something I don't understand.

Hey, If Philly had to cut 50% of it's budget, then so be it. The three things in Philly (that the city controls anyway) that should be left untouched and expanded are Fire, Police, Education. If they gotta eliminate departments and employees, then maybe it should be considered. However, making the city clean and safe should be a top prioirty. Improve the schools, keep the streets/city safe and improve quality of life, and then you have a recipie for success.


However, as horrible as this sounds, this will ultimately help the city. Think about it: Philly with no wage tax. I can imagine Philly's and PA's taxes are very low considering, so there really should be great incentive to come to Philly. Also, getting SEPTA and NJT to collaberate on a low Philly-NYC fare (Like 15$ one way and 20$ round trip), and even a SEPTA-MARC collaberation to Baltimore-Washington (around the same fare), then Philly would blossom as a Commuter city.

I know Center city is growing, but is the NE growing too? I still see plenty of Middle-class white in the NE, as far down as Oxford Circle. I also see stability in South Philadelphia. Is this true? Are there still areas of Philadelphia that are solid stock middle-upper class income earning neighborhoods? Could outer areas of the city emerge as the next young professional/middle-class family haven?

Bensalem SEPTA rider wrote:I also see stability in South Philadelphia. Is this true? Are there still areas of Philadelphia that are solid stock middle-upper class income earning neighborhoods? Could outer areas of the city emerge as the next young professional/middle-class family haven?

Yes it's true there's stability in South Philly. Plus, the northeastern and northwestern corners (plus, north central, along broad -- with gaps between the 3 neighborhoods listed here) are beginning to take off.

As for "areas of Philadelphia that are solid stock middle-upper class income earning neighborhoods":

Mount Airy is mixed, 50/50 (or so) black/white, and decidedly uppermiddle class. In the Mount Airy zip code, there are currently 6 houses selling for >$1M, and many (didn't count them) for less than $50k, so you have a nice mix of people there. Chestnut Hill is also decidedly uppermiddle and upper class, with houses consistently among the most expensive in the area. Both of these communities are very stable (though my beloved Mount Airy has seen a rather disturbing spike in small crimes recently). Across the creek, Roxborough and Manyunk are solid middle-class (drifting to uppermiddle the farther up the hill you go) communities that are also extremely stable. Same for East Falls. East Oak Lane is less stable, but is still not an "at risk" neighborhood, and is home to many professionals. Also, the West Philly City Ave neighborhoods are in this mix, too, but with blight creeping in from below, I'd be hesitant to call them stable at this moment (though they have great potential to be).

What's interesting is the transit coverage in these stable communities -- it's excellent, by and large. East Oak Lane has the Fern Rock Transportation Center (though some might say it's in Olney, whatever) and multiple buses. Mount Airy/Chestnut Hill have 2 trains and a whole bunch of buses (and one day, maybe, a streetcar, again). City Ave communities have two trains (if you can call the R6 that, when it's only 1 car!), 1 interurban trolley, and a bunch of buses too. Even Roxborugh is well covered by the buses on Henry & Ridge (let's face it, everyone lives with 2-3 blocks of those streets in Rox.), although few people actually use them.

My point about SEPTA & these great communities? Dunno... there are lousy neighborhoods with better SEPTA coverage and great neighorhoods (in the suburbs) with less. It's just an interesting point to note how much coverage these great neighborhoods have.

Lucius Kwok wrote:

Walt,

Do you know about Edmund Bacon? He was an influential city planner and worked for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission (PCPC) from 1949 to 1970. He was involved in the design of the Penn Center complex that replaced the old PRR Broad St Station. He was also involved in the redevelopment of the Society Hill area, and is the author of Design of Cities (1967).

He also drew up plans for many projects that never happened, including a much more ambitious Market East complex, with a large bus terminal, parking garage, sunken plazas with shops (similar to the Gallery mall), and office/condo towers rising above. This was in the 1960s and early 70s, before popular opinion turned against large urban renewal projects, especially if they contained expressways.

I WAS aware of Mr. Bacon back in that era. One of the problems that is natural to re-development in a city as old as Philadelphia is that you usually have to remove something in order to re-develop an area. And often that something has a constituency that doesn't want to see it removed, no matter what its condition may be. This is the nub of the current controversy in several places over the use of eminent domain to aquire occupied property for the purpose of turning it over to a private developer for "re-development of the area. I note that Phildadelphia, in the Bacon era, did not build nearly as many freeways or expressways as some places did. ( I-95 and Vine Street, etc. were built after that time)

Also, the delevoper of the Gallery Mall was none other than James Rouse, who, of course, is the developer of my "town" ( Columbia, MD) and who I met several times in the late 1970's.

Bensalem SEPTA rider wrote:

In NY and Chicago, their comebacks started when small sections of the city started seeing redevelopment.

The revitalization along the Howard/Ravenswood segments of the CTA was
documented in "Preservation", the magazine of the National Trust for Historic Preservation.

The overiding theme of the article was that mass-transit supported the revitialization by virtue of being a high-quality (fast and frequent) service.

Umblehoon wrote:

Mount Airy/Chestnut Hill have 2 trains and a whole bunch of buses

City Ave communities have two trains (if you can call the R6 that, when it's only 1 car!),

Yes it's true there's stability in South Philly

Note my reference above to the article. R5 Paoli excepted, RRD is neither fast or frequent. The service quality is not sufficient to support revitialization on the scale that occured in Chicago.

Yes, we have other transit priorities (and no money to put those into place), but IMHO R6 Manayunk via East Falls, R7 CHE and R8 CHW would do much better at supporting the urban neighborhoods that they travel through if connected to the BSS utilizing Rt 100 NHSL operating practices. This would be particularly beneficial for Germantown, where historic homes (1700's and 1800's) go for a pittance.

Imagine how many more people would consider taking transit to a restaurant in Manayunk (helping to alleviate the parking congestion on narrow neighbohood streets) if they had 20 minute off-peak headways vs. hourly. Also imagine the enhanced attraction for redevelopment around some of the BSS express stations with more frequent service and expanded access from many parts of the city.

Of the list, Frankford and Kensington are the best candidates to replicate what occured in Chicago, by virtue of their proximity to the MFSE.

Let's face it, how many Philadelphia natives ever dreamed that the gutted shell of a rowhouse in Fishtown would cost $275,000?!?

Olney would hold promise if the various institutions in the vicinity could work together within the context of a program similar to the commitment of the University of Pennsylvania for University City and near West Philadelphia.

While there are pockets of stability in South Philadelphia, I certainly would not characterize it as stable in general, especially in the area West of Broad Street between South and Snyder. Many people in South Philadelphia don't come easy to change. They want South Philadelphia to be what it is.

Bensalem SEPTA rider wrote:Could outer areas of the city emerge as the next young professional/middle-class family haven?

Not until taxes are lowered and (especially) the city embraces school choice (vouchers, if you wish to call it that). Until then, those young middle class families will be heading for the suburbs when the first child turns five.

Using SEPTA to control sprawl is a great idea. I think the bulk of our dollars should be focused on improving transit services in the city FIRST. If the burbs and exurbs want transit, let them pay for it. Although slowing down, the city is on a rebound. IF we get nothing else out of it, I wish the 15 would start running just so the effects of a historic/efficient/modern/desireable method of inner-city transporatation would start rubbing off on the neighborhoods that it passes through.

The homes around the Zoo still look rather depressed, and hopefully the 15 will have some effect on that.

The sooner we get people back into moving into the city AND using transit, the sooner we may get things like more trolleys and better transit access (such as a Frankford Junction Transporation Center) back.

We're too fragmented right now. The buses and subways basically cater to city dwellers while the railroads cater to the suburbanites. Projects such as SVM only dilute our transit model by catering to those in the exurbs who have no business living out there or working here in the first place. The more diluted we are, the less effective the system will be. Let another carrier worry about Reading & Quakertown, prioritize the Blvd subway, 23 & 56 trolley, a Del Ave trolley (Patco?) and somewhere in there Newtown.

Unlike NJ, we just don't have the density, funding or demand for transit that has allowed them to add a new rail line every 3 years. We can start though here in the city. The wage tax goes down every year (yes, I know by pennies), gas is going up every year, peoeple are coming back to the city, and jobs are coming (Cirra Centre, 17th-JFK).

What's the chance that the MFL areas (West Philly, Kensington-Port Richmond, Frankford) will make a comeback? The El is fast and convenient, those would be great areas to start.

Areas along routes like the 14 (the one major bus line I know) would make great areas. South Philadelphia would make another great area.

And as for the suburbs, towns like mine (Bensalem) would make great high-density development zones. Same for the old industrial cities.