I had considered taking the rest of the day off from blogging since there's no way I'd be able to top a post with a video of the new mayor performing Rapper's Delight, in its entirety.
But I wanted to bring up the larger point that is touched on in this news item that was way down on philly.com's home page (under PA Suburbs - I guess Kensington could be considered a suburb before the 1854 consolidation):
A proposed zoning change that would allow a mixed-use "green" project on an industrial site in Philadelphia's South Kensington neighborhood has met stiff opposition from businesses along the American Street Industrial Corridor and the city's Department of Commerce.
The Zoning Board of Adjustment yesterday delayed action on the change in designation for the tract at 1647-1724 Germantown Ave. until "we have a chance to look at it," said the Rev. William Hall, who chaired the meeting.
The developer, Home (Scale), proposes building about 50 residential and three commercial units in a complex known as High Street Philadelphia. Vincent Dougherty, the city's assistant director of commerce, said the project "would remove more industrially zoned property from an inventory constantly being reduced by residential, big-box store and commercial development."
The larger point is, while Philadelphia's not quite in the dire straits that was back in the 1990s when there was absolutely NO development taking place and the Rendell administration felt that it had to accept anything that came along, it seems unlikely that Philly will ever need all of the "industrially zoned property" property that Mr. Dougherty is seeking to protect. We can wish all we want that all of those vacant, rundown, broken factories and industrial lots magically reopen as modern plants, building computers and plasma screen television, with hundreds of high paying manufacturing jobs, but it's pretty unlikely.
It would seem that a "mixed-use 'green' project" is the next best - and only realistic - reuse of this kind of land.
Comments (9)
Until they get rid of the BPT, yeah, there's very little chance that we'll get many modern factories around here. If manufacturers are willing to move their entire operation to Mexico, under NAFTA, in order to save a few bucks, I doubt they'll be willing to pay such high taxes in Philly.
Posted by Anonymous | January 9, 2008 4:26 PM
I think you may be too quick to pass judgment on whether that particular parcel should be preserved for industrial use or allowed to be developed as something else. Manufacturing jobs, while declining, still provide a significant chunk of
Philadelphians' wages and city wage tax revenues. The real problem is that we don't have a good inventory of what land is available for industrial development, what market demands are now and will likely be in the future for industrial activity, and whether the land we have available is suitable to meet those demands.
Given the weakness of the dollar and increasing demand for US exports at the moment, this may be the perfect time to think about opportunities for manufacturing expansion (we've got a workforce, a port and some other assets that make this seem not totally crazy).
I think the city has been working on inventorying industrial land, but it is clear that, at present, we don't have enough information to make good land use decisions. We certainly lack an up-to-date comprehensive plan for future development that could guide these decisions.
Philadelphia needs to accommodate a variety of land uses to be a thriving city (and not devolve into some odd reverse bedroom community). A renewed focus on planning would help Philadelphia sort out issues related competing land uses.
Posted by Marisa | January 9, 2008 5:43 PM
Ok… ok… I think a little education on our industrial land in general, manufacturing in particular is in order. We are running out of industrial land and here’s why:
19.5% of all the City’s land is zoned Industrial, but 35% of it is vacant, contaminated, or illegally used for purposes other than industrial. 13% is consumed by the ports and airports. That leaves us with 52%, half of the total amount zoned industrial, actually available for industrial use. Thanks to the freewheeling use of variances, much of this has be sliced and diced into a patchwork of bits and pieces that are difficult to assemble for many industrial uses, especially manufacturing. Add to this the enormous market pressure to convert the relatively inexpensive industrial land into relatively high priced commercial and retail land and you have a PacMan scenario, ready to gobble up what ever industrial land it comes in contact with. Yes… we are facing a shortage of our industrial land.
But who cares, manufacturing and industry are dead in Philadelphia, right? Wrong. In 2006 the industrial sector of Philadelphia’s economy was the third largest contributor to city revenue through city wage tax with contributions over $200 million. Manufacturing in particular, has consistently been the fourth largest contributor to city revenue, ahead of education! And speaking of manufacturing, in Philadelphia the average manufacturing job pays $43,000 per year according to the US Department of Labor, almost twice that of either hospitality or retail.
Oh, and just for the record… you want to reduce crime in this city, let’s put our neighborhoods back to work! Almost every manufacturer I know has job openings for reliable and trained individuals, yet Philadelphia has one of the highest unemployment rates in the nation. There is a serious disconnect between available training and jobs.
Yes Virginia, we are running out of industrial land. Company after company has left the city because they can’t find the industrial land they need to expand. We are giving our future away to New Jersey and our own surrounding counties. Nothing will “magically happen” to create hundreds of high paying manufacturing jobs. This city is going to have to develop a long term zoning plan that doesn’t change, and it’s going to have to strategically inventory its industrial land. Manufacturing has changed. There will be no more factories belching black smoke into the air. Our manufacturing will be small, niche and modern or it will not survive. And while they are trying to fill the all those condos along the river and all those strip malls along the avenues… manufacturing and industry will remain the last, best chance for this city’s neighborhoods.
Posted by steve j. | January 10, 2008 3:05 PM
Ok… ok… I think a little education on our industrial land in general, manufacturing in particular is in order. We are running out of industrial land and here’s why:
19.5% of all the City’s land is zoned Industrial, but 35% of it is vacant, contaminated, or illegally used for purposes other than industrial. 13% is consumed by the ports and airports. That leaves us with 52%, half of the total amount zoned industrial, actually available for industrial use. Thanks to the freewheeling use of variances, much of this has be sliced and diced into a patchwork of bits and pieces that are difficult to assemble for many industrial uses, especially manufacturing. Add to this the enormous market pressure to convert the relatively inexpensive industrial land into relatively high priced commercial and retail land and you have a PacMan scenario, ready to gobble up what ever industrial land it comes in contact with. Yes… we are facing a shortage of our industrial land.
But who cares, manufacturing and industry are dead in Philadelphia, right? Wrong. In 2006 the industrial sector of Philadelphia’s economy was the third largest contributor to city revenue through city wage tax with contributions over $200 million. Manufacturing in particular, has consistently been the fourth largest contributor to city revenue, ahead of education! And speaking of manufacturing, in Philadelphia the average manufacturing job pays $43,000 per year according to the US Department of Labor, almost twice that of either hospitality or retail.
Oh, and just for the record… you want to reduce crime in this city, let’s put our neighborhoods back to work! Almost every manufacturer I know has job openings for reliable and trained individuals, yet Philadelphia has one of the highest unemployment rates in the nation. There is a serious disconnect between available training and jobs.
Yes Virginia, we are running out of industrial land. Company after company has left the city because they can’t find the industrial land they need to expand. We are giving our future away to New Jersey and our own surrounding counties. Nothing will “magically happen” to create hundreds of high paying manufacturing jobs. This city is going to have to develop a long term zoning plan that doesn’t change, and it’s going to have to strategically inventory its industrial land. Manufacturing has changed. There will be no more factories belching black smoke into the air. Our manufacturing will be small, niche and modern or it will not survive. And while they are trying to fill the all those condos along the river and all those strip malls along the avenues… manufacturing and industry will remain the last, best chance for this city’s neighborhoods.
Posted by steve j. | January 10, 2008 3:06 PM
What? How does the 35% of the land that is vacant not count? And how do you restrict your definition of economic impact so narrowly?
So you say that one manufacturing job contributes $43,000. Where are they? If a piece of industrial land has sat vacant for decades and has substantial disadvantages versus other industrial parcels, where are these jobs going to come from?
The commerce department was steadfast in their opposition to the Crane Building, for example, because they didn't want to loose all of those wonderful fictitious industrial jobs. Guess what? The building is now home to countess professional service groups generating millions in tax revenue.
If we were talking about tearing down factories to create gap outlet stores, I would totally agree with you. But we're not. In the case of the Crane Building, the commerce department opposed the creation of professional office space. In the case of many projects on American Street, the commerce department opposed projects that that integrated production space into a mixed use complex and would have brought in new users. Why? No one really knows. And in this instance the commerce department turned down an offer to bring four new companies to the site as part of a mixed-use development.
You also have to look at job density. A 1,000 sq ft office can easily generate a $500,000 payroll that whereas it can take a 100,000 sq ft industrial facility to generate that. And as for manufacturing, I think people need to look a little closer at what little bit is actually being built. We're not talking about car factories. At best, you're looking at warehouses filled with a few low-wage workers.
What the city needs is accountability. You can't preserve dereliction and pretend that you are saving the city. According to your own figures, as much as 40% of the industrial land is EMPTY. In any 'industry' that would call for a downsizing. If the nations producers were running at 60% capacity, it would signal an economic catastrophe. If 40% of the available land is vacant, then there should be aggressive measures taken to make that land economically active.
The problem with all of these discussions is the fact that no one is ever willing to offer up evidence that the city can bring in 67% more industrial users. Where are they? Look at American Street. Despite all of the hundreds of millions of tax payer dollars dumped into the corridor, it looks like an abandoned war-zone. These officials had 14 years and an amazing amount of capital, but have accomplished nothing. So where is the accountability?
Preserving land proven to be unviable is not only ridiculous but also not legally justifiable. The commerce department should do anything in its power to bring economic activity to these sites. I agree that the city can't be a bedroom community. But that isn't what's being discussed. A great number of economically viable, progressive projects are being blocked without even so much as an open public discussion.
All that matters is economic productivity. I could just as easily spout off facts about how viable platinum mines are. Let's say the city decided pondered how valuable a platinum mine would be on American Street and then spend hundreds of millions of dollars building the American Street Platinum Mine. Eventually, people would have to say, "well, where IS this platinum?." And the Philadelphia Commerce Department would then answer, "Exactly!! There aren't enough platinum mines! We need to preserve the platinum mining sites because platinum mines are so valuable!" And this poster would spout of facts about how valuable platinum mining jobs are and how the platinum mining land is under threat.
....In this case, most people would recognize that the platinum mining exercise should probably be abandoned. But perhaps not in Philadelphia. There has been absolutely no accountability required here. There are no studies saying how much taxpayer money is being create each of the few jobs that are created or how many potential jobs are lost by preventing development.
The commerce department isn't called the factory department. There need to be tests to the potential demonstrate economic impact of different development decisions. I would probably say that the Crane Building (1400 N American), for example, has had many tens time the economic impact of some giant, tax-payer-financed warehouse on the opposite end of the street with a few minimum wage workers.
Posted by Anonymous | January 10, 2008 3:45 PM
I loved the post! really enjoyed it, If you need a hand with your SEO just let me know
Posted by quality backlinks | November 13, 2011 12:37 PM
Great post really enjoyed it mate :) If you ever need some help with SEO let me know
Posted by is it ok to use duplicate content | November 23, 2011 10:05 AM
I loved the post! really enjoyed it, If you need a hand with your SEO just let me know
Posted by lee belcher | November 27, 2011 10:21 AM
I loved the post! really enjoyed it, If you need a hand with your SEO just let me know
Posted by cool ideas | November 27, 2011 12:03 PM