Tag: philadelphia

• Philadelphia readies new inclusionary zoning policy

  

  When I was living in Philadelphia as a graduate student, new development was seen as a bit of a gift. I remember developers telling me that it costs the same to build in Philly as it does in New York, except that the rents are obviously a fraction in the former relative to the latter. So it was tough to make projects pencil.

  At the same time, Philadelphia had a 10-year residential tax abatement program in place. I think it’s still in place, but it may have been modified since I was there. Either way, it was essentially an incentive to develop or redevelop existing residential properties. In the case of a renovation, the taxes associated with any improvements were what got abated for the 10 years.

  Put differently, it was an invitation to gentrify. Come buy an old row home, fix it up, and then don’t pay any additional property taxes on those improvements. This was the way things felt at the time. So it was interesting to learn today that Philly’s current development boom is about to get throttled down with a new mandatory inclusionary zoning policy that will take effect later this year. Gentrification, it would now seem, is a problem.

  The policy requires that 20% of the units in any new housing development (with 10 or more units) must be affordable for at least a 50-year period. For rental households, affordability means 40% of the area median income (AMI). And for owner-occupied households, it means 60% of AMI.

  I have already said pretty much everything I can say about inclusionary zoning. But one of the unique things about Philly’s policy is that it is only going to apply to two of its Council Districts. It is not a citywide policy. This is going to create a strong disincentive to develop in these areas, and will likely force new development into surrounding ones. But maybe that’s part of the point.

  Photo by Dan Mall on Unsplash

  2022.02.21

• Largest cities in the world from 100 to 2015 CE

  I just discovered this set of maps (via Brian Potter) looking at the largest cities in the world from 100 CE all the way through to today (well 2015 CE). Here are what the two bookends of this map series look like:

  

  

  It is an interesting reminder of just how centralized the world was around the Mediterranean and parts of Asia, and also how nothing is guaranteed. As recent as 1900, cities like Manchester and Philadelphia were among the top 10 largest cities. Today they aren’t even close.

  For the full map collection, click here.

  UPDATE: The data behind these maps has been called into question. Look out for a follow-up post.

  2021.12.26

• Floor plan comments, and thoughts on inset bedrooms

  What do you think of this suite layout? https://t.co/5PUUz8vz4c

  — Brandon Donnelly (@donnelly_b) May 31, 2021

  I came across the above floor plan over the weekend. I reshared it on Twitter and there was then a pretty good discussion about what people like and don’t like. I mean, who doesn’t like looking at floor plans?

  The suite is 790 square feet with 2 bedrooms and 1 bathroom. It rents, at least according to Bobby’s original tweet, at $2,600 per month. That’s $3.29 per square foot. I’m guessing that the apartment is in Philadelphia solely based on Bobby’s location.

  The divisive thing in this floor plan is the two inset bedrooms. Some people don’t like these. But designing a good floor plan is like working through a puzzle. You have all these constraints (some of which are just personal preference) and you have to find ways to work around them.

  When you’re working with a deep urban floor plate, you pretty much have no choice but to design floor plans with inset bedrooms. Otherwise, the suites get too big and they stop making economic sense. I have talked about this a few times before on the blog.

  So what you do is “bury” the bedroom(s) and keep the main living space as open as possible. In this case, the living/dining dimensions are about 17′ wide x 10′ deep. So a pretty good size, and certainly a very good width.

  An alternate solution might be to flip one of the bedrooms up towards the main glass (keeping the second one inset). But given that you only have 17 feet to work with here, something is going to have to give. So if you made the living room 9′ wide, you’d then only have somewhere around 8′ for your bedroom.

  Personally, I don’t mind inset bedrooms, especially if they allow for more generous living spaces. So I think that this is a fairly reasonable and functional suite layout. I would have absolutely lived in an apartment like this when I was going to school in Philadelphia. (Is this even the right location?)

  But if I were to make a few tweaks:

  I would compress the bedrooms slightly to enlarge the living space even more. (Though if the target market is student roommates, perhaps the idea is to allow for a desk in the bedroom.) I would then flip the closets to the partition wall between the two bedrooms to improve sound attenuation.

  I would also try and get the kitchen out of the hallway and into the main living/dining area. I don’t know where all the plumbing stacks sit (see, constraints), but perhaps it just slides up toward the glass. Another solution might be on the other side of the upper bedroom (where there is currently a closet).

  But what are your thoughts? Would you rent this apartment? Comments welcome below.

  2021.06.02

• Ray: Architecturally-inspired homes at the intersection of art, culture, and community

  Back in 2008, Dasha Zhukova and Roman Abramovich hired starchitect Rem Koolhaas and founded a new contemporary art museum in Moscow called the Garage Museum. Supposedly this was the first philanthropic institution in Russia dedicated solely to contemporary art. (Here’s a short video in case you’re curious what it looks like.) After it opened, the founders apparently had a realization about the way people like to consume art. Yes, people like to look at art and ponder deep things. But it turns out that people also like just being around art and other art-like things. People started coming to the Garage Museum not only to view the various exhibitions, but also to just hang out.

  This insight is now being used to inform a new real estate development company, also by Dasha, called Ray. The mission of the company is to create “architecturally-inspired homes at the intersection of art, culture, and community.” Their first two projects are in Harlem and Fishtown, Philadelphia, but apparently they have something cooking in Miami as well. What Ray hopes to do is integrate art and culture in a more meaningful way through cultural programming, exhibitions in their buildings, artist studio spaces, and other creative ideas.

  There’s also an affordable housing angle. According to the WSJ, Ray’s Harlem project is a joint venture with L+M Development Partners. I don’t know any of the specifics of this deal, but I know L+M, because one of their founding partners, Ron Moelis, was a professor of mine in graduate school. L+M is focused on affordable and mixed-income housing and uses tools like the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) to make these sorts of projects financially feasible. They aren’t, otherwise. I learned all about them in school and I always found it to be a great way to get the private sector building affordable housing.

  “Art and culture, community, and accessible pricing.”

  2021.05.17

• The effects of low-income developments on house prices in Los Angeles

  

  Richard Voith and Jing Liu of Philadelphia-based Econsult, along with a bunch of other smart coauthors, have just published a working paper looking at the effects of the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) on home prices. More specifically, they looked at the impact that LIHTC-financed properties have had in Los Angeles — both in low-income and high-income neighborhoods, as well as when it’s the first LIHTC development in the area or a subsequent one. Some of you might be assuming that low-income housing is likely to create downward pressure on home prices. But the authors found the opposite to be true. Below is the paper’s abstract. If you’d like to download a copy of the full working paper, you can do that over here.

  Abstract: While there is widespread agreement about the importance of the Low-Income Housing
  Tax Credit (LIHTC) in addressing the country’s affordable housing needs, there is less certainty about the effects of LIHTC-financed properties on their surrounding neighborhoods. A growing body of research has largely refuted the argument that affordable housing properties in and of themselves have negative effects on local property values and increase crime rates. Several key questions remain essentially unanswered, however. First, for how long do the observed spillover benefits of LIHTC construction last? Second, does the development of multiple LIHTC properties in a neighborhood have an additive, supplemental effect on surrounding conditions, or is there a threshold at which the concentration of such properties – and the predominantly low-income individuals they house – negatively affects the neighborhood?

  In this paper, we focus on Los Angeles County, a large, diverse urban area with significant affordability challenges. Drawing upon both public and proprietary property sales data, we conduct interrupted time series analyses to ascertain whether property value trends differed prior and subsequent to the introduction of a LIHTC-financed property in the community. We find that LIHTC properties positively impact surrounding housing values across the spectrum of Los Angeles’ neighborhoods. Further the concentration of multiple LIHTC properties in a neighborhood additively increases housing prices up to ½ mile away. Finally, these effects though of greater magnitude in lower-income neighborhoods, are fully present in high-income neighborhoods.

  Image: Econsult

  2020.11.12

• Two tragedies

  A friend of mine called me out today for not using my online presence — both social media and this blog — to share my views on the horrible tragedies that are taking place right now in the United States and the world. She is right. And it is certainly something that I have been thinking about. But as I mulled it over in my head, it just didn’t feel right to glibly share a few social media posts and consider my contributions complete. For almost 7 years, this blog has been my public voice and this blog is where I figured it should show up when I was ready.

  My view is that there are really two tragedies taking place right now. The first started with the murder of George Floyd. It was truly awful, and it is symptomatic of some fundamental issues that remain in our society. I support the demonstrations that have ensued and I am pleased to see people and companies taking action. To give one example, Goldman Sachs today announced the creation of a $10 million fund for Racial Equity. If any of you know of any causes that should be supported or of any actions that you believe should be taken, I would encourage you to share them in the comment section below or to email them to me directly.

  The second tragedy is the looting that has followed tragedy number one. Whoever is doing it, I think it is counterproductive and I think it serves to obscure the systemic problems that we know need to be addressed. I was reading through this Journal article today about the impact that looting is having on small black-owned businesses in Philadelphia — a city that is near and dear to me. It makes me both sad and frustrated that these businesses are scrambling to post up “Black Owned” signs in their windows in an effort to be spared from the chaos.

  The article goes on to quantify the number of US small businesses in mostly black areas that have enough cash on hand to survive 14 days or more. Very few do. In fact, almost none of them do. The number for mostly black areas is only about 5.3%. This is compared to 70.4% for mostly white areas and 97.9% for mostly Asian areas. This is a scary statistic that only amplifies the severity of tragedy number two. This looting is delivering a second blow to small businesses that were already reeling on the ground from COVID-19.

  Tragedy number one and the push for racial equity and positive change is the focus here.

  Update: Minor edits were done to this post in an attempt to clarify its original intent.

  2020.06.03

• Laneway garage conversion in Toronto

  

  This isn’t a laneway suite per se, but Office Ou here in Toronto recently completed this garage conversion. The idea was to take a typical rear laneway garage and turn it into something that could better house a wide range of uses.

  As Toronto reconsiders its laneways and as fewer people own cars (a separate topic to be debated), we are likely to see many of these spaces rethought. In this case, the result is a true extension of the existing home. You probably want to have a nice looking car — a Porsche would do — if you’re going to continue to use it for that purpose.

  I’m drawn to spaces like this because I start imagining all of the different use cases: a dining room, an office, a studio for photoshoots, a place for Pecha Kuchas, and so on. In big and expensive cities it can be rare to have that bit of extra space that allows you to tinker and experiment. And I am a big fan of tinkering.

  Office Ou was founded by Nicolas Koff, Uros Novakovic, and Sebastian Bartnicki. Nicolas and I went to architecture school together both here in Toronto and in Philadelphia. Congratulations on completing a beautiful project.

  Photo: Adrian Ozimek

  2020.05.23

• What drives attachment to cities

  The Knight Foundation recently published a report looking at what attaches people to the place in which they live. To get this information, they surveyed over 11,000 Americans, some of which live in urbanized areas and some of which just live in metro areas across the United States. This is interesting information to know at any time point in time, but you could argue that it’s even more important at a time like this, where everyone seems to be questioning everything about cities.

  Here are two of their key findings:

  • People who spend more time in the principal or main city of a metro area — whether as residents or as frequent visitors — tend to be more attached. This is is true both in terms of how they feel, but also in terms of how they act, such as how much they give back to the community. I suppose you could debate whether going to the city creates attachment or whether attached people tend to go to the city, but this association does seem somewhat intuitive to me. I am imagining a greater sense of place in principal cities.
  • People who choose to live in a place because of its quality of life tend to express more attachment than people who live in a place for other reasons — such as for work. About 40% of Miami transplants cited the climate as the primary factor for moving. Sounds right. Weather is pretty hard to control, but there are lots of other things that cities can do to improve quality of life. And it seems to be one of the stickier factors. Similarly, access to cultural activities and recreational amenities seem to lead to greater attachment.

  More specifically, here are how some people feel about their metro areas:

  

  This chart is showing the “perceived accessibility to quality features.” The left column is what they believe to be the national average. And the other columns are for Akron, Charlotte, Detroit, Macon, Miami, Philadelphia, San Jose, and St. Paul. Looking at one row in particular — affordable housing — we see that about 50% of Americans surveyed believe they have access to it. In comparison, only 29% and 12% of residents in Miami and San Jose, respectively, feel the same way.

  For a full copy of the report, click here.

  Chart: Knight Foundation

  2020.05.22

• Moovit Public Transit Index

  

  The Moovit Public Transit Index has been tracking the impact of COVID-19 on public transit usage around the world. Not surprisingly, people are using transit a lot less.

  Above is a chart from Moovit showing usage from January 15, 2020 to April 12, 2020, for a collection of US cities including San Francisco, Chicago, New York, Philadelphia, Seattle, and others. Early March is when usage started to really fall off, with most of the cities now sitting somewhere around 70-75% below January levels.

  For the most part, the cities included in this chart have followed a similar trajectory. But there are a couple of outliers. Philadelphia doesn’t seem to have fallen quite as much as other major US cities (-55.7% as of April 12, 2020). I’m not sure why. San Francisco looks to have “corrected” a lot faster. Perhaps because of an easier/quicker shift to working from home? And then there’s Seattle.

  The first confirmed US case of COVID-19 occurred in the Seattle area on January 21, 2020. Looking at the above chart (and implying causation), that single case appears to have had an immediate impact on transit usage. Over the subsequent three days, ridership dropped to -4%, -8.3% and then to -9.1%. Usage then remained consistently lower relative to all of the other cities in this index.

  Was that it? Did Seattleite’s behaviors really change that quickly? (And yes, I did have to look up the demonym for the fine people of Seattle.)

  2020.04.13

• The American Institute of Architects’ 2019 Housing Awards

  The American Institute of Architects just presented its 2019 Housing Awards. 12 housing projects were recognized across four categories.

  Some of the projects I have written about before — such as the Tiny Tower in North Philadelphia. But most of the projects haven’t been covered on this blog. One of my favorites, among the winners, is the Oak Park Housing project in Sacramento by Johnsen Schamling Architects.

  

  I like that the massing is simple and that it’s a dense — 6 unit — urban infill project in an area of Sacramento that has been struggling with disinvestment for many decades. According to the architect, it is one of the first residential projects in the neighborhood since the Oak Park Riots of 1969.

  Three of the homes front onto the main street. And the other three front onto and are accessed from a rear alley. Each home is just over 1,500 square feet. The project also had “an ambitiously limited construction budget“, so let’s call it an example of good design not having to necessarily cost a lot of money.

  I’m guessing their land costs were reasonable.

  Photo: John J. Macaulay

  2019.05.06