Will Fishtown NIMBY a new concert hall not near anyone's homes?

**desolate** · 08-26-2010, 01:09 PM

Fishtowners to vote on proposed Richmond Street entertainment venue Tuesday | PlanPhilly: Planning Philadelphia's Future

Fishtown residents and business owners will next week have their say on whether a live music/entertainment venue proposed for Richmond Street that could hold between 2,500 and 3,500 people and have a 650-car parking lot should come to the neighborhood.

Note: It's not in the neighborhood. It's next to the casino.

Not near anyone's actual homes.

and why do these group get to decide on Regional attractions just becuase it's near them?

and if it is that reason... the why aren't NoLibs and Port Richmond allowed input as this concert hall would be affecting us (which they won't but let's play crazed Nimby guy)

**Cya** · 08-26-2010, 01:39 PM

I'd like to see another entertainment venue that does concerts, etc. where I don't have to drive to South Philly, the Tower in Upper Darby, or Atlantic City.

Let's see how many neighbors show up.

**desolate** · 08-26-2010, 03:24 PM

I can see fighting a strip club next to a church.

This a concert house on the waterfront on the houseless side of 95.

It's a win like those places you mentioned. It's culture and attractions for residents.

**OldMaestro** · 08-26-2010, 04:00 PM

Sounds like another hipster milk brawl is in the works.

**mixiboi** · 08-26-2010, 11:47 PM

Its going to be kinda hard to get over there once they destroy the Girard Ave Bridge that takes you to that part of Richmond St this fall...

**OKT3** · 08-27-2010, 12:16 AM

Originally Posted by OldMaestro

Sounds like another hipster milk brawl is in the works.

I don't know, this seems like a different dynamic. Otherwise, it may be the biggest milk riot of all

**mixiboi** · 09-24-2010, 04:09 PM

Wow, I'm impressed.

he facility would be able to accommodate about 2,600 people and would incorporate high-tech features that would create an interactive experience for concert-goers. The facility is being designed with the fans’ experience as the focal point, said one person with intimate knowledge of the project and that starts from the moment a ticket is purchased. An attendee could download music, buy digital recording or view videos immediately after an event.

Read more: Grasso entertains music venue idea - Philadelphia Business Journal

The Philadelphia developer is also toying with the idea of incorporating an Internet radio station with a booth for live, on-site broadcasts. While live concerts are its main focus, the venue would also be designed to accommodate a range of entertainment including comedy acts, dinner theater and the like. The concert hall would be the first phase of the project and the museum would be in a later phase. Memorabilia from a range of local rockers would be temporarily displayed in the lobby until the museum is built.

Grasso entertains music venue idea - Philadelphia Business Journal

And seriously, this is MORE out of the way the the CASINO IS! Specially after PENNDOT destroys the Girard Bridge this Winter(Everything on that side is getting DESTROYED), and it will be a part of the NEW Delaware Ave expansion into the new Richmond st.

**Cya** · 09-27-2010, 11:44 AM

Thanks for the article, Mixboi. I can't wait for this venue to open. I think it's really just what we need in that section of the waterfront.
Any word on neighborhood objections?

I wonder if the same people who showed up to protest the opening of the casino (CasiNo) are objecting to this entertainment venue?

**desolate** · 09-27-2010, 11:48 AM

Originally Posted by Cya

Thanks for the article, Mixboi. I can't wait for this venue to open. I think it's really just what we need in that section of the waterfront.
Any word on neighborhood objections?

I wonder if the same people who showed up to protest the opening of the casino (CasiNo) are objecting to this entertainment venue?

Yes, Penn Praxis and CDAG, stocked with CasiNO memebers had some "recommendations" to the local group about what they should do.

**3rd&Brown** · 09-30-2010, 10:25 PM

Look at that HUGE parcel of land east of the site. I never noticed it. That would be a killer site for a large development, a la Naval Square. Are you listening, Toll Brothers?

**desolate** · 10-01-2010, 07:38 AM

Originally Posted by 3rd&Brown

Look at that HUGE parcel of land east of the site. I never noticed it. That would be a killer site for a large development, a la Naval Square. Are you listening, Toll Brothers?

THe Rail Yars?

It is nice as is that huge island across the river.

**hammersklavier** · 10-01-2010, 10:23 AM

They are empty.

Unfortunately, if we let development on them happen according to the current Subdivision Code (which we probably won't, because G-2 requires a variance to develop anything residential) we'd get suburbia. The current Subdivision Code enforces road hierarchy, which in turn enforces suburbia. (Yep, it's pretty badly broken).

Also, I think I've already said this, but my main concern with Grasso's new "concert hall" is that it really should face Beach at least somewhat respectably. (And it's nowhere near the casino).

P.P.S. Technically that whole area between Cumberland and the Machine Shop used to be Cramps Shipyard.

**desolate** · 10-02-2010, 07:45 AM

Originally Posted by hammersklavier

They are empty.

Unfortunately, if we let development on them happen according to the current Subdivision Code (which we probably won't, because G-2 requires a variance to develop anything residential) we'd get suburbia. The current Subdivision Code enforces road hierarchy, which in turn enforces suburbia. (Yep, it's pretty badly broken).

Also, I think I've already said this, but my main concern with Grasso's new "concert hall" is that it really should face Beach at least somewhat respectably. (And it's nowhere near the casino).

P.P.S. Technically that whole area between Cumberland and the Machine Shop used to be Cramps Shipyard.

when you graduate and start dealing wiht budgets you'll see that your design demands are a lot more expensive than the "suburban" mindset you so vehemently argue against.

**mixiboi** · 10-02-2010, 11:25 AM

Originally Posted by desolate

when you graduate and start dealing wiht budgets you'll see that your design demands are a lot more expensive than the "suburban" mindset you so vehemently argue against.

That is one of the things about the "suburban" mindset. Cheap. its going to bite back, HARD, like a poorly maintenance levee.

**thoth** · 10-03-2010, 04:57 PM

Originally Posted by desolate

when you graduate and start dealing wiht budgets you'll see that your design demands are a lot more expensive than the "suburban" mindset you so vehemently argue against.

This is your response any time anyone on this board posits an idea that isn't in line with your personal philosophy, "You damn hippies don't understand the value of a dollar". Even you have to understand that that portion of the code is a relic from when they were developing the Far Northeast. Do you really think that model of subdivision is appropriate for the old ship/rail yards in Port Richmond?

**hammersklavier** · 10-04-2010, 09:34 AM

Originally Posted by desolate

when you graduate and start dealing wiht budgets you'll see that your design demands are a lot more expensive than the "suburban" mindset you so vehemently argue against.

Fixing the Subdivision Code isn't budgetary, it's legal. The budgetary ramifications are passed on to the developers. Duh.

**desolate** · 10-05-2010, 08:44 AM

Originally Posted by thoth

This is your response any time anyone on this board posits an idea that isn't in line with your personal philosophy, "You damn hippies don't understand the value of a dollar". Even you have to understand that that portion of the code is a relic from when they were developing the Far Northeast. Do you really think that model of subdivision is appropriate for the old ship/rail yards in Port Richmond?

Well retail and residential needs parking. Only the central core can be planned like Praxis wants to plann the low value riverfront.

Building dense is an upfront cost and a long term cost.

Building low density is a low cost upfront and a low cost long term.

It's why it was actually possible to build that Mall at Passyunk, Port Richmond, Del Ave, etc.

If you had restrictive Penn Praxis style forced zoning, you get very high value projects that end up only attracting higher end retail to offset the high design costs.

**desolate** · 10-05-2010, 08:48 AM

Originally Posted by mixiboi

That is one of the things about the "suburban" mindset. Cheap. its going to bite back, HARD, like a poorly maintenance levee.

Why?

What would be the new costs to a suburb over the costs to a fully infrastructure city?

North Philly, with poor residents, and massive infrastructure costs is always going to be a huge loss overall for the taxpayer than a sprwaling HS in upper Bucks co.

**Insoluble** · 10-05-2010, 11:04 AM

Desolate, most parts of the city will never be able to beat the suburbs at their own game. I know you're enthralled by suburban style development, and it may even work well in some parts of the city. But let's face it, If someone wants to live in a suburban style development, they're going to move to the burbs. trying to reinvent the city as as car centered sprawled out suburban developments didn't work in the 60's and it ain't gunna work now. Happily, a lot of people are looking for more urban environments these days, and fueling the gentrification and re population of many central neighborhoods of the city.

**seand** · 10-05-2010, 11:59 AM

Originally Posted by desolate

North Philly, with poor residents, and massive infrastructure costs is always going to be a huge loss overall for the taxpayer than a sprwaling HS in upper Bucks co.

Huh? North Philly already has a subway line and regional rail lines and a grid of paved streets and an elerical grid and sewer and water and gas. It already has a network of schools and social services. All of that is stuff that you would have to build out from scratch for upper Bucks Co.