North Philly Photos

**eldondre** · 04-04-2009, 11:57 AM

**ArcticSplash** · 04-04-2009, 02:23 PM

This is such a shame. Have you seen the insides of these firebrick brownstones? They are HUGE.

If these were in original condition in 19107 they would be worth millions.

**eldondre** · 04-04-2009, 04:58 PM

**eldondre** · 04-05-2009, 06:52 PM

**eldondre** · 04-06-2009, 07:11 PM

**lankenau** · 04-06-2009, 08:17 PM

Originally Posted by MayfairMeat

This is such a shame. Have you seen the insides of these firebrick brownstones? They are HUGE.

If these were in original condition in 19107 they would be worth millions.

This actually makes me really sad. So much raw beauty in Philly going to waste.

**Sharkfood** · 04-09-2009, 12:33 PM

Originally Posted by lankenau

This actually makes me really sad. So much raw beauty in Philly going to waste.

I believe this is the 1500 block of N. 17th St. The city deliberately spared this block from demolitions during the heyday of NTI due to its historic character.

I believe most of the houses on that block are being or have been rehabilitated as rental housing for students and there are even two or three new construction houses.

**eldondre** · 04-09-2009, 12:46 PM

Originally Posted by Sharkfood

I believe this is the 1500 block of N. 17th St. The city deliberately spared this block from demolitions during the heyday of NTI due to its historic character.

I believe most of the houses on that block are being or have been rehabilitated as rental housing for students and there are even two or three new construction houses.

better than nothing, though it's still sad that such beautiful places couldn't find owners. I believe the preservation groups had to fight pretty hard to save these, and others, from NTI.

**eldondre** · 05-25-2009, 03:33 PM

17th just north of atlantic

**Glenn Quagmire** · 05-25-2009, 05:44 PM

Sad , such beautiful homes going to waste

**arlee** · 05-25-2009, 07:21 PM

About a few months ago Adam and I took a walk around the neighborhood on our way to lunch, and were commenting on pretty much the same things you guys have all said. So many of these buildings are amazing.

**eldondre** · 05-25-2009, 09:19 PM

rather than pay asinine amounts to demolish this (is it a nickel theater?) why not have paid to rehab it?

**Hospitalitygirl** · 05-25-2009, 09:21 PM

Originally Posted by eldondre

rather than pay asinine amounts to demolish this (is it a nickel theater?) why not have paid to rehab it?

'

That doesn't look like it will need asinine amounts to demolish it but rather to rehab it. I suppose only an engineer and architect will know for certain.

**ShoshTrvls** · 05-25-2009, 09:23 PM

Originally Posted by eldondre

rather than pay asinine amounts to demolish this (is it a nickel theater?) why not have paid to rehab it?

To what end? Have you seen how much trouble it has been to find a use for the Boyd/SamEric?

I agree it is sad, but if there isn't an audience to support it, it's throwing good money after bad. We can't save everything, particularly when no one wants it.

**Hospitalitygirl** · 05-25-2009, 09:31 PM

Originally Posted by ShoshTrvls

To what end? Have you seen how much trouble it has been to find a use for the Boyd/SamEric?

I agree it is sad, but if there isn't an audience to support it, it's throwing good money after bad. We can't save everything, particularly when no one wants it.

And then there is this very valid argument.

**eldondre** · 05-26-2009, 12:20 AM

Originally Posted by Hospitalitygirl

'

That doesn't look like it will need asinine amounts to demolish it but rather to rehab it. I suppose only an engineer and architect will know for certain.

but you're following desolate's argument which is misleading. It doesn't matter if it costs more, land acquisition and and demilition were ALL taxpayer borne costs with little effect on the root cause (demand). If I Pay you $20k but you bought a building and rehabbed it because, at the margin, it covered the difference between unprofitability and profitability, you spent $100k, while the city would have incurred a total of $60k, I saved the taxpayer $40k over Street's plan. It's really that simple. are those the numbers? who knows, but you're damn sure that demolishing these things at taxpayers expense and maintaining the lots is far more expensive to the taxpayer. So when you say it costs more, be specific. WHO does it cost more?

**Hospitalitygirl** · 05-26-2009, 07:22 AM

Originally Posted by eldondre

but you're following desolate's argument which is misleading. It doesn't matter if it costs more, land acquisition and and demilition were ALL taxpayer borne costs with little effect on the root cause (demand). If I Pay you $20k but you bought a building and rehabbed it because, at the margin, it covered the difference between unprofitability and profitability, you spent $100k, while the city would have incurred a total of $60k, I saved the taxpayer $40k over Street's plan. It's really that simple. are those the numbers? who knows, but you're damn sure that demolishing these things at taxpayers expense and maintaining the lots is far more expensive to the taxpayer. So when you say it costs more, be specific. WHO does it cost more?

But it looks as though a couple of toothpicks will take it down, nothing more and nothing extensive. And to what end will you be saving it for? How will you repurpose that building? Perhaps something newer and more appropriate for the next use is better?

**eldondre** · 05-26-2009, 08:08 AM

Originally Posted by Hospitalitygirl

But it looks as though a couple of toothpicks will take it down, nothing more and nothing extensive. And to what end will you be saving it for? How will you repurpose that building? Perhaps something newer and more appropriate for the next use is better?

which building? several of the ones in the photographs have been or in the process of being rehabbed. I'd venture to say if a couple of toothpicks would take a building down, it would have already come down. meanwhile, debt service for your NTI program accounts for a large part of our deficit and there's still a serious demand problem.

**Hospitalitygirl** · 05-26-2009, 09:30 AM

Originally Posted by eldondre

17th just north of atlantic

This one.

Originally Posted by eldondre

which building? several of the ones in the photographs have been or in the process of being rehabbed. I'd venture to say if a couple of toothpicks would take a building down, it would have already come down. meanwhile, debt service for your NTI program accounts for a large part of our deficit and there's still a serious demand problem.

It looks like the plywood boarding it up is the only thing holding it up.

**eldondre** · 05-26-2009, 10:29 AM

Originally Posted by Hospitalitygirl

It looks like the plywood boarding it up is the only thing holding it up.

somehow I doubt that. It's pretty neat, I was hoping Sandy might speculate what it once was. It looks like a theater but it's pretty small. could it really be a relic from the old nickel theater days or just an old jazz club or something?