It’s port land. We’re not selling the port.
-
-
Replying to @kimmaicutler
Why not? If the city can build a nav center on it it can sell it. Philadelphia has some huge residential developments built on former piers.
@SonjaTrauss can vouch for philly’s high density waterfront development.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @maxcan @SonjaTrauss
The land doesn’t belong to the city. It belongs to the port, which is an entirely different legal entity.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @SonjaTrauss
Is the city getting the land for market rates or way below? Yes or not, either the city or the port authority is subsidizing a very inefficient move
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @maxcan @kimmaicutler
Yes, I am loving the enthusiastic support the current condo owners are going to have when the port authority proposes high rise luxury condos right there

2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Anyway, seawall lot 330 and the pier across the street are joined together for purposes of redevelopment. For a long time the port has been trying to do something with that site (the warriors arena for example), to no avail. 1/??
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
The problem is that the pier requires a $$$$$$$ of money to make it useable, so every proposal that actually uses both sites has not been a money maker. This is why it’s actually
perfect for a Nav center. The nav centers are temporary- 4 years.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
What the port should do is separate seawall lot 330 from the pier, and just tear the pier down. But the fact that they haven’t done that makes me think there is some reason why it’s not that easy.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Whether they finally find a money making use, or decide to tear the pier down, it won’t happen in less than 4 years. They have been dithering around on this for like 20 years. Until they work it out we should use the site for something.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @SonjaTrauss @kimmaicutler
Assuming your premises: land can’t be easily developed or isnt that valuable, you’ve convinced me. Still not 100% convinced of those premises but am open.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I mean, if one could develop it and then immediately sell it and take the LT climate/disaster risks off their books, that would count as a financial gain. But if not done properly, it could also be like SF’s leaning Millennium Tower but way worse.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.