Citizens invited to explore values, vision for riverfront

Nov. 11, 2007
Chris Satullo
Inquirer columnist

In Philadelphia, the role of the citizen too often is reduced to shouting No! at proposals cooked up out of sight by a shadowy few.

In healthy cities, citizens get opportunities to say "What if . . . ?" or "Let's try this. . . ." And they get helped by people who bring the experience to spot obstacles to citizen dreams, the expertise to surmount them, and the will to make good things happen.

Wednesday night, at the Convention Center, Philadelphians will get a rare chance to see what that happy sequence looks like.

PennPraxis, an arm of the University of Pennsylvania, will roll out its Civic Vision for the Central Delaware Riverfront. That stretch of riverfront is now an awkward mishmash, with more low points than high. The Civic Vision paints a beguiling portrait of what could be done along those seven miles over the next 30 years:

Reconnect William Penn's "Greene Countrie Towne" gracefully to its river. Repair the gash in its fabric caused by Interstate 95. Spawn new neighborhoods, new parks and, just as important, new jobs and economic vitality. Heal an oft-abused river.

This effort was done under an executive order from Mayor Street, using a bold grant from the William Penn Foundation. It's not a soup-to-nuts plan. It is a dream book.

Those dreams grew out of sustained civic dialogue with more than 4,000 citizens of Philadelphia. PennPraxis asked them what they most valued about the river, expanded their sense of the possible by showing success stories from other cities, and helped them develop a set of principles to guide future decisions about the riverfront.

Since then, PennPraxis has worked with top designers from around the world, city planners, the WRT Design firm here, and key stakeholders like PennDOT to flesh out and tone up the civic vision.

It's pretty cool. But before I tell you more about it, and the controversy it has spurred, some disclosures. The head of PennPraxis, Harris Steinberg, is a dear friend. So is Harris Sokoloff, the Penn-based expert in civic dialogue who led the forums. I've worked with the two Harrises on past projects. I was an informal adviser to this one. So I'm not an unbiased observer here. Not one bit. Take what I have to say with however much salt you like.

Anyway, the 242-page document proposes steps to embody civic values over time along our orphaned river:

Most provocatively, it calls for extending Center City's street grid, Penn's grand legacy, to the river's edge. The paradox of that prim grid has long been how it enables a profusion of uses and styles inside it. In the PennPraxis vision, extending the grid could, for example, allow a new South Philly neighborhood to bloom where industrial relics now sit, or a pharma research park in Port Richmond.

It calls for preserving public access all along the river, no matter what private development occurs. It envisions small parks dotting the riverline and "green corridor" roads linking to existing neighborhoods. All that green also helps to manage runoff and limit pollution.

It's a green vision, but not a pastoral fantasy. Citizen input was clear: The Delaware has been and should remain a working river, bringing jobs to Philadelphians. The plan envisions a thriving port.

It sketches a riverfront not tyrannized by the car, where people can move on foot, bike and mass transit (including water taxis). A lot of thought goes into solving the asphalt riddle of I-95 and Columbus Boulevard.

The document is neutral about casinos, those lousy bookends the state wants to inflict on the riverfront. But it says they should be forced to comply with tough design and planning rules.

Sounds nice, right? So what's controversial?

This plan would compel the city to abandon its piecemeal, deal-by-deal method of building its riverfront. It would require sustained public investments that no one has built in to any five-year plan. It demands a civic will to uphold world-class standards - in a city used to behaving like a wallflower at the ball, desperate for any suitor.

The Civic Vision is, Steinberg says, "a hopeful and challenging document" that seeks to "set a high bar." This city has learned too well to settle, to say, "Oh, well, what did you expect?" It's time to inject a jolt of vision into a tepid brew.

But many folks who've learned to make the best of that brew have reacted negatively. Developers howl that PennPraxis ignored economic realities; former city planning and commerce officials scoff about pie in the sky.

The war of words reveals two tensions. First, breaking old habits is hard. Second, the plan does exalt long-term goals over short-term gain.

Grid and green can build economic value over the long haul. Why do you think Rittenhouse Square is such a ritzy address? In the short term, though, this plan could complicate landowners' ability to get value from their land.

And, gee, they don't like that. A lead critic of PennPraxis has been Michael Sklaroff, a partner at the well-wired law firm of Ballard, Spahr Andrews & Ingersoll. He's a brilliant, powerful guy who works on many of the city's biggest real-estate deals. He became exasperated with what he saw as Steinberg's lack of realism and unfair critique of the status quo.

So Sklaroff fired hard. And Steinberg fired back, including at a notorious city Planning Commission briefing where, by his own rueful admission, "I lost it."

Familiar Philadelphia story, right? Scandal (i.e., the mess at Penn's Landing) creates thirst for new thinking. Excited new guard offers new thoughts. Grumpy old guard shoots them down, protecting its prerogatives. Accusations fly. Plan to shelf. Nothing happens. Await next scandal.

Not so fast. Here was Sklaroff talking to me Thursday: "The last time I heard Harris talk, there was a new tone. The plan had evolved. He's listened. There's a lot more to discuss, but much in this vision is good, with better techniques for us to use on the environment and river access. This now seems more focused, more measured, more considerate of other views. I'm optimistic we can reach common ground."

Wait a second. A battle royale fading to reasoned dialogue? Men with millions at stake seeking compromise? A civic vision not shelved?

The heck with controversy. In Philadelphia, the real, man-bites-dog news is peace and sweet reason breaking out. Show up Wednesday to see if this bizarre trend continues.