Garden Court Community Association (GCCA) is holding a zoning meeting this Thursday (Jan. 16) about a new building proposed for 5027 Spruce Street. Community members are invited to attend the meeting to learn more about the project and to provide their input. The proposed building is a multi-family, four story apartment building, which will be nearly identical to the four story building at 5038 Spruce (see images below).
The public forum to discuss the proposed construction will take place at 6 p.m. in the Vineyard Community Church (corner of 51st and Sansom Streets).
Those who would like to attend the meeting but can’t make it are invited to contact GCCA’s Zoning Chair, Mariya Khandros, via email (mariya.khandros@gmail.com) with any questions or concerns.
A multi-family four story apartment building is being proposed at 5027 Spruce Street.
Four story building at 5038 Spruce Street (Source: Google).
January 14th, 2014 at 3:58 pm
Really uninspired structure, not even “in-fill” just a large cheap brick.
January 15th, 2014 at 7:58 am
“large ‘cheap’ brick”? not sure if you know what you’re talking about. And Infill is exactly what it is.
January 14th, 2014 at 3:59 pm
How did that get approved? It doesn’t fit in with those other houses in the slightest sense. That’s nasty.
January 14th, 2014 at 8:20 pm
Any city is filled with different types of buildings from different time periods. Seems better than abandoned buildings that are around. It’s clean.
January 15th, 2014 at 1:14 pm
I agree. I have no problem with building to fill empty lots, but one of the great assets of this neighborhood is the beautiful architecture. It sets the tone of the neighborhood. A new structure doesn’t have to replicate the historical look of actually old houses, but it should keep with the tone of the neighborhood, and be architecturally congruent. I think at the very least it should at least have a porch.
January 15th, 2014 at 8:35 pm
I think the picture of the building between 2 very different houses makes it seem so outstanding, but walking by it today, it doesn’t seem so bad. There is nice detail trim on the top of the building, and shutters. This block still looks a lot nicer than some other blocks on my way to the L. The building makes the neighborhood look a little more up and coming, not deteriorating like some of the porch houses on the left. Why oppose an improvement thinking it will change the whole look of the neighborhood, but keep an unkept lot? It’s not a skyscraper they’re putting in right?
January 16th, 2014 at 4:52 pm
I’m not opposing an improvement, I’m opposed to the idea that this design of building is an improvement. Sure, it’s not an empty lot, but we don’t have to fill an empty lot with just anything. We can and should be thoughtful about the types of buildings we are using to fill the space. As someone else mentioned, the pictured building does not even have the same setback as it’s neighbors. Clearly it was built as an ugly box to fit the most tenants possible in one building. Is that really the best thing for the neighborhood? I don’t think so.
Filling in an empty lot with a building is great, but we don’t have to let the first person who comes by with some cash and bricks do whatever he wants. That’s not the way to improve a neighborhood.
January 15th, 2014 at 10:13 pm
That is horridly ugly.
January 16th, 2014 at 2:55 pm
.. but junk lots and building shells where noone can live are beautiful? I don’t get it.. you guys don’t want people to live in a nice big whole floor apartment in your neighborhood because of petty aesthetic reasons, so you can keep your overgrown lots that noone is doing anything with. Buy the lot and build something you want if you are so against it. The negativity here is unbelievable.
January 14th, 2014 at 4:57 pm
Let’s Never Build Anything Anywhere
January 15th, 2014 at 10:15 am
As a general statement vacant properties cost the city millions of dollars to maintain, and they reduce the tax revenue that could come with occupancy. About 75% of vaccant properties are privately owned and many of those are tax delinquent. Therefore improvements to these properties are never made or plans to are sat on for years.
Space in the city should be valuable, and the most made out of it. You would not find as much abandonment or empty lots in neighborhoods or cities that are doing well. To keep this neighboor going in the upward direction, instead of a downward spiral, like many neighborhoods have gone, new development should be welcomed. These arpartments attract more working taxpayers.
Reducing the number of blighted properties would also help maintain the value of surrounding real estate and save money on maintenance to prevent further deterioration.
January 15th, 2014 at 3:30 pm
Doesn’t have to be all or nothing. The community can really help shape the end result at these meetings. Neighbors recently had a big impact at 4507 Kingsessing Ave, which was a case like this where the original proposal was out of scale with the existing architecture. Neighbors wrote up a list of the things they’d support and things they’d oppose, and with some negotiation got to a place that most agreed was a good result. Final sale price was pretty surprising too. http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/4507-Kingsessing-Ave-Philadelphia-PA-19143/117875478_zpid/
January 16th, 2014 at 7:48 am
The front set back should match that of the adjacent properties. Whats the material on the E/W elevation. E.F.I.S? I expect the adjacent property value would drop dramatically if this project gets approval as presented in the image. Side yard should match the consistency of the block, It appears the entry side encroaches upon the neighbor. Compliant to Code, most likely. If your going to do shutters, At least scale them proportionally to the window.