Neighbors turned out at the First Corinthian Baptist Church on Monday to hear about plans for the property at 303 S. 51st St. (Photo by West Philly Local)
Neighborhood organizers have put together a list of requests for a developer who plans to build a 30-unit apartment complex on a lot tucked away at the end of a small alley near 51st and Spruce. They plan to present the requests during a meeting with the developer, Callahan Ward, next month.
About 70 people attended Monday’s meeting, which was hosted by Neighbors for Healthy Community Development (NHCD) at the First Corinthian Baptist Church at 51st and Pine, intended to gauge community support for requests related to safety, overbuilding on the lot and the inclusion of affordable units.
The property, a former mechanic’s shop at 303 S. 51st St., is surrounded by the backyards of residential homes and only accessible by a narrow, dead-end alley. Callahan Ward bought it in 2018 and can build up to 33 units with three ground-floor commercial spaces “by right,” meaning it doesn’t need community approval. The zoning leaves nearby neighbors will little recourse but to organize.
“This is the leverage we have. In this room, in this neighborhood,” said Lauren Cliggitt, a nearby neighbor who helped start NHCD.
NHCD hopes to persuade Callahan Ward to enter into a community benefits agreement (CBA), which requires concessions – often amenities or services – from developers in exchange for community support. CBAs are often in place for big projects like stadiums or casinos. They are rarely negotiated for smaller apartment buildings, particularly ones that allow developers to build by right.
But NHCD developers said Monday that large media outlets in Philadelphia have become interested in their fight and word is spreading. They hope Callahan Ward will cooperate.
“They know what’s going on and they don’t like it,” said Silke Tudor of NHCD.
NHCD’s requests include:
• Requiring environmental testing around the site and sharing those results with the community.
• Publicly available details on how firefighters would access the site.
• Reducing the number of units.
• Providing affordable units.
In return, NHCD said it would support a variance that would allow Callahan Ward not to include first-floor commercial space, which city zoning for the property requires. The property’s odd location makes any retail commercial venture difficult.
NHCD hopes the organizing they are doing now will carry on to future development projects in the neighborhood.
“This is not just about this project,” said organizer Malyka Sankofa. “This is about the entire neighborhood.”
August 29th, 2019 at 5:42 pm
In the best of all worlds, 70 neighbors get together and buy the machine shop BEFORE Callihan Ward buys it, because they are proactively concerned about the wellbeing of the neighborhood.
Waiting for a developer to take responsibility for a building that the neighbors neglected is something to do for the retroactive.
It is heartwarming to see retroactivists finding stuff to do.
August 29th, 2019 at 5:44 pm
Might want to add in a requirement that they must properly secure neighboring properties before and during construction to insure they don’t collapse then as this monstrosity is wedged in there. Good luck!
August 29th, 2019 at 8:41 pm
Great work guys! This development is a terrible idea in this location and you should keep fighting until you win.
August 30th, 2019 at 2:53 pm
I was going to disagree with wireless until I looked at what it was sold for in 2015 and now I agree completely. It would have been a headache but buying it just so someone else couldn’t would have been a great idea and could have been turned into something the community could use.
Most of the time, the community can’t outbid the developers who are willing to overpay based on what they can do with the location (a la the Good Shepherd Community Church fiasco).
That wasn’t the case here. The community would be good to plan ahead and envision other problems that could crop up before they happen.
August 30th, 2019 at 4:57 pm
Its a fire hazard. Plain and simple. If the plans examiners are adept they will reject the building application based on code required fire lane access. If.
They would then require a variance from the board of building standards. If L&I functionally communicated with the zoning board then the question of quantity of units could come in. Whatever provisions are made to appease the fire safety officials at the board of building standards can be incorporated in with a reduction in the number of units, also a safety issue.
Let them build and encourage growth. But require that laws and regulations are followed. Especially in a obviously unsafe and clearly abnormal property creating an abutment around all the surrounding single family properties at the perimeter, creating a safety and quality of life issue for all those abutting the property.
Example: A property is zoned commercial and an application is filed to build a movie theater. The zoning application is approved. Your architect then makes plans for a building that is basically unsafe with only one doorway leading out, because of some constraints of the site i.e. it is surrounded on all three sides and only has one narrow pathway exiting the building and leading to a public right of way. So, what happens. Its gets rejected by plans examiners. The owner is told they simply cannot build a theater due to safety and must plan for something else. As a side note the architect is fired for not mentioning this to the owner, which they should have done under a standard level of care in practice.
In short, simply because zoning approval is granted does not guarantee a building permit will be issued. And our case is a perfect example.
Now, if only for those adept plans examiners…
August 30th, 2019 at 11:43 pm
Above and beyond the legalistic,we have a right to the City. It is not
August 30th, 2019 at 11:43 pm
Above and beyond the legalistic,we have a right to the City. It is not a pl
August 31st, 2019 at 5:23 pm
It is a by right project. There is nothing the city can do to forestall this. Critics will bring up potential safety issues to screw up a project. Reducing units and asking for affordable units in order to support a variance to drop commercial on the first floor is not going to work as the developers would quickly leave the first floor bare for commercial.I am mystified by the city’s insisting on including commercial on every building on its first floor as this will result in many vacancies as you cannot fill all the commercial space.
September 4th, 2019 at 2:49 pm
John Cox:
They will have to go through a slew of meetings with L & I and the Board of Building Standards before starting construction. There are entire 30+ unit apartment buildings in Old City and Queen Village only accessible through 6 foot wide gated alleys– this is no different. The opposition to this is purely based on emotion and politics, not a sliver of logic or concerns for safety are involved.
September 5th, 2019 at 12:33 pm
Just look at the complex behind the former Honest Tom’s.
September 11th, 2019 at 6:48 am
Exploitive developers and their allies are teaching us daily about wrongdoing that may or may not be sanctioned by law. “Expensive housing is not hurting anyone, but rather helping everyone” they tell us, as if everyone that matters will be able to afford the new regime their greed is bringing on. The rest can get out or be forced out, if we can’t keep up with the pace of the “progress”
We have no choice but to fight back, as people are all over the world are doing. This requires acting outside of the controlled system of bureaucracy and machine politics. The alternative is building fiercely independent People’s Power, from the grassroots up.