An artist’s rendering of the proposed 76-unit apartment building with 15 units of affordable housing at 48th and Chester.
Cedar Park Neighbors (CPN), the neighborhood community association, has released a statement supporting the controversial apartment development project at 48th and Chester, two weeks after Councilmember Jamie Gauthier opposed the proposed development. The project has also prompted some intense discussions and protests among many community members in the recent months.
“Cedar Park Neighbors is proud to support the development of a new apartment building at the corner of 48th Street and Chester Avenue,” the statement reads.
The main reason for their support is that 20 percent of the proposed building’s 76 units will be set aside as affordable (at 40 percent of the area median income) for a term of 50 years. The rental prices at this level would be in the range of $725 for a one‐bedroom apartment, and $870 for a two‐bedroom apartment.
“CPN is well aware of the need for more affordable housing options in our neighborhood,” the statement continues. “The current proposal will provide 15 units of affordable housing in a neighborhood that desperately needs it.”
Gauthier has said that her opposition to the building is based on opposition from nearby residents, which she said “dwarfs all other zoning-related matters we’ve encountered since entering office last year,” her statement reads.
She applauded the developer’s effort toward affordability and underscored that the 100 percent affordable units that some are pushing for are likely not feasible. Gauthier, who campaigned on housing justice, also spoke about the “tone and tenor” of the online meetings and conversations on the proposed development.
“I understand the urgent need to achieve housing justice, and the passion that people feel for these issues,” her statement reads. “But the vitriol I witnessed in these conversations sets a troubling precedent for all of us, especially as neighbors are pitted against neighbors, which only make it harder to have open dialogue about development issues moving forward.”
The alternative to this proposal is construction “by right”, which does not require any community input or councilmanic approval. In this case, in accordance with the current zoning, the developer may build 14 twin duplexes – semi-detached buildings with two units per each side (see illustration below). Each building would be 38 feet tall, with an additional three to four foot tall parapet wall and 10-foot tall pilot houses to access roof decks.
The project is being proposed on the land owned by a local nursing home (Renaissance Healthcare & Rehabilitation Center), at the site of the former Chester Avenue Dog Park, which closed in 2019 after their lease had been terminated. Renaissance operator, Meir Gelley, is seeking to combine several land parcels adjacent to the nursing home for the proposed development – 4701-15 Kingsessing Ave., 4720 Chester Ave., 4724 Chester Ave., 1115 S. 48th St., 1119 S. 48th St.
The project was first presented to the community at the end of last year as a four-story, 83-unit building with no affordable housing units. Since then, after a series of virtual community zoning meetings, the project has been modified to include affordable housing. The height of the proposed building has also been reduced from 47 feet to 32 feet (with a rear section at 42 feet; see rendering above).
The developer’s latest proposal also includes 58 on-site parking spaces (an increase from 41 originally proposed parking spaces) and putting some green space in front of the building.
The proposal is scheduled to go before the Zoning Board of Adjustment in a public hearing on Wednesday, June 2 at 2 p.m. The meeting will be held virtually via Zoom (go here for more information).
Fourteen twin duplexes may be built “by-right” at 48th and Chester if the apartment building proposal is not approved by the ZBA.
May 25th, 2021 at 2:22 pm
Should have been four floors like apartment across the street as a by right.
May 25th, 2021 at 8:23 pm
The rental price of the 15 “affordable” units is always published and praised.
How about the remaining 61?
$1320-$1560
Ask yourself-Who is this for?
May 26th, 2021 at 7:10 am
It’s for all the people that are coming to the neighborhood, whether this building gets built or not. Oh, they are coming alright. The proof is in the exponential growth in the population of University City over the last 20 years. The proof is in the skyrocketing home prices of this very neighborhood (twins are going for over $750k). The proof is in all the construction happening on Civic Center Boulevard, or at 42nd and Market (where 7,000 jobs will be located at this single location). People are coming, and they have money.
The question is, do you want these people to compete with current renters for existing apartments? Because let’s face it, if a landlord knows that someone can afford a higher rate at their building,, they have no obligation to keep extending the existing lease at a 2% annual increase. How about instead we give these new residents, who again are coming whether we want them or not, an option of a shiny new building, with modern amenities, to live in? This takes the pressure off existing renters, and will slow the rate of rent increases at these older buildings.
Of course rents are going to be higher at this building, compared to buildings from almost 100 years ago.. Much like how I can buy an iPhone 8 for less than an iPhone 13, creating new options helps consumers of older products. But, if we don’t ever build an iPhone 13, that iPhone 8 (which has a fixed and scarce number that exist) will only increase and increase in price.
Let’s just build this dang building already, and stop the divisiveness that is hurting our community.
May 26th, 2021 at 8:59 am
Who would the unaffordable $700k+ luxury duplexes be for? At least the apartments might offset rental pressure on the rest of the market in the neighborhood, and at least some of them will be affordable!
May 26th, 2021 at 10:37 am
what about parking, there is already no place to park
May 26th, 2021 at 10:53 am
@Wayne
The proposal includes a 56-space parking lot
May 26th, 2021 at 11:47 am
Too bad it still looks like crap, a stucco masterpiece.
Someone asked who is this project for, simple—it’s for the owner as a way to make money. And if that’s all he is about, I wish he’d build very nicely designed twins (not the stupid boxes shown about). Actually, I wish he’d sell the land cheap to the dog park!
May 26th, 2021 at 6:18 pm
The pathetic irony is how many dog owners will move into that building and clamor about why there is no greenspace devoted to pets. Soulless use of land. Ju$t pathetic.
May 27th, 2021 at 9:25 am
The building will have a street-accessible green courtyard, and both Clark Park and Kingsessing Rec Center are a block away. There’s no shortage of green space in the area. There is, however, a shortage of housing.
May 28th, 2021 at 11:42 pm
Taylor, Do you mean a general shortage, as in most if not all types of housing, or only in certain types of housing?
June 11th, 2021 at 9:05 am
The problem with Neoliberal arguments for Gentrification is that they exclude all the contradictions that the big picture would lead one to understand. In this case, it is not simply that people want to live here and that prices have skyrocketed. It is also that fanning the flames of developer greed will result in more evictions, intolerable costs for those already here, lowered quality of life as more residences are crammed into the neighborhood anywhere they can fit, etc. People have the Power to stop this- and it goes far beyond the inclusion of a few allegedly “affordable” units.
June 17th, 2021 at 11:28 am
Please, people, this rich developer needs to make more and more money because that is his right as a US citizen. That low income renters believe they have any voice in the matter is ludicrous. I’m glad that Cedar Park Neighbors and the Zoning Board made it clear that this city and university city are ruled by well-established affluent whites and they will always side firmly with other wealthy, powerful whites.
June 30th, 2021 at 11:32 am
CAN YOU SAY PAYOLA!!!!!
This is another example of extortion pay offs and back door dealings!
When will the neighbors rise up and say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!!
We all know BRIBERY IS AFOOT IN THESE DEALS!!!!!!!