The Philadelphia Historical Commission (PHC) held a public meeting on July 16 to discuss proposed construction of a senior affordable housing project in Germantown. 

The developer, OTH Capital, proposes building the 49-unit, four-story, 18,666 square-foot development at 328-330 W. Queen Lane. The project will receive residential assistance subsidies for all units. Parking is not included in the proposal.

While not a recognized historic district, the property falls within the proposed Pulaskitown Historic District, which is eligible for the National Register. 

At the meeting, a handful of neighbors expressed concerns over the project's design and scale in relation to nearby buildings and the surrounding environment. The meeting is part of an effort to mitigate the project's effect on the area, triggered by the federal subsidies the project would receive. 

James Ette’, a Democratic committeeperson for Germantown, attended the meeting and told the Local, “Affordability is a very big problem right now in Philadelphia, especially with property values [and] tax bills going up on a daily basis. A lot of seniors are losing their homes to taxes, so this [project] would be a mitigator for all of that.” 

He added, “I'm looking to see it happen, but at the same time, I do understand the neighbors’ point of view in this.” 

The subsidies were awarded by the Philadelphia Housing Authority, an agency supported by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Because the subsidies are federally funded, a review process was triggered, including Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, which looks at the project’s effect on cultural resources and historic properties. 

The act requires state and/or local historic preservation offices to host public meetings. Bruce Bohri, a spokesperson for the PHC, said these events give the public an opportunity to recommend and weigh in on options for mitigating any potential adverse effects of building.

City officials determined that the proposed development would have an “adverse effect” on the historic district due to the destruction of two district structures. They also determined the design to be “out of scale and incompatible” with the district. 

The PHC recommended that OTH Capital consider alternate sites, preservation alternatives that preserve the existing building, and design alternatives matching the surrounding district. However, the developer chose not to consider alternate sites, so the PHC’s efforts now shift to mitigation. 

The meeting 

At the meeting, Tom McInerney, a representative for the developer, presented revised plans for the project. The new design saw the upper floor’s siding changed to a cream color. McInerney said this change will help the building blend in with the surrounding buildings and make the top floor stand out less. 

At the meeting, neighbors expressed their desire to see the size of the plan reduced to three floors. Surrounding homes are all two to three stories tall, with the project’s immediate neighbor boxed in by the current design. 

Melissa Dymond lives in the property directly next to the project, and the proposed design wraps behind her house, running along the left side and hooking behind her property. 

Dymond told the Local, “There is no way to build the property at this scale without destroying many home values and decimating privacy and quality of life for neighbors who have more than accommodated any ethical and communal responsibility to provide multi-unit affordable housing in the immediate area.”

In response to calls for a smaller design, McInerney described the three-year-long process of applying for federal subsidies and how changes to the unit count this late in the game would require them to reapply. Because the historic district is eligible but not official, McInerney said OTH Capital was unaware of the Section 106 review process when starting the project. 

The lot is zoned CMX-2.5 for commercial mixed use, meaning a developer without federal subsidies could come in and build a large high-density apartment building without public input or approval from the zoning board. 

Natalie Price, a neighborhood resident of over 40 years, worries that another developer may move in and build a larger project. 

“That's why I think we're trying to work it out, so at least trying to work with us, I don't think we're asking a lot,” Price told the Local. “[I’d like] something smaller, more neighborly. … Maybe two stories, somewhere to park, and some greenspace.” 

The neighbors also called for preservation of existing Wissahickon schist walls — constructed of the native sedimentary rock  —  on the property, asking if it can be incorporated into the design. 

Dymond said, “The Wissahickon schist walls are structurally sound and historic. OTH is lazy and won’t incorporate them in the design because they want tax dollars to pay for the entire build and won’t privately invest for better plans, careful demo, or quality materials.”

She added, “Tearing the walls down will destroy neighbors' yards and will create safety and security issues when the building's greenspace and driveway then (allows) direct access to backyards.”

The Schist walls act like a fence to some neighboring properties, but the developer described “structural stability concerns” with keeping the walls intact. 

Moving forward

With the meeting concluded, the PHC will soon present the developer with a set of mitigation measures for the project to move forward. The measures will take into consideration the community’s thoughts, developer’s constraints, and the neighborhood’s historic context. 

When asked if the project could be feasible with three floors instead of four, McInerney told the Local, “I don't think there's a realistic way.”  

Ette’ said, “I don't want to affect anyone's light and air, but I do want to accommodate those who are in need, just the same. And for me, I think [affordable housing] takes more precedence.”