The Philadelphia Historical Commission (PHC) recently convened a public meeting on July 16 to address the proposed construction of a senior affordable housing project in Germantown, stirring concerns among local residents.
Developed by OTH Capital, the plan is for a four-story, 49-unit building at 328-330 W. Queen Lane, covering 18,666 square feet. The development will benefit from residential assistance subsidies for all units, with no parking provisions included in the proposal.
Although the property is not located within a designated historic district, it lies within the boundaries of the proposed Pulaskitown Historic District, recognized as eligible for the National Register.
At the public meeting, several neighbors expressed apprehensions about how the scale and design of the new construction would fit in with the existing structures and overall environment. This discussion stems from the federal subsidies allocated to the project, leading to an in-depth review process under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966’s Section 106, which examines potential impacts on cultural resources and historic sites.
James Ette’, a Democratic committeeperson from Germantown, voiced the urgent need for affordable housing amidst rising property values and increasing tax bills that threaten the homes of many seniors. He stated, “A lot of seniors are losing their homes to taxes, so this [project] would be a mitigator for all of that.”
Yet, he also acknowledged the neighbors’ concerns, emphasizing a balance between the community’s needs and preserving local quality of life.
Due to the federally funded nature of the subsidies, the PHC was obligated to conduct public meetings, allowing community members an opportunity to weigh in on the potential adverse effects of the development, including its implications for the nearby historic district.
City officials expressed that the proposed construction would negatively impact the historic district, citing the destruction of two structures within the area and deeming the design as “out of scale and incompatible” with the surrounding buildings.
In response to these concerns, the PHC encouraged OTH Capital to explore alternative sites and designs that would better harmonize with existing structures. However, the developer declined to consider alternative locations, shifting the focus of the PHC’s efforts toward mitigation strategies.
During the meeting, Tom McInerney, representing the developer, showcased revised plans, including a change of the upper floor’s siding to a cream color, aimed at facilitating a better visual integration with nearby buildings.
Nevertheless, residents articulated a strong desire for the project to be scaled down to three stories, citing concerns that the current design, reaching four stories, is incompatible with the predominantly two- to three-story surrounding homes.
Melissa Dymond, a nearby homeowner, expressed frustration with the proposed scale, stressing that it would threaten property values and residents’ quality of life. She explained, “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.”
Responding to inquiries about a potential three-story design, McInerney detailed the lengthy process of obtaining federal subsidies, stating that modifications to the unit count at this stage would necessitate a new application. He also pointed out that the eligibility—not the official designation—of the historic district wasn’t on OTH Capital’s radar during the project’s inception.
The lot is zoned as CMX-2.5 for commercial mixed use, which would allow another developer to construct a high-density apartment complex without requiring public consultations or approvals from the zoning board.
This aspect raised additional concerns, with resident Natalie Price warning that if OTH Capital’s project faltered, a different developer might take the opportunity to build an even larger structure.
Reflecting on the community’s stance, Price expressed hope for collaboration, suggesting, “At least trying to work with us, I don’t think we’re asking a lot. [I’d like] something smaller, more neighborly… Maybe two stories, somewhere to park, and some greenspace.”
Neighbors also advocated for the preservation of existing Wissahickon schist walls on the property, made from the native sedimentary rock, asking if they could be integrated into the project’s design.
Dymond criticized the developer for what she considered a lack of effort in preserving these walls, emphasizing their significance: “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.”
She added a warning: “Tearing the walls down will destroy neighbors’ yards and will create safety and security issues.”
The developer, however, cited “structural stability concerns” as a significant reason for not maintaining these historic walls.
As the meeting concluded, the focus shifts to the PHC, which is set to propose mitigation measures that take community feedback into account, while balancing the constraints faced by the developer and the context of the neighborhood.
When asked about feasibility for a three-story structure, McInerney stated, “I don’t think there’s a realistic way.”
Ette’ summed up the community sentiment: “I don’t want to affect anyone’s light and air, but I do want to accommodate those who are in need.”
image source from：chestnuthilllocal
