• New movement on trolley modernization on the T5 in Southwest Philly

• $20.8 million to replace escalators running a decade past their service life

• A $3 million contract for outreach to ‘vulnerable populations’ system-wide

• Passenger revenue $12.6 million over budget, and 159 positions unfilled

T5 Trolley Modernization moves forward

At Thursday’s meeting, the Board authorized up to $2.6 million in purchase orders to PECO for engineering and construction tied to relocating roughly 100 utility poles and five primary circuits along the T5 line. The poles sit in the path of what SEPTA plans to build there: rebuilt, fully accessible on-street stations, new low-floor vehicles that carry more riders, and a physically separated bike lane running the length of the corridor. The project will rebuild the entire streetscape. A second, related resolution sends another $500,000 to PECO for power upgrades at the 40th Street Substation.

Together, the two items bring the T5 closer to construction on what is effectively the leading edge of Trolley Modernization. SEPTA is sequencing the program with the T lines first, followed by the Media–Sharon Hill D lines and the Route 15 G line. Among the T lines, the T5 has moved fastest, with design wrapping up this year and construction scheduled for 2027 through 2030. Some stations along Island Avenue are already going in as part of the City’s Island Avenue Improvement Project.

Image Credit: SEPTA

Much of Elmwood along this corridor is currently zoned RM-1, the Philly zoning code’s medium-density workhorse for small-lot multifamily housing. That’s a good base to build on, but ‘gentle density’ alone won’t generate the ridership the modernized trolley operation needs. Near the stations themselves, mid-rise zoning should be in the mix too.

(Image: BPN Property Intelligence | Zoning along the T5: RM-1 in green; CMX-2 in light brown. See BPN’s zoning district glossary for details.)

Eastwick is flood-prone and disproportionately low-income; a rebuilt, accessible, bike-connected trolley spine there is the kind of infrastructure equity story advocates have spent years campaigning for. If this segment delivers anything close to what’s on paper, Trolley Modernization could be a shot in the arm to support more transit-accessible housing development in this part of the city.

Philadelphia’s new Transit-Oriented Communities law now provides a path to designate trolley stations for denser development, not just heavy rail stations. As SEPTA gets clearer on exactly where the modern trolley stations will go, Council President Kenyatta Johnson, whose 2nd District covers the corridor, should consider adding them to the TOC station roster to support ridership growth along this line.

Accessibility spending is up

The Board approved a $1.1 million change order for A.P. Construction’s work on the Tasker–Morris Station ADA Improvements project, pushing that contract past $9.9 million. Separately, the Board awarded a $3 million contract to Citizens Acting Together Can Help, Inc. to run outreach and engagement services for “vulnerable populations” system-wide under the Transit Police’s SCOPE program — SEPTA’s institutional answer to the homelessness and behavioral-health crises playing out across the system. A $20.8 million escalator overhaul covers units running five to 10 years past their expected service life.

Subscribe now

Read more

In this issue

• Veteran Housing in Tacony

• 27 Apartments in Spring Garden

• Ori Feibush appears before the Commission

What Happened

1319-25 Market Street

The owner of the former Market Street National Bank building at 1319-25 Market Street submitted an application for the installation of exterior signage and lighting in order to better promote the hotel, a Marriott Residence Inn, that occupies most of the building.

The applicant was seeking to install three 20ft banners on the corners of the building, the modification of an existing marquee to add Marriott branding, as well as additional lighting. Constructed in 1930, 1319-25 Market Street is an Art Deco building with ornamental terracotta tiling on the lower section of the building. The banners, rather than the lighting or the marquee, were the main point of contention with the Architectural Committee and the Historical Commission.

Commissioners, Commission Staff, and Committee members were concerned that the banners may damage the terracotta, either via the way that they’re affixed to the building or by trapping moisture and causing advanced deterioration. They also had aesthetic concerns with the banners disrupting the Art Deco styling of the building, Architectural Committee member Justin Detwiler commented “addition of those banners against that terracotta is just slapping something onto the most pure part of this building.”

At the request of the owner’s representation from Ballard Spahr & suggestion of Commissioner Dan McCoubrey, the Commission treated the marquee alterations and the banners with additional lighting as separate applications. They voted to approve the marquee changes and to grant a continuance on the banners & lighting to a future meeting.

Subscribe now

4619-25 Longshore Avenue

The owner of the former Tacony Club at 4619-25 Longshore Avenue is proposing a residential conversion to create sixteen new residential units and ground level commercial space, which is allowed by-right under the current CMX-2.5 zoning classification. According to the owner’s representative in the Architectural Committee meeting, the owner is in discussions with the Department of Veterans Affairs for the residential units to be used for VA housing.

The project as submitted includes the construction of an exterior elevator tower to increase the accessibility of the residential units. The reason for the elevator tower, according to the owner, is that the sloped roof of the building does not provide sufficient space for the elevator on the top floor without a mechanical space “popping through the middle of the roof” and adding the elevator internally would introduce design constraints for the residential units.

The Architectural Committee and the Commission had objections to the massing and impact to the historic fabric of the building, across two versions of plans submitted by the owner. The commission voted to approve the concept of an exterior elevator shaft, but to deny both of the designs presented.

27 Druim Moir Lane

Philadelphia real estate developer Ori Feibush, CEO of OCF Realty, appeared before the Commission seeking approval for exterior modifications to his home at 27 Druim Moir Lane in West Chestnut Hill. Feibush wants to construct a third story dormer to facilitate a larger staircase and increase the usability of the third floor of his home.

Subscribe now

Read more

The Zoning Board of Adjustment is proposing some changes to the regulations that govern it. These amendments were presented to the Board on June 10, 2026. Per the City Charter, the changes will take effect roughly 30 days after being filed with the Department of Records — on or about July 10, 2026 — unless a public hearing on the changes is requested by a member of the public.

Many City Hall watchers are already roughly familiar with the process through which a bill becomes a law, but the Mayor and departments also have some latitude to make pretty consequential policy changes too through administrative regulations, which follow the process described above. Proposed regulations show up on this website, and if they sit for 30 days and nothing happens, they go into effect.

The thrust of the ZBA changes is that section 5.2.3 is being struck from the regulation, and two new sections, 5.3 and 5.4, are being added. 5.2.3 relates to documents that need to be included with applications before the Board. Those requirements are being moved to their own sections and expanded upon, with some new requirements introduced.

Section 5.3 will create a new, more robust definition of Legal or Equitable Interest in a property, and acceptable documentation for proving legal or equitable interest. Applicants seeking variances/special exceptions or an L&I appeal before the board need to prove that they have some sort of ownership or legal interest in the property involved. The old language simply says “[The applicant must provide proof] of legal or equitable interest in the property in question, such as a fully signed deed, agreement of sale, lease or other similar instrument.”

The new proposed language expands that single clause into a full section. Per the new language, the Board will accept the following evidence of ownership or interest in a property:

Subscribe now

Read more

(Photo: Alejandro A. Alvarez, Philadelphia Inquirer)

At a pair of back-to-back meetings on June 25, the SEPTA Board ratified five labor agreements, adopted a $1.84 billion operating budget and a $920.7 million capital program, and signed off on a new five-year strategic plan — capping a budget season that began four weeks earlier, when the board adopted the FY2027 Annual Service Plan and set the New Bus Network in motion.

Operating Budget

The FY2027 operating budget authorizes $1.84 billion in spending, up $33.7 million (1.9%) over FY2026, against $416.8 million in revenue and roughly $1.43 billion in state and federal transfers. Critically, it includes no fare increases and no service cuts this year.

Underscoring the high stakes of this fall’s state elections for transit funding this budget “incorporates the final year of the one-time transfer of capital funds approved by [PennDOT],” and “absent a new dedicated funding source, SEPTA will face the potential for significant budget measures beginning in Fiscal Year 2028.” In his opening remarks, Chair Kenneth Lawrence pointed out this exhausts the “second and final year” of the capital-to-operating transfer the board approved last fall, a maneuver he called “unprecedented” and explicitly temporary.

If Harrisburg doesn’t deliver a statewide funding fix before July 2027, significant service cuts of the scale planned during last year’s crisis will be back on the table.

Subscribe now

Capital Budget

The FY2027 capital budget totals $920.7 million, and the twelve-year program would spend $16.5 billion across 146 projects. SEPTA’s capital budget has increased more than 50% since FY2021 — a positive development, as SEPTA had been the only agency of its peer group with a capital budget of less than a billion dollars until Leslie Richards’s tenure.

But inflation has eaten into those gains, forcing the agency to defer more than 40 projects in FY2026 alone. Most strikingly, the State of Good Repair backlog has doubled from $5.1 billion to $10.2 billion. To bridge the gap, SEPTA plans to borrow roughly $4.3 billion over twelve years, $1.5 billion more than the FY2026 plan.

The major capital priorities in the pipeline include $7.7 billion for fleet replacement of trolleys, Market-Frankford Line cars, and Silverliner IVs, $3.69 billion specifically for Trolley Modernization, and nearly $600 million for station accessibility. The Trolley Mod initiative will deliver a more ADA-accessible and light-rail-like experience to West Philadelphia and Delaware County transit riders when fully executed, and you can already see a preview of some of the street and station changes to-come on Island Ave at Lindbergh and Tanager in Southwest Philly. SEPTA will soon release an update on its long-term capital priorities in the coming months.

New Bus Network Launches

In May, the board adopted the FY2027 Annual Service Plan, which is what officially puts the the New Bus Network (formerly “Bus Revolution”) into motion. The New Bus Network will roll out in three phases:

• Phase 1 (August 2026) is Philadelphia-focused, adding two new routes — Route 72 and Route 76, the latter connecting Frankford Transportation Center to South Philadelphia — with frequency improvements on six routes, realignments on five, and efficiency changes on fifteen.
  It also launches automated camera enforcement on bus lanes and SEPTA’s first real-time bus tracking.

• Phase 2 (February 2027) reaches Chester County with the agency’s first two “Go On Demand” zones, a new Route 142, and a Direct Bus extension.

• Phase 3 (June 2027) brings a third on-demand zone to Norristown.

After protracted negotiations over the changes, the New Bus Network is expected to provide a modest overall increase in speed and reliability, with the largest benefits felt in the city of Philadelphia.

Routes that serve neighborhoods with more minority residents are slated for a 1.5 percent increase in service hours and routes serving disproportionately low-income neighborhoods will see a 0.9 percent increase. Nineteen bus routes met the threshold for review for disparate impact on minority riders or disproportionate burden on low-income riders, each requiring a documented mitigation or justification.

SEPTA held more than 200 public meetings from 2021-2024 to gather community feedback and over 25 community events prior to the May meeting to collect comments on phasing and implementation.

Subscribe now

Read more

In this issue:

• Sixteen new homes in West Philadelphia, and 363 new apartments in Manayunk

• A design proposal described as a “billboard for the billionaire class”

• An accusation of AI-generated renderings

• A choice between “saving a building or saving people’s lives”
  

  Subscribe now

What Happened

4238-40 Chester Ave

The Commission reviewed and commented on a proposal to build eight duplexes — sixteen units — on an empty lot at 4238-40 Chester Avenue, in the Southeast Spruce Hill Historic District. Because the lot is non-contributing to the district, the Commission’s role is limited to review and comment, not approval or denial.

As with many projects in the city, much of the debate was about parking. In written comments, Amy Lambert of the University City Historical Society (UCHS) called the design “functionally tone deaf with the very nature of this transit-rich neighborhood,” objecting that “[t]he inclusion of 8 garages and curb cuts just feet from three trolley lines is not pedestrian- or family-friendly.“ Benjamin Sirolly of Friends of Clark Park, immediately adjacent to the lot, protested that the curb cuts would reduce on-street parking and the driveways would preclude street trees. Jenine Sanzari, for the Spruce Hill Community Association, wrote that “replacing a garden space with a concentration of garages in such close proximity to the playground prioritizes vehicular access over public safety.“

The Commission’s oversight, however, doesn’t extend to street safety or parking except as they affect the streetscape or the buildings’ exterior. When the project was before the Architectural Committee, members lamented that the parking couldn’t be placed in the rear, but that’s prohibited by zoning.

Most of the Commission’s comments concerned aesthetics and proportions. The mansard roofs read as “top-heavy,” a product of nine-foot ceilings plus a roof deck that’s out of proportion with how more traditional houses were built. The plans also lean heavily on prefabricated aluminum, vinyl, and composite siding, with only light use of masonry. “Aesthetically,“ UCHS wrote, “the designs act as billboards for the billionaire class, reminding residents that greed through minimal attention to materials and context seems more important than the City’s own preservation ordinance.“

2108 Sansom St

The Commission unanimously denied an in-concept design for a third- and fourth-floor addition to a carriage house at 2108 Sansom Street in the Rittenhouse-Fitler Historic District.

The applicant proposed a third floor in the style of a mansard roof, plus a partial fourth floor and roof deck set back far enough not to be visible from the street. The Commission has approved vertical additions on carriage houses in Rittenhouse-Fitler before, but those typically use setbacks to limit visibility from the street. Architectural Committee members noted that a mansard roof on a carriage house would be highly unusual and would create a “false sense of history.”

It was also noted that the renderings, prepared by local firm Zangrilli Design, appeared to have been created with the help of generative AI, and “depict inconsistent proportions, window configurations, and the existing building’s relationship to surrounding buildings,” making the proposal difficult to assess.

Subscribe now

3331 Powelton Ave

The Commission unanimously denied an application to legalize window and masonry work completed without a permit at 3331 Powelton Avenue in West Philadelphia. The Commission was first notified of unpermitted work at the property in June 2025; staff told the owner that any exterior work required a permit and Commission review. Despite that, a contractor proceeded to do masonry work, remove historic windows and replace them with vinyl, brick over some windows, and complete other exterior alterations. Licenses and Inspections issued a stop-work order in May 2026, directing the owner to obtain the required permits.

The owner said the work was emergency mitigation for structural problems caused by water infiltration around the windows and brickmolds. She was already under a separate stop-work order for a broken sewer line, and after the property received L&I violations for open windows, she believed she was complying by replacing or closing them. She testified that she’d largely relied on her contractor’s advice. Commissioners and Architectural Committee members said she’d likely gotten bad advice, criticized some of the window work, and suggested she retain a contractor more familiar with historic buildings and with working in Philadelphia.

459 Roxborough Ave

The Commission voted unanimously to add Galilee Baptist Church at 459 Roxborough Avenue to the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The church has anchored the Roxborough/Manayunk-area Black community for 125 years; Commissioners praised it as exemplifying “asymmetrical balance,” calling it a “very proud” church.

David Traub of Save Our Sites, Steven Peitzman of the East Falls Historical Society, and Oscar Beisert of the Keeping Society all spoke in favor. The nomination was submitted with the cooperation and support of Rev. Dr. Richard Brown III, Galilee’s interim pastor, and the congregation.

132 North 10th St

The Commission voted unanimously to add 132 North 10th Street, the former Tetlow Manufacturing Company building in Chinatown, to the Register. The nomination was prepared by Annie Liang-Zhou, a master’s student at the University of Pennsylvania’s Weitzman School of Design.

Built as a cosmetics factory, the building is, the nominator noted, a rare surviving example of an industrial building in Chinatown. The Commission praised the nomination’s quality and detail.

5604 North 5th St

The Commission voted unanimously to add 5604 North 5th Street, the former National Bank of Olney, to the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places.

David Traub of Save Our Sites commended the nomination, noting that he “wish[es] we could nominate the rendering … it’s a splendid piece of architectural illustration and it shows what the building could be if it were restored to its original appearance.”

4889 Umbria St

The Commission voted unanimously to add 4889 Umbria Street, the former Manayunk Plush Manufacturing Company building, to the Register. The site is under active development, with a 363-unit apartment building proposed; the project was well in progress when the nomination was submitted in April 2026, having received conditional zoning approval and completed a Civic Design Review in 2025.

In its review, Commission staff “questions whether this is the appropriate moment to designate this property, given that it is actively under redevelopment,” noting the developer “designed a redevelopment project to comply with one set of regulations but would be compelled to redesign it midstream.” An attorney for the owners said they didn’t object to designation itself, but strongly objected to the “buffer” around the building, which would have required Commission approval for changes to the surrounding open land — grading, loading, parking, and the like.

Both the nominator, the Ridge Park Civic Association, and the Committee on Historic Designation accepted the owner’s proposed compromise: limiting the designation to the building’s footprint and excluding the open land. Commissioner Emily Cooperman, an architectural and landscape historian, called the boundary “very appropriate,” noting it’s “very common for industrial complexes to expand and change over time” — “a very different situation from an individual residential building on a large lot or an institutional building that has historically had a kind of breathing space.”

Subscribe now

Read more

What happened

Old City Demolition (302 Market Street)

The Commission approved on a 7-to-1 vote, with one abstention, the demolition of a two-story building at 302 Market Street, and the construction of a five-story building in its place. The original building on this lot was built in 1840 and was destroyed by a fire in 2014. The current building (the one being demolished) was built in 2017.

Commissioner Emily Cooperman, an architectural historian, was the dissenting vote on the proposal. She had two main concerns. One was that the new building at five stories would be taller than the surrounding historic buildings in the district and the original 1840 building on that site. The other was that the design of the proposed building was more indicative of the post-Civil War style Addison Hutton was known for, rather than that of the early 1840s when the original building and the immediately adjacent historic fabric were built. She complimented the design as “very handsome” but not one that she could support.

During public comment, David Traub, representing Save Our Sites, a local preservation advocacy group, commended the project as a “rather exemplary example of infill” and praised the developer for adopting the design changes recommended at the project’s earlier Architectural Committee review.

The 7-to-1 split was notable in itself. Commission decisions are typically by unanimous consent — if no member objects to a motion, it is considered passed unanimously without a roll call. Members will sometimes vote against an otherwise-passing motion specifically to register opposition and have their reasoning entered into the record. Truly contested votes, where the Commission is split, are rare.

Subscribe now

Senior Housing Project Pursues Historic Tax Credits at De Long Hook & Eye Factory (3031 N 21st Street)

The Commission provided comment on a nomination for the De Long Hook & Eye Company Factory at 3031 North 21st Street to the National Register of Historic Places. The building is not currently on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places.

Read more

The Philadelphia Land Bank Board approved three dispositions at their May 12th meeting, unlocking 44 new single-family homes on city properties — all eligible for the city’s Turn the Key (TTK) program — across the 2nd, 3rd, and 5th Council districts. All three votes were unanimous.

What Happened

The headline approvals:

• Gonsosa Development was awarded the Sub-Area 2 RFP for 19 homes in Sharswood (CD 5) — previously pulled from April’s Board agenda

• Fine Print Construction was approved for two unsolicited proposals: 14 homes in Grays Ferry (CD 2), notably capped at 80% AMI rather than the more common 100%, and 11 homes on Leidy Avenue in Parkside / Belmont (CD 3), involving subdivisions of three existing parcels.

The Leidy Avenue item prompted the meeting’s most substantive discussion — a procedural objection from a neighboring property owner that staff and a community group member witness refuted. With all members in attendance, the board approved it anyway.

Outside of the three dispositions, public comment focused on demands for greater transparency around the Land Bank’s pending operational assessment, pending Council legislation impacting land swaps, and continued discussion about the always-hot topic of the scope community input on project details and siting.

Subscribe now

Executive Director’s Report

Land Bank Executive Director Angel Rodriguez did not deliver a formal Executive Director’s report this month, but he briefly updated the board on the current Turn the Key program statistics, including revised AMI data, demographics, and so forth. Read on for a detailed breakdown of the program stats below.

Item #1 — Gonsosa Development (Sharswood Sub-Area 2 RFP)

Council District 5 (CM Jeffery Young) · 19 single-family homes · Sharswood (North Central RFP)

This RFP project was originally on the April 14th agenda, but was pulled before the meeting. It was back on the agenda this month without modification.

Project details

• 19 single-family homes on 19 parcels

• 2 stories, no basement

• 3 bedrooms / 2 baths

• ~1,200 SF each

• ≤100% AMI, maximum sale price $280,000

• HOME / Turn the Key eligible

• EOP plan applies

• Awarded via the same North Central RFP that produced the Civetta Sub-Area 1 award in April

Read more

(Source: Philadelphia.TODAY)

The Philadelphia City Planning Commission met Thursday at 1515 Arch Street, working through a packed agenda that included a contentious property transfer in Germantown, a pair of school rezonings in West Philadelphia, a federally owned VA site whose redevelopment plans are now in question, a University of Pennsylvania master plan amendment, a rezoning tied to an affordable housing project in North Philadelphia, and a long-awaited waterfront activation in Tacony.

Zoning Bill 260298, covering Lankenau Environmental Science Magnet High School, was flagged for 45-day review with staff reports due in May. Co-introduced by Councilmembers Jones Jr., Thomas, and Ahmad, the bill would rezone the area from RSD-3 to SP-CIV. There have been complications with exact property boundaries. You may have seen coverage of the School District’s plans to close Lankenau in the Inquirer. Streets Bill 260267, a staircase encroachment at 611 S. 7th Street, was approved administratively.

Property Bill 260242: Town Hall on Germantown Avenue — Approved, With Community Pushback

Source: (Photo: Rasheed Z. Ajamu, Resolve Philly)

The longest item by far. The bill, introduced by Councilmember Bass, authorizes conveying a tract of city-owned land at 5928–30 Germantown Ave to the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development (PAID), which would work with West Powelton Development — holder of an MOU since 2022 — to restore the historic Germantown Town Hall. The plan has shifted from senior housing to a charter school anchor tenant targeting Q3 2028 occupancy, a commercial kitchen and restaurant incubator, and historic exterior preservation. The Commission’s role here wasn’t to weigh in on the sale terms, but on whether the disposition aligns with the City’s planning goals. The Upper Northwest District Plan does prioritize preservation and reuse of architecturally significant or historic buildings.

Subscribe now

Read more

At last Tuesday’s Land Bank Board meeting, the board approved five dispositions and one interagency transfer, unlocking 42 units of housing on city-owned properties.

Board chair Angela Brooks was absent and the meeting was chaired by Vice Chair Nicholas Dema. Board members Alexander Balloon, Maria Gonzalez, and Jenny Greenberg were also absent.

The main event of the meeting was a proposal from Civetta Property Group, owned by principals Mike and Brennan Tomasetti. Civetta is the single largest Turn the Key developer by volume.

The meeting began with the Executive Director’s report, which included an overview of the Turn the Key program’s stats to-date, and a list of all the properties let out for Turn the Key and other workforce and affordable housing development projects since FY2017. As of this month’s report, 1,004 TTK units have been approved for development, with 569 under construction and 369 completed and sold. Forty percent of sold units — 149 homes — went to city employees. The average TTK buyer earns about 66% of Area Median Income, with a $71,000 Land Bank second mortgage and a $1,400 average monthly payment.

See the meeting packet for more details. Paid subscribers can check out the full map of public properties, filterable by agency owner, on the BPN Property Intelligence platform.

(5th District RFP property map)

Civetta’s new scattered-site proposal was a response to a Request for Proposals prepared by the Land Bank staff in coordination with 5th District Councilmember Jeffery Young’s office, and would add another 26 Turn the Key homes to the list, in Sharswood.

The 26 homes will be three-bedroom, two-bath single-family houses of roughly 1,375 square feet, sold to households at or below 100% of AMI for a maximum price of $280,000. Nine will be two-story with no basement, five two-story with finished basements, and twelve three-story with no basement. Civetta will pay $2,600 for the assembled 27,974-square-foot site, against an appraised value of $985,000. Total development costs are pegged at $6.5 million, with 10% developer equity and the balance in senior debt from Legacy Capital.

A paired RFP award to Gonsosa Development for 19 additional homes on an adjacent sub-area (Sub-Area 2) was removed from the agenda before the meeting.

One of the 26 parcels named in the RFP was the subject of some controversy at the meeting. Members of the newly-organized Philadelphia Land Stewards Union, a group advocating for the interests of volunteer stewards of city lots, organized for the public comment segment to demand the Land Bank remove 1818 N. 23rd Street from the deal. That lot has been maintained by a near neighbor, whose name we’ll leave out for privacy reasons.

Read more

Murals at the National Liberty Museum (321-23 Chestnut St)

The Commission unanimously approved the installation of murals at the National Liberty Museum. The museum came to the Commission seeking to install a series of murals along a pedestrian path between Chestnut Street and Market Street. The murals were to be installed in former window bays which had been bricked over.

Commissioners were generally supportive of the installation of the murals, but a significant amount of discussion both within the Architecture Committee and the full Commission centered on the method of attaching the murals to the building. The initial proposal was to use a “parachute cloth technique” whereby, quoting the applicant, “a thin canvas material called poly tab will be hand painted, coated in anti-graffiti clearcoat, and permanently installed on the wall with a gel adhesive.”

The gel adhesive is permanent and can only be removed by mechanical means (scraping and/or sandblasting), which would damage the underlying masonry.

Commissioners and Architecture Committee members were concerned about this use of a permanent adhesive on the masonry, even though the masonry itself was not original to the building. The museum and the artist had an alternative method available, which involved mounting aluminum panels to the masonry. This method had the downside of being more costly, according to testimony from the artist, and would require drilling into the masonry, but with the benefit of being easily removable and replaceable. As luck would have it, the masonry had already been drilled into, so there are existing mounting points available. The Commission approved the installation on the condition the museum use the more expensive and more easily removable aluminum panel method.

Relevant PHC Filings: Permit Application

Subscribe now

Adaptive Reuse of St. John’s Baptist Church (1601 South 13th St, East Passyunk)

The Commission unanimously approved, in concept, an application for the conversion of St. John’s Baptist Church to 26 rental apartments. The site is about 1,300 feet from Passyunk Avenue near the Tasker-Morris BSL stop.

This was the second time this project had come before the Commission. The applicant was seeking clarification on the feedback the Commission had given during review of the first submission, which was also approved in concept. During that first review the Commission focused on two issues: (1) the proposed material of the roof, and (2) the size and shape of new dormers to be added to the roof.

Previously the Commission had requested that the roof be redone with slate, or imitation slate, rather than asphalt shingles, as the developer had proposed. The current slate roof has reached the end of its useful life per the PHC staff, and according to the property owner is uninsurable in its current state. The owner had previously testified that slate would add over $200,000 to the total project cost. After working with the Commission staff between the first and second submissions, it does not appear that they were able to find a cheaper slate-like material to use on the roof.

(The plans reviewed by the PHC after integrating feedback from the architecture committee)

The second issue the Commission raised with the previous submission was that the proposed dormers created too much massing and were too disruptive to the roofline. The dormers are necessary so that the new upper-level apartments will have natural light.

Relevant PHC Filings: Initial Application, Revised Application, Public Comment

New Housing on Historic Lot (8226 Germantown Avenue)

The Commission unanimously approved an application for the construction of a mixed-use building with four residential units on the lot of the Dietwiler House at 8226 Germantown Avenue. The Dietwiler House, built in 1760, is one of the earliest individually designated properties by the Commission, having been designated in 1957.

The substance of this application is not so much about alterations to a historic building, but rather the construction of a new building on the lot. The applicant is seeking to restore the interior of the Dietwiler House, but otherwise leave it as is, and build a new mixed-use multifamily building on the lot. This project was first put before the Commission’s Architecture Committee in July 2024. The first submission was for a five-story, eighteen-unit building which would be physically connected to the Dietwiler House.

The proposal received substantial community pushback, with public commenters and representatives of community groups expressing concerns about the density, size of the building, the loss of green space, and the design of the building. The Architecture Committee recommended denial due to the size and massing of the new building overwhelming the smaller Dietwiler House.

From July 2024 through today the developer has worked with Commission staff, neighbors, and community groups to create a proposal that would be more acceptable to everyone. The new building was detached from the historic building, which will remain a single-family home. The developer also purchased an adjacent property so they could use an existing easement for parking access without an additional curb cut on Germantown Avenue. In successive revisions of the proposal the new development was adjusted from five stories and 18 residential units to 12 residential units, and finally to just four—as the developer calls them—luxury residential units, plus one single-family residence in the historic home.

The new proposal was received favorably by the Commission and community groups. The Commission approved the application, and this project is scheduled to go before the Zoning Board later in March.

Relevant PHC Filings: Permit Application, Revised Application

Subscribe now

Garage to Apartment Conversion (5416-26 Lena St)

The Commission unanimously approved an application to convert an unused industrial building at 5416-26 Lena Street in the Germantown Urban Village Historic District into apartments. The building will be converted into 19 apartments with 16 parking spaces.

Allison Weiss of SoLo Germantown and David Traub of Save Our Sites spoke in favor of the proposal and commended the work of the architect. A neighbor, Justin Cook, spoke against the proposal. Cook noted that, while he aesthetically endorsed the proposal, he was concerned about the increased density in the neighborhood and the availability of parking (5416-26 Lena St will have 16 spaces for 19 units). This project, he noted, was near the Hamill Mill Apartments (5423-27 Lena St) which is being redeveloped by the Philadelphia Housing Authority and is expected to have 40 residential units and a 33-unit building being built at 26-34 Church Lane.

The 26-34 Church Lane project itself was previously denied by the Commission, which has oversight over the empty lot since it falls in a Historic District. In subsequent litigation the Court of Common Pleas overruled the Commission and reclassified the property as non-contributing to the Historic District, allowing the developer to proceed without PHC oversight.

The Commission noted that they do not have oversight of issues like parking or density, and that those issues would need to be addressed by the Zoning Board.

Relevant PHC Filings: Nomination (Revised), Permit Application

Philadelphia’s Sixth Historically Protected Interior (123 S Broad St)

The Commission unanimously designated the main banking room of the Fidelity-Philadelphia Trust Company Building at 123 South Broad Street, making it the sixth publicly accessible interior space on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places.

The main point of discussion in the meeting concerned the teller stations and knee walls. The owner submitted a letter requesting these elements be considered “non-contributing,” meaning they could be removed or altered without approval by the Commission. While the Commission generally agreed that there would need to be flexibility to support any future use of the interior, Commissioner Emily Cooperman disagreed with calling the teller stations non-contributing.

The Commission generally only governs the exteriors of buildings. Very few building interiors are designated, and as such there is less history and precedent for how to handle adaptive reuse and flexibility for property owners.

(Contributing features shown in red)

Cooperman suggested that the teller stations be considered contributing, but that the designation be written in such a way that would allow for their future removal if needed. A condition would be included that, prior to removing them, the owner would document them with photographs and drawings, to be submitted to the Commission.

The Commissioners and a representative of the owner agreed with this approach.

Relevant PHC Filings: Nomination, Letter from Owner

Subscribe now

Report of the Historical Commission Staff

At the end of each month the Commission staff publishes a report of what they’ve been working on. This report can provide insight into upcoming PHC activities, as well as a view into the work the Commission does that is not covered in the meetings.

Upcoming Nominations

• The staff rejected a nomination for the Friends Hospital, a 99-acre site at 4641 E. Roosevelt Boulevard, as incomplete. It will likely be resubmitted.

• The staff is reviewing a nomination for Tulpehocken Historic District. It is likely that this would have a similar footprint to the Tulpehocken Station Historic District, which is on the National Register of Historic Places. The staff notes that the photographs in the nomination were of unsatisfactory quality and they plan to retake photographs this spring.

• The staff is reviewing a nomination for a Chestnut Street West Historic District.

• The staff is working with community members on proposals for a Wissahickon Historic District, Falls Village Historic District, and a Yorktown and Pelham area Historic District in West Mount Airy.

Appeals and Litigation

As of February there were two L&I appeals of PHC permit decisions and ten cases before either the Court of Common Pleas or Commonwealth Court.

Litigation of Commission decisions typically cuts both ways. Some are filed by neighborhood and preservationist groups seeking less leniency from the Commission. For instance, at 156 W. School House Lane, the Commission approved the demolition of a historic building on the campus of the Philadelphia School for the Deaf. A neighborhood group appealed this decision to L&I, and then to the Court of Common Pleas to try to stop the demolition. In other cases property owners or developers are seeking to reverse designations by the Commission or appeal permit denials. This happened in the case of 26-34 Church Lane where a judge forced the reclassification of a lot to be non-contributing, which cleared the path for by-right development.

Commentary

Readers may notice a conspicuous absence of the biggest news in historic preservation in the city this year: the overturning of the designation of the Washington Square West Historic District by the Court of Common Pleas. The Washington Square West Historic District was, when it was designated, Philadelphia’s largest Historic District, containing 1,441 properties with a period of significance from 1740 to 1985. Other than a brief mention in the staff report, this topic did not come up in this month’s meeting.

The ongoing fight over the Washington Square West district is emblematic of the conflict of visions about preservation in the city. Preservationists want the Commission to have both more oversight over development activity and to be less accommodating to the wishes of property owners. Developers and some property owners see the Commission’s oversight as burdensome and as another veto point preventing development.

The Commission tries to thread that needle. They frequently extol the benefits of compromise, of property owners and developers being willing to work with them, and of the flexibility they offer. To the Commission’s credit, they do frequently make decisions that anger preservationists and activist groups in the city.

However, in the case of 8226 Germantown Avenue, compromise and working with the Commission and neighborhood groups led to the downscaling of a housing project from 18 units to just four luxury units and the owner holding the property unused for nearly two years.

The case of St. John’s shows something of the art of working with the Commission. The Commission and preservationists want a slate roof. Slate roofs are expensive. In the Architecture Committee meetings and the full Commission meetings, Commissioners and committee members opined at length on the aesthetic and practical benefits of slate over asphalt. The current roof is, however, uninsurable and replacing it with slate would increase project costs by $200,000.

The Commission has an enormous amount of discretion on these types of matters. There are no clear objective guidelines on how much massing is “too much,” which type of dormer is the most appropriate for adaptive reuse of a church, or when it’s okay for a renovation to replace older materials with newer ones.

If the owner had offered to put on a slate roof in order to move the process forward, presumably the Commission would have included that as a provision of their approval. However, at no point in public meetings or filings did the owner suggest that they thought a new slate roof was a feasible option for this project.

The Commission ultimately approved a version of the project with an asphalt roof this month. There wasn’t a formal financial review of the economics of the project to determine whether the owner could actually install a slate roof. It was at the Commission’s discretion. They generally look favorably on adaptive reuse projects, particularly ones involving difficult-to-use buildings like churches. It’s reasonable to think that they may be more lenient on adaptive reuse projects than they would be on other types. In January the Commission denied an application to legalize an asphalt roof that had been installed at 4221 Pine St, replacing a slate roof, without having gone through the proper approval process.

It’s hard to tell exactly how the Commission will use its discretion. Projects that preservationists favor — like adaptive reuse — brought by developers and architects with Commission experience, generally receive favorable treatment. It also helps when the scale of a project is large enough to allow give-and-take; St. John’s being willing to redesign the dormers, for instance, likely made the Commission more comfortable approving an asphalt roof. Illegal (unpermitted) modifications, absent owners, unwillingness to engage with the Commission, generally hurt a project’s chance of approval. The Commission is also fundamentally a political body, as we saw in 2024 when, reportedly at the direction of the Parker administration, the designation of the Roundhouse was denied. So as with many things in Philadelphia politics, it doesn’t hurt to have friends in high places.

(Ambler Station rendering | Korman Communities)

SEPTA’s board unanimously authorized a 99-year ground lease at Ambler station last Thursday — the agency’s most concrete step yet toward becoming a housing developer as well as a transit operator.

At their February meeting, the board selected Korman Communities and Benchmark Real Estate to build mixed-use housing on the parking lot adjacent to the Ambler Regional Rail Station. The project is expected to add up to 170 units to the area. Starting at $402,500 annually with 3% escalators, the deal is projected to generate roughly $237 million over its lifetime. Profit-sharing provisions are still being negotiated.

Subscribe now

This is what transit-oriented development actually looks like when done right: new housing next to a train station supporting ridership; a transit agency monetizing underused parking; equitable, walkable communities built around the infrastructure taxpayers have already funded.

General Manager Scott Sauer called it part of a broader strategy to gain revenue outside of ticket sales, and projected that SEPTA’s TOC program could generate at least $10 million annually through ground leases.

While the first SEPTA TOC project is in the suburbs, Philadelphia also has opportunities to create more transit-oriented housing in the city using public land. Mayor Parker’s H.O.M.E initiative, which aims to address Philadelphia’s severe housing shortage, cannot cannot deliver 30,000 homes without denser housing near transit. The Ambler project is a proof of concept, and a model the city could replicate wherever it or SEPTA have underused land near transit.

Lawrence and Moskowitz Re-elected

The board opened its annual meeting by unanimously re-electing Kenneth Lawrence as Chair and Marian Moskowitz as Vice Chair. A fellow board member praised Lawrence’s effectiveness, and Lawrence pledged to work with the Governor, Senate, and House toward a sustainable transit funding solution. General Manager Scott Sauer’s position was renewed with a three-year contract with an annual salary of $395,000.

Finances

The January 2026 financial report showed mixed but broadly encouraging results. Total operating expenses came in at $63.5 million below budget — driven largely by cuts to consulting and contract services, as well as a staffing shortfall of 539 positions. On the revenue side, passenger revenue was $4.2 million or 2.4% above budget year-to-date, with ridership growing for the first time since July. Other income — including parking fees and advertising — came in $5.3 million over budget year-to-date. The system-wide deficit before subsidies stood at $731.1 million for the seven-month period ending January 24.

City of Philadelphia Infrastructure Agreement

The board authorized SEPTA to enter into a project agreement with the City of Philadelphia establishing a uniform framework for coordinating on city infrastructure projects — such as roads, bridges, and trails — that intersect with SEPTA facilities. The agreement runs through December 31, 2035, with a five-year extension option.

Labor Agreement

The board ratified a Memorandum of Agreement with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters (IBT) Local 500, governing terms and conditions of employment for the bargaining unit employees represented by that union.

Insurance Renewal

The board approved renewal of SEPTA’s Excess Railroad Liability Insurance program through Queen’s Island Insurance Company for a 12-month term beginning March 1, 2026. Notably, the renewal reduces SEPTA’s self-insured retention from $25 million to $10 million — bringing it in line with peer agencies — and adds a standalone Terrorism Liability Policy, a change deemed particularly prudent given Philadelphia’s role hosting major 2026 events including the FIFA World Cup and America’s 250th anniversary celebration.

Pension

The board approved terminating Galliard Capital Management as investment manager for SEPTA’s pension plan in the Domestic Fixed Income Core/Core Plus asset class, consolidating those assets with existing manager PGIM, Inc., following a recommendation from pension consultant NEPC.

Operations & Capital Contracts

The board authorized a range of procurement contracts including: a $33.5 million contract with J.D. Eckman for rehabilitation of the 12.81 viaduct on the Norristown High Speed Line (built in 1911); a $2.56 million fire suppression systems maintenance contract with Johnson Controls; and Silverliner IV blower motor alternator overhaul with Walco Electric ($1.07M).

General Manager’s Report

GM Scott Sauer highlighted SEPTA’s strong storm response during two major winter events, calling the L and B lines “workhorses” during both storms. He acknowledged the age of SEPTA’s fleets and the backlog of capital needs, and expressed encouragement at Governor Shapiro’s mention of SEPTA in his budget address. Sauer emphasized the TOC program’s revenue potential — projecting $10 million annually through leases — and referenced a forthcoming strategic plan. He also recognized specific workers by name for their roles in fleet repair and storm response.

Public Comment

Speakers included Alexander Milone of 5th Square, who called on SEPTA to expand real-time information displays as central to its ridership strategy; Jerrett Johnson of 5th Square and Transit Forward Philly, called for action to expand student pass hours, raising some issues the current time limits create for students with after-school jobs and activities; Nico Meyering of Transit Forward Philly and Young Involved Philadelphia who spoke in favor of Zero Fare and SEPTA Key Advantage for city workers; and a rider who asked about elevator reliability and ADA compliance across the system.

Subscribe now

Commentary

Any new revenue is helpful to SEPTA, but it’s important to be clear about the context in which Thursday’s meeting took place, and the relatively modest amount of revenue that could be available from more deals like this. SEPTA has been running a system-wide deficit— before subsidies—of $731 million for the first seven months of fiscal year 2026 alone. The agency is operating with 539 fewer positions than budgeted. It has slashed consulting and contract service spending just to stay afloat. Headcount gaps mean delayed maintenance, reduced service quality, and a workforce stretched thin across a network that, as Sauer noted, is aging and deeply in need of capital investment.

And yet SEPTA is doing what Republicans in Harrisburg have repeatedly asked it to do: find efficiencies, grow non-fare revenue, partner with the private sector, and prove it can be a responsible steward of public funds. The Ambler deal is evidence SEPTA is taking that charge seriously. So is the fact that passenger revenue is running 2.4% above budget year-to-date, led in part by a genuine ridership increase — the first since July. Ridership is recovering in spite of continued revenue uncertainty from the state.

Board Chair Ken Lawrence made clear that SEPTA will “work with the Governor, the Senate, and the House to find a sustainable solution” to the agency’s structural funding gap. It was a notably measured statement — diplomatic, coalition-minded, oriented toward partnership rather than confrontation. He asked transit advocates to keep their pressure campaigns respectful of elected officials who have not yet come around, nodding to the delicate politics of building a funding coalition in a divided Harrisburg.

That restraint is understandable. But there is a hard truth underneath it: SEPTA has now demonstrated, in concrete and contractual terms, that it can be the kind of partner the Commonwealth says it wants. Ridership is growing. The agency is controlling costs. It is forging innovative development agreements that could transform station areas across the five-county region. What it cannot do — what no amount of creative dealmaking can replace — is the sustained, predictable public funding that a regional transit system of this scale requires. SEPTA has shown it can do the work. Now Harrisburg needs to do its part.

We’re running some free sample posts this month to get the word out, and in the near future we will be offering two new Substack membership tiers where subscribers will get access to more meeting reporting and civic intelligence tools, including a new property data dashboard developed by our friend Brandon Cohen of CivilGrid (many thanks Brandon!)

If you agree Philadelphia needs this kind of local news reporting, please share this post with anyone who’d be interested, and consider supporting this work when the new membership tiers go live. Stay tuned!

Subscribe now

What Happened at the Philadelphia Historical Commission’s February 13th Meeting?

Proposed Historical Designation of the Circle Theater (4648-62 Frankford Avenue)

The Commission unanimously added 4648-62 Frankford Avenue, also known as the Circle Theater, to the Philadelphia Historic Register. The Circle Theater is a long-defunct movie theater in Frankford, approximately 250 feet from the Arrott Transit Center stop on the El.

The Circle Theater was built in 1928-29 and ceased operations as a theater in 1953. Today it has some street-level retail, with the bulk of the building abandoned, and the main stage of the theater largely untouched. The lot is 31,944 square feet, occupying most of a city block, with only a portion of the 132-foot frontage seeing active use today.

In 2010, writer Peter Woodall gained access to the interior of the theater. Photos published in Hidden City show the interior more or less unchanged since 1953, with many remarkably intact architectural details.

The basis of the nomination was that the building reflects the distinctive architectural style of neighborhood movie theaters between 1910 and 1930 and is the work of Hoffman-Henon, renowned movie theater designers. The nomination argues these satisfy criteria (c) and (e) of the City of Philadelphia Historic Preservation Ordinance.

The Historical Commission doesn’t govern building interiors unless specifically nominated. This nomination focused on preserving the Spanish-style façade on the second floor of the building, primarily viewable from the El platform. The street-level façade has been heavily modified to accommodate retail.

This approach—focusing on the front of the building—was the subject of some discussion when the Committee on Historic Designation reviewed the nomination. (Ted Maust, a PHC Staff member, filed the nomination. The original nomination included language intended to prevent non-architectural elements (fire escapes, service entrances, etc.) from blocking future reuse.

> However, the details of its construction, including openings for windows and doors and vestiges of fire stairs, reflect historical code requirements and functional constraints rather than architectural style, and are not character defining to the building.

What elements are or are not contributing is an important distinction in what type of future modifications to the building would be allowed. Committee member Suzanna Barucco disagreed that elements of the rear and side of the building were necessarily non-contributing to its significance, and Barucco along with other committee members had procedural concerns about whether such considerations belonged in the nomination at all.

The Committee’s findings, sent to the Historical Commission, were that “The rear and side elevations, though less eye-catching than the front of the building, are architecturally significant and the massing, masonry, and fenestration pattern are character-defining.” The Committee also recommended striking the line beginning ‘However, the details of its construction.‘

Ellie Devyatkin, representing the Frankford Community Development Corporation, spoke in support of Historic Designation. She also noted that in areas where rents and property values are low, historic designation can be burdensome for owners if they don’t come with financial support. Oscar Beisert, representing the Keeping Society, supported the nomination and echoed Devyatkin, urging leniency in future use or development of this building considering the local economic conditions.

Relevant PHC Filings: Initial Application, Public Comment

Subscribe now

Triplex Conversion in Callowhill (229 N. Camac Street)

The Commission unanimously approved a building permit application for a rear addition and conversion to a triplex at 229 N. Camac Street. Commissioners commended the architect’s work, noting the minimal visibility of the addition from the street. Approval was granted with the condition that the roof deck pilothouse be moved further back from the original roof line.

Relevant PHC Filings: Initial Application, Revised Application

Residential Conversion in Rittenhouse (25 S. Van Pelt Street)

The Commission unanimously approved a revised application for residential conversion of 25 South Van Pelt Street. Located in the Rittenhouse Fitler Historic District, the site has two structures: an 1894 Renaissance Revival building and a modern 1939 building. This permit is regarding the 1939 building, where the owner is proposing a three-story overbuild to accommodate eight residential units.

This project was first put before the Commission, and approved, as a one-story overbuild in February 2020. In January 2026, the project was resubmitted as a three-story overbuild. After feedback from the Architectural Committee, the developers revised their submission again.

There was some discussion and disagreement between the commissioners about the glazing of the windows on the addition and how it would be viewed from the street. There was a suggestion from the Commission that the developer use brick instead of concrete on the sidewalk to contribute to the streetscape and draw attention to their building.

Relevant PHC Filings: Initial Application, Revised Application

Subscribe now

New Construction in Fairmount (2115-19 Spring Garden Street)

The Commission provided review and comment to a project building four townhomes on a vacant lot in the Spring Garden Historic District at 2115-19 Spring Garden Street. Since the lot was considered non-contributing to the historic district, the Commission was not required to approve this project.

The project, working with the Commission staff, went through several design iterations. The design that was presented today added a mansard roof and design elements that break up the front of the building into three sections, roughly at scale with neighboring buildings.

This design was met with general approval from the commissioners. They suggested the developer consider adding dormer windows—real or faux—to the mansard roof and changing the style of the garage door to one resembling a carriagehouse door.

David Traub of Save Our Sites and Oscar Beisert of the Keeping Society offered public comment. Both agreed that the design was much improved and that dormers would be a welcome addition to the mansard roof. Traub remarked that the dormerless roof was somewhat “ponderous”.

There was an open question raised of how the project’s curb cut would fit in with the East Coast Greenway Spring Garden Connector, which involves adding protected bike lanes and other safety improvements to Spring Garden. The developer said they were not familiar with those plans, but that the curb cut for the garage was an existing permitted curb cut.

Relevant PHC Filings: Initial Application, Revised Application

Proposed Historical Designation of the Morris Estate House (7001-09 Greenhill Road)

The proposed designation of 7001-09 Greenhill Road was tabled by the Commission until the July meeting. This nomination presents a unique situation. Nearly identical nominations for 7001-09 Greenhill Road and an adjacent property, 6953 Greenhill Road, were submitted to the Commission simultaneously. The owners of 7001 support the nomination and were involved in the submission, while the owners of 6953 are hiring an independent consultant to evaluate the submission, and requested review of the submission be delayed to July. The Greenhill Farms Preservation Club, which nominated both properties, believes that the owner of 6953 is seeking to demolish all or part of the existing structure.

The recommendation of the PHC Staff and the Committee on Historic Designation was to table this nomination until both nominations could be considered together. The PHC favored this approach because there was a fear that if they designated 7001 Greenhill today the owner of 6953 Greenhill would have potential grounds to appeal any decision with the claim that they had been denied due process.

Members of the community, including the property owner of 7001 Greenhill, urged the Commission to proceed with the designation of the first property today and consider the second property separately in July. The Commission ultimately decided to table the nomination of 7001 Greenhill until the adjacent property was ready to be considered, but committed to not allow extensions beyond July.

While both properties have pending nominations, any permits for exterior work or demolition will have to be evaluated by the Historical Commission, so there is not in this case a risk that the owner of 6953 Greenhill will be able to legally modify or demolish structures on the property without PHC oversight.

Relevant PHC Filings: Initial Application (7001), Initial Application (6953)

Subscribe now

Proposed Historical Designation of Estate Outbuildings (419 W. Clapier Street)

The Commission unanimously denied an application to add 419 West Clapier Street to the Historic Registry. Similar to the Greenhill Road property, this nomination was part of a pair of nominations, one of which has been continued to a later date. Unlike Greenhill Road, the main house occupies one lot (5000 McKean), while the other lot (419 W. Clapier) contains the estate’s outbuildings.

This property, 419 West Clapier, was originally nominated in November 2025, when it was rejected. SoLo Germantown then revised the nomination and resubmitted it for reconsideration by the Commission. Meanwhile, the owner of 419 Clapier applied for and received demolition permits in a nine-day window between the initial nomination being rejected and the revised nomination being resubmitted. Since at the time there was no active nomination, the Commission had no jurisdiction to prevent or delay demolition.

Preservationists, including members of SoLo Germantown, Oscar Beisert of the Keeping Society, and David Traub of Save Our Sites argued for the preservation of the structures on this site. Attorney Michael Phillips, representing the owners of 419 Clapier, characterized the nomination as a reflexive action to obstruct his clients’ attempts to redevelop the site.

The preservationists’ argument was that the two properties (5000 McKean and 419 West Clapier), when considered together, represented an intact example of large estate complexes that were common in Germantown prior to increased development in the 20th century.

The view of the Commission was that due to the fact that the nomination of 5000 McKean had been continued to July 2026, they were forced to evaluate the outbuildings on their own merit. The Commission acknowledged that outbuildings don’t necessarily lack significance in their own right, but found this property lacked anything notable or worthy of designation.

Oscar Beisert expressed frustration at this outcome, particularly given the treatment of 7001-09 and 6953 Greenhill Road, where both nominations were forced by the Commission to be on a parallel path rather than allowed to proceed separately.

Relevant PHC Filings: Initial Application, Public Comment

Rear Addition in Southwark (203 Carpenter Street)

The Commission unanimously approved a building permit application for a three-story rear addition at 203 Carpenter Street, an individually designated rowhouse built in 1837. The owners, one of whom grew up in Queen Village, are seeking to modernize and expand the livable area of the home in order to support a growing family. According to the owners, when they purchased the property with the intent of renovating it, the seller did not disclose that it was on the historic register.

The PHC Staff recommended denial of the application, because the proposed work would demolish some original features in the rear of the building, and would cause the renovated building to be out of scale with neighboring properties.

Based on staff feedback during the initial review, the architect on the project implemented some of their recommendations. This commonly happens between the Architecture Committee review and the full Commission’s final approval.

There was some discussion between commissioners about whether the material used on the addition, fiber cement siding, was appropriate given the surrounding buildings were stuccoed. Since the building was built 17 years before Southwark Township was consolidated into Philadelphia City, the rear of the home is built from wood, not masonry. Philadelphia fire codes at the time would have required masonry had the building been in the city. Today stucco is not generally used over wood construction due to issues with moisture intrusion which then causes wood rot. The commissioners ultimately decided that the siding was acceptable given the history of the building and practical considerations.

They approved the permit application with the condition that a rear parapet be removed and replaced with a gutter system, which would slightly lower the height of the addition.

Relevant PHC Filings: Revised Application

Signage Legalization in Rittenhouse (124 S. 16th Street)

The Commission unanimously denied a request to legalize an illegally installed smoke shop sign at 124 S. 16th Street. The Commission will require the owner to return to the previously permitted awning.

Relevant PHC Filings: Initial Application

Subscribe now

Proposed Historical Designation of the Sugarloaf Orchard (29 & 31 W. Bells Mill Road)

The Commission unanimously added 29 & 31 W. Bells Mill Road to the historic register. The nomination was filed by Powers and Company with the full support of the property owners.

Relevant PHC Filings: Initial Application, Public Comment

Appointment of New Architectural Committee Member

Sam Weiner of Hobart Construction, a builder and developer who has worked with the Commission & Staff on numerous projects, was appointed to the Architectural Committee where he will assist in evaluating applications to modify protected buildings.

Commentary

This month’s Philadelphia Historical Commission had a broad slate of both nominations and permit applications, which gives a good view of the types of things the Commission does and how it works. Many Philadelphians support historic preservation as a general concept, but their ideas of what is historic and what preservation means may differ widely from that of professional preservationists. A member of the general public may, for instance, be surprised to learn that the nondescript rear of the Circle Theater is something that the Commission may protect in any future use of the building, but the interior is not.

They may also be surprised about the amount of control the Commission has over the exteriors of individually designated buildings and those within historic districts (which cover most of Center City). That, for instance, an addition to the rear of a South Philadelphia rowhome requires review by a panel of expert architects and preservationists, or that commercial signage in much of Rittenhouse is subject to Commission review.

Some in the city criticize the Commission, seeing them as an impediment to development or as infringing property rights. However, we saw this month that the Commission is not blind to the hardships of owning a historically designated property, nor the need to allow alterations and reuse of historic buildings.

At 25 S. Van Pelt Street, the Commission authorized significant alterations to a historical building in order to support its conversion into residential units. At 203 Carpenter Street and 229 N. Camac Street, the Commission authorized additions to existing residential buildings in order to make them more livable for their current owners.

In the case of the Circle Theater, we saw the PHC Staff already thinking about how to allow adaptive reuse of the building in the writing of the nomination. The commissioners were receptive to concerns about the economic and practical hardship of historic designation, especially in areas of the city where property values and rents are low. That said, the Commission’s response to concerns like this is to refer property owners to the PHC Staff. Staff can assist with applying for grants or tax credits, as well as providing guidance on submissions to the Commission.

This month’s meeting also showcased the relationship between the Commission and preservationists in Philadelphia. If more property rights-minded or development-friendly Philadelphians criticize the Commission for being overly restrictive, preservationists frequently criticize it for being too permissive or too slow to act. We saw this with Oscar Beisert’s frustration with the procedural process around 5000 McKean and 419 West Clapier, which ultimately led to a demolition permit being issued for 419 West Clapier.

(17th St Community Corridor Phase II rendering | Pathways Housing Wellness Corp.)

At their December board meeting, the Land Bank Board unanimously approved 41 housing units across two projects seeking to build on city-owned properties.

The Board reviewed two unsolicited housing proposals during a tight 15-minute meeting: a 3-home Turn the Key proposal in the 4th Council District, and a 38-unit apartment building using Low-Income Housing Tax Credits in the 5th Council District.

The 3-home project was proposed by Trinity Property Advisors LLC, a company owned by Candis Pressley, one of the Black Squirrel Collective training program’s member developers. Trinity is an experienced residential developer, and this is the first Land Bank-related project they’ve pursued. This application was supported in writing by Black Squirrel, 4th District CM Curtis Jones, the Philadelphia Accelerator Fund, and representatives of several other development firms, some in the Black Squirrel network.

The board voted unanimously in support. And, unusually for the Land bank, no members of the public testified for or against either of the two housing proposals at the meeting.

Subscribe now

The second project on the agenda was a Low-Income Housing Tax Credit project from Pathways Housing Wellness Corporation, which included 38 units of affordable rental housing across 9 buildings near N. 17th and Master in the 5th Council District.

This application was for the second phase of the 17th St Community Corridor LIHTC project already underway that’s expected to deliver by the end of 2026, according to PHWC’s website. With no public comments for or against, the board unanimously voted to approve it. They also quickly approved a side yard application in the 5th District.

During the public comment segment that followed, developer Jeremy Blatstein urged the board to review their conflict of interest policy in light of board member Michael Johns’s recusal from voting on the Norris Square scattered-site Turn the Key proposal at the November meeting after casting votes on it at prior meetings, and board member Maria Gonzalez’s alleged involvement with a group of Kensington-based organizations who have organized opponents of the project to attend past Land Bank board meetings.

The allegation from Blatstein seems based on inferences about Gonzalez’s professional network in her job as the Executive Director of HACE, a CDC, and her participation in neighborhood meetings with the applicant—Civetta—and local community leaders about the project. Those were documented in board materials that included a letter from Civetta summarizing the timeline of their public engagement activities. The public facts on their own fall short of proving anything about Gonzalez collaborating with opponents, and I want to be really clear we’re explicitly not endorsing that characterization.

But Blatstein still raises a good point about the disconnect in the city’s official policy, which is that only a direct financial benefit would count as a conflict of interest in these cases. However, they also ask that Land Bank board members recuse themselves if they’ve assisted or consulted on an application in some way. Un-assisting an applicant behind the scenes, though, by coordinating with project opponents would not require a board member to recuse themselves.

It’s another small but real example of the many ways housing supporters are working at a structural disadvantage in city government as a result of various humdrum rules and norms that give a procedural leg-up to opponents, even putting to the side all the explicit housing-suppressing laws on the books.

Subscribe now

Reader Poll: Which other city meetings would you want to read about?

Philly’s media landscape for housing and other built-environment issues used to be a lot stronger a decade ago, with several high-output publications and blogs covering the ins-and-outs of city government housing decisions, individual project proposals, City Council bills, and more. But it’s all gotten really bleak in recent years.

And from where we sit, it’s hard to start a pro-building political constituency without more shared knowledge and understanding of what is actually happening on these issues day-to-day in city government.

One idea we’ve been exploring is adding a paid subscriber tier to the BPN Substack next year to raise some recurring funding to pay freelance writers for monthly watchdog coverage of more city government meetings related to the built environment. We started reporting on the Land Bank board meetings last month as a way to test our audience’s level of interest in reading—and eventually supporting—original news reporting on public meetings.

Our question for you: if we added another couple of meetings to the rotation, which ones would you most want to read about? Or more to the point, which meetings would make it worth signing up for an $8-10 recurring monthly donation to help fund original reporting? Vote for your faves in the poll above, or tell us your thoughts in the comments.

(Image: Philly elected officials celebrate Turn the Key’s 100th home)

The Land Bank board met last Tuesday for their first meeting since Mayor Parker replaced two of her prior appointees with Angela Brooks and Alex Balloon in an effort to unstick one of the main political blockages to building more affordable workforce housing on city lots.

The Land Bank has emerged as a key policy battleground for Mayor Parker’s H.O.M.E. initiative, as Council considers appropriating a raft of new bond funding for the Turn the Key program to the tune of $112 million. Spending the money quickly enough will require changes to speed up the approval process, and to that end, Council and Mayor Parker struck a deal in the spring to put 1,000 city lots through a faster, more front-loaded approval process for housing.

Despite that high-level agreement on the need for speed, and the fact of the impending funding, the jury is still out on whether individual Council members will change their approach at all to individual Turn the Key projects to be more cooperative, or if they’ll keep trying to pocket-veto housing proposals when the local politics get too hot.

The proceedings at Tuesday’s meeting offered some early evidence in both directions.

Subscribe now

In their first act of the meeting, the board swore in Chief Housing and Urban Development Officer Angela Brooks as the new board chair.

After moving through some other routine board business, the board reviewed four proposals in the 5th Council District totaling 85 units, and heard public comments. These four projects came in response to a Request for Proposals (RFP) from the Land Bank. All of them are Turn the Key projects that would build several scattered-site rowhomes on vacant city lots.

They include a 10-home project in Francisville, a 17-home project and a 20-home project in North Central Philadelphia, and a 38-home project in Strawberry Mansion.

Two of the projects saw organized testimony in opposition from neighbors who maintain gardens on two of the relevant lots, neither of which have legal tenancy. All proposals were approved, with Council member Jay Young’s staffer Conlan Crosley briefly testifying in support of each project. CM Young will still need to pass resolutions in City Council to complete the land disposition process.

Other proposals have sometimes gotten stuck at that stage if the member won’t introduce the required ordinance, but with all of these projects being responses to RFPs—actively sought out by the city in consultation with the Council member—it’s somewhat more likely they’ll complete the process.

For a board that used to approve land for workforce housing at a trickle, approving 85 homes in a single meeting is a real change of pace.

Other projects on the Land Bank board agenda were not approved at the meeting.

A 36-home proposal in the 3rd district was removed from the agenda in response to communications from 3rd District CM Jamie Gauthier’s office, and a 3-unit project in the 4th District was pulled due to an application issue. CM Gauthier’s lead housing staffer Andrew Goodman is a Land Bank board member and frequently votes with the Turn the Key skeptics, on affordability grounds, but it’s unclear if the 3rd District proposal being pulled was related to that.

An unsolicited proposal from developer Mike Tomasetti for a 30-home scattered site project in Norris Square was continued for another 60 days after it appeared during the course of the discussion that the Board would deadlock in a 5-5 tie.

This project continues to face vocal opposition from CM Lozada, Norris Square-area CDCs and neighborhood organization representatives, and near neighbors.

CM Lozada came to speak at the Board meeting, and she and several public commenters appeared perplexed at the idea that the Land Bank board would follow the law that the last City Council passed, rather than the popularity contest logic of zoning meetings. CM Lozada at one point said “this legislation doesn’t work for us,” which is neither here nor there in this case since that is, in fact, the law controlling the approval pathway for this application.

This project is the poster child for everything wrong with the Land Bank and City Council’s process, which still treats these approvals like a popularity contest instead of following the objective credentials checklist in the Turn the Key law. A new report from legal accountability organization YIMBY Law argues that the Board has been engaging in unlawful discretion beyond the scope of its legal powers. If a project meets all the qualifications; the Board is just supposed to approve it.

In light of this, the Parker administration might consider bringing their legal muscle to the Land Bank table. One option could be requiring board members who oppose projects to explain, in writing, why they believe a proposal doesn’t comport with the statutory terms of the Turn the Key program. Similarly, the Solicitor’s Office could send a city lawyer to Land Bank meetings to speak, during public comment, on why the office believes given projects comply with the law’s requirements.

The Norris Square proposal has been dragged out for almost two years, beginning in February 2024. There have already been 3 other Land Bank board meetings about it. According to materials in the Board packet, Tomasetti has been going around and around with all the major players in this melodrama for two years, having meetings, giving tours, and clearly making a good-faith effort at dialogue with community members.

(Scan from the Land Bank’s November Board packet)

Everyone interested in this proposal by now is very well-informed about all the details, so it’s time to take a vote and move on.

Subscribe now

A few observations:

• If what Mayor Parker wanted from her personnel changes was a more emboldened pro-Turn the Key faction on the board, she should be happy with how Tuesday’s meeting played out

• New Board chair Angela Brooks ran a tight meeting and is very good at disagreeing with people in a warm and friendly way

• It sounds like damning with faint praise to congratulate CM Young for not rejecting proposals for an RFP his office had a hand in crafting, but it earnestly is not. It is genuinely great that he supported all of those, even though it would’ve been easy to cave to what the garden people wanted

• Why did Michael Johns recuse himself from voting on the Norris Square project in this meeting, but not the 3 previous meetings where he cast a vote?

• One undercurrent of the Norris Square conflict has been about whether these city lots should be redeveloped under Turn the Key, or go to a community organization for LIHTC development. Local organization CEIBA already has 155 city lots, however, and they haven’t built on any of them. What is the likelihood this new batch of lots would be redeveloped into housing any time soon if the Turn the Key proposal is rejected?

• Another 60-day delay for the Norris Square project is outrageous after almost two years of delay already, but the vote to delay until January was arguably the best option for keeping it alive.

Open Tabs

Housing

• Take the City’s survey about Philadelphia 2050 Comprehensive Plan, covering important housing and transportation topics

• “Philanthropy Needs to Pick a Side on the Housing Construction Debate” (Ned Resnikoff, Inside Philanthropy)

• After 6 years dealing with a NIMBY lawsuit, a deeply-affordable housing project in West Philly can finally proceed (Inquirer)

• 8th District CM Cindy Bass wants to sue to block a by-right apartment development in East Mt. Airy

Energy

• Pennsylvania’s 2025 budget included several significant energy permitting reforms from SB6, authored by Republican Senators Kristen Phillips-Hill and Greg Rothman (K&L Gates)

• The SPEED Act, a bipartisan NEPA reform bill, is advancing to the House floor after amendments protecting permitting decisions from Presidential interference

• The role of “supplemental” transmission projects in driving the PJM zone’s rising electricity bills (Consumer Advocates of the PJM States’ Transmission Handbook)

Transportation

• Governor Shapiro is flexing $220 million from the Public Transportation Trust Fund to SEPTA emergency capital projects, in compliance with the federal government’s probe of the Silverliner cars. The move should allow for regional rail service to return to its regular schedule by mid-to-late December.

• This funding will also help with the trolley tunnel issues and support capital needs for ongoing maintenance