Olive Street Rezoning Advances; Question Lingers On Height Of New Apartment Building

A Philadelphia-based developer’s bid to upzone a stretch of Olive Street to make way for planned new apartments moved ahead — with a likely cap of five or six stories, rather than 13 stories, on whatever building ultimately gets built. 

That was the outcome of Wednesday night’s latest regular monthly meeting of the City Plan Commission. The virtual meeting took place online via Zoom.

The local land-use commissioners voted unanimously in support of the Philadelphia-based PMC Property Group’s application to amend the city’s zoning map for a property it owns on the ever-densifying Downtown-Wooster Square border. 

That rezoning would change the 2.48 acres of land at 78 Olive St. from the General Business (BA) zoning classification to the Central Business/Residence (BD‑1) zoning classification.

The proposed zoning change now heads to an aldermanic committee for further review and debate, before going to the full Board of Alders for a potential final vote.

Representing the developer, local attorney Chris McKeon made a similar pitch to the City Plan Commission as he had made the night before when he first introduced PMC’s densifying plans for 78 Olive St. to the Downtown/Wooster Square Community Management Team.

The site itself already contains the 146-unit Strouse Adler apartment complex, as well as 148 on-site surface parking spaces. 

McKeon urged the City Plan Commissioners to support the proposed zoning change because of the site’s proximity to the State Street commuter train station, and because of similar approvals the City Plan Commission has granted in recent years to adjacent parcels of land on Chapel Street, Olive Street, and Union Street. (He did not mention that PMC filed lawsuit after lawsuit between 2016 and 2018 in a bid to stymie development on one of those lots, including by challenging the lot’s rezoning. Those legal challenges were ultimately unsuccessful.)

McKeon said on Wednesday that the denser housing allowed by the BD‑1 zoning designation at 78 Olive St. is in line with the city’s goals of promoting transit-oriented development — particularly atop surface parking lots — in the area between Downtown and Wooster Square.

“Approval of this Petition will further the goal of connecting the Ninth Square and Wooster Square in a way that will benefit both and that is consistent with recent development approvals,” McKeon wrote in the developer’s formal application to the Board of Alders for the zoning change.

What McKeon did not mention Wednesday night was just how many apartments and just how large of a building PMC hopes to build on the proposed upzoned site at 78 Olive. 

That’s because this particular proposal is about the underlying zoning of the land, and not about any specific plans to build an actual building.

Nevertheless, during his presentation to the community management team on Tuesday, McKeon said that PMC hopes to build 136 one-bedroom apartments in a new 13-story building at 78 Olive St.

Without referencing that specific proposal, Westville Alder and City Plan Commissioner Adam Marchand pointed out Wednesday night that the city zoning code may limit residential development at 78 Olive St. to no more than five or six stories tall, even if the site’s underlying zoning is changed to BD‑1.

That’s because Sec. 43 (d) (8) of the city zoning code states that ​“where a lot in a BD‑1 District abuts property in an RS‑1, RS‑2, RM‑1 or RM‑2 Residential District, a maximum building or structure height of 70 feet is permitted.” City zoning law also limits the allowable floor-area ratio (FAR) in BD‑1 District properties abutting residential districts to 3.0, rather than the otherwise permitted BD‑1 FAR of 6.0.

“If this [zoning change] were to be implemented, those limits would be applied on those parcels,” Marchand said, because a RM‑2 residential district sits right next door across the street on Olive Street. 

Is that a correct reading of the law? Marchand asked city attorneys Mike Pinto and Rod Williams.

“In my view, it is an abutting property” to a RM‑2 zone, Williams said about 78 Olive St. ​“It abuts a residential neighborhood.”

But, since the undeveloped portions of 78 Olive are closer to the train station side of the property than to the Olive Street side … does that mean that the stricter building-height and FAR limits do not apply?

Pinto and Williams promised to look into the question and have a clear answer by the time an aldermanic committee takes up the proposed zoning change for consideration.

Even with that allowable building size and density question unanswered, the few people who spoke up during the public hearing portion of the meeting generally threw their support behind promoting more and denser housing on Olive Street.

“It’s broadly consistent with the planning and the evolution of this neighborhood as it’s proceeded over the past several decades,” city Deputy Economic Development Administrator Steve Fontana said about PMC’s proposed zoning change for the site. ​“It also enables the sort of positive redevelopment that we wish to seek” — that is, taking surface parking lots and turning them into places for people to live.

“I do think it is exciting” that this site could be developed into more housing, Downtown Alder Eli Sabin said, though he declined to outright support the proposed zoning change at this time.

Instead, he and Wooster Square resident Anstress Farwell applauded the developer for pledging to work with neighbors on setting up a community discussion and workshop to talk about the future of this site.

Ultimately, the proposed zoning change won the City Plan Commission’s unanimous recommendation of approval.

“I’m going to support the item as I currently understand it, which may change,” Marchand said before voting in support. ​“As I currently understand it, those height limits and the FAR limit would apply.” That is, even if the BD‑1 upzoning goes through, the developer would not be allowed to build taller than 70 feet — or around five or six stories — and denser than 3.0 FAR.