5000 Warrington, Pt. 3
This is the third post I am doing about this zoning dispute. Feel free to read Part 1 and Part 2 first.
Some background: in 2020, a developer put out a proposal to build a 174 unit affordable apartment building at 50th & Warrington, with 55 parking spaces. The lot is currently a vacant industrial site. People flipped out about there being “not enough parking” and Councilmember Gauthier wouldn’t support the project until they reduced the plan to 104 apartments and 104 parking spaces. The ZBA approved a variance for the 104-unit plan, then a neighbor appealed and won the Common Pleas case in 2023. (People complain about judges overturning variances but honestly the problem is an overly-restrictive zoning code; if you actually follow the zoning code (Section 14-303(8)(e)(.1)) pretty much most variance requests should actually be denied.)
After that neighbor won the ZBA appeal, CM Gauthier’s office tried to illegally spot-zone the lot, and got sued again over that. The spot zoning lawsuit is pending. Here are some details on what happened.
To kick things off, the lawyer (Peter Kelsen from Blank Rome) for the developer (Omni) sent this email to CM Gauthier’s equitable development guy:
A few weeks later, Andrew Goodman emailed some neighborhood leaders to “get together and see if there’s a quicker way to get the zoning assurance necessary to keep Omni competitive for the affordable housing financing they are seeking at the state level.”
Goodman also stayed in touch with Kelsen, to check up on his firm’s internal analysis of changing the zoning code to make the project possible by-right.
Kelsen then offered to help draft an ordinance to change the zoning code for the lot to make Omni’s project possible:
Goodman then lets some community leaders know CM Gauthier will be introducing zoning bills for 5000 Warrington. AKA engaging in a lil bit of spot zoning.
While CM Gauthier’s office worked on legislation to change the zoning for 5000 Warrington, some neighbor was circulating flyers to garner opposition to that legislation. This person is complaining about it deregulating “any height and density limits (at least 104 units), eliminate setbacks, access regulation, and parking” which I personally think are insane things to complain about. BUT the point is, there will always be crazies out there and some of them can afford fancy lawyers and bog down progress!
CM Gauthier engaging in illegal spot zoning opens up any progress on this project to more delay/blockage from litigation. If the rest of city council permits you to run your district as a little fiefdom, it is literally within your power to rezone your whole district to make it feasible for people to build affordable housing. Refusing to do that and forcing almost every development to get your personal stamp of approval for a variance gives you a lot of power, but what is the point of having that power if you aren’t going to materially improve the lives of your constituents (e.g. by helping more people move into affordable homes)?!?
Here’s the full set of documents I received. I asked for "A copy of all records the City produced to Melissa V. Johanningsmeier in Johanningsmeier v. City of Philadelphia et al, Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Case No. 231000053." But because the universe of documents was so large, I later modified the scope of the request to just "documents produced by the City in Case No. 231000053 following the 9/13/24 Order compelling the City to produce documents which had been withheld on the basis of legislative privilege."