Zoning issue gets taken
out of people’s hands

By Lauren Fritsky
Times Staff Writer

Judd Newton can still vividly recall the decades-old memory of his four sons playing in the open spaces of his West Torresdale neighborhood.
In those days, the area boasted plenty of places in which the youngsters could toss a football or hit a baseball, said Newton, 68, who lives on Avalon Street with his wife Marie. He understands that today’s young families want the same freedom for their children.
"We’re just trying to get a little space," Newton said.
But over the years, the neighborhood landscape has transformed from rural to rife with development. As the head of the West Torresdale Civic Association, Newton has wielded at least some power in determining how far developers can go — until now.
In a rare occurrence, the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, not Newton or his neighbors, stands to decide whether a multi-unit development project will come to West Torresdale.
On June 13, a nine-judge panel will hear an appeal by the city of Philadelphia regarding a lawsuit filed against them by the development company Land Endeavors.
The company, led by Bucks County-based developer John Arch, wants to build between 13 and 17 attached, single-family dwellings on a 39,701-square-foot lot on Legion Street near Avalon in West Torresdale. The units would be housed in two buildings.
The parcel is zoned R-12 residential, which allows for the proposed configuration, but a piece of land on which Arch wants to build a driveway leading to the complex is zoned R-6, which only allows for a handful of homes. The R-12 zoning also extends to the Canterbury Court Apartments on Academy Road. Also included in the R-6 portion are three single-family homes, two of which are occupied, that Arch built.
About two years ago, the civic group turned down Arch’s proposal after claiming it was too dense and would bring too much traffic into West Torresdale. Instead of ironing out a compromise with the civic, the group’s attorney says Arch applied for — and was almost granted — a building permit by the Department of Licenses and Inspections.
But then City Councilman Brian O’Neill (R-10th dist.), whose district includes West Torresdale, halted the permit approval in its place, saying that the property’s split-zoning does not allow for the proposed number of dwellings and that Arch needed a variance from the Zoning Board of Adjustment. L&I subsequently denied Arch his permit.
Instead of taking the matter to the ZBA, Land Endeavors took the city to court, saying that L&I should have issued the permit as a matter of right.
The head of L&I, Robert Solvibile, declined comment on the case. Calls to the city’s top lawyer, Solicitor Romulo Diaz, were not returned as the Times went to press.
After several hearings, a Common Pleas Court judge ruled in favor of the development company in 2006. A three-judge panel later heard an appeal from the city in Commonwealth Court. That panel then referred the case to the nine-judge panel that will decide the case next month.
Common Pleas Judge Albert W. Sheppard Jr. said in his decision that about 87 percent of the Legion Street property remains subject to the R-12 zoning, the only portion of the property on which Arch wants to build the units. The remaining portion must adhere to the R-6 zoning. In other words, the R-6 portion on which Arch wants to build a driveway has no bearing on the R-12 part on which he plans to put the actual buildings.
O’Neill, who is the only lawyer on City Council, finds fault with that interpretation of the situation and thinks that a favorable ruling for Arch could set a dangerous precedent whereby the city discounts residents’ concerns on development matters.
"This is a real David and Goliath with these people," O’Neill told the Times. "It’s just against everything that’s ever been done in L&I."
The ZBA encourages developers to present their plans to neighborhood associations and to reach out specifically to the neighbors living near the proposed project so that they can address any concerns.
While Stanley Krakower, the attorney for West Torresdale Civic, said that Arch did attend several meetings to discuss the Legion Street plan, he maintains that the developer refused to consider lessening the density of the project. Arch also went against procedure by not going before the ZBA, Krakower said.
"This is rare. Maybe I’ve had three or four cases do this in the last twenty years," Krakower said of the case’s progression to Commonwealth Court.
"Mr. Arch took it upon himself…he found two very clever lawyers, who found a way to go directly to the court. My opinion is that (what he did) was improper procedurally."
Arch did return a call from the Times but referred questions to his lawyer, George Bochetto.
Bochetto said that his client should have received approval for his project as a matter of right and that he never needed to go before the civic group or the ZBA.
He pointed to the fact that the R-12 zoning allows for multiple buildings and said that residents were aware of that fact when they bought their homes.
"What they want to harp on is that this is an open space of property, which I understand," Bochetto said. "(But) you can’t stop development when there’s a zone (for it)."
Bochetto said the civic group made "off-the-wall" and "absurd" demands that Arch reduce the number of dwellings to as few as four, which is closer to the amount allowed if the R-6 zoning is taken into account, according to O’Neill.
Bochetto said that his client wants to build a good relationship with area residents.
"He’s a wonderful developer," the attorney said. "He only has good things to say about that neighborhood. He only wants to do the right thing."
But Krakower thinks that Arch only wants money. He could lower the number of units, "but then he wouldn’t have the big fat profit margin," Krakower said.
The lawyer feels confident, however, that the city will win the case.
"My opinion from the very beginning was that the city and the neighborhood would be affirmed, that we would be found to be correct and that the position of Mr. Arch is very erroneous," Krakower said.
Newton and the civic group plan to remain vocal in the matter. The civic president hopes that future development and zoning matters don’t escalate to the same level as the Legion Street case.
"We’ve always had cooperation from every builder that was here," Newton said. "(Arch) is the only one that’s been a problem." ••