Construction of Controversial “110 Park” Condos Continues in Ville

Students, faculty, staff, and other members of the Swarthmore college and borough community have probably noticed the large, green-wrapped construction site right in the heart of downtown Swarthmore, at 110 Park Ave. The project is a $30 million, 31 unit luxury condominium building that was approved in March 2023 after years of controversy.

(Photo credit to James Shelton / The Phoenix)

The lopsided 6-1 decision to approve the development does not reflect the level of debate that 110 Park caused among Swarthmore residents. “The process was a hairy beast. Factions sprouted up. Good people were hurt by other good people feeling hurt,” said Borough Council President Jill Gaieski in email communication with The Phoenix, citing late night hearings and overwhelming public comment sessions.

After the project was announced in 2021 by developer W. S. Cumby, local residents formed a group called “Save our Swarthmore,” and collected over 600 petitions against its construction. The group was concerned about the literal and figurative effects of the luxury five-story building towering over the rest of Swarthmore’s low-rise downtown and streetscape. Many feared 110 Park would erode the town’s old-fashioned, quaint character, with one local resident even saying it represented the “death of vibrancy,” and worrying that it would turn Swarthmore into “just another suburb.” Relatedly, others were concerned about overwhelming downtown with new traffic, the reduction of public green space, and the destruction of the historic Celia Building, though current plans allow for the front half of the building to remain.

Many have also expressed concern about the socioeconomic implications of a large-scale construction project that only includes luxury condos, selling for between $600,000 and $1.775 million, in a town that remains exclusive and unaffordable relative to the region, but has high-quality public schools and convenient regional rail access into Philadelphia. 

“Ultimately, the project does have consequences on Swarthmore’s ‘skyline’ and the character of the ‘Ville,’ but the larger issue is the lack of affordable housing in the community and this project does nothing to address that,” said Sony Devabhaktuni, an architect, writer, and assistant professor of art at Swarthmore who researches “how the street, as a material overlay of infrastructural systems, plays a role in civic life.”

The debate over 110 Park has been intensified by its intersection with larger national questions that have reshaped the politics of housing, building, and development. After the COVID pandemic trapped people in their houses and spurred a rise in remote work, low unemployment and an expanding economy clashed with inflation and a low supply of affordable housing, causing the issue to play a big role in the 2024 presidential election. Many experts and commentators blamed heavy local regulation of and backlash to construction, nicknamed NIMBYism, for the lack of housing supply in recent years, and both parties embraced various policies to deregulate and stimulate the housing industry, nicknamed YIMBYism, though in different ways.

The moment also elevated conversations surrounding land planning to the national discourse. Concerns for accessibility and the environmental benefits of denser communities caused many who might generally be sympathetic to a more regulatory approach to instead call for something called “upzoning.” This calls for allowing for or even incentivizing the construction of denser housing, specifically in proximity to access to public transit lines like SEPTA’s Media-Wawa line that allows easy trips to Philadelphia, and even New York City and Washington, D.C.

“I think initiatives all around the country for transit-oriented development and upzoning are positive in so far as they allow for density and help move away from car dependency,” Devabhaktuni said. “When we talk about building more housing, I think it’s important to consider what kind and for whom. … An important component of any such development would be to ensure that at least some of what is built is not out of reach for the working class.”

Neighborhoods near prominent higher education institutions also frequently have higher rents and home prices. This is certainly true in Swarthmore, where a recent borough-commissioned report found that home values rose about 20% over inflation levels between 2000 and 2020, and another 20% over even the high inflation rates between 2020 and 2022. This has caused the approximately one-square-mile town to be increasingly inaccessible to much of the wide socioeconomic range of the Philadelphia region, and is why many were pushing for the inclusion of affordable units within 110 Park.

(Credit to Swarthmore Borough)

In an email to The Phoenix, W. S. Cumby President and CEO Bill Cumby III said that affordability wasn’t feasible for this project. “We would have liked to incorporate a formal affordable housing component, but … between the value of existing land in Swarthmore, the costs of the approval process, the restrictions on density (fixed costs like land and approval costs could be spread over more units if more density were allowed) and the current costs of building materials, the only option was a for-sale luxury condominium.”

Furthermore, Bill Cumby and several elected officials emphasized the condos’ “by-right” status, which meant that there was little the borough could realistically do to stop 110 Park or exert influence over decisions like the provision of affordable housing. Swarthmore Mayor Marty Spiegel wrote to The Phoenix that, “the permit application met or exceeded all aspects of the Borough’s zoning code. Whether council members agreed with the opposing sentiments of the community or not, they are charged with upholding Borough codes and, in my opinion, there was no legal basis for the application to be denied.” Spiegel also feels that the loudest voices during the controversy might not have been completely representative. “That is not to say that all those who remained silent were in support of the project, but from my experience in other controversial issues facing the Borough, those who are strongly opposed to an issue are far more likely to make their voices heard.”

Gaieski also emphasized this awkward position, saying that while many on the council might have been uncomfortable with it, ordinances that could have been relevant, like those calling for developments of a certain character, were “vague and subjective.”

Spiegel and Borough Manager Bill Webb have also been skeptical about the alleged implications for concerns like parking, overdevelopment, and green space. Spiegel cited the planned parking garage under the building, and said that no special parking protections will be provided in the Ville. Additionally, he wrote, “There should be no major change as regards to green space access. There was no public access to green space at the former buildings that occupied this space. It was private property then and will remain private property.”

In pushing for its approval, the Cumbys and Heidi Foggo, 110 Park’s lead realtor, said that the inspiration for the project came from residents approaching them and expressing the need for downsized, one-level units that allowed them to stay in town and near to the college and SEPTA station.

In talking about the impact of the condos, Gaieski and Spiegel both cited revisions to the town zoning code made in 2013 to address possible downtown economic stagnation that many feared. These revisions allowed for five-story buildings, and called for denser and more mixed-use construction. “My position has always been that if we do not look at some development of our downtown, it will stagnate,” Spiegel said.

Despite the project’s approval, however, the local pushback was not completely ineffectual. While the original proposal included the demolition of the beloved Celia Building at 102 Park, and therefore the removal of the businesses inside it, the plan is now to keep the front half of the building. About the retail space, Foggo wrote in an email to The Phoenix, “102 Park is the building adjacent to 110 Park and it is part of the 110 Park Community. That building has been purchased and the residents will make the lower level an independent bookstore, which is very exciting. The other retail space is and will remain owned by the builders and they are still exploring different options for that space.”

(The Celia Building at 102 Park – Photo credit Alejandro A. Alvarez /Philadelphia Inquirer)

This change in plans also removed six units from 110 Park. While Cumby says the process was particularly long and expensive for a project that met all zoning laws, “there were several points along the way that we received very constructive feedback which we were able to incorporate into the project.” Foggo added that “in the end, the revisions that were required turned out to have a very positive impact on both the aesthetic of the building and community support.”

More broadly, though, the controversies seem to have played a role in prompting a re-examination of the town’s zoning and economic goals. While the zoning laws at the time of approval allowed little power to the town to stop or influence the site, Gaieski and others on the Borough Council have since rewritten ordinances on development character and height, “until a more thoughtful sub-zoning scheme can be developed.”

Furthermore, many leaders implied that the saga surrounding 110 Park will play a role in the borough’s current long-term planning process. While the condos meet a long-term goal for more downtown density, says Gaieski, “the destruction of a few affordable units to make room for the condos cuts against another goal: to help make available a range of housing options in the town center.” She continued, saying that a near-comprehensive town plan will try to incentivize other housing projects in this area of town by loosening height restrictions with zoning changes.

Still, 110 Park promises to change the town. The thirty new taxable units will naturally increase the borough’s revenue, as did the permit fees that are part of any approval process. While the total tax collection from 110 Park is yet to be determined and the borough manager was not readily available for more detailed numbers, Spiegel emphasized that “the real beneficiary will be our school district, since the overwhelming majority of resident tax dollars go to the school district.” Swarthmore’s property tax going to the Wallingford-Swarthmore public schools is around 3%, accounting for most of the town’s 3.7% overall tax rate.

The construction is a mere 500 feet from the base of campus, and Devabhaktuni pointed out that it is already visible from several spots on campus, including in front of Parrish Hall and near the Best West house. Swarthmore College hired W. S. Cumby to build NPPR Apartments, as well as the Danawell connector and the building housing the Inn at Swarthmore. While elected leaders told The Phoenix that the college did not play a role in the proposal or development of the project, the college’s presence has certainly been felt. “Having the college here in Swarthmore makes everything just a bit more interesting,” Gaieski said.

The proximity to campus is a key element of the Swarthmore’s local economy, with students, faculty, and staff making up a large part of the Ville’s market. Conversely, town residents are often seen on campus walking their dogs or attending public lectures and events. “I think many of our new residents are excited to participate in offerings from the college including concerts, lectures, athletics and enjoying the beautiful campus,” said Foggo.

Now that, according to Foggo, 22 of the building’s 31 luxury condos have been sold (quicker than expected) and the construction site continues to grow, 110 Park’s presence is coming into form.

Editor‘s Note: A previous version of this article expressed the local school and total property taxes as 30 and 37 out of 100, respectively, instead of in the accurate unit for Pennsylvania, which is mills (out of thousand). The article has been updated to change this rate.