Subway (sandwiches) on Baltimore Avenue

[seand]

By extending to to the north to Locust St., I believe they are also stepping on the toes of Walnut Hill, which covers Market to Spruce, 46th to 52nd.

Its kind of weird when your civic is named after a very specific real estate development, which is totally recognizable by its distinctive architecture, to start expanding in every direction. Cedar, Hazel, Larchwood were all built out in 3-story Victorian architecture as streetcar suburbs. The Garden Court development was built in 2-story Tudor with parking garages in the back at a later date. Even the two-story Victorians further west are around 1905-1910 and pre-car.

It wouldn't matter much except the GCCA seems to want to contest their neighbors' zoning processes. Sounds positively "neo-imperialist" to me.

[seand]

Yeah Walnut Hill has all kinds of fancy maps on their website, due to their recent collaboration with the Enterprise Center to do a detailed mapping/planning initiative. And they draw their southern border on all of the maps at Spruce.
Walnut Hill Community Association » The Neighborhood

GCCA just wants to expand in every direction, and their bigger boundaries are not the ones acknowledged by the PCPC. Or any of their neighbors.

I kind of wonder if the sheep farmers in the Falkland Islands appreciated that they were being given the opportunity to pick which nationality they belonged to when that little war was going down in the 1980's.

[fuzzycraig]

Walnut Hill and Spruce Hill both claim my block, 4500 Locust.

[seand]

Walnut Hill and Spruce Hill both claim my block, 4500 Locust.

And Garden Court too, according to them. You are blessed in being able to pick from 3 neighborhood associations, according to GCCA.

BTW when I was hungry last night I briefly considered what my neighbor would say if I told him I was giving the contents of his fridge the opportunity to pick which household they belonged to but decided against it.

So more to the point, who actually holds the zoning meeting if you decide you want to build a roof deck, or do you have to meet 3 different times and give 3 different groups of neighbors the chance to complain that your roof deck is going to raise their property taxes and is just a conspiracy to drive them out of the neighborhood.

When you put it that way, its not really much of an "opportunity" at all, is it?

[Ptolemy]

An up-date: 4533 Baltimore Ave. is still vacant.

I live on Baltimore Avenue near Clark Park. I would rather not see a Subway sandwich shop as I like how the businesses on Baltimore Ave. are independent locally owned and a few are rather quirky, such as The Queen of Sheba Bar or Bindlestiff Books. However, having said that, it annoys me that a small group of NIMBY-types can dictate to a landlord who he or she can rent to ... when the business that desires to rent the space is a legitimate, family-friendly service providing enterprise.

This is America, after all. When I stroll in attractive shopping streets such as Germantown Avenue in Chestnut Hill or Main Street in Manayunk invariably you will find a "chain" eatery that managed to secure a spot. Doesn't men the whole district is going downhill. A well lit attractive restaurant can contribute things to the block from employment to people to enhancing the security of the block. The more businesses that are open at night adds to safety and security on that block.

It's a shame Mr. Patterson, the landlord, is asking so much to rent the modestly sized space. Maybe if the rent was lowered there would be an interesting local business occupying that space.

[annie]

It's a shame Mr. Patterson, the landlord, is asking so much to rent the modestly sized space. Maybe if the rent was lowered there would be an interesting local business occupying that space.

Agreed but as someone pointed out on WPL it's hard to have significantly increase home prices and apartment rates in the area and then expect commercial landlords to charge modest rents. The supposed rent seems high but then again its on a busy commercial corridor around the corner from homes that go for $500,000 or more.

[raider.adam]

I don't know why it is a shame. I mean if you want, residents can start mugging and stabbing people in front of the property to drop the asking price.

And honestly, I wouldn't even classify the opposition as NIMBY's. It's a Subway going into an already existing storefront that sold food before also.

They are just busybodies.

[seand]

Well I'd say they are lazy practitioners of a half-digested, half-understood set of principles, principles I myself strongly support. It is important as consumers to support locally sourced food, locally owned businesses whenever possible. Not because of some sort knee-jerk association with certain kinds of branding, i.e. "I hate chains because they use national distribution streams - except for Trader Joe's, Whole Foods, Apple and the mom and pops where every single ingredient comes from Sysco." There are real economic issues involved in spending your money places where more of your dollar recirculates locally but it takes research and thinking critically in the choices you make not simply banning businesses that don't reinforce your half thought-out sense of "alternative" brand identity.

Casually saying "we should just ban all tax-paying, locally hiring businesses whose branding does not match my vague perception of myself and my neighborhood" is unconsciously elitist and economically self-destroying to the nieghborhood and just dumb.

Living in a free country means that people opening businesses don't have to ask for your "I shop for this kind of brand only" approval to try to make a go for it. And anybody who is really a fan of supporting locally owned businesses in Philadelphia would never support a zoning policy where the tastes of a few "not in my neighborhood" aesthetes trumps a fair and equal application of the law based on whether a use is appropriate or not.

Local businesses will always come out on the short end of the stick the more zoning is about arbitrary political processes and not a fair and equal application of the law because they can't afford to hire high-powered lawyers just to get a routine take-out food license. Subway may come and go, but arguing that for some magic reason take-out food at that location is terrible but take-out food 3 doors away is fine actually means that THERE WILL NEVER, EVER BE A LOCALLY OWNED AND ACTUALLY LICENSED FOOD BUSINESS AT THAT LOCATION. It also makes the whole process less predictable and makes it harder for locally owned businesses to make a go of it at other locations.

But a lot of people are lazy. They don't actually want a system where people are free to make smarter choices, they want a system where (often corrupt) local government arbitrary bans all businesses that don't match their vaguely considered set of brand associations, whether it has any actual connection to sustainable economics or not.

[raider.adam]

Well I'd say they are lazy practitioners of a half-digested, half-understood set of principles, principles I myself strongly support. It is important as consumers to support locally sourced food, locally owned businesses whenever possible. Not because of some sort knee-jerk association with certain kinds of branding, i.e. "I hate chains because they use national distribution streams - except for Trader Joe's, Whole Foods, Apple and the mom and pops where every single ingredient comes from Sysco." There are real economic issues involved in spending your money places where more of your dollar recirculates locally but it takes research and thinking critically in the choices you make not simply banning businesses that don't reinforce your half thought-out sense of "alternative" brand identity.

Casually saying "we should just ban all tax-paying, locally hiring businesses whose branding does not match my vague perception of myself and my neighborhood" is unconsciously elitist and economically self-destroying to the nieghborhood and just dumb.

Living in a free country means that people opening businesses don't have to ask for your "I shop for this kind of brand only" approval to try to make a go for it. And anybody who is really a fan of supporting locally owned businesses in Philadelphia would never support a zoning policy where the tastes of a few "not in my neighborhood" aesthetes trumps a fair and equal application of the law based on whether a use is appropriate or not.

Local businesses will always come out on the short end of the stick the more zoning is about arbitrary political processes and not a fair and equal application of the law because they can't afford to hire high-powered lawyers just to get a routine take-out food license. Subway may come and go, but arguing that for some magic reason take-out food at that location is terrible but take-out food 3 doors away is fine actually means that THERE WILL NEVER, EVER BE A LOCALLY OWNED AND ACTUALLY LICENSED FOOD BUSINESS AT THAT LOCATION. It also makes the whole process less predictable and makes it harder for locally owned businesses to make a go of it at other locations.

But a lot of people are lazy. They don't actually want a system where people are free to make smarter choices, they want a system where (often corrupt) local government arbitrary bans all businesses that don't match their vaguely considered set of brand associations, whether it has any actual connection to sustainable economics or not.

And it needs to be said that were are talking about a vocal minority dictating to the majority.

And as you put it, it is just "anti-chain". If the proposed plan was "Mom and Pop's Hoagie Shop" and they ordered everything from Sysco, as you mentioned and they would feel good about it even though it is no different than the chain restaurant except one had to pay a franchise fee.


This is actually why a proper zoning code and permit process should handle most of this stuff "over the counter".

[seand]

And it needs to be said that were are talking about a vocal minority dictating to the majority.

And as you put it, it is just "anti-chain". If the proposed plan was "Mom and Pop's Hoagie Shop" and they ordered everything from Sysco, as you mentioned and they would feel good about it even though it is no different than the chain restaurant except one had to pay a franchise fee.

Except that Subway has a big enough pool that franchises can offer insurance for their employees and most mom-and-pops can't currently.

This is actually why a proper zoning code and permit process should handle most of this stuff "over the counter".

Which would make many, many more local owner businesses willing and able to take the plunge.

[Ptolemy]

Many interesting and good points being made. Do I think a Subway sandwich shop will be a threat to other sandwich shops in the neighborhood like Fiesta, Fu-Wah, Best House, or Royal? Not really. However Subway might offer a product local people might want that the other sandwich shops don't have.

Well it's all moot, now. There isn't going to be Subway there.

[seand]

Many interesting and good points being made. Do I think a Subway sandwich shop will be a threat to other sandwich shops in the neighborhood like Fiesta, Fu-Wah, Best House, or Royal? Not really. However Subway might offer a product local people might want that the other sandwich shops don't have.

Well it's all moot, now. There isn't going to be Subway there.

Errr they got the ZBA reversal on Feb. 1 but the ZBA were allowing hail mary legal appeals till March 2, which just passed so AFAIK people in the 19143 who want it will eventually be able to get there $5 foot longs on.

Perhaps you missed the link upthread.
Subway restaurant decision reversed after ‘plea for reconsideration’ (Update) | West Philly Local

I have not seen or heard of any appeals, perhaps because it would have taken actually hiring lawyers and there was no defendable legal argument that says Subway is an inapropriate use that wouldn't also apply to existing businesses like Desi Village and Fiesta, which are already serving take-out food mere steps away. "That brand of business, functionally exactly like these other businesses already in operation on the same block just does not appeal to me aesthetically" won't cut it in court.

[annie]

There's a giant "SUBWAY COMING SOON" sign on the window.

[ODragon]

There's a giant "SUBWAY COMING SOON" sign on the window.

I have some good coupons for there. I hope its VERY soon!

[seand]

Maybe James Roebuck should ask to put up a sign in the window. Oh wait . . .

[annie]

The Subway has been open for a week or two and the world seems not to have ended.

[raider.adam]

The Subway has been open for a week or two and the world seems not to have ended.

I'm sure property values have plummeted.

[thoth]

I'm sure property values have plummeted.

I heard Mariposa is closing. They can't compete now that the whole neighborhood can just eat $5 footlongs for every meal.

[philly57]

What kind of neighborhood sandwich shop in Philadelphia closes because of competition from Subway?! Lame.

[loveisnoise]

What kind of neighborhood sandwich shop in Philadelphia closes because of competition from Subway?! Lame.

One that sucked to begin with.