Good Shepherd Church Case – Study Notes
The Good Shepherd Church case in West Philadelphia highlights a conflict between historic preservation and urban redevelopment, ultimately leading to a compromise solution.
The initial plan for demolition was revised to preserve the church building but integrate a new apartment structure into its adjacent garden.
Developer Landskroner aimed for a total of units, exceeding the church's standalone capacity of units, to ensure financial viability.
ISA architects designed the new addition with a peaked roof and high-quality materials (zinc, wood) to aesthetically complement both the church and neighboring Victorian homes.
The compromise involved sacrificing the church's open front garden, with the new building situated only feet from the church, and included basement units to meet density targets.
The project required a significant zoning variance, as the site was originally zoned for only single-family homes to accommodate units, with a variance hearing scheduled for August.
Key players included the Preservation Alliance, advocating for the church's survival, and the Garden Court Community Association, which eventually endorsed the revised plan.
Critics voiced concerns about the loss of open space, the visual obstruction of the church's façade ("like looking at half of a face"), and potential strains on neighborhood infrastructure due to increased density.
This case mirrors a common pattern in Philadelphia development: historic religious buildings are acquired by developers, prompting community preservation efforts, and often resulting in a blend of retention and new construction.
Paul Steinke characterized the outcome as a pragmatic compromise, stating, "We didn’t want the perfect to be the enemy of the good," accepting an imperfect but valuable result.