The Struggle to Preserve Philadelphia's Chinatown

KC's Pastries

KC’s Pastries is simply a must-stop when visiting Chinatown in Philadelphia. The bakery specializes in a mix of French and Asian pastries including buns and cakes. Since its founding in 1995, the bakery has received recognition from multiple forms of Philadelphia news including 34th Street Magazine, Philadelphia Inquirer, and Philadelphia Daily News. In addition, it has been repeatedly voted as one of the best bakeries in Philadelphia by Philadelphia Weekly (Home Page | K.C.’S Pastries). 

KC’s Pastries received its name from the original owner, K.C. Leung, who began his baking career in Hong Kong in 1976 (Home Page | K.C.’S Pastries).  The Chinatown bakery has been located on 10th Street since 2004 but prior to this, its location can be traced back to 13th Street as of 1996 (Briggs 2). 

From the beginning, urban development and location has encouraged business for KC’s Pastries. According to the (Briggs 1), 1996 was the first year the Flower Show was held at the Convention Center. This annual event attracted almost 245,000 visitors to the areas between 9th and 13th Street which meant lots of business for the nearby shops and restaurants. Angel Leung, the first manager of KC’s Pastries, describes a 10% increase in business because of the Flower Show, allowing the bakery to gain popularity and allow visitors from all areas of Philadelphia to try their Asian and French style desserts (Briggs 2). KC’s Pastries relocation to 11th Street does not hinder its continued popularity. The bakery currently stands a few buildings away from the Friendship Arch of Philadelphia Chinatown, which clearly defines the Chinatown neighborhood with its brightly colored pagodas and Chinese symbols. This makes it a common tourist destination for those looking to explore Philadelphia Chinatown. This urban development attraction brings business to KC’s Pastries given its close proximity to the arch and the bakery creates an inviting atmosphere for anyone to enter and try something delicious and low-stakes for their wallet. 

By examining various documents like property and trademark records from the Philadelphia Atlas and United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) respectively, it can be inferred that the managers of KC’s Pastries have changed. As mentioned before, the first confirmed manager of the bakery was Angel Leung. However, through a USPTO trademark document from 2011, the manager switched to Kin Chi Leung somewhere between 1995 and 2011. While this could be a variation of the original owner’s name, it is also common for Chinatown businesses to be passed down generationally. What will often be seen in property documents is the ownership of a building being sold for a dollar, meaning it was passed down by family or close family friends. 

Historically, restaurants have been an integral part of Chinatowns, bringing business to the area (Lee 61). While many Chinese people gravitated towards these places as a way to eat comforting and familiar food, Chinatown was also a hub for visitors who had never tried Chinese food or witnessed such culture to experience something different. People were so excited about the prospect of trying new things that the New York Times even wrote an article encouraging people to try Chinese food and printing instructions on how to use chopsticks, a staple Asian utensil (Lee 60). As more of the white American public began flooding to the streets of Chinatown to eat, a Chinese and American fusion dish named chop suey became extremely popular. It was able to appeal to the American public and allowed Chinese restaurants to economically prosper in the community center due to the dish’s high demand. Similarly, KC’s Pastries was able to create a positive impact on community centers in Philadelphia by also building its foundation on a fusion of French and Chinese style desserts. K.C. Leung began his baking career in Hong Kong which is known for its fusion of Western and Eastern influences due to its history of colonization by the British (Home Page | K.C.’S Pastries). His bakery brought more fusion food to America. While KC’s Pastries appeal to white Americans with their French style pastries, Chinatown bakeries are important to the general Asian community. As shown through the many Yelp Reviews of Asian-American frequenters, bakeries are a convenient place to get comfort food in the form of a quick bite. Bakeries are also able to provide cheap and convenient food for Chinatown residents who cannot afford expensive meals, thus developing the community around it by encouraging a common gathering place to get food.

Sources

1. Briggs, Rosland. "FLOWER SHOW'S NEIGHBORS SOUGHT CROSS-POLLINATION< SOME REAP THE BENEFITS OF BEING CONVENIENT TO THE CONVENTION CENTER.." Philadelphia Inquirer, March 2, 1996: D01. NewsBank: Access World News Research Collection. https://infoweb.newsbank.com/apps/news/document-view?p=AWNB&docref=news/0EB32CFD250F864C.
2. “K.C.’s Pastries.” Home Page | K.C.’s Pastries, 2014. Archived December 28, 2016, at the Wayback Machine, https://web.archive.org/web/20161228144739/http://kcpastries.com/.
3. “KC’s Pastries - Philadelphia, PA.” Yelp. Accessed November 10, 2023. https://www.yelp.com/biz/kcs-pastries-philadelphia?start=50.
4. Lee, Heather R. “3. A Life Cooking for Others.” Eating Asian America, 2020, 53–77. https://doi.org/10.18574/nyu/9781479818952.003.0008.
5. phila.gov. “Atlas | Phila.gov,” 2023. https://atlas.phila.gov/109%20N%2010TH%20ST/property.
6. Uspto.gov. “Trademark Status & Document Retrieval,” 2023. https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=85044439&caseSearchType=US_APPLICATION&caseType=DEFAULT&searchType=statusSearch.
7. DeFranza, David. Chinatown, Philadelphia, Flickr, July 18, 2009
8. Sun, Kate. KC's Pastries, November 10, 2023

Chinese Cultural & Community Center (YMCA)

The front façade of 125 North 10 ^th  Street, Philadelphia lays barren, with a barricade covering the front door. Despite the building’s disuse, it holds a long and integral history as a Community Center for Philadelphia’s Chinatown, yet its outwardly bland contemporary appearance hides an ongoing chain of court litigation and community history. As Philadelphia’s Chinatown faces threats from gentrification, the 76ers arena proposal, and loss of community strength, activists should look towards revitalizing the former Community Center to strengthen Philadelphia’s Chinatown and meet the Asian community’s unique needs.

The Community Center has strengthened Chinatown by promoting Chinese cultural celebrations, a point of common interest for most residents. In 1966, Tien Teh Chang founded the Chinatown Building and Education Foundation (CBEF), an organization whose primary purpose was “to acquire and hold title to a building or buildings preferably in the Chinatown section of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, to be used as a Chinese Building and Education Foundation” (Orphans’ Court Division 1). A year later, Mr. Chang purchased the property at 125 North 10 ^th  Street with this purpose in mind (Wilson 70), and the center formally opened in 1971 (Orphans’ Court Division 1). The center was a focal point for traditional celebrations such as the Chinese New Year: for 1973’s Year of the Ox, the center imported a Dancing Dragon from China, motivated by the Center’s youth arm (The Philadelphia Inquirer 1973). The center also worked on décor and planning for other Chinese New Years, making scrolls with Chinese characters, and acting as the starting point for many parades (The Philadelphia Inquirer 1965). The center's work helped maintain Chinese culture because Chinatown residents could be exposed to celebrations for important cultural events despite American apathy towards Eastern cultures. The celebrations allowed immigrant residents to maintain connections with traditions from their birth country, and US-born Asian Americans were exposed to traditions from their ancestral culture.

Music is a standard cornerstone of most cultures, and its incorporation into everyday life helped strengthen Chinatown’s community. Uniting musicians, the center founded the “Central-Chinatown YMCA Orchestra”, debuting in September of 1960 to celebrate the Chinese Valentine Festival at the Bellevue-Stratford Hotel (The Philadelphia Inquirer 1960). Bolstering cultural expression, the center “boasted a sizable collection of Chinese musical instruments and a Chinese music ensemble” (Orphans’ Court Division 2). The presence of Chinese musical instruments supported the preservation of Chinese culture since residents could continue to practice or learn music that held significant cultural influence. In the context of celebrations, musical expressions helped Chinatown residents establish a more united form of culture which then helps residents maintain better cohesion. The Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation embodies the influence of cultural cohesion when they incorporated “a Chinese calligraphic symbol”, a “unifying element”, to identify the neighborhood. Residents “embraced the symbol, incorporating it into decorative ironwork on doorways, front stoops, and mailboxes” (Wilson 112). By preserving celebrations and music relevant to Chinese culture, Chinatown can replicate a similar sense of unity, strengthening the community in the process.

Beyond the community’s cultural preservations, the center met the needs of Chinatown’s residents, especially immigrant and elderly residents who were neglected by standard social and government services. The center serviced the unique needs of Chinatown’s Asian community by offering “language classes, cooking classes, job training classes, free hot lunches for seniors, ... a Dragon Club for youth, ... family counseling, [and] assistance in legal, immigration, employment, translation, financial, personal and social related problems” (Orphans’ Court Division 2). Philadelphia’s Chinatown had a large presence of elders since many did not speak English, outcasting them from much of the US, so the center’s services were tailored to the unique needs of the community. Many residents were also immigrants who did not speak English, were seeking work, and needed help with legal proceedings, so the center also tailored its services to their aid.

Following the passing of Mr. Chang, the center closed in 2007 and it has been dormant since. In a state of dilapidation, the building had fallen into disrepair and disuse, so Scioli Turco, Inc., a nonprofit that focuses on rehabilitating neglected property took on 125 North 10 ^th  Street as its next project. Their original work focused on the exterior of the building where they replaced the front and rear windows, both of which were designed in a traditionally ‘Chinese’ fashion, so the Philadelphia Historic Commission required the conservators to maintain their appearance. An internal review of the property found that the building had been hollowed out, so Scioli Turco undertook additional steps which, among other work, included restoring the floors and stairs, replacing some of the roofing, and leveling the basement (Duran Rey). Per their conservatorship status, Scioli Turco’s role was merely to return the building to safe standards and upon completion, sell the building. Despite being rehabilitated and sold, the building still lies dormant; Joe Palmer, the project manager from Scioli Turco, laments that the building remains vacant.

The center’s rich history of community cultural development and service models how this vacancy could be filled. The center could return as a cultural anchor for Philadelphia’s Chinatown, holding celebrations for culturally significant events and revitalizing Asian arts. Likewise, services for immigrants are just as needed today as they were decades ago, and the center’s location at the heart of Philadelphia’s Chinatown places it within reach of a large immigrant community. Outside of past recollections, the Boston Chinatown Neighborhood Center (BCNC) is a contemporary model of what the space could be. Like Mr. Chang’s original aspirations for the space, the BCNCs mission statement is, “to ensure that children, youth, and families have the resources and supports they need to achieve greater economic success and social well-being” (Wang 1). In the face of mounting threats, Philadelphia’s Chinatown would be strengthened by additional community support, a role the Chinese Cultural and Community Center is familiar with from its past.

Sources:

Orphans’ Court Division, and John W Herron, Chinatown Building and Education Foundation, A Nonprofit Corporation O.C. No. 278 NP of 2017 Control No. 180338 § (2019).

Wilson, Kathryn Elizabeth. “ʺWe Want Homes, Not Highwaysʺ: Urban Renewal and the ‘Save Chinatown’ Movement.” Essay. In Ethnic Renewal in Philadelphia’s Chinatown: Space, Place, and Struggle. Temple University Press, 2015.

“Let’s Welcome the Year of the Ox.” The Philadelphia Inquirer, February 2, 1973.

Williams, Edgar. “Year of the Serpent 4663.” The Philadelphia Inquirer, February 7, 1965.

“With Lo, Ku, Po.” The Philadelphia Inquirer, July 31, 1960.

Wilson, Kathryn Elizabeth. “ʺBe Part of Progress, Not Its Sacrificial Lambʺ: Community-Development Strategies, 1970–2000.” Essay. In Ethnic Renewal in Philadelphia’s Chinatown: Space, Place, and Struggle. Philadelphia (Pa.): Temple University Press, 2015.

Duran Rey, Adrian. Interview of Joe Palmer from Scioli Turco. Personal, October 27, 2023.

Wang, Michael. 2016. “Community-Made, Community-Led: Exploring the History of Boston Chinatown Neighborhood Center”. Undergraduate Journal of Service Learning & Community-Based Research 5 (November):1-14. https://doi.org/10.56421/ujslcbr.v5i0.235.

Pennsylvania Convention Center

Spanning over 2 million square feet, the Pennsylvania Convention Center hosts around 250 events each year in its seven exhibit halls and 82 meeting rooms, ranging from internationally attended conventions to regional company retreats. The floor-to-ceiling glass facade entrance on North Broad Street serves as the gateway to Philadelphia’s arts and cultural venues on Broad Street, the city’s renowned museums along the Benjamin Franklin Parkway via Lenfest Plaza, while the Arch Street entrance leads to the famous Reading Terminal Market and Philadelphia’s Historic District. However, the Convention Center's official website makes no mention of its vicinity to Philadelphia’s Chinatown, located across the street to the East and North. 

In the late 1980s, Philadelphia’s Chinatown buzzed with anticipation and apprehension as the construction of the Pennsylvania Convention Center at 1101 Arch St loomed on its western edge. It was already encircled by Independence Mall, the Police Administration Building, and the old Metropolitan Hospital to the east, the Gallery Shopping Mall to the South, and the Vine Street Expressway to the North. As another addition to the city’s urban renewal projects, the Convention Center represented promises of progress and the encroaching challenges the tight-knit community faces. While initially viewed as an opportunity for economic growth, the reality of the impact of the Convention Center on the residents and businesses in the community turned out to be far more complex. Chinatown’s battle against the Pennsylvania Convention Center is a story of preservation, betrayal, and struggle. 

From the beginning, Chinatown residents foresaw trouble concomitant with the construction. The influx of people and the uncertainty of their impact on the neighborhood was perceived as an invasion, raising concerns about increased crime, panhandling, and congestion–families could lose their homes and parking would become a scarce commodity (Flander, 35). Chinatown’s unique character was at risk, as the Convention Center threatened to overshadow the community's identity, reducing it to a mere backdrop for tourists and visitors. Despite vocal expressions of concern at community meetings, hopes that restaurants would be filled by conventioneers from families linked to the restaurant business overpowered these concerns and Chinatown accepted the Convention Center without a significant fight (Flander, 4). In 1986, the Pennsylvania General Assembly approved funding for the new facility and construction began in April 1991 (Nepa). Developer Willard Rouse, then chairman of the Convention Center Authority, had promised that the center would be a “gateway” into Chinatown and assured that shops within the Center would have an “Asian character” (Flander, 4). 

The construction of the $523 million Convention Center led to the displacement of 26 families and seven businesses, but the Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation was able to relocate them to new units on Ninth Street (Heavens, 74). Concerns about urban development spurring gentrification in Chinatown rose since the rapid population growth in the neighborhood already exacerbated housing shortages. When the developers designated a brick wall along 11th Street, PCDC also prompted architects to reconsider their plans because Chinatown was already constrained by a five-story height limit and was geographically limited for expansion (Fish, 30). Displacement and fears of gentrification strained the social fabric of Chinatown, impacting the overall well-being of its residents. George Moy and Cecilia Yep, directors of PCDC, said they feared the convention center could turn Chinatown, a cultural center for the region’s estimated 4,000 residents, into a hotel haven (Burton, 3). With an influx of conventioneers, developers would respond by building hotels to serve their needs. As more upscale businesses, condominiums, and amenities are established, the overall appeal of the neighborhood increases, leading to a surge in property values and rents so high that Chinatown’s working-class residents, 70% of whom were making meager income and living below the poverty line, would be compelled to leave. Higher property values would make the area more attractive to wealthier residents and developers seeking investment opportunities, which could permanently transform the community’s character and dynamics. And, unlike tangible city projects, the ascent of property values presented a more elusive challenge for organized opposition (Wilson, 141). The repercussions of the presence of the Convention Center extended far beyond its geographical occupation.

Once the Convention Center opened in 1993, Chinatown faced a bitter reality: the main entrances were facing away from Chinatown, and the rents were not affordable for Chinese restaurants and businesses. A manager from a food store on Race Street expressed their frustration, stating, “They don’t know Chinatown’s here. No one’s going to walk out the back of the building. They probably think it’s a truck-loading zone” (Flander, 5). The design of the convention center, more than any other factor, had left Chinatown with a sense of betrayal. According to Yep, Chinatown was promised that the Convention Center would refrain from serving food to avoid competition with local restaurants and that the center would include a 350-car garage (Flander, 5). However, these promises were not materialized. Now, Aramark serves as the exclusive caterer of the Convention Center, and the increasing traffic from conventioneers puts more pressure on those who visit Chinatown for a meal to find parking. Moreover, although parking lots are accessible, they predominantly serve conventioneers and charge high prices (Flander, 5). Many Chinatown residents felt neglected by the city, expressing the sentiment that the city routinely prioritizes Center City over their community, evidenced by the limited representation on tourism maps distributed to conventioneers and little to no mention in visitors’ guides (Flander, 5). 

Chinatown’s encounter with the Pennsylvania Convention Center is not just a localized narrative but a universal one, reflecting the broader challenges faced by marginalized groups amidst relentless urban development. Convention centers, a common feature in downtown development projects, embody a neoliberal approach to city planning. Cities create private attractions for public benefit, defining which segments of the public are less integral to the city, which are oftentimes the groups who are less likely to protest or vote (McDonogh, 284). It reveals who the city of Philadephia values–the transient outsiders who are not part of the community, not the actual people who live in Chinatown, thereby threatening the existence of an ethnic enclave that has stood as a steadfast guardian of not only its geography but its memories and relationships. The lessons learned from Chinatown’s battle are a powerful reminder of the need for inclusive urban policies, transparent communication between developers and communities, holding developers accountable for their promises, and giving a voice to residents in the decision-making processes that shape their neighborhoods. Today, as plans for the $1.3 billion 76ers arena loom, Chinatown finds itself once again in the spotlight, emblematic of the struggle faced by minority communities in the face of modernization.

Sources

1. Burton, Cynthia. "September 27, 1988 (Page 3 of 100)." Philadelphia Daily News (1960-2001), Sep 27, 1988.
2. Fish, Larry. "August 24, 1992 (Page 30 of 60)." Philadelphia Inquirer (1969-), Aug 24, 1992.
3. Flander, Scott. "September 15, 1997 (Page 4, 5, 35 of 119)." Philadelphia Daily News (1960-2001), Sep 15, 1997.
4. Heavens, Alan J. "February 28, 1993 (Page 74 of 372)." Philadelphia Inquirer (1969-), Feb 28, 1993.
5. McDonogh, Gary W., and Cindy Hing-Yuk Wong. “Beside Downtown: Global Chinatowns.” In Global Downtowns, edited by Gary W. McDonogh and Marina Peterson, 284. University of Pennsylvania Press, 2012.  http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt3fj4rx.15 .
6. Nepa, Stephen. "Convention Centers." Encyclopedia of Greater Philadelphia. Last modified February 25, 2022.  https://philadelphiaencyclopedia.org/essays/convention-centers/ . 
7. Pennsylvania Convention Center. "About." Pennsylvania Convention Center. Last modified 2023.  https://www.paconvention.com/about .
8. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority. "Pennsylvania Convention Center." Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority. Accessed November 10, 2023. https://www5.septa.org/travel/destinations/pennsylvania-convention-center/. 
9. Wilson, Kathryn E. “A Legacy of Resistance”: Chinatown North and Twenty-First-Century Challenges.” In Ethnic Renewal in Philadelphia’s Chinatown: Space, Place, and Struggle, 141. Temple University Press, 2015. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt14jxv76.11.

Ray's Cafe & Tea House

Local businesses, especially restaurants and cafes, are an essential part of making and maintaining community in Chinatown. These businesses provide local employment opportunities for residents, bring in customers from outside Chinatown, and many even serve as community gathering centers where residents of Chinatown can meet. Located near the intersection of North 9th and Race Street is Ray’s Cafe and Tea House, a small specialty Coffee and Tea Shop that has been serving the Philadelphia Chinatown community since 1989. The story of how Ray’s Cafe and Tea House came to be is a perfect example of how Chinatown activists have been able to work towards protecting Chinatown from encroaching development projects. According to their website ( Ray's Cafe / 小蜜蜂 ) Ray is the surname of the family who runs the store, and they describe themselves as a “family business.” The cafe is currently operated by Grace Chen and her sons Randy and Lawrence Ray. Ray’s Cafe was established around 1989 after land that first belonged to Chinese families that was given away to the Pennsylvania College of Podiatric Medicine was actually reclaimed for Chinatown thanks to efforts by the Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation. 

The History of Gim San Plaza

Ray’s Cafe and Tea House is located in a portion of Chinatown that almost wasn’t allowed to exist. PCDC called this the “Gim San Project.” It was created on what is considered the eastern border of Chinatown. However the story of Gim San Plaza’s creation is marked by intense political and logistical challenges. It began in 1986, when PCDC negotiated with the PRA (Philadelphia Redevelopment Authority) to make sure this land could stay in the hands of Chinatown residents and businesses. The PRA reportedly treated PCDC like they were “small fry” according to Cecilia Moy Yep. However, ultimately the PRA decided to give PCDC a chance to get the land on the condition that they acted quickly. Yep immediately commissioned architect Sabrina Soong to make a rough plan for the development and also organized a meeting to see if anyone in the community would be willing to buy homes in the area. It took two weeks to get a list of buyers (as well as a list of backup buyers in equal numbers), 500,000 dollars in down payment money, and a construction loan from PNC bank. By April of 1985, thanks to PCDC’s efforts (and to the dismay of the Podiatry College) the land on East Ninth street from Cherry to Race was to be redeveloped for Chinatown. In May of 1987, the construction of Gim San (or “Gold Mountain”) Plaza began (Wilson, 110-111). Ray’s Cafe and Tea House was one of fourteen businesses from Race to Cherry street that are today part of the completed Gim San plaza along with twenty residential units ( History – Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation ). Ray’s Cafe and Tea House almost didn’t exist because of a predatory development project that was encroaching the eastern border of Chinatown. 

What’s on the Menu?

Ray’s cafe is known for its siphon coffee, which is a technique for brewing coffee involving two glass bulbs and is generally known for creating a stronger but also much less acidic coffee. On Ray’s Cafe’s older website, (rayscafe.com) in the FAQ section Grace Chen says that, “30-35 years ago Taiwan already had this type of coffee shop. So while I was growing up I remember seeing these kinds of cafes.” Also according to their website, Ray’s claims to be the first and only place in Philadelphia that offers siphon coffee. Besides siphon coffee, Ray’s also has a full menu of both Chinese and Taiwanese cuisine with some of their most popular dishes being Taiwanese beef noodles, leek boxes, pork with leek dumplings, shrimp spring rolls, and cold sesame noodles ( Yelp.com ). Finally, on Ray’s website there is a link to a short news clip in which Grace Chen and Randy are interviewed and we get to see the cafe’s day to day operations. There are also clips of the siphon coffee being made. The interviewer for CBS seems to be very satisfied with his cup of Jamaican Blue Mountain siphon coffee. Ray’s Cafe, and many establishments like it, serve the Chinatown community as not just places to go and eat, but places to gather with others and make community connections within Chinatown.

Sources

1. Google maps. Accessed November 6, 2023. https://maps.google.com/. 
2. “History.” Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation. Accessed November 6, 2023. https://chinatown-pcdc.org/about/history/. 
3. Ray’s Cafe / 小蜜蜂. Accessed November 6, 2023.  https://www.rayscafephilly.com/ .
4. Ray’s Café & Teahouse - 362 Photos & 220 Reviews - Yelp. Accessed November 7, 2023. https://www.yelp.com/biz/rays-caf%C3%A9-and-teahouse-philadelphia-2. 
5. ​​“Welcome to Ray’s Café.” Rays Cafe & Tea House Inc. 141 N 9th St Phila PA 19107 (215) 922-5122. Accessed November 6, 2023. https://www.rayscafe.com/. 
6. Wilson, Kathryn Elizabeth. Ethnic renewal in Philadelphia’s chinatown: Space, place, and Struggle. Philadelphia (Pa.): Temple University Press, 2015.

On Lok House

Located on 219 North 10th Street, On Lok House, or House of Peace and Tranquility, is an affordable housing apartment for low-income seniors in Philadelphia’s Chinatown. Dedicated in 1985, the building is a legacy from a time when the Chinatown community began to defend themselves against the threats of demotion and when “family” had become a prominent component of the community’s identity.

The existence of On Lok House is inextricably linked to the influence of urban development. During the 1960s, when the demolition of a large share of the community for the Vine Street Expressway project was known to Chinatown residents, community leaders and organizations emerged to claim their right to the city. One decade before the construction of On Lok House, Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation (PCDC) had collaborated with the city government to release the 1975 Chadbourne Report that pointed to the need of increasing provision of housing for the displaced residents in Chinatown (chinatown-pcdc.org). Replacement housing became the top priority for organizations like PCDC. The idea of constructing On Lok House was inculcated with the care for community from its early founding pioneers. For example, Dr. Yam Tong Hoh, an activist in the “Save Chinatown” movement and project coordinator with PCDC, was particularly concerned with the living conditions of low-income elderly under the threat of damaging urban renewals (Moloshok 2012). Many of them were old men previously working as Chinatown workers and living by themselves in the country, already suffering from substandard boardinghouses. On Lok House stands today as a legacy from an age of fight and self-protection against the damaging urban renewals that once deprived the residence of Chinese immigrants.

For decades, family has been a key determining factor of Chinatown’s community. The role of On Lok House in consolidating the family identity of the Chinatown community is essential. The loosening of immigration laws by the U.S. government in the 1960s drew an influx of Chinese immigrants, many of them traveled long distance to reunite with their relatives already in Chinatown. The 1970s and 80s were an age of expansion and population growth for the community. Yet the expanding population largely intensified the living conditions in Chinatown—overcrowding became a major challenge. One thing special about Philadelphia’s Chinatown is that due to its moderate size, Chinese immigrants coming to the United States consider living in Philadelphia only if they have family already here (The Philadelphia Inquirer 1984). On Lok House was constructed as part of PCDC’s effort to not only accommodate the displaced elderly who were deprived of residence but also the growing housing demand for an expanding community of families. Its existence is integral to consolidating the family nature and nurturing a broader sense of community within Philadelphia’s Chinatown.

Upon visiting On Lok House, one would be impressed by the quintessential Chinese elements inscribed in the design of the building: green tile eaves, red pillars, and mosaic ornamentation (Wilson 113). On Lok House is among the landmarks that represent the ethnic characteristics of Chinatown and a vivid example of the architectural theming strategy that community organizations have used to accentuate Chinatown’s cultural identity (Wilson 112).

The roles of On Lok House in nurturing and anchoring a unique sense of Chinatown community is not confined to its physical appearance only. On Lok House also reaffirms and demonstrates the identity of Chinatown community through the cultural activities and social services it holds and provides within the community. With its free lunch program, On Lok House is where seniors gather together to share meals as well as accessing services such as translation. Eddie Wong, the administrator of On Lok House, reveals that the apartment is a social hub where the elderly take Chinese calligraphy classes and play with social dances, allowing them to experience a feeling of cultural familiarity (Xinyun Li).

Notably, the influence of On Lok House in cultivating a sense of community transcends the geographic boundaries of Chinatown and reaches the broader Chinese American community in Philadelphia. It attracts seniors across the city to live in Chinatown. For the younger generations of Chinese immigrants living a more suburban lifestyle – usually visiting their parents or grandparents over weekends – On Lok House provides them with comfort and security knowing that their elderly family members are able to live and thrive in their cultural niches. Stella Tse, representative of the Chinatown community, spoke at the city’s Fair Housing Assessment that “we knew our grandparents were well taken care of and that they were able to be independent people in a foreign country (chinatown-pcdc.org).” On Lok House is a symbol of the collective care the community has instilled into the elderly group, manifesting the Chinese tradition of honoring the elderly that is still being cherished among the immigrant community.

Sources

1. “History – Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation.” PCDC,  https://chinatown-pcdc.org/about/history/ .
2. Moloshok, Rachel. “A Life of Service: The Reverend Dr. Yam Tong Hoh Papers.” The Historical Society of PENNSYLVANIA: Legacies, vol. 12, no. 1, May 2012.
3. Logan, Joe. “IN A FEW BUSTLING CITY BLOCKS, CHINESE HERITAGE IS.” The Philadelphia Inquirer, January 8, 1984.
4. Wilson, E. Kathryn. Ethnic Renewal In Philadelphia’s Chinatown: Space, Place, and Struggle. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2015.
5. Wong, Eddie. Interview by Xinyun Li. Zoom, November 6, 2023.
6. “Chinatown Testifies at the AFFH Hearing.” PCDC,  https://chinatown-pcdc.org/chinatown-testifies-at-the-affh-hearing/ .
7. On Lok House conceptual drawing, Historical Society of Pennsylvania, 1980.
8. On Lok House Construction in Progress Photograph, Historical Society of Pennsylvania, 1984.
9. On Lok House appreciation dinner invitation, Historical Society of Pennsylvania, 1985.

Chinatown Christian Church & Center

Chinatown Christian Church and Center (better known as C4 to the locals) serves as a religious and community center for people in the neighborhood. During church hours, people pack the seats for church service. But CCC&C serves other purposes as well. It has the only playground in Chinatown, offers youth programs, and serves as the center for the Philadelphia Suns. What CCC&C is to Chinatown is more than just a church. It is a community center that brings the people within Chinatown together.

Before CCC&C was established, Reverend Lee Hong founded the First Baptist Church in 1898 at the corner of 10th and Spring Street Chinatown to establish Sunday Schools that offered Chinese and English language instruction (Wilson). Later, in the summer of 1941, CCC&C was established by Florence Scott, the superintendent of the First Baptist Church, in response to the founding of Holy Redeemer Church (Ting). This change was due to their wanting to work together with the Chinese community more than against each other. It became an interdenominational center under the official sponsorship of Philadelphia's Baptist, Evangelical, Reformed, Methodist, and Presbyterian churches (Ting).

Although Caucasian women started the church, the administration was quickly transferred to the Chinese administration as early as 1955 (Ting). The church became more Chinese, attracting those anxious to retain a Chinese identity. The bond of race and religion united many attendees who were often migrants.

Today, the church continues to serve as the center for Chinese Americans to practice their religion. However, as mentioned earlier, CCC&C has a much larger purpose for the overall community. It is the home to the Philadelphia Suns, a non-profit organization that builds character in its members and youth through sports and community volunteering. Many Philadelphia Suns members join when they are still children, growing up visiting the playgrounds of CCC&C, often filled with the vibrant energy of other community members gathered to play basketball. Philadelphia Suns also offer volleyball and basketball programs to members of the community.

The current President of the Philadelphia Suns is Harry Leong, the center director of CCC&C. Harry’s work as an outreach director at CCC&C corresponds to his work with the Philadelphia Suns, where he brings the community together through his service events. He often leads cleanup events in Chinatown, ensuring the community is well maintained. One of the biggest services that Harry leads is the Chinese Lion Dancing. Made up of a majority of younger volunteers, Harry teaches the art of lion-dancing and instrumental melodies that accompany the performance. You can find the team marching down the streets of Chinatown during Chinese New Year, bringing together the community and people outside the community. After the long day of performances, you can find the Suns family gathered in the basement of CCC&C, sharing a post-performance meal.

Again, CCC&C is more than just a church. It is a community center that brings the people within Chinatown together. It holds the memories of many youths, including me, who grew up in Chinatown and is the home to the organization that keeps the traditions and energy alive. I remember sitting in the wooden pews in the service room where Sunday Service took place, not for religious practice, but for a piano recital. The church would hold various community events, such as a performance recital for my after-school music program. I also remember gathering in the back room of the church and having our end-of-the-season potluck for our volleyball team. These precious memories of mine are a shared memory of many other children within the Chinatown community, but that community is being threatened by the proposed plan of the new 76er’s Arena.

When speaking about the arena with Harry, he worried about the future of Chinatown. A future that entails seeing the Chinatown of his childhood, filled with bars and a lack of community. Chinatown has come a long way from its past, and the threat of a new arena comes with a backward development of Chinatown. The community that CCC&C and Harry have built over many decades will be lost forever. “Once the developers come in and take over a portion of the area, Chinatown will never get it back.” - Harry Leong. With the arena, many people will be forced out of Chinatown, leading to the destruction of the community that is essential to CCC&C because, after all, why would there need to be a church and community center when there is no community? Businesses will be forced to close, and eventually, so will CCC&C. CCC&C is essential to Chinatown, just as Chinatown is essential to CCC&C. The two coexist and depend on each other. With the arena, everything will be gone. The liveliness, the center, the lion dancing, the community, the people. “The only thing that will be Chinese will be that gate.” - Harry Leong.

Sources

1. First Baptist Church. Historical Society of Pennsylvania. Accessed November 10, 2023. https://www.portal.hsp.org/.
2. Lin, Ye. Interview of Harry Leong. Personal, Feburary 27, 2023.
3. More than a place to worship: Chinese Christian - proquest. Accessed November 10, 2023. https://www.proquest.com/docview/211996643?pq-origsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true.
4. Ordonez, Harold. September 2, 2015. FourSquare. https://foursquare.com/v/chinese-christian-church--center/4ba40f9df964a520477d38e3.
5. Wilson, Kathryn Elizabeth. Ethnic renewal in Philadelphia’s Chinatown: Space, place, and Struggle. Philadelphia (Pa.): Temple University Press, 2015.
6. Yam Tong and Daisy Law Hoh Papers, 1919-1977. Accessed November 10, 2023. https://www2.hsp.org/collections/manuscripts/h/hoh3020.htm.

History of Chinatown Mural

On the corner of Tenth and Winter Street in Chinatown, you will find the History of Chinatown mural. This mural can be viewed as a timeline depicting important events, places, and themes from Chinatown’s past, and specifically depicts integral centers of community such as 913 Race Street and pays homage to the community’s struggles against urban development projects, most prominently the Vine Street Expressway. Painted in the summer of 1995 by Arturo Ho, Giz, N. Phung, and H. Tran, this mural had a dual purpose: to celebrate the 125th anniversary of Philadelphia Chinatown’s founding and to immortalize the movement against the Vine Street Expressway, which the mural physically overlooks. The act of painting the mural was a part of a much larger celebration in homage to Chinatown’s history which spanned multiple months, featured an enormous parade, benefit concerts, and the unveiling of a new plaque commemorating 913 Race, where the simultaneous first Chinatown laundromat and first business was established. 

This celebration was well-received by many members of Chinatown, including Bernardine Lee, who told the Philadelphia Inquirer, “It’s a chance to be recognized as an integral part of the city. This says: ‘We’ve been here for a long time, and we’re here to stay.’” (Philadelphia Inquirer, June 26 1995). Chinatown, which had been fighting the construction of the proposed development of a Convention Center in the years leading up to the painting of this mural, has a history of needing to fight against encroachment from other parts of the city and protect itself, and in recent history this is most prominently seen in the fight against the aforementioned Vine Street Expressway. This struggle against urban development has resulted in resiliency becoming a large part of Chinatown’s character, an aspect that is omnipresent throughout the mural’s depiction of Chinatown’s history. 

What is the meaning of the imagery present within the mural?

The History of Chinatown mural traces the origins of Chinatown through many instances of symbolic imagery. Beginning with depictions of early immigrant railroad workers separating from their families, the sweat shed by these laborers then transforms into laundry water, then further into a highway until reaching its final depiction as a book. This interconnected depiction of Chinatown’s history, which is ultimately read by a father and son, indicates a passing of knowledge onto future generations in an effort to secure their happiness, as depicted in the view of children playing in the bottom left of the mural. All of this culminates in an art piece much in line with Chinatown’s historical community values, producing a mural with the spirit of resiliency and community strength as well as the importance of knowledge and education at the forefront.

What is the function of a mural within Chinatown? 

Historically, murals have served as a medium of celebration and remembrance for Chinatowns all over the country. Similar murals in Boston and Chicago’s Chinatowns have been commissioned by members of Chinatown to represent their common themes of resilience, tradition, and strength of community. These themes are particularly evident in the Boston mural, Tied Together by a Thousand Threads, which (similarly to History of Chinatown) depicts scenes with an association to food, laundromats, and repression, as it includes images of a dim sum spread, a seamstress, and the immigration raid of 1903. Another type of mural was painted in St. Paul, Minnesota (titled Flows of Interconnected Motifs) which was entirely symbolic, as each artist selected an image that represented Hmong culture to paint, conveying the same message of perseverance through hardship and the significance of a tight-knit community. As a matter of fact, within the past year, a new mural has been painted in Philadelphia’s Chinatown: The Past Supporting the Future. This mural blends the didactic and abstract styles, primarily featuring an image of a crane in front of a red sun, while also being surrounded by scenes from the history of Philadelphia’s Chinatown, similar in style to the History of Chinatown. At the dedication ceremony, John Chen of the PCDC echoed the powerful sentiment of Bernardine Lee from almost 30 years ago, saying, “We’ve been here over 150 years. We’re not going anywhere” (Crimmins).

A deeper dive into 913 Race Street:

Positioned front and center at the top of the mural, the depiction of a Chinese laundry worker serves as an homage to the origin of Philadelphia’s Chinatown, as well as how many Chinese immigrants got their start in the United States. The laundry worker is wringing out a rag, producing water that goes on to serve as the guiding path for Chinatown throughout history. In Philadelphia, the first business opened in Chinatown was, in fact, a laundromat, established at 913 Race Street. If you recall, this is the very same address that received the commemorative plaque in the 1995 celebration of Chinatown’s 125th anniversary, which also included the painting of the History of Chinatown. In addition, a more official historical landmark was placed at this location 15 years later, emphasizing its continued importance to the neighborhood. Ever since the first laundry was established at 913 Race in 1870, the building has housed a multitude of businesses and neighborhood events, making it a true community center. For example, newspaper articles from 1945 list meetings of the Chinese Benevolent Association as being scheduled for 913 Race, and by the time of the 1995 celebration and painting of the mural, it housed a restaurant called Tsui Hang Chun, which received a rave review from Jim Quinn of the Philadelphia Inquirer. However, just 2 years later, 913 Race had changed hands once again, as an ad in the newspaper described the 1997 Grand Opening Special of the H.K. Golden Phoenix dim sum restaurant. Despite this revolving door of owners, 913 Race has remained a constant in Chinatown, just as it paves the path for the neighborhood in the mural.

What was the struggle against the Vine Street Expressway in Chinatown?

The aforementioned History of Chinatown mural depicts many of the major historical events throughout the Philadelphia Chinatown’s rich history, but one section in particular stands out as a major highlight piece. The mural features a section of highway with signs sporting anti-construction slogans including “Homes, Not Highways,” as well as protesters fighting against these destructive changes. This depiction is in reference to the struggle in the early 70s against the construction of the Vine Street expressway and what would be its effective division of Chinatown and the isolation of its members. 

The Vine Street expressway was not the first instance of urban development wherein the spaces critical to a Chinatown’s life were put under threat. Similar to the Vine Street struggle, Chinatowns in Chicago and Boston had previously instances wherein highways built through them faced very little, if any protest from the community and were therefore constructed without any effort to mitigate the development’s negative effects. Because of this, Philadelphia’s planners expected a similar response from the community; however, the planner’s views of Chinatown and resident’s views were radically different, specifically in reference to the geographical boundaries of Chinatown resulting in much more backlash than initially anticipated.

For the residents, Chinatown was much more than just its restaurant and business core, it also included buildings such as the Holy Redeemer Church and School which were central to Chinatown’s sense of place and community. To the people of Chinatown, these buildings were essential parts of making Chinatown not just a business center, but more importantly a living community. Therefore, when this sense of community was put in jeopardy by the Vine Street project, they began to protest on all levels. In this manner, the Save Chinatown movement was born. This movement played a significant role in the commissioning of the History of Chinatown mural, and therefore received similarly significant depictions within the mural.

The Save Chinatown movement was not limited to simple protests, as the community employed all methods of pushing against this Vine Street development. From petitions to letter writing to political lobbying - the spirit of resilience throughout the community was put on full display. The result of the movement against the expressway was a long-winded campaign which ultimately culminated in the emergence of a new structure of leadership within Chinatown featuring a new generational face and new set of community priorities, further exemplifying the generational turnover depicted in the mural. These results showcase the effects of urban development, but more specifically the effects of these developments on the strengthening of community character when properly fought against.

Therefore, through the lobbying efforts of the community, the Vine Street proposal was renegotiated and scaled-down in order to spare the integral parts of the Chinatown neighborhood. Although this outcome was a compromise, it mitigated significant community impact and preserved centers of community while ensuring that Chinatown remained visible to the general public. Through the History of Chinatown mural, the magnitude of this struggle is on full display via both its commissioning and its depiction of the community’s call to action, resulting in a mural rich with a depiction of Chinatown’s fight for survival.

Final Thoughts

In summary, the History of Chinatown mural is a large tribute to the trials and tribulations that the Asian-American community has undergone throughout the course of Philadelphia’s Chinatown history. When community centers like the Holy Redeemer Church were put in harm’s way by projects like the Vine Street Expressway, Chinatown stood strong in resistance, staying true to its strength of spirit shown in the mural. Other important locations in the neighborhood, such as 913 Race, have remained essential parts of the entire community. While Chinatown will no doubt be challenged by future projects that encroach upon its territory, like the recent proposal to build a new 76ers arena on its border, it is equally certain that the people of Chinatown will stand in solidarity and in opposition, fighting relentlessly for their right to exist.

Sources

1. Ordine, Bill. "Chinatown Feted for Rich Legacy." Philadelphia Inquirer, June 26, 1995.
2. Lee, Sophia. "History of Chinatown Mural." AIA Philadelphia. July 1, 2022. https://aiaphiladelphia.org/news/committee-news/143/143-History-of-Chinatown-Mural-ASIAN-ARCHITECTS-DESIGNERS-ARTISTS-OF-PHILLY#:~:text=This%20mural%20was%20painted%20in, located%20on %20the%20north%20side.
3. Lapinsky, Kira. "Asian Immigrant Art: Case Study of St. Paul, Philadelphia, Chicago, and Boston Murals." University of St. Thomas - In Context. October 11, 2018. https://blogs.stthomas.edu/ arthistory/2018/10/11/asian-immigrant-art-case-study-of-st-paul-philadelphia-chicago-and-boston-murals/.
4. Crimmins, Peter. "A Crane Rises in Chinatown." WHYY.Org. April 13, 2023. https://whyy.org/articles/philadelphia-chinatown-mural-dedication/.
5. Wilson, Kathryn. Ethnic Renewal in Philadelphia’s Chinatown. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press, 2015.
6. "Events of the Day." The Philadelphia Inquirer Public Ledger, April 17, 1945.
7. Quinn, Jim. "The 30 Percent Solution." Philadelphia Inquirer, February 7, 1993.
8. "H.K. Golden Phoenix Grand Opening Special." Philadelphia Inquirer, January 24, 1997.
9. Highsmith, Carol M, photographer. This "History of Chinatown" mural, by four artists "Arturo Ho, Giz, N. Phung, and H. Tran" covers a building wall on the upper edge of the Chinatown neighborhood in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania United States Philadelphia, 2019. -04-07. Photograph. https://www.loc. gov/item/2019689264/.

The Yellow Seeds Organization

A Voice for Chinatown's Poor and Working Class in the Asian American Movement

As demolition for the Vine Street Expressway began in the 1960s, Chinatown organizers took to the streets against Philadelphia City Hall in defense of their community. From the Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation (PCDC) representing Chinatown in meetings with City Hall to Cecilia Moy Yep’s refusal to hand over her home to the city in the “Chinatown Alamo,” Philadelphia’s “Save Chinatown” movement was a focus of city attention throughout the 60s and 70s. The main forces fighting in favor of Chinatown in the “Save Chinatown” movement were the conservative Chinese Benevolent Association (CBA), the PCDC, and the most radical of them, the Yellow Seeds Organization, headquartered at 1006 Winter Street. 

Operating as both an organization and as a bilingual newspaper that published between 1972 and 1975, Yellow Seeds expressed a more radical view than other organizations of the time, placing emphasis on voicing the concerns of Chinatown’s poor and elderly residents. Yellow Seeds represented a part of the greater Asian American Movement in the United States that developed in conjunction with the Black Power movement of the late 1960s. Black Power generally emphasized pride in being black, and more radical organizations in the movement such as the Black Panther Party (BPP) supported complete economic and political self-determination for black Americans. When paired with the greater anti-Vietnam War movement of the era, the BPP’s radical language resonated with young people of color throughout the United States, prompting similar groups for Puerto Ricans, Chicano people, and Asian Americans to form and build their own ethnic consciousness (Bae 695). In a similar fashion to Black Power, the Asian American Movement stressed “Yellow Power,” a defiance of Orientalizing stereotypes placed on Chinese Americans and other Asian Americans by white American society. 

Yellow Power was a popular rallying cry for young Asian Americans throughout the country, from the radical university student-run newspaper Gidra in Los Angeles, to the organization I Wor Kuen (IWK) in New York City’s Chinatown. IWK was directly influenced by the BPP, evidenced by their Twelve Point Program advocating for “‘an end to racism,’ better housing and health care, and ‘community control of our institutions and land’” (Chao). 

Founded by young students including activist Mary Yee, Yellow Seeds were part of this greater radical tradition. Yellow Seeds as an organization began appearing in student newspapers in 1971 through advertising screenings of recently produced Chinese films and cultural events. Film screenings were valuable to many members of the Chinese community as there was limited access to media of mainland China in the United States following the 1949 Maoist Revolution (Chao). 

While a part of broader ethnic consciousness movements, Yellow Seeds differed from other ethnic groups by placing emphasis on the elderly, demonstrating greater knowledge of Chinatown’s community. Rather than broadly advocating against oppression, Yellow Seeds understood the needs of their community and addressed them through years of newspaper publications. In their first issue, Yellow Seeds ran an article explaining the life of Mr. Lao, an elderly resident of Chinatown living in depressed conditions, unable to leave his apartment and unable to receive the assistance he needed (Yellow Seeds, Vol. 1, No. 1, April 1972). 

The actual content of the newspaper included living conditions in Chinatown, upcoming community programs and events, world news that focused on radical and anti-war movements, and local urban renewal updates written in Chinese and an accessible style of English. As a secondary point, Yellow Seeds collaborated with other radical groups in Philadelphia such as the Puerto Rican Socialist Party and Black United Liberation Front in protests and as a social function (Philadelphia Daily News, July 15, 1974). This interracial collaboration points to the interconnected struggles of what was deemed Third World Peoples at the time. 

Yellow Seeds’ radical stance kept the more politically tame PCDC in check, ensuring that the needs of the community’s poor and elderly were kept in mind when the PCDC negotiated with City Hall. Yellow Seeds Newspaper reported on PCDC elections and relevant developments in the “Save Chinatown” movement. Importantly, Yellow Seeds and the PCDC had the same goal in mind of preserving Chinatown in the face of redevelopment. The relationship between the two was not adversarial; the criticisms that Yellow Seeds offered held the PCDC accountable to the economically disadvantaged population of Chinatown. 

Yellow Seeds functioned as an extension of the Asian American Movement to Philadelphia at a critical moment of resistance against urban renewal. By having a radical stance shared by other Third World organizations that threatened the political status quo of the United States, Yellow Seeds remains a reminder of the power of organizing working class people against economic and social oppression, and their vision is carried on in the present by new community organizers, namely Asian Americans United.

Sources

1. Bae, Aaron Byungjoo. "'The Struggle for Freedom, Justice, and Equality Transcends Racial and National Boundaries': Anti-Imperialism, Multiracial Alliances, and the Free Huey Movement in the San Francisco Bay Area," Pacific Historical Review 86, no. 4 (November 2017): 691-722.  https://www.jstor.org/stable/26419858 .
2. Chao, Eveline. “How Asian-American Radicals Brought ‘Yellow Power’ To Chinatown.” Gothamist, Published Oct 19, 2016, Modified Oct 28, 2016.  https://gothamist.com/news/how-asian-american-radicals-brought-yellow-power-to-chinatown/ . 
3. “Chinatown Renewed Out of Existence.” Yellow Seeds (Philadelphia, PA), Vol. 2, No. 2, May 1974. 
4. "July 15, 1974 (Page 3 of 52)." Philadelphia Daily News (1960-2001), Jul 15, 1974,  https://proxy.swarthmore.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/july-15-1974-page-3-52/docview/2068685227/se-2  (accessed November 9, 2023).
5. Kubota, Larry. "Yellow Power.” Gidra (Los Angeles, CA), Vol. 1, No. 1, April 1969,  https://www.jstor.org/stable/community.29566056 . 
6. “This is Where Mr. Lao Lives.” Yellow Seeds (Philadelphia, PA), Vol. 1, No. 1, April 1972. 
7. Yee, Mary. “The Save Chinatown Movement: Surviving against All Odds.” Pennsylvania Legacies 12, no. 1 (2012): 24–31.  https://doi.org/10.5215/pennlega.12.1.0024 .