Dear Chris,
I disagree vehemently with your stance that the meeting promoted by Al
and others is redundant.
I love Historic property.
I want to see our neighborhood improved and (where appropriate) restored.
But,
IMPOSING an ideal &/or
GIFTING Tax Credits to folks (like RAPAPORT) for non-change &/or
UNCOMPENSATED TAKING on SIDE or REAR FACADES
(at corners) &/or
LIMITING developement (including improvement) &/or
COMPLICATING resale &/or
IGNORING that many uglifications are done without L&I permit
ESTABLISHING BOUNDARIES that
EXCLUDE
all of PENN and many buildings worth saving and
the green spaces, such as Clark Park and
the Non Spruce Hill neighborhoods of UC
Cedar Park, Squirrel Hill, etc.
AND
INCLUDE
TAKING of EASEMENTS on most of the homes in Spruce Hill
strikes me as foolish and counter productive.
Your reference to the site:
http://sprucehill.uchs.net/factsheet.htm
was welcome. But, the site contains as much editorial as fact.
For example actual conclusions under "studies show", might also reveal
that heavily promoted is actually condo, commercial and apartment
developement and that what is lost is the "family home" and that the
studies had poor or nonexistent "controls" and are therefore not
particularly conclusive. Further, the folks who are saying "it won't
increase cost or delay or complicate permitting" are flat out LYING.
They may be ignorant of the reality and naive enough to repeat what has
been told to them, but they are not speaking fact.
Please trust me when I say...
any extra step through a Phila city bureaucracy, even a "simple" step is
a frustrating, time consuming, often frightening chore and
any extra charge, even one as small as $50 or $100 dollars translates to
a lot of deferred developement when it is multiplied over thousands of
projects in thousands of homes. It also creates a paper nightmare for
the small contractor. Note: in our neighborhood often the best and less
expensive craftsmen are the worst at paperwork.
I recently attended a HISTORIC COMMISSION HEARING which debated the
merits of a mural painted on an wall on Waverly Street at 15th. This is
a street so small that it makes Ionic St. (located between Chestnut and
Sansom at 44th) look large. The wall is the north side of a 3-story tall
row home. The top two floors are brick. The first floor has been a
damaged stucco graffiti billboard for all of my memory (20 + years) of
it. The wall faces the Dumpster of a Student Dormitory for a Center City
college. The mural is at the beginning of a row which leads to backyard
parking. I don't think there are any homes fronting onto the 1500 block
of Waverly. Certainly no entrances anywhere near the mural. The
Historic Commission ordered the Mural "Painted Over" with Red-Brick
colored Paint.
At an appeal of that the decision, the Historic Commission tied,
half wanted it painted over,
half were convinced it qualified as "art" and could stay.
But, members of the commission made comments that convinced me that
Color
Content and
Petty Spats between neighbors
influence what is permitted (or fined) and what is not.
I would not have gone to the trouble to restore my "Fish Scale" siding if
I had to paint it ochre.
Because it is restored, the folks who follow me into my home can choose
Ochre, but I want to enjoy light and color and the pleasure of coming
home to something which feels like a retreat from my auto and office.
I choose rainbow colors, partly in support of those troubled by the
actions of some homophobic thugs in Powelton Village. I left the HC
hearing fearful that
a homophobic person might create a complaint or hassles under the guise
of
preventing my "Bright" "Not Historic" color choices or that
a racist person could object to my mural,
without revealing that the content
which portrays the joyful interaction of folks with
nonhomogeneous skin tones,
is what really caused their offense.
The owners of the Waverly Street Mural wasted time and money on attorneys
and at hearings TO DEFEND the right to pay a young ARTIST, with private
funds, to IMPROVE what was an ugly, graffitid, stucco wall facing a
Dumpster. The HC demanded an uncompensated taking of the rights to the
side wall because the property is technically a corner (even though there
is no true sidewalk and the "street" is really only a cartway to back
yard parking).
Do I want my friends and neighbors in Spruce Hill to go through similar
complaints and trials? No!
The UCHS does lots of good. The House Tours are a source of good ideas.
I will always believe that education is a wonderful public service.
But, the constant of History is change.
Take my own house -
Do we require pure 1890's restoration?
Or do we protect the changes made in 1908?
Will there be any nod to my "faux window" / return to the 1890's or to
my rainbow colors?
Can we ever allow any Solar Cells or other improvements
which save energy, but
might be visible on the exterior?
I have researched this matter as thoroughly as time allows, and I have
found more truth in any one missive by Al Krigman than in any of the
commentary being sent out by the Pro-SHHD supporters.
I found one woman in the Art Museum Historic District who told me the
following:
She wanted to install new vinyl windows in her bedrooms.
(To improve energy efficiency and reduce Lead poisoning risks).
She had a quote of under $200 / window.
But, she was a little short of cash and was reluctant to tap a Credit
Card at 15%.
She talked to her local Pro-Historic District neighbors and was assured
that
side and upper windows would not be affected.
The HD proposal passed.
Two years later she has enough cash to install new windows,
even though her choice is now $240/window.
She applies for a permit.
The HC comes back with a rejection and a "compromise",
windows that cost $800 each.
Her home is a "corner" home.
She got no tax credit for the side facade (or its many windows),
but she must suffer
inefficient heating and cooling,
and continued deterioration
because she has no expectation of being able to afford $800/window.
She feels lied to and
She won't let me use her name or address, because
She believes "the HC might force repair or change out of spite".
So, if you believe that a UCHD won't increase costs, limit repairs,
complicate resale, make arbitrary decisions on color or content, than
maybe you can afford to let the proposal pass without question. But, if
like me, your home is your largest asset and you want to preserve its
value, you may prefer to attend the open community meeting about the
proposed historic designation of our neighborhood and learn more about
what will really happen to the average property owner (the one whose
maximum tax credit makes it not worth the troubles) if the Historic
District is allowed the taking of facade easements in Spruce Hill.
Tuesday March 19th,
7-9 pm, Newman Center,
3720 Chestnut Street.
Those on all sides of the issue encouraged to attend.
I am not part of the planning for the meeting. I have had no recent,
direct communication with Ann Dixon or Al Krigman and don't know the
Agenda, but... my home is the largest asset for my family and that of my
friends. I am willing to go and learn as much as possible to protect
myself and my friends from encroachment or forcible easement against
title.
Sincerely,
Liz
On Sun, 17 Mar 2002 14:46:56 -0500 Chris Hibbard
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Dear list,
> let's review the process , this is from the UCHS site listed below.
> Al's proposed meeting is redundant.
>
> How is a Philadelphia Historic District created?
> Working with local community and historic preservation groups, the
> Historic Designation Committee of the Commission undertakes a
> preliminary
> review of an area's significance and of the boundaries that reflect
> that
> significance. After that determination, a nomination is prepared
> that
> contains a description of the characteristics of the potential
> district,
> its significance, an evaluative inventory listing, for every
> property in
> the district, photographs and a map. A community group, a
> preservation
> organization, or a person on the Commission staff may write a
> nomination.
> Upon the completion of this work, the Commission schedules public
> hearings
> to consider the nomination and to determine whether the proposed
> district
> meets the criteria for designation provided in the Ordinance. At
> least
> sixty (60) days before the hearings, every owner receives written
> notice of
> the hearings, notices are posted in the neighborhood, and a notice
> appears
> in the newspaper. The Commission holds several sessions to receive
> public
> testimony and comment on the proposed district. At least one of
> these
> sessions takes place during the evening in the neighborhood. In
> addition,
> interested persons may submit written comments on the proposed
> district.
> Finally, the Commission will vote to designate-or not to
> designate-the
> district as historic
>
>
<http://sprucehill.uchs.net/factsheet.htm>http://sprucehill.uchs.net/fact
sheet.
> <http://sprucehill.uchs.net/factsheet.htm>htm
>
>
>
> ----
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
> list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information,
> see
> <http://www.purple.com/list.html>.
Elizabeth Campion - Neighbor & Real Estate Broker -
Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Direct & VM: 215-790-5653 / Cell Phone (emergencies): 215-880-2930
Mail to : P.O. Box 23632 / Phila, Pa 19143
PRUDENTIAL, FOX & ROACH - Reception:215-546-0550, Shared Fax:
215-546-9781
Office at 210 W. Rittenhouse Sq., Suite # 406 / Phila, Pa 19103
----
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
<http://www.purple.com/list.html>.
