Assumption Case Enters Unfamiliar Territory As L&I Board Sends Case Back To Historical Commission

 

Photo: Nathaniel Popkin

Photo: Nathaniel Popkin

While demolition remains on hold for the historic Church of the Assumption on Spring Garden Street, its immediate future remains unclear following an unusual move by the Board of Licenses and Inspections Review on Wednesday afternoon.

After hearing arguments concerning the right of the church’s present owner to demolish it based on financial hardship, the Board issued a request for an opinion from the Philadelphia Historical Commission “as soon as possible” concerning the case. They recommended that the matter be taken up at the Commission’s next monthly meeting, which is to be held this Friday, January 11th. In the meantime, the review board retains the right to issue a final decision on the appeal of the demolition permit.

The hearing opened with Samuel Stretton, the attorney for the Callowhill Neighborhood Association, summarizing the events leading up to the present appeal: the granting of hardship by the Historical Commission to the church’s previous owner, the nonprofit Siloam, in September 2010; the Board of L&I Review’s overturning of the Commission’s decision in May 2011 after CNA appealed; the sale of the church to John Wei in July 2012, while Siloam’s appeal of L&I’s decision was still being heard before the Court of Common Pleas; and the ruling by Common Pleas Judge Idee C. Fox, three months after the sale, reinstating the Commission’s original hardship ruling.

Stretton and CNA then appealed Fox’s ruling to the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court, where the case is still pending. In the meantime, Wei applied for and received a demolition permit after L&I checked with the Historical Commission, who consulted the City’s Law Department to verify the reading of Fox’s decision. The City held that the hardship runs with the land regardless of the owner.

The Church of the Assumption in 1919

The Church of the Assumption in 1919

When Wei’s permit was approved in December, Stretton asked for a stay of demolition from the Commonwealth Court. The court refused, he said, because a new party had taken the permit, not Siloam. Thus, he turned to the Board of L&I Review, which issued the stay on the very day that demolition was approved to commence.

Although he made reference to the witnesses who had testified in the past to make the case that the church’s repair was feasible, Stretton told the board he didn’t believe witnesses would be necessary for the present appeal. “Our argument, based on the record, speaks for itself,” he said.

The correct procedure, according to Stretton, was for the new owner to prove the case for financial hardship before the Historical Commission, especially since Wei was a commercial developer with financial circumstances distinct from Siloam’s. He added that Wei’s purchase in July proved that the church did have value and undermined Siloam’s original case for razing it.

“They’re saying, been there, done that,” Stretton said. “We’re saying it’s a new person and a different standard. Mr. Wei is not a nonprofit.”

Defending the actions of the City was solicitor Andrew Ross, who argued that the appellants had no evidence to present to challenge the principle of “the ruling follows the land.”

“There is no ordinance that says, if I have a property for which I obtain a permit and then sell it to you, that you can’t proceed on the permit,” Ross told the board.

He dismissed Stretton’s claim that the Historical Commission judged hardship according to an owner’s financial well-being and cited Judge Fox’s October ruling that the church’s hardship was based on the value of the property and the costs of repairing and maintaining it.

Regardless, Ross concluded, the Board was present to decide on the permit itself, as the hardship reading was something for the Commonwealth Court to decide on.

Representing the church’s owner was Carl Primavera, who has garnered a reputation for taking on developers mired in high-profile legal battles. Primavera said that while he appreciated the community’s push to save the church, the structure’s unsafe condition posed a serious liability to his client.

Photo: Chandra Lampreich

Photo: Chandra Lampreich

“If someone could have saved this beautiful building, they would have,” he said.

Stretton countered that Wei understood what he was getting himself into when he bought the church and that nothing was stopping him from making repairs.

In appealing the issuing of the permit, CNA sought one of two outcomes: to have the Historical Commission conduct a brand new hardship review for the new owner, or to have the permit stayed until the appeal in Commonwealth Court was finally resolved.

However, the Board’s decision, which followed about 45 minutes of oral arguments and 15 minutes of deliberation, did not fit in with either scenario. While the Historical Commission is supposed to report back to the Board on the situation, the Commission does not have the final say on the appeal. Questions concerning what procedure the Commission will follow were also unanswered by Board members, who suggested that would be left up to the Commission to decide. Since its next meeting is on Friday, there is also the question of whether the Commission is even able to take up the case on such short notice.

Following the hearing, Jonathan Farnham, the Commission’s executive director, acknowledged the unfamiliar terrain that the three-year-old case surrounding Assumption was now entering. The first step for him would be to review the Board’s decision in writing to determine what exactly was required of him and the body. Otherwise, Farnham said, “anything could happen” on Friday and in the intervening days.

About the author

Christopher Mote covers stories of preservation, planning, zoning and development. He lives in South Philadelphia and has a special fondness for brownstone churches and mansard roofs.

Send him a message at: motecw[at]hotmail[dot]com



1 Comment


  1. The real question is why Jon Farnham is leading the Commission into “unfamiliar territory?”

    The case is rather simple, and the reason for lack of precendent is obvious.
    A hardship decision is based on the fact that the property can not be sold. Obviously a sale renders the hardship decision moot.

    Granted hardship for non-profits and individuals are not based on whether the property can be sold. But these exceptions are based on the owner’s circumstances and clearly become moot upon sale of the property.

    Now the right thing for the Historical Commission to do is to recognize that for whatever reason, they have erred.

Recent Posts
La Salle To Host, Nutter To Lead, International Mayors Forum

La Salle To Host, Nutter To Lead, International Mayors Forum

September 2, 2015  |  Morning Blend

Mayors’ forum to explore the importance of the urban family, Philly’s “Fin-de-siècle Firehouse Boom,” Habitat for Humanity building in North Philly, and demo work looms for Mt. Sinai hospital > more

The End Of The Road For 40th And Pine

The End Of The Road For 40th And Pine

September 2, 2015  |  Last Light

Demolition of the beleaguered Levy-Leas House is underway at 40th and Pine. Hidden City co-editor Michael Bixler takes one last look at the building's lost potential with a walk inside one of architect Samuel Sloan's last remaining West Philadelphia homes > more

Pearl Is Indeed Thinking Big For 16th & Walnut

Pearl Is Indeed Thinking Big For 16th & Walnut

September 1, 2015  |  Morning Blend

A 12-story mixed use planned for demolished Lululemon location, Washington Post opines on what the Pope visit means for Philly’s rep, Fairmount Park Conservancy gets federal arts grant, and some needed development in Southwest Philly > more

Come Swing Away On The Porch

Come Swing Away On The Porch

August 31, 2015  |  Morning Blend

Leisure swings at 30th Street Station’s Porch, why it is Philly's duty to stay in town and welcome the Pope madness, a festival seeks to make the Schuylkill a community gathering space, and City of Brotherly Love rated 3rd best host to tourists > more

Renovations Furnish Lawsonia Building With Good Fortune

Renovations Furnish Lawsonia Building With Good Fortune

August 31, 2015  |  The Shadow Knows

The old Lawsonia furniture factory in Callowhill is being renovated for commercial and residential reuse after 13 years of false starts and vacancy. The Shadow plates up this little slice of industrial heritage on Spring Garden Street > more

Reviving The Potential Of Broad & Washington

Reviving The Potential Of Broad & Washington

August 28, 2015  |  Morning Blend

Another development set for Broad & Washington, Old Navy flagship coming to Chestnut, Wawa to open early for Pope, Philly traffic numbers looking good, and some help on deciding which Fringe Fest events to attend > more