The cases referenced below are indicative of the manner in which The Philadelphia Historical Commission (PHC) imposes arbitrary and expensive encumbrances on owners of properties that have been designated as historic, either on their own or as part of districts. Examples 1 and 2 are especially egregious because the buildings in question are of relatively recent construction and the differences between what is not allowed and what the PHC demands would have essentially no visual impact, yet they represent major cost burdens. Item 3 involves an illustration of the epigram "no good deed goes unpunished" in that an owner repaired a porch without approval from the PHC and is now being obliged to do the job all over again. Number 4 is an instance in which the PHC has expressed a preference for a decaying brick roadbed over the needs of residents for adequate water and sewer service. The 5th illustration shows the arrogant attitude of the Historical Commission about spending money ... when it's someone else's.
"This is not a popularity contest."
Statement by Michael Sklaroff, Chairman, in cutting off testimony about the sentiment of the community by Carl Primavera. Mr Primavera, an attorney for the property owner, was speaking against the historic designation of the entire National Products Co building, as opposed to only its facade on North 2nd Street.
Note: An editorial appeared in The Philadelphia Daily News of November 21 2002 criticizing the Philadelphia Historical Commission for its unwillingness to be flexible in its position, and for its failure to seriously consider a compromise on the question of the facade versus the entire building in this situation. To read this editorial, click here. Last updated 10.4.2008