August 1999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

D,EMOLITION DENIAL Pennsylvania Court Upholds Denial of Permit to Demolish Victorian Hotel The Court of Common, Pleas in Lycoming County, Pennsylvania, has upheld the City of Williamsport's denial of an application for a permit to demolish a historic Victo- rian hotel. Among other things, the court ruled that the property owner, a nonprof- it home for the aged, had not met its burden of proof in establishing that the City's action resulted in an unlawful taking of property. The court also ruled that the Williams- port Historic District Ordi- nance is not void for vague- ness and that the City Council had not acted arbi- trarily and capriciously in denying the permit. The decision in this case was issued just one month before the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania reversed its 1991 ruling that the historic desig- nation of Philadelphia's Boyd Theater violated the takings clause of the Pennsylvania Constitution. See "Pennsyl- vania Supreme Court Reverses Itself in United Artists; Rules Philadelphia Preservation Ordinance is Constitutional." Nonetheless, the Court of Common Pleas determined that the original United Art- ists decision did not apply to ordinances enacted pursuant to the Local Historic Districts Act. (The Park Home v. City of Williamsport, No. 92-01,607 (Ct. of Comm. Pleas Oct. 21, 1993).) This case involves a challenge to the City of Williamsport's denial, pursuant to its histor- ic district ordinance, of an applica- tion to demolish a historic struc- ture known as the Park Home. The Park Home, also known as the Herdic House, was designed by Eber Culver as a four-story, brick, Victorian hotel which opened to the public in 1865. The building was converted into a licensed per- sonal care boarding facility for el- derly woman in 1940 and has since been operated as a home for the aged. Although two of the build- ing's top floors were removed in 1938, the building otherwise retains its original integrity. The Park Home is located in the Williamsport Historic District, a locally designated historic district which is also listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Accord- ing to the court, the architectural character of the Park Home is "unique and one of the more out- standing examples of Nineteenth Century structures in the Historic District" and constitutes "the cor- nerstone of the Williamsport His - 12 111,R 1190 —servation Law Reporter December I qcil toric District." Supreme Court had ruled that th The building is owned by Park designation of a theater as a histol Home, a Pennsylvania non-profit is landmark under the Philadelphi, corporation established in 1930 historic preservation ordinance wa: whose corporate purpose is to es- an unlawful taking under the Com tablish and maintain a home for monwealth's constitution. Parl the aged. It currently houses twen-' Home argued that, under Unitet ty elderly women. The organiza- Artists, designation of any propero tion would like to demolish the without the consent of the own' building to construct a larger facili- er—regardless of whether under ty. authority of a historic district of On January 21, 1992, the Board historic landmarks ordinances—is Ounconstitutional. of Directors of the Park Home ap- Finding that plied to the Williamsport Historical reading of the decision to be overly Architectural Review Board (the broad, the court determined that "HARB") for a demolition permit. the original United Artists decision Under local law, the HARB is re- did not apply to historic districts. sponsible for advising the City In distinguishing United Art - Council regarding the issuance of ists, the Court of Common Pleas Certificates of Appro- observed that the Wil- priateness for the de- The court deter- liamsport ordinance molition of structures mined that the was enacted pursuant located in the Wil- original United to the Local Historic Ink liamsport Historic Dis- trict. On February 3, Artists Districts Act while the decision Philadelphia ordinance 1992, the HARB voted did not apply to was adopted under unanimously to rec- historic dis- separate procedures. ommend the denial of triCts. The court also noted the permit. The City that the United Artists Council thereafter case involved the designation of the voted to deny the application, 6-0, interior of a theater, while the Park with one abstention. Park Home Home designation only governed ultimately appealed the City Coun- the exterior of a building. Lastly, cil's decision to the Court of Com- the court stressed that in United mon Pleas. Artists there was substantial dis- Park Home raised several argu- agreement over the historical sig- ments before the court in seeking nificance of the designated struc- to overturn the City's decision. ture, while the Park Home is un - Among other things, the organiza- questionably significant. tion argued that the City's historic The court next rejected the district ordinance was unconstitu- organization's argument that the tional under United Artists The- denial of the demolition permit in ater, Inc. v. Philadelphia Historical this case amounted to an unlawful Commission, 595 A.2d 6 (Pa. taking of property. The court 1991)[10 PLR 1109] and that the found that the organization had not City's action in denying the permit met its burden of proof in establish - amounted to an unlawful taking. ing that a taking had occurred. In that decision, the Pennsylvania in reaching Mnclusion, tr