Re: [UC] church
BGAnderson wrote: "I think its a shame that the tower collpased last night. I'm going to guess the heavy rains and a lack of proper maintenance were the cause. How many other historic buildings are going to fall before we really invest in historic preservation?" I heard on the news that this building wasn't really being used as a church anymore, but as a shelter. In that regard it is amazing and wonderful that no one was seriously injured or worse. I'm going to go with the guess that the heavy rains we've been having did weaken the structure and the one yesterday was just the last straw. Historic preservation would be a good thing, and something that's done inplaces here in the US and it seems especially in parts of Europe and Great Britain where they really DO have history. Of course, the taxes in England, at least, are far higher than ours here. That's what helps pay for the preservation. And there is a difference even there as to what is preserved/rebuilt/restored...my roommate, who's been to London several times, told me about seeing the bombed out buildings from WWII being left as is, with new buildings all around them. They didn't tear them all down, but they didn't rebuild some of themeither. Maybe their perspective on what falls under historic preservation (the Roman wall vs. a building from the 20th centrury) is different. I'm all for preservation, when it is feasible - like the Victory Building. I recall spending way too many nights there when the London Victory Club was open and it was a beautiful building. I was so sad to see it just sitting there rotting away for years. I'm not sure I like all the "luxury" high priced living I'm seeing all over the place, but that's another story. To me, there is a difference between preservation and designation. The first does try, with (I believe?) the help of federal/state funding along with private investors, to restore/rehab/repair. Designation, on the other hand,forces an individual to fork over money they may not have to restore/rehab/repair in a way that a small group of people decide is right with no help/funding from the government - state or federal. Wendy
[UC] Lost Dog owner located
The List Serves rule! It took about ONE HOUR for Henry to show up and give me the contact information for the current owner of the dog. Thanks to many people who chipped in with assistance. Roger Harman 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.
Re: [UC] church
Someone just sent me this link: http://www.sacredplaces.org Partners for Sacred Places is the only national, non-sectarian, non-profit organization dedicated to the sound stewardship and active community use of America's older religious properties. Partners provides assistance to the people who care for sacred places while promoting a new understanding of how these places sustain communities. In a message dated 8/4/2004 3:46:34 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Shaera writes: BGAndersEn wrote: I think its a shame that the tower collpased last night. I'm going to guess the heavy rains and a lack of proper maintenance were the cause. How many other historic buildings are going to fall before we really invest in historic preservation? I heard on the news that this building wasn't really being used as a church anymore, but as a shelter. In that regard it is amazing and wonderful that no one was seriously injured or worse. I'm going to go with the guess that the heavy rains we've been having did weaken the structure and the one yesterday was just the last straw. Historic preservation would be a good thing, and something that's done in places here in the US and it seems especially in parts of Europe and Great Britain where they really DO have history. Of course, the taxes in England, at least, are far higher than ours here. That's what helps pay for the preservation. And there is a difference even there as to what is preserved/rebuilt/restored...my roommate, who's been to London several times, told me about seeing the bombed out buildings from WWII being left as is, with new buildings all around them. They didn't tear them all down, but they didn't rebuild some of them either. Maybe their perspective on what falls under historic preservation (the Roman wall vs. a building from the 20th centrury) is different. I'm all for preservation, when it is feasible - like the Victory Building. I recall spending way too many nights there when the London Victory Club was open and it was a beautiful building. I was so sad to see it just sitting there rotting away for years. I'm not sure I like all the luxury high priced living I'm seeing all over the place, but that's another story. To me, there is a difference between preservation and designation. The first does try, with (I believe?) the help of federal/state funding along with private investors, to restore/rehab/repair. Designation, on the other hand, forces an individual to fork over money they may not have to restore/rehab/repair in a way that a small group of people decide is right with no help/funding from the government - state or federal. Wendy 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.
Re: [UC] church
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think its a shame that the tower collpased last night. I'm going to guess the heavy rains and a lack of proper maintenance were the cause. How many other historic buildings are going to fall before we really invest in historic preservation? Well, given the accounts Al's given us, about another church which couldn't afford the repairs mandated by the PHC, it's difficult to see this as a mandate for the HD proposal. One could argue, with equal force and evidence, that the owners would be facing repairs of an extremely (and prohibitively) expensive nature. The fact is this is a huge loss for the beauty of the neighborhood. I'm glad no one was hurt... and I hope it can be rebuilt. 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.
RE: [UC] Valuing Historic Preservation
BGAnderson didn't actually say anything about the HD proposal. I think it's a general statement... Could be interpreted broadly, the we being we as in individuals with private money, or our society locally (as in the HD ideals), on the state level, or at the federal level. The church collapse is not a great example of the pros or cons of a potential HD. The repairs on that steeple will be of a tremendously costly nature no matter how you look at it (this is not about buying cheap balusters at Home Depot). That's probably why it collapsed in the first place. What's more interesting is the problem that many urban churches face - declining congregation, declining funds, less money for maintenance and repair, and the corresponding deterioration of building stock that would cost much less to maintain than to rebuild (if money were available). This topic is on my mind because we can extrapolate and sort of predict the loss of many of these buildings in the not-too-distant future. I think I have the answer, though. SLOT MACHINES in the churches. Think about it. :) HillierARCHITECTURE Elisabeth Dubin T 215 636 x4176 | F 215 636 9989 The Widener Bldg. | Mezzanine | One South Penn Square | Philadelphia | PA | 19107-3502 www. hillier. com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Siano Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2004 4:15 PM To: University City List Subject: Re: [UC] church [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think its a shame that the tower collpased last night. I'm going to guess the heavy rains and a lack of proper maintenance were the cause. How many other historic buildings are going to fall before we really invest in historic preservation? Well, given the accounts Al's given us, about another church which couldn't afford the repairs mandated by the PHC, it's difficult to see this as a mandate for the HD proposal. One could argue, with equal force and evidence, that the owners would be facing repairs of an extremely (and prohibitively) expensive nature. The fact is this is a huge loss for the beauty of the neighborhood. I'm glad no one was hurt... and I hope it can be rebuilt. 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. 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.
Re: [UC] church
In a message dated 8/4/2004 4:23:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: http://www.sacredplaces.orgPartners for Sacred Places is the only national, non-sectarian, non-profit organization dedicated to the sound stewardship and active community use of America's older religious properties. Partners provides assistance to the people who care for sacred places while promoting a new understanding of how these places sustain communities. Seems long on places that could use help. Short on the help they could use. A bunch of anointed preservation fanatics spouting the noblesse oblige but not actually doing anything as droll as raising money. Or, was there a page on this web site I somehow missed? Al Krigman(Left of Ivan Groznyj)
Re: [UC] church
A bunch of anointed preservation fanatics spouting the noblesse oblige but not actually doing anything as droll as raising money. You're such a depressing entity on this list, even if you do bring some useful links once in a while. What a negative attitude you have, and you don't even know the institution or the people. There's more to community building than raising money or renting apartments. Disappointed, Dan W. -- -- Daniel Widyono -- -- www.widyono.net-- -- www.cis.upenn.edu/~widyono -- -- 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.
Re: [UC] church
In a message dated 8/4/2004 5:23:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
youdon't even know the institution or the
people
Bruce gave us the website. I looked at it. It offered no substantive help
whatsoever. Or, if it did, show me what I missed and I'll retract my
statement.
And, you can can the personal attacks. They don't do your well-known
reputation for proportionany justice whatsoever. ("You're such a
depressing entity," and"What a negative attitude you have," indeed!)
Al
Krigman(Left of Ivan Groznyj)
Re: [UC] church
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm going to go with the guess that the heavy rains we've been having did weaken the structure and the one yesterday was just the last straw. I've been wondering: Mill Creek? anybody? . laserbeam® [aka ray] 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.
Re: [UC] church
On 04 Aug, 2004, at 15:46, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: BGAnderson wrote: I think its a shame that the tower collapsed last night. I'm going to guess the heavy rains and a lack of proper maintenance were the cause. How many other historic buildings are going to fall before we really invest in historic preservation? There are more than two sides to this issue. Especially when the edifice involved is or was a church I heard on the news that this building wasn't really being used as a church anymore, but as a shelter. In that regard it is amazing and wonderful that no one was seriously injured or worse. Actually, it was still an active Church. It is a typical store-front church, not unlike the Reverend Larry and the antil-McPentrafacation folks down the block. The last I knew, the congregation numbered around 50. The muti-purpose room of the church was used as a day-care Christian Academy during the day and, apparently, as a homeless shelter in the evening. Not that long ago it was an active Episcopal Church with an adjoining Seminary. The Seminary building is now a community help organization (I forget its name) which built the parking lot across the street. I believe that ownership of the church building was transferred about 10, maybe 15 years ago. I'm going to go with the guess that the heavy rains we've been having did weaken the structure and the one yesterday was just the last straw. The property was under repair. No, I don't know exactly what that means. I know that one of the stained glass windows in the multi-purpose room had recently been removed for work. The scaffolding was still in place. The tower had been a known problem for several months. Pieces of facade had fallen, and the entire front of the church was blocked (to the sidewalk) with chain link fencing. How extensive the known problem happened to be I have no idea. All this is just from sidewalk observations. To me, there is a difference between preservation and designation. The first does try, with (I believe?) the help of federal/state funding along with private investors, to restore/rehab/repair. Designation, on the other hand, forces an individual to fork over money they may not have to restore/rehab/repair in a way that a small group of people decide is right with no help/funding from the government - state or federal. This particular property is typical of the bulk of the churches in West Philadelphia. They were built as exalted edifices 100 to 150 years ago. Then, nominally 50 years ago, when white flight was at its height, they were abandoned by their congregations. Since then, they have typically, been occupied by a succession of too poor to maintain them organizations -- either religious or otherwise. Those which have remained as religious edifices are in the worst repair... those which were not re-uses for religious purposes have long since been torn down, or converted into speakeasies. The unique problem of a religious structure is that when it was built it was typically an extremely good structure; representing the best that the congregation could conceive. Affordability was not really an issue at the time they were built. Organized Religion was growing and raising money for a new church was comparatively easy. (No more difficult than it was during Franklin's time when they built the steeple on Christ Church, which just celebrated its anniversary!) So today, you have what's left. Historic designation or Historic Preservation is utterly meaningless in this context. The simple fact of the matter is -- nobody gives a damm what happens to these structures, except for a few people who want to tell others what they can and cannot do with their properties. When these few are gone, they're gone, and they won't be an issue anymore. I am fairly certain that because of the damage done to the main sanctuary's roof when the tower collapsed, the entire building will come down. For one thing -- tonight's rain simply poured into that hole soaking the wooden floors and plaster walls inside, further damaging the interior. Of course, the hulk may simply sit there with a chain-link fence around it for 5 or 10 years. I would be very surprised if the congregation has no funds to pay for the removal of the ruble of the tower, let alone demolition of the remainder of the tower (there is barely one floor still standing) and repairs to the roof and the sanctuary. So unless the City needs debris for landfill someplace, the pile will sit there for quite some time. T.T.F.N. William H. Magill [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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.
[UC] church, latest video
go to http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/news/080304_nw_churchcollapse.html click on video for latest news video on church (withfootage of interior this time) andphotos of church pre-collapse ml
Re: [UC] church
In a message dated 8/4/2004 9:46:48 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Not that long ago it was an active Episcopal Church with an adjoining Seminary. The Seminary building is now a "community help organization" (I forget its name) which built the parking lot across the street. I believe that ownership of the church building was transferred about 10, maybe 15 years ago. Actually, *Reformed* Episcopal. Born of a church split in 1873, and from my understanding more "conservative" than mainstream Episcopals. We Mennonites rented space from them when it was still a seminary, andas the building transitioned to a social service agency -- the seminary was in the more modern blocky building next store. Behind the main church is a large dormitory which used to serve the seminary. At one time we Mennos were considering buying the dorm, although not very seriously. I would imagine that's where the shelter is. Also, my understanding is that a concrete ball used to top the majestic steeple, but it got hit by lightning and toppled some years back. "The Reformed Episcopal Church was organized in New York City in 1873 by eight clergymen and twenty laymen who were formerly priests and members of the Protestant Episcopal Church. A long debate over the excessive ritualism and exclusive attitude of the Protestant Episcopal Church toward other denominations lay behind the separation. The immediate cause of the division lay in the participation of Bishop George David Cummins, Assistant Bishop of Kentucky, at a Communion Service held in the Fifth Avenue Presbyterian Church in New York City. In the face of criticism and with the conviction that the evangelical and catholic nature and mission of the Protestant Episcopal Church were being lost, Bishop Cummins resigned as Assistant Bishop of Kentucky and transferred his Episcopal oversight to a new jurisdiction called the Reformed Episcopal Church." http://www.recus.org/history.htm Ross Benderhttp://rossbender.org
Re: [UC] church
William H. Magill wrote: So today, you have what's left. Historic designation or Historic Preservation is utterly meaningless in this context. The simple fact of the matter is -- nobody gives a damm what happens to these structures, except for a few people who want to tell others what they can and cannot do with their properties. When these few are gone, they're gone, and they won't be an issue anymore. tonight I noticed they're excavating inside the (mosque?) at 43rd and walnut. mini bulldozers coming out of a hole in the wall and dumping dirt into a big dumpster. I think that place used to be a (movie theatre?) and then it became a (christian? church?) of some sort (well, there used to be a 'jesus loves you' marquee on the 43rd st side). anyway, maybe they're finally excavating so that the floor ends up level? in other news, remember that methodist episcopal church on 33rd and chestnut? asbury? and how penn was going to convert it into studio/gallery space for their fine arts dept? but it burned down during construction, leaving only the stone walls and facade? and now there's nothing there but a parking lot? . laserbeam® [aka ray] 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.
