Sign up | Log in | Forgot Password

Naval Home News

Well you know that old adage: if at first you don't succeed...

At 4:11 this afternoon the roof of the Naval Home was on fire again. This time it was called in quickly and according to Jim Campbell, a historical architectural consultant working for Toll Brothers, damage was minimal and was limited to areas already approved for demolition. [7/19/03 Webmaster's note: two sources disagree with Campbell's optimistic assessment. They say damage from the new fire was not limited to areas already slated for demolition, but included one undamaged roof bay as well.]

However, for those of us who got there in time to witness the orange flames shooting out of the roof, it was definitely a deja vu moment. This time the flames were coming from the south end of the building in what seems to be one of the only roof areas undamaged by the original fire.

Preliminary assessments by the Philadelphia Fire Department point to carelessness on the part of construction workers as the cause of the blaze. Their initial assessment is that a spark from construction earlier in the day smoldered unnoticed until it ignited after workers left the site. A full investigation has not yet been completed. City officials were quick on the scene including Kathleen Murray representing Council President Verna and the City's "Housing Czar," Kevin Hanna. Several representatives from Toll Brothers also arrived quickly to begin inspecting the damage.

Ann Hoskins-Brown is a long time resident of Southwest Center City.

More info.

• Photos of 2nd Naval Home fire taken by Southwest Center City resident Lisa Parsley
• Naval Home news
• Write your elected officials about the Naval Home.

After opening the April 2, 2003 hearing in the City's suit against Toll Brothers by quipping "Are we working feverishly?" Judge Seamus P. McCaffery began what the community took to be a complete reversal of his earlier position in the suit. Throughout the hearing he accepted arguments from Toll's John McDonald at face value, brushing aside the objections of the City's senior counsel Andrew Ross and scolding spectators for visibly (and audibly) registering their shock and dismay at statements by Toll that ran counter to what they were witnessing on the property.

John McDonald, Toll executive, spoke first at the hearing, asserting their position that substantial progress had been made. He cited conceptual agreement on the design for a new roof for the historic structure and reported that a temporary fence had been erected, debris removal had begun, and the process was being documented by archival quality photography. He then displayed (to the Court but not to any of the spectators) drawings or plans for the new roof.

"The City is less sanguine," Ross responded. He cited Toll Brothers' repeated failures to agree to any stipulations in writing, to produce the engineering report Toll claimed was necessary to answer the Keast & Hood report, or to produce an historic structures report. The security fence, which was to have surrounded the entire Strickland group, only surrounds Biddle Hall. Finally, he noted that while there was agreement on the roof concept, Toll broke its agreement to produce plans for the roof, with specifications, by the hearing date. He asked the judge for a $5,000 absolute fine and a $10,000 conditional fine if there is no immediate remediation.

In a heated response, McDonald said that Andrew Ross was out of the loop and not well-informed on the progress on the building, and blamed city officials for being obstructionist, standing in the way of Toll's progress by not granting permits quickly enough and/or getting approvals from the state or the federal historic entities. "I invite you to come see the progress we're making," McDonald said. He also suggested that the City was not cooperating with Toll's efforts at demolition and graffiti removal. (For another perspective on that, see report on SOSNA's March 19 community meeting, to which Toll Brothers was invited to send a representative but did not do so.) City Planning commission official Richard Tyler explained that Tolls' permit for demolition was rejected because it went far beyond what was necessary to repair the roof to include demolition of the interior partition walls. "We don't want to approve a far-reaching demolition permit in support of a plan we haven't been shown yet," Tyler observed.

McCaffery made it plain that he was satisfied with Toll's representations, saying, "as long as I believe that things are being done properly, as efficiently and quickly as they can, I have no problem continuing" without issuing court orders or sanctions. "A court order is an admission that the process has failed," he said, and granted McDonald's request that another hearing be scheduled in sixty days. He admonished both sides not to "let it get to where you're pointing fingers. Call me."

Carl Primavera, speaking for Toll, suggested that a great deal of the problem was one of communication and it was agreed that Toll would keep a daily log of tasks accomplished and send it to the City on a daily basis.

Andrew Ross also asked that Toll take steps to secure the two residences, installing security fences, making roof repairs and shoring up the center hall staircase in one of the residences. McDonald responded that the fencing would go up; the other repairs, he said, had already been done and the City had been informed. Ross also asked that the City be reimbursed for the cost incurred with L&I boarded up the windows, as well as for the cost of the Keast & Hood engineering report. Primavera asked the City to submit an invoice, which, he averred, would be paid within thirty days.

The date of the next hearing was set for Tuesday, June 3, 2003 at 12 noon, courtroom 1103, Criminal Justice Center.

Write your Elected Officials!

Is the Pennsylvania State Employees Retirement System (PASERS) a partner in the destruction of Pennsylvania's historic landmarks? Say it ain't so! But it is. SERS, the pension plan of thousands of state employees, is in a partnership with Toll Brothers Real Estate. That's the same Toll Brothers who have been sued for "demolition by neglect" by the City of Philadelphia for their treatment of the former U.S. Naval Home. And the same Toll Brothers who planned to turn part of Valley Forge National Park into suburban "McMansions."

According to Toll Brothers' annual report, PA-SERS is a one-third partner in the Toll Realty Trust. The state has an investment of at least $7.5 million in this subsidiary of Toll Brothers. Is it right that Pennsylvania invests the hard-earned retirement funds of its civil servants in a company with such a strong track record for disrespecting our nation's historic sites? Especially those sites that Pennsylvanians hold near and dear.

Or could Toll's treatment of these historic sites be an anomaly in a company with an otherwise stellar record?

Ask the people of Boston what they think. The Boston Globe did just that in a 4 day exposé of the construction industry that focused on Toll Brothers. In this series of articles, titled "Luxury by Design, Quality by Chance," the Globe sent an investigative team to monitor construction in one of Toll's suburban Boston developments. Their findings? Three of the homes "fail minimum standards of the state building code." They also investigated Toll developments in other states. In one of the most telling statements, the attorney for a customer in Tennessee described his client's house as "a seventh-grade shop project gone wrong."

In addition consumer complaints, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts charged Toll Brothers on 18 criminal counts for building permit violations. (Commonwealth of Massachusetts vs. Robert I. Toll and Commonwealth of Massachusetts vs. Bruce E. Toll Criminal Action Nos. 9857 CR2793 and 2794 on file at the Norfold County District Court in Wrentham, Massachusetts 02903.) Toll has been sued by a variety of plaintiffs including the Sierra Club over a Florida development threatening the wetlands, homeowners in Virginia over Toll's use of synthetic stucco (one couple was awarded $1.4 million dollars in damages), and the Orange County (CA) CoastKeepers for violations of the Clean Water Act during construction.

Should Pennsylvania really be investing in this company?

The State's partnership subscription with Toll Brothers is up for renewal in August of 2003. Tell Pennsylvania Treasurer Barbara Hafer to use her pension power to encourage Toll to do the right thing by Valley Forge Park, the Naval Home, and it's own consumers before renewing Pennsylvania's partnership agreement. In addition, press local, state and national elected officials to closely monitor Toll's plans for restoration and development of the Naval Home property.

Write your Elected Officials!

With thoughts of impending war on peoples' minds, a smaller than anticipated crowd attended the SOSNA-sponsored update on the Naval Home situation. However, the smaller audience led to a more intimate discussion of the status and next moves in this battle to save and develop this historic site.

Attending the meeting were Kathleen Murray, Special Assistant to Council President Anna C. Verna; Robert Solvibile, First Deputy Commissioner, Licenses & Inspections; Andrew Ross Senior Counsel in the City's Law Department; and Dr. Richard Tyler of the Philadelphia Historical Commission. In addition to neighbors and interested citizens, several representatives from the City's Office of Housing and Community Development were also in the audience.

Kathleen Murray led off by saying it was "wonderful to have the community at the hearings... the Judge knows you're out there." She also noted, "whatever the community wants, Mrs. Verna will support." Robert Solvibile began by joking, "The good news, I'll be out of this!" He noted that he handles demolition and enforcement for L&I and that the Naval Home has been turned over to David Perry who will handle "development issues." He stressed to the community that "Andrew Ross hit a grand slam in court" and urged residents to continue attending the hearings.

Other speakers reviewed information that was old hat to those who have been following the story in the press: Judge Seamus P. McCaffery has given Toll Brothers until the next open court hearing on April 2, 2003 to begin undertaking a laundry list of tasks relating to the preservation of Biddle Hall. Included on the list are major items such as:

• A completed historic structures report that will, among other things, identify the appropriate period for the building restoration
• A response to the preservation recommendations made by Keast & Hood, the engineering consultants hired by the City
• Graffiti removal; and
• Salvage operations including full documentation in preparation for restoring the roof and structure.

Additional tasks to be completed by the April 2nd deadline include:

• Increasing security;
• Clearing the site of trash, weeds and the like; and
• Adding a secondary fence around the three surviving Strickland structures.

Mr. Ross said he is likely to ask for fines and sanctions if these tasks are not complete or underway by the deadline. It was noted that Toll has contracted with Campbell, Thomas & Company to conduct the historic structures study and the firm of O'Donnell, Naccarto, Mignona & Jackson to respond to the Keast & Hood report. Mr. Solvibile stated L&I planned to retain Keast & Hood to monitor the salvage process.

Some of the most interesting information of the evening came from Dr. Richard Tyler of the City Historical Commission. He reported on two meetings with the Pennsylvania Historical and Museums Commission (PHMC) which has a number of rights under covenants in the original agreement of sale. Representatives from PHMC inspected the site, then later met with Dr. Tyler and representatives from Toll Brothers to discuss what steps PHMC would require. PHMC Bureau for Historic Preservation director Jean Cutler then formalized their requirements in a letter to Toll Brothers president Zvi Barzilay dated March 18, 2003.

Key items from the PHMC letter include:

• It is "imperative that the former configuration of the roof be maintained including the clerestory and dormers."
• The modified truss system "needs to be kept to 16 feet on center in order to maintain the openness of the clerestory and the dormers within the new residential units."
• Large format photography, undertaken according to guidelines developed by the Historic American Building Survey (HABS) is required in addition to measured drawings of attic, to document the condition of the building.
• "Toll Brothers, Inc. has provided only limited maintenance of the property resulting in serious deterioration of the property. Both the Advisory Council and the Commission are concerned about the state of the buildings and wish to see it improved immediately."

Dr. Tyler noted that one PHMC member controls some of the historic preservation tax credits that Toll will seek as part of any future development.

Other good news from the meeting was an update on the roof condition. The interior of the roof was constructed to mimic the prow and keel of a ship. (See a photo by Marie Carbo of this unique structure) Dr. Tyler said that upon closer inspection both the attic and these critical roof elements were "in better shape than we first thought." He noted that while the elements could not be reused, they could be recorded for future recreation. Not trusting the long-term stability of digital media, Dr. Tyler said that the documentation would be done according to the HABS standard as recommended by PHMC. Sam Harris, an engineer, architect and attorney, has been retained by Toll to undertake the documentation.

Questions were raised about the status of the steps required for April 2nd hearing. It was particularly noted that security was still poor and no graffiti removal or salvage efforts appeared to be underway. While Mr. Ross stated that "the ball is in Toll's court" to get the items completed, Dr. Tyler noted Toll had submitted two proposals for graffiti removal both of which he considered "too aggressive". He said "neither the granite base of the building nor the Pennsylvania marble facade can withstand the attack of harsh chemicals. The Pennsylvania marble is irreplaceable." He recommended methods similar to those underway at City Hall and provided Toll with information on those processes. He had not received a third proposal.

The next Court hearing will be held on April 2, 2003 at 12 noon at the Criminal Justice Center, 1301 Filbert Street, in courtroom 1103. The public is strongly encouraged to attend.

More info:

• View SOSNA webmaster Laura Blanchard's report and photos of the meeting.
• Inquirer Report on meeting.

It was standing room only at last night’s meeting on the fate of the former U. S. Naval Home in Southwest Center City. The Naval Home, a National Historic Landmark, burned in the early morning hours of February 3, 2003 in a fire that has been labeled arson by the Philadelphia Fire Department. Sponsored by SOSNA, the South of South Neighborhood Association, the crowd came out to see just what actions City officials plan to take to preserve this historic landmark.

Moderated by SOSNA Board Chair Angela Richardson, the meeting took the form of short informational presentations by invited speakers followed by questions from the crowd. Attending the meeting were: Kathleen Murray, Special Assistant to City Council President Anna Verna; Kevin Hanna, Secretary of Housing and Neighborhood Preservation; Robert Solvibile, First Deputy Commissioner from the Department of Licenses and Inspections; Richard Tyler of the Philadelphia Historical Commission; Andrew Ross of the City’s Law Department; and John Gallery, Executive Director of the Preservation Alliance. Toll Brothers was invited to send a representative, but did not respond.

The meeting began with an overview of the current status by Kathleen Murray that was later fleshed out by other City officials. Ms. Murray reported that as a result of pressure from Council, the Mayor’s office, neighborhood activists, and preservation groups, Licenses and Inspections hired the firm of Keast and Hood to conduct an independent evaluation of the structural condition of Biddle Hall. The preliminary report indicates no major structural damage. The final report is expected within a few days and will be available through Council President Verna’s office.

Kevin Hanna reported that the Office of Housing and Neighborhood Preservation will work with Toll Brothers to either develop the property in a way that is consistent with the neighborhood’s desires or to help Toll Brothers “dispose of the property to another developer.” However, he pointed out that any legal actions would have to “run their course” first. He also noted that as far as he knows, the property is not for sale.

Andrew Ross of the Law Department confirmed that the City has filed a complaint against Toll Brothers citing all violations from overgrown weeds to the fire damage. The City asked for and received expedited status. The hearing is scheduled for February 20, 2003 in City Hall Courtroom 446 at 9:00 AM. The public is welcome to attend.

Robert Solvibile reported that, in addition to hiring structural engineers, L&I also has an evaluation underway and stated that they will “not support any demolition.” L&I has been sealing both the perimeter of the property and the three historic structures. Through contractors from the Philadelphia Housing Authority, L&I over 70 windows and doors have been sealed. Toll Brothers was directed to improve perimeter security and informed L&I that a guard is now on duty around the clock. Mr. Solvibile asked that any neighborhood reports of vandalism or security breaks be reported to Mary Ann Mahoney of Council President Verna’s office at 215-686-3412. He noted that the City will place liens on the property for the work.

Richard Tyler described various covenants that govern the sale of the Naval Home to Toll Brothers. He pointed out that the developer has been cited for violations of these covenants, but noted that the City has no enforcement authority. The General Services Administration sold the property without any City involvement. Kevin Hanna noted that the City is exploring a variety of options including working with the Federal Government.

John Gallery of the Preservation Alliance commended the City for its action so far, but said that public pressure must be continued. He reminded the crowd that Toll Brothers primary interest is in constructing over 1,000 housing units on the site. He pointed out that Biddle Hall has no economic value to the developer and that all three historic building on the site are susceptible to damage. Speaking to the City officials, he said, “this is not the time to do a cheap job.” The crowd cheered as he suggested replacing the roof, putting a lien on the property, and taking it to Sheriff’s sale.

Several key issues emerged over the course of the meeting. The Biddle Hall roof was one. Commissioner Solvibile refused to commit the City to replacing the roof immediately. At various times during the course of the meeting he gave different reasons for waiting. Early in the meeting, he said that L&I would wait for the Court Order before securing the roof. Next, he said L&I needed to wait for the engineering report and must also meet with the Historical Commission and others to see what options were available. As members of the audience tried to push Mr. Solvibile into a commitment – even to putting a tarp on the roof as a temporary measure – he continued to state that no work would be done on the roof until the engineering report was finalized, probably by the end of the week.

Another key theme was the limitations on the City’s options. Since the agreement of sale was with the General Services Administration, the City is not able to enforce the contract. Both John Gallery and Richard Tyler stressed that the covenants in the contract were weak and would be difficult to enforce. One option, mentioned several times, was that the City could play a key role in helping Toll Brothers to, as John Gallery said, “find a realistic way to get out of the deal” and turn the property over to another developer.

All the invited guests stressed the importance of putting pressure on State and Federal elected officials. In addition, it was pointed out that Toll Brothers is a publicly traded company and is likely to respond to shareholder pressure and could be impacted by negative public relations. One suggestion was to write letters to Toll Brothers’ major shareholders, especially any institutional shareholders. Suggestions from the crowd included:

• Placing ads opposite Toll Brothers’ real estate advertising
• Writing to Governor Rendell, Senators Spector and Santorium, and others at the State and Federal level
• Involving veterans’ groups – especially the Navy
• Reassessing the property tax on the Naval Home property (Ms. Murray reported that the City is looking at this)
• Organizing protests to increase public attention and pressure

SOSNA will post letters to City, State, and Federal officials on its website (and will form a task force to provide follow-up. It will also research and post contact information on Toll Brothers’ major shareholders. The Preservation Alliance is asking the National Trust to contact Federal representatives and the General Services Administration and go on record with its support. The Preservation Alliance is also willing to act as an intermediary between the City and Toll Brothers if necessary.

The Naval Home issue, and follow-up action steps, will be on the agenda at SOSNA’s regularly scheduled General Meeting to be held tonight, February 12, 2003, at 7:30 PM at the Marian Anderson Recreation Center. A second community meeting on the Naval Home, sponsored by the 30th Ward Democrats, is scheduled for Thursday, February 13, 2003 at 7:00 PM, at Greater St. Matthew’s Baptist Church. A similar roster of City officials is expected to attend.

Ann Hoskins Brown has resided in South West Center City for over twenty years. She is a member of SOSNA.