Saving the Wanamaker Grand Court is up to us
As the person who wrote the interior preservation law, hear me when I say that it would be a mistake to think the Grand Court is untouchable and will be preserved.
In the spring of 2008, I authored bill No. 080527 in Philadelphia City Council with my colleagues in then-Councilman Bill Green’s office that permits the historic designation of the public interior portions of buildings. The impetus was the planned demolition of the Boyd Theatre on Chestnut Street, the last movie palace in Philadelphia.
To explain why the interiors of buildings needed to be protected in addition to the exteriors, the first slide in our 44-page deck described a scenario 10 years in the future where the Wanamaker Building is up for sale yet again, but this time a retail company doesn’t buy it, and the new owner fills in the Grand Court to convert it to office space.
Well, here we are 17 years later, not 10.
It took more than a year to pass bill No. 080527 due to opposition from developers who claimed we would cripple redevelopment in Philadelphia. To Councilman Green’s credit, he resisted deals from opponents to back off from their opposition if we crammed the legislation with exemptions and loopholes.
Almost exactly 10 years after bill No. 080527 was introduced, the Philadelphia Historical Commission unanimously voted to approve a nomination to add the Wanamaker Grand Court interior to the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places.
We were ultimately unable to save the Boyd. By the time the interior law was enacted in 2009, years before the theater was demolished, the interior was already badly damaged — there wasn’t much left to protect. All of these years later, I remain disappointed that this magnificent theater was lost, and realized how a fast one was pulled on us.
Let’s not blow it with the Wanamaker Grand Court.
As the person who wrote the interior preservation law, hear me when I say that it would be a mistake to think the Grand Court is untouchable and will be preserved.
The historic designation is by no means a panacea. While it will make it more difficult to alter or demolish the interior — the law does have a lot of power — the owner could intentionally let the interior fall into disrepair to help justify a hardship exemption to the law. The owner could also request a hardship exemption claiming that the only way to make the building economically viable is to alter or eliminate the Grand Court, especially the organ that has no functional purpose.
It is going to be up to City Council, the Historical Commission, and the public to ensure that there are no shenanigans by the building owner, that the Grand Court is kept preserved if the building is shuttered for a long period of time, and to not capitulate to developers who cry crocodile tears about the cost of developing the building without being allowed to alter or demolish the interior.
Council and the Commission must make it unequivocally clear to prospective buyers that there will be no hardship exemptions. Any redevelopment cannot alter the Grand Court and the organ must be kept in working order.
The Wanamaker Grand Court was our poster child for the interior preservation law because as Benjamin Leech wrote in his nomination of it: “its rich and living legacy of daily organ recitals, seasonal light shows, its role as a civic crossroads, and its continued vitality as retail space, the Grand Court exemplifies the cultural, economic, social, and historical heritage of Philadelphia.”
We must do everything we can to make sure the historic designation is respected and faithfully followed.
Seth Levi is a Philadelphia native and was the director of strategic initiatives for City Councilman Bill Green in 2008-2009. He’s currently the chief strategy officer for the Southern Poverty Law Center and lives in Atlanta.