Advocacy
CHHS
Considers CHC Sugarloaf Master Plan
As
has been reported in the Local,
Chestnut Hill College (CHC) proposes to develop the 30+ acre “Sugarloaf”
estate as part of a multi-decade program to expand the size of the
college, and is requesting that the property be rezoned as an Institutional
Development District (IDD). A 500-page Master Plan outlining the
proposed development has been drafted by a team consisting of architects
SaylorGregg, landscape architects Andropogon Associates, Ltd., and
others.
In
keeping with our mission to preserve and nurture the historical,
physical and cultural resources and the character of Chestnut Hill,
the Chestnut Hill Historical Society has initiated a series of meetings
with the College and the project team and we are currently reviewing
the proposed plan.
It
must be stated at the outset that we firmly support the vitality
of the College as an important part of the health of our community.
We applaud the College and its design team for the thoroughness
of their efforts to date, particularly in the aspects of the Plan
that provide community amenities such as a green space buffer on
the perimeter of the property and a public recreational path. We
also appreciate the team’s efforts in planning for storm water
management and other sustainable practices. It must also be stated
that the Historical Society approaches historic preservation as
the careful management of change, rather than simply obstructing
it.
We understand
that the College feels compelled by business reasons to seek the
zoning change. There are a number of key matters that must be considered
very carefully in light of the proposed plan, however, which has
the potential to become the most momentous change in our community
since the development of Market Square.
It
is our position that all of the potential negative effects of the
project on our historic and natural resources, as well on the historic
and cultural character of Chestnut Hill in general, must be defined,
evaluated, and adequately and appropriately addressed in order for
the community to endorse a plan for the College. It is also our
position that alternatives should be responsibly explored for any
potential adverse effects on historic and cultural resources that
can be expected to result from the proposed Plan.
The
Sugarloaf property as a whole is listed in the National Register
of Historic Places as one of the most important resources in our
National Register
Historic District. The historic components of this property
include both its buildings and their landscape garden setting, which
includes not only many specimen trees and lawn areas, but such built
features as a series of carefully placed and constructed garden
walls that define levels and spaces.
Until relatively
recently, the buildings inventoried in the National Register Nomination
all survived. Three have been removed by the College because of
their poor condition. While this may be understandable, we regret
that there was no consultation with the community on possibilities
for the preservation or re-use of part of their fabric or measures
that would have recorded information about their construction or
configuration for future generations. We wonder, for example, if
part of the ruins of the former cottages might have been incorporated
in some way into the proposed elevated path that is to parallel
Germantown Avenue. Several other buildings and their historic landscape
setting survive on the Sugarloaf property, and their preservation
must be addressed, given the fact that the plan that is part of
the proposed IDD eliminates all but one of these structures. Further,
the effect of the plan on other resources of the Historic District,
including adjacent and nearby properties, must also be thoroughly
evaluated. The potential negative effects are multiple, and include
the deprivation of light and air, noise, and generally negative
change in historic setting. As part of the community’s due
diligence with respect to this proposed plan, we submit that these
likely negative effects must be addressed and mitigated in order
to win the community’s endorsement for the plan and the proposed
IDD.
Three
committees of the Historical Society are now addressing these matters
in a coordinated effort: the Historic District Advisory Committee
(HDAC), chaired by Patricia Cove, a past president of CHHS; the
Preservation Advocacy Committee, chaired by Emily Cooperman, Ph.D.,
Principal of ARCH Preservation Consulting; and the joint CHHS/FOW
Easement Committee, co-chaired by Shirley Gracie of Eichler &
Moffly Realtors and Karren A. DeSeve, partner in the law firm of
Baumann, DeSeve & Landau).
We
also continue to work closely with the Friends of the Wissahickon
(FOW), our partner on many conservation issues, and hope to speak
with one voice about the CHC proposal.
The
CHC Master Plan is both ambitious and complex, and requires a methodical
review. We are giving this issue our urgent attention. We will,
of course, speak to these issues in the DRC meeting on October 20.
Frank
Niepold
President, CHHS Board of Directors
|