Society Hill Restoration

Society Hill Restoration refers to the urban renewal and historic preservation effort that transformed a declining Philadelphia neighborhood into one of America's most celebrated residential districts during the 1950s through 1970s. The project, initiated by city planner Edmund Bacon and the Philadelphia Redevelopment Authority, combined selective demolition of incompatible structures with restoration of colonial and Federal-era buildings, creating a model for preservation-based urban renewal that influenced cities nationwide. Society Hill's transformation demonstrated that historic neighborhoods could attract affluent residents and investment without wholesale clearance, offering an alternative to the tower-block approach that characterized most urban renewal of the era.

Pre-Restoration Conditions

Society Hill had declined significantly by the mid-twentieth century from its colonial-era prominence as one of Philadelphia's most desirable addresses. The neighborhood's eighteenth-century houses had been divided into rooming houses or abandoned entirely; commercial and industrial uses had infiltrated the residential fabric; and the Dock Street wholesale food market occupied several blocks, generating truck traffic and warehouse activity incompatible with residential use. These conditions represented typical American urban decline as affluent residents departed for suburbs, leaving older neighborhoods to residents with fewer options.

The neighborhood's historic architecture survived despite these conditions, its colonial and Federal-era houses representing one of the nation's finest concentrations of early American residential building. The opportunity to preserve and revitalize this architecture attracted planners who saw alternatives to the demolition-focused urban renewal then dominant. Edmund Bacon, Philadelphia's planning director, championed Society Hill as a demonstration project that could prove preservation's viability as a planning strategy.

Planning Approach

The Society Hill restoration combined several strategies that distinguished it from conventional urban renewal. The Dock Street market was relocated to new facilities in South Philadelphia, removing the commercial activity incompatible with residential use. Individual historic buildings were sold for rehabilitation rather than demolished, with deed restrictions requiring buyers to complete restoration according to approved standards. New construction on cleared sites was required to complement rather than compete with historic structures, with the modernist Society Hill Towers by I.M. Pei providing dramatic contrast while respecting neighborhood scale at ground level.

The Redevelopment Authority's "certified" house program sold historic properties at nominal prices to buyers who agreed to restoration requirements. This approach leveraged private investment for public benefit, with homeowners providing the capital for restoration that government could not afford. The program attracted young professionals and others willing to invest "sweat equity" in deteriorated properties, creating a community invested in the neighborhood's success. This model of incentivized private restoration has since been adopted for historic neighborhoods throughout the country.

Architectural Results

The restoration preserved and highlighted Society Hill's collection of colonial and Federal-era architecture, creating streetscapes that approach the character of the neighborhood's eighteenth-century prime. Row houses, freestanding mansions, and institutional buildings display the brick construction, Georgian doorways, and Federal-era refinements characteristic of early American architecture. The restoration's requirements ensured that alterations respected historic character, maintaining visual coherence that careless changes might have compromised.

New construction within Society Hill follows design guidelines intended to complement historic buildings without imitating them. I.M. Pei's Society Hill Towers, three high-rise residential buildings completed in 1964, demonstrate that modern architecture can coexist with historic surroundings when carefully designed. The towers' location, set back from the street on landscaped grounds, provides transition between their height and the low-rise historic fabric. Their architectural quality—Pei was among the era's most celebrated modernists—ensured that new construction would enhance rather than diminish the neighborhood's distinction.

Social Implications

Society Hill's transformation generated controversy regarding its social implications. The restoration displaced low-income and working-class residents who had occupied the neighborhood's deteriorated housing, replacing them with affluent professionals who could afford restoration costs. This displacement, characteristic of what would later be called gentrification, raised questions about whom urban renewal was intended to benefit. Critics argued that preservation-based renewal simply produced a more attractive form of the displacement that tower-block urban renewal accomplished more brutally.

Defenders of the Society Hill approach noted that the neighborhood's previous condition represented failure for all involved—deteriorated housing serving no one well and historic architecture at risk of loss. The restoration created viable housing from derelict structures, preserved irreplaceable architecture, and generated tax revenue that supported citywide services. These benefits, while not reaching the displaced residents directly, contributed to Philadelphia's broader fiscal and physical health. The debate continues to inform discussions about preservation, gentrification, and urban change.

National Influence

Society Hill's success influenced preservation and planning practice throughout the United States. The neighborhood demonstrated that historic districts could attract investment and residents, challenging assumptions that old buildings were obstacles to urban vitality. Other cities developed similar programs, adapting Society Hill's combination of deed restrictions, certified rehabilitation, and compatible new construction to their own circumstances. The model contributed to the historic preservation movement's growth and to federal legislation supporting preservation.

The neighborhood's continuing success—Society Hill remains one of Philadelphia's most desirable addresses—validates the restoration's approach while providing ongoing lessons about preservation's long-term management. Maintaining architectural character across generations of owners requires ongoing attention to guidelines and enforcement, challenges that Society Hill and similar districts continue to navigate. The restoration thus represents not a completed project but an ongoing commitment to stewardship that each generation must renew.

See Also

• Edmund Bacon
• Colonial Georgian Architecture
• Federal Style Architecture
• I.M. Pei
• Historic Preservation in Philadelphia