Seligsohn v. Philadelphia Parking Authority
| Citation | 194 A.2d 606,412 Pa. 372 |
| Parties | Frances H. SELIGSOHN, Appellant, and Export-Import Clothing Co. v. The PHILADELPHIA PARKING AUTHORITY, City Stores Company and Strawbridge & Clothier. |
| Decision Date | 11 October 1963 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania |
Nathan B. Feinstein, Peuben E. Cohen, Cohen, Shapiro & Cohen, Philadelphia, for appellant.
David N. Bressler, Harry Shapiro, Shapiro, Rosenfeld, Stalberg & Cook, Philadelphia, for appellee, Philadelphia Parking Authority.
Oscar M. Hansen, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, Philadelphia, for appellee Strawbridge & Clothier.
Bernard M. Guth, Samuel D. Goodis, Folz, Bard, Kamsler, Goodis & Greenfield, Philadelphia, for appellee City Stores Co.
Before BELL, C. J., and MUSMANNO, JONES, COHEN, EAGEN, O'BRIEN and ROBERTS, JJ.
This appeal is from a decree of the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County which upheld the action of the Philadelphia Parking Authority [Authority] in condemning certain property and in entering into a long term lease with two department stores for the rental of a public parking facility to be erected by the Authority upon the condemned property.
Frances H. Seligsohn, owner of an improved property located at 8th and Filbert Streets, Philadelphia, leased her building thereon to the Export-Import Clothing Co., a corporation engaged in the sale of men's women's and children's wearing apparel of which corporation Mrs. Seligsohn was the president and sole stockholder. The Seligsohn building is located across the intersection from Lit Brothers' department store, operated by City Stores Company, [Lit], and Strawbridge & Clothier's department store [Strawbridge].
On February 23, 1962, and Authority, created under the Parking Authority Law of June 5, 1947, P.L. 458, as amended, 53 P.S. § 341 et seq., condemned certain properties, including the Seligsohn property, in the vicinity of and to the north of 8th and Filbert Streets in Philadelphia. On this property the Authority proposes to erect a 950 car public parking facility which will have six entrances for public access as well as access by physical connection with the Lit and Strawbridge stores.
Over a long period of time prior to this condemnation, certain studies and surveys had been made by reputable agencies to determine the need for public parking facilities in the central business district of Philadelphia, including, generally, the area in and about 8th and Filbert Streets. The authority had the benefit of such studies and surveys.
As the court below found upon adequate evidence 'a public parking authority, by its nature, is required to establish facilities which will sustain revenue bonds so that it will be financially independent of the Government with which it is related' and '[r]evenue bonds of a public parking authority, without additional security, are not readily saleable.'
Cognizant of the need for a public parking facility in this general area and of the difficulties inherent in the financing of such a project, negotiations were entered into, long prior to condemnation, between the Authority, Lit and Strawbridge. Through such negotiations, a plan was evolved which would assure the erection of a needed public parking facility and its proper and adequate financing. Under this plan, the Authority would condemn the required property and erect thereon a public parking facility to meet the public needs. This facility would be then leased to Lit and Strawbridge until January 1, 2000, with the right to extension of the lease for a full 50 year term, at rentals to be paid consisting of three parts: (a) debt service rentals sufficient to repay principal and interest on the bonds to be issued by the Authority; (b) Authority rentals of $25,000 per year; (c) excess rentals calculated at 7% of gross revenues of the project over $675,000 and 10% over $775,000. Under this lease, the parking rates were fixed according to a schedule and the Authority agreed not to reduce such rates, except at the request of Lit and Strawbridge. Title to the project would remain in the Authority and, ultimately, vest in the City of Philadelphia, creator of the Authority.
On the basis of this plan, the Authority sold $4,500,000 worth of bonds to finance the project, the security for such bonds being the lease with Lit and Strawbridge without which, as the court below found, the bonds of the Authority would not have been saleable.
The Authority has sold its bonds, condemned the properties, demolished the buildings on the property and the project is now underway.
Mrs. Seligsohn instituted an...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Campbell v. Bethlehem Parking Authority
...purposes in an urban renewal project. This case is more closely related to our Supreme Court's opinion in Seligsohn v. Philadelphia Parking Authority, 412 Pa. 372, 194 A.2d 606 (1963) than it is to Price, supra. In Seligsohn our Supreme Court affirmed the decision of a chancellor based upon......