PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 FEBRUARY 2018 1 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES THE MINUTES OF THE 666 TH STATED MEETING OF THE PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION FRIDAY, 9 FEBRUARY 2018 ROOM 18-029, 1515 ARCH STREET BOB THOMAS, CHAIR PRESENT Robert Thomas, AIA, Chair Emily Cooperman, Ph.D. Mike Fink, Department of Licenses & Inspections Steven Hartner, Department of Public Property Melissa Long, Division of Housing & Community Development John Mattioni, Esq. Dan McCoubrey, AIA, LEED AP BD+C Rachel Royer, LEED AP BD+C R. David Schaaf, RA, Philadelphia City Planning Commission H. Ahada Stanford, Commerce Department Betty Turner, M.A. Jonathan E. Farnham, Executive Director Randal Baron, Historic Preservation Planner III Laura DiPasquale, Historic Preservation Planner II Allyson Mehley, Historic Preservation Planner I Megan Schmitt, Historic Preservation Planner I ALSO PRESENT John Toates, John Toates Architecture and Design Patrick McDonough, John Toates Architecture and Design Stuart Rosenberg, SgRA Dani Leiman, BHA Jacob Cooper Darin Jellison, BHA Trae Anderson, Wawa Tom Chapman, Wawa Sharadan Rerabaugh David S. Traub, Save our Sites Patrick Grossi, Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia John Moore CALL TO ORDER Mr. Thomas called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. Commissioners Cooperman, Fink, Hartner, McCoubrey, Royer, Schaaf, and Turner joined him. Ms. Stanford and Mr. Mattioni joined later. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 FEBRUARY 2018 2 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES MINUTES OF THE 665 TH STATED MEETING OF THE PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to approve the minutes of the 665th Stated Meeting of the Philadelphia Historical Commission, held 12 January 2018. Mr. Schaaf seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. MINUTES OF THE 664 TH STATED MEETING OF THE PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to approve the minutes of the 664th Stated Meeting of the Philadelphia Historical Commission, held 8 December 2017, as corrected. Ms. Turner seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. CONTINUANCE REQUESTS ADDRESS: 2108 SANSOM ST Proposal: Construct third-floor addition with pilot house and decks Type of Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Joseph Ianoale and Amanda Korson Applicant: Joseph Ianoale History: 1870 Individual Designation: None District Designation: Rittenhouse Fitler Residential Historic District, Contributing, 2/8/1995 Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 DISCUSSION: Mr. Thomas announced that there was a request to continue the application for 2108 Sansom Street to the 9 March 2018 meeting. ACTION: Mr. Schaaf moved to continue the review of 2108 Sansom Street to the 9 March 2018 Historical Commission
Contributing, 2/8/1995 Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 DISCUSSION: Mr. Thomas announced that there was a request to continue the application for 2108 Sansom Street to the 9 March 2018 meeting. ACTION: Mr. Schaaf moved to continue the review of 2108 Sansom Street to the 9 March 2018 Historical Commission meeting. Ms. Turner seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. THE REPORT OF THE ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE, 14 NOVEMBER 2017 Dan McCoubrey, Chair CONSENT AGENDA Mr. Thomas introduced the Consent Agenda, which included applications for 2400 Pine Street, 1834 Delancey Place, and 109 Elfreths Alley. Mr. Thomas noted that the Commissioners received two letters with questions related to 109 Elfreth’s Alley, and suggested considering 109 Elfreth’s Alley separately from the other two items on the Consent Agenda. Mr. Thomas asked if any Commissioners had additional comments on 2400 Pine Street or 1834 Delancey Place. None were offered. Mr. Thomas asked if anyone in the audience had comments on the Consent Agenda. None were offered. Mr. Thomas asked if anyone wished to remove 109 Elfreth’s Alley from the Consent Agenda. Mr. McCoubrey added that the Commission also received a letter regarding the ownership of the property. He explained that the letter’s author, Neil Frauenglass, president of the Elfreth’s Alley Association, has reviewed the plans and believe they are in keeping with the historic aesthetic of the Alley, but that they temporarily withdraw their approval owing to a question of PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 FEBRUARY 2018 3 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ownership of the garden area proposed for development. Mr. Thomas explained that the Commission also received a letter from the Philadelphia Archaeological Forum, which noted that the Forum has reviewed the minutes of the Architectural Committee meeting and has concerns related to the review of the application. Mr. Thomas asked if any Commissioners had any additional thoughts about removing 109 Elfreth’s Alley from the Consent Agenda. Mr. Thomas asked if anyone was present representing the Archaeological Forum or Elfreth’s Alley Association. None were present. Ms. Cooperman said that she had a question about the issue of ownership that was raised in the letter from the Elfreth’s Alley Association, stating that she believed such a matter was not within the jurisdiction of the Historical Commission. Mr. Thomas stated that he agreed, and that the issue with the description of the property that was being addressed in the letter was an issue
in the letter from the Elfreth’s Alley Association, stating that she believed such a matter was not within the jurisdiction of the Historical Commission. Mr. Thomas stated that he agreed, and that the issue with the description of the property that was being addressed in the letter was an issue the owner would have to resolve with the Department of Licenses & Inspections, Zoning, and the Office of Property Assessment. Ms. Cooperman then said that she thought the archaeological matters should be discussed, to which Mr. Thomas replied that the Commissioners would take it up in the order of the agenda. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to adopt the recommendations of the Architectural Committee for the applications for 2400 Pine Street and 1834 Delancey Place. Ms. Turner seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. AGENDA ADDRESS: 2400 PINE ST Proposal: Demolish building; construct 3-story house Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Jacob Cooper and Natalie Aronson Applicant: Jacob Cooper History: 1963; Norman Rice home and office; Norman Rice, architect Individual Designation: None District Designation: Rittenhouse Fitler Residential Historic District, Non-contributing, 2/8/1995 Staff Contact: Laura DiPasquale, laura.dipasquale@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend approval, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standard 9 and the Historical Commission’s in-concept approval in July 2017, provided the Pine Street elevation is further developed to have more presence as a corner property; the garage door submitted at the 23 January 2018 meeting is used; and that no mechanical equipment is visible from any street. OVERVIEW: This application proposes to demolish the existing non-contributing one and two- story building that runs between Pine and Waverly Streets along S. 24th Street and to construct a two and three-story building in its place. The applicants previously sought and received in- concept approval from the Historical Commission for this project. The proposed building would be two stories in height along Pine Street, with a third floor stepping up approximately one-third of the way along 24th Street. A deck would be located on the second-floor roof. The proposed building would be clad in red brick and feature large steel windows and zinc-clad projections into which would be set aluminum curtain-wall windows and slatted shading devices. The building would be combined with the property at 2403-05 Waverly Street, which is outside of the historic district. ACTION: See Consent Agenda. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 FEBRUARY 2018 4 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC
steel windows and zinc-clad projections into which would be set aluminum curtain-wall windows and slatted shading devices. The building would be combined with the property at 2403-05 Waverly Street, which is outside of the historic district. ACTION: See Consent Agenda. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 FEBRUARY 2018 4 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ADDRESS: 1834 DELANCEY PL Proposal: Replace windows; construct roof deck, elevator shaft, additions at rear Type of Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Barbara Eberlein Applicant: Barbara Eberlein, Eberlein Design Consultants, LTD. History: 1855 Individual Designation: None District Designation: Rittenhouse Fitler Residential Historic District, Contributing, 2/8/1995 Staff Contact: Randal Baron, randal.baron@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend approval, provided that the rooftop additions are not visible from the public right-of- way and do not require extension of the chimeys; that the front replacement windows replicate the appearance of the historic windows; and that the front window shutter hardware is retained; with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 6, 9, and 10 and the Roofs Guideline. OVERVIEW: This application proposes to remove a rear bay and replace several arch-top casement windows on the rear façade. In the location of the bay, the application proposes to construct an elevator tower and some infill of the piazza. The plans also call for a roof deck and pilothouse on the main block of the house. The Historical Commission’s staff has reviewed a mock-up to determine the setback needed to ensure that the rooftop additions will not be visible from Delancey and 19th Streets. The application also proposes inserting a garage in the rear façade along an alley and replacing windows. Although it is barely visible from the alley, the removal of the bay does not comply with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. Similar garages have been approved for many properties on this block of the alley. Additional details are needed for the proposed replacement windows on the front façade; the windows require a subframe, but it is unclear whether the subframe can be inserted behind the existing frame and brickmold. ACTION: See Consent Agenda. ADDRESS: 109 ELFRETHS ALY Proposal: Remove non-historic addition; construct additions and roof deck; replace windows Type of Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Burgundy & Gold Properties, LLC Applicant: Alvin Holm, Alvin Holm AIA Architects History: 1798 Individual Designation: 6/26/1956 District Designation: Old City Historic District, Significant, 12/12/2003 Staff Contact: Randal
ADDRESS: 109 ELFRETHS ALY Proposal: Remove non-historic addition; construct additions and roof deck; replace windows Type of Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Burgundy & Gold Properties, LLC Applicant: Alvin Holm, Alvin Holm AIA Architects History: 1798 Individual Designation: 6/26/1956 District Designation: Old City Historic District, Significant, 12/12/2003 Staff Contact: Randal Baron, randal.baron@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend approval, provided that as much of the rear ell roof structure is retained as possible and that the owner continue to confer with the Philadelphia Archeological Forum, with the staff to review details, pursuant Standards 9 and 10. OVERVIEW: This application proposes to demolish a non-historic addition and construct a new addition at this house at the east end of Elfreth’s Alley. The property is located at the northeast corner of N. Front Street and Elfreth’s Alley. Front Street was relocated when I-95 was constructed. The Historical Commission approved a small, one-story addition to the side of the PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 FEBRUARY 2018 5 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES rear ell in 1988. The Historical Commission approved the larger rear addition in 2005 and it was constructed in 2008. The house was abandoned at about the time of the completion of the larger addition and sat empty for many years, suffering from water infiltration, mold, and deterioration. The proposed addition would replace the non-historic additions. A three–story section of the addition would be constructed on Elfreth’s Alley, to the east of the historic building, on an open lot. The three–story section facing Elfreth’s Alley would be set back and slightly lower than the main block of the historic house to leave the original roofline exposed. It would be red brick and follow the fenestration and beltcourse of the existing structure. Certain details such as the materials and placement of windows on the Front Street side would differentiate the addition from the historic building, while allowing it to be compatible. A one-story link addition would replace the existing link addition and lead to a two-story rear section of the addition. The application offers three alternates for the rear portion of the addition, but the architect prefers the cross gable design shown on drawing 8C. The plans propose to retain the original house and the east wall of the rear ell exposed to public view. The application proposes to rebuild the roof of the rear ell and
the rear portion of the addition, but the architect prefers the cross gable design shown on drawing 8C. The plans propose to retain the original house and the east wall of the rear ell exposed to public view. The application proposes to rebuild the roof of the rear ell and to recover the entire roof with Timberline asphalt shingles. The current proposal design has taken into account the comments of Historical Commission at its December 2017 meeting. At that time, the Commissioners suggested that the additions should be less grand in massing and detail than originally proposed and that the second-floor east wall of the rear ell should be exposed. The Commissioners also rejected the proposed front dormer and a transom over the front door. The Philadelphia Archeological Forum has submitted a letter requesting that the owner protect archeological resources, but no specific resources were identified. The Historical Commission has not typically required homeowners to undertake archaeological investigations when erecting additions. The property owner is discussing the request with the Archeological Forum. DISCUSSION: Commissioner Stanford arrived at the meeting. Mr. Baron presented the application to the Historical Commission. Property owner John Moore represented the application. Mr. Thomas explained to Mr. Moore that this project likely would have been approved on the Consent Agenda except for a letter received that morning from the Philadelphia Archeological Forum. He summarized the organization’s concerns. Mr. Moore responded that he has been in touch with Doug Mooney of the Archeological Forum and that he had received a list of qualified consultants from him. He said that he willing to hire such a consultant to guide him with through the archaeological issues at the site. Ms. Cooperman said that hiring an archaeologist to consult on this project would allay her concerns, but that she thought it was important to include in the Commission’s resolution the need to hire a qualified consultant. Mr. Moore said that he would coordinate the retention of a consultant with the staff. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to approve the application, provided that the owner retains a fully qualified archaeological consultant to advise on the preservation of subsurface artifacts, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 8, 9, and 10. Ms. Turner seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 FEBRUARY 2018 6 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES OLD BUSINESS ADDRESS: 2216 WALNUT STREET Name of Resource:
on the preservation of subsurface artifacts, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 8, 9, and 10. Ms. Turner seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 FEBRUARY 2018 6 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES OLD BUSINESS ADDRESS: 2216 WALNUT STREET Name of Resource: 2216 Walnut Street Proposed Action: Reclassification Property Owner: 2216 Walnut Street LLC Applicant: Stuart Rosenberg Staff Contact: Jon Farnham, jon.farnham@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the Historical Commission classify the property at 2216 Walnut Street as non-contributing in the Rittenhouse-Fitler Residential Historic District, pursuant to Section 5.14 of the Historical Commission’s Rules & Regulations, for the following reasons: 1. the underlying 1880s rowhouse was so altered in 1950 that it lost all attributes of a residential building discernible to the public; and, 2. the commercial use as a sales office for business machines is not a use that would qualify the building for a classification of contributing under the statement of significance of the Rittenhouse-Fitler Residential Historic District. OVERVIEW: This application proposes to classify the property at 2216 Walnut Street as non- contributing in the Rittenhouse-Fitler Residential Historic District. The building in question at 2216 Walnut Street was not explicitly addressed in the district inventory, but was apparently included within the inventory entry for the adjacent building, the Roosevelt Hotel at 2218-22 Walnut Street, which is classified as significant. At the time of the designation of the historic district, the parcels at 2216 and 2218-22 Walnut Street were consolidated as one tax parcel. The inventory entry, which numbers the property as 2216-24 Walnut, describes the 10-story residential hotel at the corner, which was built in 1927, but it makes no mention whatsoever of the four-story building at 2216, which began as a rowhouse constructed about 1888 and was significantly reconstructed as an office building in 1950. The 1950 reconstruction included a new front façade, floor-level modifications, and rear additions. From the public right-of-way, the building appears as a mid twentieth-century, four-story office building. The classification application argues that the statement of significance does not mention any historic buildings in the district that post-date 1935, that the statement of significance does not claim that office buildings played a role in the district’s significance, and that the most analogous building in the district, 1606 Locust Street, which began as a four-story rowhouse
of significance does not mention any historic buildings in the district that post-date 1935, that the statement of significance does not claim that office buildings played a role in the district’s significance, and that the most analogous building in the district, 1606 Locust Street, which began as a four-story rowhouse but was refaced in the twentieth century as an office building, is classified as non-contributing. DISCUSSION: Mr. Mattioni arrived at the meeting. Ms. Cooperman and Mr. Thomas recused, owing to their associations with the property owner. Ms. Turner assumed the chair. Mr. Farnham presented the classification request to the Historical Commission. Architect Stuart Rosenberg represented the application. Mr. Rosenberg reaffirmed his request that the property be classified as non-contributing. He added that the Preservation Alliance has also submitted its formal support for the reclassification. Ms. Turner opened the floor to public comment. Patrick Grossi of the Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia commented that the Alliance holds an easement over both this façade and that of the more significant building to the west. He noted that the Alliance has no objection to the reclassification request, particularly given the proposed retention of the 1950s façade. The retention of the façade, he noted, will not dramatically alter the streetscape. David Traub of PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 FEBRUARY 2018 7 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES Save Our Sites noted that his organization has, in the past, expressed grave reservations about reclassifying properties in historic districts. In this case, however, he noted that the building is so anomalous and out of place in its context, that Save Our Sites does not object to the request. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to classify 2216 Walnut Street as non-contributing to the Rittenhouse-Fitler Residential Historic District. Ms. Royer seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. ADDRESS: 150 S INDEPENDENCE W MALL Proposal: Install signage and entrance doors Type of Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Carlyle Revolution LLC, Atlantic Revolution LLC Applicant: Thomas Chapman, Blank Rome, LLP History: 1923, Horace Trumbauer, architect, Public Ledger Building Individual Designation: None District Designation: Society Hill Historic District, Significant, 3/10/1999 Staff Contact: Megan Schmitt, megan.schmitt@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend approval, provided: the entrance door design shown on Drawing 9 is used; the door material is bronze; and the marble base is reused or replaced in kind; the existing canopy brackets are reused; the canopy stays
Schmitt, megan.schmitt@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend approval, provided: the entrance door design shown on Drawing 9 is used; the door material is bronze; and the marble base is reused or replaced in kind; the existing canopy brackets are reused; the canopy stays inboard of the piers; the canopy dimensions are minimized and customized for the building; and the face of the sign aligns as much as possible with the face of the columns; and, the treatment for blocking the two windows matches that used on the existing adjacent blocked window. OVERVIEW: This application proposes to install entrance doors and marquee for a new location of the Wawa convenience store. A single door on Chestnut Street would be removed and a double door would be inserted in the space. This would result in the demolition and partial salvaging of the decorative bronze and red granite elements. A new curved marquee would be attached to the masonry opening around the doorway. The sign would be comprised of the letters spelling "Wawa." These would be individual backlit aluminum boxes with acrylic faces. Ground-floor windows on S. 6th Street would be altered with a black frit to obscure the view into the store’s walk-in refrigerator. Vinyl signs are proposed for the inside of the windows. The staff finds the proposed conversion of the single door to a double door involves significant alteration of the decorative bronze and red granite elements, which are both distinctive materials. The staff suggests that utilizing the existing brackets for the proposed canopy may be a more appropriate installation technique. DISCUSSION: Ms. Schmitt presented the application. Attorney Tom Chapman and architect Trae Anderson represented the application. Mr. Thomas asked the representatives of the application if they wanted to make any comments. Mr. Anderson noted that the proposed color of the frit had been changed to match the existing white, per the comments of the Architectural Committee. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 FEBRUARY 2018 8 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES Ms. Schmitt added that the revised plans did show changes based on the comments made by the Architectural Committee. Mr. Thomas stated that they had just received the letter with comments from the National Park Service. Mr. Thomas asked Mr. McCoubrey if the changes in the revised drawings reflected the comments made at the Architectural Committee meeting, to which he replied
on the comments made by the Architectural Committee. Mr. Thomas stated that they had just received the letter with comments from the National Park Service. Mr. Thomas asked Mr. McCoubrey if the changes in the revised drawings reflected the comments made at the Architectural Committee meeting, to which he replied that they were very responsive, and that each comment was followed by an adjustment to the design. Mr. Thomas asked for public comment, of which there was none. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved approve the revised application as presented to the Historical Commission at its meeting of 9 February 2018. Ms. Turner seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. THE REPORT ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE HISTORICAL COMMISSION STAFF, JANUARY 2018 Mr. Farnham reminded the Commissioners that earlier in the week he had emailed them year- end numbers for the Historical Commission’s 2017 activities. He reported that the Commission had approved 2209 applications, the most ever in a single year, adding that the numbers would continue to increase in the coming year. Mr. Farnham informed the Commissioners that 92% of the approvals were issued by the staff, without referral to the Architectural Committee or the Historical Commission, and that 8% were issued by the Historical Commission. Summarizing the designation matters for 2017, Mr. Farnham stated that 45 resources were individually designated, including one object, the Christopher Columbus statue on S. Broad Street. One small historic district in the Spruce Hill section of West Philadelphia was also designated in 2017. Mr. Farnham further explained that five nominations were rejected, two reclassification requests were denied, and three nominations were tabled indefinitely. These three nominations are still on hold pending events that will trigger their appearance before Commission. Additionally, four nominations were withdrawn and the staff rejected four nominations for being incorrect and incomplete in 2017. These were 150 Dupont Street (St. David’s Episcopal Church), 5247 Ridge Avenue (Wissahickon Presbyterian Church), 1617 E. Moyamensing Avenue (the Abigail Vare School) and 4100 Chestnut Street (the Philadelphia City Passenger Railway Company’s Car House). Mr. Farnham informed the Commissioners that some of these nominations would be revised and presented to them in 2018. Mr. Farnham stated that appeals of designations had increased significantly, with the Historical Commission facing seven appeals of designation-related actions in 2017. He reminded the Commissioners that he had provided them with the details of all of the appeals, including three that were related to
presented to them in 2018. Mr. Farnham stated that appeals of designations had increased significantly, with the Historical Commission facing seven appeals of designation-related actions in 2017. He reminded the Commissioners that he had provided them with the details of all of the appeals, including three that were related to building permit applications, in the email he sent them earlier in the week. Mr. Farnham informed the members of the Commission that staff member Meredith Keller had given birth to her son last week and that everyone was healthy. Mr. Farnham explained that the staff would be moving forward on historic district designation matters in 2018, including Overbrook Farms in two phases and a Ridge Avenue thematic district. Mr. Farnham stated that Councilman Jones has been supportive of the demolition moratorium for Ridge Avenue. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 FEBRUARY 2018 9 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ADJOURNMENT ACTION: At 9:36 a.m., Ms. Cooperman moved to adjourn. Mr. Mattioni seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES CITED IN THE MINUTES Standard 6: Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. Standard 8: Archaeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken. Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new works shall be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. Standard 10: New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. Roofs Guideline: Recommended: Designing additions to roofs such as residential, office, or storage spaces; elevator housing; decks and terraces; or dormers or skylights when required by the new use so that they are inconspicuous from the public right-of-way and do not damage or obscure character-defining features.