COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 20 NOVEMBER 2024 1 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION OF THE PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, 20 NOVEMBER 2024 REMOTE MEETING ON ZOOM EMILY COOPERMAN, CHAIR CALL TO ORDER START TIME IN AUDIO RECORDING: 00:00:00 The Chair called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m. The following Committee members joined her: Committee Member Present Absent Comment Emily Cooperman, Ph.D., Chair X Suzanna Barucco X Jeff Cohen, Ph.D. X Bruce Laverty X Debbie Miller X Elizabeth Milroy, Ph.D. X The meeting was held remotely via Zoom video and audio-conferencing software. The following staff members were present: Jonathan Farnham, Executive Director Kim Chantry, Historic Preservation Planner III Heather Hendrickson, Historic Preservation Planner II Ted Maust, Historic Preservation Planner II Dan Shachar-Krasnoff, Historic Preservation Planner II Alex Till, Historic Preservation Planner II The following persons attended the online meeting: Allison Weiss, SoLo Germantown Civic Association Abbey Lewis Abby Lualhati Adrienne Carpenter Alex Balloon Amy Lambert Beverly Penn Dave Aquadro David Breiner, CABE Associate Dean David Traub, Save Our Sites Dennis Carlisle Elisabeth Steuble Frank Boyer, The Galman Group George Thomas, CivicVisions Hanna Stark, Preservation Alliance Harrison Haas Jay Farrell COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 20 NOVEMBER 2024 2 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES Jessica Griffith, Wedge Recovery Center Jim Kohler Julia Hayman Karen Bedrosian-Richardson Kenny Brown Kevin McMahon Meredith Ferleger, Esq., Dilworth Paxson Michael Phillips, Esq., Klehr Harrison Michael Ramos Monica Gonzalez Nancy Pontone Nyla Boulware Oscar Beisert, Keeping Society Paul Steinke, Preservation Alliance Russell Fulton Sherman Aronson, West Mount Airy Neighbors Steven Peitzman Suzanne Ponsen, West Central Germantown Neighbors Suzanne Singletary Vanessa Lowe William O'Brien, Esq. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 20 NOVEMBER 2024 3 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES AGENDA Address: 360-66 AND 368 LYCEUM AVE Name of Resource: Victorian Roxborough Historic District Proposed Action: Amendment Property Owner: Daniel R. Neducsin and Tracy and Andrew Thomas Applicant: Bill O’Brien, Esq. Staff Contact: Heather Hendrickson, heather.hendrickson@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application proposes to rescind the designations of the properties at 360-66 and 368 Lyceum Avenue. Rescission is not applicable in this case because the properties themselves are not individually designated; instead, they are components of the Victorian Roxborough Historic District, which is the designated resource. Therefore, the application is, in effect, proposing to amend the historic district by
properties at 360-66 and 368 Lyceum Avenue. Rescission is not applicable in this case because the properties themselves are not individually designated; instead, they are components of the Victorian Roxborough Historic District, which is the designated resource. Therefore, the application is, in effect, proposing to amend the historic district by relocating the district boundary to exclude the properties. The Victorian Roxborough Historic District was designated under Criteria for Designation C and D (architectural criteria) and J (community heritage criterion) with a Period of Significance of 1830 to 1930. The historic district nomination is available at this link: https://www.phila.gov/media/20220601135612/Historic-District-Victorian-Roxborough.pdf The property at 360-66 Lyceum Avenue is classified as contributing to the historic district. Four structures stand on the property, an older detached building facing Lyceum Avenue and three rowhouses facing Conarroe Street. The older building is dated to c. 1855 and is described as an Italianate villa that has been altered. The rowhouses were constructed in 2000 and are not mentioned in the inventory. The property at 368 Lyceum Avenue is classified as non- contributing to the historic district. Three dwellings, a single and a twin, all built about 2013, stand on the property. The two properties in question are located on the district boundary. The application argues that the removal of the properties from the historic district is appropriate because the structures do not contribute to the historic character of the district; the one older building has been heavily altered and the others are not historic. Section 14-1004(5) of the City’s historic preservation ordinance stipulates that the Historical Commission may amend “any designation of a … district as historic … in the same manner as is specified for designation.” Section 5.14.a.3 of the Historical Commission’s Rules and Regulations stipulates that “the Commission may amend a district boundary to enlarge or reduce the size of a district.” STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends redrawing the Victorian Roxborough Historic District boundary as depicted in the figure below to exclude 360-66 and 368 Lyceum Avenue, pursuant to Section 14-1004(5) of the historic preservation ordinance and Section 5.14.a.3 of the Historical Commission’s Rules and Regulations. Six of the seven structures on the properties are non-historic. The seventh structure dates to 1855 but has been so heavily altered that all character-defining architectural features except its basic form have been lost. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:06:55 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Hendrickson presented the amendment to
Six of the seven structures on the properties are non-historic. The seventh structure dates to 1855 but has been so heavily altered that all character-defining architectural features except its basic form have been lost. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:06:55 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Hendrickson presented the amendment to the Committee on Historic Designation. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 20 NOVEMBER 2024 4 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES • Attorney William O’Brien and preservation consultant George Thomas represented the property owner. DISCUSSION: • Mr. Thomas made a short presentation explaining why the buildings standing at 360- 66 and 368 Lyceum Avenue should be classified as non-contributing to the Victorian Roxborough Historic District. He reasoned that the buildings at 368 Lyceum Avenue were built in 2013 and were therefore not historic and did not fall within the district’s Period of Significance. He reasoned that older building at 360-66 Lyceum Ave had been so heavily altered that it lacked historic integrity and fails to contribute to the historic district. • Mr. Cohen stated that he was not opposed to the boundary amendment and asked if any early photograph of the building on 360-66 Lyceum existed. o Mr. Thomas responded that he looked but could not find one. • Ms. Cooperman stated that she had no reason to think this was not an appropriate amendment. • Ms. Barucco commented that she also did not disagree but noted that the property at 360-66 Lyceum was specifically called out in the district nomination, which she found interesting. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Paul Steinke of the Preservation Alliance commented on but did not oppose the application. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Committee on Historic Designation found that: • The older building at 360-66 Lyceum Avenue has been so heavily altered from its original appearance that it does not contribute to the historic district. The newer buildings on the site have no historical or architectural significance. • The buildings at 368 Lyceum Avenue were built after the year 2000. • The property at 368 Lyceum Avenue was classified as “non-contributing” to the Victorian Roxborough Historic District but should have been excluded from the district because it sits on the boundary. The Committee on Historic Designation concluded that: • The older building at 360-366 Lyceum Avenue has been heavily altered and only the basic shape of the historic building remains.
“non-contributing” to the Victorian Roxborough Historic District but should have been excluded from the district because it sits on the boundary. The Committee on Historic Designation concluded that: • The older building at 360-366 Lyceum Avenue has been heavily altered and only the basic shape of the historic building remains. It does not contribute architecturally to the historic district. • The newer buildings at 360-366 Lyceum Avenue have no historical or architectural significance. • The property at 368 Lyceum Avenue includes contemporary buildings that are classified as “non-contributing” in the district inventory and were constructed outside of the Period of Significance for the Victorian Roxborough Historic District, and therefore could be excluded from the district. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend redrawing the Victorian Roxborough Historic District boundary to exclude 360-66 and 368 Lyceum Avenue, pursuant to Section 14-1004(5) of the historic preservation ordinance and Section 5.14.a.3 of the Historical Commission’s Rules and Regulations. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 20 NOVEMBER 2024 5 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ITEM: 360-66 and 368 Lyceum Ave MOTION: Amend boundary to exclude properties MOVED BY: Cohen SECONDED BY: Milroy VOTE Committee Member Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Emily Cooperman, Chair X Suzanna Barucco X Jeff Cohen X Bruce Laverty X Debbie Miller X Elizabeth Milroy X Total 5 1 ADDRESS: 449 LOCUST AVE Name of Resource: Edwin T. Chase House Review: Designate Property Owner: KJB Solutions LLC Nominator: Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia Staff Contact: Dan Shachar-Krasnoff, daniel.shachar-krasnoff@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 449 Locust Avenue and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the stone house, built for prominent Philadelphia lawyer Edwin T. Chase in 1861, satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, and E. The nomination argues that the Edwin T. Chase House is a highly characteristic example of the work of John Riddell, one of the most prolific residential architects in mid- nineteenth century Philadelphia, satisfying Criterion E. Under Criteria C and D, the nomination contends that the three-story, Italianate-style house exemplifies Riddell’s own particular brand of the domestic pattern book architecture that defined the era. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the property at 449 Locust Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, and E. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:23:30 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Shachar-Krasnoff presented
Italianate-style house exemplifies Riddell’s own particular brand of the domestic pattern book architecture that defined the era. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the property at 449 Locust Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, and E. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:23:30 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Shachar-Krasnoff presented the nomination to the Committee on Historic Designation. • Hannah Stark of the Preservation Alliance represented the nomination. • Attorney Meredith Ferleger represented the property owner. DISCUSSION: • Ms. Ferleger intoned that the property owner does not oppose the designation of 449 Locust Avenue to the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. She noted that the owner will propose a boundary change at the Historical Commission meeting that will remove the E. Woodlawn Street side of the lot from the designated site. This would allow more flexible redevelopment of the rear of the property, where no historic features exist. She explained that the topography slopes up from E. Woodlawn COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 20 NOVEMBER 2024 6 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES Street to the structures proposed for designation, limiting the view of the designated structures from that vantage point. • Ms. Cooperman pointed out that the suburban Chase House should have some “breathing room.” o Ms. Ferleger stated that they will propose designating more than half of the lot, removing a smaller section at the rear. • Ms. Milroy asked about a tree survey. o Ms. Ferleger replied that a tree survey is being conducted. • Ms. Barucco expressed appreciation that the owner’s representative took the time to explain her thinking regarding the proposed designation. • Ms. Milroy commended the designation and noted the importance of John Riddell’s pattern books. • Mr. Cohen complimented the elegantly written nomination. He also noted that the Michael Bouvier House was an idiosyncratic design for a pattern book. In conclusion, he opined that the Victorian era Chase House is significantly more cubic in design houses from the Georgian period. • Mr. Laverty complimented the author for identifying the Chase House from Riddell’s pattern books and for using sources in private hands that are difficult to access. PUBLIC COMMENT: • David Traub of Save Our Sites spoke in favor of the designation. • Allison Weiss of the Solo Germantown Civic Association spoke in favor of the designation. • Suzanne Ponsen of the West Central Germantown Neighbors Association spoke in
in private hands that are difficult to access. PUBLIC COMMENT: • David Traub of Save Our Sites spoke in favor of the designation. • Allison Weiss of the Solo Germantown Civic Association spoke in favor of the designation. • Suzanne Ponsen of the West Central Germantown Neighbors Association spoke in favor of the designation. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Committee on Historic Designation found that: • The house was designed by architect John Riddell. • The house was built for Edwin T. Chase in 1861. • The house resembles pattern book designs for Italianate style houses. The Committee on Historic Designation concluded that: • The nomination demonstrates that the Italianate-style house exemplifies Riddell’s own particular brand of the domestic pattern book architecture that defined the era, satisfying Criteria C and D. • The nomination demonstrates that the Edwin T. Chase House is a highly characteristic example of the work of John Riddell, one of the most prolific residential architects in mid-nineteenth century Philadelphia, satisfying Criterion E. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 449 Locust Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, and E. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 20 NOVEMBER 2024 7 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ITEM: 449 Locust Ave MOTION: Satisfies Criteria C, D, and E MOVED BY: Laverty SECONDED BY: Cohen VOTE Committee Member Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Emily Cooperman, Chair X Suzanna Barucco X Jeff Cohen X Bruce Laverty X Debbie Miller X Elizabeth Milroy X Total 5 1 ADDRESS: 6701-19 N BROAD ST Name of Resource: Oak Lane Trust Company Bank Review: Designation Property Owner: Oxford Finance Companies Nominator: Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia Staff Contact: Kim Chantry, kim.chantry@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 6701-19 N. Broad Street and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the former Oak Lane Trust Company Bank satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, and E. Under Criterion C, the nomination contends that the Oak Lane Trust Company Bank is exemplary of the Art Deco style and specifically Philadelphia’s regionally popular “Chaste Deco” expression of the Zig-Zag subtype of the Art Deco style. Under Criterion D, the nomination contends that the Oak Lane Trust Company Bank building is one of the many Art Deco banks and
Trust Company Bank is exemplary of the Art Deco style and specifically Philadelphia’s regionally popular “Chaste Deco” expression of the Zig-Zag subtype of the Art Deco style. Under Criterion D, the nomination contends that the Oak Lane Trust Company Bank building is one of the many Art Deco banks and other commercial institutions that dominated Philadelphia streetscapes throughout the early twentieth century. Lastly, the nomination contends that the Oak Lane Trust Company Bank building satisfies Criterion E, owing to architect Ralph B. Bencker’s design of both the initial 1923 construction of the Oak Lane Trust Company Bank and the 1926 additions and alterations. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the property at 6701-19 N. Broad Street satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, and E. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:47:15 RECUSAL: • Ms. Barucco recused from the review of the nomination because the author of the nomination is her student at Thomas Jefferson University. PRESENTERS: • Ms. Chantry presented the nomination to the Committee on Historic Designation. • Hanna Stark of the Preservation Alliance and nomination author Julia Hayman represented the nomination. • Jessica Griffith, the Vice President of Compliance and Continuous Quality Improvement at the Wedge Recovery Centers, represented the property owner. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 20 NOVEMBER 2024 8 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES DISCUSSION: • Ms. Hayman detailed the historic significance of the property as provided in the nomination. • Ms. Griffith stated that she is representing the owner, Broad Street Professional Building LP, who is a related party to the Wedge Medical Center, Inc. She stated that the property owner opposes the historic designation of the property. She explained that the building functions as a mental health and substance abuse outpatient service for individuals on medical assistance, and because of this, there are no funds to pay for historically accurate renovations. She stated that it is already an expensive building to maintain, and that a historic designation would create a further undue hardship. She stated that the Wedge Recovery Center is an essential community service. She acknowledged that the Committee does not address concerns of financial hardship or building condition, and that she will pursue those avenues as well in opposition to the designation. o Ms. Cooperman thanked Ms. Griffith for her participation in the review. She explained that a historic designation of the property would not compel
the Committee does not address concerns of financial hardship or building condition, and that she will pursue those avenues as well in opposition to the designation. o Ms. Cooperman thanked Ms. Griffith for her participation in the review. She explained that a historic designation of the property would not compel the owner to undertake a restoration. She stated that the Historical Commission has a long track record of taking into account the needs of institutions that serve the public. She recommended that Ms. Griffith speak with the Historical Commission’s staff to learn more about the process. • Ms. Cooperman commented that the building was designed in 1922, but the Exposition Internationale des Arts Décoratifs et Industriels Modernes, where the Art Deco style was first exhibited, took place in 1925. Therefore, the building cannot be called Art Deco in style. She noted that the Committee often discusses how inadequate style labels generally are to describe the inventiveness and creativeness of buildings in many cases. She stated that when one is referring to a building that is this iconic and which is expressive of the talent of a particular designer, it does not do it justice to put the building in the pigeonhole of Art Deco. She opined that this building rises above style names typically applied to buildings in order to understand them. She stated that this building is the epitome of Ralph Bencker’s power and talent, on a site that is so prominent on North Broad Street. She recommended the inclusion of Criterion H for this reason. • Mr. Cohen agreed with Ms. Cooperman’s points. He stated that he was unsure if “Chaste Deco” was a widely used term and suggested that the building’s design is more sculptural than Art Deco. He suggested that Ralph Bencker may have been looking to the late work of William Price and the Arts and Crafts movement. • Mr. Laverty thanked Ms. Hayman for her nomination and the amount of work which went into it. He questioned the use of “Chaste Deco” as a descriptor of the building’s style. o Ms. Hayman responded that it is an odd term for which there is minimal scholarship available, but it is a different style than the more polychromatic expressions of Art Deco. o Ms. Cooperman commented that the term “chaste” underplays the inventiveness of the design. • Ms. Milroy observed that nomenclature can be difficult when
it is an odd term for which there is minimal scholarship available, but it is a different style than the more polychromatic expressions of Art Deco. o Ms. Cooperman commented that the term “chaste” underplays the inventiveness of the design. • Ms. Milroy observed that nomenclature can be difficult when authoring nominations based on an architectural style. She noted the sheer quantity of windows on the building on both major thoroughfare facades and commented that this is not typical of bank buildings, which tend to want to be less transparent. • Mr. Cohen agreed with Ms. Cooperman’s earlier recommendation of the addition of Criterion H for significance. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 20 NOVEMBER 2024 9 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES o Mr. Laverty noted that, in addition to the major crossroad, the building also sits at the highest point of Broad Street. PUBLIC COMMENT: • David Traub of Save Our Sites commented in support of the nomination. • Amy Lambert commented in support of the nomination and encouraged the property owner to use the Historical Commission’s staff as a resource. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Committee on Historic Designation found that: • The building is the epitome of the talents of architect Ralph B. Bencker, the designer of both the original 1923 building and its 1926 addition. • Owing to the unique location at the intersection of N. Broad Street and Old York Road, Criterion H is applicable. The Committee on Historic Designation concluded that: • The Oak Lane Trust Company Bank is exemplary of Ralph B. Bencker’s own unique style of architecture and cannot technically be classified as Art Deco, satisfying Criterion C. • The Oak Lane Trust Company Bank building is one of the many banks and other commercial institutions in Art Deco and similar styles that dominated Philadelphia streetscapes throughout the early to mid-twentieth century, satisfying Criterion D. • The Oak Lane Trust Company Bank building was designed by prominent Philadelphia architect Ralph B. Bencker in 1923 and 1926, satisfying Criterion E. • Owing to its unique location or singular physical characteristic, the building represents an established and familiar visual feature of the neighborhood, community, or City, satisfying Criterion H. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 6701-19 N. Broad Street satisfies Criteria for
or singular physical characteristic, the building represents an established and familiar visual feature of the neighborhood, community, or City, satisfying Criterion H. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 6701-19 N. Broad Street satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, E, and H. ITEM: 6701-19 N Broad St MOTION: Satisfies Criteria C, D, E, and H MOVED BY: Cohen SECONDED BY: Milroy VOTE Committee Member Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Emily Cooperman, Chair X Suzanna Barucco X Jeff Cohen X Bruce Laverty X Debbie Miller X Elizabeth Milroy X Total 4 1 1 COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 20 NOVEMBER 2024 10 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES NORTHWEST PHILADELPHIA APARTMENTS THEMATIC HISTORIC DISTRICT Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Multiple Nominator: West Mount Airy Neighbors Staff Contact: Ted Maust, theodore.maust@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the Northwest Philadelphia Apartments Thematic Historic District. The proposed district includes 30 properties in Northwest Philadelphia, all of them apartment buildings within close proximity to the Chestnut Hill West Line of SEPTA Regional Rail. The nominators have focused on the period 1910 to 1940, when many apartment buildings were constructed in this part of the city. The nomination argues that the proposed district meets Criteria for Designation A, D, F, and J. Under Criteria A and J, the nominators argue that these apartment buildings brought about a transformation of this area of Philadelphia into a bustling suburb populated in large part by middle-class residents, thus having significant character as part of the development and heritage of the community as well as the city as a whole. The nomination also argues that the proposed district embodies distinguishing characteristics of various distinctive architectural styles, meeting Criterion D. Among those styles cited in the nomination are Tudor Revival, Colonial Revival, Neoclassical, Italian Renaissance, Beaux Arts, and Art Deco/Moderne. Finally, the nomination cites Criterion F, arguing that properties in the district contain elements of design, detail, materials or craftsmanship which represent a significant innovation. The authors note that many of these buildings differ from more urban apartment structures in that they forego maximum density in favor of more suburban siting, with landscaped courts, open lawns, and other site features which related to the surrounding tree-lined streets. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates the proposed Northwest Philadelphia Apartments Thematic
buildings differ from more urban apartment structures in that they forego maximum density in favor of more suburban siting, with landscaped courts, open lawns, and other site features which related to the surrounding tree-lined streets. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates the proposed Northwest Philadelphia Apartments Thematic Historic District satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, and J, but that a stronger case would need to be made for Criterion F if it is to be included. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 01:23:00 RECUSAL: • Ms. Cooperman recused from the review of the nomination because she owns a condominium unit in a building in the proposed historic district. PRESENTERS: • Mr. Maust presented the nomination to the Committee on Historic Designation. • Sherman Aronson and Adrienne Carpenter of the West Mount Airy Neighbors represented the nomination. • Attorney Michael Phillips spoke on behalf of the Lindy Communities, the owner of 6907 McCallum Street, known as Sedgwick Gardens. • Frank Boyer, the Regional Condominium Manager at The Galman Group, spoke on behalf of the property owners at 6635 McCallum Street, The McCallum, and 400-14 W. Hortter Street, Germantown Manor. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 20 NOVEMBER 2024 11 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES DISCUSSION: • Mr. Phillips spoke about the Lindy family’s special connection to Sedgwick Gardens; the buildings were constructed by Jacob Lindy and the site was the first apartment development in a large portfolio still managed by the family. As the Lindy family views this property as an heirloom, Mr. Phillips contended that regulation by the Historical Commission was unnecessary. o Mr. Phillips further contended that Sedgwick Gardens, built 1939-1940, is a chronological outlier in the proposed thematic district. He also suggested that the common “theme” of the subject properties is insufficient to justify designation, as the apartment buildings display a wide variety of architectural styles and scales. • Mr. Boyer noted that the properties managed by the Gallman Group are condominiums and wondered what complications that might create for seeking Commission approval for maintenance and property improvements, including wheelchair accessible ramps. o He further noted that the condominium associations of these two properties already have standards for window replacement which include replacing “like for like.” o At the invitation of Ms. Barucco, Mr. Farnham responded that many condominium buildings are already listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places,
accessible ramps. o He further noted that the condominium associations of these two properties already have standards for window replacement which include replacing “like for like.” o At the invitation of Ms. Barucco, Mr. Farnham responded that many condominium buildings are already listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places, and the Historical Commission’s staff regularly reviews building permits from condominium unit owners. The reviews are sometimes more complex if they involve different standards between condominium associations and the Historical Commission, but that the staff is very familiar with such cases. Mr. Farnham also affirmed that the Historical Commission regularly reviews and approves requests to make buildings more accessible and while it may provide feedback on the design of a ramp or other accessibility measure, it would not stand in the way of those measures. o Ms. Barucco noted that it sounded like the condominium association’s standards for changes to the exterior of the building were in line with the Historical Commission’s standards. • Mr. Cohen praised the nomination for revealing a dimension of Germantown that otherwise has been overlooked. The construction of these buildings in just a few decades had a significant impact on the landscapes along the transit corridors parallel to Germantown Avenue. o Mr. Cohen did identify room for more research about these buildings, suggesting that productive lines of inquiry would include further examining the social history of the buildings especially the economic context which made the style and scale of these buildings attractive to both developers and residents in comparison to other options. He wondered what type of households made up the residents of these buildings who might have not fit the single-family detached dwelling model. o Mr. Cohen addressed Mr. Phillips’ comments about the proposed district lacking a single style, noting that other historic districts, including thematic ones, have been characterized by a variety of styles. He suggested that what linked these buildings went beyond the various styles which all stemmed from a “collective grandeur” that may have appealed to particular demographics and communities. • Ms. Milroy noted that her former home community of Evanston, Illinois has had an apartment district on the National Register of Historic Places since the 1980s and that there is precedent for suburban apartments being identified as worthy of historic preservation. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 20 NOVEMBER 2024 12 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES
Illinois has had an apartment district on the National Register of Historic Places since the 1980s and that there is precedent for suburban apartments being identified as worthy of historic preservation. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 20 NOVEMBER 2024 12 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES • Mr. Laverty commended the nominators and said he welcomed additions to the proposed district or other similar districts in other neighborhoods of Philadelphia. • Ms. Barucco appreciated the analysis of the various apartment typologies, especially the particular layouts and sitings that developers chose for these buildings. o She also noted that this nomination’s focus on the railway was important and effective. • Ms. Milroy shifted the conversation to the staff recommendation and the question of whether Criterion F was sufficiently supported by the nomination. o Ms. Barucco said she felt that Criterion F was not necessary for this nomination to succeed and agreed with the staff that it was not very well developed within the statement of significance. o Ms. Milroy said the best argument for Criterion F she found in the nomination was that these were multi-family buildings that mimicked existing suburban single-family residential forms and used a variety of historical architectural references to do so. o Mr. Cohen agreed that these apartments developing in this suburban setting was a local innovation but that it was an innovation being experienced in many places in the country as suburbanization became more common. o Mr. Aronson noted that the nominators had chosen to include Criterion F after observing evolution and adaptation within the design of these apartment buildings. The earliest ones mostly looked like large houses, though they were divided into flats. By the 1920s, more confident in the demand for apartments, they took cues from urban apartment buildings and looked much different. The developers were innovating form and style to meet demand, if not in craftsmanship or technology. o Mr. Laverty commented that, while he could see further research and writing buttressing Criterion F, he felt the nomination strongly supported the other Criteria and thus he was in favor of removing Criterion F. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Steven Peitzman of the East Falls Historical Society commented in support of the nomination. • Allison Weiss of the SoLo Germantown Civic Association commented in support of the nomination. • Suzanne Ponsen of West Central Germantown Neighbors commented in support of the nomination.
of removing Criterion F. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Steven Peitzman of the East Falls Historical Society commented in support of the nomination. • Allison Weiss of the SoLo Germantown Civic Association commented in support of the nomination. • Suzanne Ponsen of West Central Germantown Neighbors commented in support of the nomination. • David Traub of Save Our Sites commented in support of the nomination. • Amy Lambert of the University City Historical Society commented in support of the nomination and asked how properties could be added to the Thematic District in future or if other parts of the city could be added. o Ms. Barucco and Mr. Farnham answered that an amendment could be submitted, as long as the additional properties shared the history documented in the current nomination. • Russell Fulton commented in support of the nomination and suggested that one future addition to the district should be the Wallingford Apartments on W. Walnut Lane. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Committee on Historic Designation found that: COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 20 NOVEMBER 2024 13 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES • The nomination makes a significant contribution to the understanding of the built environment along the Chestnut Hill West Line. • The subject properties, while displaying a variety of architectural styles, are united by their proximity to the railroad and their adaptation of urban forms to a suburban setting. The Committee on Historic Designation concluded that: • The nomination demonstrates that the historic district satisfies Criteria for Designation A and J, showing that the subject properties have significant character and value as part of the development of the city of Philadelphia and exemplify the economic and social heritage of the community. • The nomination demonstrates that the historic district satisfies Criterion for Designation D, embodying a variety of architectural styles as developers adapted apartment buildings for the suburban setting. • The nomination does not fully justify designating the historic district under Criterion F. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the proposed Northwest Philadelphia Apartments Thematic Historic District satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, and J. ITEM: Northwest Philadelphia Apartments Thematic Historic District MOTION: Satisfies Criteria A, D, and J MOVED BY: Laverty SECONDED BY: Milroy VOTE Committee Member Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Emily Cooperman, Chair X Suzanna Barucco X
proposed Northwest Philadelphia Apartments Thematic Historic District satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, and J. ITEM: Northwest Philadelphia Apartments Thematic Historic District MOTION: Satisfies Criteria A, D, and J MOVED BY: Laverty SECONDED BY: Milroy VOTE Committee Member Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Emily Cooperman, Chair X Suzanna Barucco X Jeff Cohen X Bruce Laverty X Debbie Miller X Elizabeth Milroy X Total 4 1 1 ADJOURNMENT START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 02:12:28 ACTION: The Committee on Historic Designation adjourned at 11:50 a.m. PLEASE NOTE: • Minutes of the Philadelphia Historical Commission and its advisory Committees are presented in action format. Additional information is available in the video recording for this meeting. The start time for each agenda item in the recording is noted. • Application materials and staff overviews are available on the Historical Commission’s website, www.phila.gov/historical. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 20 NOVEMBER 2024 14 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES CRITERIA FOR DESIGNATION §14-1004. Designation. (1) Criteria for Designation. A building, complex of buildings, structure, site, object, or district may be designated for preservation if it: • (a) Has significant character, interest, or value as part of the development, heritage, or cultural characteristics of the City, Commonwealth, or nation or is associated with the life of a person significant in the past; • (b) Is associated with an event of importance to the history of the City, Commonwealth or Nation; • (c) Reflects the environment in an era characterized by a distinctive architectural style; • (d) Embodies distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style or engineering specimen; • (e) Is the work of a designer, architect, landscape architect or designer, or professional engineer whose work has significantly influenced the historical, architectural, economic, social, or cultural development of the City, Commonwealth, or nation; • (f) Contains elements of design, detail, materials, or craftsmanship that represent a significant innovation; • (g) Is part of or related to a square, park, or other distinctive area that should be preserved according to a historic, cultural, or architectural motif; • (h) Owing to its unique location or singular physical characteristic, represents an established and familiar visual feature of the neighborhood, community, or City; • (i) Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in pre-history or history; or • (j) Exemplifies the cultural, political, economic, social, or historical heritage of the community.