Historical Commission — May 13, 2022

PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 1 THE MINUTES OF THE 717TH STATED MEETING OF THE PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION FRIDAY, 13 MAY 2022, 9:00 A.M. REMOTE MEETING ON ZOOM ROBERT THOMAS, CHAIR CALL TO ORDER START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:00:00 Mr. Thomas, the Chair, called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. and announced the presence of a quorum. The following Commissioners joined him: Commissioner Present Absent Comment Robert Thomas, AIA, Chair (Architectural Historian) X Donna Carney (Philadelphia City Planning Commission) X Emily Cooperman, Ph.D., Committee on Historic Designation Chair (Historian) X Mark Dodds (Department of Planning and Development) X* Arrived at 9:20 Kelly Edwards, MUP (Real Estate Developer) X Patrick O’Donnell (Department of Public Property) X Sara Lepori (Commerce Department) X John P. Lech (Department of Licenses & Inspections) X John Mattioni, Esq. X Dan McCoubrey, AIA, LEED AP BD+C, Architectural Committee Chair (Architect) X Stephanie Michel (Community Organization) X Jessica Sánchez, Esq. (City Council President) X Kimberly Washington, Esq. (Community Development Corporation) 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 Laura DiPasquale, Historic Preservation Planner II Shannon Garrison, Historic Preservation Planner II Meredith Keller, Historic Preservation Planner II Allyson Mehley, Historic Preservation Planner II Leonard Reuter, Esq., Law Department Megan Cross Schmitt, Historic Preservation Planner II The following persons attended the online meeting: Paul Steinke, Preservation Alliance Hal Schirmer J. M. Duffin Steven Peitzman PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 2 Sharla Russell Colin Hunsberger Kay Sykora Jonathan Morse Jay Farrell The Reverend Michael Caine Margaret Ann Morris Kathy Sykes Dan Herrman Patrick Grossi, Preservation Alliance Nancy Pontone P. Justin Detwiler Antoinette Murphy Rhonda Lancaster Dan Henderson Dennis Carlisle David La Fontaine Angel Rodriguez, Philadelphia Land Bank Job Itzkowitz Dane Bombara Kevin McMahon Oscar Beisert Matthew Leili, Esq. Robert Freedman Rustin Ohler John Scorsone Mary McNatt David Smith, Esq. George McClennen Yevgeny Desyatnik Peter Dilsheimer Layal Issa Justin Kaplan Morris Zimmerman, OZ Collaborative Bruce Bohri Mike Simone David Mercuris, The Goldenberg Group Steve Black Gideon Fink Shapiro Sergio Coscia Linda D. Evans Mohammed Shariff John Carpenter Cassidy Martin Don & Susan Simon Andrew Dillon Troy Hannigan Jessica Vitali Kevin M. Trapper, The Goldenberg Group Michael Farinella Amy Lambert PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY

Bruce Bohri Mike Simone David Mercuris, The Goldenberg Group Steve Black Gideon Fink Shapiro Sergio Coscia Linda D. Evans Mohammed Shariff John Carpenter Cassidy Martin Don & Susan Simon Andrew Dillon Troy Hannigan Jessica Vitali Kevin M. Trapper, The Goldenberg Group Michael Farinella Amy Lambert PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 3 Doug Bomar Michael Mattioni, Esq. Cheryl Feldman Langdon Palmer Alexander Fidrych Julia Heberle David Traub Logan Dry, KCA Design Associates Jared Blake Corinne O'Connell, Habitat for Humanity Ann Levering Kathy Lent Michael Motyka, OZ Collaborative Celeste Hardester Nick Kraus, Heritage Consulting Group Helene Feldman Allison Weiss Julian Hinson Jordan Donaldson ADOPTION OF MINUTES, 716TH STATED MEETING, 8 APRIL 2022 START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:06:05 DISCUSSION: • Mr. Thomas asked the Commissioners, staff, and members of the public if they had any additions or corrections to the minutes of the preceding meeting of the Historical Commission, the 716th Stated Meeting, held 8 April 2022. No comments were offered. ACTION: Mr. Thomas moved to adopt the minutes of the 716th Stated Meeting of the Philadelphia Historical Commission, held 8 April 2022. Ms. Washington seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 4 ITEM: Adoption of the Minutes of the 716th Meeting MOTION: Adoption of minutes MOVED BY: Thomas SECONDED BY: Washington VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Edwards X O’Donnell (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 11 2 REPORT OF THE ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE, 26 APRIL 2022 CONSENT AGENDA START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:08:00 DISCUSSION: • Mr. Thomas asked the Commissioners, staff, and public for comments on the Consent Agenda. None were offered. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. ACTION: Mr. Thomas moved to adopt the recommendation of the Architectural Committee for the applications for 7037, 7039, and 7041 Ridge Avenue and 701 Lombard Street. Mr. McCoubrey seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 5 ITEM: Consent Agenda MOTION: Approval MOVED BY: Thomas SECONDED BY: McCoubrey VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X O’Donnell

adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 5 ITEM: Consent Agenda MOTION: Approval MOVED BY: Thomas SECONDED BY: McCoubrey VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X O’Donnell (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 11 2 AGENDA ADDRESS: 2204 WALNUT ST Proposal: Demolish non-contributing building and construct 10-story building Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Flamingo Bay Investments Applicant: Sergio Coscia, Coscia Moos Architecture History: 1871; John Ashhurst House; Furness & Hewitt; New front façade in 1938 for Anthracite Industries, Inc., George W. Neff, architect District Designation: Rittenhouse Fitler Historic District, Non-contributing, 2/8/1995 Staff Contact: Jon Farnham, jon.farnham@phila.gov OVERVIEW: The application proposes to demolish the building at 2204 Walnut Street, which is classified as non-contributing to the Rittenhouse-Fitler Residential Historic District, and construct a 10-story, mixed-use, commercial and residential building in its place. The overall height of the building would be 117 feet. The upper stories would be set back 10’-2” from the lower front façade at the fifth floor and an additional 5’-3” at the seventh floor. No cladding or other materials are identified in the application. In 2019, the Historical Commission approved a two-story rooftop and rear addition for the existing four-story building. The addition would have been set back from the front façade. Renderings of the project are included below. SCOPE OF WORK: • Demolish non-contributing building; and, • Construct 10-story building. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 6 STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include: • Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. o The existing building is classified as non-contributing to the Rittenhouse-Fitler Residential Historic District. The existing building is not considered historic fabric and therefore its demolition complies with Standard 9. o At 10 stories and 117 feet tall, the proposed building is not compatible with the streetscape or historic district. The historic buildings in the immediate

as non-contributing to the Rittenhouse-Fitler Residential Historic District. The existing building is not considered historic fabric and therefore its demolition complies with Standard 9. o At 10 stories and 117 feet tall, the proposed building is not compatible with the streetscape or historic district. The historic buildings in the immediate area are between three and five stories in height. The application does not comply with Standard 9. The height of the proposed building should be reduced to a maximum of six stories, with the upper two stories set back from the front façade. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the demolition but denial of the new construction, pursuant to Standard 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend approval of the demolition of the non-contributing building but denial of the proposed building, pursuant to Standard 9. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:09:15 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Farnham presented the application to the Historical Commission. • Architect Jessica Vitali represented the application. DISCUSSION: • Ms. Vitali presented the application to the Historical Commission. She described the surrounding neighborhood and pointed out several tall buildings in the area. She displayed the plans of the proposed building as well as photographs of the existing building. She explained that they designed the building to be compatible with the historic district as defined in the nomination. She described the buildings on the 2200 block of Walnut Street. She described the proposed building. She stated that the building will include a retail unit at the first floor and residential units above. She showed numerous renderings of the building and explained why she considers the high-quality design to be compatible with the historic district. • Mr. McCoubrey stated that the Architectural Committee concluded that the proposed building is too tall for the location in the historic district. He stated that a six-story building might be appropriate. He also noted that the white color of the building might be too bright and should be toned down. • Ms. Cooperman stated that the proposed building would be intrusive, owing to its height and color. It would not satisfy the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. • Mr. McCoubrey stated that taller buildings are typically found on corners, not mid- block. • Mr. O’Donnell asked about the zoning height limit for this location. o Ms. Vitali stated that buildings at this location are restricted by FAR but not by height.

the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. • Mr. McCoubrey stated that taller buildings are typically found on corners, not mid- block. • Mr. O’Donnell asked about the zoning height limit for this location. o Ms. Vitali stated that buildings at this location are restricted by FAR but not by height. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 7 • Mr. Thomas stated that he liked many aspects of the design including the fenestration and the cornice line above the fourth floor but agreed with his colleagues about the color and height. • Ms. Edwards stated that she finds the color appropriate for the varied block with a gas station. • Mr. Mattioni stated that he considers the proposed building to be appropriate for the historic district. He stated that he likes the setbacks. PUBLIC COMMENT: • David Traub of Save Our Sites stated that the height should be reduced, and the color of the exterior changed to an earth tone. • Jim Duffin of the Center City Residents Association stated that the scale of the building is “jarring,” and the color is inappropriate. • Steven Peitzman stated that the white color is “out of place.” He asked why there are no windows on the sides of the proposed building. o Mr. Thomas stated that the building code does not typically allow windows on property lines. • Hal Schirmer suggested setbacks on the sides from the property lines. He suggested a one or two-foot setbacks. o Ms. Kelly and Mr. Thomas stated that Mr. Schirmer’s proposed setbacks were not sufficient and would not meet the building and fire codes. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The existing building is classified as non-contributing to the Rittenhouse-Fitler Residential Historic District. The existing building is not considered historic fabric. • The historic buildings in the immediate area of 2204 Walnut Street are between three and five stories in height. • The colors of the historic buildings in the Rittenhouse-Fitler Residential Historic District are typically muted earth tones. The proposed building is white. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The demolition of existing non-contributing building complies with Standard 9. • At 10 stories and 117 feet tall, the proposed building is too tall and therefore not compatible with the streetscape or historic district. The application does not comply with Standard 9. • The color

Historical Commission concluded that: • The demolition of existing non-contributing building complies with Standard 9. • At 10 stories and 117 feet tall, the proposed building is too tall and therefore not compatible with the streetscape or historic district. The application does not comply with Standard 9. • The color of the proposed building is too bright. The application does not comply with Standard 9. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to approve the demolition of the non-contributing building but deny the construction of the proposed building, pursuant to Standard 9. Ms. Cooperman seconded the motion, which passed by a vote of 7 to 4. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 8 ITEM: 2204 Walnut St MOTION: Approval of demolition, denial of new construction MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Cooperman VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Edwards X O’Donnell (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 7 4 2 ADDRESS: 322-40 RACE ST Proposal: Construct five-story mixed-use building Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Elders + Deacons, the Minister Trustees Applicant: Morris Zimmerman, O:Z Collaborative History: 1837; First German Reformed Church, includes houses at 151 and 153 N 4th St Individual Designation: 1/25/1966 District Designation: Old City Historic District, Significant, 12/12/2003 Staff Contact: Jon Farnham, jon.farnham@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application proposes to construct a five-story mixed-use building on the site of the Old First Reformed United Church of Christ at the southeast corner of 4th and Race Streets in the Old City Historic District. The building would include residential and service facilities for homeless men, commercial spaces, and offices for the church. The site of the new building, along 4th Street to the west of the church building, currently includes an eighteenth-century house classified as significant in the historic district, a pseudo-colonial house classified as non- contributing, a surface parking lot, and open space. In June 2019, the Historical Commission approved the massing and location of the proposed building in concept and granted final approval of the relocation eighteenth-century house to the south property line and the restoration of its commercial first-floor façade, and the demolition of the non-contributing house. This application requests final approval of the new building. The new building would include a two-story section for church offices adjacent to

granted final approval of the relocation eighteenth-century house to the south property line and the restoration of its commercial first-floor façade, and the demolition of the non-contributing house. This application requests final approval of the new building. The new building would include a two-story section for church offices adjacent to the relocated house and a five-story section at the corner with commercial space on the ground floor and residential units with support spaces on the upper floors. The new building would be beveled to maintain views of the church from Race Street. The new building would be designed to meet passive house standards and would be clad with brick, cast stone, and metal panels. The church-office section of the building would be clad in cast stone and have the appearance of a PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 9 separate building. The mass of the new building would be broken down with shifts in height and changes in materials. The upper floors would stand on columns at the northeast side of the building. It is important to note that, although the land at the corner of 4th and Race is now open, it was historically built up with structures about the size of the proposed building. The clearing of that land post-dates the period of significance of the historic district by many decades. SCOPE OF WORK • Construct mixed-use building STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include: • 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. o The new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. o The new construction will 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 shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its

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 shall 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. o The 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 will be unimpaired. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends approval, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 9 and 10 and the Historical Commission’s approval in concept of June 2019. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, primarily owing to the metal panels proposed for the courtyard elevation. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:33:30 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Farnham presented the application to the Historical Commission. • The Reverend Michael Caine, developer Troy Hannigan, and architect Morris Zimmerman represented the application. DISCUSSION: • Mr. Hannigan introduced the project including its guiding principles. The building will provide housing and services for previously homeless persons. The building will be constructed to passive house standards. He explained the site and context. He showed the plans for the proposed building and discussed how the spaces would be used. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 10 • Mr. Zimmerman explained how he had incorporated the recommendations of the Architectural Committee including the substitution of more brick where metal panels had been proposed and the revisions to the shapes of the windows on the beveled façade. He stated that they have changed the colors of some materials. • Mr. McCoubrey stated that the overall design is very well done. He stated that the Architectural Committee suggested toning down the color of the white, two-story section on 4th Street. He also suggested making the grey metal panels a slightly warmer color. He questioned the extent of the metal panels on the courtyard side. • Ms. Cooperman stated that the goal is compatibility with the historic district, not with buildings outside the district like the Mint building. • Ms. Edwards stated that the project is a great one. She suggested revising the grey color. • Mr. Farnham stated that there are several grey buildings in the vicinity in the historic district including historic

with the historic district, not with buildings outside the district like the Mint building. • Ms. Edwards stated that the project is a great one. She suggested revising the grey color. • Mr. Farnham stated that there are several grey buildings in the vicinity in the historic district including historic police and fire stations clad in light grey brick directly across the street from the church and a new building to the east of the police and fire stations with grey brick and metal panels, which the Historical Commission approved. • Mr. Hannigan stated that the project is under time and funding pressure and asked that the Historical Commission delegate some of the details to review by the staff. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Oscar Beisert stated that this is a great project. He questioned the use of the grey metal panels. He suggested using better materials on the highly visible sections of the building. • David Traub of Save Our Sites stated that Philadelphia is a city of earth tones. He suggested changing the colors to a red-brick tone. The proposal is discordant. • Jim Duffin stated that he agreed with Oscar Beisert. He also noted that the color grey is associated with the Society of Friends. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • In June 2019, the Historical Commission approved the massing and location of the proposed building in concept and granted final approval of the relocation eighteenth- century house to the south property line and the restoration of its commercial first- floor façade, and the demolition of the non-contributing house. • The applicants revised the design of the new building to incorporate the suggestions of the Architectural Committee. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new construction will 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, thereby satisfying Standard 9. • The colors of the metal panels and cast stone should be reconsidered to better reflect the coloration of the historic district. • The 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 will be unimpaired, thereby satisfying Standard

and cast stone should be reconsidered to better reflect the coloration of the historic district. • The 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 will be unimpaired, thereby satisfying Standard 10. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 11 ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to approve the application, with the suggestion to reconsider the colors of the metal panels and cast stone, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 9 and 10 and the Historical Commission’s approval in concept of June 2019. Ms. Edwards seconded the motion, which passed with unanimous consent. ITEM: 322-40 Race St MOTION: Approve MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Edwards VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Edwards X O’Donnell (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 12 1 ADDRESS: 14 AND 20 PELHAM RD, SUBDIVIDED FROM 30 PELHAM RD Proposal: Construct two houses on subdivided parcels Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: CDP Pelham LLC Applicant: Logan Dry, KCA Design Associates History: 1902; Fairelawn; G.W. & W.D. Hewitt Individual Designation: 7/14/2017 District Designation: None Staff Contact: Kim Chantry, kim.chantry@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application proposes to construct two, three-story, single-family, detached houses on parcels that have been subdivided from the rear of the historically designated property at 30 Pelham Road. The historic building, a grand Tudor Revival mansion, stands on a very large lot at the corners of Cresheim and Pelham Roads and faces Cresheim. The historic carriage house, which was designated at the same time as the mansion, was subdivided off many years ago and faces Westview Avenue. The proposed new buildings would be located at the rear of the site, away from the historic house. They are designed to be compatible with the surrounding context in terms of setback, massing, materials, and features. The proposed new construction will not block views of the historic resource from the public right-of-way and will not have an adverse impact on the designated resource. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 12 SCOPE OF WORK: • Construct two three-story single-family detached residences on subdivided parcels. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s

from the public right-of-way and will not have an adverse impact on the designated resource. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 12 SCOPE OF WORK: • Construct two three-story single-family detached residences on subdivided parcels. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include: • Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. o The proposed work is compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features of the property, satisfying Standard 9. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standard 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend approval, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standard 9, provided: • The masonry veneer bases are extended up to include the first floors; • The front porch coverings change to a pent or more conventional porch; • The stair bay on the east sides change to a full bay that extends out, or does not interrupt the roof line and the third-floor component reads as a shed dormer; • The front doors change to a four-lite with bottom panel, or six-lite; • The sidelites next to the doors change to windows; • The garage doors change to carriage-style doors with or without lites; • Metal siding is eliminated as a façade material; • The four-inch brick refers to the depth of the brick; and • The color of the black windows is reconsidered. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 01:00:40 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Chantry presented the application to the Historical Commission. • Architect Logan Dry represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The proposed new buildings would be located at the rear of the site, away from the historic house, and will not block views of the historic resource from the public right- of-way. • The applicant has revised the application per the Architectural Committee’s recommendations. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The proposed work is compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features of the property, satisfying Standard 9. PHILADELPHIA

not block views of the historic resource from the public right- of-way. • The applicant has revised the application per the Architectural Committee’s recommendations. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The proposed work is compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features of the property, satisfying Standard 9. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 13 ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to approve the revised application, provided glazing is added to the front entrance doors, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standard 9. Ms. Washington seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. ITEM: 14 and 20 Pelham Rd MOTION: Approval with condition MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Washington VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Edwards X O’Donnell (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 12 1 ADDRESS: 7037, 7039 AND 7041 RIDGE AVE Proposal: Remove non-historic additions; renovate building; and construct three-story building Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Gerardo A. & Jean T. Papiro, owner; Select Redevelopment, equitable owner Applicant: Dane Bombara, Square Architects, LLC Individual Designation: None District Designation: 7037 Ridge Ave: None 7039 Ridge Ave: Ridge Ave Roxborough Historic District, Contributing, 10/12/2018 7041 Ridge Ave: Ridge Ave Roxborough Historic District, Contributing, 10/12/2018 Staff Contact: Kim Chantry, kim.chantry@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application proposes to restore a historic building on Ridge Avenue and construct a three- story multi-family building behind the historic building. The vacant parcel at 7037 Ridge Avenue, upon which the majority of the new construct will sit, is not designated as part of the Ridge Avenue Thematic Historic District, but this parcel will be consolidated with two that are designated, and the historic designation will then encompass the entire larger property. The one-story commercial addition at the front of the historic building, which dates from 1987, will be removed, the first-floor front façade will be restored, and a porch reconstructed. The one-story rear additions, which date from the 1990s, will be removed. The three-story multi-family building proposed for the property will not block views of the historic resource. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 14 A similar application was reviewed by the Architectural Committee in February 2022 and was withdrawn by the applicant prior to review by

multi-family building proposed for the property will not block views of the historic resource. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 14 A similar application was reviewed by the Architectural Committee in February 2022 and was withdrawn by the applicant prior to review by the Historical Commission so that revisions could be considered. The new building proposed in the earlier application was four-stories in height and located significantly closer to the historic building. This application was revised to account for the Architectural Committee’s comments, which included recommendations for reducing the height of the new construction by removing the first-floor parking and siting the new construction further from the historic building. This application also includes several revised details for the restoration of the historic building façade. SCOPE OF WORK: • Demolish non-historic additions on existing building. • Restore historic building façades. • Construct three-story multi-family building at rear. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include: • Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. o The proposed work is compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features of the property and its environment, satisfying Standard 9. The proposed work will result in a restoration of a historic Ridge Avenue property. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standard 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend approval, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standard 9, provided: • The entry at the new building is reconsidered to be more traditional in design; • A buffer between the paving and the historic building is considered; • The area between the two masses of the new building is darkened in color to be more recessive; • The edge of the front dormer on the new building is pulled back slightly so that it is not as close to the gable end of the building; • Painted wood windows rather than aluminum clad windows are used for the historic building; • Fiber-cement siding rather than vinyl siding is used on the new building; and • The

building is pulled back slightly so that it is not as close to the gable end of the building; • Painted wood windows rather than aluminum clad windows are used for the historic building; • Fiber-cement siding rather than vinyl siding is used on the new building; and • The windows on the new building have a more traditional sill and frame. ACTION: See Consent Agenda. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 15 ADDRESS: 701 LOMBARD ST Proposal: Add roof deck; cut window openings; create basement access Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Julian Hinson & Justin Billhime Applicant: Liam Zheng, AR Engineers History: 1979; Gross Realty and Construction, developer Individual Designation: None District Designation: Society Hill Historic District, Contributing, 3/10/1999 Staff Contact: Megan Cross Schmitt, megan.schmitt@phila.gov OVERVIEW: The property at 701 Lombard Street is a 3-story, 2-bay, brick, contemporary house constructed ca. 1970 and is classified as contributing to the Society Hill Historic District. This application proposes to construct a roof deck and pilot house, cut two new window openings at the third-story south façade, and create basement access from the parking space at the west side of the building. The staff reviewed a previous version of this application that showed the deck lifted off the roof, causing the railing to be visible from the public right-of-way. Fig. 5 shows the difference between the originally proposed railing visibility (red square) versus the current application (yellow square). The staff believes that lowering the deck to sit closer to the roof has succeeded in making the railing minimally visible and therefore inconspicuous from the public right-of-way, as seen in the site-line studies on drawing A.3. The plans note that the proposed railing is white vinyl, and the staff recommends that a metal picket would be more appropriate. Based on the site-line studies, the pilot house appears visible looking west from 7th Street. The staff recommends that the roof of the pilot house be slanted to minimize the visibility from this view. The staff also asks the applicant to clarify the location of the stair to the pilot house. The roof plan shows it set back from the east façade behind a skylight; however, elsewhere on the plans, it appears that the stair extends all the way to the front façade of the building. The application proposes to cut two new window openings at the third-story

the pilot house. The roof plan shows it set back from the east façade behind a skylight; however, elsewhere on the plans, it appears that the stair extends all the way to the front façade of the building. The application proposes to cut two new window openings at the third-story south or Lombard Street façade The staff recommends that the proportions of the new window openings more closely match those of the existing windows. The proposed new basement access is recessed from Lombard Street and will have minimal impact on the public’s understanding of the building. SCOPE OF WORK: • Construct roof deck and pilot house; • Cut two new window openings; • Create basement access. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include: • Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 16 o The deck railing is proposed in white vinyl, which is not a material that is compatible with the building or the historic district. Instead, the staff recommends a simple metal picket railing to satisfy Standard 9. o The proportions of the proposed window openings are not compatible with the existing windows on the same façade. To satisfy Standard 9, the staff recommends that they be revised to be more harmonious in size and scale with the existing fenestration. o Because the new basement access is set back at the end of the parking space, the staff contends that this change will be inconspicuous from the public right-of-way and therefore will not impact the public’s understanding of this building or the historic district. This scope satisfies Standard 9. • Roofs Guideline | Recommended: Designing rooftop additions, elevator or stair towers, decks or terraces, dormers, or skylights when required by a new or continuing use so that they are inconspicuous and minimally visible on the site and from the public right- of-way and do not damage or obscure character-defining historic features. o The railing appears to be minimally visible from the public right-of-way; however, it should be a simple metal picket

new or continuing use so that they are inconspicuous and minimally visible on the site and from the public right- of-way and do not damage or obscure character-defining historic features. o The railing appears to be minimally visible from the public right-of-way; however, it should be a simple metal picket rather than white vinyl. o As proposed, the pilot house appears to be highly visible from 7th Street. The staff recommends slanting the roof of the pilot house to minimize its visibility. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval, provided the deck railing is metal picket, the pilot house roof slants back, the stair to the pilot house is set back from the façade of the building, and the size and proportions of the new window openings are revised to be more harmonious with the existing windows, pursuant to Standard 9 and the Roofs Guideline. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend approval, provided that the pilot house roof is pitched in the direction of the stair the height of the pilot house is minimized; the pickets of the deck railing are black metal; the details of the new windows are compatible with the existing windows and align with the windows on the first floor; the cladding and coping at the pilot house is a neutral gray tone; with the staff to review details; pursuant to Standard 9 and the Roofs Guideline. ACTION: See Consent Agenda. ADDRESS: 316 DELANCEY ST Proposal: Construct one-story rear addition Review Requested: Review In Concept Owner: Elizabeth & Robert Legnini Applicant: Alex Rice, Archer & Buchanan Architecture History: 1969; R.M. Parsky, architect Individual Designation: None District Designation: Society Hill Historic District, Contributing, 3/10/1999 Staff Contact: Meredith Keller, meredith.keller@phila.gov OVERVIEW: The property at 316 Delancey Street is a two-and-one-half-story Georgian Revival building constructed in 1969 to relate to the adjacent eighteenth-century structures. It fronts Delancey Street, and the side of the building extends along Saint Peter’s Way. The building’s character-defining features include a pent eave, gambrel roof, and front and rear dormers. The property is classified as contributing in the Society Hill Historic District. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 17 This in-concept application proposes to construct an addition at the third story of the rear ell. The addition would not impact the existing chimney and would be set back from the Saint Peter’s Way elevation, but it would require the

MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 17 This in-concept application proposes to construct an addition at the third story of the rear ell. The addition would not impact the existing chimney and would be set back from the Saint Peter’s Way elevation, but it would require the demolition of the rear dormer and a significant portion of the lower slope of the gambrel roof. The addition would feature six-over-nine double- hung sash windows and Boral trim and clapboard siding. SCOPE OF WORK: • Demolish rear dormer and portion of rear gambrel roof; • Construct rear addition; • Alter Juliet balcony; and • Replace deteriorated wood trim with Boral trim. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include: • 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. o The application proposes to replicate deteriorated wood trim in Boral trim. Provided the new features replicate the historic in design, dimension, and profile, a substitute material may be appropriate and would comply with Standard 6. • Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. o The proposed addition would cause the loss of a large portion of the rear slope of the gambrel roof and the demolition of the rear dormer, both character-defining features of the property. The work does not comply with Standard 9. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Denial, pursuant to Standard 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Standard 9. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 01:15:20 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Keller presented the application to the Historical Commission. • Architect Alex Rice represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The building was constructed in 1969 as part of the Philadalphia Redevelopment Authority’s effort to revitalize Society Hill. The building is classified as a contributing resource in the Society

Architect Alex Rice represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The building was constructed in 1969 as part of the Philadalphia Redevelopment Authority’s effort to revitalize Society Hill. The building is classified as a contributing resource in the Society Hill Historic District. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 18 • The property is highly visible from the public right-of-way because it is adjacent to St. Peter’s Way. • The application has been revised to reduce the amount of demolition at the rear gambrel roof and to retain and incorporate most of the existing rear dormer window. The addition has also been reduced in size with a greater setback along St. Peter’s Way, and it will no longer wrap around the chimney. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The proposed Boral trim would replicate the appearance of the original wood trim and would be incorporated into the new construction at the addition. The work complies with Standard 6. • The revised addition appears as an enlarged dormer and is appropriate in massing, size, scale, and materials. The work satisfies Standard 9. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to approve the revised application in concept, pursuant to Standards 6 and 9. Mr. Mattioni seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. ITEM: 316 Delancey St MOTION: Approval in concept MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Mattioni VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Edwards X O’Donnell (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 12 1 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 19 ADDRESS: 133 BECK ST Proposal: Construct two-story rear addition with roof deck Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Jordan & Melanie Donaldson Applicant: Jared Melvin Blake, Level Nine Architects History: 1830 Individual Designation: 6/24/1958, 1/26/1965 District Designation: None Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application seeks final approval for a two-story rear addition with a roof deck at 133 Beck Street. The main block was constructed circa 1830. The one-story addition was constructed with concrete block and a stucco finish around the middle of the twentieth century. The property is located at the northeast corner of Beck Street and S. Hancock Street. The new

a roof deck at 133 Beck Street. The main block was constructed circa 1830. The one-story addition was constructed with concrete block and a stucco finish around the middle of the twentieth century. The property is located at the northeast corner of Beck Street and S. Hancock Street. The new addition would be visible from the public right-of-way. The scope of work includes the demolition of the one-story non-historic addition and the full rear wall of the main block. A new two-story addition with roof deck is proposed. It would be wood- frame construction with Hardie Board clapboard style siding. The proposed windows on the addition are double hung. SCOPE OF WORK: • Remove existing one-story rear addition. • Demolish rear wall of main block. • Construct new two-story addition and roof deck with foundation. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include: • Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. o The demolition of the rear main wall permanently removes a large amount of historic material and does not meet Standard 9. If the applicant can retain the rear wall, reuse its existing openings, utilizing selective demolition, instead of full demolition, the work will meet Standard 9. o The rear addition was constructed in the middle of the twentieth century more than one hundred years after the historic main block and is constructed of concrete block; therefore, the addition is not historically significant and its demolition meets Standard 9. o The proposed two-story addition is compatible in terms of massing, scale, and materials and generally meets Standard 9. • 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 will be unimpaired. o The full demolition of the rear wall would be a permanent alteration and therefore does not meet Standard 10. If the applicant can update reuse existing openings in the rear wall instead of full demolition, the proposal will meet Standard 10. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022

be unimpaired. o The full demolition of the rear wall would be a permanent alteration and therefore does not meet Standard 10. If the applicant can update reuse existing openings in the rear wall instead of full demolition, the proposal will meet Standard 10. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 20 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends approval of the proposed addition if the applicant can eliminate the full demolition of the rear wall, pursuant to Standards 9 and 10. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Standards 9 and 10. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 01:23:28 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Mehley presented the application to the Historical Commission. • Owner Jordan Donaldson and architect Jared Blake represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The application has been revised with the following changes: o The amount of demolition on the original rear wall has been reduced. o Details and notes have been added to plans and elevations to clarify the scope of work. o The addition’s cladding material has been changed to red brick. o The addition’s parapet has been lowered to just above the roof deck and includes a cast-stone cap. o A black metal railing has been added to perimeter of roof deck. o Windows have been added to the new addition on the street facing side. o The courtyard wall will be rebuilt with brick and a bluestone cap. • The revised application successfully addresses all of the comments and concerns of the Architectural Committee. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The proposed two-story addition is compatible in terms of massing, size, scale, materials, and architectural features. The new rear addition will reuse its existing openings, utilizing selective demolition, instead of full demolition, therefore the proposal meets Standard 9. • The existing rear addition was constructed in the middle of the twentieth century more than 100 years after the historic main block and is constructed of concrete block; therefore, the addition is not historically significant, and its demolition meets Standard 9. • The revised application has been updated to maintain most of the original rear wall and reuse existing openings on the second and third floors, therefore the proposal meets Standard 10. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to approve the revised application, with the staff

significant, and its demolition meets Standard 9. • The revised application has been updated to maintain most of the original rear wall and reuse existing openings on the second and third floors, therefore the proposal meets Standard 10. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to approve the revised application, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 9 and 10. Ms. Carney seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 21 ITEM: 133 Beck St MOTION: Approval of revised application MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Carney VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Edwards X O’Donnell (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 12 1 ADDRESS: 341 N FRONT ST Proposal: Construct three-story addition on three-story building Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: John Scorsone Applicant: Brett Harman, Harman Deutsch Ohler Architecture History: 2002 Individual Designation: None District Designation: Old City Historic District, Non-contributing, 12/12/2003 Staff Contact: Megan Cross Schmitt, megan.schmitt@phila.gov OVERVIEW: The property at 341 N. Front Street is a 3-story, 2-bay, brick, vernacular house constructed ca. 2002 and is classified as non-contributing in the Old City Historic District. The upper bays at the N. Front Street façade appear to be clad in vinyl siding. The ground-story of the rear (Water Street) façade is also brick and has a garage, with the upper floors clad in vinyl siding. A deck and railing are visible on the roof of the second story. This application proposes to construct a three-story addition on top of the existing building. The third story of the N. Front façade is proposed to be reconstructed and clad in a red brick veneer to match existing. Aluminum composite panels are proposed to clad the upper floors. At the rear (Water Street) façade, the floors of the addition are proposed to be clad in the same aluminum composite panels. Covered balconies are proposed at the top floors of both the N. Front and Water Street facades. Glass guardrails are proposed throughout. Aluminum-clad wood windows are also proposed throughout both facades. SCOPE OF WORK: • Construct three-story addition on a three-story building PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 22 STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s

Water Street facades. Glass guardrails are proposed throughout. Aluminum-clad wood windows are also proposed throughout both facades. SCOPE OF WORK: • Construct three-story addition on a three-story building PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 22 STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include: • Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. o Because this structure is not historic fabric, no historic material will be destroyed with its alteration, satisfying Standard 9. o Although the materials of the proposed addition are similar to the materials on other non-historic structures adjacent to the subject property, they are not compatible with the district as a whole. Moreover, the massing, size, and scale of the proposed addition are not compatible with the Old City Historic District. The proposed addition appears much taller that the surrounding buildings. For these reasons, the proposal does not satisfy Standard 9. • Standard 10: New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall 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. o There is no historic fabric to protect; therefore, the proposal satisfies Standard 10. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Denial, pursuant to Standard 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Standard 9. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 01:27:46 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Schmitt presented the application to the Historical Commission. • Architect Rustin Ohler represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The revised plans reflected several of the recommendations recommended by the Architectural Committee. • The top floor of the addition has been set back from both the front and rear facades, reducing the impact on the streetscape. • Although the use of metal railings is typically preferred, the applicant demonstrated that there are several other examples of glass guardrails in this immediate area within the historic district. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The setback of the top floor of the addition

the impact on the streetscape. • Although the use of metal railings is typically preferred, the applicant demonstrated that there are several other examples of glass guardrails in this immediate area within the historic district. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The setback of the top floor of the addition improved the scale of the overbuild, satisfying Standard 9. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to approve the revised plans, pursuant to Standard 9. Ms. Carney seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 23 ITEM: 341 N Front St MOTION: Approve revised application MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Carney VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Edwards X O’Donnell (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 12 1 CONTINUANCE REQUEST CHRISTIAN STREET HISTORIC DISTRICT Proposed Action: Continuance Request Property Owner: Various Nominator: Preservation Alliance Number of Properties: 154 Staff Contact: Kim Chantry, kim.chantry@phila.gov OVERVIEW: The Committee on Historic Designation is scheduled to review a nomination proposing the designation of the Christian Street Historic District at its 15 June 2022 meeting. The Historical Commission is scheduled to review the nomination with the Committee’s recommendation at its 8 July 2022 meeting. The nomination proposes to designate a historic district along the 1400 to 1900 blocks of Christian Street. The Historical Commission notified the 203 property owners within the proposed district of its reviews in writing on 7 April 2022. On 27 April 2022, the Historical Commission’s staff held an information session for owners within the proposed district. During the information session, a property owner inquired about delaying the reviews, owing to potential conflicts between the meetings and vacation schedules, and owing to a desire to have additional time to consider the implications of a designation. Following the information session, the property owner submitted a formal continuance request, asking the Historical Commission to delay the reviews to September and October 2022. To prevent demolitions around the proposed the Christian Street Historic District during the preparation of the nomination, City Council instituted a demolition moratorium in 2021. The moratorium is in effect until the Historical Commission completes its review of the nomination or 1 July 2022, whichever comes first. The scheduling of the review of the nomination was

the Christian Street Historic District during the preparation of the nomination, City Council instituted a demolition moratorium in 2021. The moratorium is in effect until the Historical Commission completes its review of the nomination or 1 July 2022, whichever comes first. The scheduling of the review of the nomination was designed to ensure that buildings in the proposed district were protected from demolition until the notice letters were sent. The moratorium is attached. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 24 Now that the Historical Commission has sent the notice letters, the provisions of the historic preservation ordinance apply to the properties within the proposed district. Section 14-1005(6)(f) of the preservation ordinance enumerates the Historical Commission’s jurisdiction over properties while considering nominations. The code provision gives the Historical Commission 90 days from the submission of any building permit application to conclude the review of a nomination and designate the resource, or the application is deemed approved. In other words, the Historical Commission has 90 days from the submission of any permit application to complete the designation of a district to be able to deny the application; if it does not complete the nomination review within 90 days, L&I may issue the permit without the Historical Commission’s review. Permits for inappropriate alterations and even demolition could be issued if the Historical Commission does not act in a timely manner. For example, if a demolition permit application were submitted on 13 May 2022, the Commission would have until about 13 August 2022, give or take a day, to complete the nomination review, designate the district, and deny the application, or the permit would be issued without the Commission’s review. If the final decision on the nomination is postponed to October, per the continuance request, buildings within the proposed district would be vulnerable to inappropriate alterations and demolitions for at least two months. One distinction is worth noting. When a property owner requests the continuance of the review of an individual nomination, that property owner is inherently waiving the right to a timely review and therefore the 90-day clock for permit applications is tolled. When a property owner within a proposed district requests the continuance of the review of district nomination, the property owner is waiving its rights but cannot waive the rights of other owners and therefore the 90-day clock for permit applications is not tolled.

90-day clock for permit applications is tolled. When a property owner within a proposed district requests the continuance of the review of district nomination, the property owner is waiving its rights but cannot waive the rights of other owners and therefore the 90-day clock for permit applications is not tolled. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: While the staff routinely strongly supports continuance requests when historic resources remain protected during the continuances, the staff recommends against granting this request because it will put historic resources at risk. Moreover, the request was proffered by one of 203 property owners in the proposed district and accommodating that one owner may inconvenience other owners. An owner who cannot attend a meeting may submit written comments in advance of the meeting. Finally, continuing the review at this point in the process may introduce confusion about the review schedule, given that all owners have already been notified of the original schedule. 14-1005(6)(f) Jurisdiction During Consideration of Designation. L&I shall not issue any building permit for the demolition, alteration, or construction of any building, structure, site, or object that is being considered by the Historical Commission for designation as historic or that is located within a district being considered by the Historical Commission for designation as historic where the building permit application is filed on or after the date that notices of proposed designation have been mailed, except that L&I may issue a building permit if the Historical Commission has approved the application or has not taken final action on designation and more than 90 days have elapsed from the date the permit application was filed with the Historical Commission. Where the Historical Commission takes final action on designation within the time allotted herein, any building permit application on file with L&I shall be deemed to have been filed after the date of the Historical Commission’s action for purposes of this Chapter 14-1000. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 01:50:00 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 25 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Chantry presented the continuance request to the Historical Commission. • Mohammed Irfan Shariff represented the property owner making the continuance request. Colin Hunsberger represented a property owner who supported the continuance. Linda Evans represented a property owner who opposed the continuance. • Patrick Grossi, representing the Preservation Alliance, the nominator, opposed the continuance for the reasons provided in the staff overview and

Shariff represented the property owner making the continuance request. Colin Hunsberger represented a property owner who supported the continuance. Linda Evans represented a property owner who opposed the continuance. • Patrick Grossi, representing the Preservation Alliance, the nominator, opposed the continuance for the reasons provided in the staff overview and recommendation. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Hal Schirmer offered comments about designation. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The request was proffered by one of 203 property owners in the proposed district. • It routinely supports continuance requests when historic resources remain protected during the continuances; however, this request will put historic resources at risk for the reasons provided in the staff overview and recommendation. • A property owner who cannot attend a meeting may submit written comments in advance of the meeting. • The staff of the Historical Commission is available to answer questions from property owners and provide education ahead of the upcoming public meetings. The Historical Commission concluded that: • If the final decision on the nomination is postponed to October, per the continuance request, buildings within the proposed district would be vulnerable to inappropriate alterations and demolitions for at least two months. The Historical Commission has a responsibility to protect historic resources when possible. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to deny the continuance request. Mr. O’Donnell seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 26 ITEM: Christian Street Historic District MOTION: Denial of continuance MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: O’Donnell VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X O’Donnell (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 10 3 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 20 APRIL 2022 ADDRESS: 5626 MORTON ST Name of Resource: Sun Ra House Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Le Sony'R Ra Nominator: Historical Commission staff Staff Contact: Jon Farnham, jon.farnham@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 5626 Morton Street, known as the Arkestral Institute of Sun Ra, in Germantown. The nomination contends that the property satisfies Criterion for Designation A as delineated in Section 14-1004(1) of the Philadelphia Code; it “is associated with the life of a person significant in the past,” Sun Ra, who was a poet, author, composer,

as the Arkestral Institute of Sun Ra, in Germantown. The nomination contends that the property satisfies Criterion for Designation A as delineated in Section 14-1004(1) of the Philadelphia Code; it “is associated with the life of a person significant in the past,” Sun Ra, who was a poet, author, composer, actor, philosopher, mystic, founder of the Afrofuturism movement, and one of the most influential jazz musicians of the twentieth century. He and some of his band members lived and rehearsed in the house from 1968 to his death in 1993 and some band members continue to live and play at the rowhouse in 2022. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the property at 5626 Morton Street satisfies Criterion for Designation A as delineated in Section 14-1004(1) of the Philadelphia Code; it “is associated with the life of a person significant in the past,” Sun Ra, and should be listed individually on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 5626 Morton Street satisfies Criterion for Designation A because it is associated with the life of a person significant in the past, Sun Ra. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 27 START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 02:35:30 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Farnham presented the nomination to the Historical Commission. • No one represented the property owner. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Rhonda Lancaster stated that she lives in Germantown and is in the music industry. She stated that it is important for Philadelphia to preserve its musical heritage. She stated that the Historical Commission should designate Sun Ra’s House. • Oscar Beisert supported the nomination. • Jim Duffin commented on the rich history of Germantown and supported the nomination. • Mary McNatt stated that she attended a Sun Ra show with her grandfather when she was young and supports the nomination. She stated that she was very glad to attend today’s meeting to witness the designation of this important site. • Hal Schirmer supported the nomination. • Allison Weiss supported the nomination. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • Sun Ra was a poet, author, composer, actor, philosopher, mystic, founder of the Afrofuturism movement, and one of the most influential jazz musicians of the twentieth century. • Sun Ra and some of

• Allison Weiss supported the nomination. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • Sun Ra was a poet, author, composer, actor, philosopher, mystic, founder of the Afrofuturism movement, and one of the most influential jazz musicians of the twentieth century. • Sun Ra and some of his band members lived and rehearsed in the house from 1968 to his death in 1993. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The property at 5626 Morton Street satisfies Criterion for Designation A; the property is associated with the life of a person significant in the past, Sun Ra. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 5626 Morton Street satisfies Criterion for Designation A, and to designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Edwards seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 28 ITEM: 5626 Morton St MOTION: Designate, Criterion A MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Edwards VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Edwards X O’Donnell (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 12 1 ADDRESS: 1613 TO 1627 W NORRIS ST AND 1610 TO 1616 PAGE ST Name of Resource: Parking lot Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Philadelphia Land Bank Nominator: Mary McNatt Staff Contact: Meredith Keller, meredith.keller@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate a parking lot at 1613 to 1627 W. Norris Street and 1610 to 1616 Page Street in North Philadelphia. The parking lot is paved with asphalt and has low concrete walls along W. Norris Street. The nomination contends that the parking lot satisfies Criteria for Designation A, B, G, and H, which are enumerated as follows in Section 14- 1004 of the historic preservation ordinance. (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; (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;

of a person significant in the past; (B) Is associated with an event of importance to the history of the City, Commonwealth or Nation; (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; The nomination provides some background on the parking lot and explains why current access to parking is important for neighborhood residents. The nomination does not provide specific arguments regarding the historical significance of the parking lot or the satisfaction of the Criteria for Designation, except to check the boxes on the nomination form. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 29 According to a document in the Department of Licenses and Inspections Zoning Archive, the parking lot was constructed in 1964 or 1965. The City of Philadelphia was issued a zoning permit to demolish the rowhouses at 1613 to 1627 W. Norris Street and 1610 to 1616 Page Street and construct a “City-owned public parking lot” on October 6, 1964. The rowhouses that were demolished dated to 1873. They were constructed by Thomas S. Shoemaker, the “largest homebuilder at the time of the Centennial.” Shoemaker built hundreds of similar rowhouses in North Philadelphia in the second half of the nineteenth century. The parking lot was constructed for the public school to the south, across Norris Street, now called the Carver Science and Engineering. Originally called the George Washington Carver School, the school building was a replacement for the nearby, outdated James L. Claghorn School, was designed by architects Baader, Young and Schlutze, who specialized in school buildings, and opened in September 1949. The school was erected on the site of the former Baptist Home for Aged and Poor. The nomination contends that the parking lot is located on land that was once part of Monument Cemetery. That is untrue. Monument Cemetery was located to the southeast of the parking lot. The shortest distance from the parking lot to the former cemetery boundary is approximately 135 feet. The land where the parking lot is located was historically separated from the cemetery by Turner’s Lane, which no longer exists, and by Norris Street, originally called Franklin Avenue. The parking lot is currently held

shortest distance from the parking lot to the former cemetery boundary is approximately 135 feet. The land where the parking lot is located was historically separated from the cemetery by Turner’s Lane, which no longer exists, and by Norris Street, originally called Franklin Avenue. The parking lot is currently held by the Philadelphia Land Bank, part of the Philadelphia Housing Development Corporation, a quasi-City agency. The Land Bank holds vacant land and ensures that the land is repurposed in ways that benefit the public. The Page Street section of the parking lot has been slated for redevelopment as low and moderate-income housing by Habitat for Humanity. Zoning permits ZP-2021-009229, 009245, 009247, and 009249 and building permits RP-2021-014883, 015076, and 015075 have been issued for the project and are not subject to the Historical Commission’s review. The remainder of the land will be redeveloped to benefit the public at a future date. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination fails to demonstrate that the parking lot at 1613 to 1627 W. Norris Street and 1610 to 1616 Page Street satisfies any Criteria for Designation and that the parking lot should not be designated as historic. The staff notes that a large section of the parking lot is already committed for redevelopment as low- income housing and the permits for that redevelopment are not reviewable by the Historical Commission. While parking may be at a premium in this neighborhood, the Historical Commission must limit the use of its regulatory authority to preserving truly historic resources. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination fails to demonstrate that the properties at 1613 to 1627 W. Norris Street and 1610 to 1616 Page Street satisfy any Criteria for Designation. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 02:43:35 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Keller presented the nomination to the Historical Commission. • Mary McNatt represented the nomination. • Angel Rodriguez, Executive Director of the Philadelphia Land Bank and Deputy Executive Director of the Philadelphia Redevelopment Authority, and Corinne O’Connell, CEO of Habitat for Humanity Philadelphia, represented the property owner and opposed designation. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 30 PUBLIC COMMENT: • Oscar Beisert of the Keeping Society thanked the staff for processing the nomination but stated that the properties are not historically significant. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical

owner and opposed designation. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 30 PUBLIC COMMENT: • Oscar Beisert of the Keeping Society thanked the staff for processing the nomination but stated that the properties are not historically significant. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The nomination contends that the parking lot satisfies Criteria for Designation A, B, G, and H, but provides no argument for those Criteria. • Building permits have been issued for the properties at 1610, 1612, and 1614 Page Street, and Habitat for Humanity plans to construct three townhouses for income- qualifying individuals. The Historical Commission has no review authority over the permits. • The remaining properties will be redeveloped in the future. • The properties are not currently zoned or licensed as a parking lot. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The nomination fails to demonstrate that the properties have significant character, interest of value as part of the development, heritage, or cultural characteristics of the City, Commonwealth, or nation or that they are associated with the life of a person significant in the past. The nomination does not satisfy Criterion A. • The nomination fails to demonstrate that the properties are associated with an event of importance to the history of the City, Commonwealth or Nation. The nomination does not satisfy Criterion B. • The nomination fails to demonstrate that the properties are part of or related to a square, park, or other distinctive area that should be preserved according to a historic, cultural, or architectural motif. The nomination does not satisfy Criterion G. • The nomination fails to demonstrate that the properties represent an established and familiar visual feature of the neighborhood, community, or City, owing to a unique location or singular physical characteristic. The nomination does not satisfy Criterion H. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination fails to demonstrate that the properties at 1613 to 1627 W. Norris Street and 1610 to 1616 Page Street satisfy any Criteria for Designation. Mr. Mattioni seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 31 ITEM: 1613 to 1627 W. Norris St and 1610 to 1616 Page St MOTION: Decline to designate MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Mattioni VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X

PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 31 ITEM: 1613 to 1627 W. Norris St and 1610 to 1616 Page St MOTION: Decline to designate MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Mattioni VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Edwards X O’Donnell (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 12 1 ADDRESS: 1400 BLOCK OF RODMAN ST Name of Resource: Historic Street Paving Thematic District Proposed Action: Amendment Property Owner: Schuylkill Park, owner; Naudain South Associates, LLC, equitable owner Applicant: David Smith, Esq., Schnader, Attorneys at Law Staff Contact: Jon Farnham, jon.farnham@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application proposes to remove a dead-end alley from the Historic Street Paving Thematic District. The alley is referred to as the 1400 block of Rodman Street in the district inventory, but that name is misleading because it has never been a public street. It is a private alley. The application argues that the alley should not have been included in the district because it is not a public right-of-way and because the paving itself has very low integrity. In 1998, the Historical Commission designated the Historic Street Paving Thematic District, a collection of several hundred blocks of streets in the city that retain their historic street paving materials. The designation covers the cartway itself, but not the curbs or sidewalks. The historic preservation ordinance authorizes the Historical Commission to review building permit applications issued by the Department of Licenses & Inspections, but not streets permits for work within the right-of-way, which are issued by the Streets Department of the City of Philadelphia. Therefore, the Historical Commission acts in an advisory capacity regarding the historic streets under the auspices of the Streets Department, providing advice to the department about the appropriateness of alterations to historic cartways. Per an informal agreement, the Streets Department consults with the Historical Commission whenever it undertakes work to historic streets or reviews applications from third parties for work to historic streets. Nearly all of the paving in the historic district is in the right-of-way and most of it is within the Street Department’s portfolio, but some is controlled by PennDOT as well as SEPTA, which maintains some paving around trolley tracks in the right-of-way. PennDOT and SEPTA have opted not to seek the

of the paving in the historic district is in the right-of-way and most of it is within the Street Department’s portfolio, but some is controlled by PennDOT as well as SEPTA, which maintains some paving around trolley tracks in the right-of-way. PennDOT and SEPTA have opted not to seek the Historical Commission’s advice, and therefore the paving in the historic PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 32 district under the control of those agencies is not regulated by the Historical Commission. In addition to the paving in the right-of-way, the Historical Commission included a small number of other paved areas in the historic district. It included the unit and 100 blocks of S. Orianna Street, the 300 block of Sansom Street, and the 400 block of St. James Place, all of which are walkways within Independence National Historical Park (INHP). The Historical Commission has no authority to regulate property owned by the federal government, so it has not reviewed applications for the paving at INHP. The Historical Commission also explicitly included three sections of privately owned paving, Bladen’s Court, a dead-end street off Elfreth’s Alley; Littleboy’s Way, which runs between Cuthbert and Arch Streets in Old City; and the paved common area at the English Village, on line with the 2100 block of St. James Street. In all three cases, the properties with historic street paving are also designated as historic. The paving is protected, even without the paving district, because the paving is considered appurtenances to the otherwise designated properties. When the Historical Commission considered the nomination for the Historic Street Paving Thematic District, it sent the standard notice letters to the Streets Department, PennDOT, SEPTA, INHP, and the owners at Bladen’s Court, Littleboy’s Way, and the English Village. However, it appears that the Historical Commission was unaware that other street paving included within the historic district was located on private property and therefore failed to notify the owners of that paving of the proposed designation, including in the case of the so-called 1400 block of Rodman Street. The paving on the alley in question, the so-called 1400 block of Rodman Street, is not now and never has been on the City Plan, the official record of public streets. It is not a public right-of- way. It is privately owned and has been since it was laid out in 1869 to provide

alley in question, the so-called 1400 block of Rodman Street, is not now and never has been on the City Plan, the official record of public streets. It is not a public right-of- way. It is privately owned and has been since it was laid out in 1869 to provide access to the rears of buildings along South and Naudain Streets (See Deed JTO-203-516+). The buildings that backed up to the alley have been demolished and the parcels have been consolidated into one large parcel, 1441-49 South Street, which spans the alley. The property at 1441-49 South Street is a surface parking lot that is not designated as historic. The Historical Commission did not notify the property owner of the parking lot of the consideration or designation of the historic paving district. The Commission’s failure to notify can be attributed to its incorrect assumption that the alley was within the right-of-way and managed by the Streets Department. The alley in question is about 170 feet long, running east from S. 15th Street and ending at a fence. The alley is currently used for parking. The condition of the street paving at the alley is very poor. Historic paving materials are missing in many places and the alley has been patched and repatched with asphalt many times and is indistinguishable from the surface parking lot in many areas. Building permit applications for the surface parking lot are not currently subject to the Historical Commission’s review because the parking lot property is not designated as historic in its own right and the fact that the alley is not a public street was unknown to the Historical Commission until this application was submitted. The Historical Commission has amended the Historic Street Paving Thematic District three times, in 1999, 2014, and 2016, to add blocks overlooked initially and to remove blocks of low integrity. In 2013, the Streets Department retained a consultant to inspect the historic paving under its auspices and develop a prioritized list for repair with suggestions for additions to and removals from the district, which the Historical Commission adopted in 2014. The Historical Commission removed several blocks of street paving in the right-of-way from the district at that time because their integrity was low and condition poor, making restoration expensive and therefore unlikely. Section 5.14.a of the Historical Commission’s Rules & Regulations governs amendments to historic districts. While not precisely on

The Historical Commission removed several blocks of street paving in the right-of-way from the district at that time because their integrity was low and condition poor, making restoration expensive and therefore unlikely. Section 5.14.a of the Historical Commission’s Rules & Regulations governs amendments to historic districts. While not precisely on point, Section 5.14.b governs rescissions of individually PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 33 designated resources as well as entire historic districts and may be applicable. Pursuant to Section 5.14.b.1, the Historical Commission may rescind a designation when one or more of these conditions apply: the historic qualities of the resource have been lost or destroyed; additional information shows that the resource does not qualify for designation; and the Historical Commission committed an error when it initially designated the resource. In this case, all three conditions apply. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends amending the Historic Street Paving Thematic District by removing the private alley incorrectly known as the 1400 block of Rodman Street, pursuant to Section 5.14 of the Rules & Regulations. New information shows that the alley should not have been included in the historic district; it is not a public right-of-way. The Historical Commission committed an error when it initially included the alley in the district; it failed to understand that the alley is not a public right-of-way and it failed to notify the property owner of the proposed designation. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the entry for the 1400 block of Rodman Street should be removed from the inventory of the Historic Street Paving Thematic District. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 02:59:20 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Farnham presented the application to the Historical Commission. • Attorney David Smith and preservation consultant Nick Kraus represented the property owner. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Paul Steinke of the Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia stated that his organization is not opposed to removing this alley from the Historic Street Paving Thematic District. He suggested that the developer remove the granite block and donate them to the City’s Streets Department. • Oscar Beisert stated that he has no comment on the merits of the proposal. He then asked a question about a hypothetical situation, which Mr. Thomas addressed. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • New information shows that the alley is

the City’s Streets Department. • Oscar Beisert stated that he has no comment on the merits of the proposal. He then asked a question about a hypothetical situation, which Mr. Thomas addressed. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • New information shows that the alley is not a public right-of-way. • The Historical Commission committed an error when it initially included the alley in the district; it mistook the alley for a public right-of-way and it failed to notify the property owner of the proposed designation. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The 1400 block of Rodman Street should be removed from the inventory of the Historic Street Paving Thematic District. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to amend the Historic Street Paving Thematic District by removing the entry for the 1400 block of Rodman Street, pursuant to Section 5.14 of the Rules & Regulations. Mr. McCoubrey seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 34 ITEM: 1400 Block of Rodman St MOTION: Remove entry for 1400 block of Rodman Street MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: McCoubrey VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Edwards X O’Donnell (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 12 1 ADDRESS: 3475 COLLINS ST Name of Resource: Tioga Mills Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Vu Read Center LLC; Land Lapper, Inc.; Kevin Konieczny; Tioga-Collins Street Associates Nominator: Kevin McMahon, Powers & Co. Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate 3475 Collins Street, historically known as Tioga Mills, and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination argues that Tioga Mills was a major producer of cotton yarns for Philadelphia’s vast hosiery industry during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries and therefore satisfies Criteria for Designation A and J. The company survived changes in the industry by successfully transitioning to producing specialized yarns in the early twentieth century as the cotton hosiery industry declined. The mill complex includes five contributing buildings constructed between 1886 and 1919 by the owner Thomas Henry & Sons. The Period of Significance begins in 1886, when the first mill building was completed, and ends in 1926, when the owner sold the building and

as the cotton hosiery industry declined. The mill complex includes five contributing buildings constructed between 1886 and 1919 by the owner Thomas Henry & Sons. The Period of Significance begins in 1886, when the first mill building was completed, and ends in 1926, when the owner sold the building and relocated the company to Nashville, Tennessee. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 3475 Collins Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A and J. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 3475 Collins Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A and J. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 03:16:52 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 35 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Mehley presented the nomination to the Historical Commission. • Kevin McMahon represented the nomination and one of the property owners. • No other property owners were present. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • Although the Tioga Mills complex has undergone some change and demolition, it represents a rare example of a largely intact manufacturing complex constructed in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. • The nomination presents successful arguments for designation. • The property is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The Historical Commission reviewed and commented on the National Register nomination in early 2021. The Historical Commission concluded that: • Tioga Mills was a major producer of cotton yarns for Philadelphia’s vast hosiery industry during the late-nineteenth and early-twentieth centuries, when the city was the world’s greatest textile center. Important from its start in 1886, the mill was also significant later, after about 1910, as an example of an operation that successfully transitioned to new product lines, after the cotton hosiery industry began to decline, satisfying Criterion A. • In the late nineteenth century, the textile industry in Philadelphia was located in Kensington and the adjacent communities of Port Richmond and Harrowgate. Technological developments in the nineteenth century prompted a shift from production in the home to production in large, purpose-built factories such as Tioga Mills in the Harrowgate community, satisfying Criterion J. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 3475 Collins Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A and J, and to designate it as

production in the home to production in large, purpose-built factories such as Tioga Mills in the Harrowgate community, satisfying Criterion J. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 3475 Collins Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A and J, and to designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Carney seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 36 ITEM: 3475 Collins St MOTION: Designate, Criteria A and J MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Carney VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Edwards X O’Donnell (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 12 1 ADDRESS: 1424-26 CHESTNUT ST Name of Resource: Jacob Reed's Sons' Store, Main Sales Floor Proposed Action: Interior Designation Property Owner: Sunny Spring LLC Nominator: Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the first-floor interior of 1424-26 Chestnut Street historically known as the Main Sales Floor of the Jacob Reed’s Sons’ Store, and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The exterior of the building has been designated since 1966, when it was added to the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination argues under Criterion E that the Main Sales Floor of the Jacob Reed’s Sons’ Store is the primary public interior space in this landmark building designed by prominent Philadelphia architect William L. Price for Alan H. Reed, successor to one of the leading menswear merchants of the nineteenth century in Philadelphia. Under Criteria C and D, the nomination contends that the store, constructed between 1904 and 1905, was the first commercial building in Philadelphia constructed of reinforced concrete, a structural system which is most expressed by the public interior space of the Main Sales Floor. The Main Sales Floor is also the only major Arts and Crafts-style commercial interior in Philadelphia, serving as a significant early example of Price’s influential ideas on the appropriate expression of materials, structure, and labor. Finally, under Criterion F, the nomination asserts that the interior space features craftsmanship and artistry in the form of tilework from Henry Chapman Mercer’s Moravian Pottery and murals by local artist Gertrude Monaghan, which

significant early example of Price’s influential ideas on the appropriate expression of materials, structure, and labor. Finally, under Criterion F, the nomination asserts that the interior space features craftsmanship and artistry in the form of tilework from Henry Chapman Mercer’s Moravian Pottery and murals by local artist Gertrude Monaghan, which reflect Price’s thinking on architecture and its relationship with ornamentation. This Main Sales Floor maintains a high degree of architectural integrity and has undergone few major alterations since its completion in 1905. The proposed period of significance is 1905 to PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 37 1983. This date span reflects the period it was operated as a men’s clothier by Jacob Reed’s Sons’. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the interior main floor of 1424-26 Chestnut Street satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, E and F. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the interior main floor, historically known as the Main Sales Floor, of 1424-26 Chestnut Street satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, E and F. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 03:20:40 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Mehley presented the nomination to the Historical Commission. • Patrick Grossi and Kevin McMahon represented the nomination. • No one represented the property owner. PUBLIC COMMENT: • David Traub of Save Our Sites supported the nomination. • Jim Duffin supported the nomination. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The Main Sale Floor interior space is one of the most important interiors of this period in Philadelphia. • If designated, this interior would only be the fifth interior designated space listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places and the second privately owned commercial space. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The Main Sales Floor of the building at 1424-26 Chestnut Street is the only major Arts and Crafts-style commercial interior in Philadelphia, satisfying Criterion C. • Constructed in 1904 and 1905, the building was the first commercial building in Philadelphia constructed of reinforced concrete, a structural system which is most expressed by the public interior space of the Main Sales Floor, satisfying Criterion D. • The building with its Main Sales Floor was designed by prominent Philadelphia architect William L. Price. It is a significant early example of Price’s influential ideas on the

concrete, a structural system which is most expressed by the public interior space of the Main Sales Floor, satisfying Criterion D. • The building with its Main Sales Floor was designed by prominent Philadelphia architect William L. Price. It is a significant early example of Price’s influential ideas on the appropriate expression of materials, structure, and labor, satisfying Criterion E. • The Main Sales Floor features craftsmanship and artistry in the form of tilework from Henry Chapman Mercer’s Moravian Pottery and murals by local artist Gertrude Monaghan, satisfying Criterion F. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the interior main floor, historically known as the Main Sales Floor, at 1424-26 Chestnut Street satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, E, and F and to designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Mr. Mattioni seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 38 ITEM: 1424-26 Chestnut St MOTION: Designate, Criteria for Designation C, D, E, F MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Mattioni VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Edwards X O’Donnell (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 12 1 ADDRESS: 5008-10 GERMANTOWN AVE Name of Resource: The Reser-Royal House Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Nai Liang Li Nominator: Keeping Society Staff Contact: Megan Cross Schmitt; megan.schmitt@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 5008-10 Germantown Avenue, known as the Reser-Royal House, as historic and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination argues that the Reser-Royal House is an important structure and represents the development and heritage of Germantown from the construction of the house around 1727 until the closure of a fruit market in the house in 1969, satisfying Criterion A. The nomination notes that, while suffering from neglect and insensitive alterations, the structure continues to exemplify the basic form and features of early Germantown houses. The nomination also claims that the house exemplifies the commercial, economic, political, and social heritage of Germantown Avenue and Germantown as the area evolved from a village to a residential suburb to a dense residential neighborhood, satisfying Criterion J. Finally, the nomination contends that the house exemplifies the American institution of

nomination also claims that the house exemplifies the commercial, economic, political, and social heritage of Germantown Avenue and Germantown as the area evolved from a village to a residential suburb to a dense residential neighborhood, satisfying Criterion J. Finally, the nomination contends that the house exemplifies the American institution of human chattel slavery during the colonial period, satisfying Criterion J. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 5008-10 Germantown Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation A and J. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 5008-10 Germantown Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation A, I and J. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 03:27:43 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 39 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Schmitt presented the nomination to the Historical Commission. • Oscar Beisert represented the nomination. • No one represented the property owner. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Jim Duffin supported the nomination. • Steven Peitzman supported the nomination on behalf of the East Falls Historical Society. • Allison Weiss supported the nomination on behalf of SoLo Germantown Civic Association. • Rhonda Lancaster supported the nomination. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The house, located on Germantown Avenue close to the corner of what is now W. Seymour Street, was constructed in the 1740s, and possibly earlier. • Documentation shows that the house was occupied by enslaved people and indentured servants The Historical Commission concluded that: • The Reser-Royal House is an important structure and represents the development and heritage of Germantown from the construction of the house around 1727 until the closure of a fruit market in the house in 1969, satisfying Criterion A. • The house exemplifies the commercial, economic, political, and social heritage of Germantown Avenue and Germantown as the area evolved from a village to a residential suburb to a dense residential neighborhood, satisfying Criterion J. • The house also exemplifies the American institution of human chattel slavery as well as indentured servitude during the colonial period, satisfying Criterion J. • Because of the important role archaeology can play in documenting the lives of enslaved people and indentured workers, Criterion I applies to this nomination. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 5008-10 Germantown Avenue satisfies Criteria for

colonial period, satisfying Criterion J. • Because of the important role archaeology can play in documenting the lives of enslaved people and indentured workers, Criterion I applies to this nomination. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 5008-10 Germantown Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation A, I and J, and to designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Carney seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 40 ITEM: 5008-10 Germantown Ave MOTION: Designate, Criteria A, I and J MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Carney VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Edwards X O’Donnell (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 12 1 VICTORIAN ROXBOROUGH HISTORIC DISTRICT Proposed Action: Designation Nominator: Central Roxborough Civic Association Number of Properties: 343 Staff Contact: Laura Dipasquale, laura.dipasquale@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate a historic district that consists of 343 properties in three geographic clusters in Central Roxborough. The nomination contends that the Victorian Roxborough Historic District is significant under Criteria for Designation C, D, and J. The period of significance begins in 1830, the approximate beginning of the Victorian era broadly and Roxborough’s suburbanization specifically. Satisfying Criterion J, the nomination covers a pivotal century in Roxborough’s development, ending in 1930 with the construction of the Henry Avenue bridge over the Wissahickon Creek, which initiated a new wave of development in the community. Satisfying Criteria C and D, the primarily two and three-story detached and semidetached residential buildings, as well as handful of mixed-use, religious, and institutional buildings embody distinguishing characteristics of a variety of architectural styles found during the Victorian period. These include Gothic Revival, Italianate, Second Empire and Queen Anne, as well as late-nineteenth and early-twentieth century revival styles including Colonial Revival, Tudor Revival, Dutch Colonial, and American Four Square. The district, which is bisected by the historic Ridge Avenue corridor, is composed of sections of the neighborhood that best reflect the historical and architectural significance of the community. This nomination is a direct result of the Victorian Roxborough Demolition Moratorium, which was passed by City Council in late 2021 and became law in January 2022. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff

corridor, is composed of sections of the neighborhood that best reflect the historical and architectural significance of the community. This nomination is a direct result of the Victorian Roxborough Demolition Moratorium, which was passed by City Council in late 2021 and became law in January 2022. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the Victorian Roxborough Historic District satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, and J. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 41 COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the proposed Victorian Roxborough Historic District satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, and J. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 04:02:25 PRESENTERS: • Ms. DiPasquale presented the nomination to the Historical Commission. • Celeste Hardester of the Central Roxborough Civic Association represented the nomination. • Several property owners were in attendance. o George McClennen, representing Leverington Church at 6301 Ridge Avenue, opposed designation. o Margaret Ann Morris, owner of 531 Hermitage Street, supported designation. o Alexander Fidrych, owner of 544 Hermitage Street, supported designation. o Julia Heberle, owner of 323 and 325 Green Lane, supported designation. o Mike Simone, owner of 419 Martin Street, supported designation, but requested that the rear of his property be excluded from the district boundary. o Dan Herrman, owner of 608 Leverington Avenue, supported designation. o Kay Sykora, owner of 445 Green Lane, supported designation. PUBLIC COMMENT: • David Traub of Save Our Sites supported the nomination. • Paul Steinke of the Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia supported the nomination. • Hal Schirmer supported the nomination HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The proposed historic district consists of 343 properties in three geographic clusters in Central Roxborough. • The period of significance begins in 1830 and ends in 1930. • All three sections or clusters of the proposed district contain buildings of a variety of styles and periods, which is characteristic of the overall district. • The property at 419 Martin Street is a long, narrow parcel that extends through to Monastery Avenue, beyond the depth of the adjacent parcels and is on the boundary of the district. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The nomination demonstrates that the district represents a pivotal century in Roxborough’s development, satisfying Criterion J. • The primarily two and three-story detached and

extends through to Monastery Avenue, beyond the depth of the adjacent parcels and is on the boundary of the district. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The nomination demonstrates that the district represents a pivotal century in Roxborough’s development, satisfying Criterion J. • The primarily two and three-story detached and semi-detached buildings, as well as handful of mixed-use, religious, and institutional buildings embody distinguishing characteristics of a variety of architectural styles found during the Victorian period, including the Gothic Revival, Italianate, Second Empire and Queen Anne, as well as late-nineteenth and early-twentieth century revival styles including Colonial Revival, Tudor Revival, Dutch Colonial, and American Four Square, satisfying Criteria C and D. • The rear half of 419 Martin Street fronting on Monastery Avenue, does not contain any historic features and is not a character-defining feature of the property, and PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 42 therefore can be excluded from the district without compromising the integrity of the district. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the Victorian Roxborough Historic District satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, and J, and to designate the district as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places, with the district boundary amended to exclude the rear Parcel B of 419 Martin Street. Ms. Carney seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. ITEM: Victorian Roxborough Historic District MOTION: Designate, Criteria C, D, J MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Carney VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Edwards X O’Donnell (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 12 1 CONTINUANCE REQUEST ADDRESS: 305 N FRONT ST Proposal: Renovate building; rebuild facades; add deck and pilot house Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: 305 Front Street Land Trust Applicant: Ben Estepani, PACE Architecture + Design History: 1845; Glass block infill added Individual Designation: None District Designation: Old City Historic District, Contributing, 12/12/2003 Staff Contact: Megan Cross Schmitt, megan.schmitt@phila.gov OVERVIEW: The property at 305 N. Front Street is a four-story, three-bay, painted brick, vernacular building constructed ca. 1845, and is considered a contributing structure within the Old City Historic District. The rear (east) elevation faces N. Water Street and has five stories with a garage door at the first floor

The property at 305 N. Front Street is a four-story, three-bay, painted brick, vernacular building constructed ca. 1845, and is considered a contributing structure within the Old City Historic District. The rear (east) elevation faces N. Water Street and has five stories with a garage door at the first floor and three bays of glass-block-infilled windows at stories two through five. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 43 The Architectural Committee reviewed an earlier version of this project. After the January 2022 Architectural Committee meeting, the applicant withdrew an application. The applicant now presents revised plans and a report from a structural engineer assessing the deteriorated conditions of the building. The applicant proposes to remove and reconstruct the existing brick from the front and rear facades. At the N. Front Street façade, the applicant proposes to clad the first story in cast stone and clad stories two through four in a red brick veneer to match existing. The first story of the N. Water Street façade proposes a new garage door with cast-stone surround, with floors two through five clad in a red brick veneer to match existing. The applicant now proposes a fenestration pattern at the N. Front Street façade that appears to replicate the locations of the original windows. Casement windows are proposed using a simulated divided lite pattern that attempts to approximate a six-over-six, double-hung window, the original window type. Sills and headers would be limestone. At the N. Water Street elevation, the fenestration pattern is altered from the historic pattern. At stories two through five, balconies with double-doors are proposed at the middle bay, which are flanked by casement windows like the ones proposed for the front. A new garage door with a cast stone surround is proposed at the ground story. A roof deck and pilot house are proposed with six-foot setbacks from both the east and west facades. The pilot house is located at the south side of the building and would be clad in siding. SCOPE OF WORK: • Remove and reconstruct brick facades at front and rear; • Construct roof deck and pilot house. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include: • Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work

and rear; • Construct roof deck and pilot house. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include: • Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. o The extent of the historic brick that is proposed for demolition does not satisfy Standard 9. o Any historic storefront material that exists beneath the altered N. Front Street façade should be preserved and restored. o The proposed reconstruction does not reflect existing physical and archival evidence of the building’s historic conditions. Given the availability of such evidence, the proposed reconstruction should more closely reflect the historic facades in terms of fenestration, window type, and façade materials. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Denial, pursuant to Standard 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Standard 9. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 04:35:58 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 44 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Farnham presented the continuance request. • No one represented the property owner. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. ACTION: Mr. Thomas moved to continue the review of the application to the June 2022 meeting of the Historical Commission. Mr. McCoubrey seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. ITEM: 305 N Front St MOTION: Continue to June 2022 PHC meeting MOVED BY: Thomas SECONDED BY: McCoubrey VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X O’Donnell (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 12 1 OLD BUSINESS 4200-30 CHESTER AVENUE HISTORIC DISTRICT Proposed Action: Designation Nominator: University City Historical Society Number of Properties: 16 Staff Contact: Kim Chantry, kim.chantry@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate a small historic district comprised of 16 properties on the south side of the 4200 block of Chester Avenue in the Spruce Hill neighborhood of West Philadelphia. The district’s inventory classifies all sixteen properties as contributing to the historic district; however, several of the properties have substantial non- historic additions which the inventory calls out as non-contributing. The nomination argues

south side of the 4200 block of Chester Avenue in the Spruce Hill neighborhood of West Philadelphia. The district’s inventory classifies all sixteen properties as contributing to the historic district; however, several of the properties have substantial non- historic additions which the inventory calls out as non-contributing. The nomination argues that the district satisfies Criteria for Designation A, C, D, and J. Under Criteria A and J, the nomination states that the eight sets of twins have significant character, interest, and value as PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 45 part of the development of the neighborhood, being among the earliest block development projects of its kind for middle class residents in the emerging suburb of West Philadelphia during the post-Civil War period. Under Criteria C and D, the nomination contends that the block, constructed between 1870 and 1872, reflects the environment in an era characterized by the Second Empire style, and that the twins embody distinguishing characteristics of the Second Empire style, including mansard roofs with dormers, moulded cornices, and decorative brackets beneath the eaves. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the proposed historic district satisfies Criteria for Designation A, C, D, and J, provided the properties at 4200, 4202, 4204, and 4206 Chester Avenue, which have been substantially altered, are excluded from the historic district. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the proposed 4200-30 Chester Avenue Historic District satisfies Criteria for Designation A, C, D, and J, and to include Criterion I owing to archaeological potential. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 04:37:30 RECUSALS: • Mr. Mattioni recused from the review because his law firm represents a property owner in the proposed historic district. PRESENTERS: • Ms. Chantry presented the nomination to the Historical Commission. • Oscar Beisert represented the nomination on behalf of the University City Historical Society and suggested that the boundary remain as proposed in the nomination because an owner may one day want to remove the non-historic additions and restore the front facades of the first few buildings on the block. • Attorney Michael Mattioni and historic consultant Gideon Fink Shapiro represented the property owner of 4200 and 4202 Chester Avenue and contended that the designation should be limited to the properties spanning 4208 to 4230 Chester Avenue, owing to

the front facades of the first few buildings on the block. • Attorney Michael Mattioni and historic consultant Gideon Fink Shapiro represented the property owner of 4200 and 4202 Chester Avenue and contended that the designation should be limited to the properties spanning 4208 to 4230 Chester Avenue, owing to the altered conditions of the properties at 4200, 4202, 4204, and 4206 Chester Avenue. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Paul Steinke, representing the Preservation Alliance, supported the nomination as proposed, including all properties spanning from 4200 to 4230 Chester Avenue. • Hal Schirmer supported the nomination. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The buildings at 4200, 4202, 4204, and 4206 Chester Avenue have significant alterations to the front facades; however, a building does not need to be a pristine example of an architectural style or be unique in order to be designated as historic. • The Historical Commission is experiencing an increase in the numbers of permit application reviews resulting from the increased designation activity. The Historical Commission operates with limited resources and therefore must designate carefully, as each designation is a commitment to spend resurces in the future, to regulate the PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 46 resource through permit application review and potentially to defend the designation decision on appeal. • All buildings identified in the nomination are worthy of historic designation, but the Historical Commission may choose to decline to designate every building owing to limited resources. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The block has significant character, interest, and value as part of the development of the neighborhood, being among the earliest block development projects of its kind for middle class residents in the emerging suburb of West Philadelphia during the post- Civil War period, satisfying Criteria A and J. • The block reflects the environment in an era characterized by the Second Empire style, and the twins embody distinguishing characteristics of the Second Empire style, satisfying Criteria C and D. • The district may be likely to yield information important in pre-history or history, satisfying Criterion I. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the 4200-30 Chester Avenue Historic District satisfies Criteria for Designation A, C, D, I, and J; to amend the boundary to exclude the properties at 4200, 4202, 4204, and 4206 Chester Avenue; and to designate the

satisfying Criterion I. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the 4200-30 Chester Avenue Historic District satisfies Criteria for Designation A, C, D, I, and J; to amend the boundary to exclude the properties at 4200, 4202, 4204, and 4206 Chester Avenue; and to designate the 4208-30 Chester Avenue Historic District, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Carney seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. ITEM: 4208-30 Chester Avenue Historic District MOTION: Designate with amended boundary, Criteria A, C, D, I, and J MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Carney VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Edwards X O’Donnell (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 8 1 4 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 47 ADJOURNMENT START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 05:32:10 ACTION: At 2:32 p.m., Mr. Mattioni moved to adjourn. Mr. McCoubrey seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. ITEM: Adjournment MOTION: Adjourn MOVED BY: Mattioni SECONDED BY: McCoubrey VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Edwards X O’Donnell (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 9 4 PLEASE NOTE: • Minutes of the Philadelphia Historical Commission 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. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 13 MAY 2022 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 48 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

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.