Historical Commission — Jan 8, 2021

PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 1 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES THE MINUTES OF THE 701ST STATED MEETING OF THE PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION FRIDAY, 8 JANUARY 2021 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 X Donna Carney (Department of Planning & Development) X Emily Cooperman, Ph.D., Committee on Historic Designation Chair X Mark Dodds (Division of Housing & Community Development) X Kelly Edwards, MUP X Steven Hartner (Department of Public Property) X Sara Lepori (Commerce Department) X Josh Lippert (Department of Licenses & Inspections) X John Mattioni, Esq. X Dan McCoubrey, AIA, LEED AP BD+C, Architectural Committee Chair X Jessica Sánchez, Esq. (City Council President) X Betty Turner, MA, Vice Chair X Kimberly Washington, Esq. X Owing to public health concerns surrounding the COVID-19 virus, all Commissioners, staff, applicants, and public attendees participated in the meeting 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 I Meredith Keller, Historic Preservation Planner II Allyson Mehley, Historic Preservation Planner II Leonard Reuter, Esq., Law Department Megan Cross Schmitt, Historic Preservation Planner II PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 2 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES The following persons attended the online meeting: Eric Godfrey, Becker & Frondorf Dana Fedeli Robert Powers, Powers & Company Stephanie Boggs, Klehr Harrison Harvey Branzburg Allison Weiss, SoLo Germantown RCO Hillary Wittich Adrian Trevisan Jay Farrell Cameron Adamez Brett Feldman, Klehr Harrison Harvey Branzburg Matt Ulassin, USA Architects David Traub, Save Our Sites Paul Steinke, Preservation Alliance Leah Silverstein, Chestnut Hill Conservancy Michael Forman Nina Huang, Mandarin Interpreter Tom Beck Charlie Moleski, Becker & Frondorf Jeffrey Ogren Esq., Bochetto & Lentz P.C. Nick Kraus, Heritage Consulting Group Mike Katra Don Simon Kelly Piasecki Rob Piasecki Paul Boni Patrick Grossi, Preservation Alliance Oscar Beisert Eric Leighton, Cecil Baker & Partners Elizabeth Okakpu Seth Brown Kirsti Bracali John Carpenter Kevin McMahon, Powers & Company Logan Ferguson, Powers & Company Ming Lee Yuan, Olson Kundig Jeff Gelles Dan Bosin Uk Jung Nic Charbonneau, Harrison Design Sylvia Bastani Celeste Hardester

Boni Patrick Grossi, Preservation Alliance Oscar Beisert Eric Leighton, Cecil Baker & Partners Elizabeth Okakpu Seth Brown Kirsti Bracali John Carpenter Kevin McMahon, Powers & Company Logan Ferguson, Powers & Company Ming Lee Yuan, Olson Kundig Jeff Gelles Dan Bosin Uk Jung Nic Charbonneau, Harrison Design Sylvia Bastani Celeste Hardester Henry Clinton, Law Office of Henry M. Clinton, LLC Chris Carickhoff, Studio C Architecture Sue Patterson Doug Seiler, Seiler + Drury Elizabeth Armour Kevin Kilcoyne, Seiler + Drury Father Carl Braschoss Althea Banks PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 3 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES Doug Mooney Glen Muschio Vivek Tomer LeRon McCoy Karen Arnold Christian Matozzo Ben Derby Linda Santoro, Heritage Consulting Group Matt McClure, Ballard Spahr Nancy Pontone Harrison Haas, Cozen O’Connor Jim McAuliffe, AIA, USA Architects Deirdre Kelleher Katherine Haas Steve Olszewski, Baker Street Partners J M Duffin Kim Seff, Studio IQL M. A. Morris Steven Peitzman Chuck Broadbent George Poulin, Strada LLC Celeste Morello ADOPTION OF MINUTES, 700TH STATED MEETING, 11 DECEMBER 2020 START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:04:30 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 700th Stated Meeting, held 11 December 2020. No corrections were offered. ACTION: Mr. Thomas moved to adopt the minutes of the 700th Stated Meeting of the Philadelphia Historical Commission, held 11 December 2020. Ms. Cooperman seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 4 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ITEM: Adoption of the Minutes of the 700th Meeting MOTION: Adoption of minutes MOVED BY: Thomas SECONDED BY: Cooperman VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (DPD) X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 12 1 CONTINUANCE REQUESTS ADDRESS: 208-10 REX AVE Name of Resource: Hirst-Duhring House Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Virginia, William H. & Hewson Baltzell Nominator: Chestnut Hill Conservancy Staff Contact: Laura DiPasquale, laura.dipasquale@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 208-10 Rex Avenue in Chestnut Hill and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination argues that the house, constructed about 1857-60, with alterations around 1893 and a substantial

Nominator: Chestnut Hill Conservancy Staff Contact: Laura DiPasquale, laura.dipasquale@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 208-10 Rex Avenue in Chestnut Hill and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination argues that the house, constructed about 1857-60, with alterations around 1893 and a substantial rear addition in 1927, satisfies Criteria for Designation A, C, and E. Under Criterion A, the nomination contends that the property has significant character as one of the early prominent suburban villas constructed in the first period of the development of the suburban character of the Chestnut Hill section of the city after the extension of the first railroad to the area. The nomination also argues that the building is significant under Criterion A for its association with architect H. Louis Duhring, who owned and lived in the house between 1919 and 1946, and under Criterion E as a representative example of Duhring’s influential architectural work. The nomination also contends that the property is significant under Criterion C as reflecting the environment of both the period of its original Italianate construction and its Arts and Crafts addition. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 208-10 Rex Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation A, C, and E. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 5 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 208-10 Rex Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation A, C, and E. START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:04:52 RECUSAL:  Ms. Cooperman recused owing to her association with the Chestnut Hill Conservancy in 2017 when the property was nominated. PRESENTERS:  Mr. Thomas presented the continuance request to the Historical Commission. PUBLIC COMMENT:  None. ACTION: Mr. Thomas moved to grant the continuance of the review of the nomination for 208-10 Rex Avenue to the February 2021 meeting of the Historical Commission. Mr. McCoubrey seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. ITEM: Continuance of review of 208-10 Rex Ave MOTION: Adoption MOVED BY: Thomas SECONDED BY: McCoubrey VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (DPD) X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 11 1 1

Thomas SECONDED BY: McCoubrey VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (DPD) X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 11 1 1 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 6 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ADDRESS: 1533-39 N 7TH ST Name of Resource: Trinity Reformed Church Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: 99 Real Estate LLC Nominator: The Keeping Society of Philadelphia Staff Contact: Meredith Keller, meredith.keller@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 1533-39 N. 7th Street and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the former Trinity Reformed Church satisfies Criteria for Designation D, E, and J. Under Criterion D, the nomination argues that the church exemplifies the “inexpensive, but expressive” form of Gothic ecclesiastical architecture. Under Criterion E, the nomination contends that the church was designed by influential Philadelphia architect Samuel Sloan, who included an illustration of the building in his 1868 publication of The Architectural Review and American Builders’ Journal. The nomination further argues that the modest but expressive design reflects the cultural, economic, and social heritage of Philadelphia’s working-to-middle-class residents. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 1533-39 N. 7th Street satisfies Criteria for Designation D, E, and J. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that 1533-39 N. 7th Street satisfies Criteria for Designation D, E, and J, and that the property should be designated as historic and listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. ACTION: See below. ADDRESS: 156 W SCHOOL HOUSE LN Name of Resource: Boxwood Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Teen Challenge Training Center Inc. Nominator: Penn Knox Neighborhood Association Staff Contact: Meredith Keller, Meredith.keller@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 156 W. School House Lane and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the building satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, and E. Under Criteria C and D, the nomination argues that Boxwood reflects the Colonial Revival style of architecture as applied to upper-class suburban residences in late nineteenth-century Philadelphia. The nomination further argues that the “cottage-stable” at the rear of the property represents Gothic Revival cottage motifs

Designation C, D, and E. Under Criteria C and D, the nomination argues that Boxwood reflects the Colonial Revival style of architecture as applied to upper-class suburban residences in late nineteenth-century Philadelphia. The nomination further argues that the “cottage-stable” at the rear of the property represents Gothic Revival cottage motifs popularized by Andrew Jackson Downing in the late 1840s and early 1850s. Under Criterion D, the nomination asserts that Boxwood was designed by Mantle Fielding, a prolific and significant architect who influenced the built environment in Northwest Philadelphia at the turn of the twentieth century. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 156 W. School House Lane satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, and E. However, the staff asserts that the so-called “cottage-stable” at the rear of the property does not reflect the Gothic Revival style and, therefore, does not satisfy Criteria C and D as presented in PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 7 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES the nomination. While the building has a cross gable, a typical feature of the Gothic Revival, it does not have any other features characteristic of the style. The building may have served as a barn, potentially for an earlier residence predating Boxwood, and was later updated with a cross gable. The staff recommends that the so-called “cottage-stable” contributes to the site’s historical significance but does not exhibit sufficient character-defining features to be considered reflective of or exemplary of the Gothic Revival style. ACTION: See below. ADDRESS: 121 PLEASANT ST Name of Resource: The Joseph Meehan House & Grounds Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: CDPHI LLC Nominator: Keeping Society of Philadelphia Staff Contact: Megan Cross Schmitt; megan.schmitt@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the building at 121 Pleasant Street and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the building satisfies Criteria for Designation A and J. Under Criterion A, the nomination argues that the house is significant owing to its association with the life and work of Joseph Meehan, “a prominent editor, horticulturalist, landscape gardener, nurseryman, writer and veteran of the Civil War…” Under Criterion J, the nomination argues that the Joseph Meehan House & Grounds is significant as a representation of the “commercial and cultural legacy of the larger Meehan family in Mt. Airy, Germantown, and Philadelphia.” STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates

and veteran of the Civil War…” Under Criterion J, the nomination argues that the Joseph Meehan House & Grounds is significant as a representation of the “commercial and cultural legacy of the larger Meehan family in Mt. Airy, Germantown, and Philadelphia.” STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the building at 121 Pleasant Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A and J. ACTION: See below. ADDRESS: 222-48 N BROAD ST Name of Resource: Hahnemann Hospital Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Broad Street Healthcare Properties LLC Nominator: Keeping Society of Philadelphia Staff Contact: Laura DiPasquale, laura.dipasquale@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate a portion of the property known as 222-48 N. Broad Street and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination is limited to the boundaries of the Neo-Gothic building constructed in 1928 for Hahnemann Medical College & Hospital. The nomination contends that the property satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, F, and J. Under Criterion D, the nomination argues that the building embodies distinguishing characteristics of the Neo-Gothic style, including the main Gothic arch entrance, buttresses, and tracery, as applied to skyscrapers in the 1920s. Under Criteria A and J, the nomination contends that subject building important in exhibiting the heritage of Hahnemann Medical College & Hospital, which opened in 1848 and became a major source of general medicine and surgical care for numerous Philadelphians, particularly the poor and working class people of North PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 8 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES Philadelphia, which represents a shift in the cultural, economic, and social mores of the period, when the lower classes would first gain access to healthcare in a modern medical facility. Under Criterion F, the nomination argues that the 1928 Hahnemann Hospital represents both innovation in the design of medical colleges and hospitals in the first and second quarters of the twentieth century and the broader development of modern hospitals in the Philadelphia region, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and the larger nation. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the 1928 Hahnemann Hospital building, a portion of 222-48 N. Broad Street, satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, F, and J. ACTION: See below. ADDRESS: 1826 CHESTNUT ST Name of Resource: Aldine Theatre Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Sam’s Place Realty Associates LP Nominator: Kevin Block, Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia Staff Contact: Laura DiPasquale,

a portion of 222-48 N. Broad Street, satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, F, and J. ACTION: See below. ADDRESS: 1826 CHESTNUT ST Name of Resource: Aldine Theatre Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Sam’s Place Realty Associates LP Nominator: Kevin Block, Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia Staff Contact: Laura DiPasquale, laura.dipasquale@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 1826 Chestnut Street as historic and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the former Aldine Theatre, constructed in 1921, is significant under Criteria for Designation A, E, and J. Under Criterion A, the nomination argues that the theatre has significant character, interest, or value as one of the last remaining first-run movie palaces in Philadelphia. Under Criterion E, the nomination explains that the Aldine was the work of prominent local builders William Steele & Sons. Under Criterion J, the nomination argues that the Aldine represents the commercial development of Chestnut Street in the prestigious Rittenhouse Square neighborhood after the turn of the twentieth century. Following the submission of the nomination and notification to the property owner, the nominator uncovered additional information not presented in the nomination, which is posted on the Historical Commission’s website as additional information. The Committee on Historic Designation previously reviewed a nomination for the property in March 1986 and recommended against designation owing to the loss of architectural integrity of the interior and the front doors. The Historical Commission adopted the recommendation of the Committee at its April 1986 meeting and declined to designate the property. The staff notes that the interior of the property is not under consideration, and that the Historical Commission routinely designates properties that have alterations. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 1826 Chestnut Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A, E, and J. START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:06:28 PRESENTERS:  Mr. Thomas presented the continuance requests to the Historical Commission. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 9 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES DISCUSSION:  Mr. Farnham noted that the City of Philadelphia retained a Mandarin Chinese interpreter to assist the owner of 1533-39 N. 7th Street if he was in attendance.  Interpreter Nina Huang stated in Mandarin Chinese that she was available to assist the property owner. She asked in Mandarin Chinese if the owner was at the meeting and if he wanted to

Chinese interpreter to assist the owner of 1533-39 N. 7th Street if he was in attendance.  Interpreter Nina Huang stated in Mandarin Chinese that she was available to assist the property owner. She asked in Mandarin Chinese if the owner was at the meeting and if he wanted to speak. o No one responded. PUBLIC COMMENT:  Steven Peitzman questioned the length of the request to continue the nomination for 222-48 N. Broad Street. He then complained about the continuance process and asked that nominators be granted the courtesy of an expeditious movement of their nominations. He opposed any further delay of the N. Broad Street nomination. ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION:  Attorney Jeffrey Ogren represented the owner of the property at 222-48 N. Broad Street and stated that he had initially requested a continuance to the February Committee on Historic Designation meeting, but was told that the Committee was not meeting that month. The staff had suggested continuing the matter to March. He called Mr. Peitzman “disingenuous” and observed that his law office is closed, owing to COVID, and he and his client are addressing this matter in a diligent and expeditious manner under the current conditions of the pandemic. He observed that the property in question is large and complicated and questioned why Mr. Peitzman, a private third party, was able to dictate the schedule. He stated his client would be prepared to move ahead at the March 2021 Committee on Historic Designation meeting. ACTION: Mr. Thomas moved to grant the continuances of the reviews of the nominations for 1533-39 N. 7th Street to the April 2021 Philadelphia Historical Commission meeting; 156 W. School House Lane to the January 2021 Committee on Historic Designation meeting; 121 Pleasant Street to the January 2021 Committee on Historic Designation meeting; and 1826 Chestnut Street to the March 2021 Committee on Historic Designation meeting. Ms. Cooperman seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 10 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ITEM: Continuance of reviews of designation matters MOTION: Adoption MOVED BY: Thomas SECONDED BY: Cooperman VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (DPD) X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 1 ACTION: Mr. Thomas moved to

Cooperman VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (DPD) X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 1 ACTION: Mr. Thomas moved to grant the continuance of the review of the nomination for 222-48 N. Broad Street to the March 2021 Committee on Historic Designation meeting. Ms. Cooperman seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. ITEM: Continuance of review of 222-48 N Broad St MOTION: Adoption MOVED BY: Thomas SECONDED BY: Cooperman VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (DPD) X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 1 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 11 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES REPORT OF THE ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE, 15 DECEMBER 2020 CONSENT AGENDA START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN AUDIO RECORDING: 00:18:55 DISCUSSION:  Mr. Thomas asked the Commissioners, staff, and public for comments on the Consent Agenda. PUBLIC COMMENT:  Paul Steinke of the Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia requested a discussion of the application for 230, 232, 234-36 S. 4th Street. DISCUSSION:  In response to the public comment, Mr. Thomas removed 230, 232, 234-36 S. 4th Street from the consent agenda. ACTION: Mr. Thomas moved to adopt the recommendation of the Architectural Committee for the application for 250 S. 20th Street, the only matter on the Consent Agenda. Mr. McCoubrey seconded the motion, which adopted by unanimous consent. ITEM: Consent Agenda MOTION: Approval MOVED BY: Thomas SECONDED BY: McCoubrey VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (DPD) X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Lepori (Commerce) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 12 1 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 12 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES AGENDA ADDRESS: 230, 232, 234-36 S 4TH ST Proposal: Remove rear ells and additions; construct additions Review Requested: Review In Concept Owner: 234 S. 4th St. LP and Forman Family Realty Trust Applicant: Ming-Lee Yuan, Olson Kundig History: 1805 Individual Designation: 4/30/1957 District Designation: Society Hill Historic District, Significant, 3/10/1999 Staff Contact: Jon Farnham,

234-36 S 4TH ST Proposal: Remove rear ells and additions; construct additions Review Requested: Review In Concept Owner: 234 S. 4th St. LP and Forman Family Realty Trust Applicant: Ming-Lee Yuan, Olson Kundig History: 1805 Individual Designation: 4/30/1957 District Designation: Society Hill Historic District, Significant, 3/10/1999 Staff Contact: Jon Farnham, jon.farnham@phila.gov BACKGROUND: This application proposes to combine two historic rowhouses and construct large additions at the rear and on an adjacent vacant lot to create one large residence. The Historical Commission approved the application in concept in November 2019. The applicant now requests final approval. The application proposes work to a site that consists of three parcels and includes two historic rowhouses at 230 and 232 S. 4th Street and a lot surrounded by a non-historic brick wall with fence. The rowhouses face S. 4th Street and open onto Leithgow at the rear. The open lot runs west from 4th Street to Leithgow Street along Locust Street. The application proposes to combine the parcels, join the historic rowhouses, remove the rear ells of the two rowhouses as well as later garage and dining room additions, and construct additions to create one large dwelling. At its November 2019 meeting, when the Historical Commission granted approval in concept to the proposal, it determined that the removal of the rear ells would constitute an alteration, not a demolition, in the legal sense. The new additions would be clad in brick with metal windows. The additions would be in the style of nearby mid twentieth-century Modernist houses. Since the approval in concept, the architects have refined the design, but have not deviated from the conceptual design that was approved. The overall square footage and footprint have been reduced slightly and more of the existing garden space at the corner of 4th and Locust will be retained, but otherwise the design is unchanged. SCOPE OF WORK:  Remove rear sections of the buildings at 230 and 232 S. 4th Street.  Construct additions. 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

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 Historical Commission has already determined that the rear ells to be removed are not “historic materials that characterize the property.” The proposed additions are differentiated from the old and are compatible in massing, size, PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 13 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. Therefore, this application satisfies 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 would be unimpaired. o The Historical Commission has already determined that the rear ells and additions are not considered part of “the essential form and integrity of the historic property.” Therefore, this application leaves in place the essential form and integrity of the historic property and satisfies Standard 10. 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 November 2019. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend approval, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 9 and 10 and the Historical Commission’s approval in concept of November 2019, provided the following:  the rear sections being removed are documented and a copy of the documentation is provided to the Historical Commission,  the window replacement complies with the Historical Commission’s review criteria and policies,  the new chimney is clad in brick and compatible with the historic chimneys,  the connections between the additions and historic buildings are carefully designed, and  the roof framing is retained or the structure is stabilized before it is removed and replaced. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:22:28 PRESENTERS:  Mr. Farnham presented the revised application to the Historical Commission.  Architect Ming Lee Yuan represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT:  Paul Steinke of the Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia observed that the application noted that the roof framing would be repaired or the structure would

RECORDING: 00:22:28 PRESENTERS:  Mr. Farnham presented the revised application to the Historical Commission.  Architect Ming Lee Yuan represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT:  Paul Steinke of the Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia observed that the application noted that the roof framing would be repaired or the structure would be stabilized before the roof framing was removed and replaced on the two historic houses. He noted that there was no mention of the dormer windows, which he called character-defining features. He suggested that the Commission and staff ensure that, if the roof framing is removed and replaced, the original dormers are removed and reinstalled to the greatest extent possible. He claimed that replacing the dormers would not satisfy the standards. DISCUSSION:  Mr. McCoubrey stated that the applicant’s intention is to retain and reuse the dormers. He stated that the staff could review the details to ensure that the dormers were retained and reused to the fullest extent possible.  Mr. Farnham stated that he is administering the project. He observed that the architect’s intention is to retain and reuse the dormers. If the roof needs to be reframed, the dormers would be removed and then reinstalled on the reframed roof. He stated that he had not heard of any plan to replace or reconstruct the dormers PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 14 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES until Mr. Steinke raised it a few minutes ago. He questioned the basis of Mr. Steinke’s assertion. He stated that the architect was in attendance and could confirm that the dormers will be retained. He stated that the staff will ensure that the dormers are preserved when it reviews the final construction drawings.  Ms. Yuan, the architect for the project, stated that there has never been any intention of replacing the dormers. They will be retained.  Mr. Thomas stated that there does not seems to be an issue with the dormers, which will be retained. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  The Historical Commission approved the application in concept in November 2019.  Since the approval in concept, the architects have refined the design, but have not deviated from the conceptual design that was approved. The overall square footage and footprint have been reduced slightly and more of the existing garden space at the corner of 4th and Locust will be

2019.  Since the approval in concept, the architects have refined the design, but have not deviated from the conceptual design that was approved. The overall square footage and footprint have been reduced slightly and more of the existing garden space at the corner of 4th and Locust will be retained, but otherwise the design is unchanged. The Historical Commission concluded that:  The project satisfies Standards 9 and 10, provided the stipulated conditions are met. ACTION: Mr. Thomas moved to approve the application, provided removed sections of the buildings are documented, replacement windows satisfy standards, the new chimney is clad in brick, the roof framing is retained or the structure is stabilized before the framing is replaced, and the dormers are retained, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 9 and 10 and the November 2019 approval in concept. Mr. McCoubrey seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. ITEM: 230, 232, 234-36 S 4TH ST MOTION: Approve with conditions MOVED BY: Thomas SECONDED BY: McCoubrey VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (DPD) X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 12 1 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 15 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ADDRESS: 3433, 3435, 3437, AND 3439 LANCASTER AVE Proposal: Construct rear addition Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Kalidave Limited Partners Applicant: George Poulin, Strada LLC History: 1875; John Shedwick Development Houses Individual Designation: 1/7/1982 District Designation: None Staff Contact: Kim Chantry, kim.chantry@phila.gov BACKGROUND: This application proposes to rehabilitate four rowhouses and construct a three-story rear addition with roof deck, elevator, and stair access. The applicant will work with the staff on the approval of restoration work to the front facades. An application for a larger rear addition was submitted for review last month. After the staff provided the applicant with its recommendation of denial and the reasons for it, the applicant withdrew the initial application before a public meeting review and revised it based on the feedback. This current application presents those revisions, but also includes the original and now proposed design as renderings on the final two pages of the application so that the Architectural Committee and Historical Commission can see how the design has evolved to- date in an

revised it based on the feedback. This current application presents those revisions, but also includes the original and now proposed design as renderings on the final two pages of the application so that the Architectural Committee and Historical Commission can see how the design has evolved to- date in an effort to make the rear addition, which is visible from the east side, compatible with and deferential to the historic row. SCOPE OF WORK  Restore front facades of historic rowhouses.  Construct three-story rear addition with roof deck and pilot houses for stair and elevator. 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 work 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 proposed addition connects to secondary elevations at the rear and will not impact the character-defining front facades of this row. The new addition is differentiated from yet compatible with the historic row.  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 proposed scope includes minimal demolition at the rear, and the addition could theoretically be removed in the future and the historic rear ells would remain. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 9 and 10. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 16 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted 4 to 2 to recommend approval, with staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 9 and 10, with the following conditions:  The elevator pilot house is eliminated by not having the elevator extend to the roof;  Alternatives are considered for the color of the stucco and the flatness of the wall on the rear elevation;  Consideration is given to the alignment of the mansard cornice with the addition;  Mechanical units are inconspicuous from the public right-of-way; and  The deck on the existing rear ell is eliminated. START

the color of the stucco and the flatness of the wall on the rear elevation;  Consideration is given to the alignment of the mansard cornice with the addition;  Mechanical units are inconspicuous from the public right-of-way; and  The deck on the existing rear ell is eliminated. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:25:10 PRESENTERS:  Ms. Chantry presented the revised application to the Historical Commission.  Architect George Poulin and property owner Vivek Tomer represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT:  Paul Steinke of the Preservation Alliance supported the application. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  The application has been revised to reflect the Architectural Committee’s comments.  The deck on the existing rear ell at 3433 Lancaster Avenue is acceptable.  If the building code requires ADA access to the main roof deck, a chair lift could be considered for access from the third floor to the roof, since the elevator access was removed owing to the recommendation of the Architectural Committee.  The applicant was highly responsive to feedback from both the staff and the Architectural Committee. The Historical Commission concluded that:  The proposed addition connects to secondary elevations at the rear and will not impact the character-defining front facades of this row. The new addition is differentiated from yet compatible with the historic row, satisfying Standard 9.  The proposed scope includes minimal demolition at the rear, and the addition could theoretically be removed in the future and the historic rear ells would remain, satisfying Standard 10. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to approve the revised application, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 9 and 10. Mr. Thomas seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 17 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ITEM: 3433, 3435, 3437, AND 3439 LANCASTER AVE MOTION: Approval MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Thomas VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (DPD) X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 12 1 ADDRESS: 250 S 20TH ST Proposal: Construct ADA entrance Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Archdiocese of Philadelphia, Saint Patrick Parish Applicant: Nicholas Leo Charbonneau, Harrison Design History: 1913; Saint Patrick's Roman Catholic Church; LaFarge

Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 12 1 ADDRESS: 250 S 20TH ST Proposal: Construct ADA entrance Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Archdiocese of Philadelphia, Saint Patrick Parish Applicant: Nicholas Leo Charbonneau, Harrison Design History: 1913; Saint Patrick's Roman Catholic Church; LaFarge & Morris, architects Individual Designation: None District Designation: Rittenhouse Fitler Historic District, Significant, 2/8/1995 Staff Contact: Kim Chantry, kim.chantry@phila.gov BACKGROUND: This application proposes to install an ADA entrance between the church building and the rectory at Saint Patrick’s Roman Catholic Church, which will provide ADA access to the upper church, the lower church, the rectory, and two accessible restrooms each for the upper and lower church levels. The proposed scope requires the removal of the existing connector bridge between the church and rectory in order to construct the new elevator shaft. The existing connector bridge was not included in the original architectural drawings of the church, but was built at the same time or soon after the church was completed, based on historic photographs. The new ADA connector will incorporate salvaged copper paneling and mouldings from the historic connector into the new design. SCOPE OF WORK  Remove existing connector bridge.  Construct ADA-compliant entrance addition in same location, using some salvaged materials. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 18 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 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 work 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 proposed addition is highly compatible with the historic church and rectory, and allows for their continued use. It is compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing of the historic buildings and the 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 proposed addition could be removed in the future, and the essential form and integrity of both

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 proposed addition could be removed in the future, and the essential form and integrity of both the church and rectory would be unimpaired.  Accessibility Guidelines: Recommended: Providing barrier-free access that promotes independence for the user while preserving significant historic features. Finding solutions to meet accessibility requirements that minimize the impact of any necessary alteration on the historic building, its site, and setting, such as compatible ramps, paths, and lifts. o The proposed addition would provide barrier-free access while preserving significant historic features. The proposed addition would provide accessibility while minimizing the impact on the historic building. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 9 and 10, and the Accessibility Guidelines. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend approval, with the recommendation that consideration be given to reusing the existing doors at the new entrance with an automatic operator, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 9 and 10, and the Accessibility Guidelines. ACTION: See Consent Agenda ADDRESS: 2035 S COLLEGE AVE Proposal: Install mechanical equipment; modify openings; provide ADA accessibility Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: The Trustees of the Estate of Stephen Girard Applicant: Doug Seiler, Seiler + Drury Architecture History: 1833; Founder’s Hall, Girard College; Thomas U. Walter, architect Individual Designation: 6/26/1956 District Designation: None Staff Contact: Megan Cross Schmitt, megan.schmitt@phila.gov BACKGROUND: This application proposes to make a series of upgrades to Founder’s Hall, in part so Girard College can return the building to its original use as an educational facility. Founder’s Hall has long been used to host events, many of which generate income for the school. The proposed PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 19 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES work addresses current issues the building has with heating and cooling, ventilation, and interior space configuration. The application also addresses ADA accessibility. SCOPE OF WORK  Install mechanical equipment.  Modify openings.  Provide ADA accessibility.  Remove existing ceiling panels and replace with louvers. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include:  Standard 1: A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use

openings.  Provide ADA accessibility.  Remove existing ceiling panels and replace with louvers. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include:  Standard 1: A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces and spatial relationships. o The proposed changes are motivated, in part, by Girard College’s decision to return Founder’s Hall to its original use as an educational facility, as well as to address issues that currently negatively impact the interior spaces used for events, including heating, cooling and ventilation.  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 work 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 application proposes to pin back the front doors at the north and south entrances to create interior vestibules with frameless glass doors. The doors are important details of the exterior of the building. However, the modification still allows visitors to see the doors upon entering the building and is also reversible. o The application proposes to convert two windows into doors by removing and storing the existing windows and stone spandrels and installing doors in the openings. There is a need to permit an easier flow between the indoor and outdoor spaces but the applicant should explore whether the programmatic needs could be met by limiting this alteration to one opening rather than two. o The application proposes to remove an existing window and replace it with a new window and louver as required for HVAC function. The applicant should investigate retaining the existing window sash and installing the louver behind it rather than removing the window. o Modifications to improve ADA accessibility are proposed at the north, south and east sides of the building. At the north and south entrances, new ADA ramps are proposed to increase accessibility into these main entrances. o An ADA accessible wheelchair lift is proposed at the east elevation that would replace the existing lift. o When fasteners are required for loading or ADA ramps, existing holes in the masonry should be reused to the greatest

ADA ramps are proposed to increase accessibility into these main entrances. o An ADA accessible wheelchair lift is proposed at the east elevation that would replace the existing lift. o When fasteners are required for loading or ADA ramps, existing holes in the masonry should be reused to the greatest extent possible. o The application includes a future scope of work that proposes to remove six original cast iron ceiling panels at the north side of the building and install louvers as required for the new HVAC system. The panels would be saved on site. The louvers should be finished in a color that matches the adjacent ceiling panels as closely as possible. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 20 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES  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 If all removed elements like windows, stone sills and panels, and ceiling panels are securely stored on site, the proposed alterations could be reversed in the future, and the essential form and integrity of the building would be unimpaired.  Accessibility Guidelines: Recommended: Providing barrier-free access that promotes independence for the user while preserving significant historic features. Finding solutions to meet accessibility requirements that minimize the impact of any necessary alteration on the historic building, its site, and setting, such as compatible ramps, paths, and lifts. o The proposed ramps would provide barrier-free access while preserving significant historic features. The proposed ramps would provide accessibility while minimizing the impact on the historic building. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval with conditions, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 1, 9, and 10 and the Accessibility Guidelines. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee made no recommendation, owing to the expectation that the application will be supplemented and resubmitted. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:38:16 PRESENTERS:  Ms. Schmitt presented the revised application to the Historical Commission.  Sylvia Bastani of Girard College represented ownership.  Architects Doug Seiler and Kirsti Bracali represented the application. DISCUSSION:  Ms. Bastani explained the motivation behind the proposed changed, remarking that Girard College wished to expand the school’s use of Founder’s Hall to the benefit of the students and the public alike.  Mr. Seiler presented the

ownership.  Architects Doug Seiler and Kirsti Bracali represented the application. DISCUSSION:  Ms. Bastani explained the motivation behind the proposed changed, remarking that Girard College wished to expand the school’s use of Founder’s Hall to the benefit of the students and the public alike.  Mr. Seiler presented the slides and explained the various proposed interventions. He reviewed the ways in which the revised proposal responded to the comments of the Architectural Committee, in particular the request for more detailed technical drawings.  Mr. Seiler stated that reversible interventions were used whenever possible and penetrations into historic fabric for the purpose of fastening were minimized.  Mr. Seiler informed the members of the Historical Commission that various entities had jurisdiction over changes to the interior of Founder’s Hall, owing to an easement. He mentioned this in the context of how the proposed interventions at the interior impacted such exterior elements as windows and doors.  Ms. Bracali reiterated to the members of the Historical Commission that the project team had been working closely with the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission per the terms of the easement, and they were also seeking input from the National Park Service. Ms. Bracali also reported that they had given a courtesy review of the project to the Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia.  Ms. Bracali stated that they intended to return to the Architectural Committee in January to present the revised application and seek a recommendation for a final approval.  Mr. Thomas thanked the applicants for the very thorough and exciting presentation and asked if there were any comments from the other commissioners. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 21 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES o Mr. McCoubrey thanked the applicants for their presentation and for responding to the comments of the Architectural Committee. He said that because the current application was in-concept, the application would return to the Architectural Committee for its review. Mr. McCoubrey stated that he appreciated the team’s development of the requested details but believed the application could benefit from the additional review by the Architectural Committee.  Mr. McCoubrey asked the applicants if they were creating a new driveway in order to access the new loading lift and platform. o Mr. Seiler responded that this was a solution they were considering but that they were open to exploring other options.  Mr. McCoubrey commended the

Committee.  Mr. McCoubrey asked the applicants if they were creating a new driveway in order to access the new loading lift and platform. o Mr. Seiler responded that this was a solution they were considering but that they were open to exploring other options.  Mr. McCoubrey commended the project team for doing an excellent job and for thinking very carefully about this building.  Ms. Carney commented that she appreciated the applicants’ sensitive approach and level of detail that was shown in the presentation. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  The application was revised to respond to the feedback provided by the Architectural Committee, in particular their request for more details.  The applicants proposed interventions demonstrated their sensitivity to this important building. The Historical Commission concluded that:  The sensitivity, reversibility and thoughtful level of detail demonstrated in the revised application satisfied Standards 1, 9 and 10, and the Accessibility Guidelines.  No action on the application is required because the application requests an in-concept review and the Historical Commission’s comments presented during the discussion provide the requested advice. ADDRESS: 2036 DELANCEY PL Proposal: Construct addition Review Requested: Review In Concept Owner: Rebecca Malcolm-Naib and Farid Naib Applicant: Uk Jung, Studio Hada History: 1880 Individual Designation: 1/6/1972 District Designation: Rittenhouse Fitler Historic District, Contributing, 2/8/1995 Staff Contact: Laura DiPasquale, laura.dipasquale@phila.gov BACKGROUND: This application seeks in-concept approval for the removal of a non-historic garage and construction of a three-story addition with garages at the rear of this corner property at S. 21st Street and Delancey Place. Historically, a one-story glass conservatory appended the rear of the building. The proposed addition would attach to the existing building through a glass connector, would utilize existing openings to provide access to the new addition, and would be clad in brick. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 22 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial in-concept, pursuant to Standard 9. They objected to the height of the addition, which extended above the cornice line of the existing house, the use of solid railings and parapet walls, the size and scale of the masonry openings on the proposed addition, the use of a lighter material at the full first floor, and the connection between the historic building and existing building. Following the Architectural Committee, the applicant revised the

house, the use of solid railings and parapet walls, the size and scale of the masonry openings on the proposed addition, the use of a lighter material at the full first floor, and the connection between the historic building and existing building. Following the Architectural Committee, the applicant revised the application to respond to the Committee’s recommendation by reducing the height, number of windows, replacing the dark panel area with a change in brick coursing, revising the glass connection to the existing house to step back through all levels, and changing the material of the base of the building. SCOPE OF WORK:  Remove existing garage  Construct three-story addition with garages 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 construction removes a non-historic element of the property. The new work is differentiated from the old and is generally compatible in massing, scale, and materials to the historic building. Architectural features such as window sizes and infill materials should be further explored. The application mostly complies with this standard.  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 proposed addition does not remove significant amounts of historic material and be removed in the future without damaging the essential form and integrity of the historic property. The application complies with this standard. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends approval in-concept, pursuant to Standards 9 and 10. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial of the in-concept application, pursuant to Standard 9. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 01:14:46 PRESENTERS:  Ms. DiPasquale presented the revised application to the Historical Commission.  Architect Uk Jung represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 23 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES  The revisions made between the original

DiPasquale presented the revised application to the Historical Commission.  Architect Uk Jung represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 23 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES  The revisions made between the original application and the Historical Commission submission respond to the Architectural Committee’s comments.  The nature of the connection, the materials, and elevation have improved between the Architectural Committee submission and the Historical Commission submission.  The existing iron gate that is shown in plans but not in the rendering should be retained.  Details such as the articulation of the garage doors can be worked out in the final review stage. The Historical Commission concluded that:  No action on the application is required because the application requests an in- concept review and the Historical Commission’s comments presented during the discussion provide the requested advice. ADDRESS: 2313 MADISON SQ Proposal: Construct roof deck and pilot house Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Robert Piasecki and Kelly Gibb Piasecki Applicant: Robert Piasecki History: 1872; Madison Square; Charles Leslie, developer Individual Designation: 9/28/1971 District Designation: None Staff Contact: Meredith Keller, meredith.keller@phila.gov OVERVIEW: The property at 2313 Madison Square is individually designated, along with nearly every property on the street’s two garden blocks. The buildings are largely two stories in height with brick facades, though several, including the building at 2313 Madison Square, have mansard roofs which provide an additional story. None of the buildings on the two blocks currently have roof decks. This application proposes to demolish the rear portion of the roof, including a rear chimney, and to construct a roof deck with a pilot house. SCOPE OF WORK:  Demolish rear roof;  Demolish rear chimney; and  Construct roof deck with 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 proposed alterations would result in the demolition of the rear half of the roof and a rear chimney. The proposed work does not comply with

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 alterations would result in the demolition of the rear half of the roof and a rear chimney. The proposed work does not comply with this standard.  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 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 24 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 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 proposed roof deck and pilot house would not be visible from Madison Square but would be visible from Kauffman Street, which functions as a service alley. Where appropriate, roof decks are typically approved at the rear ells of buildings and not on the main block. This application proposes to construct a roof deck and pilot house on the main block of the building. The work does not comply with this standard. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Denial, pursuant to Standard 9 and the Roofs Guideline. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Standard 9 and the Roofs Guideline. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 01:20:35 PRESENTERS:  Ms. Keller presented the revised application to the Historical Commission.  Owner and architect Robert Piasecki represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT:  None. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  The Architectural Committee reviewed two options for the construction of a roof deck and pilot house. One option proposed to demolish the rear roof so that the roof deck and pilot house would sit lower and visibility would be minimal. The second option retained the existing roof and proposed to construct the roof deck and pilot house above. In both option, an enclosed stair to the deck would be constructed in the location of an existing second-story deck.  The application has been revised to retain the roof, reduce the massing of the deck and pilot house, and minimize the visibility of the railing on the eastern side of the building. The deck and pilot house would remain behind the existing chimney located at the center of the roof. The Historical Commission concluded that:  The

the roof, reduce the massing of the deck and pilot house, and minimize the visibility of the railing on the eastern side of the building. The deck and pilot house would remain behind the existing chimney located at the center of the roof. The Historical Commission concluded that:  The revised application addresses the concerns of demolition and visibility raised by the Architectural Committee.  The deck would be inconspicuous from all public rights-of-way, with the exception of Kauffman Street, which functions as a service alley. The application satisfies Standard 9 and the Roofs Guideline. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to approve the revised application, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 9 and the Roofs Guideline. Ms. Edwards seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 25 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ITEM: 2313 MADISON SQ MOTION: Approval MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Edwards VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (DPD) X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 12 1 ADDRESS: 6830-32 RIDGE AVE Proposal: Rehabilitate existing building and construct four-story rear addition Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Baker Street Partners LLC Applicant: Christopher Carickhoff, Studio C Architecture LLC History: 1850; Porch removed; brick applied to first floor front Individual Designation: None District Designation: Ridge Ave Roxborough Thematic Historic District, Contributing, 10/12/2018 Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov BACKGROUND: This application proposes the development of 6830 and 6832 Ridge Avenue. The two properties are being consolidated into a single lot. While 6832 Ridge Avenue is a contributing resource to the Ridge Avenue Thematic Historic District, 6830 Ridge Avenue is not part of the district. For the purposes of this review, the one-story building at 6830 Ridge Avenue should be considered non-contributing. Constructed circa 1850, a three-story, single-family, masonry building stands at the front of the property at 6832 Ridge Avenue. A map (Figure 1) from the late nineteenth century indicates that it was historically configured as a main block with a rear ell, and that two smaller additions at the rear of the property were added during the twentieth century. A historic photo from the district inventory shows that the building originally had a front porch. This application proposes to rehabilitate

it was historically configured as a main block with a rear ell, and that two smaller additions at the rear of the property were added during the twentieth century. A historic photo from the district inventory shows that the building originally had a front porch. This application proposes to rehabilitate the contributing historic building and construct a four- story rear addition. While the new construction appears connected on the exterior with the historic building, there are no interior connections between the two. The first-story area of the addition will be used for parking and the three upper stories will contain 12 residential units. The interior of the historic building will be converted to three residential units. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 26 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES SCOPE OF WORK:  Rehabilitate three-story historic building.  Construct four-story new addition at rear of historic building.  Demolish non-historic building at 6830 Ridge Ave and construct new three-story 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 shall not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale, and proportion to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. o The proposed new construction should be separate from the historic building and the tower reduced in height (or removed from design) to meet Standard 9. o Screening around parking area should be created to meet 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 If the new construction is separated from the historic building, application would meet Standard 10. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval, with staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 9 and 10, with the following conditions:  The addition is separated from the historic building.  The parking area is screened.  The “tower” is removed or the height of four-story building is otherwise reduced. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Standard 9. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 01:32:00 PRESENTERS: 

is separated from the historic building.  The parking area is screened.  The “tower” is removed or the height of four-story building is otherwise reduced. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Standard 9. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 01:32:00 PRESENTERS:  Ms. Mehley presented the revised application to the Historical Commission.  Architect Chris Carickhoff represented the application. DISCUSSION:  Mr. McCoubrey said that the revised application did take into consideration the Architectural Committee comments in a very constructive way. He commented that the reduction in the new building’s height and the general scale of the building is much improved. Mr. McCoubrey said the renderings show a planting strip between the driveway and the existing building, but it is not shown in the plans. He added that it is important to keep that driveway away from the side of the building. Mr. McCoubrey noted the only other comment related to the new building’s third-story windows. He pointed out that they are the same size as the second-story windows and noted that dormer windows are typically smaller than the windows below and recommending differentiating the windows in size, with the dormer windows being smaller. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 27 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES PUBLIC COMMENT: None HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that the revised application included the following changes.  The fourth floor was removed from the proposed new construction. The revised plan now calls for a three-story building that is shorter in height than the historic building.  The new construction was shifted back five feet, so it is no longer touching the historic building.  The window configuration was changed to two-over-two to match historic precedence on the street.  The roof lines were changed from gambrel to gable roof with dormers to match historic precedence on the street.  The board & batten siding was changed to stucco, with texture to match existing historic building.  The color scheme was changed from black & white to be more compatible with historic color palette and with historic precedence on the street.  The stair tower was removed from the proposed new construction.  The number of parking spaces was reduced.  A planting area between the driveway and historic building was added. The Historical Commission concluded that:  The revised application

historic color palette and with historic precedence on the street.  The stair tower was removed from the proposed new construction.  The number of parking spaces was reduced.  A planting area between the driveway and historic building was added. The Historical Commission concluded that:  The revised application addresses the concerns of the Architectural Committee. This includes separating the new construction from the historic building, more effective screening of the parking area, reduction of new building height from four stories to three stories, and the removal of the tower from new building’s design. As a result of these changes, the Commission concluded that the application satisfies Standard 9 and 10. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to approve the revised application, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 9 and 10. Ms. Sanchez seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 28 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ITEM: 6830-32 RIDGE AVE MOTION: Approval MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Sanchez VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (DPD) X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 12 1 ADDRESS: 253 QUINCE ST Proposal: Construct additions and decks; alter openings Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: LeRon McCoy Applicant: James Luke, Morning Companies, LLC History: 1830 Individual Designation: 2/28/1961 District Designation: None Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov BACKGROUND: This application proposes exterior alteratxions to the building at 253 Quince Street that include additions at the first and third floor, two exterior balconies, and alterations to openings at the rear of building. The building was constructed circa 1830 and has undergone changes over time including a small front addition connected along the south elevation, a two-story rear addition, and alterations to window and door openings. SCOPE OF WORK:  Construct one-story addition at the first floor along the south elevation  Construct rear addition with balcony at the third floor  Add balcony at the second floor on the front elevation  Rehabilitate the interior STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include: PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 29 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES  Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related

floor on the front elevation  Rehabilitate the interior STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include: PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 29 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES  Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale, and proportion to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. o The scale and proportions of the proposed third-floor addition and front balcony are incompatible with the historic character of the building therefore the application does not meet 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 A large section of the south wall of the main block is proposed for removal as part of the first-floor addition, therefore the application does not meet Standard 10. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Denial, 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: 01:39:25 PRESENTERS:  Ms. Mehley presented the revised application to the Historical Commission.  Architect Matthew Ulassin represented the application. DISCUSSION:  Mr. McCoubrey and Mr. Thomas discussed the proposed roof change to the front non-historic dormer. The architect, Mr. Ulassin, explained the need for ceiling height in that area, which is a bathroom. Mr. McCoubrey noted that additional glazing would be helpful to the overall aesthetic and suggested that a shed roof might be more successful to meet the needs of the use of the space. Both Mr. McCoubrey and Mr. Thomas concluded that the roof geometry and glazing details could be worked out with the staff. PUBLIC COMMENT:  Elizabeth Armour, owner of 251 Quince Street, spoke in opposition to the application. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that the revised application included the following changes:  Better existing condition drawings, which show a more accurate representation of the windows, facias, trim, and other details.  A third-floor addition that had been reduced in size with

to the application. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that the revised application included the following changes:  Better existing condition drawings, which show a more accurate representation of the windows, facias, trim, and other details.  A third-floor addition that had been reduced in size with a smaller shed dormer.  A larger dormer on the front of the building to allow for more head height.  Replacement windows on the side and rear of the building on the second floor and adjusted new window openings on the first floor.  Modifications to the first-floor addition to properly address drainage.  The removal of the cementitious siding for better compatibility with the existing construction. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 30 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES  The stuccoing of the exterior CMU wall in adjacent parking area to blend in with the additional CMU added for the first-floor addition. The Historical Commission concluded that:  The revised application addresses the concerns of the Architectural Committee. As a result of the revisions, the application satisfies Standard 9 and 10. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to approve the revised application, with the staff to review details including the final design of the front dormer, pursuant to Standards 9 and 10. Ms. Carney seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. ITEM: 253 Quince St MOTION: Approval MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Carney VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (DPD) X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 12 1 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 3 DECEMBER 2020 ADDRESS: 2101 E WESTMORELAND ST AND 3320 COLLINS ST Name of Resource: Scholler Bros., Inc. Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: ARAWA Holding Corp Nominator: Keeping Society of Philadelphia Staff Contact: Meredith Keller, meredith.keller@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the properties at 2101 E. Westmoreland Street and 3320 Collins Street and list them on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the properties satisfy Criterion for Designation J. Under Criterion J, the nomination argues that the properties comprised an industrial complex known as Scholler Brothers Incorporated where textile soaps, softeners, and other textile chemicals were manufactured. The nomination contends that the company and its associated

Historic Places. The nomination contends that the properties satisfy Criterion for Designation J. Under Criterion J, the nomination argues that the properties comprised an industrial complex known as Scholler Brothers Incorporated where textile soaps, softeners, and other textile chemicals were manufactured. The nomination contends that the company and its associated buildings are representative of Kensington’s larger historic textile industry. The buildings on the PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 31 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES Westmoreland lot are in very poor condition. Most of the structures have lost their roofs and are vacant shells of buildings. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination fails to demonstrate that the properties at 2101 E. Westmoreland Street and 3320 Collins Street satisfy Criterion for Designation J. While Scholler Brothers is an example of the manufacturing firms that collectively comprised the Kensington textile industry, it is not an exemplar. To qualify under Criterion J, a site must exemplify, not merely be an example of the heritage of a community. Each criterion in the preservation ordinance establishes a standard that some but not all properties can meet. If the ordinance were intended to permit the designation of all properties regardless of merit, it would not have included Criteria for Designation. Moreover, the poor condition of much of the complex argues against designation. The preservation ordinance authorizes the Historical Commission to mandate the preservation, but not the reconstruction, of historic buildings. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination fails to demonstrate that the properties at 2101 E. Westmoreland Street and 3320 Collins Street satisfy Criterion for Designation J. START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 02:05:35 PRESENTERS:  Ms. Keller presented the nomination to the Historical Commission.  No one represented the property owner.  Nominator Oscar Beisert represented the nomination. DISCUSSION:  Mr. Beisert opposed the Committee on Historic Designation’s recommendation. He stated that he found that Scholler Brothers Inc. was one of the primary manufacturers of fabric softener. He asked that the significance be considered within the context of Kensington’s textile manufacturing industry.  Ms. Cooperman stated that the Committee on Historic Designation discussed the properties at length and found that the buildings were historic but not historically significant. PUBLIC COMMENT:  None. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  The building are in extremely poor condition with several missing

Ms. Cooperman stated that the Committee on Historic Designation discussed the properties at length and found that the buildings were historic but not historically significant. PUBLIC COMMENT:  None. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  The building are in extremely poor condition with several missing roofs.  The nomination contends that the properties are significant under Criterion J for their association to Scholler Brothers, Inc., a soap manufacturer that provided products for the textile industry and that operated out of the buildings for several decades. The Historical Commission concluded that:  Not all examples of cultural, political economic, social, and historical heritage are significant enough to satisfy Criterion for Designation J.  Scholler Brothers Inc. was not a significant enough company to warrant designation. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 32 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ACTION: Mr. Mattioni moved to find that the properties at 2101 E. Westmoreland Street and 3320 Collins Street fail to satisfy any Criteria for Designation and to decline to designate them. Ms. Cooperman seconded the motion, which passed by a vote of 9 to 3. Messrs. Lippert and Thomas and Ms. Edwards dissented. ITEM: 2101 E WESTMORELAND ST AND 3320 COLLINS ST MOTION: Decline to designate, owing to a failure to satisfy Criteria for Designation MOVED BY: Mattioni SECONDED BY: Cooperman VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (DPD) X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 9 3 1 ADDRESS: 5700 N BROAD ST Name of Resource: North City Trust Company Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: 5700 N Broad Street LP Nominator: Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia Staff Contact: Laura DiPasquale, laura.dipasquale@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 5700 N. Broad Street as historic and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the former North City Trust Company building, constructed in 1931 in the Art Deco style by architects Thalheimer & Weitz, is significant under Criteria for Designation A, B, E and H. Under Criteria A and B, the nomination provides a history of the North City organization and its founder, Frank H. Schrenk. Under Criterion E, the nomination provides a history of the architectural firm of Thalheimer & Weitz

& Weitz, is significant under Criteria for Designation A, B, E and H. Under Criteria A and B, the nomination provides a history of the North City organization and its founder, Frank H. Schrenk. Under Criterion E, the nomination provides a history of the architectural firm of Thalheimer & Weitz and its areas of work. The nomination form identifies Criterion H, and the architectural description notes that the building is a local landmark owing to its height in the context of the surrounding primarily one-story commercial buildings, but the statement of significance does not extrapolate on this Criterion. Details of the building’s striking and remarkably intact Art Deco design are relegated to the architectural description, but not addressed in the statement of significance. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 5700 N. Broad Street satisfies Criteria for Designation E and H, but not A and B. The PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 33 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES staff additionally recommends that the property satisfies Criterion D, as it embodies distinguishing characteristics of the Art Deco style. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 5700 N Broad Street satisfies Criteria for Designation D, E, and H. START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 02:14:10 PRESENTERS:  Ms. DiPasquale presented the nomination to the Historical Commission.  No one represented the property owner.  Nominator Adrian Trevisan and Patrick Grossi represented the nomination. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  The building at 5700 N. Broad Street is positioned at a high point along N. Broad Street, at an important intersection, and is highly visible from many locations. The Historical Commission concluded that:  The property embodies distinguishing characteristics of the Art Deco style, satisfying Criterion D.  The property is the work of architects Thalheimer & Weitz, satisfying Criterion E.  The property is a landmark along N. Broad Street, satisfying Criterion H. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the property satisfies Criteria for Designation D, E, and H, and to designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Mr. McCoubrey seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 34 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ITEM: 5700 N

satisfies Criteria for Designation D, E, and H, and to designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Mr. McCoubrey seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 34 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ITEM: 5700 N BROAD ST MOTION: Designate; Criteria D, E, H MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: McCoubrey VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (DPD) X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 12 1 ADDRESS: 500 N CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS BLVD Name of Resource: Philadelphia Cold Storage Company Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: 500 NCCB FEE LLC Nominator: Keeping Society of Philadelphia Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 500 N. Christopher Columbus Boulevard, located in the Callowhill neighborhood, as historic and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Historically known as the Philadelphia Warehousing & Cold Storage Company, this complex of warehouses and supporting structures was constructed in phases between 1891 and 1910. The nomination argues that e property at 500 N. Christopher Columbus Boulevard satisfies Criterion C, as a key example of purpose-built cold storage warehouses and ice manufacturing plants during the last nineteenth and early twentieth centuries in Philadelphia. The nomination contends the property satisfies Criterion E, as Warehouse A is the work of Philadelphia master builder Allen B. Rorke (1846-1899). It further claims that the property satisfies Criterion H, that the complex is a distinctive visual feature on the Delaware River waterfront. Finally, the nomination asserts that the property at 500 N. Christopher Columbus Boulevard is significant for its association with the commercial and industrial growth and heritage of Philadelphia from the time of its founding through the first half of the twentieth century. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 500 N Columbus Blvd, satisfies Criteria for Designation C, E, H, and J, with a period of significance of 1891-1932. The staff recommends revising the boundary based on an agreement between the owner and nominator, dated 13 November 2020, with the exception of the Boiler House. The staff recommends classifying the Boiler House and 2001 flag mural (on the south elevation of Warehouse B) as non-contributing

of significance of 1891-1932. The staff recommends revising the boundary based on an agreement between the owner and nominator, dated 13 November 2020, with the exception of the Boiler House. The staff recommends classifying the Boiler House and 2001 flag mural (on the south elevation of Warehouse B) as non-contributing resources. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 35 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 500 N Christopher Columbus Blvd satisfies Criteria for Designation C, E, H, I, and J, and that the designation include the original boundary in the nomination, and that the Boiler House be classified as non-contributing. START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 02:18:20 PRESENTERS:  Ms. Mehley presented the nomination to the Historical Commission.  Owner Seth Brown, attorney Brett Feldman, and preservation consultant Nick Krauss represented the owner.  Nominator Oscar Beisert represented the nomination. DISCUSSION:  The Commissioners spoke at length about the applicability of Criterion I to this site.  Ms. Cooperman contended that there is archaeological potential on the entire parcel.  Mr. Brown and Mr. Feldman argued that adding Criterion I to the proposed designation without mention of it in the nomination does not set a good precedent for future nominations and potentially complicates financial planning for the project. They observed that the preservation ordinance requires that the Historical Commission give the property owner 30 days of notice before the review of a nomination at a public meeting to permit the owner to evaluate the nomination and the implications of designation. In this case, with Criterion I added at the Committee on Historic Designation meeting with no notice or documentation, the property owner was denied an opportunity to participate in the deliberations. The property owner could not anticipate the addition of Criterion I, the archaeological criterion, and still, to this moment, has no written documentation indicating the basis for asserting that the property has an archaeological potential, only the speculative statements of a single Committee member.  Mr. Thomas suggested a compromise in which Criterion I would be applied within the boundary agreed upon by the owner and nominator. o Mr. Brown and Mr. Feldman agreed they would be amenable to this compromise. PUBLIC COMMENT:  Patrick Gross, Preservation Alliance of Greater Philadelphia, spoke in favor of the designation and the

compromise in which Criterion I would be applied within the boundary agreed upon by the owner and nominator. o Mr. Brown and Mr. Feldman agreed they would be amenable to this compromise. PUBLIC COMMENT:  Patrick Gross, Preservation Alliance of Greater Philadelphia, spoke in favor of the designation and the boundary agreed upon by the owner and nominator.  Jim Duffin spoke in support of the nomination and expressed his disagreement with the Committee on Historic Designation’s addition of Criterion I to its recommendation.  Doug Mooney, president of the Philadelphia Archaeological Forum and member of the Committee on Historic Designation, voiced his support for the addition of Criterion I and outlined the reasons behind the Committee’s recommendation. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  Architect Otto Charlies Wolf designed the earliest buildings on site including Warehouse A, Ice Machine House, and Stack Buildings. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 36 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES The Historical Commission concluded that:  The complex is a key example of purpose-built cold storage warehouses and ice manufacturing plants during the last nineteenth and early twentieth centuries in Philadelphia, satisfying Criterion C.  Warehouse A is the work of Philadelphia master builder Allen B. Rorke (1846-1899) and the earliest buildings on site were Warehouse A, Ice Machine House, and Stack Buildings which were designed by architect Otto Charles Wolf (1856-1916), satisfying Criterion E.  The complex is a distinctive visual feature on the Delaware River waterfront, satisfying Criterion H.  Based on the history of the waterfront and archaeological investigations completed at nearby sites, there is a likelihood of archaeological artifacts at the site, satisfying Criterion I  The complex is significant for its association with the commercial and industrial growth and heritage of Philadelphia from the time of its founding through the first half of the twentieth century, satisfying Criterion J. ACTION: Mr. Mattioni moved to find the nomination demonstrates that the property at 500 N. Christopher Columbus Boulevard satisfies Criteria for Designation C, E, H, I, and J, and to designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places, with a revised boundary based on the signed agreement between the owner and nominator dated 13 November 2020 and the Boiler House deemed non-contributing. Ms. Carney seconded the motion, which passed by a vote of 10 to 2. ITEM: 500 N

listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places, with a revised boundary based on the signed agreement between the owner and nominator dated 13 November 2020 and the Boiler House deemed non-contributing. Ms. Carney seconded the motion, which passed by a vote of 10 to 2. ITEM: 500 N CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS BLVD MOTION: Designate, Criteria C, E, H, I, and J with revised boundary MOVED BY: Mattioni SECONDED BY: Carney VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (DPD) X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 10 2 1 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 37 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ADDRESS: 3000 W SCHOOL HOUSE LN AKA 3001 W COULTER ST Name of Resource: Stone Gothic Cottage on Cherry Lane Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: The Overseers of the Penn Charter School Nominator: Nancy Pontone, East Falls Historical Society Staff Contact: Megan Cross Schmitt; megan.schmitt@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate this building, located on the edge of the campus of the William Penn Charter School at 3000 W. School House Lane, and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination does not propose the designation of the entirety of the 3000 W. School House Lane parcel, but only the small portion on which the building in question stands. The nomination contends that the building satisfies Criteria for Designation C and D. Under Criterion C, the nomination argues that the house is significant as a fine example of the Gothic Revival style which was “part of the mid-19th century picturesque and romantic movements in architecture.” Under Criterion D, the nomination contends that features such as the steeply pitched roof with center gable and steep cross gables, the one-story entry porch, and the use of Wissahickon schist further demonstrate the house’s Gothic Revival style of architecture. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that this building, located on the larger parcel known as 3000 W. School House Lane, satisfies Criteria for Designation C and D. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates the building, located on the edge of the campus of the William Penn Charter School at 3000 W. School House Lane, satisfies Criteria

School House Lane, satisfies Criteria for Designation C and D. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates the building, located on the edge of the campus of the William Penn Charter School at 3000 W. School House Lane, satisfies Criteria for Designation C and D. START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 03:25:45 PRESENTERS:  Ms. Schmitt presented the nomination to the Historical Commission.  No one represented the property owner.  Nominator Nancy Pontone represented the nomination. DISCUSSION:  Ms. Schmitt informed the members of the Historical Commission that the staff had been in contact with the property owner, the Penn Charter School, the day before this meeting. The representative of school, Hal Davidow, expressed frustration that they had not received the notices originally sent by the Historical Commission staff dated 2 November 2020. However, he acknowledged that there had been delays with recent mail service. Ms. Schmitt explained that Mr. Davidow said that the school did not oppose the nomination of the subject property.  Mr. Farnham reiterated that the staff of the Historical Commission did send the required notice to the property and to the property owner within the timeframe required by the historic preservation ordinance. He explained that the reason the letters did not reach the correct party at the school until very recently was beyond the control of the Historical Commission.  Ms. Pontone said that she was available to answer questions if there were any. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 38 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES  Ms. Washington asked Ms. Schmitt if the property owner representative had requested a continuance or had opposed the nomination when she spoke with them. Ms. Schmitt responded that Mr. Davidow had not requested a continuance, and that he had informed her of a board meeting held the day before the Historical Commission meeting at which the board decided not to oppose the designation. PUBLIC COMMENT:  David Traub of Save Our Sites spoke in support of the nomination. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  The nominated building, referred to by the nominator as the Gothic Cottage, is situated on the larger parcel of 3000 W. School House Lane.  The Historical Commission provided proper notice to the property owner in compliance with the notice requirements in the historic preservation ordinance. 

found that:  The nominated building, referred to by the nominator as the Gothic Cottage, is situated on the larger parcel of 3000 W. School House Lane.  The Historical Commission provided proper notice to the property owner in compliance with the notice requirements in the historic preservation ordinance.  The property owner does not oppose the designation. The Historical Commission concluded that:  Built ca. 1848, the house is significant as a fine example of the Gothic Revival style, satisfying Criterion C.  Features such as the steeply pitched roof with center gable and steep cross gables, the one-story entry porch, and the use of Wissahickon schist further demonstrate the house’s Gothic Revival style of architecture, satisfying Criterion D. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the subject building located on the larger property at 3000 W. School House Lane satisfies Criteria for Designation C and D, and to designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Washington seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 39 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ITEM: 3000 W SCHOOL HOUSE LN AKA 3001 W COULTER ST MOTION: Designate, Criteria C & D MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Washington VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (DPD) X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 12 1 ADDRESS: 1432-48 S 29TH ST Name of Resource: St. Gabriel’s Roman Catholic Church and Rectory Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Archdiocese of Philadelphia Nominator: Celeste Morello Staff Contact: Megan Cross Schmitt; megan.schmitt@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the church building and rectory at 1432-48 S. 29th Street and list them on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The school building on the western half of the parcel is not included in this nomination. The nomination contends that the buildings satisfy Criteria for Designation D and E. Under Criterion D, the nomination argues that the church building represents the Romanesque style of architecture and exemplifies the forms and features similar to those found in French pilgrimage churches of Romanesque design. Under Criterion E, the nomination contends that St. Gabriel’s church and rectory are designs of significant Philadelphia architect Edwin F.

the nomination argues that the church building represents the Romanesque style of architecture and exemplifies the forms and features similar to those found in French pilgrimage churches of Romanesque design. Under Criterion E, the nomination contends that St. Gabriel’s church and rectory are designs of significant Philadelphia architect Edwin F. Durang. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the church building and rectory at 1432-48 S. 29th Street satisfy Criteria for Designation D and E. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 1432-48 S. 29th Street satisfies Criteria for Designation D and E. START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 03:31:12 PRESENTERS:  Ms. Schmitt presented the nomination to the Historical Commission.  Attorney Henry Clinton represented the parish and the property owner. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 40 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES  Celeste Morello represented the nomination. DISCUSSION:  Ms. Morello informed the members of the Historical Commission that the Committee on Historic Designation unanimously recommended that St. Gabriel’s Church and Rectory be listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places.  Attorney Henry Clinton spoke on behalf of the parish and expressed its objection to the nomination of both buildings. Mr. Clinton explained that the parish opposed the designation of the church building because it would make it more difficult to make changes to the exterior of the building. He also expressed the parish’s vigorous opposition to the designation of the rectory building, arguing that it did not possess any of the significant architectural features that the church building did.  Mr. Clinton acknowledged that the two buildings were physically connected by a narrow hallway. However, he stated that they were clearly two separate buildings. He suggested that the only reason the rectory building was being nominated was owing to its physical attachment to the church building. Mr. Clinton stated that he realized that both the church and the rectory were designed by the same architect. However, the rectory did not possess the same architectural significance as the church.  Mr. Reuter asked Mr. Clinton if he was representing the parish only or if he was also representing the property owner, the Archdiocese of Philadelphia. o Mr. Clinton confirmed that he was representing both the parish and the Archdiocese of Philadelphia.  Ms. Morello stated that, in her

church.  Mr. Reuter asked Mr. Clinton if he was representing the parish only or if he was also representing the property owner, the Archdiocese of Philadelphia. o Mr. Clinton confirmed that he was representing both the parish and the Archdiocese of Philadelphia.  Ms. Morello stated that, in her opinion, the rectory could be subdivided from the church building at some point in the future. She added that she intentionally did not nominate the area of green space on the property where burials had taken place.  Mr. Clinton reiterated that just because the rectory building was on the same parcel as the church building, it did not have to be nominated. He also pointed out that the rectory windows were not original.  After the review was over and the Historical Commission voted to recommend the subject property be listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places, the pastor of St. Gabriel’s Church, Father Carl Braschoss, spoke in opposition to the designation. He informed the members of the Historical Commission that he had experienced technical difficulties logging into the Zoom meeting while the nomination was being discussed so he was unable to comment at that time. Father Braschoss expressed his disappointment that he had not been able to voice his opposition while the item was under consideration. PUBLIC COMMENT:  Oscar Beisert of the Keeping Society of Philadelphia spoke in support of the nomination.  Paul Steinke of the Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia spoke in support of the nomination. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  The church building and the rectory building are connected by a narrow hallway, but can be understood as two separate buildings.  The Historical Commission has designated rectory buildings in the past owing to their own architectural significance, independent of any associated church building. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 41 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES  Both the church building and the rectory building were designed by renowned architect Edwin F. Durang. The Historical Commission concluded that:  The church building represents the Romanesque style of architecture and exemplifies the forms and features similar to those found in French pilgrimage churches of Romanesque design, satisfying Criterion D.  St. Gabriel’s church and rectory are designs of significant Philadelphia architect Edwin F. Durang, satisfying Criterion E. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination

style of architecture and exemplifies the forms and features similar to those found in French pilgrimage churches of Romanesque design, satisfying Criterion D.  St. Gabriel’s church and rectory are designs of significant Philadelphia architect Edwin F. Durang, satisfying Criterion E. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the church and rectory buildings at 1432-48 S. 29th Street satisfy Criteria for Designation D and E, and to designate them as historic, listing them on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Edwards seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. ITEM: 1432-48 S 29TH ST MOTION: Designate, Criteria D and E MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Edwards VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (DPD) X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 12 1 ADDRESS: 1101 JACKSON ST Name of Resource: Epiphany of Our Lord Roman Catholic Church Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Archdiocese of Philadelphia Nominator: Celeste Morello Staff Contact: Kim Chantry, kim.chantry@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 1101 Jackson Street as historic and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that Epiphany of Our Lord Roman Catholic Church, completed in 1905, satisfies Criteria for Designation D, E, and H. Under Criterion D, the nomination contends that the church building embodies distinguishing characteristics of High Gothic architecture. Under Criterion E, the PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 42 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES nomination argues that the church and rectory are the work of Frank R. Watson, one of the most important of the several architects specializing in church design in Philadelphia in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Under Criterion H, the nomination contends that the monumental church building represents an established and familiar visual feature in the predominantly red brick rowhouse neighborhood. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 1101 Jackson Street satisfies Criteria for Designation D, E, and H. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 1101 Jackson Street satisfies Criteria for Designation D, E, and H. START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 03:47:30 PRESENTERS:  Ms. Chantry presented the nomination to the Historical Commission.

H. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 1101 Jackson Street satisfies Criteria for Designation D, E, and H. START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 03:47:30 PRESENTERS:  Ms. Chantry presented the nomination to the Historical Commission.  No one represented the property owner.  Celeste Morello represented the nomination. DISCUSSION:  Father Carl Braschoss, the pastor of St. Gabriel’s Roman Catholic Church, stated that he wanted to speak during the prior review of St. Gabriel’s but was not able to do so. He stated that he is disappointed that he was not able to speak. He stated that he was ready to speak but was excluded for some technical reason. o Mr. Thomas responded that the Commission will look at its procedures, but it allows everyone to speak who has a hand raised indicating a desire to speak. o Mr. Farnham stated that when attorney Henry Clinton introduced himself during the review of St. Gabriel’s, he mentioned that Father Carl Braschoss may be in attendance. At that time, Mr. Farnham looked through the list of attendees and Father Braschoss was not on the list. By the end of the review of St. Gabriel’s, Father Braschoss had appeared on the attendees’ list but had not raised his hand. Father Braschoss’s hand was not raised until the Commission began this current review. Mr. Farnham concluded that he should have asked Father Braschoss if he wished to speak at the end of the prior review, but at that time, his hand was not raised indicating a desire to speak. o Mr. Reuter stated that Mr. Clinton was an attorney representing the owners and interested parties in the matter of the St. Gabriel’s nomination. Mr. Reuter opined that Mr. Clinton would have called on Father Braschoss if he felt it was necessary, but that the Commission received as much information as was necessary. He concluded that Mr. Clinton could raise the matter later if he chooses to do so. PUBLIC COMMENT:  Christian Matozzo, a registered parishioner of Epiphany of Our Lord parish, spoke in opposition to the designation.  David Traub, representing Save Our Sites, spoke in support of the designation. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 43 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES  Epiphany of Our

Our Lord parish, spoke in opposition to the designation.  David Traub, representing Save Our Sites, spoke in support of the designation. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 43 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES  Epiphany of Our Lord Roman Catholic Church was completed in 1905. The Historical Commission concluded that:  The church building embodies distinguishing characteristics of High Gothic architecture, satisfying Criterion D.  The church and rectory are the work of Frank R. Watson, one of the most important of the several architects specializing in church design in Philadelphia in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, satisfying Criterion E.  The monumental church building represents an established and familiar visual feature in the predominantly red brick rowhouse neighborhood, satisfying Criterion H. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find the nomination demonstrates that the property at 1101 Jackson Street satisfies Criteria for Designation D, E, and H, and to designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Carney seconded the motion, which passed by a vote of 12 to 0. ITEM: 1101 JACKSON ST MOTION: Designate, D, E, H MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Carney VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (DPD) X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 12 1 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 44 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES COMMENT ON NATIONAL REGISTER NOMINATIONS ADDRESS: 4102-04 LANCASTER AVE Name of Resource: Leader Theater Proposed Action: Comment on National Register Nomination Property Owner: Kalidave Limited Partners Nominator: Logan I. Ferguson, Powers & Company, Inc. Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov ADDRESS: 900-04 N 63RD ST Name of Resource: Overbrook Garden Apartments Proposed Action: Comment on National Register Nomination Property Owner: Overbrook Gardens Apts LLC Nominator: Kevin McMahon, Powers & Company, Inc. Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov ADDRESS: 2155 CASTOR AVE Name of Resource: Schlichter Jute Cordage Company Proposed Action: Comment on National Register Nomination Property Owner: Sterling Paper Lofts LLC Nominator: Logan I. Ferguson, Powers & Company, Inc. Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov ADDRESS: 3475 COLLINS ST Name of Resource: Tioga Mills Proposed Action: Comment on National Register Nomination Property Owner: Multiple condominium owners Nominator: Kevin McMahon,

Proposed Action: Comment on National Register Nomination Property Owner: Sterling Paper Lofts LLC Nominator: Logan I. Ferguson, Powers & Company, Inc. Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov ADDRESS: 3475 COLLINS ST Name of Resource: Tioga Mills Proposed Action: Comment on National Register Nomination Property Owner: Multiple condominium owners Nominator: Kevin McMahon, Powers & Company, Inc. Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov ADDRESS: 4100 HAVERFORD AVE Name of Resource: West Philadelphia Passenger Railway Co. Carhouse Proposed Action: Comment on National Register Nomination Property Owner: DAJ Haverford LLC Nominator: Cindy Hamilton and Michael LaFlash, Heritage Consulting Group Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 04:01:00 PRESENTERS:  Ms. Mehley presented the nominations to the Historical Commission.  Logan Ferguson represented the nominations for 4102-04 Lancaster Avenue and 2155 Castor Avenue.  Kevin McMahon represented the nominations for 900-04 N. 63rd Street and 3475 Collins Street.  No one represented the nomination for 4100 Haverford Avenue. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 45 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES DISCUSSION:  Mr. Lippert inquired about the local designation status of each of the four properties. o Ms. Mehley confirmed that 4100 Haverford Avenue is the only one listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. She noted several were identified as potential historic resources in memoranda written for the Phila2035 planning report.  Ms. Ferguson and Mr. McMahon confirmed that their nominations were part of a larger scope related to Federal Historic Preservation Tax Incentive projects.  The Commission members commented that each property appeared worthy of designation on the National Register and noted they should also be considered for local designation.  Mr. Thomas asked the staff to communicate the Philadelphia Historical Commission’s recommendation of 4102-04 Lancaster Avenue, 900-04 N. 63rd Street, 2155 Castor Avenue, 3475 Collins Street, and 4100 Haverford Avenue for designation to the National Register of Historic Places to the Pennsylvania Historical & Museum Commission. PUBLIC COMMENT:  Steven Peitzman supported the National Register nomination and recommended 4102-04 Lancaster Avenue be nominated for the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places.  David Traub and Jim Duffin supported the National Register nomination for 2155 Castor Avenue and commented favorably on the building’s architecture. ADJOURNMENT START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 04:22:55 ACTION: At 1:24 p.m., Ms. Cooperman moved to adjourn. Ms. Edwards seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 46

National Register nomination for 2155 Castor Avenue and commented favorably on the building’s architecture. ADJOURNMENT START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 04:22:55 ACTION: At 1:24 p.m., Ms. Cooperman moved to adjourn. Ms. Edwards seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 JANUARY 2021 46 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ITEM: Adjournment MOTION: Adjourn MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Edwards VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (DPD) X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 11 2 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.