Committee on Historic Designation — Sep 6, 2023

COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 6 SEPTEMBER 2023 1 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION OF THE PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, 9 SEPTEMBER 2023 REMOTE MEETING ON ZOOM EMILY COOPERMAN, CHAIR CALL TO ORDER START TIME IN AUDIO RECORDING: 00:00:00 The Chair called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m. The following Committee members joined her: Committee Member Present Absent Comment Emily Cooperman, Ph.D., chair X Suzanna Barucco X Jeff Cohen, Ph.D. X Bruce Laverty X Debbie Miller X Elizabeth Milroy, Ph.D. X The meeting was held remotely via Zoom video and audio-conferencing software. The following staff members were present: Jonathan Farnham, Executive Director Kim Chantry, Historic Preservation Planner III Laura DiPasquale, Historic Preservation Planner III Shannon Garrison, Historic Preservation Planner II Heather Hendrickson, Historic Preservation Planner I Ted Maust, Historic Preservation Planner I Allyson Mehley, Historic Preservation Planner II Leonard Reuter, Law Department Dan Shachar-Krasnoff, Historic Preservation Planner II Alex Till, Historic Preservation Planner I The following persons attended the online meeting: Aaron Moselle, WHYY News Alex Balloon Allee Davis Allison Weiss, SoLo Germantown Amy Lambert, University City Historical Society Bruce Bohri, Department of Planning and Development Carolyn Klepser David Traub, Save Our Sites Darryl Blackwell Eric Teel Greg Pronko Hanna Stark, Preservation Alliance Henry Felsman COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 6 SEPTEMBER 2023 2 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES Ian Litwin, Philadelphia City Planning Commission J. Jabez Smith Jay Farrell Jeffrey J. Smith Katherine Liss, Philadelphia City Planning Commission Kathy Dowdell Kimberly Haas, Hidden City Philadelphia Nancy Pontone Oscar Beisert, Keeping Society Paul Steinke, Preservation Alliance Russell Fulton Stephanie Pennypacker Steven Peitzman Susan Wetherill Yvonne Haskins, Esq. AGENDA ADDRESS: 700-34 RACE ST Name of Resource: Roundhouse, Philadelphia Police Headquarters Proposed Action: Designate Property Owner: City of Philadelphia Nominator: Preservation Alliance/Docomomo Philadelphia Staff Contact: Jon Farnham, jon.farnham@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property known as the Roundhouse, the former Philadelphia Police Headquarters at 700-34 Race Street, and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Philadelphia architectural firm Geddes Brecher Qualls & Cunningham (GBQC) and engineer August Komendant designed the Roundhouse in 1959 and its construction was completed in 1962. The building is composed of approximately 1,000 precast concrete units. The nomination argues that the Roundhouse reflects the environment in an era characterized by a distinctive architectural style, the Expressionist

Qualls & Cunningham (GBQC) and engineer August Komendant designed the Roundhouse in 1959 and its construction was completed in 1962. The building is composed of approximately 1,000 precast concrete units. The nomination argues that the Roundhouse reflects the environment in an era characterized by a distinctive architectural style, the Expressionist style, satisfying Criterion for Designation C, and embodies distinguishing characteristics of that style, satisfying Criterion D. The nomination contends that the Roundhouse embodies distinguishing characteristics of an engineering specimen with its architectural precast concrete and state of the art post tensioning, also satisfying Criterion D. The nomination highlights the collaboration between the prominent Philadelphia architectural firm GBQC, engineer August Komendant, and general contractor Sovereign Construction Company and asserts that they were designers and builders whose work significantly influenced the development of the city, state, and nation, satisfying Criterion E. The nomination claims that the Roundhouse contains elements of design, detail, materials, and craftsmanship that represent significant innovations, satisfying Criterion F. The nomination asserts that the Roundhouse satisfies Criterion H, owing to its unique siting and location. Finally, the nomination contends that the Roundhouse satisfies Criterion J because it exemplifies the progressive period in Philadelphia under Mayors Clark and Dilworth. The proposed boundary for the designation includes the northern portion of the site with the building but not the surface parking lot to the south. The boundary also excludes a small parcel at the northwest corner of the site that is owned by the Delaware River Port Authority, not the City of Philadelphia. The nomination identifies the concrete perimeter wall as a non-contributing feature, owing to the expectation that any redevelopment of the site will require its demolition. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 6 SEPTEMBER 2023 3 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 700-34 Race Street, the Roundhouse, satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, E, F, H, and J. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:09:11 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Farnham presented the nomination to the Committee on Historic Designation. • Hanna Stark of the Preservation Alliance and Allee Davis of Docomomo represented the nomination. • No one represented the property owner. Mr. Farnham noted that the property owner, the City of Philadelphia, does not oppose the designation. DISCUSSION: • Ms. Stark stated that the Preservation Alliance is thrilled to see this nomination move

the Preservation Alliance and Allee Davis of Docomomo represented the nomination. • No one represented the property owner. Mr. Farnham noted that the property owner, the City of Philadelphia, does not oppose the designation. DISCUSSION: • Ms. Stark stated that the Preservation Alliance is thrilled to see this nomination move forward and hopes that it is listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. She explained that the Preservation Alliance is hopeful that the property will be designated so the site’s future redevelopment will result in the preservation of this mid-century landmark. She stated that the nomination explores the social history of the police’s use of the building over time. The building has become associated with the destructive urban renewal initiatives and police brutality. The Preservation Alliance contends that the site can and should be transformed and repurposed into part of a solution, repairing historic wrongs, while maintaining this very important building. The Preservation Alliance has commissioned conceptual architectural renderings which can be found at save the website roundhouse.org. These renderings model how future development of the site can accommodate preservation of the Roundhouse and include recognition of the past wrongs committed in the building. Designation will ensure that future redevelopment preserves the building. Ms. Stark thanked the Committee for its consideration and stated that she hopes that the Roundhouse will be listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. • Ms. Milroy stated that this is a wonderfully detailed and thoroughly researched nomination. It certainly makes the case for an important building. It certainly sums up the conversations and debates around this building, which warrants preservation. The architectural technological innovations that this building demonstrates are important and as well as its role as a marker in Philadelphia’s history. • Ms. Barucco agreed with Ms. Milroy. She stated that she is very excited to see this nomination on the agenda. She stated that the building is a landmark. She stated that “its significance is a slam dunk.” She stated that she knows that there will be a use found for this building. She noted that there have been a couple of architectural studios, at the University of Pennsylvania and at Georgia Tech, exploring ways that this building can be reused. She stated that she supports the nomination. • Ms. Cooperman noted that the nomination discusses the associations that the Roundhouse acquired largely during the Rizzo administration as a dangerous and

of architectural studios, at the University of Pennsylvania and at Georgia Tech, exploring ways that this building can be reused. She stated that she supports the nomination. • Ms. Cooperman noted that the nomination discusses the associations that the Roundhouse acquired largely during the Rizzo administration as a dangerous and threatening place, but it also discusses the fact that the Roundhouse was conceived in part is a progressive prescription to address police corruption of the past and it also housed enlightened administrations that brought the best of law enforcement practices to the city. So, we should not pretend that all of those tragic things did not take place, but we should also remember that this building was intended not as a place in which all of those repressive and racist and unenlightened practices would COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 6 SEPTEMBER 2023 4 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES take place. Its intention was quite the opposite, to be a place of progressive values, and the architecture really reflects that because it was an architecture that was looking to the future and to technologically in a spirit of progressiveness. And unfortunately, time and again, the hopes that have been pinned on architecture to reform human nature have proven to be unsuccessful. Ms. Cooperman concluded that she hopes that this building will be able to carry its original progressive, positive intention to its future use. • Mr. Laverty agreed with Ms. Cooperman. He observed that one could compare the hopes that the planners of this building had with those of the planners of Eastern State Penitentiary. The prison, like the Roundhouse, was founded on a wonderful idea, but the execution was quite horrific. He stated that the nominators here have done a fantastic job with the research, and in the presentation of the merits of the building itself, without ignoring social terror that occurred in it. He noted a minor mistake on page 12 in the third paragraph. He corrected that the Mitchell/Giurgola William Penn High School was not located at 15th and Mount Vernon Streets, as the nomination claims, but was located on N. Broad Street between Thompson and Master Streets. He applauded and supported the nomination. • Ms. Davis thanked architect Jack Pyburn for his help with and inspiration for the nomination. She also thanked Oscar Beisert, who was helpful throughout the process. She also

the nomination claims, but was located on N. Broad Street between Thompson and Master Streets. He applauded and supported the nomination. • Ms. Davis thanked architect Jack Pyburn for his help with and inspiration for the nomination. She also thanked Oscar Beisert, who was helpful throughout the process. She also thanked the City for not opposing the nomination. She concluded that it is an important building and offers opportunity for the city on many levels. • Mr. Farnham noted for the record that the nomination was originally submitted in June of 2019, withdrawn in the aftermath of the murder of George Floyd, amended, and then resubmitted in December 2022. He thanked Ian Litwin, who is in the meeting today, for the public process that he ran for the City of Philadelphia under the auspices of the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. • Ms. Milroy pointed to a mistake in the caption of figure 7. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Yvonne Haskins stated that she worked in the building as a policewoman in the 1960s. She thanked the Historical Commission for considering the nomination and the Committee for discussing its history, both good and bad. She concluded that the building is very significant in Philadelphia’s history. • Kathy Dowdell stated that she thinks that the lack of public comment on this matter is indicative of the fact that the City agencies already held an exhaustive public set of public meetings and conducted significant public outreach. She stated that it was a wonderful effort. She observed that often those kinds of efforts are viewed as a rubber stamp for something that the City already wanted to do, and that she was really pleasantly surprised in this case because the outreach effort really produced a very different outcome than she was expecting in her “old lady cynicism.” She also noted that she attended a presentation by architect Jack Pyburn on this building held by the National AIA Preservation Committee about 25 years ago, and, at the time, she was astounded by the structural system used for this building. For that reason alone, this building is a landmark, she asserted. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Committee on Historic Designation found that: • Philadelphia architectural firm Geddes Brecher Qualls & Cunningham (GBQC) and engineer August Komendant designed the Roundhouse in 1959 and its construction was completed in 1962. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 6 SEPTEMBER 2023

landmark, she asserted. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Committee on Historic Designation found that: • Philadelphia architectural firm Geddes Brecher Qualls & Cunningham (GBQC) and engineer August Komendant designed the Roundhouse in 1959 and its construction was completed in 1962. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 6 SEPTEMBER 2023 5 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES • The building is composed of approximately 1,000 precast concrete units. The Committee on Historic Designation concluded that: • The Roundhouse reflects the environment in an era characterized by a distinctive architectural style, the Expressionist style, satisfying Criterion for Designation C, and embodies distinguishing characteristics of that style, satisfying Criterion D. • The Roundhouse embodies distinguishing characteristics of an engineering specimen with its architectural precast concrete and state of the art post tensioning, also satisfying Criterion D. • Prominent Philadelphia architectural firm GBQC, engineer August Komendant, and general contractor Sovereign Construction Company were designers and builders whose work significantly influenced the development of the city, state, and nation, satisfying Criterion E. • The Roundhouse contains elements of design, detail, materials, and craftsmanship that represent significant innovations, satisfying Criterion F. • The Roundhouse satisfies Criterion H, owing to its unique siting and location. • The Roundhouse satisfies Criterion J because it exemplifies the progressive period in Philadelphia under Mayors Clark and Dilworth. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 700-34 Race Street, the Roundhouse, satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, E, F, H, and J. ITEM: 700-34 Race St. MOTION: Designate; Criteria C, D, E, F, H, and J MOVED BY: Barucco SECONDED BY: Laverty VOTE Committee Member Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Emily Cooperman, chair X Suzanna Barucco X Jeff Cohen X Bruce Laverty X Debbie Miller X Elizabeth Milroy X Total 5 1 ADDRESS: 1611 WALNUT ST Name of Resource: Hollinger Building Proposed Action: Designate Property Owner: 1611 PPW LLC Nominator: Center City Residents’ Association Staff Contact: Heather Hendrickson, heather.hendrickson@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate 1611 Walnut Street and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the Hollinger Building, built in 1923, satisfies Criteria for Designation C, E, and J. Under Criterion C, the nomination argues that the Hollinger Building, with its Neoclassical façade, reflects an era in American architecture when this architectural style was commonly

the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the Hollinger Building, built in 1923, satisfies Criteria for Designation C, E, and J. Under Criterion C, the nomination argues that the Hollinger Building, with its Neoclassical façade, reflects an era in American architecture when this architectural style was commonly applied to commercial buildings serving COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 6 SEPTEMBER 2023 6 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES the financial industry. The nomination contends that the property satisfies Criterion E due to it being an important representative commercial building designed by Charles E. Oelschlager, an architect whose work significantly influenced the City of Philadelphia and the larger surrounding region. Under Criterion J the nomination maintains that the Hollinger Building is representative of and related to the cultural, economic, and social heritage of Walnut Street’s redevelopment and transformation from residential to commercial which occurred between 1900 and 1930. The nomination argues the Hollinger Building also represents the economic and historical heritage of the community through the business tenants that have leased its commercial space, from the pre-1940s bankers and brokers, to Bachrach, Inc., a legacy in American photography and portraiture. The period of significance spans from 1923 when the building was constructed, to 1968, Bachrach’s 100th anniversary and last year of renting the commercial space. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that 1611 Walnut Street satisfies Criterion for Designation C, E, and J. The staff also recommends adding language to the Physical Description section clarifying that the storefront has been significantly altered since original construction and the division between the first level and mezzanine level is the only character defining feature that remains. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:30:37 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Hendrickson presented the nomination to the Committee on Historic Designation. • Oscar Beisert represented the nomination. • No one represented the property owner. DISCUSSION: • Ms. Cooperman stated that in her opinion she believed the current glass storefront could be deemed a noncontributing element so long as the sense of the two-story storefront remained a character-defining feature of the property. o Ms. Barucco agreed and added the addition of the word “glazed” storefront would be helpful to clarify. • Mr. Laverty thanked the nominators for recognizing Charles Oelschlager and his contributions to Philadelphia architecture. He noted Mr. Oelschlager was involved in a wide variety of endeavors. o Ms.

the property. o Ms. Barucco agreed and added the addition of the word “glazed” storefront would be helpful to clarify. • Mr. Laverty thanked the nominators for recognizing Charles Oelschlager and his contributions to Philadelphia architecture. He noted Mr. Oelschlager was involved in a wide variety of endeavors. o Ms. Cooperman agreed. • Ms. Milroy noted that the staff’s recommendation failed to call out the extant storefront pilasters as character-defining elements, which remain. She asked the chair if this should be indicated in the Committee’s motion. o Ms. Cooperman responded in the affirmative. PUBLIC COMMENT: • David Traub, representing Save Our Sites, commented in support of the nomination. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Committee on Historic Designation found that: • The storefront has been altered throughout the years and the glazed storefront elements are not character-defining features. • The addition of the word “glazed” storefront would more clearly describe the noncontributing storefront elements. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 6 SEPTEMBER 2023 7 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES • The pilasters, which surround the storefront, are contributing or historic elements. The Committee on Historic Designation concluded that: • The nomination demonstrates that the property satisfies Criterion C due to its Neoclassical façade. • The nomination demonstrates that the property satisfies Criterion E because it is a representative commercial building designed by Charles E. Oelschlager. • The nomination demonstrates that the property satisfies Criterion J and is representative of the cultural, economic, and social heritage of Walnut Street’s redevelopment and transformation from residential to commercial which occurred between 1900 and 1930. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 1611 Walnut Street satisfies Criteria for Designation C, E, and J, with the understanding that the significantly altered glazed storefront excluding the historic masonry surround is not a character- defining feature, but the division between the first level and mezzanine level is a character- defining feature. ITEM: 1611 Walnut St. MOTION: Designate; Criteria C, E, and J MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Barucco VOTE Committee Member Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Emily Cooperman, chair X Suzanna Barucco X Jeff Cohen X Bruce Laverty X Debbie Miller X Elizabeth Milroy X Total 5 1 ADDRESS: 150 AND 160 W WASHINGTON LN Name of Resource: Cranford Proposed Action: Designate Property Owners: 150: G13 Residences,

Barucco VOTE Committee Member Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Emily Cooperman, chair X Suzanna Barucco X Jeff Cohen X Bruce Laverty X Debbie Miller X Elizabeth Milroy X Total 5 1 ADDRESS: 150 AND 160 W WASHINGTON LN Name of Resource: Cranford Proposed Action: Designate Property Owners: 150: G13 Residences, LLC; 160: Sapphire Corp. Nominator: The Keeping Society Staff Contact: Laura DiPasquale, laura.dipasquale@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate two properties, 150 and 160 W. Washington Lane, as historic, listing them on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The property at 150 W. Washington Lane includes a Colonial Revival brick house constructed in 1893 and expanded in 1909. The property at 160 W. Washington Lane is an undeveloped parcel surrounded by a stone retaining wall. The nomination argues that the properties are significant under Criteria A and D. Under Criterion A, the nomination argues that the properties are significant for their association with Charles F. Jenkins, a prominent Quaker businessman, historian, and publisher, who impacted the cultural and social development of the Germantown COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 6 SEPTEMBER 2023 8 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES community and larger Philadelphia area. Under Criterion D, the nomination argues that the properties represent a distinctive example of the Colonial Revival style. The nomination, which was submitted under a combined address of 150-160 W. Washington Lane but updated by the staff, does not appear to accurately reflect the history of the parcel at 160 W. Washington Lane, instead conflating it with that of 150 W. Washington Lane and identifying it as a side yard and garden. The undeveloped parcel at 160 W. Washington Lane was part of Edward Cope property that fronted on W. Tulpehocken Street and extended along Greene Street to W. Washington Lane until Cope’s death in 1911. At that time, the parcel was conveyed to Cope’s daughter, Maria C. Jenkins and her husband Charles F. Jenkins, who had purchased a portion of the property that would become 150 W. Washington Lane from Cope and a portion from David H. Livezey in 1893 and constructed the house in question at 150 W. Washington Lane. Charles and Maria Jenkins sold the property with the house at 150 W. Washington Lane to Elizabeth and E. Naudain Simons in 1917, and the undeveloped parcel at 160 W. Washington Lane to the same in 1919. While the Jenkins family

the house in question at 150 W. Washington Lane. Charles and Maria Jenkins sold the property with the house at 150 W. Washington Lane to Elizabeth and E. Naudain Simons in 1917, and the undeveloped parcel at 160 W. Washington Lane to the same in 1919. While the Jenkins family may have used the parcel at 160 W. Washington Lane as a garden prior to the death of Edward Cope in 1911, the nomination does not provide evidence to support this claim. The only historic reference to a garden at the Jenkins property is a 1902 photograph of a sundial, whose location is not identified in the nomination. The nomination does not discuss the stone retaining wall that runs the length of the 160 W. Washington Lane parcel. It is likely a remnant of the Edward Cope property. The stone wall abuts a Colonial Revival brick retaining wall along 150 W. Washington Lane, and corresponds to historic maps, none of which are provided in the nomination. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 150 W. Washington Lane satisfies Criteria for Designation A and D but does not demonstrate that the property at 160 W. Washington Lane satisfies any criteria. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:42:56 PRESENTERS: • Ms. DiPasquale presented the nomination to the Committee on Historic Designation. • Oscar Beisert of the Keeping Society represented the nomination. • Attorney Yvonne Haskins represented the property owner of 160 W. Washington Lane. No one represented the property owner of 150 W. Washington Lane. DISCUSSION: • Mr. Beisert explained that the properties at 150 and 160 W. Washington Lane had been on his list of potential nominations for a long time, and when he learned that it had been the home of Charles Jenkins, that added to the significance. He stated that, given Jenkins’ importance with the Farm Journal and landscape gardening in general, he had to include the lot or side yard at 160 W. Washington Lane, as it was associated with 150 W. Washington Lane for many years and is the only logical place where a garden could have been located. • Ms. Haskins, the attorney for the owner of 160 W. Washington Lane, expressed respect for Mr. Beisert but disagreed with the inclusion of 160 W. Washington Lane. She noted that the property owner could not attend the meeting and explained

logical place where a garden could have been located. • Ms. Haskins, the attorney for the owner of 160 W. Washington Lane, expressed respect for Mr. Beisert but disagreed with the inclusion of 160 W. Washington Lane. She noted that the property owner could not attend the meeting and explained that she had just sent a letter to the Historical Commission from an arborist evaluating the condition of any growth and trees on the property. She opined that the letter is clear COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 6 SEPTEMBER 2023 9 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES that there are no trees worthy of preservation on the property. She explained that the letter identifies three heritage trees, all of which are dying and should be removed. She opposed the designation of 160 W. Washington Lane, explaining that the properties have been separated and opining that there is clearly no basis for preservation of a property that has dangerous trees. • Ms. Cooperman offered general remarks about the designation of landscapes. She explained that the City does not regulate gardens per se as historic, nor does it regulate trees under normal circumstances through the preservation ordinance. She noted that in the past, the Commission has designated buildings with a buffer that would be appropriate for a suburban house. She explained that, when the house was built, Germantown was considered a suburb despite being in the city. She endorsed the nomination for the significance of Charles Jenkins, going on to explain that Jenkins lived on the Cope landscape, on his father-in-law's estate. She opined that it was a shared family landscape—a Cope landscape, rather than a Jenkins landscape. She noted that the nomination places Maria Cope Jenkins in the backseat, as someone who is an appendage spouse, but that in traditional Quaker families like the Copes, women were recognized as having more agency. She connected the nomination and the Cope family to their shared family landscape and the importance of green space to them in the development of what is now the Awbury Arboretum. She noted that there is not really a good amount of information in the nomination about the extent of this yard as a Cope/Jenkins landscape, its character, and that obviously the Cope house is gone. • Ms. Milroy asked if the two properties been severed. o Ms. Haskins responded that her client owned both

is not really a good amount of information in the nomination about the extent of this yard as a Cope/Jenkins landscape, its character, and that obviously the Cope house is gone. • Ms. Milroy asked if the two properties been severed. o Ms. Haskins responded that her client owned both properties as one time about 10 years ago and subdivided them into the two parcels around that time. Currently, the properties are owned by different parties. • Ms. Miller agreed with Ms. Cooperman’s comments on landscapes and the parcel at 160 W. Washington Lane being part of a shared landscape. Referencing the Cope connection to Awbury, she noted that the family had a history of creating semi- personal landscapes for shared use. She opined that even with limited information available in the photographs in the nomination, the parcel at 160 W. Washington Lane was clearly a developed landscape, and that they would not have just had a weedy scrub brush landscape next to their beautiful home. She explained that some landscape features still remain, including the curved path, which may be coated now, but the original path is likely right underneath, as well as a round feature that is identified as the potential sundial plinth, but may be a well. She stated that, even if trees need to come down, the landscape itself has remnants of a design, that may be overlooked by someone without experience looking for remnant clues. The historic garden could be recreated. She noted that she has a hard time dismissing 160 W. Washington Lane as having no significance, when it was there for two homes and two families. • Ms. Milroy also agreed with Ms. Cooperman. She commented that she read the depression in the ground as a base for the sundial and noted that it would be interesting to see a modern photograph taken in the same location on the property as the historic photograph of the sundial in the nomination. • Ms. Cooperman commented that there was less information in the nomination than she would have liked in terms of historic aerial photographs and maps. She also noted that the nomination lacked a full chain of title that would have been helpful in determining how long the lot was associated with the Jenkins and Cope families, particularly when 160 was owned by Maria Cope Jenkins and Charles Jenkins, who COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION,

and maps. She also noted that the nomination lacked a full chain of title that would have been helpful in determining how long the lot was associated with the Jenkins and Cope families, particularly when 160 was owned by Maria Cope Jenkins and Charles Jenkins, who COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 6 SEPTEMBER 2023 10 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES sold it after 1919. She noted that they did not buy two lots and develop them together, but that that was not the nature of the Cope landscape. She argued that the two lots having separate deed history is not evidence of them lacking an association. o Ms. Milroy agreed, noting that the discussion is about “daddy’s landscape,” in terms of 160 being owned by Edward Cope, Maria Cope Jenkins’ father. • Ms. Milroy observed that the challenge with gardens and landscapes is that they die. If not properly cared for, trees will die and have to be removed, because gardens are living things. She noted that Awbury Arboretum, which is now property of the City, was another part of the Cope family history of landscape and green space. She agreed that there could have been more evidence provided in the nomination itself, but that there is compelling evidence nonetheless. She argued that it is important to consider a house in its context, and the fact that this house did not sit all by itself. She noted that the side porch presumably entered into Jenkins’ office, which faced the garden. She opined that the garden was a point of conversation between husband and wife and wife’s family. • Ms. Cooperman explained that she also sits on the Historical Commission, and that there will be a question as to whether 160 W. Washington Lane is a developable lot. She observed that the Commission has approved many applications for development of land such as this that is associated with similar buildings such where there is an appropriate setback. She noted that the City cannot designate trees, but that development on the property should give appropriate breathing space for the house that was there historically. o Ms. Barucco commented that it is unfortunate that the City does not regulate plantings given that the city was at the center of landscape history. o Ms. Milroy noted that public sentiment is strong to preserve that patch of land at 160

for the house that was there historically. o Ms. Barucco commented that it is unfortunate that the City does not regulate plantings given that the city was at the center of landscape history. o Ms. Milroy noted that public sentiment is strong to preserve that patch of land at 160 W. Washington Lane. • Ms. Miller commented that, if one were to peel back the layers on the open parcel, there will likely be preserved landscape under the ground surface. She questioned whether the inclusion of Criterion I would be appropriate, noting that there are fields of landscape and garden archaeology. She noted that gardens deal with ephemeral things, but that often one can go down just an inch and uncover something. The historic garden could be recreated. o Ms. Cooperman agreed with Ms. Miller but noted that the nomination itself would need more information to support the inclusion of Criterion I. • Ms. Haskins responded that it appears the Committee members are comparing a privately owned property with public land, the Awbury Arboretum, and opined that that seems like a taking. This vacant lot is private property, not a public park. o Ms. Cooperman disagreed, noting that that is not what is happening. o Ms. Milroy explained that the Committee was discussing the historic association between the Cope family and Awbury Arboretum and the city’s larger park development as well as the properties at 150 and 160 W. Washington Lane, but in no way suggesting condemnation or taking of these properties. • Ms. Cooperman summarized that there was a historic association between the properties at 150 and 160 W. Washington Lane, and that there is evidence that the latter was at one time a garden, not just an open lot, that was part of the larger Cope property and used as the side yard for the Jenkins’ house. • Mr. Laverty disagreed with the other Committee members, arguing that he did not think the case was made for 160 W. Washington Lane in terms of research into landscape design or archaeology even at a tertiary level, and that since the COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 6 SEPTEMBER 2023 11 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES properties are separate, the Committee should think of them as separate. He noted that the discussion of perimeter and breathing space around the house does not seem applicable here, as

the COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 6 SEPTEMBER 2023 11 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES properties are separate, the Committee should think of them as separate. He noted that the discussion of perimeter and breathing space around the house does not seem applicable here, as it is generally applied to boundaries around resources on the same parcel. The Historical Commission does not designate adjacent parcels to provide breathing space around historic buildings. He stated that he does not think the case is made in the nomination for that here. o Ms. Cooperman responded that she feels there is enough information in the nomination that these properties were a house and side yard, and that they can extrapolate what they know about Germantown properties and that the house and lot were associated with the same family. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Allison Weiss of SoLo Germantown Civic Association supported the nomination of both properties. She opined that there is a need to preserve landscapes and green spaces. She noted that the zoning archives show that 160 W. Washington Lane used to be one property with 150 W. Washington Lane, and that a photograph on a magazine cover shows that it was the garden for the house. • Neighbor Lecie Solomon expressed thanks for the nomination and research. She noted that she grew up in the house across the street and never knew its significance but knew the property was beautiful. She opined that people do not pass Washington Lane and see the properties at 150 and 160 W. Washington Lane as separate. She noted that Germantown is historically known for its green space and trees, and that the yard and green space add to the magnificence of Germantown properties. She noted that she led the petition drive in favor of the nomination. She obtained 72 signatures on a petition asking for both properties to be included on the Register. • Russell Fulton, the History and Heritage committee chair of West Central Germantown Neighbors, supported the nomination and argued that the two properties go together. He opined that it would be ironic if the Commission did not designate both the residence and garden of such an important person. He noted that the properties together represent a period in which every country gentleman had his house and garden. He explained that he suspects that Jenkins, who was a horticulturalist and

would be ironic if the Commission did not designate both the residence and garden of such an important person. He noted that the properties together represent a period in which every country gentleman had his house and garden. He explained that he suspects that Jenkins, who was a horticulturalist and publisher of the Farm Journal, only left Germantown for Kitchens Lane so he could have more ground to do horticultural studies and experiments. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Committee on Historic Designation found that: • 150 and 160 W. Washington Lane were historically associated with one another as part of the shared family complex of Edward Cope, his daughter Maria Cope Jenkins, and her husband Charles Jenkins. • The Cope family had a history of shared family landscapes and open space with the development of nearby Awbury, which they left to the City of Philadelphia to preserve as Awbury Arboretum. • Charles F. Jenkins was a person significant in the history of Philadelphia as a prominent Quaker businessman, historian, and editor and publisher of the Farm Journal. • Large yards, gardens, and open space are an important part of the character of Germantown. • The preservation ordinance does not regulate plantings, including trees. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 6 SEPTEMBER 2023 12 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES • The nomination lacks an argument for the inclusion of Criterion I, although evidence of the original garden may remain, and some remnants may be just below the ground surface. The Committee on Historic Designation concluded that: • The nomination demonstrates that the properties satisfy Criterion A for their association with Charles F. Jekins and the Cope family. • The nomination demonstrates that the properties satisfy Criterion D. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the properties at 150 and 160 W. Washington Lane satisfy Criteria for Designation A and D. ITEM: 150 and 160 W. Washington Ln. MOTION: Designate; Criteria A and D MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Miller VOTE Committee Member Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Emily Cooperman, chair X Suzanna Barucco X Jeff Cohen X Bruce Laverty X Debbie Miller X Elizabeth Milroy X Total 4 1 1 ADDRESS: 1621 JEFFERSON ST Name of Resource: Dr. Oscar James Cooper House Proposed Action: Designate Property Owner: Union Housing Development Nominator: Preservation Alliance

No Abstain Recuse Absent Emily Cooperman, chair X Suzanna Barucco X Jeff Cohen X Bruce Laverty X Debbie Miller X Elizabeth Milroy X Total 4 1 1 ADDRESS: 1621 JEFFERSON ST Name of Resource: Dr. Oscar James Cooper House Proposed Action: Designate Property Owner: Union Housing Development Nominator: Preservation Alliance Staff Contact: Ted Maust, theodore.maust@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 1621 Jefferson Street and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The semi-detached rowhouse with a side ell, constructed in 1890, was the home and medical office of Dr. Oscar James Cooper from 1930- 1972. The nomination contends that Dr. Cooper’s legacy as founder of the Omega Psi Phi Fraternity, charter member of the Pyramid Club, and long-time physician makes the property eligible for designation under Criteria for Designation A and J. It argues that Dr. Cooper was “a person significant in the past” and that his medical office, which served many in the predominantly African American neighborhood “exemplifies the cultural, political, economic, social or historical heritage of the community.” STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 1621 Jefferson Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A and J. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 6 SEPTEMBER 2023 13 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 01:20:54 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Maust presented the nomination to the Committee on Historic Designation. • Hanna Stark of the Preservation Alliance represented the nomination. • J. Jabez Smith represented the property owner. DISCUSSION: • Ms. Milroy congratulated the nominator and praised the nomination. She further commended the owners for their work doing a sensitive restoration of the property. • Ms. Barucco expressed gratitude for the property owner’s community work and stewardship of the property. • Mr. Laverty commented that it was pleasing to review such a well-renovated property and noted the retention of the turret as a special highlight. • Ms. Cooperman wondered whether the nomination could have included architectural merits as well as social history, but that the nomination as it stands is worthy of designation. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Eric Teel commented in support of the nomination. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Committee on Historic Designation found that: • Dr. Oscar James Cooper was an important figure in the history of Philadelphia, especially in North Philadelphia. • The subject property has

of designation. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Eric Teel commented in support of the nomination. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Committee on Historic Designation found that: • Dr. Oscar James Cooper was an important figure in the history of Philadelphia, especially in North Philadelphia. • The subject property has been sensitively restored and retains key features which are significant to the residential architecture of the neighborhood, including a prominent turret. The Committee on Historic Designation concluded that: • The nomination demonstrates that the property satisfies Criterion A and J through its association with Dr. Oscar James Cooper, who had significant impact on the North Philadelphia community through his medical practice and his leadership in social organizations including the Omega Psi Phi Fraternity and the Pyramid Club. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 1621 Jefferson Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A and J. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 6 SEPTEMBER 2023 14 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ITEM: 1621 Jefferson St. MOTION: Designate; Criteria A and J MOVED BY: Milroy SECONDED BY: Laverty VOTE Committee Member Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Emily Cooperman, chair X Suzanna Barucco X Jeff Cohen X Bruce Laverty X Debbie Miller X Elizabeth Milroy X Total 5 1 ADDRESS: 307 S CHADWICK ST Name of Resource: Frank Weise House and Studio Proposed Action: Designate Property Owner: GHI-1 LLC Nominator: Historical Commission staff Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 307 S. Chadwick Street and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The building at 307 S. Chadwick Street was constructed as a stable circa 1895. Beginning in 1966, it was altered by owner and architect Frank Weise into his studio and residence based on a design from 1960. The design reflects a period when architects were questioning the limits of Modernism. Although Postmodernism was not formally named for almost two decades, Weise’s house and studio embodied the spirit of Postmodern architecture. The design incorporated traditional forms from the past without losing its sense of place in the mid-twentieth century. Satisfying Criteria C and D, the Weise house and studio reflect the environment in an era characterized by a distinctive architectural style and embody distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style. Through his work as an architect, planner,

from the past without losing its sense of place in the mid-twentieth century. Satisfying Criteria C and D, the Weise house and studio reflect the environment in an era characterized by a distinctive architectural style and embody distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style. Through his work as an architect, planner, and community organizer, Frank Weise significantly influenced the historical, cultural, and cultural development of Philadelphia in the second half of the twentieth century; therefore, the house and studio satisfy Criterion E. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the property at 307 S. Chadwick Street, the Frank Weise House and Studio, satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, and E. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 01:32:25 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Mehley presented the nomination to the Committee on Historic Designation. • No one represented the property owner. DISCUSSION: • Ms. Milroy said she disagreed with the nomination’s assertion that Postmodernism was not defined until 20 years after the 1960s. She contended that Frank Weise was in the throes of Postmodernism when he designed the building in 1960. Ms. Milroy said this is a wonderful building and great nomination, but discussion of COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 6 SEPTEMBER 2023 15 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES Postmodernism was well under way in the 1950s and the chronology in the nomination should be clarified. • Ms. Cooperman contended that it all depends on how you define Postmodernism and noted there were many different things going on simultaneously. She stated there were trends in Modernism which looked to historic form and historic treatments of materials at the same time Mies van der Rohe’s largest Modernist projects were going up. Ms. Cooperman noted there are trends that continue the ideas of what came to be called International Modernism, thanks to Henry Russell Hitchcock and Philip Johnson, that move toward and away from that direction from the beginning. She said that Frank Weise was important because he worked in an inventive and energetic way. He was clearly part of the Philadelphia architectural scene at the time, but he was doing his own thing. Ms. Cooperman said that this sometimes leads toward the eccentric, which he verges toward with this house. She recounted a personal experience visiting 307 S. Chadwick Street not long after Frank Weise died, during which she observed that his kitchen had counters that he had sculpted in plaster,

own thing. Ms. Cooperman said that this sometimes leads toward the eccentric, which he verges toward with this house. She recounted a personal experience visiting 307 S. Chadwick Street not long after Frank Weise died, during which she observed that his kitchen had counters that he had sculpted in plaster, so they were not exactly usable, and commented they were sculptural in character and in keeping with other aspects of the house. Ms. Cooperman said it important to say that Frank Weise is a key component in what is known as the Philadelphia School. She highlighted the architect’s role in redevelopment, adding that Frank Weise was often quite sensitive and contributed to the streetscape. • Ms. Barucco stated she loves this building and enjoyed the nomination. She stated she is grateful there is a record of this building and the fact that the nominator could show the architect’s thought process really added to the value of it and to our understanding of Frank Weise. Ms. Barucco said she was not surprised to hear Ms. Cooperman’s story about the kitchen countertop because it seemed like he was always working on this building and designing and thinking about it. She said she appreciated the images of his other work and observed that Frank Weise had a broad range and was trying a lot of different paths. Ms. Barucco commented that the nomination is primarily written in the present tense, and this can be challenging for the reader. She also asked the nominator to check page 23 to confirm that the final paragraph is complete. • Mr. Laverty commented on this the building’s unique ability to fit into its streetscape among former horse stables. He commended the staff for nominating the building. PUBLIC COMMENT: • David Traub of Save Our Sites commented in support of the nomination. He referred to Frank Weise as a pre-Postmodernist and noted that the architect was deviating from the mainstream of Modern architecture long before the Postmodern movement with its references to historic architecture. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Committee on Historic Designation found that: • Frank Weise was a key architect in what is known as the Philadelphia School and influential in the redevelopment of Philadelphia during the latter half of the twentieth century. • The nomination is an important record of the development of Home and Studio building and provides context within the

• Frank Weise was a key architect in what is known as the Philadelphia School and influential in the redevelopment of Philadelphia during the latter half of the twentieth century. • The nomination is an important record of the development of Home and Studio building and provides context within the body of Frank Weise’s architectural work. The Committee on Historic Designation concluded that: COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 6 SEPTEMBER 2023 16 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES • The nomination demonstrates that the property satisfies Criterion C and D, as an early example of Postmodernism in Philadelphia, reflecting the environment in an era characterized by a distinctive architectural style and embody distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style. • The nomination demonstrates that the property satisfies Criterion E, as architect Frank Weise significantly influenced the historical, cultural, and cultural development of Philadelphia through his work as an architect, planner, and community organizer in the second half of the twentieth century. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 307 S. Chadwick Street satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, and E. ITEM: 307 S. Chadwick St. MOTION: Designate; Criteria C, D, and E MOVED BY: Barucco SECONDED BY: Miller VOTE Committee Member Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Emily Cooperman, chair X Suzanna Barucco X Jeff Cohen X Bruce Laverty X Debbie Miller X Elizabeth Milroy X Total 5 1 Ms. Miller exited the meeting. ADDRESS: 4837 AND 4839 GERMANTOWN AVE Name of Resource: 4837 Germantown Ave Proposed Action: Designate Property Owner: Greg Pronko Nominator: SoLo/Germantown Civic Association Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov OVERVIEW: These nominations propose to designate the properties at 4837 and 4839 Germantown Avenue and list them on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Jon Kirby and James Kinnier & Sons erected the residential rowhouses in the Second-Empire style in 1870 and 1871. The nominations contend that the rowhouses reflect the environment in an era characterized by a distinctive architectural style and embody distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style, the Second Empire style, satisfying Criteria C and D. In November 2022, the Historical Commission designated the property at 4841 Germantown Avenue based on architectural style, under Criteria C and D. At that time, the Commission recommended nominating the buildings at 4837 and 4839 Germantown Avenue. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 6 SEPTEMBER 2023

style, satisfying Criteria C and D. In November 2022, the Historical Commission designated the property at 4841 Germantown Avenue based on architectural style, under Criteria C and D. At that time, the Commission recommended nominating the buildings at 4837 and 4839 Germantown Avenue. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 6 SEPTEMBER 2023 17 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the properties at 4837 and 4839 Germantown Avenue satisfy Criteria for Designation C and D. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 01:48:27 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Mehley presented the nominations to the Committee on Historic Designation. • Allison Weiss and Oscar Beisert represented both nominations. • Greg Pronko attended as the owner of 4837 Germantown Avenue. • No one represented the owner of 4839 Germantown Avenue. DISCUSSION: • Mr. Pronko inquired about the impact of the designation. o Ms. Cooperman explained the Criteria for Designation and the review requirements for historic properties. She encouraged Mr. Pronko to contact staff who can respond to all questions about the designation and review requirements for future work to property. • Ms. Barucco reminded the Committee of remarks made during the 2022 meetings for 4841 Germantown Avenue. She noted that the construction of these buildings and their design reflected a specific moment on Germantown Avenue when it was become more urbane, just after the Civil War and when Germantown became part of Philadelphia. She stated her support for these nominations and said she was pleased to see these presented for consideration in light of the recent designation of 4841 Germantown Avenue. Ms. Cooperman agreed with these remarks. • Ms. Milroy observed that the nominations are similar to the one accepted for 4841 Germantown Avenue. She added she is pleased Mr. Pronko is participating in the consideration of his property for designation and has expressed interest in learning more. • The Committee members remarked on the importance and role of the streetcar line along Germantown Avenue and its influence on the development of this corridor. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Steven Peitzman commented in support of the nominations. • David Traub commented in support of the nominations. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Committee on Historic Designation found that: • 4837 and 4839 Germantown Avenue were constructed at the same time as 4841 Germantown Avenue. Designation of all three properties will ensure the protection of the rowhouses

David Traub commented in support of the nominations. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Committee on Historic Designation found that: • 4837 and 4839 Germantown Avenue were constructed at the same time as 4841 Germantown Avenue. Designation of all three properties will ensure the protection of the rowhouses which were originally designed and constructed together as one building during 1870 and 1871. • The proposed nominations are similar to the nomination adopted for 4841 Germantown Avenue’s designation in 2022. • Their design and construction reflect a key period in the history and development of Germantown Avenue. The Committee on Historic Designation concluded that: • The nominations demonstrate that 4837 and 4839 Germantown Avenue reflect the environment in an era characterized by a distinctive architectural style and embody COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 6 SEPTEMBER 2023 18 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style, the Second Empire style, satisfying Criteria C and D. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 4837 Germantown Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation C and D. ITEM: 4837 Germantown Ave. MOTION: Designate; Criteria C and D MOVED BY: Milroy SECONDED BY: Barucco VOTE Committee Member Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Emily Cooperman, chair X Suzanna Barucco X Jeff Cohen X Bruce Laverty X Debbie Miller X Elizabeth Milroy X Total 4 2 COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 4839 Germantown Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation C and D. ITEM: 4839 Germantown Ave. MOTION: Designate; Criteria C and D MOVED BY: Laverty SECONDED BY: Barucco VOTE Committee Member Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Emily Cooperman, chair X Suzanna Barucco X Jeff Cohen X Bruce Laverty X Debbie Miller X Elizabeth Milroy X Total 4 2 ADJOURNMENT START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 02:09:33 ACTION: The Committee on Historic Designation adjourned at 11:51 a.m. PLEASE NOTE: • Minutes of the Philadelphia Historical Commission and its advisory Committees are presented in action format. Additional information is available in the video recording for COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 6 SEPTEMBER 2023 19 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES this meeting. The start time for each agenda item in the recording is noted. • Application materials and

presented in action format. Additional information is available in the video recording for COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 6 SEPTEMBER 2023 19 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, PRESERVATION@PHILA.GOV PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 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. CRITERIA FOR DESIGNATION §14-1004. Designation. (1) Criteria for Designation. A building, complex of buildings, structure, site, object, or district may be designated for preservation if it: • (a) Has significant character, interest, or value as part of the development, heritage, or cultural characteristics of the City, Commonwealth, or nation or is associated with the life of a person significant in the past; • (b) Is associated with an event of importance to the history of the City, Commonwealth or Nation; • (c) Reflects the environment in an era characterized by a distinctive architectural style; • (d) Embodies distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style or engineering specimen; • (e) Is the work of a designer, architect, landscape architect or designer, or professional engineer whose work has significantly influenced the historical, architectural, economic, social, or cultural development of the City, Commonwealth, or nation; • (f) Contains elements of design, detail, materials, or craftsmanship that represent a significant innovation; • (g) Is part of or related to a square, park, or other distinctive area that should be preserved according to a historic, cultural, or architectural motif; • (h) Owing to its unique location or singular physical characteristic, represents an established and familiar visual feature of the neighborhood, community, or City; • (i) Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in pre-history or history; or • (j) Exemplifies the cultural, political, economic, social, or historical heritage of the community.