1 THE MINUTES OF THE 497TH MEETING OF THE PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION 9 January 2004 City Council Caucus Room, 4th Floor, City Hall Michael Sklaroff, Esq., Chair Present Michael Sklaroff, Esq., Chair James Brown, IV Duane Bumb, Deputy Director, Department of Commerce Warren Huff, City Planning Commission Kathleen Murray, Special Assistant to the President of City Council Vincent Rivera, AIA Denise Smyler, Esq. Harris Steinberg, AIA Thomas Sugrue, Ph.D. Norman Tissian Scott Wilds, Deputy Director for Policy and Planning, Office of Housing and Community Development Randal Baron, Historic Preservation Specialist Jonathan Farnham, Historic Preservation Planner Richard Tyler, Historic Preservation Officer Lawrence Copeland, Esq., Senior Attorney, Law Department Eileen Quigley, Esq., Assistant City Solicitor, Law Department Also David O’Donnell, Queen Village Neighbors Association John Lee, 1509 Walnut Street Helen Beck, 1509 Walnut Street Mason Warner, 1509 Walnut Street Joel Spivak, 616 Carpenter Street Joseph Beller, Esq., 4163 Main Street Sherry Bore, 1828 Spruce Street Rick Snyderman, 303 Cherry Street John Devine, 2014 Sansom Street Janet C. Bressler, 565 North Judson Street Karl Krumholz, SRK Architects Jeff DiRomaldo, Marianna Thomas Architects Fred Duling, 1709 Brandywine Street 2 Joanne Phillips, Ballard, Spahr, Andrews and Ingersoll Marianna Thomas, Marianna Thomas Architects Arlene Matzkin, Friday Architects Steve Grandizio, 945 South 2nd Street Michael Sklaroff, Chair, recognized the presence of a quorum and called the 497th Stated Meeting of the Philadelphia Historical Commission to order at 9:15 a.m. Minutes of the 496th Stated Meeting of the Philadelphia Historical Commission Upon a motion made by Mr. Tissian and seconded by Ms. Murray, the Commission voted unanimously to approve, as amended by Mr. Sklaroff, the minutes of the 496th Stated Meeting, 12 December 2003. Old Business 4163 Main Street Michael David, Owner Larry Persofsky, Applicant Date: c. 1865 Proposal: demolish and redesign the front facade. Joseph Beller, Esq., requested a further continuance of the review of the application for 4163 Main Street. Mr. Tissian moved the granting of a continuance for a period not to exceed six months. Ms. Murray seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. The Packard Building Mr. Wilds noted the continued presence of oversize advertising banners on the Packard Building beyond the period approved by the Commission. Mr. Sklaroff recommended drawing the attention of the owner’s lawyer to this condition. The Commission agreed. 3 Report of the Architectural Committee, 16 December 2003, Vincent Rivera, Chair City Hall, Broad and Market Streets City of Philadelphia, Owner
banners on the Packard Building beyond the period approved by the Commission. Mr. Sklaroff recommended drawing the attention of the owner’s lawyer to this condition. The Commission agreed. 3 Report of the Architectural Committee, 16 December 2003, Vincent Rivera, Chair City Hall, Broad and Market Streets City of Philadelphia, Owner Marianna Thomas, Architect/Applicant DATE: 1871-1901, John McArthur Jr. with Thomas U. Walter, architects PROPOSAL: Alter portal doors for ADA and security The Architectural Committee recommended approval in concept as submitted. This application proposes alterations to four doorways in the East and West Portals in City Hall. The alterations would improve ADA access and security. In each doorway, the central double-leaf doors, which are non-historic and automatic, would be replaced with replications of the historic manual doors. An historic panel and window sidelight section would be converted into a single-leaf automatic door for ADA access. Access panels with card readers, motion sensors, door closers, emergency release buttons, and other support hardware would be added. The Architectural Committee recommended approval in concept of the proposal as submitted. Mr. Farnham presented the report of the Architectural Committee. In response to a question from Mr. Wilds, Ms. Thomas advised the Commission that the sidelight does not lend itself to conversion to a door. He then suggested storage of the historic fabric; Mr. Sklaroff supported this to the extent practicable. Following a brief discussion with Ms. Thomas concerning the character of the proposed work, Mr. Sklaroff asked for the deletion of the word destructive from the fourth paragraph of the Committee’s report. Mr. Steinberg inquired into the existence of a master plan. Mr. Sklaroff suggested that the Commission invite Hyman Myers to describe the current City Hall project. Mr. Bumb moved that the Commission render a final approval of the proposal subject to the storage of the historic fabric removed during the installation if feasible. Mr. Rivera seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. 4 128 Bainbridge Street Michael Samschick, Owner Joel Spivak, Applicant DATE: c. 1780 PROPOSAL: Revised design for addition The Architectural Committee recommended denial. Mr. Sklaroff recused himself and passed the gavel to Mr. Sugrue. Joanne Phillips, Esq., requested a continuance of the application review for 128 Bainbridge Street. Mr. Wilds reminded the Commission that this property has had “a long and difficult history” with the Commission and that any new application should be “consistent with the prior actions” of the Commission. Mr.
Mr. Sugrue. Joanne Phillips, Esq., requested a continuance of the application review for 128 Bainbridge Street. Mr. Wilds reminded the Commission that this property has had “a long and difficult history” with the Commission and that any new application should be “consistent with the prior actions” of the Commission. Mr. Wilds moved that the Historical Commission table the application for a period not to exceed six months. Ms. Smyler seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. 1709 Brandywine Street Fred Duling, Owner Arlene Matzkin, Architect/Applicant DATE: c. 1920 and 1940 PROPOSAL: Review in concept of the demolition of a non-contributing garage, and construction of a new multi-unit residential building The Architectural Committee recommended approval in concept. This application for approval in concept proposes the demolition of a non-contributing garage and the construction of a new building at 1709 Brandywine Street. The new building would include four residential units as well as four parking spaces on the ground floor. Mr. Farnham presented the Committee’s report. Mr. Sklaroff found the staff’s recommendation distracting and not germane to the matter at hand, which is the Architectural Committee report. Others disagreed. A consensus emerged to discuss this question at a later date. Mr. Wilds asked if this design fits the character of the historic district. Ms. Matzkin replied that she thought it appropriate for this block, which lacks a real historic context. Mr. Steinberg found it a delightful contribution to the street but urged a refinement of the stairs. Mr. Bumb moved the approval of the submission in concept. Mr. Brown seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. 5 565 Judson Street Janet Bressler, Owner/Applicant DATE: vacant at the time of designation PROPOSAL: Landscaping for parking The Architectural Committee recommended approval provided that the extant granite at the curb cut is retained and reset. This application proposes the addition of landscaping as well as paving for parking at the vacant lot at 565 Judson Street. The lot’s owner also owns the rowhouse at 563 Judson Street, to the south, and would like off-street parking. The Commission has 45-day-review-and-comment jurisdiction over the lot, which was vacant at the time of designation, but full jurisdiction over the curb cut. Mr. Farnham introduced the Committee’s report. Mr. Steinberg asked about the plan and any intention to erect a fence. Mr. Tissian asked if the owner planned to build on the lot. Ms. Bressler responded that she may build in
the time of designation, but full jurisdiction over the curb cut. Mr. Farnham introduced the Committee’s report. Mr. Steinberg asked about the plan and any intention to erect a fence. Mr. Tissian asked if the owner planned to build on the lot. Ms. Bressler responded that she may build in the future but currently proposes to leave the lot open with hedges and vines as landscaping and it that would resemble a courtyard when the automobile is not there. Mr. Sklaroff observed that the benefit of open space would remain when the car is absent. The owner noted the many garages on Brandywine Street. Mr. Bumb moved to approve the application, provided the extant granite curb at the curb cut is retained and reset. Mr. Wilds seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. 945 South Second Street Steve Grandizio, Owner Sabrina Soong, Architect/Applicant DATE: c. 1815 PROPOSAL: New rear addition with deck and stair; legalize new front wall The Architectural Committee recommended approval as submitted, with louvered shutters or no shutters at the second floor, with staff to review details. This proposal seeks to legalize the demolition of the front facade and the construction of a new concrete block, backup wall. The owner will clad this backup wall with a brick facade that replicates its original Flemish bound appearance while retaining the mid-20th century openings at the first floor. In addition, the applicant wishes to widen the visible rear ell and to build a roof deck on it with a stair to the yard. Mr. Baron introduced this application. 6 Mr. Steinberg questioned the design of the front facade. Mr. Baron explained the three phases of construction and alteration, c.1 815, c. 1860 and the mid-20th century which resulted in the present configuration of openings. Mr. Wilds asked if the proposal included a cornice; he received a positive response. Mr. Sklaroff and Mr. Wilds sought a clarification of the sequence of events that led to the demolition of the front wall. Mr. Baron and Mr. Grandizio described the existence of a four-inch bulge in the front wall that necessitated starbolts; upon the removal of the Permastone, however, they found a serious crumbling of the original brick. Mr. Sklaroff noted that all this work had occurred without permits and suggested that the Department of Licenses and Inspections contact the masonry contractor who performed the illegal work Mr. Tissian offered a motion to
the removal of the Permastone, however, they found a serious crumbling of the original brick. Mr. Sklaroff noted that all this work had occurred without permits and suggested that the Department of Licenses and Inspections contact the masonry contractor who performed the illegal work Mr. Tissian offered a motion to approve the Architectural Committee’s recommendation. Mr. Huff seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. 301-303 Cherry Street Rick Snyderman, Owner Joel Spivak, Applicant DATE: c. 1860, attributed to architect Steven Button PROPOSAL: Legalize demolition of clerestory and construction of a penthouse; construct a roof deck The Architectural Committee recommended approval of the proposal, provided that ribbon windows are substituted for the existing fenestration and that the penthouse is faced with gray stucco, with staff to review details This application proposes the legalization of the demolition of a clerestory and the construction of a penthouse as well as the approval of the construction of a deck on the roof of the building at 301-303 Cherry Street. The clerestory was demolished and the penthouse constructed without Commission approval or a building permit. Such work requires a building permit regardless of historical status. The penthouse is visible from N. 3rd, N. 4th, and Cherry Streets. An application to legalize the demolition of clerestory and construction of the penthouse and to approve the construction of the deck was reviewed and denied by the Commission at its October 2003 meeting. This application proposes the legalization of the demolition and the approval of a slightly modified penthouse and identical deck. The penthouse, which is 42' x 14', would be reduced in height approximately 3'-6" from the earlier, denied design; it would remain visible from N. 3rd, N. 4th, and Cherry Streets. Mr. Farnham introduced this application. Mr. Steinberg asked whether the penthouse windows would be ribbon or punched. Mr. Spivak replied punched. In response to a question, Mr. Rivera found the proposed windows acceptable. 7 Mr. Wilds moved to approve the application, provided that ribbon windows are substituted for the existing fenestration and that the penthouse is faced with gray stucco, with staff to review details. Ms. Smyler seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. 1728 Chestnut Street Ilan Zaken, Owner Nurit Nachum, Contractor/Applicant DATE: 1914, Frank H. Keisker, architect; storefront and window alterations, c. 1965 PROPOSAL: Alter storefront for second door The Architectural Committee recommended approval, subject to the removal of the railings at the second floor
Smyler seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. 1728 Chestnut Street Ilan Zaken, Owner Nurit Nachum, Contractor/Applicant DATE: 1914, Frank H. Keisker, architect; storefront and window alterations, c. 1965 PROPOSAL: Alter storefront for second door The Architectural Committee recommended approval, subject to the removal of the railings at the second floor if they are not required by the Code, with staff to review details. Mr. Baron presented this proposal. Mr. Sugrue offered a motion to approve the Committee’s recommendation. Mr. Steinberg seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. 1828 Spruce Street Richard and Sherri Bore, Owners Karl Krumholz, SRK Architects, Architect/Applicant DATE: 1887 for Col. A. K. McClure; A. J. Boyden, architect; significant to the historic district PROPOSAL: Partial demolition; one-story side addition and two-story rear addition The Architectural Committee recommended approval of Scheme B, with staff to review details. Mr. Baron presented this application which includes several parts. First, it calls for a small one- story addition in the crutch of the rear ell. Second, the rear of the ell would be demolished up to the three-sided bay. The ell has some decorative features, including a molded, wooden cornice, stained glass windows and a chamfered corner. Third, the submission proposes a large, two-story rear addition to extend across the full width of the property; it includes a garage. This addition would wrap around the three-sided bay. There would be one, four-light, fixed window at the first floor and a series of four-light, fixed windows at the second floor. Mr. Rivera, a partner in SRK Architects, recused himself. Mr. Sklaroff noted the importance of this proposal for what it says about neighborhood renewal and of the importance of the rear facade. Mr. Krumholz responded that the project does not entail the removal of historic materials, for they will remain as interiors encased in the planned addition. Mr. Sklaroff, Mr. Steinberg, Mr. Wilds and Mr. Krumholz discussed further the character of Cypress Street, which forms the rear of the Spruce Street properties in this block, and the context of this particular house and proposal. 8 Mr. Sugrue moved the acceptance of the Architectural Committee’s recommendation and approve Scheme B, with staff to review details. Ms. Murray seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. 1509 Walnut Street John Lee, Owner/Applicant DATE: 1902, Newman, Woodman & Harris, architects; storefront cut, c. 1985 PROPOSAL: Illuminated signage; remove basement grates The Architectural Committee recommended approval of the sign,
Committee’s recommendation and approve Scheme B, with staff to review details. Ms. Murray seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. 1509 Walnut Street John Lee, Owner/Applicant DATE: 1902, Newman, Woodman & Harris, architects; storefront cut, c. 1985 PROPOSAL: Illuminated signage; remove basement grates The Architectural Committee recommended approval of the sign, if the panels are painted wood, approval of the lights, and denial of t he removal of the basement grates. Mr. Baron introduced this application. Mr. Huff noted that the City Planning Commission also must review this proposal. Mr. Lee stated that the grates will not be compatible with the changes to the storefront and that their removal would yield a more consistent appearance. Messrs. Rivera, Steinberg and Wilds thought their preservation in situ important, and Mr. Sklaroff noted that here the historic should frame the new. Mr. Steinberg moved that the Commission adopt the recommendation of the Architectural Committee to approve the signage and to deny the removal of the basement grates. Mr. Brown seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. Report of the Historical Commission Staff, December 2003, Richard Tyler Commission members did not have any questions for Mr. Tyler regarding the report of the activities of the Historical Commission staff. Mr. Wilds asked for a report on the status of 14 South Third Street, which Mr. Tyler provided. 9 Harry A. Batten Memorial Fund Mr. Tyler requested that the Historical Commission approve the reimbursement of $9701.81 from the Batten Fund to Preservation Pennsylvania, which was not expended during the assessment of the Church of Christ, historically known as the Mary Patterson Memorial Presbyterian Church, 6301 Vine Street. Preservation Pennsylvania had awarded a grant of $16,000 to undertake an engineering evaluation of this building. Mr. Harris offered a motion to reimburse Preservation Pennsylvania $9701.81, the unexpended amount of its $16,000 grant, from the Harry A. Batten Fund. Ms. Murray seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. Mr. Harris made a motion to adjourn. Ms. Murray seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 10:45 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Richard Tyler, Historic Preservation Officer Randal Baron, Historic Preservation Specialist Jonathan Farnham, Historic Preservation Planner