PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 1 THE MINUTES OF THE 764TH STATED MEETING OF THE PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION FRIDAY, 10 APRIL 2026, 9:00 A.M. REMOTE MEETING ON ZOOM ZACHARY FRANKEL, CHAIR CALL TO ORDER START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:00:00 Mr. Frankel, the Chair, called the meeting to order at 9:06 a.m. and announced the presence of a quorum. The following Commissioners joined him: Commissioner Present Absent Comment Zachary Frankel, Chair (Real Estate Developer) X Kimberly Washington, Esq., Vice Chair (Community Development Corporation) X Liam Kelly Fleming (Commerce Department) X Donna Carney (Philadelphia City Planning Commission) X Emily Cooperman, Ph.D., Committee on Historic Designation Chair (Historian) X Thomas Holloman (City Council) X Kyle O’Connor (Department of Public Property) X John P. Lech (Department of Licenses & Inspections) X Dan McCoubrey, AIA, LEED AP BD+C, Architectural Committee Chair (Architect) X Stephanie Michel (Community Organization) X Franz Rabauer X Robert Thomas, AIA (Architectural Historian) X Matthew Treat (Department of Planning and Development) X The meeting was held using Zoom video and audio-conferencing software. The following staff members were present: Jonathan Farnham, Executive Director Kim Chantry, Historic Preservation Planner III Shannon Garrison, Historic Preservation Planner III Kristin Hankins, Historic Preservation Planner II Ted Maust, Historic Preservation Planner II Allyson Mehley, Historic Preservation Planner III Josh Schroeder, Historic Preservation Planner I Dan Shachar-Krasnoff, Historic Preservation Planner II Alex Till, Historic Preservation Planner II The following persons attended the meeting in person: Henry Cieplinski Kathy Dowdell Leonard Reuter, Esq., Law Department PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 2 The following persons attended the meeting on Zoom: Allison Weiss, SoLo Germantown Andy Marsden David Gest, Chestnut Hill Conservancy David Traub, Save Our SItes Hanna Stark, Preservation Alliance Henry Leong Jacob Cooper Jake Blumgart, Inquirer Jay Farrell Jingyi Emma Luo Ken Weinstein Kenny Grono, Buckminster Green Kimberly Haas, Hidden City Matt Goldberg Meir Rinde, WHYY/Billy Penn Michael Bucci, g_space LLC Oscar Beisert, Keeping Society Robert Powers, Powers & Co. Ryan Crocetto Stephanie Pennypacker Stephanie Sultanov Graham Stephanie Toothman Tabitha Morgan Timothy Lee ADOPTION OF MINUTES, 763RD STATED MEETING, 13 MARCH 2026 START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:03:06 DISCUSSION: • Mr. Frankel asked the Commissioners, staff, and members of the public if they had any suggested additions or corrections to the minutes of the preceding meeting of the Historical Commission, the 763rd Stated
ADOPTION OF MINUTES, 763RD STATED MEETING, 13 MARCH 2026 START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:03:06 DISCUSSION: • Mr. Frankel asked the Commissioners, staff, and members of the public if they had any suggested additions or corrections to the minutes of the preceding meeting of the Historical Commission, the 763rd Stated Meeting, held 13 March 2026. No comments were offered. ACTION: Mr. Thomas moved to adopt the minutes of the 763rd Stated Meeting of the Philadelphia Historical Commission, held 13 March 2026. Ms. Cooperman seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 3 ITEM: Adoption of the Minutes of the 763rd Stated Meeting of the PHC MOTION: Adopt minutes MOVED BY: Thomas SECONDED BY: Cooperman VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Frankel, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Kelly Fleming (Commerce) X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Holloman (City Council) X O’Connor (DPP) X Lech (L&I) X McCoubrey X Michel X Rabauer X Thomas X Treat (DPD) X Total 11 2 REPORT OF THE ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE, 24 MARCH 2026 CONSENT AGENDA START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:04:00 DISCUSSION: • Mr. Frankel asked the Commissioners, staff, and public for comments on the Consent Agenda. None were offered. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to adopt the recommendation of the Architectural Committee for the application for 406 S. Camac Street. Mr. Frankel seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 4 ITEM: Consent Agenda MOTION: Adopt Architectural Committee recommendation for Consent Agenda item MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Frankel VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Frankel, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Kelly Fleming (Commerce) X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Holloman (City Council) X O’Connor (DPP) X Lech (L&I) X McCoubrey X Michel X Rabauer X Thomas X Treat (DPD) X Total 11 2 AGENDA ADDRESS: 2027 AND 2029 BRANDYWINE ST Proposal: Demolish roof and rear of building; construct four-story addition Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: James Adducci and Elizabeth Andersen Applicant: Kenny Grono, Buckminster Green History: 1859 Individual Designation: None District Designation: Spring Garden Historic District, Contributing, 10/11/2000 Staff Contact: Heather Hendrickson, heather.hendrickson@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This revised application proposes demolishing the roofs and rears of two adjoining rowhouses and constructing a fourth-floor addition setback from the front cornice
and Elizabeth Andersen Applicant: Kenny Grono, Buckminster Green History: 1859 Individual Designation: None District Designation: Spring Garden Historic District, Contributing, 10/11/2000 Staff Contact: Heather Hendrickson, heather.hendrickson@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This revised application proposes demolishing the roofs and rears of two adjoining rowhouses and constructing a fourth-floor addition setback from the front cornice by 12 feet, 10 inches. In this project, the buildings at 2027 and 2029 Brandywine Street would be converted into one single-family home with additional space in the new fourth floor addition. A third-floor rear deck is proposed that would span the two properties. The rear of the property has some visibility from 20th Street. The first iteration of this application that was presented to the Architectural Committee proposed a large gabled roof that spanned both properties and the entirety of the main blocks. The Architectural Committee recommended that the applicant retain more of the flat roofed form of the main block, as a gabled roof was not historically appropriate for this row, and that the applicant retain more of the existing main block fabric. This revised application is in response to those suggestions. SCOPE OF WORK: • Demolish roof and rear of building • Construct four-story addition PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 5 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 will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. o Removal of the flat roofs and the addition of a steep gable roof is not compatible with the historic scale, proportion, or massing of the structures and of the row. • 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 proposed alteration is not reversible. 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: 00:04:35 PRESENTERS: •
historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. o The proposed alteration is not reversible. 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: 00:04:35 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Chantry presented the application to the Historical Commission. • Contractor Kenny Grono represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Kathy Dowdell commented about the extent of demolition. • Bob Powers, a resident of Spring Garden, commented that the project is “overkill.” HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The application reviewed by the Architectural Committee included a large gabled roof that spanned both properties and the entirety of the main blocks. The application has been revised based on Architectural Committee feedback and no longer proposes a large gabled roof but rather proposes an additional story set back from the fronts of the buildings by nearly 13 feet. The flat roof approach is preferable to the gabled roof approach. • The properties are located mid-block with minimal visibility of the rears. • The existing rear ells have been modified over time, but the extent of those earlier alterations was not well documented. • The extent of the proposed demolition exceeds that allowed under preservation standards. More historic fabric should be retained. The structural integrity of the buildings should be ensured. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The addition of a setback addition on the main block and the demolition of the rear ells is not compatible with the historic scale, proportion, or massing of the structures and of the row, and fails to satisfy Standard 9. • The proposed work is not reversible and fails to satisfy Standard 10. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 6 ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to deny the application, pursuant to Standards 9 and 10. Ms. Cooperman seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. ITEM: 2027 and 2029 BRANDYWINE ST MOTION: Denial MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Cooperman VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Frankel, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Kelly Fleming (Commerce) X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Holloman (City Council) X O’Connor (DPP) X Lech (L&I) X McCoubrey X Michel X Rabauer X Thomas X Treat (DPD) X Total 11 2 ADDRESS: 406 S CAMAC ST Proposal: Cut window
Recuse Absent Frankel, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Kelly Fleming (Commerce) X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Holloman (City Council) X O’Connor (DPP) X Lech (L&I) X McCoubrey X Michel X Rabauer X Thomas X Treat (DPD) X Total 11 2 ADDRESS: 406 S CAMAC ST Proposal: Cut window opening(s) on side wall; install window(s) Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Mackenzie Lee Applicant: Mackenzie Lee History: 1829 Individual Designation: 2/28/1961 District Designation: Washington Square West Historic District, Contributing, 9/13/2024 Staff Contact: Kim Chantry, kim.chantry@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application proposes to cut a new window opening on the north (side) wall of the corner trinity house at 406 S. Camac Street. The property owner has submitted several options for the type of window. The primary goal is to get light into the space. All existing windows and front entry door date to a 2020 replacement. The small second floor window opening on the side elevation and the overbuild at the rear dates to a 2000 approval by the Historical Commission. The new property owner recently replaced the front brick steps with appropriate marble steps. The brick steps, done by the prior owner without a building permit, had been in violation for several years but have now been corrected. SCOPE OF WORK: • Cut new window opening(s) into side wall; install window(s). STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: • Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 7 destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. o The addition of one or two new windows on the side elevation that match the first- floor front window will not destroy historic materials, features, or spatial relationships which characterize the property, and will be compatible with the historic features of the building, satisfying Standard 9. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of one or two new windows that match the first-floor front window in size, design, and alignment, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standard 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend approval of one new window that matches the first-floor front window in size, design, and alignment, with the staff
windows that match the first-floor front window in size, design, and alignment, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standard 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend approval of one new window that matches the first-floor front window in size, design, and alignment, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standard 9. ACTION: See Consent Agenda. ADDRESS: 408 S 22ND ST Proposal: Alter front door and front steps Review: Final Approval Owner: Timothy McMillin and Kaitlin Woodson Applicant: Michael Bucci, g_space LLC History: 1869 Individual Designation: None District Designation: Rittenhouse-Fitler Residential Historic District, Contributing, 2/8/1995 Staff Contact: Josh Schroeder, joshua.schroeder@phila.gov BACKGROUND: This application proposes raising the front door at the rowhouse at 408 S. 22nd Street. The application proposes adding marble front steps and replacing the existing paneled double-leaf door with a single leaf door featuring sidelights in the existing doorway. The panel above the existing door would be removed to make way for the new door, but existing arched transom and crown molding would remain. All seven houses from 400 to 412 S. 22nd Street were constructed simultaneously about 1869. As the application contends, the existing entrances at 408 and 410 S. 22nd Street have fewer steps and lower doors than the adjacent houses, though the heights of the doorways are consistent across all seven houses. The staff was unable to locate any record of alterations to the front entrances, but the buildings at 408 and 410 share similar features that distinguish the pair from the adjacent houses. By the early twentieth century, both had mansards. Zoning documents indicate that until about 1963, the building at 408 S. 22nd Street had a single large window on the first-floor front, similar to that at 410 S. 22nd Street. The staff contends that the proposed steps and elevated door would be a historically appropriate design but suggest a single-leaf door that otherwise matches the existing door in appearance. SCOPE OF WORK: • Alter front door and front steps. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 8 STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include: • Standard 2: The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alterations of features, spaces and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. o The
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include: • Standard 2: The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alterations of features, spaces and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. o The proposed new steps and raised doorway are historically appropriate for this block of S. 22nd Street. • 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 will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. o The existing door is a historic feature of the houses on this block. The design of the proposed replacement deviates from the historic design and is therefore not appropriate. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the proposed steps and door placement, but denial of the door design, pursuant to Standards 2 and 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend approval of the proposed steps and door placement provided a handrail is included, but denial of the door design as proposed, pursuant to Standards 2 and 9. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:43:25 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Schroeder presented the application to the Historical Commission. • Architect Michael Bucci represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Oscar Beisert of the Keeping Society spoke against changing the door design, noting that the doors are a preeminent feature on this block of rowhomes. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The rowhouses at 408 and 410 S. 22nd Street are paired and share similar features that distinguish them from the other rowhomes on their block. • It is unclear whether the lowered steps and door height at 408 and 410 S. 22nd Street constitute historic features that merit preservation because there is inconclusive evidence as to whether they are original features or later alterations. • The double doors on this block of S. 22nd Street are historic features that contribute to the Rittenhouse-Fitler Residential Historic District. • With the correct hardware and craftsmanship, combining the double-leaf door into a single door can alleviate the inconveniences experienced by the applicants. The Historical Commission concluded that: • Raising the door and constructing new steps would
22nd Street are historic features that contribute to the Rittenhouse-Fitler Residential Historic District. • With the correct hardware and craftsmanship, combining the double-leaf door into a single door can alleviate the inconveniences experienced by the applicants. The Historical Commission concluded that: • Raising the door and constructing new steps would alter the historic, if not original, PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 9 condition and fail to satisfy Standard 2. • The existing door design and size are historic features of this block of the Rittenhouse-Fitler Residential Historic District, and replacing the door would fail to satisfy Standard 9. FAILED MOTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to approve the proposed steps and door placement, but deny the proposed design of the door, pursuant to Standards 2 and 9. Mr. Lech seconded the motion, which failed by a vote of 3 to 8. ITEM: 408 S 22nd St FAILED MOTION: Approval of the proposed steps and door placement; denial of the door design as proposed MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Lech VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Frankel, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Kelly Fleming (Commerce) X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Holloman (City Council) X O’Connor (DPP) X Lech (L&I) X McCoubrey X Michel X Rabauer X Thomas X Treat (DPD) X Total 3 8 2 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 10 ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to deny the application, pursuant to Standards 2 and 9. Ms. Washington seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. ITEM: 408 S 22nd St MOTION: Denial MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Washington VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Frankel, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Kelly Fleming (Commerce) X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Holloman (City Council) X O’Connor (DPP) X Lech (L&I) X McCoubrey X Michel X Rabauer X Thomas X Treat (DPD) X Total 11 2 ADDRESS: 4225 PINE ST Proposal: Legalize replacement of slate on mansard with charcoal asphalt-fiberglass shingles Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Neighborhood Preservation & Development Fund LP Applicant: Ryan Crocetto, Altman Management Company, LLC History: 1900; William Kimball, developer Individual Designation: None District Designation: Southeast Spruce Hill Historic District, Contributing, 7/12/2024 Staff Contact: Ted Maust, theodore.maust@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application proposes legalizing the removal of slate roofing and its replacement with GAF Timberline Ultra High Definition asphalt-fiberglass shingles in a charcoal
Altman Management Company, LLC History: 1900; William Kimball, developer Individual Designation: None District Designation: Southeast Spruce Hill Historic District, Contributing, 7/12/2024 Staff Contact: Ted Maust, theodore.maust@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application proposes legalizing the removal of slate roofing and its replacement with GAF Timberline Ultra High Definition asphalt-fiberglass shingles in a charcoal color on the mansard at 4225 Pine Street. This property is part of a larger development row on the 4200 block of Pine Street, all of which historically featured slate mansard roofs. The properties on the block were listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places in July 2024 as part of the Southeast Spruce Hill Historic District, meaning that any slate mansard replacement prior to written notice being sent to property owners was not reviewed by the Historical Commission. In October and December 2025, and again in January 2026, a community member contacted the Department of Licenses and Inspections to inform it of the recent replacement of the slate with asphalt-fiberglass shingles at this property. The Department of Licenses and Inspections issued a violation for the roofing work without a building permit in January 2026, prompting this request for legalization from the property owner. According to the National Park Service’s Preservation Brief #29, slate roofs have a lifespan of PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 11 60 to 125 years. Section 6.10.c.4 of the Commission Rules & Regulations states that “the staff shall review and may approve without referral to the Architectural Committee and the Commission permit applications proposing the replacement of slate roofing materials, with the exception of mansards, turrets, and other character-defining features, provided the severity of deterioration requires replacement and the substitute materials closely approximate the color and shape of the historic slate roofing materials.” The Historical Commission’s staff acknowledges that the slate on the mansard reached the end of its lifespan, but it would have been unable to administratively approve a black asphalt-fiberglass shingle in this shape as a replacement, had this application been submitted as a building permit application for review in advance of the work commencing. SCOPE OF WORK: • Legalize replacement of slate on mansard with charcoal asphalt-fiberglass shingles. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: • Standard 6: Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color,
SCOPE OF WORK: • Legalize replacement of slate on mansard with charcoal asphalt-fiberglass shingles. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: • Standard 6: Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. o The black GAF Timberline asphalt-fiberglass shingles do not match the old in design, color, texture, or materials. This application fails to satisfy Standard 6. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Denial, pursuant to Standard 6. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Standard 6. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 01:04:35 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Maust presented the application to the Historical Commission. • Property managers Ryan Crocetto and Andy Marsden represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The unpermitted work does not appear to be of good quality. • The installed shingles do not resemble the historic slate. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The unpermitted work does not replicate the appearance of the historic slate mansard roof and thus does not meet Standard 6. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to deny the application, pursuant to Standard 6. Mr. Thomas seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 12 ITEM: 4225 PINE ST MOTION: Denial MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Thomas VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Frankel, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Kelly Fleming (Commerce) X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Holloman (City Council) X O’Connor (DPP) X Lech (L&I) X McCoubrey X Michel X Rabauer X Thomas X Treat (DPD) X Total 11 2 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 18 MARCH 2026 ADDRESS: 1018 S 2ND ST Name of Resource: Andrew Nebinger Jr. House Proposed Action: Designate Property Owner: Henry A. Cieplinski Nominator: Historical Commission Staff Contact: Heather Hendrickson, heather.hendrickson@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 1018 S. 2nd Street in the Southwark or Queen Village neighborhood and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the property satisfies Criteria for Designation A and J. Under Criterion A, the nomination asserts that the building’s early history is associated with prominent medical doctor Andrew
2nd Street in the Southwark or Queen Village neighborhood and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the property satisfies Criteria for Designation A and J. Under Criterion A, the nomination asserts that the building’s early history is associated with prominent medical doctor Andrew Nebinger Jr. Under Criterion J, the nomination argues that the property’s funeral home use, dating back to 1898 and extending through 2026, exemplifies the cultural, social, and historical heritage of the Southwark community as part of a broader pattern of neighborhood-based, family-operated funeral establishments deeply embedded in South Philadelphia’s social fabric. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that 1018 S. 2nd Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A, and J. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 1018 S. 2nd Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A and J. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 01:10:43 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 13 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Chantry presented the nomination to the Historical Commission. • Henry Cieplinski represented the property owner and expressed his support for the designation. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • There is strong justification for the nomination. Both the property’s association with Dr. Andrew Nebinger Jr. and its long-standing use as a funeral home independently meet some Criteria for Designation, and together they provide a compelling, multifaceted story of historical significance. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The nomination demonstrates that the property satisfies Criterion A for its association with Dr. Andrew Nebinger Jr. • The nomination demonstrates that the property satisfies Criterion J as exemplifying the cultural, social, and historical heritage of the Southwark community as part of a broader pattern of neighborhood-based, family-operated funeral establishments deeply embedded in South Philadelphia’s social fabric. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 1018 S. 2nd Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A and J and to designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Mr. Frankel seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. ITEM: 1018 S 2nd St MOTION: Designate, Criteria A and J MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Frankel VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Frankel, Chair X Washington, Vice
historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Mr. Frankel seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. ITEM: 1018 S 2nd St MOTION: Designate, Criteria A and J MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Frankel VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Frankel, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Kelly Fleming (Commerce) X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Holloman (City Council) X O’Connor (DPP) X Lech (L&I) X McCoubrey X Michel X Rabauer X Thomas X Treat (DPD) X Total 11 2 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 14 ADDRESS: 601 W GODFREY AVE Name of Resource: Carl Metz House Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: William Freeman Jr. and John D. Mitchell Nominator: Historical Commission Staff Contact: Jon Farnham, jon.farnham@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 601 W. Godfrey Avenue, known as the Carl Metz House, and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination asserts that the property satisfies Criteria for Designation C and D as delineated in Section 14-1004(1)(a) of the Philadelphia Code. The nomination contends that the Carl Metz House reflects the environment characterized by a distinctive architectural style, the “Spanish type architecture” style, and embodies distinguished characteristics of that style, satisfying Criteria C and D. Constructed by real estate developer Carl Metz to designs by his son, Carl Metz Jr., in 1927, when the Spanish Colonial Revival style was at the apex of its popularity in the Philadelphia region, the Carl Metz House is one of the finest single-family residential examples of the style in the City of Philadelphia and therefore merits designation as a historic landmark. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 601 W. Godfrey Avenue, known as the Carl Metz House, satisfies Criteria for Designation C and D as delineated in Section 14-1004(1)(a) of the Philadelphia Code. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 601 W. Godfrey Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation C and D. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 01:18:18 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Farnham presented the nomination to the Historical Commission. • No one represented the property owner. PUBLIC COMMENT: • David Traub of Save Our Sites commented in support of the nomination. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: •
OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 01:18:18 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Farnham presented the nomination to the Historical Commission. • No one represented the property owner. PUBLIC COMMENT: • David Traub of Save Our Sites commented in support of the nomination. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • Constructed by real estate developer Carl Metz to designs by his son, Carl Metz Jr., in 1927, when the Spanish Colonial Revival style was at the apex of its popularity in the Philadelphia region, the Carl Metz House is one of the finest single-family residential examples of the style in the City of Philadelphia. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The Carl Metz House at 601 W. Godfrey Avenue reflects the environment characterized by a distinctive architectural style, the “Spanish type architecture” style or Spanish Colonial Revival style and therefore satisfies Criterion for Designation C. • The Carl Metz House at 601 W. Godfrey Avenue embodies distinguished characteristics of the “Spanish type architecture” style or Spanish Colonial Revival style and therefore satisfies Criterion for Designation D. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 15 ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 601 W. Godfrey Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation C and D and to designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Carney seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. ITEM: 601 W Godfrey Ave MOTION: Designate, Criteria C and D MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Carney VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Frankel, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Kelly Fleming (Commerce) X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Holloman (City Council) X O’Connor (DPP) X Lech (L&I) X McCoubrey X Michel X Rabauer X Thomas X Treat (DPD) X Total 11 2 ADDRESS: 119 E GOWAN AVE Name of Resource: Mount Airy Train Station Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority Nominator: Andrian Trevisan, Powers & Co., Inc Staff Contact: Alex Till, alexander.till@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 119 E. Gowan Avenue and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The two-story brick and frame Stick style building was designed by architect Frank Furness and constructed in 1883 as one of a series of station buildings for the Philadelphia and Reading Railroad. The nomination contends that the building satisfies
Avenue and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The two-story brick and frame Stick style building was designed by architect Frank Furness and constructed in 1883 as one of a series of station buildings for the Philadelphia and Reading Railroad. The nomination contends that the building satisfies Criteria for Designation A as an example of the development of the Mount Airy neighborhood and for its association with Franklin B. Gowan. It also contends that the property is significant under Criterion E as Frank Furness was a notable architect whose work significantly influenced the architectural development of the city. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the property at 119 E. Gowan Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation A and E. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 119 E. Gowan Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation A and E. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 16 START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 01:24:05 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Till presented the nomination to the Historical Commission. • Bob Powers represented the nomination. • Ken Weinstein represented the property owner. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The railroad station building at 119 E. Gowan Avenue was designed by famed architect Frank Furness for the Philadelphia & Reading Railroad and constructed in 1883. • The station is an important example of those built for the Philadelphia & Reading Railroad and contributed to the early development of the Mount Airy neighborhood. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The nomination demonstrates that the property satisfies Criterion for Designation A as an example of the development of the Mount Airy neighborhood and for its association with Franklin B. Gowan. • The nomination demonstrates that the property satisfies Criterion for Designation E as Frank Furness was a notable architect whose work significantly influenced the architectural development of the city. ACTION: Mr. Thomas moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 119 E. Gowen Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation A and E and to designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Cooperman seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 17 ITEM: 119 E
satisfies Criteria for Designation A and E and to designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Cooperman seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 17 ITEM: 119 E Gowen Ave MOTION: Designate, Criteria A and E MOVED BY: Thomas SECONDED BY: Cooperman VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Frankel, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Kelly Fleming (Commerce) X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Holloman (City Council) X O’Connor (DPP) X Lech (L&I) X McCoubrey X Michel X Rabauer X Thomas X Treat (DPD) X Total 11 2 ADDRESS: 701 W JOHNSON ST Name of Resource: Blue Bell Mission Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Real Estate Appreciation, LLC Nominator: Keeping Society Staff Contact: Josh Schroeder, joshua.schroeder@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 701 W. Johnson Street, known as the Blue Bell Mission, and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places under Criterion J. The Blue Bell Mission is a one-story wood frame building that sits on a schist foundation. The original portion of the mission is recognizable as a simple chapel with a basic rectangular shape with steep gabled roof and a brick vestibule entrance centered on the primary elevation. A small cupola once existed at the front of the main roof. Three additions of varying size and configuration are at the rear. The mission was constructed in 1879 as a Methodist mission chapel on the site of what is now 6244 Wissahickon Ave before it was physically moved to its present location in 1922. The proposed period of significance spans from the chapel’s construction in 1879 until the end of its affiliation with the Methodist church in 2013 when it was sold to the Mt. Airy United Fellowship Church, who used the building for another several years. The nomination contends that the property satisfies Criterion J for its tenure as a religious and community centerpiece of the Blue Bell Hill neighborhood and as one of the remaining “mission chapels.” STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the property at 701 W. Johnson Street satisfies Criterion J. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 701 W. Johnson Street satisfies Criterion for Designation J. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2026
The staff recommends that the property at 701 W. Johnson Street satisfies Criterion J. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 701 W. Johnson Street satisfies Criterion for Designation J. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 18 START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 01:28:32 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Schroeder presented the nomination to the Historical Commission. • Oscar Beisert of the Keeping Society represented the nomination. • Ken Weinstein represented the property owner. PUBLIC COMMENT: • David Traub of Save Our Sites spoke in favor of the nomination and urged Mr. Weinstein to restore some of the chapel’s lost historic features. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The Blue Bell Mission is one of few remaining examples of a so-called “mission chapel,” a type of church building that was not intended to be permanent. • The Blue Bell Mission was one of the few institutional buildings to serve the Blue Bell Hill community. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The nomination demonstrates that the Blue Bell Mission at 701 W. Johnson Street had been a significant religious and social institution in the Blue Bell Hill neighborhood since 1879 and therefore exemplifies the social and historical heritage of that community, satisfying Criterion J. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 701 W. Johnson Street satisfies Criterion for Designation J and to designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Mr. Lech seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. ITEM: 701 W Johnson St MOTION: Designate; Criterion J MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Lech VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Frankel, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Kelly Fleming (Commerce) X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Holloman (City Council) X O’Connor (DPP) X Lech (L&I) X McCoubrey X Michel X Rabauer X Thomas X Treat (DPD) X Total 11 2 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 19 OLD BUSINESS ADDRESS: 1018 WINTER ST Proposal: Demolish and reconstruct upper floors with pilot house Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Ken Leong and Marie Chin Applicant: Sam Xu, Constrecture LLC History: 1830 Individual Designation: 4/25/1974 District Designation: None Staff Contact: Allyson.Mehley@phila.gov BACKGROUND: This application proposes demolishing the
HISTORIC RESOURCES 19 OLD BUSINESS ADDRESS: 1018 WINTER ST Proposal: Demolish and reconstruct upper floors with pilot house Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Ken Leong and Marie Chin Applicant: Sam Xu, Constrecture LLC History: 1830 Individual Designation: 4/25/1974 District Designation: None Staff Contact: Allyson.Mehley@phila.gov BACKGROUND: This application proposes demolishing the majority of the primary façade, roof, and rear ell at the building at 1018 Winter Street and reconstructing the building with a contemporary design and materials. The building was constructed in 1830 and retains a high level of historic integrity with its form, features, and materials. The property at 1018 Winter Street is individually listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Although the rear of the property has a parking area, the back of the building is not visible from the public right-of-way. SCOPE OF WORK: • Demolish majority of second and third floors including roof and dormers. • Construct second and third floors including front façade. • Construct pilot house. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include: • Standard 2: The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alterations of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. o The application proposes a significant amount of demolition, including the front façade’s second floor, roof, and dormer. Therefore, the application does not meet Standard 2. • Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new works shall be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. o The proposed alterations to the front façade in terms of materials, features, scale, and proportion do not meet Standard 9. o The proposed increase in size and massing at the rear of the property overwhelms the original form and environment of the historic building and does not meet Standard 9. • Standard 10: New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such 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 demolition and proposed new construction permanently alter the historic building’s
Standard 10: New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such 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 demolition and proposed new construction permanently alter the historic building’s form and integrity; therefore, the application does not meet Standard 10. • Roofs Guideline | Recommended: Designing rooftop additions, elevator or stair towers, PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 20 decks or terraces, dormers, or skylights when required by a new or continuing use so that they are inconspicuous and minimally visible on the site and from the public right-of- way and do not damage or obscure character-defining historic features. o The location of the proposed pilot house at the rear of the property could meet the Roofs Guideline if other aspects of the application were revised to meet Standards 2, 9, and 10. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Denial, pursuant to Standards 2, 9, and 10. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION The application fails to satisfy Standard 2, owing to the significant demolition proposed for the front façade’s second floor, gable roof, and front dormer. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 01:34:10 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Mehley presented the application to the Historical Commission. • Property owner Harry Leong represented the application. Applicant and architect Sam Xu was not present at the meeting. Mr. Farnham confirmed that applicant was notified of the meeting. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The application was revised to maintain the building’s main block and limit changes to the rear of the building. • The revisions appear to be moving in the right direction, but the drawings do not adequately show the proposed changes, especially how the rear alterations relate to the main block. The drawing set should be further developed, with special attention to clarifying the demolition plans and the detailed elevations of new rear addition. • A structural engineering report should be submitted with an assessment of the building’s structural integrity and identification of unsafe areas. • The applicant should work with the Historical Commission’s staff to ensure the submission of a complete application. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The revised application was incomplete and therefore could not be evaluated for compliance with Standards 2, 9, and 10. ACTION: Mr.
and identification of unsafe areas. • The applicant should work with the Historical Commission’s staff to ensure the submission of a complete application. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The revised application was incomplete and therefore could not be evaluated for compliance with Standards 2, 9, and 10. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to remand the application to the Architectural Committee for a new review because the application had been significantly revised. Ms. Carney seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 21 ITEM: 1018 WINTER ST MOTION: Remand MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Carney VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Frankel, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Kelly Fleming (Commerce) X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Holloman (City Council) X O’Connor (DPP) X Lech (L&I) X McCoubrey X Michel X Rabauer X Thomas X Treat (DPD) X Total 11 2 ADJOURNMENT START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 01:40:05 ACTION: At 10:58 a.m., Mr. Frankel moved to adjourn to executive session to discuss litigation. Mr. McCoubrey seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. ITEM: Adjournment MOTION: Adjourn MOVED BY: Frankel SECONDED BY: McCoubrey VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Frankel, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Kelly Fleming (Commerce) X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Holloman (City Council) X O’Connor (DPP) X Lech (L&I) X McCoubrey X Michel X Rabauer X Thomas X Treat (DPD) X Total 11 2 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 22 PLEASE NOTE: • Minutes of the Philadelphia Historical Commission and its advisory committees are presented in action format. Additional information is available in the video recording for this meeting. The start time for each agenda item in the recording is noted. • Application materials and staff overviews are available on the Historical Commission’s website, www.phila.gov/historical. 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
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.