PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 MAY 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 1 THE MINUTES OF THE 765TH STATED MEETING OF THE PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION FRIDAY, 8 MAY 2026, 9:00 A.M. ROOM 18-029, 1515 ARCH STREET, WITH REMOTE OPTION ON ZOOM DAN MCCOUBREY, ACTING CHAIR CALL TO ORDER START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:00:00 Mr. McCoubrey, the Acting Chair, called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. and announced the presence of a quorum. The following Commissioners joined him: Commissioner Present Absent Comment Zachary Frankel, Chair (Real Estate Developer) X Kimberly Washington, Esq., Vice Chair (Community Development Corporation) X James Onofrio (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 Arrived 9:11am Franz Rabauer X Robert Thomas, AIA (Architectural Historian) X Emily Persico (Department of Planning and Development) X The meeting was held in person at 1515 Arch Street, with the option for applicants and the public to participate via Zoom video and audio-conferencing software. The following staff members were present: Jonathan Farnham, Executive Director Kim Chantry, Historic Preservation Planner III Kristin Hankins, Historic Preservation Planner II Heather Hendrickson, 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: Alvin Holm Steven Cunningham PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 MAY 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 2 Leonard Reuter, Esq., Law Department Rich Villa, Ambit Architecture The following persons attended the meeting on Zoom: Allison Weiss, SoLo Germantown Aisha Branham, MGA Partners Amy Stein, MGA Partners David Fecteau, Philadelphia City Planning Commission David Traub, Save Our Sites Dorothy Krotzer Evan Litvin, LO DESIGN H. Coolbaugh James Templeton, Temple University Jay Farrell Jim Kelly Josie Pickens Kate Jacobi, Mural Arts Philadelphia Kimberly Haas, Hidden City Nancy Pontone Paul Steinke, Preservation Alliance Samantha Chui, Philadelphia City Planning Commission Seth Brown Sherman Aronson ADOPTION OF MINUTES, 764TH STATED MEETING, 10 APRIL 2026 START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:03:00 DISCUSSION: • Mr. McCoubrey asked the Commissioners, staff, and members of the public if
Philadelphia Kimberly Haas, Hidden City Nancy Pontone Paul Steinke, Preservation Alliance Samantha Chui, Philadelphia City Planning Commission Seth Brown Sherman Aronson ADOPTION OF MINUTES, 764TH STATED MEETING, 10 APRIL 2026 START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:03:00 DISCUSSION: • Mr. McCoubrey 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 764th Stated Meeting, held 10 April 2026. No comments were offered. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to adopt the minutes of the 764th Stated Meeting of the Philadelphia Historical Commission, held 10 April 2026. Mr. Lech seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 MAY 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 3 ITEM: Adoption of the Minutes of the 764th Stated Meeting of the PHC MOTION: Adopt minutes MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Lech VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Frankel, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Onofrio (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 Persico (DPD) X Total 8 5 REPORT OF THE ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE, 21 APRIL 2026 CONSENT AGENDA START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:03:28 DISCUSSION: • Mr. McCoubrey asked the Commissioners, staff, and public for comments on the Consent Agenda. None were offered. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to adopt the recommendation of the Architectural Committee for the applications for 137 N. 2nd Street, 1500-10 N. Broad Street, and 40 Spring Garden Street, Building D. Mr. Lech seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 MAY 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 4 ITEM: Consent Agenda MOTION: Adopt Architectural Committee recommendations MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Lech VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Frankel, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Onofrio (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 Persico (DPD) X Total 8 5 AGENDA ADDRESS: 137 N 2ND ST Proposal: Install mural Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Incentanile Holdings LLC Applicant: Kate Jacobi, Mural Arts Philadelphia History: 1855 Individual Designation: 12/31/1984 District Designation: Old City Historic District, 12/12/2003 Staff Contact: Dan Shachar-Krasnoff, Daniel.shachar-krasnoff@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application proposes installing a mural on
8 5 AGENDA ADDRESS: 137 N 2ND ST Proposal: Install mural Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Incentanile Holdings LLC Applicant: Kate Jacobi, Mural Arts Philadelphia History: 1855 Individual Designation: 12/31/1984 District Designation: Old City Historic District, 12/12/2003 Staff Contact: Dan Shachar-Krasnoff, Daniel.shachar-krasnoff@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application proposes installing a mural on the south facade of the building at 137 N. 2nd Street. The adjoining buildings at the northeast corner of Elfreth’s Alley and N. 2nd Street were demolished in 1966. The exposed party wall is clad with stucco. The mural will be created off site with the panels assembled and installed on-site. The facade will be primed, the mural clothed panels adhered to the wall with acrylic gel adhesive and sealed with clear acrylic, and two additional clear coats applied to protect against UV rays. The project is being undertaken in cooperation with the Elfreth’s Alley Association, Old City District, and Technically Philly. Sean Martana is the lead artist. The mural’s design celebrates the work of artisans, tradespeople, makers, and crafters in anticipation of the America 250th celebration. SCOPE OF WORK: Install mural. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 MAY 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 5 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 The south façade of 137 N. 2nd Street was not exposed until the adjoining buildings at 133 and 135 N. 2nd Street were demolished. The installation will not cover or alter any historic material. • Section 6.15.a. of the Historical Commission’s Rules & Regulations: o Murals shall not be placed directly upon historic fabric. o Murals shall not be placed in a manner that obscures historic fabric. o The Philadelphia Historical Commission, its committees, and staff shall not consider a mural’s content as part of its review of any application for a building permit, but may consider size, scale, and relationship to the historic context. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standard 9 and Section 6.15.a. of the Historical Commission’s Rules &
not consider a mural’s content as part of its review of any application for a building permit, but may consider size, scale, and relationship to the historic context. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standard 9 and Section 6.15.a. of the Historical Commission’s Rules & Regulations. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend approval, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standard 9 and Section 6.15.a. of the Historical Commission’s Rules & Regulations. ACTION: See Consent Agenda. ADDRESS: 302 MARKET ST Proposal: Demolish two-story building; construct five-story building Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: RS Realty IV LLC Applicant: Rich Villa, Ambit Architecture History: Building from 1840 destroyed by fire Individual Designation: 11/4/1976 District Designation: Old City Historic District, Contributing, 12/12/2003 Staff Contact: Alex Till, alexander.till@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application proposes demolishing the two-story brick building at 302 Market Street, which was constructed in 2017, and constructing a five-story building in its place. The new building will have a contemporary design with a first-floor storefront and a masonry facade that employs different colors and textures of brick. It will also feature windows of varied sizes that get smaller on the upper floors and feature a multi-light over single-light design. The front façade will face Market Street, but the rear will not be visible from any public rights-of-way. The original c. 1840 four-story Greek Revival building on the property was lost in a fire in 2014. The Historical Commission reviewed and approved the existing two-story building at its May 2015 meeting. SCOPE OF WORK: • Demolish a non-contributing building. • Construct a five-story building. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 MAY 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 6 STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include: • Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. o The proposed new building will satisfy Standard 9 if the proposed windows are revised. The height of the building fits well within the row and the proposed materials and other design elements are compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features of the district. o
and its environment. o The proposed new building will satisfy Standard 9 if the proposed windows are revised. The height of the building fits well within the row and the proposed materials and other design elements are compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features of the district. o The windows on the upper floors would be fenestrated with windows with multi-light top sash with single-light bottom sash. If they are revised to use the same arrangement on both sash, they will satisfy Standard 9. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval, provided the upper-floor windows are simplified, pursuant to Standard 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, with the suggestion that the applicant revise the application based on the comments made. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:04:18 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Till presented the application to the Historical Commission. • Architect Rich Villa represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT: • David Traub of Save Our Sites commented in support of the application. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The revisions to the application addressed all of the comments raised by the Architectural Committee. • The lights in the windows on the top floor are too small and should be revised to be proportional to the rest of the building. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The application satisfies Standard 9. Its massing, size, scale, and architectural features are compatible with the historic district. ACTION: Mr. Lech moved to approve the revised application, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standard 9. Ms. Carney seconded the motion, which passed by a vote of 7 to 1 with 1 abstention. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 MAY 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 7 ITEM: 302 Market St MOTION: Approval MOVED BY: Lech SECONDED BY: Carney VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Frankel, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Onofrio (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 Persico (DPD) X Total 7 1 1 4 ADDRESS: 1500-10 N BROAD ST Proposal: Rehabilitate buildings; construct addition Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Temple University Applicant: Aisha Branham, MGA Partners History: 1909; Alfred Edward Burk Mansion, Temple University; Simon & Bassett, architects; 1954, addition, L. Manfredi, architect Individual Designation: 1/26/1971 District Designation: None Staff Contact: Ted Maust, theodore.maust@phila.gov
ADDRESS: 1500-10 N BROAD ST Proposal: Rehabilitate buildings; construct addition Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Temple University Applicant: Aisha Branham, MGA Partners History: 1909; Alfred Edward Burk Mansion, Temple University; Simon & Bassett, architects; 1954, addition, L. Manfredi, architect Individual Designation: 1/26/1971 District Designation: None Staff Contact: Ted Maust, theodore.maust@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application proposes extensive rehabilitation and restoration of the Alfred Burk Mansion and its associated 1954 addition as well as the conservatory at the rear of the property at 1500 N. Broad Street. The buildings have been vacant for many years and have undergone several stabilization projects. The scope of work for the main building includes repairs and patching of the masonry, roof and window replacement, and restoration of the front door. A new vestibule is proposed at the rear between the mansion and its addition. The application proposes a partial restoration of the balustrade along the perimeter wall, using surviving balusters to restore the portion in front of the mansion and installing a metal picket fence between limestone piers on the historic granite base for other portions of the site. The project proposes the addition of accessibility ramps and site work to replace the parking lot with a lawn which mediates the grade change between the mansion and the conservatory. The conservatory would also receive masonry repair and restoration as well as a new roof. The PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 MAY 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 8 elevation facing the mansion would feature large windows and French doors evoking its historic greenhouse appearance, whereas the elevations along Jefferson and Carlisle Streets, and facing north would largely retain their current appearance with some small non-historic openings infilled. SCOPE OF WORK: Rehabilitate buildings; construct addition. 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 The proposed vestibule is differentiated from the historic mansion but compatible in scale and proportion. • Standard 10: New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if
and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. o The proposed vestibule is differentiated from the historic mansion but compatible in scale and proportion. • 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 vestibule requires no demolition of the mansion. If removed in the future, it would not negatively impact the historic resource. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval, pursuant to Standards 9 and 10. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend approval, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 9 and 10. ACTION: See Consent Agenda. ADDRESS: 6363 OVERBROOK AVE Proposal: Construct deck on front porch roof Review: Final Approval Owner: Steven A. Cunningham Applicant: Alvin Holm, Alvin Holm AIA Architects History: 1903; Hoar/McCahan House; Horace Trumbauer, architect; 1920, alterations, W.F. Price Individual Designation: None District Designation: Overbrook Farms Historic District, Contributing 11/8/2019 Staff Contact: Josh Schroeder, joshua.schroeder@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application proposes to construct a deck on the front porch of the dwelling at 6363 Overbrook Avenue. The front porch was open when the home was originally constructed was later enclosed. The proposed deck would cover the entire roof of the front porch as well as the car park to the side. The proposed deck would include wood railings and a new semi- circular platform supported by four new columns extending over the front steps to the porch. An exterior steel spiral staircase to access the roof from the ground would be included on the side opposite the car park. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 MAY 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 9 Construction of the roof deck began in the fall of 2025 without permits or review by the Historical Commission. The Department of Licenses and Inspections issued a stop work order and violation in January 2026. A platform over the porch roof, posts for the railing, and bases for the columns have already been constructed. The two outermost second-floor windows on the front façade have been removed, the openings altered for doors, and doors and exterior light fixtures installed. The submitted plans show the new second-floor doors as existing, but this change was made as part of the construction of the deck. In response to the
two outermost second-floor windows on the front façade have been removed, the openings altered for doors, and doors and exterior light fixtures installed. The submitted plans show the new second-floor doors as existing, but this change was made as part of the construction of the deck. In response to the Architectural Committee’s comments on 21 April, the application has been revised and supplemented to include: revised drawings showing wood railing for the deck, instead of vinyl as first proposed; photographs of the new doors installed in the altered window openings, showing the retention of the existing upper trim and lintels; photographs of preferred and alternate locations for the proposed exterior spiral staircase; and photographs corresponding to the address list of other houses in the neighborhood with second story roof decks or similar features. Per research by the staff, all of these appear to have been present when the Overbrook Farms Historic District was designated and have not undergone review by the Philadelphia Historical Commission. SCOPE OF WORK: Construct deck on front porch roof, alter front facade, and add spiral staircase. 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. • 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 proposed alterations substantially change the front façade’s appearance. The house originally featured an open front porch. An upper-level deck with a more ornate front entrance, steel spiral staircase, and removal of second-story windows is a further departure from the house’s original and historic appearance. Therefore, the application fails to satisfy Standards 2 and 9. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Denial, pursuant to Standards 2 and 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Standards 2 and 9. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:15:58 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Schroeder presented the application to the Historical Commission. • Property owner Steven Cunningham and architect Alvin Holm represented
to Standards 2 and 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Standards 2 and 9. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:15:58 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Schroeder presented the application to the Historical Commission. • Property owner Steven Cunningham and architect Alvin Holm represented the application. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 MAY 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 10 PUBLIC COMMENT: • David Traub of Save Our Sites commented that the revisions improved from the design but withheld his comments on whether the proposed work was appropriate. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The enclosed porch, octagonal bays, and porte-cochere at 6363 Overbrook Ave are alterations that have gained historic significance. • Any similar porches or decks in the historic district are either original to the buildings or later additions that were added prior to the Historical Commission designating the district. The Historical Commission has not approved decks on the roofs of front porches in the district. • The proposed changes would alter the primary façade’s historic appearance, which is highly visible from the public right-of-way. • The proposed deck and related alterations may not meet building code or zoning requirements or standards. The applicant should explore other regulatory requirements before submitting a revised application to the Historical Commission. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The removal of windows and the installation of doors in altered window openings and proposed deck on top of a sloped porch roof on the house’s primary façade are significant changes to the property’s historic character that alter features, spaces and spatial relationships that characterize a property. The application fails to satisfy Standard 2. • The front-porch roof deck, semi-circular platform with columns, and alterations to front window openings, and spiral staircase are not compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing compatible of the house and do not satisfy Standard 9. ACTION: Mr. Lech moved to deny the revised application, pursuant to Standards 2 and 9. Ms. Cooperman seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 MAY 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 11 ITEM: 6363 Overbrook Ave MOTION: Denial MOVED BY: Lech SECONDED BY: Cooperman VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Frankel, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Onofrio (Commerce) X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Holloman (City Council)
HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 MAY 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 11 ITEM: 6363 Overbrook Ave MOTION: Denial MOVED BY: Lech SECONDED BY: Cooperman VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Frankel, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Onofrio (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 Persico (DPD) X Total 9 4 ADDRESS: 40 SPRING GARDEN ST – BUILDING D Proposal: Construct three-story addition Review Requested: Review In Concept Owner: 500 NNCB Fee LLC Applicant: Lea Litvin, LO Design History: 1891; Philadelphia Warehousing & Cold Storage Company Individual Designation: 1/8/2021 District Designation: None Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application seeks in-concept approval for a three-story addition on a two-story building, known as Building D, within the Philadelphia Warehousing & Cold Storage Company complex. The existing building was constructed in 1891 and 1900, first serving as the Ice Machine House and then as a Machine Shop for the company. Although it was built in two phases, the primary elevation facing N. Beach Street appears as a unified façade. It is clad in red brick and detailed with rough-faced stone. The project proposes to adaptively reuse the building with commercial space on the ground floor and residential units on the upper floors. Adjacent projects in this historic complex (500 N. Christopher Columbus Boulevard, Buildings B and F) were previously approved by the Historical Commission at public meetings. When the adjacent construction is completed, the east and south elevations of Building D will remain visible from the public right-of-way. The west wall of the building will be visible within a private courtyard of Building F that includes the industrial brick stack. SCOPE OF WORK: • Lower sill heights of first floor windows. • Construct stairs and accessibility ramp along front façade. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 MAY 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 12 • Construct three-story addition. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include: • Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. o The construction
exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. o The construction of the overbuild should be set behind the building’s east, south, and west cornice lines to meet Standard 9. o Although this is a two-story building, it is approximately 50 feet tall. Since the buildings in the complex are large industrial buildings, a three-story addition proposed as 35 feet in height would not overwhelm Building D’s massing or scale, or that of the other buildings in the complex; therefore, the addition satisfies Standard 9. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends approval, pursuant to Standard 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend approval of the in-concept application, pursuant to Standard 9. ACTION: See Consent Agenda. COMMENT ON NATIONAL REGISTER NOMINATION ADDRESS: 3031-49 N 21ST ST Name of Resource: De Long Hook & Eye Company Factory Proposed Action: National Register Comment Property Owner: Deliverance Center of Hope, Inc. Nominator: Kevin McCahon, Powers & Co. Staff Contact: Alex Till, alexander.till@phila.gov OVERVIEW: The Pennsylvania Historical & Museum Commission (PHMC) has requested comments from the Philadelphia Historical Commission on the National Register nomination of 3031 N 21st Street located in North Philadelphia and historically known as the De Long Hook & Eye Company Factory. PHMC is charged with implementing federal historic preservation regulations in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, including overseeing the National Register of Historic Places in the state. PHMC reviews all such nominations before forwarding them to the National Park Service for action. As part of the process, PHMC must solicit comments on every National Register nomination from the appropriate local government. The Philadelphia Historical Commission speaks on behalf of the City of Philadelphia in historic preservation matters including the review of National Register nominations. Under federal regulation, the local government not only must provide comments, but must also provide a forum for public comment on nominations. Such a forum is provided during the Philadelphia Historical Commission’s meetings. The De Long Hook & Eye Company Factory is significant under Criterion A in the area of industry as home to one of the largest and best-known manufacturers of notions and sewing accessories in the United States during the first half of the twentieth
during the Philadelphia Historical Commission’s meetings. The De Long Hook & Eye Company Factory is significant under Criterion A in the area of industry as home to one of the largest and best-known manufacturers of notions and sewing accessories in the United States during the first half of the twentieth century. In 1889, Frank Emerson De Long patented an innovative form of hook and eye fastener. In a factory in PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 MAY 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 13 Philadelphia, De Long immediately went about manufacturing his hooks and eyes, which very quickly became the most popular and widely available form of garment fastener in the United States. Sold from the catalogs of national suppliers like Sears and Montgomery Ward, and in department stores and pharmacies in thousands of cities and towns, the De Long Hook & Eye became an iconic American product in just a few short years. By the late 1910s, as the hook and eye began to decline in popularity, De Long pivoted, investing significantly in the development of snap fasteners, which were quickly becoming standard in many forms of women’s clothing. Around the same time, De Long relocated to a new, purpose-built factory at 21st and Clearfield Streets in North Philadelphia, which was completed in 1918. This large, modern facility allowed De Long to increase the efficiency of its production, especially of snap fasteners, which helped the company to remain one of, if not the largest, manufacturers of notions and sewing accessories in the country for many years to come. The period of significance of the De Long Hook & Eye Company Factory begins in 1918, when the factory was completed and began operations, and ends in 1962, when it was finally closed after having been acquired by the Scovill Manufacturing Company in 1955. This property in not listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:35:09 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Till presented the National Register nomination to the Historical Commission. DISCUSSION: • Ms. Carney commented that she appreciates seeing old industrial building added to the National Register and wondered if there were development plans in the works for this property. • Mr. Till and Ms. Cooperman pointed out that, typically, National Register nominations for buildings like this one are done to qualify for historic tax credits for redevelopment. • Mr. McCoubrey commented that he
the National Register and wondered if there were development plans in the works for this property. • Mr. Till and Ms. Cooperman pointed out that, typically, National Register nominations for buildings like this one are done to qualify for historic tax credits for redevelopment. • Mr. McCoubrey commented that he is impressed to see buildings such as this one being redeveloped. • Mr. McCoubrey and Ms. Carney agreed that the interior of the building is impressive. • Mr. Lech commented that even though there are many old industrial buildings in this area of the city, there were even more in the past and he is in support of this one being preserved. • Ms. Cooperman commented that the building likely survived because of its heavy concrete construction. • Mr. McCoubrey also highlighted the small decorative pedimented entrance. • Ms. Cooperman complimented the nominator, Kevin McMahon, for a well-researched and written nomination. She added that he could have argued for significance under Criterion C, but the presented argument for Criterion A is convincing. • Mr. McCoubrey directed the staff to report the Philadelphia Historical Commission’s support for the nomination to the Pennsylvania Historical & Museum Commission. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Paul Steinke of the Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia commented on a companion building to this one and highlighted the De Long building located at 1228 Chestnut Street, which served as a companion property for the De Long Hook & Eye Company in Center City. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 8 MAY 2026 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 14 ADJOURNMENT START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:42:31 ACTION: At 9:43 a.m., Ms. Carney moved to adjourn. Ms. Cooperman seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. ITEM: Adjournment MOTION: Adjourn MOVED BY: Carney SECONDED BY: Cooperman VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Frankel, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Onofrio (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 Persico (DPD) X Total 9 4 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.