Historical Commission — Oct 11, 2019

PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 1 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES THE MINUTES OF THE 686TH STATED MEETING OF THE PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION FRIDAY, 11 OCTOBER 2019 ROOM 18-029, 1515 ARCH STREET ROBERT THOMAS, CHAIR CALL TO ORDER START TIME IN AUDIO RECORDING: 00:00:00 Mr. Thomas, the chair, called the meeting to order at 9:08 a.m. and announced the presence of a quorum. The following Commissioners joined him: Commissioner Present Absent Comment Robert Thomas, AIA, Chair X Emily Cooperman, Ph.D., Committee on Historic Designation Chair X Kelly Edwards, MUP X* Arrived at 9:13 am Steven Hartner (Department of Public Property) X Josh Lippert (Department of Licenses & Inspections) X Melissa Long (Division of Housing & Community Development) X John Mattioni, Esq. X Dan McCoubrey, AIA, LEED AP BD+C, Architectural Committee Chair X Jessica Sánchez, Esq. (City Council President) X* Arrived at 9:10 am H. Ahada Stanford, Ph.D. (Commerce Department) X* Arrived at 9:12 am Meredith Trego (Department of Planning & Development) X Betty Turner, MA, Vice Chair X Kimberly Washington, Esq. X* Arrived at 9:13 am The following staff members were present: Jonathan E. Farnham, Ph.D., Executive Director Randal Baron, Historic Preservation Planner III Kim Chantry, Historic Preservation Planner II Laura DiPasquale, Historic Preservation Planner II Shannon Garrison, Historic Preservation Planner I Meredith Keller, Historic Preservation Planner II Leonard Reuter, Esq., Law Department The following persons were present: Michael O’Mara, St. Joseph’s Preparatory School Rustin Ohler, Harman Deutsch Ohler Architecture Frank LaMura, Marvin Windows Yen Ho PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 2 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES Todd Curry, Emerald Windows Robert Parsky Paul Steinke, Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia Steven Peitzman G. O’Connell Bridget Golob Ming Yuan, Olson Kundig Arwa Abdelmoula, Esq., Ballard Spahr Celeste Morello J. Baylor, 19th Street Baptist Church Colin Goan, Streamline Harrison Haas, Esq., Cozen O’Connor Daniel Kelley, Bingham Court HOA Patrick Grossi, Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia Nick Kraus, Heritage Consulting Group Nancy Pontone Banin Shah, Penn Law Helena Tsourous Robert Schwarz Tatiana Paden, Temple University Mustabin Hossain, Temple University Aaron Wunsch Kate McGlinchey, Old City District Paul Boni, Esq., Society Hill Civic Association Will Heaston, Penn Law Rich Thom Oscar Beisert Suzanna Barucco, SBK + Partners Theresa Stuhlman, Parks and Recreation ADOPTION OF MINUTES, 685TH STATED MEETING, 13 SEPTEMBER 2019 START TIME IN AUDIO RECORDING: 00:01:10 DISCUSSION:  Mr. Thomas asked the Commissioners for any additions or

Boni, Esq., Society Hill Civic Association Will Heaston, Penn Law Rich Thom Oscar Beisert Suzanna Barucco, SBK + Partners Theresa Stuhlman, Parks and Recreation ADOPTION OF MINUTES, 685TH STATED MEETING, 13 SEPTEMBER 2019 START TIME IN AUDIO RECORDING: 00:01:10 DISCUSSION:  Mr. Thomas asked the Commissioners for any additions or corrections to the minutes of the preceding meeting, the 685th Stated Meeting, held 13 September 2019. None were offered. PUBLIC COMMENT: None ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to approve the minutes of the 685th Stated Meeting of the Philadelphia Historical Commission, held 13 September 2019. Mr. Mattioni seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 3 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ITEM: Adoption of Minutes, 685th Stated Meeting MOTION: Approval MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Mattioni VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lippert (L&I) X Long (DHCD) Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Stanford (Commerce) X Trego (DPD) X Turner, Vice Chair X X Washington X Total 8 5 JEWELERS’ ROW HISTORIC DISTRICT Proposed Action: Designation Nominator: Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 OVERVIEW: During the March 2019 Historical Commission meeting, the owners of properties in the proposed Jewelers’ Row Historic District requested that the Historical Commission continue the review of the nomination to a future Committee on Historic Designation meeting to allow for additional time an architectural historian to evaluate the nomination and write a report. The Historical Commission granted the continuance with the understanding that the property owners’ attorney would provide a status update on the report at the August 2019 meeting of the Historical Commission. At the August 2019 meeting, the attorney updated the Historical Commission, explaining that the evaluation would be ready in October or November and agreeing to provide a status update at the October 2019 meeting. The Historical Commission continued the review of the historic district nomination and remanded it to the December 2019 meeting of the Committee on Historic Designation, with the understanding that a status update would be provided at today’s meeting. The attorney has provided his status update to the Historical Commission in the form of a letter, dated 4 October 2019. In his update, he explains that the consultant is still working on the evaluation and concludes that the report may or may not be complete in time

today’s meeting. The attorney has provided his status update to the Historical Commission in the form of a letter, dated 4 October 2019. In his update, he explains that the consultant is still working on the evaluation and concludes that the report may or may not be complete in time for the December 2019 meeting of the Committee on Historic Designation meeting. The attorney offers to provide an update at the November 2019 meeting of the Historical Commission and make any request for an additional continuance at that time. The Preservation Alliance has submitted a letter responding to the attorney’s letter. START TIME IN AUDIO RECORDING: 00:01:35 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 4 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES PRESENTERS:  Mr. Farnham presented the update to the Historical Commission. He informed the Commissioners that the Historical Commission had received a letter from the attorney representing many of the property owners in the proposed district. The letter stated that the owners’ consultants’ report was not yet complete. The attorney will report back to the Commission at its November meeting. At this point in time, the Jewelers’ Row Historic District nomination is scheduled to be reviewed by the Committee on Historic Designation in December 2019 and the Historical Commission in January 2020. CONTINUANCE REQUESTS ADDRESS: 7709 CHEROKEE ST; 540 W MORELAND AVE; 545 W MERMAID LN Name of Resource: Keewaydin Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Robin Sommers (7709 Cherokee St); Ganos LLC (540 W Moreland Ave); Donald J. Ratchford and Nancy A. Dickson (545 W Mermaid Ln) Nominator: Chestnut Hill Conservancy Staff Contact: Meredith Keller, meredith.keller@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the properties at 7709 Cherokee Street, 540 W. Moreland Avenue, and 545 W. Mermaid Lane and list them on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The three properties historically comprised the main buildings of the Keewaydin estate. The nomination contends that the buildings satisfy Criteria for Designation C, D, E, and J. Under Criteria C and D, the nomination argues that Keewaydin stands as a characteristic example of the Dutch Colonial Revival style, which operated as a particular mode within the broader Colonial Revival movement. Under Criterion E, the nomination contends that the estate was designed by notable Philadelphia architect George T. Pearson. Under Criterion J, the nomination argues that the estate was constructed for Edward W. Clark Jr. and his wife Lydia Jane (Newhall) Clark,

a particular mode within the broader Colonial Revival movement. Under Criterion E, the nomination contends that the estate was designed by notable Philadelphia architect George T. Pearson. Under Criterion J, the nomination argues that the estate was constructed for Edward W. Clark Jr. and his wife Lydia Jane (Newhall) Clark, a distinguished Philadelphia family and fixture of Chestnut Hill society. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the properties at 7709 Cherokee Street, 540 W. Moreland Avenue, and 545 W. Mermaid Lane satisfy Criteria for Designation C, D, E, and J. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the Historical Commission continue the review of the nomination of 7709 Cherokee Street, 540 W. Moreland Avenue, and 545 W. Mermaid Lane and remand it to the November 2019 meeting of the Committee on Historic Designation. ACTION: See below. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 5 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ADDRESS: 1810 CHESTNUT ST Name of Resource: Samuel T. Freeman & Co. Auction House Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: The Business Known As “C” Nominator: Philadelphia Historical Commission staff Staff Contact: Meredith Keller, meredith.keller@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 1810 Chestnut Street and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the building satisfies Criterion for Designation D. Under Criterion D, the nomination argues that architectural firm Tilden & Register designed the Samuel T. Freeman & Co. Auction House in 1923-24 in Renaissance Revival style; the building’s style offered a sense of distinction and grandeur to a company with a legacy of auctioning the exclusive collections of Philadelphia’s elite. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 1810 Chestnut Street satisfies Criterion for Designation D. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the Historical Commission continue the review of the nomination of 1810 Chestnut Street and remand it to the October 2019 meeting of the Committee on Historic Designation. ACTION: See below. ADDRESS: 5250 UNRUH ST Name of Resource: Tacony Worsted Mills Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: 5250 Unruh Avenue Assoc. Nominator: Alexander Balloon, Tacony Community Development Corp. Staff Contact: Megan Cross Schmitt, megan.schmitt@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 5250 Unruh Avenue and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places.

of Resource: Tacony Worsted Mills Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: 5250 Unruh Avenue Assoc. Nominator: Alexander Balloon, Tacony Community Development Corp. Staff Contact: Megan Cross Schmitt, megan.schmitt@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 5250 Unruh Avenue and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the building satisfies Criteria for Designation E and J. Under Criterion E, the nomination argues that the Tacony Worsted Mills is an early and intact example of an industrial complex designed by Walter Harvey Geissinger, a prolific architect who designed several commercial and industrial buildings throughout Philadelphia. Under Criterion J, the nomination contends that the Tacony Worsted Mills was considered locally and nationally to be one of the finest and largest worsted yarn mills of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 5250 Unruh Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation E and J. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the Historical Commission continue the review of the nomination of 5250 Unruh Avenue and remand it to the December 2019 meeting of the Committee on Historic Designation. ACTION: See below. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 6 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ADDRESS: 231 REED ST Name of Resource: Sacred Heart of Jesus Parochial School Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Christopher Columbus Charter School Nominator: Celeste Morello Staff Contact: Kim Chantry, kim.chantry@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 231 Reed Street and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the former Sacred Heart of Jesus Parochial School, constructed in 1893, satisfies Criteria for Designation D, H, and J. Under Criterion D, the nomination argues that the building embodies distinguishing characteristics of Romanesque Revival architecture. Under Criterion H, the nomination argues that the imposing school building, cited on a prominent corner of Moyamensing Avenue where most other buildings are smaller-scale, represents an established and familiar visual feature of the neighborhood. Under Criterion J, the nomination contends that the building exemplifies the cultural, political, economic, social, or historical heritage of the community. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 231 Reed Street satisfies Criteria for Designation D and H. The staff fails to comprehend the argument for the satisfaction of Criterion

that the building exemplifies the cultural, political, economic, social, or historical heritage of the community. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 231 Reed Street satisfies Criteria for Designation D and H. The staff fails to comprehend the argument for the satisfaction of Criterion J proffered in the nomination. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the Historical Commission continue the review of the nomination of 231 Reed Street and remand it to the November 2019 meeting of the Committee on Historic Designation. ACTION: See below. ADDRESS: 156 W SCHOOL HOUSE LN Name of Resource: Boxwood Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Teen Challenge Training Center Inc/Pennsylvania School for the Deaf Nominator: Penn Knox Neighborhood Association Staff Contact: Meredith Keller, meredith.keller@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 156 W. School House Lane and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the building satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, and E. Under Criteria C and D, the nomination argues that Boxwood reflects the Colonial Revival style of architecture as applied to upper-class suburban residences in late nineteenth-century Philadelphia. The nomination further argues that the “cottage-stable” at the rear of the property represents Gothic Revival cottage motifs popularized by Andrew Jackson Downing in the late 1840s and early 1850s.Under Criterion D, the nomination asserts that Boxwood was designed by Mantle Fielding, a prolific and significant architect who influenced the built environment in Northwest Philadelphia at the turn of the twentieth century. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 156 W. School House Lane satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, and E. However, the staff asserts that the so-called “cottage-stable” at the rear of the property does not reflect the Gothic Revival style and, therefore, does not satisfy Criteria C and D as presented in the nomination. While the building has a cross gable, a typical feature of the Gothic Revival, it does PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 7 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES not have any other features characteristic of the style. The building may have served as a barn, potentially for an earlier residence predating Boxwood, and was later updated with a cross gable. The staff recommends that the so-called “cottage-stable” contributes to the site’s historical significance but does not

HISTORIC RESOURCES not have any other features characteristic of the style. The building may have served as a barn, potentially for an earlier residence predating Boxwood, and was later updated with a cross gable. The staff recommends that the so-called “cottage-stable” contributes to the site’s historical significance but does not exhibit sufficient character-defining features to be considered reflective of or exemplary of the Gothic Revival style. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the Historical Commission continue the review of the nomination of 156 W. School House Lane and remand it to a future meeting of the Committee on Historic Designation. ACTION: See below. ADDRESS: 1535 W GIRARD AVE Name of Resource: Charles T. Yerkes House Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Willis W. Berry, Jr. Nominator: Philadelphia Historical Commission staff Staff Contact: Laura DiPasquale, laura.dipasquale@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 1535 W. Girard Avenue and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the property, constructed between 1864 and 1865, is significant under Criteria for Designation A, D, and J. Under Criterion A, the nomination argues that the property is significant for its association with Charles Tyson Yerkes, Jr., one of shrewdest businessmen and most influential mass-transit financiers of the late nineteenth century. While Quaker-born Yerkes got his start in business in Philadelphia, his influence extended beyond the city, and even the nation, as he would go on to give Chicago its “L,” and London its “Tube” systems. Through his questionable morals and unfettered ambition, Yerkes exemplified the Gilded Age robber baron to such an extent that he was immortalized, shortly after his death, in Theodore Dreiser’s Financier trilogy of the early twentieth century. The nomination argues that the free-standing townhouse, located along Girard Avenue, just west of Broad Street was designed in a high-style Italianate or Italian Renaissance style, satisfying Criterion D, and also exemplifies the development of West Girard Avenue as it transitioned from a rural area to a streetcar suburb and ultimately a fashionable thoroughfare for the nouveau riche elite in the second half of the nineteenth century, satisfying Criterion J. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 1535 W. Girard Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, and J. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that

in the second half of the nineteenth century, satisfying Criterion J. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 1535 W. Girard Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, and J. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that that the Historical Commission continue the nomination for 1535 W. Girard Avenue and remand it to the November 2019 meeting of the Committee on Historic Designation. ACTION: See below. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 8 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ADDRESS: 1734-54 W THOMPSON ST Name of Resource: Church of the Gesu Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Saint Joseph’s Preparatory Nominator: Celeste Morello Staff Contact: Megan Cross Schmitt, megan.schmitt@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 1734-54 W. Thompson Street and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the building satisfies Criteria for Designation D and E. Under Criterion D, the nomination describes the Church of the Gesu as “High Victorian Baroque,” stating that it “expresses the intellectual, yet contemporary taste of the late nineteenth century with the combination of styles.” The nomination argues that the church, constructed 1879-1888, is also an interesting example of the association the Society of Jesus, the Jesuits, has had with Baroque architecture since the 1500s. Under Criterion E, the nomination recognizes that architect Edwin F. Durang was highly regarded as “insightful [and] thoroughly professional,” and well known for his work on Catholic churches throughout Philadelphia. It contends that Durang’s design for the Church of the Gesu is his “American representation of the Baroque, a ‘Roman Catholic’ style.” STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 1734-54 W. Thompson Street satisfies Criteria for Designation D and E. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 1734-54 W. Thompson Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, E, and H. ACTION: See below. ADDRESS: 1045-49 SARAH ST Name of Resource: Otis Elevator Company Boiler and Engine House Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Antal Group Inc. Nominator: The Keeping Society of Philadelphia Staff Contact: Laura DiPasquale, laura.dipasquale@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 1045-29 Sarah Street and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the former boiler and

Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Antal Group Inc. Nominator: The Keeping Society of Philadelphia Staff Contact: Laura DiPasquale, laura.dipasquale@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 1045-29 Sarah Street and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the former boiler and engine house of the Otis Elevator Company, built in 1904, satisfies Criteria for Designation A, C, G, and J. Under Criteria A and J, the nomination argues that the property is significant in the development of Fishtown/Kensington as part of the Morse Elevator Works and the Otis Elevator Company. Under Criterion C, the nomination contends that the building is representative of industrial power plant design of the early twentieth century. Under Criterion G, the nomination argues that the building is part of the earliest, extent, coherent industrial complexes in Fishtown, but does not propose to designate the complex as a district. Many of the other properties associated with the former Morse and Otis Elevator Companies were individually designated in 2015 and 2016. The Committee on Historic Designation reviewed this nomination on March 12th and recommended that the property satisfies Criteria D and J. The owner, who did not attend the Committee’s review, requested that the Historical Commission remand the nomination to the PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 9 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES Committee to provide him with an opportunity to participate in the review. The Commission granted the request, sending the nomination back to the Committee. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 1045-49 Sarah Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A, C, and J, but not Criterion G. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION, MARCH 2019: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the property satisfies Criteria for Designation D and J. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION, SEPTEMBER 2019: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the Historical Commission continue the nomination for 1045-49 Sarah Street be continued and remanded it to the December 2019 Committee on Historic Designation meeting. ACTION: See below. ADDRESS: 1533-39 N 7TH ST Name of Resource: Trinity Reformed Church Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: 99 Real Estate LLC Nominator: The Keeping Society of Philadelphia Staff Contact: Meredith Keller, meredith.keller@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 1533-39 N 7th Street and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic

ST Name of Resource: Trinity Reformed Church Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: 99 Real Estate LLC Nominator: The Keeping Society of Philadelphia Staff Contact: Meredith Keller, meredith.keller@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 1533-39 N 7th Street and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the former Trinity Reformed Church satisfies Criteria for Designation D, E, and J. Under Criterion D, the nomination argues that the church exemplifies the “inexpensive, but expressive” form of Gothic ecclesiastical architecture. Under Criterion E, the nomination contends that the church was designed by influential Philadelphia architect Samuel Sloan, who included an illustration of the building in his 1868 publication of The Architectural Review and American Builders’ Journal. The nomination further argues that the modest but expressive design reflects the cultural, economic, and social heritage of Philadelphia’s working-to-middle-class residents. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 1533-39 N 7th Street satisfies Criteria for Designation D, E, and J. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that 1533-39 N. 7th Street satisfies Criteria for Designation D, E, and J, and that the property should be designated as historic and listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. ACTION: See below. START TIME IN AUDIO RECORDING: 00:04:53 PRESENTERS: None. REASON FOR REQUEST: The property owners of 7709 Cherokee Street, 540 W. Moreland Avenue, 545 W. Mermaid Lane, 1810 Chestnut Street, 5250 Unruh Avenue, 231 Reed PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 10 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES Street, 156 W. School Lane, 1535 W. Girard Avenue, 1734-54 W. Thompson Street, 1045- 49 Sarah Street, and 1533-39 N. 7th Street have requested that the Historical Commission continue the reviews of their nominations to provide additional time to evaluate the nominations and the implications of designation. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. ACTION: Mr. Mattioni moved to continue and remand the reviews of the following nominations:  7709 Cherokee Street, 540 W. Moreland Avenue, 545 W. Mermaid Lane to the 13 November 2019 meeting of the Committee on Historic Designation;  231 Reed Street to the 13 November 2019 meeting of the Committee on Historic Designation;  1535 W. Girard Avenue to the 13 November 2019 meeting of the Committee on Historic Designation;  1810 Chestnut Street to the 5 December 2019 meeting of

of the Committee on Historic Designation;  231 Reed Street to the 13 November 2019 meeting of the Committee on Historic Designation;  1535 W. Girard Avenue to the 13 November 2019 meeting of the Committee on Historic Designation;  1810 Chestnut Street to the 5 December 2019 meeting of the Committee on Historic Designation;  5250 Unruh Avenue to the 5 December 2019 meeting of the Committee on Historic Designation;  1045-49 Sarah Street to the 5 December 2019 meeting of the Committee on Historic Designation;  1734-54 W. Thompson Street to the 13 December 2019 meeting of the Historical Commission;  1533-39 N. 7th Street to the 10 January 2020 meeting of the Historical Commission; and,  156 W. School House Lane to the 20 May 2020 meeting of the Committee on Historic Designation. Ms. Cooperman seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. ITEM: Continuance of reviews of nominations MOTION: Approval MOVED BY: Mattioni SECONDED BY: Cooperman VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lippert (L&I) X Long (DHCD) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Stanford (Commerce) X Trego (DPD) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 12 1 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 11 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES THE REPORT OF THE ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE, 24 SEPTEMBER 2019 Dan McCoubrey, Chair ADDRESS: 432 CATHARINE ST Proposal: Demolish rear roof slope; construct third-floor addition Type of Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Helena Tsourous Applicant: Zach Ogden, Hivemind Construction History: 1830 Individual Designation: 12/31/1984 Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 BACKGROUND: This 2-1/2 story brick row house was constructed circa 1830 and is part of a cohesive group of row houses along the 400 block of Catharine Street. The original main block has a single dormer on the front roof and another single dormer on the rear roof. The application proposes to demolish the building’s rear roof and dormer and build an addition from the ridge over the rear second story to create a third floor. No work to the front façade is included in this application. SCOPE OF WORK  Demolish existing rear roof of main block.  Demolish rear dormer.  Construct third floor over rear of building.  Interior renovations but no work to front facade. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties

in this application. SCOPE OF WORK  Demolish existing rear roof of main block.  Demolish rear dormer.  Construct third floor over rear of building.  Interior renovations but no work to front facade. 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 alteration of features, spaces and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. o The demolition of the rear roof and dormer will result in the removal of distinctive materials and the alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. This demolition will diminish the historic character of the property.  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 of the rear roof and dormer will destroy historic features which characterizes the property. The proposal will not protect the historic integrity of the property. 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 IN AUDIO RECORDING: 00:10:40 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 12 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES PRESENTERS:  Ms. Keller presented the application to the Historical Commission.  Architect Juliet Whalen and owner Helena Tsourous represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT:  Paul Steinke of the Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia opposed the application. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  The applicant presented a revised scheme showing the height of the rear addition reduced by six inches. The applicant stated the rear addition would not be visible from the public right-of-way with this change.  The applicant explored the alternate schemes suggested by the Architectural Committee, but the applicant concluded they were not feasible based on limitations including the homeowner’s goals for the property.  The proposed change would have a limited impact on the building’s historic character because the change would not be visible from the public right-of-way. The Historical Commission is charged with protecting historic resources for the

they were not feasible based on limitations including the homeowner’s goals for the property.  The proposed change would have a limited impact on the building’s historic character because the change would not be visible from the public right-of-way. The Historical Commission is charged with protecting historic resources for the public. The Historical Commission concluded that:  The demolition of the rear roof and dormer will not result in the removal of distinctive materials and the alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. This demolition will not diminish the historic character of the property, satisfying Standard 2.  The construction of the rear roof and dormer will not destroy historic features that characterize the property. The proposal will protect the historic integrity of the property, satisfying Standard 9. FAILED MOTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to deny the application, pursuant to Standards 2 and 9. Ms. Cooperman seconded the motion, which failed by a vote of 3 to 8. Messrs. Hartner and Lippert and Mses. Edwards, Long, Sanchez, Stanford, Trego, and Washington dissented. Mr. Mattioni abstained. ACTION: Ms. Trego moved to approve the application, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 2 and 9. Ms. Sanchez seconded the motion, which passed by a vote of 8 to 3 with 1 abstention. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 13 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ITEM: 432 Catharine St MOTION: Approval MOVED BY: Trego SECONDED BY: Sanchez VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lippert (L&I) X Long (DHCD) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Stanford (Commerce) X Trego (DPD) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 8 3 1 1 ADDRESS: 25 S VAN PELT ST Proposal: Alter facades; construct fourth-floor addition Type of Review Requested: Review In Concept Owner: 25 Van Pelt Real Estate Advisors, LLC Applicant: Christopher Stromberg, S2 Design History: 1894, Westray Ladd, architect (1894); Magaziner & Eberhard, architects (1939 addition), Evening Home and Library Association District Designation: Rittenhouse Fitler Historic District, Contributing, 2/8/1995 Staff Contact: Laura DiPasquale, laura.dipasquale@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 BACKGROUND: Located between Ludlow and Chestnut Streets in the Rittenhouse Fitler Historic District, the property at 25 S. Van Pelt Street features two notable building campaigns: a Renaissance Revival portion to the south, designed by Westray Ladd and constructed in 1894 as the headquarters of the Evening Home &

215-686-7660 BACKGROUND: Located between Ludlow and Chestnut Streets in the Rittenhouse Fitler Historic District, the property at 25 S. Van Pelt Street features two notable building campaigns: a Renaissance Revival portion to the south, designed by Westray Ladd and constructed in 1894 as the headquarters of the Evening Home & Library Association, a charity for “wayward” boys; and a modern section, designed by Magaziner & Eberhard and constructed in 1939 for the Big Brothers Association of Philadelphia (the local precursor to Big Brothers Big Sisters). The 1939 project entailed the rehabilitation of the entire complex, including exterior modifications to and partial demolition of the 1894 building, which was originally twice as wide, and the incorporation of the interiors of the old and new buildings. The 1939 addition included a large gymnasium, lecture rooms, basement workshops, and a caged-in roof court. The Rittenhouse Fitler Historic District inventory classifies the entire property as contributing and does not explicitly identify portions of the property as historic or non-historic. Moreover, the historic district does not include a period of significance, so alterations and additions of any date may be considered historically significant. This in-concept application proposes to make substantial alterations to the 1939 portion of the property to separate it from the 1884 portion of the building and convert it into three residential units. At the first floor of the primary (west) facade, the application proposes to cut new window, PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 14 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES door, and garage openings. At the second floor, the application proposes to cut recessed balconies. A new third floor would be inserted within the existing 25-foot tall second floor, across the bottom row of the existing upper-floor windows. As a result, the application proposes to alter the window configuration to install a series of metal panels. The existing window configuration would also be altered in the north bay of the building to make the openings consistent with those of the two bays to the south. The application also proposes a fourth-floor rooftop addition, set back approximately five feet from the front façade. The addition would feature a parapet, implying a roof deck, but does not show any access structures on the roof. On the rear (east) elevation, which currently faces a parking lot not associated with the building, the application proposes to cut new three new rows of windows at

front façade. The addition would feature a parapet, implying a roof deck, but does not show any access structures on the roof. On the rear (east) elevation, which currently faces a parking lot not associated with the building, the application proposes to cut new three new rows of windows at the second floor, a full column of windows in the northernmost bay of the second and third floors, and to install new windows in original openings at the first-floor level. SCOPE OF WORK:  Cut down/enlarge existing window openings to create garage and pedestrian entrances  Remove existing brick to create new second-floor balconies at front  Remove existing brick to create new second-floor windows at rear  Install spandrel panels in place of glazing between second and third floors  Construct fourth-floor addition 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 shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. o The application proposes to remove substantial portions of existing brick and significantly alter the materials and features that characterize the property. o The application does not comply with this standard.  Windows Guideline | Not Recommended: Changing the number, location, size, or glazing pattern of windows on primary or highly-visible elevations which will alter the historic character of the building; Cutting new openings on character-defining elevations or cutting new openings that damage or destroy significant features; Adding balconies at existing window openings or new window openings on primary or other highly-visible elevations where balconies never existed and, therefore, would be incompatible with the historic character of the building. o This application proposes to substantially alter the number, location, and size of windows on the primary elevation of the building, to cut new window and balcony openings on the primary façade. o The staff suggests that it may be possible to cut minimal new openings to provide code-required egress, but does not recommend approval of the installation of garage entrances or balconies on the primary elevation. o The application does not comply with this guideline.  Roofs Guideline | Recommended: Designing rooftop additions, elevator or stair towers, decks or terraces, dormers, or skylights when required by a new or continuing use so that they are inconspicuous

installation of garage entrances or balconies on the primary elevation. o The application does not comply with this guideline.  Roofs Guideline | Recommended: Designing rooftop additions, elevator or stair towers, decks or terraces, dormers, or skylights when required by a new or continuing use so 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 current height and position of the proposed rooftop addition would render it highly visible from the public right-of-way. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 15 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES o The staff notes that this building may be able to accommodate a one-story rooftop addition, set in from all sides, but that, at 14 feet in height, the proposed addition is unnecessarily tall and would be conspicuous from the public right-of- way. o The application does not comply with this standard. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Denial, pursuant to Standard 2 and the Windows and Roofs Guidelines. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Standard 2 and the Windows and Roofs Guidelines. START TIME IN AUDIO RECORDING: 00:26:50 PRESENTERS:  Ms. DiPasquale presented the application to the Historical Commission.  Architect Christopher Stromberg and owner William Vessal represented the application. DISCUSSION:  Mr. Stromberg explained that revisions were made in response to the Architectural Committee’s comments. He noted that the original building would be renovated as part of the development project, but commented that he is looking to treat the original building and addition separately. Though the entire property is classified as contributing to the Rittenhouse Fitler Historic District, he asked that the Historical Commission exercise flexibility with the changes proposed to the addition. Mr. Stromberg suggested that what defines the addition is the red brick and ribbon windows and stated that the proposed design would maintain those elements.  Mr. McCoubrey observed that the building has a front and back, and that the back and side express the concrete structure. The design of the front, he continued, disguises the structure with a spandrel panel. He called it a calculated move on the part of the architect. o Mr. Stromberg asserted that the rear of the building abuts a parking lot that would accommodate a large future development. The rear of the building, he noted, would no longer be visible from a

a spandrel panel. He called it a calculated move on the part of the architect. o Mr. Stromberg asserted that the rear of the building abuts a parking lot that would accommodate a large future development. The rear of the building, he noted, would no longer be visible from a public way.  Mr. Mattioni remarked that, while he understands the design of the addition is intended to be minimalist, it stands in stark contrast to the design of the original structure. He commented that the addition is discordant with the historic structure and with the neighboring buildings. He stated that he would like to see the proposed changes, so that the building has its own character.  Ms. Cooperman opined that she has spent a significant amount of time reviewing the Rittenhouse Fitler Historic District nomination to identify Modernist buildings similar to this one in the district. She noted that the question is open-ended but that there are buildings from the 1930s that are called out in the narrative of the nomination. Magaziner & Eberhard, she continued, are very important Modernist practitioners from the period. One of the key hallmarks of Modernist design, she contended, is minimalism, and she noted that the building expresses a conscious aesthetic choice to have a minimalist palette, minimalist surface plane, and minimalist treatment of openings. She argued that those elements are the building’s character-defining features and maintained that the addition is also a contributing structure within the district. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 16 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES  Mr. McCoubrey reiterated that the Modernist building is an addition to the original structure on the corner. He added that while the Commission is not considering the corner structure, since the applicant is treating them separately, the two buildings are connected and the Modernist section was conceived as an addition to the existing building. He noted that the Committee asked that alternatives to dividing the addition into a rowhouse system be conceived and that the applicant consider a loft apartment or studio approach, given the nature of the building. Mr. McCoubrey added that there is further concern with the overbuild of the addition relative to the original structure. He noted that the overbuild would be significantly visible and, without a proper setback, would be at odds with the Roofs Guideline. He then commended the applicant for revising the second-story windows

McCoubrey added that there is further concern with the overbuild of the addition relative to the original structure. He noted that the overbuild would be significantly visible and, without a proper setback, would be at odds with the Roofs Guideline. He then commended the applicant for revising the second-story windows and introducing punched windows to bring in light into that portion of the building. He suggested that the spandrel panels be the color originally intended and that the brick color shown recedes, though the panels originally would have stood out from the wall material. Mr. McCoubrey stated that while many of the revisions were good that there are still several concerns, such as the overbuild and the pilot houses on top of the overbuild. He suggested that the applicant investigate whether the original Magaziner & Eberhard drawings for the addition exist and to see whether the drawings show a five-story structure as claimed by the applicant. If the addition was intended to be taller, he continued, then there could be some basis for an overbuild. o Ms. DiPasquale stated that she did not see evidence that the building was intended to be five stories. She noted that there was a rooftop cage for outdoor activities, and it made the building appear taller. o Mr. Vessal responded that the original plans show the additional stories. o Ms. Cooperman replied that the Commission has only to work with the building that was built. What is there now, she argued, is what the Commission is charged with preserving. She added that another hallmark of the design is asymmetry and contended that turning a unified building with an asymmetrical composition into three different units fundamentally alters the design cohesion of the addition.  The Commission discussed the number of bays and individual windows at the current second story, questioning whether there was an error in the existing drawing. Mr. Thomas surmised that the rendering, the existing elevation, and the proposal are all in accordance. o Mr. Stromberg added that several elements at the second-story windows had been altered in the past. He then addressed the Commission’s comments regarding asymmetry, stating that he retained some asymmetry at the third bay. He argued that whether the building functions as rowhouses or lofts, additional windows would be needed between the first and second stories, because the current configuration leaves 12-feet of solid brick wall between floors. He

the Commission’s comments regarding asymmetry, stating that he retained some asymmetry at the third bay. He argued that whether the building functions as rowhouses or lofts, additional windows would be needed between the first and second stories, because the current configuration leaves 12-feet of solid brick wall between floors. He commented that he is trying to maintain the large expanses. He then commented that he lowered the fourth story to match the ridgeline of original building.  Mr. Thomas opined that while there is not much pedestrian traffic on this block, new development on surrounding blocks has greatly increased foot traffic in the area. He remarked that there was another Magaziner-designed building, a health center, at the nearby southwest corner of Van Pelt and Chestnut Streets. He noted that it was a very significant building and that Magaziner’s son, Henry, tried to find a use for the building, but eventually the Historical Commission received a hardship application, and the building was ultimately demolished. He contended that the issue the applicant raised over not being able to find a use for the building is an issue suited for the Committee on Financial Hardship. The Commission, Mr. Thomas stated, is guided by the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and that the proposed work does PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 17 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES not comply with those standards. Others questioned whether a hardship application was the correct procedural approach. o Mr. Stromberg replied that he finds the arrangement of the historic building and modern addition to be unique and that the proposed use would improve the streetscape and be more pedestrian-friendly. He argued that the inaccessibility of the first floor currently hinders the streetscape. He further contended that restoring the original structure would be more straightforward and should be a smoother process, since the intention would be to restore it as close to its original state as possible. o Several Commissioners noted that the 1894 building should be restored to its 1939 appearance, not its 1894 appearance because it is now part of an ensemble that dates to 1939. o Mr. Thomas asked whether the developer is still searching for a use for the original building. o Mr. Vessal responded that he would like to turn the 1894 building back into a single-family residence.  Mr. McCoubrey stated that he would like to review the proposed conversion

to 1939. o Mr. Thomas asked whether the developer is still searching for a use for the original building. o Mr. Vessal responded that he would like to turn the 1894 building back into a single-family residence.  Mr. McCoubrey stated that he would like to review the proposed conversion of the gymnasium to rowhouses and the restoration of the original building at the same time. o Ms. Cooperman agreed, adding that the alterations to the original 1894 building are the work of Magaziner & Eberhard of 1939. To restore the 1894 building to its 1894 appearance, she continued, would remove historically significant alterations made in 1939. o Mr. Stromberg clarified that the restoration would include the removal of the metal pipe railing and air conditioner over the entry. He commented that he would be amenable to leaving the metal pipe railing if it reflects the design of Magaziner & Eberhard. He stated that he would collaborate with the Historical Commission to determine how to restore the building.  Mr. Thomas remarked that, if the applicants continue to pursue the conversion of the gym into rowhouses, there would be details that would need to be refined, such as at the garages. He advocated for maintaining a good walking street.  Ms. Cooperman emphasized that the Historical Commission needs to carefully consider whether to allow new openings at the addition. She stated that she understands the desire for windows between the existing first and second stories, but argued that it would chop up the façade and change the rhythm of the elevation. Others suggested that some changes would need to be made to the 1939 building to allow for its adaptive reuse. PUBLIC COMMENT: None HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  The original 1894 building and the 1939 Modernist addition exist on a single tax parcel and are considered one contributing property in the Rittenhouse Fitler Historic District.  The application proposes to convert the two-story gymnasium into three single-family rowhouses.  The addition to the original building was designed by noted Philadelphia firm Magaziner & Eberhard with a minimalist design intent. The Historical Commission concluded that: PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 18 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES o The application proposes to remove and alter character-defining features and does not comply with Standard 2. o The application would substantially alter the fenestration

Eberhard with a minimalist design intent. The Historical Commission concluded that: PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 18 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES o The application proposes to remove and alter character-defining features and does not comply with Standard 2. o The application would substantially alter the fenestration pattern of the primary façade. The work does not comply with the Windows Guideline. o The proposed overbuild would be highly visible from the public right-of-way and does not comply with the Roofs Guideline. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to deny the in-concept application, pursuant to Standard 2 and the Windows and Roofs Guidelines. Ms. Cooperman seconded the motion, which passed by a vote of 7 to 2 with 2 abstentions. Mr. Thomas declined to vote. ITEM: 25 S Van Pelt St MOTION: Denial in-concept MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Cooperman VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair Cooperman X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lippert (L&I) X Long (DHCD) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Stanford (Commerce) X Trego (DPD) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 7 2 2 1 ADDRESS: 516 S 4TH ST Proposal: Construct two, four-story buildings Type of Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Wood Capital Investments 2, LLC Applicant: Rotciver Lebron, Harman Deutsch Ohler Architects History: Parking lot with archaeological potential District Designation: Society Hill Historic District, Contributing, 3/10/1999 Staff Contact: Meredith Keller, meredith.keller@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 BACKGROUND: In October 2018, a proposal for new construction at 516 S. 4th Street was reviewed by the Historical Commission. At the time, the Historical Commission found that it held review-and- comment jurisdiction over the property, because the Society Hill Historic District inventory classified the property as a non-contributing vacant lot with archaeological potential. Since then, the Historical Commission has amended the Society Hill Historic District and reclassified non- contributing properties listed with archaeological potential as contributing properties. The property at 516 S. 4th Street is now contributing to the district, owing to the archaeological potential of the site, and the Commission holds full jurisdiction. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 19 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES SCOPE OF WORK  Construct two, four-story residential buildings with rear yard. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include:  Standard 8: Archaeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must

STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES SCOPE OF WORK  Construct two, four-story residential buildings with rear yard. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include:  Standard 8: Archaeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken. o The proposed plans include creating an open space at the rear, undisturbed portion of the property where archaeological potential exists and constructing two new buildings. The new construction would largely be limited to the boundary of the previous building, which was a four-story structure demolished in the mid- 1960s. If the open area is not disturbed during construction, the work would comply with this standard. However, if construction would impact the previously undisturbed ground, the staff recommends retaining an archaeologist to ensure that archaeological resources are protected during any ground disturbance.  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 new buildings include a red brick veneer, fiber cement lap siding, vinyl windows at the street-facing facades, and fiberglass doors. Though the buildings are compatible with the district in size and scale, the proportions created by the application of different cladding materials detracts from the streetscape. Similarly, the proportions, placement, and materials of the windows are inappropriate for the district. The proposed work does not comply with this standard. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Denial, pursuant to Standards 8 and 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Standards 8 and 9. START TIME IN AUDIO RECORDING: 01:04:16 PRESENTERS:  Ms. Keller presented the application to the Historical Commission.  Architect Rustin Ohler and developer Colin Goan represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT:  Paul Boni, chair of the zoning and historic preservation committee of the Society Hill Civic Association, commented that the application lacks relevant photographs of the surrounding area. At the Architectural Committee, he stated that he pointed out that the district zigs and zags at this area and that the nearby buildings the application includes are not all included in the district. Conversely, he continued, many

Association, commented that the application lacks relevant photographs of the surrounding area. At the Architectural Committee, he stated that he pointed out that the district zigs and zags at this area and that the nearby buildings the application includes are not all included in the district. Conversely, he continued, many of the buildings that fall within the district are not represented in photographs. He distributed copies of photographs to the Commission. He remarked that it is important as a matter of process that the application and the Historical Commission’s files contain photographs of the relevant area. He expressed disappointment that PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 20 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES even after his comments at the Architectural Committee meeting no one has provided proper contextual photographs. Mr. Boni opined that the revised application presents a completely different design than the one reviewed by the Committee, so much so that there is no benefit of input from the Architectural Committee. He added that several Architectural Committee members liked the photograph of the historic building that once stood at the site and suggested that the applicant incorporate design elements of that structure. Mr. Boni argued that it may not have been the position of the entire Committee. He then asked that the application be remanded back to the Architectural Committee or that the application currently before the Historical Commission be approved in-concept only to allow for another review of the details. He stated that he is concerned that the “finer points” have not been reviewed to the degree they should and that the design would benefit from another review by the Committee. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  Archaeological potential could exist below the basement level of the historic building, and the current construction should not extend below that point. The Historical Commission is charged with protecting extant material below the depth of the previous excavation.  Under the current application, there is a planned open area at the rear of the project site that historically had a one-story shed structure, presumably with no basement. While some archaeological potential may exist at that area, no construction is proposed.  The design of the new building has been significantly revised from the original application reviewed by the Architectural Committee, and the applicant has responded to the Committee’s comments. The Historical Commission concluded that: 

no basement. While some archaeological potential may exist at that area, no construction is proposed.  The design of the new building has been significantly revised from the original application reviewed by the Architectural Committee, and the applicant has responded to the Committee’s comments. The Historical Commission concluded that:  No archaeological resources would be disturbed to construct the proposed building, satisfying Standard 8.  The proposed building would be compatible in massing, size, scale, and materials, satisfying Standard 9. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to approve the application, provided the S. 4th Street cornice is extended over the door, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 8 and 9. Ms. Trego seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 21 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ITEM: 516 S 4th St MOTION: Approval, with conditions MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Trego VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lippert (L&I) X Long (DHCD) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Stanford (Commerce) X Trego (DPD) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 12 1 THE REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 18 SEPTEMBER 2019 Emily Cooperman, Chair ADDRESS: 4600 DISSTON ST AND 6913 DITMAN ST Name of Resource: Frank Shuman House and Laboratory Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Jan Smiarowski (4600 Disston); Penn Industrial Installations (6913 Ditman) Nominator: Yen Ho Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the Frank Shuman House and Laboratory at 4600 Disston Street and 6913 Ditman Street in the Tacony neighborhood of Philadelphia as historic and list them on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Under Criterion A, the nomination contends that the properties are significant for their association with Frank Shuman, a prolific inventor with more than 60 U.S. patents to his name, including pioneering glass and solar power inventions. The nomination asserts that Shuman’s former home and laboratory also reflect the cultural, economic, social, and historical heritage of Tacony in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries as a center for industry and invention, satisfying Criterion J. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the properties at 4600 Disston Street and 6913 Ditman Street satisfy Criteria for Designation A and J. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the

center for industry and invention, satisfying Criterion J. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the properties at 4600 Disston Street and 6913 Ditman Street satisfy 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 properties at 4600 Disston Street and 6913 Ditman Street satisfy Criteria for Designation A and J. START TIME IN AUDIO RECORDING: 01:18:25 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 22 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES PRESENTERS:  Ms. DiPasquale presented the nomination to the Historical Commission.  Yen Ho represented the nomination.  No one represented the property owners. PUBLIC COMMENT: None HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  The property is already listed of the National Register of Historic Places.  Frank Shuman was an inventor who had an impact not only on Philadelphia but on the entire nation. The Historical Commission concluded that:  The properties are significant for their association with Frank Shuman, a prolific inventor with more than 60 U.S. patents to his name, including pioneering glass and solar power inventions, satisfying Criterion A.  The properties reflect the cultural, economic, social, and historical heritage of Tacony in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries as a center for industry and invention, satisfying Criterion J. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that 4600 Disston Street and 6913 Ditman Street satisfy Criteria for Designation A and J, and to designate the properties as historic, listing them on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Trego seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. ITEM: 4600 Disston St and 6913 Ditman St MOTION: Designation, Criteria A and J MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Trego VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lippert (L&I) X Long (DHCD) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Stanford (Commerce) X Trego (DPD) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 12 1 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 23 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ADDRESS: 711, 713, AND 715 N 6TH ST Proposed Action: Designation Property Owners: Michael Fausey and Ann McParlin (711); Lanny Larcinese (713); Downtown Philly Properties (715) Nominator: Arielle Harris, Keeping Society of Philadelphia Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to

PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ADDRESS: 711, 713, AND 715 N 6TH ST Proposed Action: Designation Property Owners: Michael Fausey and Ann McParlin (711); Lanny Larcinese (713); Downtown Philly Properties (715) Nominator: Arielle Harris, Keeping Society of Philadelphia Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the properties at 711, 713, and 715 N. 6th Street as historic and list them on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the properties satisfy Criteria for Designation A, C, D, and E. Under Criterion A, the nomination argues that the buildings, which were built in 1872 as part of a 68-building development on land owned by the Stephen Girard Estate, are significant for their association with Stephen Girard. Designed by prominent local architect James H. Windrim, satisfying Criterion E, the twin houses embody distinguishing characteristics of the “high vernacular” Second Empire style popular during the period, satisfying Criteria C and D. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the properties at 711, 713, and 715 N. 6th Street satisfy Criteria for Designation A, C, D, and E. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the properties at 711, 713, and 715 N. 6th Street satisfy Criteria for Designation A, C, D, and E. START TIME IN AUDIO RECORDING: 01:21:05 PRESENTERS:  Ms. DiPasquale presented the nomination to the Historical Commission.  Oscar Beisert represented the nomination.  No one represented the property owners. PUBLIC COMMENT: None HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  Although the buildings were constructed after the death of Stephen Girard, they are associated with him through the Stephen Girard Trust, which financed the construction and subsequently generated rental income to fund Girard College. The Historical Commission concluded that:  The buildings are part of a 68-building development on land owned by the Stephen Girard Estate and are significant for their association with Stephen Girard, satisfying Criterion A.  The buildings were designed by prominent local architect James H. Windrim, satisfying Criterion E.  The buildings embody distinguishing characteristics of the “high vernacular” Second Empire style popular during the period, satisfying Criteria C and D. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that 711, 713, and 715 N. 6th Street satisfy Criteria for Designation A, C, D, and E, and

 The buildings embody distinguishing characteristics of the “high vernacular” Second Empire style popular during the period, satisfying Criteria C and D. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that 711, 713, and 715 N. 6th Street satisfy Criteria for Designation A, C, D, and E, and to designate the properties as historic, listing them on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Trego seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. Mr. Mattioni abstained. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 24 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ITEM: 711, 713, and 715 N 6th St MOTION: Designation, Criteria A, C, D, and E MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Trego VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lippert (L&I) X Long (DHCD) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Stanford (Commerce) X Trego (DPD) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 11 1 1 ADDRESS: 128-40 DIAMOND ST Name of Resource: Kensington Hospital Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Kensington Hospital Nominator: Steven Peitzman Staff Contact: Laura DiPasquale, laura.dipasquale@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 128-40 Diamond Street and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the property, which contains several buildings and additions constructed between 1868 and 1978, is significant under Criteria for Designation A, E, G, and J. The nomination places the period of significance between 1890 and 1945, the years during which the Kensington Hospital for Women occupied and expanded their facilities at this location. Additions and buildings constructed or acquired outside of this period or that are not known to have been significant to the Kensington Hospital for Women are considered non-contributing to the historical significance of the property. Under Criterion A, the nomination argues that the property is significant for its association with Howard A. Kelly, MD., who founded the Kensington Hospital for Women in the 1880s and went on to become an internationally-known figure in gynecology, surgery, and medical education. Under Criterion G, the nomination contends that the Hospital chose to position its facility on Norris Square owing to the then-absolute belief in the value of fresh air and ventilation to avoid hospital infection. Under Criterion J, the nomination explains how the Kensington Hospital for Women served the women of Kensington and beyond, and expanded its facilities numerous times, including with

position its facility on Norris Square owing to the then-absolute belief in the value of fresh air and ventilation to avoid hospital infection. Under Criterion J, the nomination explains how the Kensington Hospital for Women served the women of Kensington and beyond, and expanded its facilities numerous times, including with additions by the prolific firm of Watson & Huckel, satisfying Criterion E. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 128-40 Diamond Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A, E, G, and J. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 25 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 128-40 Diamond Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A, E, G, and J. START TIME IN AUDIO RECORDING: 01:24:55 PRESENTERS:  Ms. DiPasquale presented the nomination to the Historical Commission.  Steven Peitzman represented the nomination.  No one represented the property owner. PUBLIC COMMENT: None HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  The property at 128-40 Diamond Street is a single tax parcel that contains several buildings and additions constructed between 1868 and 1978.  The Kensington Hospital for Women occupied and expanded its facilities at this location between 1890 and 1945. Additions and buildings constructed or acquired outside of this period or that are not known to have been significant to the Kensington Hospital for Women will be considered non-contributing to the historical significance of the property. The Historical Commission concluded that:  The property is significant for its association with Howard A. Kelly, MD., founder of the Kensington Hospital for Women, satisfying Criterion A.  The property includes buildings and additions by the prolific firm of Watson & Huckel, satisfying Criterion E.  The Kensington Hospital for Women chose to position its facility on Norris Square owing to the belief at the time in the value of fresh air and ventilation to avoid hospital infection, satisfying Criterion G.  The property served the women of the Kensington neighborhood and beyond, satisfying Criterion J. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that 128-40 Diamond Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A, E, G, and J, and to designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Trego seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION,

J. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that 128-40 Diamond Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A, E, G, and J, and to designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Trego seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 26 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ITEM: 128-40 Diamond St MOTION: Designation, Criteria A, E, G, and J MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Trego VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lippert (L&I) X Long (DHCD) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Stanford (Commerce) X Trego (DPD) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 12 1 ADDRESS: OLD BUSTLETON AVE AND WINCHESTER AVE, PENNYPACK PARK Name of Resource: Roman Catholic Church of Maternity, Blessed Virgin Mary Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: City of Philadelphia Nominator: Celeste Morello Staff Contact: Laura DiPasquale, laura.dipasquale@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the Roman Catholic Church of Maternity B.V.M., located in Pennypack Park. The property does not have an Office of Property Assessment-compliant address. The nomination contends that Maternity BVM, which was constructed in 1870 along the Bustleton & Somerton Turnpike, is significant under Criteria for Designation D, G, and H. Under Criterion D, the nomination contends that the small church building embodies distinguishing characteristics of the “Gothic Chapel,” or Gothic Revival style frequently utilized by rural communities of the mid-nineteenth century. Under Criteria G and H, the nomination explains the history of the church from its founding of the church along Pennypack Creek and the former Bustleton Turnpike in rural Bustleton to the City’s acquisition of the church and incorporation into Pennypack Park and its isolation owing to the new Bustleton Avenue that opened in 1970. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the Maternity BVM Church in Pennypack Park satisfies Criterion D, but not Criteria G or H. The staff contends that the arguments made under Criteria G and H may satisfy Criterion J. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the Maternity BVM Church in Pennypack Park satisfies Criteria for Designation D and J, but not Criteria G and H. START TIME IN AUDIO RECORDING: 01:28:00 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 27 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF

Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the Maternity BVM Church in Pennypack Park satisfies Criteria for Designation D and J, but not Criteria G and H. START TIME IN AUDIO RECORDING: 01:28:00 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 27 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES PRESENTERS:  Ms. DiPasquale presented the nomination to the Historical Commission.  Celeste Morello represented the nomination.  No one represented the property owner. PUBLIC COMMENT: None HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  The property does not have an Office of Property Assessment-compliant address.  Maternity BVM church was constructed in 1870 along the Bustleton & Somerton Turnpike and later incorporated into Pennypack Park after the re-routing of Bustleton Avenue in 1970. The Historical Commission concluded that:  The building embodies distinguishing characteristics of the “Gothic Chapel,” or vernacular Gothic Revival style frequently utilized by rural communities in the mid- nineteenth century, satisfying Criterion D.  The building was built to serve the rural Bustleton area and its mill communities around the Pennypack Creek, satisfying Criterion J. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the church at Old Bustleton Avenue and Winchester Avenue in Pennypack Park satisfies Criteria for Designation D and J, and to designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Long seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. ITEM: Old Bustleton Ave and Winchester Ave, Pennypack Park MOTION: Designation, Criteria D and J MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Long VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lippert (L&I) X Long (DHCD) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Stanford (Commerce) X Trego (DPD) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 12 1 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 28 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ADDRESS: 917 S 47TH ST Name of Resource: St. Francis de Sales Church Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Archdiocese of Philadelphia Nominator: Corey Loftus Staff Contact: Kim Chantry, kim.chantry@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate Saint Francis de Sales Church, one building on a larger parcel at 917 S. 47th Street, and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the church, built between 1907 and 1911, satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, E, F, H, and

proposes to designate Saint Francis de Sales Church, one building on a larger parcel at 917 S. 47th Street, and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the church, built between 1907 and 1911, satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, E, F, H, and J. Under Criterion A, the nomination argues that the church is associated with the lives of numerous persons of historic significance, including its music directors and parishioners. Under Criterion D, the nomination contends that the church building embodies distinguishing characteristics of the Byzantine Revival style. Under Criterion E, the nomination explains that the church building is a result of the work of many design professionals whose work has significantly influenced the historical and architectural development of the City, Commonwealth, or Nation, including Henry D. Dagit (architect), Nicola D’Ascenzo (stained glass) and Rafael Guastavino (tile artist and dome engineer). Under Criterion F, the nomination argues that the grand Guastavino dome contains elements of design, detail, materials and craftsmanship which represent a significant innovation. Under Criterion H, the nomination contends that the church with its great dome represents an established and familiar visual feature of the neighborhood. Lastly, under Criterion J, the nomination contends that the church’s musical heritage associated with its organ, choirs, and music directors exemplifies the social and historical heritage of the community. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that Saint Francis de Sales Church at 917 S. 47th Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, E, F, H, and J. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that Saint Francis de Sales Church at 917 S. 47th Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, E, F, H, and J, and that the proposed edits from Annabelle Radcliffe-Trenner should be included in the final nomination as an addendum. START TIME IN AUDIO RECORDING: 01:32:10 PRESENTERS:  Ms. Chantry presented the nomination to the Historical Commission.  No one represented the nomination or the property owner. PUBLIC COMMENT:  Steven Peitzman supported the designation. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  The nomination proposes the designation of the church building with a small perimeter buffer only, and not any other building on the parcel.  The proposed edits from Annabelle Radcliffe-Trenner are minor technical corrections or additions, and do not change the merits

AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  The nomination proposes the designation of the church building with a small perimeter buffer only, and not any other building on the parcel.  The proposed edits from Annabelle Radcliffe-Trenner are minor technical corrections or additions, and do not change the merits of the nomination. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 29 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES  The review of the nomination was continued and remanded to this Committee meeting by the Commission at its May 2019 meeting, at the request of Michael Phillips, the attorney representing the property owner. Mr. Phillips was informed of the date and time of this meeting for this and all Archdiocese-owned properties to follow on the meeting agenda. The Historical Commission concluded that:  The church building is associated with the lives of numerous persons of historic significance, including its music directors and parishioners, satisfying Criterion A.  The building embodies distinguishing characteristics of the Byzantine Revival style, satisfying Criterion D.  The building is a result of the work of many design professionals whose designs have significantly influenced the historical and architectural development of the city, Commonwealth, and nation, including Henry D. Dagit, Nicola D’Ascenzo and Rafael Guastavino, satisfying Criterion E.  The grand Guastavino dome contains elements of design, detail, materials and craftsmanship which represent a significant innovation, satisfying Criterion F.  The church building with its great dome represents an established and familiar visual feature of the neighborhood, satisfying Criterion H.  The church’s musical heritage associated with its organ, choirs, and music directors exemplifies the social and historical heritage of the community, satisfying Criterion J. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that Saint Francis de Sales Church at 917 S. 47th Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, E, F, H, and J, and to designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places, and that the proposed edits from Annabelle Radcliffe-Trenner should be included in the final nomination as an addendum. Mr. McCoubrey seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. ITEM: 917 S 47TH ST MOTION: Designate, Criteria A, D, E, F, H, and J MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: McCoubrey VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lippert (L&I) X Long (DHCD) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Stanford (Commerce) X Trego

MOTION: Designate, Criteria A, D, E, F, H, and J MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: McCoubrey VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lippert (L&I) X Long (DHCD) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Stanford (Commerce) X Trego (DPD) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 12 1 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 30 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ADDRESS: 808 S HUTCHINSON ST Name of Resource: St. Paul’s Roman Catholic Church Rectory Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Archdiocese of Philadelphia Nominator: Celeste Morello Staff Contact: Kim Chantry, kim.chantry@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 808 S. Hutchinson Street and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the purpose- built rectory for St. Paul’s Roman Catholic Church satisfies Criteria for Designation A and D. The nomination contends that the Vicar General of the Archdiocese, Maurice A. Walsh, resided in the rectory from its construction in 1879 until his death in 1888, during which time he achieved much success with overseeing numerous activities of the Archdiocese, satisfying Criterion A. The nomination further argues that the building embodies distinguishing characteristics of the Second Empire style, satisfying Criterion D. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 808 S. Hutchinson Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A and D. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 808 S. Hutchinson Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A and D. START TIME IN AUDIO RECORDING: 01:36:50 PRESENTERS:  Ms. Chantry presented the nomination to the Historical Commission.  Celeste Morello represented the nomination.  No one represented the property owner. PUBLIC COMMENT: None HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  St. Paul’s Roman Catholic Church was listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places in 1971. This nomination is for its rectory, which is on a separate parcel. The Historical Commission concluded that:  The Vicar General of the Archdiocese, Maurice A. Walsh, resided in the rectory from its construction in 1879 until his death in 1888, during which time he achieved much success with overseeing numerous activities of the Archdiocese, satisfying Criterion A.  The building embodies distinguishing characteristics of the Second Empire style, satisfying Criterion D.

the Archdiocese, Maurice A. Walsh, resided in the rectory from its construction in 1879 until his death in 1888, during which time he achieved much success with overseeing numerous activities of the Archdiocese, satisfying Criterion A.  The building embodies distinguishing characteristics of the Second Empire style, satisfying Criterion D. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the property at 808 S. Hutchinson Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A and D, and to designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Trego seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 31 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ITEM: 808 S HUTCHINSON ST MOTION: Designate, Criteria A and D MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Trego VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lippert (L&I) X Long (DHCD) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Stanford (Commerce) X Trego (DPD) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 12 1 ADDRESS: 1501 S 10TH ST Name of Resource: Church of the Annunciation Roman Catholic Church Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Archdiocese of Philadelphia Nominator: Celeste Morello Staff Contact: Kim Chantry, kim.chantry@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the church building at 1501 S. 10th Street and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the former Church of the Annunciation Roman Catholic Church, now known as Annunciation BVM Church, satisfies Criteria for Designation D and H. Under Criterion D, the nomination argues that the church, which opened in 1863, embodies distinguishing characteristics of the Gothic Revival style. Under Criterion H, the nomination contends that Annunciation is one of very few large, Gothic Revival buildings in this area of South Philadelphia, and therefore represents an established and familiar visual feature of the neighborhood. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the church building at 1501 S. 10th Street satisfies Criteria for Designation D and H. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the church building at 1501 S. 10th Street satisfies Criteria for Designation D and H. START TIME IN AUDIO RECORDING: 01:39:30 PRESENTERS:  Ms. Chantry presented the nomination to the Historical Commission.  Celeste Morello represented the nomination.  No one represented the property owner. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11

that the church building at 1501 S. 10th Street satisfies Criteria for Designation D and H. START TIME IN AUDIO RECORDING: 01:39:30 PRESENTERS:  Ms. Chantry presented the nomination to the Historical Commission.  Celeste Morello represented the nomination.  No one represented the property owner. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 32 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES PUBLIC COMMENT: None HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  The Church of the Annunciation Roman Catholic Church was constructed in 1863.  The carports at the far east of the property are considered non-contributing for the purposes of the nomination. The Historical Commission concluded that:  The church building embodies distinguishing characteristics of the Gothic Revival style, satisfying Criterion D.  The church building is one of very few large, Gothic Revival buildings in this area of South Philadelphia, and therefore represents an established and familiar visual feature of the neighborhood, satisfying Criterion H. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the church building at 1501 S. 10th Street satisfies Criteria for Designation D and H, and to designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Mr. McCoubrey seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. ITEM: 1501 S 10TH ST MOTION: Designate, Criteria D and H MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: McCoubrey VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lippert (L&I) X Long (DHCD) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Stanford (Commerce) X Trego (DPD) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 33 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ADDRESS: 1001-19 N 5TH ST Name of Resource: St. Peter the Apostle Roman Catholic Church Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: St. Peters Roman Catholic Church Nominator: Celeste Morello Staff Contact: Meredith Keller, meredith.keller@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate St. Peter the Apostle Roman Catholic Church at 1001-19 N. 5th Street and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. While the larger parcel includes several buildings, the nomination proposes to designate the church building exclusively. The nomination contends that the building satisfies Criteria for Designation A and E. Under Criterion A, the nomination argues that St. John Neumann, the first male saint in the United States, who is enshrined at the site, is significant for his role in establishing

to designate the church building exclusively. The nomination contends that the building satisfies Criteria for Designation A and E. Under Criterion A, the nomination argues that St. John Neumann, the first male saint in the United States, who is enshrined at the site, is significant for his role in establishing the country’s parochial school system as well as the hospitals that evolved into the St. Francis health system. Under Criterion E, the nomination contends that the church building was reconstructed in 1895 according to designs by prolific Philadelphia architect Edwin Forrest Durang. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that St. Peter the Apostle Roman Catholic Church located at 1001-19 N. 5th Street 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 St. Peter the Apostle Roman Catholic Church located at 1001-19 N. 5th Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A, E, and H. START TIME IN AUDIO RECORDING: 01:41:00 PRESENTERS:  Ms. Keller presented the nomination to the Historical Commission  Celeste Morello represented the nomination. PUBLIC COMMENT: None HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  The Committee on Historic Designation suggested that the property satisfies Criterion H, in addition to A and E, because the building stands as a prominent landmark in the neighborhood.  The boundary of the nomination includes only the church building and a small buffer. The Historical Commission concluded that:  St. John Neumann, the first male saint in the United States, is enshrined at the site and maintained a close association with St. Peter the Apostle Roman Catholic Church, satisfying Criterion A.  The church was designed by prolific Philadelphia architect Edwin Forrest Durang, satisfying Criterion E.  The church stands as a prominent neighborhood landmark, satisfying Criterion H. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 34 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the church building at 1001-19 N. 5th Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A, E, and H, and to designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Trego seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. ITEM: 1001-19 N 5th St MOTION: Designation, Criteria A, E, and H MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Trego VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman

designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Trego seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. ITEM: 1001-19 N 5th St MOTION: Designation, Criteria A, E, and H MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Trego VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lippert (L&I) X Long (DHCD) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Stanford (Commerce) X Trego (DPD) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 12 1 OLD BUSINESS ADDRESS: 1249-53 S 19TH ST Proposal: Demolish building Type of Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: 19th Street Baptist Church Applicant: Susan Uhl, Landmark Architectural Design History: 1874, Furness & Hewitt, architects, 19th Street Baptist Church Individual Designation: 7/5/1984 District Designation: None Staff Contact: Randal Baron, randal.baron@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 BACKGROUND: The property at 1249-53 S. 19th Street is located at the southeast corner of Titan and S. 19th Streets. Constructed in 1874 by the architectural firm of Furness & Hewitt, this Gothic Revival, green-serpentine stone church and school complex was listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places in 1984. The applicant is proposing the complete demolition of the church and school building, seemingly in response to several open violations including partially collapsed roof and wall, resulting in an unsafe structure determination by the Department of Licenses & Inspections. The materials provided in the application include four photographs of the overall structures and two of the interior of the sanctuary. There is no engineer’s report or cover letter explaining the existing conditions or scope of work. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 35 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES The Historical Commission tabled the application for a period not to exceed six months at its April 2019 meeting because if found that the application could not be reviewed in its current form because it was incomplete. It offered no necessity in the public interest or financial hardship argument to justify the demolition. The tabling period was intended to allow the owner time to supplement the application with information about necessity in the public interest or the infeasibility of reuse. No additional information was submitted during the tabling period. SCOPE OF WORK  Complete demolition of church and school building. 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

the infeasibility of reuse. No additional information was submitted during the tabling period. SCOPE OF WORK  Complete demolition of church and school building. 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 alteration of features, spaces and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. foreclosed.  Standard 5: Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved. o The proposed complete demolition of the buildings fails to retain the historic character, distinctive materials, features, spaces, spatial relationships, finishes, construction techniques, or examples of craftsmanship that characterize this complex. Section 14-1005(6)(d) of the historic preservation ordinance, the prohibition against demolition:  No building permit shall be issued for the demolition of a historic building, structure, site, or object, or of a building, structure, site, or object located within a historic district that contributes, in the Historical Commission’s opinion, to the character of the district, unless the Historical Commission finds that issuance of the building permit is necessary in the public interest, or unless the Historical Commission finds that the building, structure, site, or object cannot be used for any purpose for which it is or may be reasonably adapted. In order to show that building, structure, site, or object cannot be used for any purpose for which it is or may be reasonably adapted, the owner must demonstrate that the sale of the property is impracticable, that commercial rental cannot provide a reasonable rate of return, and that other potential uses of the property are foreclosed. o The applicants have not demonstrated that the existing building cannot be reasonably adapted, that the sale is impracticable, or that all other potential uses of the property have been foreclosed upon. The applicants have not demonstrated that the issuance of the demolition permit is necessary in the public interest. While abating unsafe and imminently dangerous conditions are in the public interest, the proposed demolition may not be necessary in the public interest. The unsafe condition may be able to be abated through repair. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Denial, pursuant to Standards 2 and 5, and Section 14-1005(6)(d), the prohibition against demolition. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Standards 2

demolition may not be necessary in the public interest. The unsafe condition may be able to be abated through repair. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Denial, pursuant to Standards 2 and 5, and Section 14-1005(6)(d), the prohibition against demolition. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Standards 2 and 5, and Section 14-1005(6)(d), the prohibition against demolition. START TIME IN AUDIO RECORDING: 01:43:49 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 36 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES PRESENTERS:  Mr. Baron presented the application to the Historical Commission.  James Baylor, trustee for 19th Street Baptist Church, represented the application.  Mr. Reuter, the Historical Commission’s attorney, provided an overview of the ongoing court case regarding this property. Regarding the demolition permit application currently before the Historical Commission, Mr. Reuter reminded the Historical Commission that it tabled this matter to give the applicant an opportunity to supplement the application with information justifying the demolition as necessary in the public interest or owing to financial hardship. He noted that the applicant failed to submit any additional information during the tabling period. He opined that the Historical Commission’s decision regarding this application was therefore a foregone conclusion; the Historical Commission must deny the application because no justification for the demolition has been offered, much less accepted. Aaron Wunsch spoke out of order, yelling from the audience that the decision was not a foregone conclusion and that the Historical Commission should not simply approve the application. Mr. Thomas called for order. It was noted that Mr. Wunsch misunderstood Mr. Reuter, who was not asserting that the demolition was a foregone conclusion but was instead asserting that the Historical Commission’s denial was a foregone conclusion because no justification for the demolition was offered. PUBLIC COMMENT:  Aaron Wunsch spoke in opposition to the application for demolition. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  The church complex is designated as historic and is historically significant.  The building has been declared Unsafe but not Imminently Dangerous by the Department of Licenses & Inspections.  The congregation no longer utilizes the building, and construction fencing has been installed to block access to the building and sidewalk.  No documentation has been submitted to support a claim of financial hardship or demolition in the public interest. The Historical Commission concluded that:  The proposal to demolish does not comply with Standards

the building, and construction fencing has been installed to block access to the building and sidewalk.  No documentation has been submitted to support a claim of financial hardship or demolition in the public interest. The Historical Commission concluded that:  The proposal to demolish does not comply with Standards 2 and 5, as the historic character, materials, or features would not be preserved.  The proposal does not comply with Section 14-1005(6)(d), the prohibition against demolition, as no argument has been made regarding financial hardship or public interest. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to deny the application, pursuant to Standards 2 and 5, and Section 14-1005(6)(d), the prohibition against demolition. Ms. Cooperman seconded the motion, which passed by a vote of 11 to 0. Mr. Lippert abstained. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 37 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ITEM: 1249-53 S. 19th St MOTION: Denial MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: McCoubrey VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lippert (L&I) X Long (DHCD) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Stanford (Commerce) X Trego (DPD) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 11 1 1 ADDRESS: 230, 232, 234-36 S 4TH ST Proposal: Consolidate lots; remove rears; construct additions Review Requested: Review In Concept Owner: 234 S. 4th St. LP and Forman Family Realty Trust Applicant: Ming-Lee Yuan, Olson Kundig History: 1805 Individual Designation: 4/30/1957 District Designation: Society Hill Historic District, Significant, 3/10/1999 Staff Contact: Randal Baron, randal.baron@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 BACKGROUND: This in-concept application proposes work to a site that consists of three parcels and includes two rowhouses and a parking area. The rowhouses face S. 4th Street and open onto Leithgow at the rear. The parking area runs west from 4th Street to Leithgow Street along Locust Street. A similar in-concept application was reviewed by the Architectural Committee in July 2019. The Committee objected to the proposal and the application was withdrawn before the August meeting of the Historical Commission. The application proposes to combine the parcels, join the historic rowhouses, and construct additions to create one large dwelling. The application proposes to remove the rear ells of the two rowhouses as well as a later garage and rear addition. In 1913, architect Albert Kelsey altered the building at 232 S. 4th Street, converting the rowhouse and adding the rear addition for a clubhouse for

create one large dwelling. The application proposes to remove the rear ells of the two rowhouses as well as a later garage and rear addition. In 1913, architect Albert Kelsey altered the building at 232 S. 4th Street, converting the rowhouse and adding the rear addition for a clubhouse for the Fire Insurance Society of Philadelphia, an insurance industry trade organization. The current application proposes constructing additions with internal courtyards. During its review of the earlier application, the Architectural Committee objected to the removal of the rear ells and rear additions and suggested that the applicants either revise the application to retain more historic fabric or supplement it to justify the demolitions of the historic rear sections. The new application does neither. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 38 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES SCOPE OF WORK:  Remove rear sections of the buildings at 230 and 232 S. 4th Street.  Construct additions. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include:  Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. o The massing, size, scale, proportions, and height of the proposed additions are not compatible with the historic buildings to which they will attach. o The removal of the rear ells and rear additions will destroy historic materials that characterize the property.  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 In light of the proposed removal of the rear ells, the work proposed in the application is not reversible. If the project were undertaken, the form and integrity of the historic property would be significantly impaired. Section 14-1005(6)(d) of the historic preservation ordinance, the prohibition against demolition:  No building permit shall be issued for the demolition of a historic building, structure, site, or object, or of a building, structure, site, or object located within a historic district that contributes, in the Historical Commission’s opinion, to the character of the district, unless

ordinance, the prohibition against demolition:  No building permit shall be issued for the demolition of a historic building, structure, site, or object, or of a building, structure, site, or object located within a historic district that contributes, in the Historical Commission’s opinion, to the character of the district, unless the Historical Commission finds that issuance of the building permit is necessary in the public interest, or unless the Historical Commission finds that the building, structure, site, or object cannot be used for any purpose for which it is or may be reasonably adapted. In order to show that building, structure, site, or object cannot be used for any purpose for which it is or may be reasonably adapted, the owner must demonstrate that the sale of the property is impracticable, that commercial rental cannot provide a reasonable rate of return, and that other potential uses of the property are foreclosed. o The applicants have not demonstrated that the existing building cannot be reasonably adapted, that the sale is impracticable, or that all other potential uses of the property have been foreclosed upon. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Denial, pursuant to Section 14-1005(6)(d) and Standards 9 and 10. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Section 14-1005(6)(d) and Standards 9 and 10. START TIME IN AUDIO RECORDING: 01:54:27 PRESENTERS:  Mr. Baron presented the application to the Historical Commission.  Architect Ming-Lee Yuan, attorney Carl Primavera, preservation consultant Nick Kraus, and property owner Michael Forman represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT: PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 39 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES  Oscar Beisert commented that the original application should be denied or the revised application should be remanded to the Architectural Committee.  Paul Steinke, representing the Preservation Alliance, commented that the revised application should be remanded to the Architectural Committee.  Steven Peitzman commented that the revised application should be remanded to the Architectural Committee.  Dan Kelly, an architect and the president of Bingham Court Homeowners’ Association, spoke in support of the application.  Robert Parsky, an architect who has lived in Society Hill and advocated for its preservation 1965, spoke in support of the application.  Paul Boni, representing Society Hill Civic Association, spoke in support of the application. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found and concluded that:  The architectural plans should indicate that the stucco on

Society Hill and advocated for its preservation 1965, spoke in support of the application.  Paul Boni, representing Society Hill Civic Association, spoke in support of the application. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found and concluded that:  The architectural plans should indicate that the stucco on the south party wall of the building at 232 S. 4th Street will be improved.  Floor plans should be submitted to demonstrate that the rear ells need to be removed.  The application as submitted has not shown that the rear ells and additions lack significance. The application should provide additional information regarding the age, condition and significance of the ells and additions.  Contemporary design can be woven into historic fabric in Society Hill.  The revised design is sufficiently different from that presented to the Architectural Committee to warrant remanding the revised application to the Architectural Committee. ACTION: Mr. Mattioni moved to remand the revised application to the Architectural Committee. Ms. Cooperman seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. ITEM: 230, 232, 234-36 S 4th St MOTION: Remand to Architectural Committee MOVED BY: Mattioni SECONDED BY: Cooperman VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lippert (L&I) X Long (DHCD) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Stanford (Commerce) X Trego (DPD) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 12 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 OCTOBER 2019 40 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ADJOURNMENT START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN AUDIO RECORDING: 02:43:50 ACTION: At 11:52 a.m., Mr. Mattioni moved to adjourn. Ms. Long seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. ITEM: Adjournment MOTION: To adjourn MOVED BY: Mattioni SECONDED BY: Long VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Trego (PCPC) X Stanford (Commerce) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 12 1 PLEASE NOTE:  Minutes of the Philadelphia Historical Commission are presented in action format. Additional information is available in the audio 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.