THE MINUTES OF THE 450TH STATED MEETING OF THE PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION 9 FEBRUARY 2000 Commission Conference Room 18th Floor, 1515 Arch Street Stephanie G. Wolf, Ph.D., Vice- Chair Present Stephanie G. Wolf, Ph.D., Vice-Chair David Brownlee, Ph.D. Teresa M. Mulligan, Assistant Deputy Director, Department of Commerce Joseph James, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Public Property Barbara Kaplan, Executive Director, City Planning Commission Michael Sklaroff, Esq. Robert Thomas Dennis Ward III Scott Wilds, Assistant Director, Office of Housing and Community Development Caroline Wischmann Shelly Merhige, Office of City Council President Carol Lawrence, Director of Public Art Randal Baron, Assistant Historic Preservation Officer Diane M. Hughes, Executive Secretary Richard Tyler, Historic Preservation Officer Mark Zecca, Esq., Senior Attorney, City of Philadelphia Law Department Also Thomas Buck, Architect Tony Santora, Builder Bernice Hamel, Society Hill Civic Association Tom Bruce, Christopher Beardsley Architects Jeanne & Roger Doherty Sally Smith, Society Hill resident-neighbor William Menke, Menke & Menke, Landscape Architects & Planners David Stevens, 116 Delancey Street, Society Hill Civic Association Lenore Millhollen, Center City Residents Association/Preservation Alliance ~ Scott Baron, 108 Delancey Street Christian A. Busch, The Sullivan Co. Judith Eden, Center City Residents Association Vincent Costello, Director of Communications, City of Philadelphia Stephanie G. Wolf, Vice-Chair, recognized the presence of a quorum and called the 450th Stated Meeting of the Philadelphia Historical Commission to order at 9:15 A.M. MINUTES of the 449th Stated Meeting of the Philadelphia Historical Commission. Upon a motion made by Mr. Brownlee and duly seconded, the Commission unanimously approved the minutes of the 449th Stated Meeting of the Philadelphia Historical Commission held on 12 January 2000, Wayne Spilove, Chair. 1 impression of always being an exterior portico. The Committee recommended the use of smooth stucco to echo the former interior plaster walls. Mr. Ward made a motion to accept the Committee's recommendation with staff to review details for approval. Mr. Wilds seconded the motion which carried with 10 votes. Mr. Brownlee and Mr. Sklaroff recused themselves. College Hall, University of Pennsylvania Marianna Thomas, Architect DATE: 1870-72 PROPOSAL: Air conditioning vent in rose window Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval of removal of the chamfering of the tracery, removal of the glazing, and installation of a louver for the HVAC system. The original proposal called for the reduction of the extent of masonry tracery in the gable rose window and the installation of a louvered vent. The Architectural Committee questioned the need
of the chamfering of the tracery, removal of the glazing, and installation of a louver for the HVAC system. The original proposal called for the reduction of the extent of masonry tracery in the gable rose window and the installation of a louvered vent. The Architectural Committee questioned the need to remove the tracery and suggested that placement of the louvers on a different plane or an increase in velocity would yield an adequate flow of air. The Commission engaged an independent consultant, Michael Henry of Watson and Henry. Mr. Henry concluded that if the ductwork and vent are placed farther behind the wood tracery and the chamfered edges of the tracery removed, the system should get a sufficient intake of fresh air, while keeping the circular tracery relatively intact. The applicant agreed that this is an acceptable compromise. Mr. Wilds stated that in looking at the drawings, there may be no need to remove the beveled tracery in the larger openings, however this cannot be determined until the onset of the work. Mr. Wilds made a motion to accept the Committee's recommendation for approval of the removal of the chamfered portions of the tracery, with staff to review details for approval. Ms. Mulligan seconded the motion which carried with 10 votes. Mr. Brownlee and Mr. Sklaroff recused themselves. 100 Delancey Street a.k.a. 328 South Front Street Christopher Beardsley, Architect DATE: c. 1970 PROPOSAL: Rear addition Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval The proposal calls for an addition to the rear of this corner property. The building forms part of a row developed during the Redevelopment Period and has a contemporary design. The addition matches the scale and shapes of the original building. Some Commissioners thought that this proposal met Standards 9 and 10, and that other concerns expressed by neighborhood residents should be addressed by the Zoning Board of Adjustment. Bernice Hamel, Society Hill Civic Association, expressed her concerns that she did not realize the effect this addition would have on the façade. She believes the proposal should be tabled for at least a month, to enable the owners and architects to come to some compromise. Ms. Kaplan questioned whether this proposal should not have gone to the Zoning Board 3 The revised proposal calls for signage with solid lettering, halo lighting and two shed awnings with the store's name on the aprons over the windows. The awnings will be grey,
to come to some compromise. Ms. Kaplan questioned whether this proposal should not have gone to the Zoning Board 3 The revised proposal calls for signage with solid lettering, halo lighting and two shed awnings with the store's name on the aprons over the windows. The awnings will be grey, not green as previously proposed. The revised proposal meets Standards 9 and 10. Mr. James made a motion to accept the Committee's recommendation for approval with staff to review details for approval. Mr. Ward seconded the motion which carried unanimously. 235-245 South 18th Street, The Barclay Christian Busch, Architect DATE: 1928 PROPOSAL: Masonry repair Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval with staff to review details for approval. The proposal calls for replacement of damaged brick on the interior of this U-shaped building. Non-historic breaks in the façade created by the removal of air-conditioning units will be infilled. About 40 percent of the bricks require replacement. The bricks range from buff through orange to purple with various mixes of the different colors. Mr. Baron is working closely with the architect to find the right match. Mr. James made a motion to accept the Committee's recommendation for approval with the staff to review details for approval. Ms. Merhige seconded the motion which carried unanimously. 2208 Brandywine Street Thomas Buck, Owner/Applicant DATE: c. 1859 PROPOSAL: Rebuild front façade Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval with staff to review details for approval. The proposal calls for reconstruction of the front façade, owing to the extreme bowing of the front wall which star bolts cannot correct. The applicant proposed to keep the historic marble watertable and the wood door surround cornice. The application also includes new 2 over 2 windows with full screens and a replacement 4-panel door. The owner wishes to replace the historic wood lintels and sills with limestone, stating that stone is more resilient than wood. The new façade may need to have slightly larger mortar joints. After much discussion, the Commission decided upon an untinted mortar with the mortar joint as thin as possible. The applicant and his neighbor will use the same mason and restore the windows to the historical appearance with limestone lintels and sills. Mr. Brownlee made a motion to accept the Committee's recommendation for approval with the revision of untinted mortar with staff to review details for approval. Mr. Ward seconded the motion which carried unanimously. 2210 Brandywine Street Stephen Wagner,
restore the windows to the historical appearance with limestone lintels and sills. Mr. Brownlee made a motion to accept the Committee's recommendation for approval with the revision of untinted mortar with staff to review details for approval. Mr. Ward seconded the motion which carried unanimously. 2210 Brandywine Street Stephen Wagner, Owner/Applicant DATE: c. 1859 PROPOSAL: Rebuild front façade Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval of the new façade, windows, and limestone lintels and sills, with staff to review details for approval. 5