Committee on Historic Designation — May 24, 2023

COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 24 MAY 2023 1 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION OF THE PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, 24 MAY 2023 REMOTE MEETING ON ZOOM EMILY COOPERMAN, CHAIR CALL TO ORDER START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:00:00 The Chair called the meeting to order at 9:33 a.m. The following Committee members joined her: Committee Member Present Absent Comment Emily Cooperman, Ph.D., chair X Suzanna Barucco X Jeff Cohen, Ph.D. X Bruce Laverty X Arrived at 10:19 am Debbie Miller X Elizabeth Milroy, Ph.D. X The meeting was held remotely via Zoom video and audio-conferencing software. The following staff members were present: Jonathan Farnham, Executive Director Kim Chantry, Historic Preservation Planner III Laura DiPasquale, Historic Preservation Planner III Shannon Garrison, Historic Preservation Planner II Heather Hendrickson, Historic Preservation Planner I Ted Maust, Historic Preservation Planner I Allyson Mehley, Historic Preservation Planner II Dan Shachar-Krasnoff, Historic Preservation Planner II Alex Till, Historic Preservation Planner I The following persons attended the online meeting: Loretta Tate Crump Keith Coleman Constance Winters Alex Balloon Cheryl R. Eggleston Deborah Gary Janyah Green Jay Farrell Paul Steinke, Preservation Alliance Kathy Dowdell Carolyn Klepser Elicia Pegues Spearman Amy Lambert COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 24 MAY 2023 2 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION Ann Tydeman-Solomon Steven Peitzman Judith Robinson, 32nd Ward RCO Oscar Beisert, Keeping Society Elicia Spearman Hanna Stark, Preservation Alliance Russell Fulton, West Central Germantown Neighbors Kimberly Haas Angelo Tartaglini Cindy Bass, Philadelphia City Council Andrew Goodman, Councilperson Jamie Gauthier's Office Alice McBryde Charlene Collins Phyllis Hayes Allison Weiss, SoLo/Germantown Civic Association Jacqueline Wiggins Dennis Carlisle Patrick Bayer Kevin Poole, Democratic Committeeperson Alex Goldberg Morgan Allgrove-Hodges, Councilperson Jamie Gauthier's Office Hal Schirmer, Esq. David Traub, Save Our Sites Suzanne Ponsen, West Central Germantown Neighbors Susan Evans Nancy Pontone Doxie McCoy Rosalind Plummer Wood Sherman Aronson Dennis Carlisle AGENDA ADDRESS: 6700 LINCOLN DR Name of Resource: C. DeLores Tucker House Proposed Action: Designate Property Owner: Frank & Kim Dempsey Miller Nominator: Historical Commission staff Staff Contact: Laura DiPasquale, laura.dipasquale@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 6700 Lincoln Drive as historic and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the property, constructed in 1917 on a design by architect W. Frisbey Smith, is significant under Criteria for Designation A and D. Under Criterion A, the nomination argues that the property is significant for its association with

list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the property, constructed in 1917 on a design by architect W. Frisbey Smith, is significant under Criteria for Designation A and D. Under Criterion A, the nomination argues that the property is significant for its association with C. DeLores Tucker, a civil rights activist and first female African American Secretary of State in the nation, who owned and lived in the property from 1959 until her death in 2005. Under Criterion D, the nomination explains that the residence is a prime example of Tudor Revival residential architecture in the Mt. Airy neighborhood of the larger Germantown section of Philadelphia. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 24 MAY 2023 3 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 6700 Lincoln Drive satisfies Criteria for Designation A and D. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:09:30 PRESENTERS: • Ms. DiPasquale presented the nomination to the Committee on Historic Designation. • No one represented the property owner. Ms. DiPasquale noted that the property owner has not contacted the Historical Commission. DISCUSSION: • Mr. Cohen opined that the nomination is well-produced and for a worthy property. He added what he called “nit-picking” comments, suggesting that the reference to flat arch lintels in the description should eliminate the word lintel, since those are usually straight, and that the spelling for “sidelites” should be “sidelights.” • Mr. Cohen commented that the Tudor Revival was a broad stylistic category and noted that this particular design had Arts and Crafts elements with its squatter proportions and features. He also expressed a desire to learn more about the work of architect W. Frisbey Smith. • Ms. Miller remarked that this property is one of the many hidden gems of Philadelphia's history, noting that a person with an amazing life lived in a house that sits on the corner of Lincoln Drive. She explained that she learned new things about Ms. Tucker from the nomination and joked that it is always fun when Tupac Shakur can make it into a nomination. She argued that Ms. Tucker was an amazing woman of color who prompted great social change. • Ms. Barucco agreed with Ms. Miller, noting that she is also amazed by the history that is hidden all around us and the nominations that bring it to life. • Ms. Milroy

nomination. She argued that Ms. Tucker was an amazing woman of color who prompted great social change. • Ms. Barucco agreed with Ms. Miller, noting that she is also amazed by the history that is hidden all around us and the nominations that bring it to life. • Ms. Milroy concurred, remarking that Ms. Tucker was an amazing woman. • Ms. Cooperman noted that she appreciates how the nominations for this property and that of the Sadie T.M. Alexander house a few blocks away are starting to put together a better picture of the importance of Black heritage in this part of the city. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Kevin Poole supported the nomination, noting that he knew Mrs. Tucker and her husband, and has a love for her family and all they did for civil rights. He noted that Mrs. Tucker was one of the driving forces for voting rights for 18-year-olds after the Vietnam War, as well as for civil rights nationwide. • Oscar Beisert supported the nomination. • Elicia Spearman supported the nomination, noting that she and Mrs. Tucker were both members of the AKA sorority. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Committee on Historic Designation found that: • The property at 6700 Lincoln Drive was constructed in 1917 on a design by architect W. Frisbey Smith. • C. DeLores Tucker, a civil rights activist and first female African American Secretary of State in the nation, purchased the property in 1959 and lived there until her death in 2005. The Committee on Historic Designation concluded that: COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 24 MAY 2023 4 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION • The property is significant for its association with C. DeLores Tucker, a person significant in history, satisfying Criterion A. • The property is a good example of the Tudor Revival style, with Arts and Crafts influences, satisfying Criterion D. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 6700 Lincoln Drive satisfies Criteria for Designation A and D. ITEM: 6700 Lincoln Dr. MOTION: Designate; Criteria A and D MOVED BY: Cohen SECONDED BY: Milroy VOTE Committee Member Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Emily Cooperman, chair X Suzanna Barucco X Jeff Cohen X Bruce Laverty X Debbie Miller X Elizabeth Milroy X Total 5 ADDRESS: 1268 S 26TH ST Name of Resource: Wharton Hall Proposed Action: Designate Property

D MOVED BY: Cohen SECONDED BY: Milroy VOTE Committee Member Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Emily Cooperman, chair X Suzanna Barucco X Jeff Cohen X Bruce Laverty X Debbie Miller X Elizabeth Milroy X Total 5 ADDRESS: 1268 S 26TH ST Name of Resource: Wharton Hall Proposed Action: Designate Property Owner: Angelo Tartaglini Nominator: Historical Commission staff Staff Contact: Alex Till, alexander.till@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 1268 S. 26th Street and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. A three-story brick commercial building, known as Wharton Hall, built between 1892 and 1894, stands on the property. The nomination contends that the property satisfies Criterion for Designation H, owing to its unique blend of Victorian architect styles and height, establishing it as a familiar visual feature of the neighborhood. The nomination further argues that the property, through its history of use in a variety of community-focused ways as a commercial space, entertainment venue, banquet hall, political venue, and later, school, exemplifies the cultural, economic, social, and historical heritage of the Gray’s Ferry community, satisfying Criterion for Designation J. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 1268 S. 26th Street satisfies Criteria for Designation H and J. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:20:23 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Till presented the nomination to the Committee on Historic Designation. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 24 MAY 2023 5 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION • Angelo Tartaglini represented the property owner. Owing to technical difficulties, he was unable to speak during the meeting, but Mr. Till explained that Mr. Tartaglini sent an email to the Historical Commission in support of the nomination. DISCUSSION: • Ms. Cooperman commented that the building is rather remarkable, but she was unfamiliar with it before the nomination was received. She added that it has been well cared for. • Ms. Milroy added that it is a wonderful building and she drove down to the property to see it in person. She addressed the iron balconies and questioned if they were on the building historically. o Mr. Till pointed out the oldest photograph of the building from 1959 that shows some fire escapes on the building but not the same balconies as there are at present. o Ms. Milroy pointed out that the second-story windows have been turned into French doors. o Ms. Cooperman pointed out other changes have been

the oldest photograph of the building from 1959 that shows some fire escapes on the building but not the same balconies as there are at present. o Ms. Milroy pointed out that the second-story windows have been turned into French doors. o Ms. Cooperman pointed out other changes have been made to the arrangement of the building as well such as the placement of doors at ground level. She also clarified that the balconies would not be considered historic features of this nomination since the period of significance ends in 1956. • Ms. Cooperman expressed an interest in learning more about Alfred G. Clay, the developer who constructed Wharton Hall. She added that the building is more sophisticated than one would expect from a straightforward developer. o Ms. Milroy added that there is not much discussion of the architecture in the nomination other than addressing the eclectic combination of styles. She thinks a longer stylistic discussion would have been interesting. o Mr. Cohen added that the scale and verticality of the building is remarkable. He described its style as a “squeezed Queen Anne that ranges widely in its reference.” He also expressed interest in learning more about Alfred G. Clay, adding that the building’s stylistic details would suggest that an architect was involved. o Ms. Cooperman agreed with the idea that an architect may have been involved with the building, adding that the style is “retardataire” and looks more like a building from the 1880s than the 1890s. She posited whether the Committee should make a recommendation to add Criterion C to the nomination. o Ms. Milroy responded that they are limited with Criterion C to sticking to “official” architectural styles. The eclecticism of late nineteenth-century designs makes it difficult to stick to one formal definition and that architects from the time really mixed elements from multiple styles together in creative ways. She wants to encourage nominators to recognize these mixed-style examples and would like to find a way to include them under Criterion C. o Mr. Cohen agreed with the previous statements. He reiterated that the building really stands out scale-wise in the neighborhood. o Ms. Cooperman added that the style requirements of Criterion C can put nominations “in a box” sometimes. o Ms. Barucco commented that the limits of Criterion C can be pushed in a nomination with a carefully written description and narrative about how the building

out scale-wise in the neighborhood. o Ms. Cooperman added that the style requirements of Criterion C can put nominations “in a box” sometimes. o Ms. Barucco commented that the limits of Criterion C can be pushed in a nomination with a carefully written description and narrative about how the building reflects its time period. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 24 MAY 2023 6 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION o Mr. Cohen agreed and offered that the stylistic categorization sometimes does not tell the full story. He thinks it would be difficult to find many comparable buildings to this one that tell the same story. o Ms. Cooperman also agreed and explained that she initially was surprised to see this building in Philadelphia as it almost looks like it should belong in a different city. o Mr. Cohen pointed out how the gables in particular highlight the unique scale and style of the building and is happy to see that they were never clipped off over time. He does not think they need to add Criterion C as the nomination is currently written. • Ms. Milroy commented that she would like to see any maps or aerial photographs in a nomination include compass directions and also highlight the specific location of the building. o Ms. Miler agreed and that it is difficult sometimes to identify specific locations without those highlights. She proceeded to add that she thinks the scale and style of the building reinforce the community-centric role that it has served over time. Criteria H and J are appropriate here because of the community use of the property, even still so today. o Ms. Cooperman pointed out a minor error in figure 2. It should be labeled as the south façade looking north. • Mr. Cohen had two suggestions to also make the nomination easier to read. He suggested better integrating the photographs with the writing and also added that in certain sections of the city, namely Germantown, directions get difficult and perhaps using terms like “left” and “right” would be better. o Ms. Cooperman disagreed with the suggestion to sometimes use “left” and “right” terminology. • Ms. Barucco wondered about the use of Criteria H compared to C. If the architecture of the building was not so unique, Criterion H would likely not apply. Since the architectural characteristics define the uniqueness of the building as it relates to Criterion H, it follows

and “right” terminology. • Ms. Barucco wondered about the use of Criteria H compared to C. If the architecture of the building was not so unique, Criterion H would likely not apply. Since the architectural characteristics define the uniqueness of the building as it relates to Criterion H, it follows that Criterion C should also be applied. o Ms. Cooperman responded that they have in the past used Criterion H without Criterion C even with architectural aspects. She added that she does not oppose adding Criterion C to this nomination and it is the Commission’s purview to do so. • Mr. Farnham stepped in to note that the property owner added a comment to the meeting chat that only one of the balconies discussed earlier was original to the building. He also wanted to point out a row of similar buildings on the 3000 block of N. 16th Street, which the staff will research to see if there is a connection. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Paul Steinke, Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia, supported the nomination as a distinctive piece of architecture in the neighborhood. He used to frequent the neighborhood and often pass by the building and at the time, it was in deplorable condition, vacant and partially boarded up. He feared for its survival. He went on to commend Mr. Tartaglini for restoring the building so beautifully. • David Traub, Save Our Sites, echoed Mr. Steinke’s comments. It is a singular piece of architecture anchoring the corner. He lives nearby and is always amazed by the well-maintained building. He pointed out how it fits Criterion H, owing to its unique location. It is a familiar visual feature. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 24 MAY 2023 7 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION • Oscar Beisert supported the nomination and thanked the nominator. He added that this is an unusual building and that he is curious to know if the spandrels are original to the building. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Committee on Historic Designation found that: • The property at 1268 S. 26th Street demonstrates a unique blend of late Victorian architectural styles that set it out as a unique feature in its neighborhood. • Those architectural features, while not all following one formal style, combine to create a design that is distinct and representative of the late nineteenth century. • The property has been used in a variety of community

architectural styles that set it out as a unique feature in its neighborhood. • Those architectural features, while not all following one formal style, combine to create a design that is distinct and representative of the late nineteenth century. • The property has been used in a variety of community focused ways throughout its history. The Committee on Historic Designation concluded that: • The property reflects the environment in an era characterized by a distinctive blend of late Victorian architectural styles, satisfying Criterion C. • The property, owing to its unique location, scale, and architecture, represents an established and familiar visual feature of the Gray’s Ferry neighborhood, satisfying Criterion H. • The property, owing to its use in a variety of community focused ways throughout its history, exemplifies the cultural, political, economic, social, and historical heritage of the community, satisfying Criterion J. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 1268 S. 26th Street satisfies Criteria for Designation C, H, and J. ITEM: 1268 S. 26th St. MOTION: Designate, Criteria C, H, and J MOVED BY: Barucco SECONDED BY: Laverty VOTE Committee Member Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Emily Cooperman, chair X Suzanna Barucco X Jeff Cohen X Bruce Laverty X Debbie Miller X Elizabeth Milroy X Total 6 COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 24 MAY 2023 8 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION ADDRESS: 415 N 53RD ST Name of Resource: Ethel Hedgemon Lyle House Proposed Action: Designate Property Owner: Earlene Martin Nominator: Historical Commission staff Staff Contact: Alex Till, alexander.till@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 415 N. 53rd Street and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. A two-story brick rowhouse, the home of Ethel Hedgemon Lyle from 1924 to 1950 stands on the property. The nomination contends that the property satisfies Criterion for Designation A for its association with Ethel Hedgemon Lyle, the founder of Alpha Kappa Alpha, the nation’s first Sorority for Black women. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 415 N. 53rd Street satisfies Criterion for Designation A. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:51:20 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Till presented the nomination to the Committee on Historic Designation. • No one represented the property owner. DISCUSSION: • Ms. Milroy commented that this was a great nomination, and a that Ms. Lyle’s memory

satisfies Criterion for Designation A. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:51:20 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Till presented the nomination to the Committee on Historic Designation. • No one represented the property owner. DISCUSSION: • Ms. Milroy commented that this was a great nomination, and a that Ms. Lyle’s memory is certainly worthy of recognition. She expressed interest in learning more about the history of the housing development on the block. It would be interesting and valuable to fill in that context of the neighborhood. o Mr. Till added that he did not find a great deal of information on the development of the block other than narrowing down the time period of the construction of the row. He also pointed out that the row remains fully intact. o Ms. Miller questioned whether that additional context was needed to support the nomination as it is written. The great thing about the nomination is that it represents a common type of Philadelphia rowhouse and a remarkable woman who lived there. The house represents an average middle-class background inhabited by a notable woman whose personal story is the focus of the historical importance. o Ms. Milroy agreed and added that she has spent time researching the development of this section of West Philadelphia and is interested in investigating the background behind the development of the area that allowed a person like Lyle to live in this place and accomplish what she did. o Mr. Cohen added that the real estate development history could be an interesting part of the story here. However, since the nomination focuses only on Criterion A, he was unsure whether that was necessary in this case. He went on to say that through examining deed registry sheets, it should be possible to find out who owned the lots around this one and who developed the block. It might be interesting to see when African American residents started moving into that neighborhood to give more context to the nomination. o Ms. Cooperman agreed that it would be wonderful to know this context, though it is not needed to demonstrate why the property is worthy of nomination under Criterion A. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 24 MAY 2023 9 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION o Ms. Milroy responded that she was not by any means casting doubt on the worthiness of the property to be nominated. Ms. Cooperman agreed and wanted to make

why the property is worthy of nomination under Criterion A. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 24 MAY 2023 9 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION o Ms. Milroy responded that she was not by any means casting doubt on the worthiness of the property to be nominated. Ms. Cooperman agreed and wanted to make sure that the record reflected the Committee’s agreement on the worthiness of the nomination under Criterion A. The questions of the history of the development of the neighborhood and its history with African American residents are important topics that would require a more complex research project to properly explore. o Mr. Cohen agreed that it is not necessary to have all this context explored in this nomination but that it would be nice to have a little of it outlined in it. • Mr. Laverty wanted to highlight a recent article by Larry Santucci from the Federal Reserve Bank discussing restrictive deed covenants in the City of Philadelphia and the Great Migration. The article even highlights a period advertisement for new rowhouses on a block nearby this one in a “new restricted section.” He added that the article provides some of the context that the Committee has been discussing. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Oscar Beisert offered support for the nomination and commented that it is great to see so many previously unknown African American historic sites being protected. • Amy Lambert, president of University City Historical Society, thanked the nominator for nominating a building in West Philadelphia that has importance to the African American community and the city. • David Traub, Save Our Sites, commented that the house, though a fairly typical example of a Philadelphia rowhouse, does possess some architectural merit with distinctive details along the cornice and in the brick corbeling. • Ms. Hendrickson read a letter in support of the nomination from Elicia Spearman, North Atlantic Regional Director of Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority Inc., written on 23 May 2023. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Committee on Historic Designation found that: • The property at 415 N. 53rd St was the home of Ethel Hedgemon Lyle from 1924 to 1950. • Ethel Hedgemon Lyle was the principal founder of Alpha Kappa Alpha, the nation’s first sorority for Black women. The Committee on Historic Designation concluded that: • The property is associated with the life of Ethel Hedgemon Lyle, the founder of Alpha Kappa Alpha, the nation’s

from 1924 to 1950. • Ethel Hedgemon Lyle was the principal founder of Alpha Kappa Alpha, the nation’s first sorority for Black women. The Committee on Historic Designation concluded that: • The property is associated with the life of Ethel Hedgemon Lyle, the founder of Alpha Kappa Alpha, the nation’s first sorority for Black women, satisfying Criterion A. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 415 N. 53rd Street satisfies Criterion for Designation A. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 24 MAY 2023 10 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION ITEM: 415 N. 53rd St. MOTION: Designate, Criterion A MOVED BY: Miller SECONDED BY: Barucco VOTE Committee Member Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Emily Cooperman, chair X Suzanna Barucco X Jeff Cohen X Bruce Laverty X Debbie Miller X Elizabeth Milroy X Total 6 ADDRESS: 5001 BALTIMORE AVE Name of Resource: St. Paul's, Hickman Temple AME, Emmanuel Christian Church Proposed Action: Designate Property Owner: Emmanuel Christian Center Inc. Nominator: University City Historical Society Staff Contact: Kim Chantry, kim.chantry@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 5001 Baltimore Avenue as historic and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the Emmanuel Christian Church satisfies Criteria for Designation D, E, H, and J. Under Criterion D, the nomination argues that the church embodies distinguishing characteristics of Late Gothic Revival architecture. Under Criterion E, the nomination contends that the church and chapel addition are examples of the work of Isaac Pursell, a prolific church designer in Philadelphia and the surrounding areas. Under Criterion H, the nomination claims that the church represents an established and familiar visual feature in the heart of the Cedar Park neighborhood of West Philadelphia. Lastly, under Criterion J, the nomination argues that the church exemplifies the cultural, economic, social, and historical heritage of the Cedar Park community. The church building has suffered from deferred maintenance over the years, resulting in the installation of a large steel bracing system on the east façade to comply an Unsafe violation. A make-safe building permit was obtained in December 2022 to address an additional Unsafe violation related to the masonry. At its 14 January 2022 meeting, the Historical Commission accepted the University City Historical Society’s request to withdraw the nomination pending review at that time for this property, owing to discussions with the then-owner Hickman Temple

obtained in December 2022 to address an additional Unsafe violation related to the masonry. At its 14 January 2022 meeting, the Historical Commission accepted the University City Historical Society’s request to withdraw the nomination pending review at that time for this property, owing to discussions with the then-owner Hickman Temple AME Church. The property sold in June 2022 to Emmanuel Christian Center Inc. and the University City Historical Society then resubmitted the nomination with updated photographs. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 5001 Baltimore Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation D, E, H, and J. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 01:09:20 COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 24 MAY 2023 11 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION PRESENTERS: • Ms. Chantry presented the nomination to the Committee on Historic Designation. • Amy Lambert, president of the University City Historical Society, represented the nomination. • No one represented the property owner. DISCUSSION: • Ms. Lambert explained the current ownership status of the property. She stated that the University City Historical Society is trying to understand what needs to be done from the owner’s perspective and also help them to appreciate the historic building. • Mr. Cohen agreed that the building is a neighborhood landmark. He stated that it is referred to as Late Gothic in the nomination, but the attributes which make it Late Gothic are not mentioned. He stated that the nomination needs more information on the architect, Isaac Pursell. • Ms. Cooperman agreed that more information is needed in the nomination on the architect, Isaac Pursell. She stated that Pursell is substantially underrecognized. She suggested the National Register nomination for Chester’s Third Presbyterian Church as a resource on Pursell. She stated that he was enormously influential, primarily through publications. She stated that he was an important and influential designer of churches, primarily Presbyterian, and that this building features the typical volumetric organization of his work. She suggested that more information is added to the property file regarding Isaac Pursell. o Ms. Lambert offered to provide more information on the architect for the Historical Commission’s file. • Ms. Milroy suggested that one could research a potential John Wanamaker connection. • Ms. Barucco acknowledged that stained glass windows were recently removed from the building, during a period of time in which the property was not under the Historical Commission’s jurisdiction. She opined that, despite the removal of the

Ms. Milroy suggested that one could research a potential John Wanamaker connection. • Ms. Barucco acknowledged that stained glass windows were recently removed from the building, during a period of time in which the property was not under the Historical Commission’s jurisdiction. She opined that, despite the removal of the stained glass, the building retains significance. She stated that the Historical Commission tends to focus on windows because they have such an impact on architecture and character, but that this building retains significance despite the removal of stained glass in this case. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Oscar Beisert, representing the Keeping Society, commented in support of the nomination. • Kathy Dowdell, community member, commented about how well the church building fits into the neighborhood context. • Paul Steinke, representing the Preservation Alliance, commented in support of the nomination. He commented that the Preservation Alliance has been part of efforts to meet with the new owners of the property about preservation efforts. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Committee on Historic Designation found that: • At its 14 January 2022 meeting, the Historical Commission accepted the University City Historical Society’s request to withdraw the nomination pending review at that time for this property, owing to discussions with the then-owner Hickman Temple AME Church. The property sold in June 2022 to Emmanuel Christian Center Inc. and COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 24 MAY 2023 12 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION the University City Historical Society then resubmitted the nomination with updated photographs. • Stained glass windows were removed from the building during a period of time in which the Historical Commission had no jurisdiction over the review of work to the property. • The nomination would benefit from more information on architect Isaac Pursell. The Committee on Historic Designation concluded that: • The church embodies distinguishing characteristics of Late Gothic Revival architecture, satisfying Criterion D. • The church and chapel addition are examples of the work of Isaac Pursell, a prolific church designer in Philadelphia and the surrounding areas, satisfying Criterion E. • The church represents an established and familiar visual feature in the heart of the Cedar Park neighborhood of West Philadelphia, satisfying Criterion H. • The church exemplifies the cultural, economic, social, and historical heritage of the Cedar Park community, satisfying Criterion J. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the

heart of the Cedar Park neighborhood of West Philadelphia, satisfying Criterion H. • The church exemplifies the cultural, economic, social, and historical heritage of the Cedar Park community, satisfying Criterion J. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 5001 Baltimore Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation D, E, H, and J. ITEM: 5001 Baltimore Ave. MOTION: Designate, Criteria D, E, H, and J. MOVED BY: Barucco SECONDED BY: Milroy VOTE Committee Member Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Emily Cooperman, chair X Suzanna Barucco X Jeff Cohen X Bruce Laverty X Debbie Miller X Elizabeth Milroy X Total 6 ADDRESS: 5920 GREENE ST Name of Resource: Thomas C. Potter House Proposed Action: Designate Property Owner: K and A Insurance Agency Nominator: West Central Germantown Neighbors Staff Contact: Kim Chantry, kim.chantry@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 5920 Greene Street as historic and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the Colonial Revival dwelling, constructed in 1892, satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, and E. Under Criterion C, the nomination contends that the Potter House reflects the environment of suburban, residential architecture of the upper classes of Germantown and Philadelphia in an era characterized by the Colonial Revival style. Under Criterion D, the nomination outlines how the building embodies distinguishing characteristics of the Colonial Revival style. Lastly, under COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 24 MAY 2023 13 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION Criterion E, the nomination states that the Potter House is the work of Mantle Fielding, Jr., an architect who significantly influenced the architectural development of Northwest Philadelphia. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 5920 Greene Street satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, and E. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 01:36:00 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Chantry presented the nomination to the Committee on Historic Designation. • Russell Fulton and Suzanne Ponsen of the West Central Germantown Neighbors represented the nomination. • Property owner Keith Coleman and attorney Michael Nix represented the property owner. DISCUSSION: • Mr. Fulton stated that the community is proud of the nomination which they commissioned from Oscar Beisert. o Ms. Ponsen agreed and stated that they look forward to submitting more nominations in the future. • Mr. Coleman introduced himself as the property owner. He stated his credentials, which included

• Mr. Fulton stated that the community is proud of the nomination which they commissioned from Oscar Beisert. o Ms. Ponsen agreed and stated that they look forward to submitting more nominations in the future. • Mr. Coleman introduced himself as the property owner. He stated his credentials, which included the former president of the Germantown Special Service District, former president of 14th District Advisory Board, former treasurer and secretary of Central Germantown Council, and former member of West Central Neighbors. He introduced his attorney, Michael Nix. He stated that he is a lifetime resident of West Germantown and is opposed to the historic designation of his property. He stated that he appreciates the historic significance, but believes designation is not in his best interest or that of his neighbors. He stated that designation will restrict his property use, limit his ability to make updates and necessary repairs, make it more difficult to sell the property, make it expensive to maintain the property, and could discourage him from investing in the building in the future. He noted a lack of financial incentives associated with designation of the property. He suggested that designation could have a negative impact on the neighborhood as it could deter developers and investors from investing in the area. He stated that there needs to be a balance between new construction and historic properties. He stated that his property does not rise to the level necessary to be a historic landmark. He noted that the building has been altered over the years and original features were removed. He suggested that there are many other buildings in Philadelphia which would be more deserving of historic designation. He stated that the West Central Germantown Neighbors does not reflect the views of the people who live here. He stated that he has no intention to sell or alter the property, which he purchased in 2002 as an investment property. He stated that he has no intention of demolishing the building or erecting a new structure on the parking lot. He requested that the Committee recommend against the designation of his property. He stated that he has lived in Germantown his entire life and does not see the value of designation at this time. He stated that the West Central Germantown Neighbors do not reflect other interest groups. He noted that Councilperson Cindy Bass was on the Zoom call earlier but

property. He stated that he has lived in Germantown his entire life and does not see the value of designation at this time. He stated that the West Central Germantown Neighbors do not reflect other interest groups. He noted that Councilperson Cindy Bass was on the Zoom call earlier but was unable to stay on long enough for this matter to be heard. He stated that other members of the community are opposed to the designation of his property, because it would not benefit the community. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 24 MAY 2023 14 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION • Mr. Nix introduced himself as Mr. Coleman’s attorney. He stated that he lives nearby, and that this is his first time participating in this type of meeting. He questioned if the property needs to fall within a historic district map in order to be designated. He stated that the property is not associated with an individual significant in the past. He opined that the architect is not significant or unique and therefore Criterion E does not apply. He stated that the immediate area is full of buildings which have architectural qualities which would satisfy Criteria C and D, yet this property is being singled out. He reiterated that Mr. Coleman does not want his property designated as historic. He asked that the Committee recommend against designation. • Ms. Cooperman explained that the Historical Commission has no jurisdiction over the review of work to the interior, and that its involvement is only triggered by the submission of a building permit application. She offered that the Historical Commission uses discretion when reviewing work and can consider any number of factors. She stated that “uniqueness” is not one of the Criteria for Designation. • Mr. Cohen commented that Greene Street is a remarkable place. He observed that Mantle Fielding, Jr. was relatively young when he designed this building, just out of George Pearson’s office, and was much more restrained than Pearson. He stated that the building is an important chapter in Germantown’s history and the transition from the 1880s to the 1890s, and that the nomination makes the case for designation. • Ms. Milroy asked about the architect for Figure 21 in the nomination. o Oscar Beisert, the author of the nomination, responded that he does not believe he has this information based on how he obtained the drawing. • Ms. Barucco commented on how

nomination makes the case for designation. • Ms. Milroy asked about the architect for Figure 21 in the nomination. o Oscar Beisert, the author of the nomination, responded that he does not believe he has this information based on how he obtained the drawing. • Ms. Barucco commented on how this building is true Colonial Revival in style. o Ms. Cooperman discussed Colonial Revival architecture and how the application of its specific motifs are recognizable on this building. She stated that it speaks importantly to the characteristics of the built environment of Germantown. • Ms. Miller commented in support of the nomination. She noted that there was an earlier structure on this lot, and that the property would qualify for designation under Criterion I for archaeology, but that she will not advocate for it owing to it not being argued for in the nomination. She encouraged nominators to look at earlier resources to uncover history that predates the current built environment. • Mr. Coleman stated that, while he appreciates the thoughts of the Committee, it is made up of professional architectural historians who all sound the same. He observed that there was no diversity of thought in the discussion. He referenced an extremely similar property on the next block. He stated that he understands the importance of preserving history. He stated that he feels disrespected by the West Central Germantown Neighbors. He reiterated that the group does not represent the community. • Mr. Nix reiterated that Councilperson Cindy Bass was in the Zoom meeting earlier but was unable to stay on long enough for this matter to be heard. • Ms. Cooperman encouraged Mr. Coleman to contact the Historical Commission’s staff with any questions or for guidance regarding work to the building. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Ann Tydeman-Solomon, a near neighbor and not a member of West Central Germantown Neighbors, commented in support of the nomination. She commented that Mr. Coleman has been a good neighbor, and that his property has been used respectfully as an event venue for many years. She commented that it adds to the COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 24 MAY 2023 15 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION historic character of this area of West Germantown. She commented that she has spoken to neighbors who support designation. • Connie Winters, a neighbor of the property, commented in support of the nomination. She opined that it is possible to maintain older

DESIGNATION, 24 MAY 2023 15 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION historic character of this area of West Germantown. She commented that she has spoken to neighbors who support designation. • Connie Winters, a neighbor of the property, commented in support of the nomination. She opined that it is possible to maintain older buildings and make a reasonable income. • Amy Lambert commented in support of the nomination. She thanked West Central Germantown Neighbors for submitting the nomination. • Allison Weiss, representing SoLo/Germantown Civic Association, commented in support of the nomination. • Steven Peitzman commented in support of the nomination. • Paul Steinke, representing the Preservation Alliance, commented in support of the nomination. He commented that the Committee’s purview is limited to a review of the Criteria for Designation, and it appears that the nomination makes a compelling argument for designation under Criteria C, D, and E. • Kevin Poole, Democratic Committeeperson, commented in support of the nomination. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Committee on Historic Designation found that: • The building was designed by architect Mantle Fielding, Jr. and constructed in 1892. The Committee on Historic Designation concluded that: • The property reflects the environment of suburban, residential architecture of the upper classes of Germantown and Philadelphia in an era characterized by the Colonial Revival style, satisfying Criterion C. • The building embodies distinguishing characteristics of the Colonial Revival style, satisfying Criterion D. • The building is the work of Mantle Fielding, Jr., an architect who significantly influenced the architectural development of Northwest Philadelphia, satisfying Criterion E. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 5920 Greene Street satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, and E. ITEM: 5920 Greene St. MOTION: Designate, Criteria C, D, and E. MOVED BY: Milroy SECONDED BY: Cohen VOTE Committee Member Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Emily Cooperman, chair X Suzanna Barucco X Jeff Cohen X Bruce Laverty X Debbie Miller X Elizabeth Milroy X Total 5 1 COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 24 MAY 2023 16 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION ADDRESS: 2008 CHESTNUT ST AND 2010 CHESTNUT ST Name of Resource: William Howell Row Proposed Action: Designate Property Owner, 2008: 2008 Chestnut LLC Property Owner, 2010: Women's Opportunities Resource Center Nominator: Historical Commission staff Staff Contact: Jon Farnham, jon.farnham@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the properties at 2008 and 2010 Chestnut

CHESTNUT ST AND 2010 CHESTNUT ST Name of Resource: William Howell Row Proposed Action: Designate Property Owner, 2008: 2008 Chestnut LLC Property Owner, 2010: Women's Opportunities Resource Center Nominator: Historical Commission staff Staff Contact: Jon Farnham, jon.farnham@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the properties at 2008 and 2010 Chestnut Street as historic and list them on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Constructed in 1869, the “marble-fronted dwellings” reflect the environment in an era characterized by buildings with marble facades, satisfying Criterion C. Additionally, the rowhouses embody distinguishing characteristics of the Second Empire style, the most popular style in the decade after the Civil War, including their marble façades with decorative window and door surrounds, broad bracketed cornices, and mansards with dormers, satisfying Criterion D. Finally, the buildings at 2008 and 2010 Chestnut Street are emblematic of the transition of the area south of Market Street and west of Broad Street from vacant land and sites used by the building materials industry to a dense, upper-middle-class and upper-class residential neighborhood in the years after the Civil War and its subsequent transition to a mixed-use commercial and residential neighborhood a few generations later. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the properties at 2008 and 2010 Chestnut Street satisfy Criteria for Designation C, D, and J. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 02:34:50 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Farnham presented the nomination to the Committee on Historic Designation. • No one represented the property owners. DISCUSSION: • Ms. Miller stated that the nomination was too long and included too much extraneous information. She stated that it was difficult to read and understand. o Mr. Cohen disagreed and stated that the nomination was wonderfully rich. He stated that it was extensively researched and well written. • Mr. Cohen stated that it is critical to get beyond mansard roofs when talking about the Second Empire style. He stated that there are variations of the Second Empire that involve emphasizing the depth of the wall and others that emphasize planar walls and incising. • Ms. Milroy stated that the nomination was long but included helpful information. She stated that Figure 33, the Kennedy watercolor, is located at the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, not the Library Company. • Ms. Barucco stated that she enjoyed the nomination, even though it was long. She noted that this part of Center City has a rich

long but included helpful information. She stated that Figure 33, the Kennedy watercolor, is located at the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, not the Library Company. • Ms. Barucco stated that she enjoyed the nomination, even though it was long. She noted that this part of Center City has a rich and complicated history. She stated that she is very interested in the idea of a marble building in a brick city. She stated that the buildings are emblematic of a period. • Ms. Cooperman noted that the occasional marble, brownstone, and serpentine clad building is found in the otherwise brick city. She stated that these buildings are wonderful reminders that marble-fronted buildings were fashionable at times in Philadelphia. She stated that she was struck by the state of the Childs Mansion in COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 24 MAY 2023 17 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION the photograph in the nomination. She noted that discussions of style are complicated, and, in this case, the buildings are more American Second Empire than they are French Second Empire. • Mr. Cohen stated that he was struck by the fact that the marble yards were located in the heart of what we now think of as the Rittenhouse area. He stated that it is amazing how quickly the area switched identities. He noted that the research will serve other nominations, for example the history of the marble industry. • Ms. Barucco stated that nominations should build on earlier research. • Ms. Milroy wondered if people in 1869 lamented the proliferation of marble-fronted buildings in the same way some now lament the proliferation of metal-clad buildings. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Oscar Beisert commented in support of the nomination. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Committee on Historic Designation found that: • The rowhouses at 2008 and 2010 Chestnut Street were constructed in 1869 by wallpaper manufacturer turned real estate developer William Howell. • Circumstantial evidence points to John McArthur Jr. as the architect of the buildings. • Marble-fronted buildings were fashionable in the years immediately after the Civil War. • The area around 20th and Chestnut Streets was developed as a fashionable residential district in the years after the Civil War. The Committee on Historic Designation concluded that: • Constructed in 1869, the “marble-fronted dwellings” at 2008 and 2010 Chestnut Street reflect the environment in an era characterized by buildings with marble facades, satisfying Criterion C.

Streets was developed as a fashionable residential district in the years after the Civil War. The Committee on Historic Designation concluded that: • Constructed in 1869, the “marble-fronted dwellings” at 2008 and 2010 Chestnut Street reflect the environment in an era characterized by buildings with marble facades, satisfying Criterion C. • The rowhouses at 2008 and 2010 Chestnut Street embody distinguishing characteristics of the Second Empire style, the most popular style in the decade after the Civil War, including their marble façades with decorative window and door surrounds, broad bracketed cornices, and mansards with dormers, satisfying Criterion D. • The buildings at 2008 and 2010 Chestnut Street are emblematic of the transition of the area south of Market Street and west of Broad Street from vacant land and sites used by the building materials industry to a dense, upper-middle-class and upper- class residential neighborhood in the years after the Civil War and its subsequent transition to a mixed-use commercial and residential neighborhood a few generations later. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the properties at 2008 and 2010 Chestnut Street satisfy Criteria for Designation C, D, and J. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 24 MAY 2023 18 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION ITEM: 2008 Chestnut St. and 2010 Chestnut St. MOTION: Designate, Criteria C, D, and J. MOVED BY: Cohen SECONDED BY: Barucco VOTE Committee Member Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Emily Cooperman, chair X Suzanna Barucco X Jeff Cohen X Bruce Laverty X Debbie Miller X Elizabeth Milroy X Total 5 1 ADDRESS: 500 E WASHINGTON LN Name of Resource: Roberts Le Boutillier House Proposed Action: Designate Property Owner: Raymond & Rosalind P Wood Trustees Nominator: Historical Commission staff Staff Contact: Ted Maust, theodore.maust@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 500 E. Washington Lane as historic and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the Gothic Revival dwelling, constructed in 1876, satisfies Criteria for Designation C and D as a rare survivor of the grand Gothic Revival houses of the neighborhood. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 500 E. Washington Lane satisfies Criteria for Designation C and D. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 02:51:00 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Maust presented the nomination to the Committee on Historic Designation. • Rosalind Plummer Wood, the

STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 500 E. Washington Lane satisfies Criteria for Designation C and D. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 02:51:00 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Maust presented the nomination to the Committee on Historic Designation. • Rosalind Plummer Wood, the property owner, participated in the review. DISCUSSION: • Ms. Plummer Wood read her letter of opposition, submitted to the Historical Commission on 19 May 2023. In her letter, Ms. Plummer Wood asked why her property was selected when the nomination identified two other earlier examples of the Gothic Revival nearby which are not historically designated. She further contended that the nomination made factual errors in its description of the property at 500 E. Washington Lane, specifically the reference to it as “brownstone.” She noted that the stone had been stained during her ownership with a consumer product from Home Depot. Ms. Plummer Wood contended that the property at 500 E. Washington Lane is a derivative work and that the extensive modifications, especially to the porches, have rendered it nonhistoric. • Ms. Cooperman reiterated that the Committee’s purview is to judge nominations based on the given criteria and make a recommendation to the Historical Commission. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 24 MAY 2023 19 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION • Ms. Plummer Wood noted that the Historical Commission staff had not been in contact with her before the notice letters were mailed and she could have provided information about the modification to the property earlier in the process. • Mr. Maust indicated that the Historical Commission has the ability to take a range of concerns into consideration and indicated it works with homeowners to mitigate any inconvenience resulting from designation. • Mr. Cohen noted that this property stood out to him as a “faceted” example of the Gothic Revival and that, despite the modifications which Ms. Plummer Wood noted, it remains an excellent example of the architectural style. • Mr. Cohen expressed the desire that designation not be an impediment to the owner, but reiterated the belief that the property is worthy of preservation. • Ms. Milroy also expressed compassion and understanding for Ms. Plummer Wood’s concerns and sought to assure her that the Historical Commission intended to help and preserve. • Ms. Milroy described the nomination as opening further doors for research as to the identity of the architect or even the creation

• Ms. Milroy also expressed compassion and understanding for Ms. Plummer Wood’s concerns and sought to assure her that the Historical Commission intended to help and preserve. • Ms. Milroy described the nomination as opening further doors for research as to the identity of the architect or even the creation of a historical district. • Ms. Barucco commended the owner for their stewardship of the property and suggested that the fears they expressed would not come to pass. She encouraged the Historical Commission’s staff to speak with the homeowner. o Mr. Farnham clarified that the staff was in conversation with the homeowner by email. • Ms. Cooperman stressed that designation has minimal limitations on future work and that the staff should work with the homeowner to preserve the property if it is designated. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Oscar Beisert expressed support for the nomination and described the property as an excellent example of the “Romantic Era” of architecture in Germantown. He further advocated greater preservation of the neighborhood’s complex and diverse architecture. • Kevin Poole, a Democratic Committeeperson and neighbor, attested that Ms. Plummer Wood is a good neighbor and justifiably concerned about the future of the property and her daughter. He noted that the property is a landmark but urged the Historical Commission to take her concerns seriously. He further noted that the property was a place where great musical artists had performed including Bobby Caldwell. • Amy Lambert, the president of the University City Historical Society, voiced support for the nomination and concurred that the property is a landmark that she often notices when passing by. • Steven Peitzman commented that designation of a property such as this, occupied by the owner, should not be onerous and expressed that the Historical Commission’s regulation of the exterior should not be an impediment to the owner’s endeavors. He noted the need for more incentives for designations for property owners. • Allison Weiss of SoLo/Germantown Civic Association spoke in support of the nomination. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Committee on Historic Designation found that: COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 24 MAY 2023 20 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION • The property at 500 E. Washington Lane is a building which has a strong identity as a Gothic Revival style even as it is distinctive in its volume and its faceted nature, suggesting that it was an architect-designed structure. The Committee on Historic

MAY 2023 20 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION • The property at 500 E. Washington Lane is a building which has a strong identity as a Gothic Revival style even as it is distinctive in its volume and its faceted nature, suggesting that it was an architect-designed structure. The Committee on Historic Designation concluded that: • The property at 500 E. Washington Lane is a good example of the Gothic Revival architectural style, satisfying Criteria for Designation C and D. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 500 E. Washington Lane satisfies Criteria for Designation C and D. ITEM: 500 E. Washington Ln. MOTION: Designate, Criteria C and D MOVED BY: Barucco SECONDED BY: Cohen VOTE Committee Member Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Emily Cooperman, chair X Suzanna Barucco X Jeff Cohen X Bruce Laverty X Debbie Miller X Elizabeth Milroy X Total 5 1 ADDRESS: 1632 POPLAR ST Name of Resource: Green Hill Market House Proposed Action: Rescind Property Owner: Church Of The Living God Applicant: Church of the Living God Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, Allyson.mehley@phila.gov OVERVIEW: The owner of 1632 Poplar Street has requested that the Historical Commission rescind the designation of the property. The building at 1632 Poplar Street was constructed in 1859 and historically known as the Green Hill Market House. It is currently used as a church and is being marketed for sale. The Historical Commission designated it in May 2018, finding that it satisfied Criteria for Designation A, C, D, and J. In a letter to the Historical Commission, dated 5 April 2023, Bishop Lessie Williams of the Church of the Living God states that the church was not aware of the historic designation, had not approved of it, and would like the designation rescinded. As the staff explained to a representative of the property owner, Section 5.14.b of the Historical Commission’s Rules and Regulations governs rescission requests. An owner requesting a rescission must submit documentation demonstrating that: • the historic building has lost the qualities that made it eligible for designation; • new information shows that it was never eligible for designation; or, • the Historical Commission erred when it designated the property. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 24 MAY 2023 21 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION The rescission request consists of a letter from the property owner stating that the church was not

• new information shows that it was never eligible for designation; or, • the Historical Commission erred when it designated the property. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 24 MAY 2023 21 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION The rescission request consists of a letter from the property owner stating that the church was not aware of the historic designation and had not approved of it. If the church is claiming that the building does not now or never did qualify for designation, it should submit documentation of the claim. If the church is claiming that it did not receive adequate notice of the consideration of the designation in 2018, the Historical Commission could reconsider designating the property with new notice to the property owner. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the Committee on Historic Designation reaffirm that the property satisfies the Criteria for Designation. The staff recommends that the Historical Commission investigate the claims that the church was unaware of the designation and, if it determines that a fatal error was made during consideration of the designation, it could rerun the review. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 03:29:50 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Mehley presented the rescission request to the Committee on Historic Designation. • Alice McBryde represented the property owner. DISCUSSION: • Mr. Farnham clarified for the Committee and meeting attendees that the property has been designated by the Historical Commission. He said that, if the original nominator Oscar Beisert wished to speak about the property, he was welcome to do so as a member of the public. • Ms. McBryde spoke on behalf of the Church of the Living God and as a representative of the Bishop Lessie Williams. Ms. McBryde added that she is a member of their Board of Directors. She stated that the Church only became aware of the historic designation in October 2022 and that the church leadership did not receive any letters notifying them of the designation process. Ms. McBryde commented that it is unclear how the building was designated historic because the Church has made numerous modifications to the building, including to the exterior, during its ownership. She explained that the Church is requesting that the designation be rescinded and believed the Church should have played a part in the original review and designation of the property. Ms. McBryde noted that, even for this meeting, the church leadership did not receive information on the review process

ownership. She explained that the Church is requesting that the designation be rescinded and believed the Church should have played a part in the original review and designation of the property. Ms. McBryde noted that, even for this meeting, the church leadership did not receive information on the review process that would have allowed the church leadership to prepare for it. She confirmed that they had been in contact with staff member Kim Chantry. Ms. McBryde reiterated they need to better understand the Historical Commission’s process for rescission as they wish to remove the historic designation from the property. • Ms. Cooperman asked Mr. Farnham to explain the process of designation and the roles of the Committee on Historic Designation and Historical Commission. Mr. Farnham summarized the roles and process. He noted that staff had provided information to the Church about the rescission process. Mr. Farnham said the staff can provide additional guidance to the representatives of the Church. He observed that the Church could ask to postpone the process in order to learn more about it before it moves forward. • Ms. Cooperman followed Mr. Farnham’s comments and stated that, prior to designation, the Committee had reviewed the nomination and recommended to the Historical Commission that the building met one or more Criteria for Designation and COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 24 MAY 2023 22 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION was worthy of designation. She said that the Historical Commission then designated the building, in part, based on the Committee’s recommendation. Ms. Cooperman asked Ms. McBryde if the Church wished to have further conversations with the staff about the process before the Committee makes a recommendation to the Historical Commission. The Committee will determine whether anything has changed since the designation, or new information is available that would alter the Committee’s original recommendation that the property is worthy of designation. o Ms. McBryde inquired if Ms. Cooperman meant that the Committee would proceed with the rescission. She asked for clarity on this point. o Ms. Cooperman replied that the Committee cannot rescind the designation. She opined that in order to recommend in favor of rescission, the Committee would need to have new information that is different than what they reviewed in the original nomination. She explained the information would need to demonstrate the property does not meet any of the Criteria for Designation under which it was originally nominated. Ms. Cooperman stressed

favor of rescission, the Committee would need to have new information that is different than what they reviewed in the original nomination. She explained the information would need to demonstrate the property does not meet any of the Criteria for Designation under which it was originally nominated. Ms. Cooperman stressed that, if the Church does not have any new information that would alter the understanding of the original Criteria, the Committee would not change its recommendation. • Ms. McBryde reiterated that the Church was never made aware of the consideration for designation. She said that the notice letters sent by the Historical Commission were either not received or never made their way to the Church leadership. If the Church had been aware of the nomination, it would have participated in the review process. She stated her belief that the designation process should be redone. o Ms. Cooperman commented that, if the Church’s aim is to start the process over, the best thing for the Committee to do is to proceed with its review. Ms. Cooperman replied that the Committee does not have a role in deciding if the nomination process should start over. She stated that, if the Historical Commission finds at its upcoming meeting that the Church did not have proper notice, the Historical Commission can decide to rerun the designation process. • Ms. Cooperman observed that, based on Ms. McBryde’s statements and questions, and the desire of the Church leaders to have the designation rescinded or have the Commission restart the designation process, the Committee should proceed with the review rather than recommend continuing it to a future meeting. o Ms. McBryde replied that she appreciated the Committee’s response to her concerns and questions regarding the rescission and designation processes. • Mr. Farnham said that a Historical Commission staff member can meet with her before 9 June 2023 meeting of the Historical Commission to provide an overview of the process. • Mr. Farnham, in response to public comments, stated that the property owner submitted the rescission request to the Historical Commission. • Ms. Milroy stated that she reviewed the rescission request packet provided by the staff. She observed that recent photographs of the building show that it appears as it did at the time of designation in 2018. Ms. Milroy continued that the Committee has received no new information that would alter her recommendation that the nomination showed

the rescission request packet provided by the staff. She observed that recent photographs of the building show that it appears as it did at the time of designation in 2018. Ms. Milroy continued that the Committee has received no new information that would alter her recommendation that the nomination showed that the property satisfied the Criteria for Designation in 2018. • Mr. Cohen agreed with Ms. Milroy’s comments. He said that neither the building nor the evidence before them has changed much since their 2018 review of the 1632 Poplar Street nomination for designation. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 24 MAY 2023 23 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION PUBLIC COMMENT: • Oscar Beisert stated that he nominated the property. He provided a summary of the building’s history and its significance. He spoke in support of maintaining the historic designation. • Stephen Peitzman spoke in support of the building’s historic significance and maintaining the historic designation of the property. • Judith Robinson spoke in support of maintaining the historic designation of the property. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Committee on Historic Designation found that: • The owner was not aware of the proposal to designate the church building in 2018. As a result, the owner did not participate in the review. • The owner has not presented new information that shows the property is not eligible for designation based on the Criteria for Designation presented in 2018. • The building appears as it did in 2018. No significant changes have occurred to the physical appearance that would disqualify for designation or maintenance of the designation. The Committee on Historic Designation concluded that: • No basis to rescind the designation for 1632 Poplar Street has been provided. No evidence has been presented that the building has lost the qualities that made it eligible for designation and no new information has been presented showing that it was not eligible for designation. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend denial of the rescission request. ITEM: 1632 Poplar St. MOTION: Denial of rescission request MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Milroy VOTE Committee Member Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Emily Cooperman, chair X Suzanna Barucco X Jeff Cohen X Bruce Laverty X Debbie Miller X Elizabeth Milroy X Total 5 1 ADJOURNMENT START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:00:00 The Committee on Historic Designation adjourned at 01:48 p.m. COMMITTEE

Milroy VOTE Committee Member Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Emily Cooperman, chair X Suzanna Barucco X Jeff Cohen X Bruce Laverty X Debbie Miller X Elizabeth Milroy X Total 5 1 ADJOURNMENT START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:00:00 The Committee on Historic Designation adjourned at 01:48 p.m. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 24 MAY 2023 24 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION ITEM: Adjournment MOTION: Adjourn MOVED BY: Barucco SECONDED BY: Miller VOTE Committee Member Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Emily Cooperman, chair X Suzanna Barucco X Jeff Cohen X Bruce Laverty X Debbie Miller X Elizabeth Milroy X Total 5 1 PLEASE NOTE: • Minutes of the Committee on Historic Designation are presented in action format. Additional information is available in the video recording for this meeting. The start time for each agenda item in the recording is noted. CRITERIA FOR DESIGNATION §14-1004. Designation. (1) Criteria for Designation. A building, complex of buildings, structure, site, object, or district may be designated for preservation if it: (a) Has significant character, interest, or value as part of the development, heritage, or cultural characteristics of the City, Commonwealth, or nation or is associated with the life of a person significant in the past; (b) Is associated with an event of importance to the history of the City, Commonwealth or Nation; (c) Reflects the environment in an era characterized by a distinctive architectural style; (d) Embodies distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style or engineering specimen; (e) Is the work of a designer, architect, landscape architect or designer, or professional engineer whose work has significantly influenced the historical, architectural, economic, social, or cultural development of the City, Commonwealth, or nation; (f) Contains elements of design, detail, materials, or craftsmanship that represent a significant innovation; (g) Is part of or related to a square, park, or other distinctive area that should be preserved according to a historic, cultural, or architectural motif; (h) Owing to its unique location or singular physical characteristic, represents an established and familiar visual feature of the neighborhood, community, or City; (i) Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in pre-history or history; or (j) Exemplifies the cultural, political, economic, social, or historical heritage of the community.