PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 1 THE MINUTES OF THE 742ND STATED MEETING OF THE PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION FRIDAY, 14 JUNE 2024, 9:00 A.M. REMOTE MEETING ON ZOOM ROBERT THOMAS, CHAIR CALL TO ORDER START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:00:00 Mr. Thomas, the Chair, called the meeting to order at 9:05 a.m. and announced the presence of a quorum. The following Commissioners joined him: Commissioner Present Absent Comment Robert Thomas, AIA, Chair (Architectural Historian) X Kimberly Washington, Esq., Vice Chair (Community Development Corporation) X Donna Carney (Philadelphia City Planning Commission) X Emily Cooperman, Ph.D., Committee on Historic Designation Chair (Historian) X Erin Kindt (Department of Public Property) X Sara Lepori (Commerce Department) X John P. Lech (Department of Licenses & Inspections) X John Mattioni, Esq. X Dan McCoubrey, AIA, LEED AP BD+C, Architectural Committee Chair (Architect) X Stephanie Michel (Community Organization) X Arrived 9:43 Matthew Treat (Department of Planning and Development) X The meeting was held remotely via Zoom video and audio-conferencing software. The following staff members were present: Jon Farnham, Executive Director Kim Chantry, Historic Preservation Planner III Laura DiPasquale, Historic Preservation Planner III Shannon Garrison, Historic Preservation Planner III Izzy Korostoff, Community Initiatives Specialist Ted Maust, Historic Preservation Planner II Allyson Mehley, Historic Preservation Planner II Leonard Reuter, Esq., Law Department Dan Shachar-Krasnoff, Historic Preservation Planner II Alex Till, Historic Preservation Planner II The following persons attended the online meeting: Allison Weiss, SoLo Germantown Civic Association Adrian Pietrzak Agata Reister, Landmark Architectural Design Alina Herzberg Andrew Biggin PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 2 Andy Wasserman Ann Marie Dimino Ben Honig Britt Chapman Carl Lysaght Christie Bloom Colin Murphy Cyn Lee Daniel Trubman David Fecteau, Philadelphia City Planning Commission David Orphanides, Esq. David Traub, Save Our Sites Deborah Gary, Society to Preserve Philadelphia African American Assets Diane Pyfer Diane Sweeney Doug Mooney, Philadelphia Archaeological Forum Drew Moyer Elizabeth Milroy Ethans Grossman Francine Sandrow Frederick Poindexter G.C. Seibert, Cresheim Green Associates Georgia Faino Gretchen Lindenfeldar Hanna Stark, Preservation Alliance Harrison Haas Hazel Lee Hillary Wittich Ian Toner Jacob Peck Jamie Angelo Jay Farrell Jay Ifert Jenn Patrino, Tierview Development John Scott John Walker Jonathan Hessney Joshua Zugerman Justino Navarro, Spring Garden Civic Association Katie Low Kevin Levy Kevin McMahon Kevin Hoekzema Kimberly Haas, Hidden City Philadelphia Len Shatz Lisa Ernst Lucy Davis Lynn Landes
Wittich Ian Toner Jacob Peck Jamie Angelo Jay Farrell Jay Ifert Jenn Patrino, Tierview Development John Scott John Walker Jonathan Hessney Joshua Zugerman Justino Navarro, Spring Garden Civic Association Katie Low Kevin Levy Kevin McMahon Kevin Hoekzema Kimberly Haas, Hidden City Philadelphia Len Shatz Lisa Ernst Lucy Davis Lynn Landes Mark Forester Mary Costello, Esq., City of Philadelphia Law Department Matthew McClure, Esq, Ballard Spahr PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 3 Maureen Gavin Megan Schmitt Michael Cunningham Michael Phillips, Esq., Klehr Harrison Michael Ramos Michaelle Bond Michelle Flamer Michiko Quinones, 1838 Black Metropolis Nancy Valente, Freedom Mortgage Noah Ostroff Oscar Beisert, Keeping Society Patricia Freeland, Spring Garden Civic Association Patrick Bayer Paul Steinke, Preservation Alliance Peter Furcht Philip Rakita Rich Gallagher Richard Beck Robert Hotes Robert Sher Robert Weinberg Rustin Ohler, Harman Deutsch Ohler Architects Sam Katovitch, Toner Architects Sara Pochedly, Toner Architects Scott Seibert, Cresheim Green Associates Sean Finnegan Stephanie Pennypacker Stephen Perzan Steven Peitzman Tina Marie Hartnett Todd Pitock Tom Bond Tyler Britten Veronica Blum Wesley Parrott Yvette Forrest ADOPTION OF MINUTES, 741ST STATED MEETING, 10 MAY 2024 START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:05:45 DISCUSSION: • Mr. Thomas asked the Commissioners, staff, and members of the public if they had any suggested additions or corrections to the minutes of the preceding meeting of the Historical Commission, the 741st Stated Meeting, held 10 May 2024. No comments were offered. ACTION: Mr. Thomas moved to adopt the minutes of the 741st Stated Meeting of the Philadelphia Historical Commission, held 10 May 2024. Ms. Washington seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 4 ITEM: Adoption of the Minutes of the 741st Stated Meeting of the PHC MOTION: Adopt minutes MOVED BY: Thomas SECONDED BY: Washington VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Kindt (DPD) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Treat (DPD) X Total 7 4 REQUESTS FOR CONTINUANCES ADDRESS: 2313 GREEN ST Proposal: Demolish garage, construct three-story residential building Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Laura and Anil Nanda Applicant: Lea Litvin, LO Design History: 1908; garage built 1954 Individual Designation: None District Designation: Spring Garden Historic District, Contributing, 10/11/2000 Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application proposes
ADDRESS: 2313 GREEN ST Proposal: Demolish garage, construct three-story residential building Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Laura and Anil Nanda Applicant: Lea Litvin, LO Design History: 1908; garage built 1954 Individual Designation: None District Designation: Spring Garden Historic District, Contributing, 10/11/2000 Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application proposes demolishing a non-historic garage and constructing a three-story residential building at the open rear area of 2313 Green Street. The new construction would face Wallace Street and would not connect to the historic building. The proposed building is planned as three stories tall and would contain five residential units. The proposed cladding material is a mix of red brick and gray metal standing-seam siding. Windows are proposed as single-light openings. A garage with a roll down door would be located on the first level facing Wallace Street. Views of the proposed new building are largely obscured by surrounding buildings, fencing, and landscaping. The most visible area of the building would be the north and west elevations. The north elevation would be visible from a driveway entry along Wallace Street. The west wall would be visible from Wallace Street during part of the year or if one or more trees were removed from the adjacent property. SCOPE OF WORK: • Demolish a non-historic two-story garage. • Construct a three-story building with a roof deck. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 5 STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include: • Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale, and proportion to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. o The 1954 garage building was constructed outside of the historic district’s period of significance (1901-1950) and is not physically connected to the historic building. Therefore, it is not considered contributing to the property and may be demolished, meeting Standard 9. o The size and scale of the proposed building is compatible with the historic building and district, meeting Standard 9. o The proportion and features of the window openings and single-light windows are not compatible with the overall historic district and do not meet Standard 9. o
meeting Standard 9. o The size and scale of the proposed building is compatible with the historic building and district, meeting Standard 9. o The proportion and features of the window openings and single-light windows are not compatible with the overall historic district and do not meet Standard 9. o While the red brick is compatible with the historic district, the dark standing seam siding is not. Although much of the new building will not be seen from the public right-of-way, owing to the visibility of the standing seam metal on the north and west walls. The application does not meet Standard 9. • 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 will be unimpaired. o Since the new construction is separated from the historic building, the application satisfies Standard 10. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Denial, pursuant to Standard 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend approval, provided additional brick is added to the west elevation, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 9 and 10. ACTION: See Below. WASHINGTON SQUARE WEST HISTORIC DISTRICT Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Multiple Nominator: Washington Square West Civic Association and Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia Staff Contact: Laura DiPasquale, laura.dipasquale@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate a large historic district comprised of 1,441 resources spanning approximately 26 city blocks in the Washington Square West neighborhood of Center City Philadelphia. The nomination ascribes various types of significance to the district, including social, architectural, cultural, and archaeological significance, arguing that the district satisfies Criteria for Designation A, C, E, F, I, and J. The nomination contends that the proposed Washington Square West historic district illustrates the development of Philadelphia’s residential and commercial core over more than two centuries, from the establishment of the Mikveh Israel Cemetery in 1740 until the solidification of the neighborhood as an LGBTQ+ community in the 1980s. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 6 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the Washington Square West Historic District satisfies Criteria for Designation A, C, E, F, I, and J. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the Washington Square West Historic
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the Washington Square West Historic District satisfies Criteria for Designation A, C, E, F, I, and J. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the Washington Square West Historic District satisfies Criteria for Designation A, C, E, F, I, and J. Following the Committee meeting, the staff provided a memo on Criterion I, which is cited for 21 vacant lots in the district but not applied to similar sites with existing structures. The staff suggests classifying 19 of the 21 sites as non-contributing because the nomination does not offer sufficient information to justify the contributing classifications. Vacant lots that are classified as non-contributing in historic districts are limited to review and comment jurisdiction as opposed to plenary jurisdiction by the Commission for properties with structures on them at the time of designation. START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:06:14 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Farnham presented the continuance requests to the Historical Commission. ACTION: Mr. Lech moved to continue the review of 2313 Green Street and the Washington Square West Historic District to the July 2024 meeting of the Historical Commission. Ms. Washington seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. ITEM: Continuance MOTION: Approve continuances MOVED BY: Lech SECONDED BY: Washington VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Kindt (DPD) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Treat (DPD) X Total 7 4 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 7 REPORT OF THE ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE, 28 MAY 2024 CONSENT AGENDA START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:14:17 DISCUSSION: • Mr. Thomas asked the Commissioners, staff, and public for comments on the Consent Agenda. None were offered. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. ACTION: Mr. Thomas moved to adopt the recommendation of the Architectural Committee for the application for 2040 Christian Street. Ms. Washington seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. ITEM: Consent Agenda MOTION: Adopt Architectural Committee recommendation for Consent Agenda item MOVED BY: Thomas SECONDED BY: Washington VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Kindt (DPD) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Treat (DPD)
Adopt Architectural Committee recommendation for Consent Agenda item MOVED BY: Thomas SECONDED BY: Washington VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Kindt (DPD) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Treat (DPD) X Total 7 4 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 8 AGENDA ADDRESS: 242 CHRISTIAN ST Proposal: Legalize door and basement entrance Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Olymphia Hankinson Applicant: Jason Ferreira, Superior Consulting Agency History: 1820 Individual Designation: 5/31/1966 District Designation: None Staff Contact: Kim Chantry, kim.chantry@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application proposes to legalize work performed without a building permit or Historical Commission’s review and approval. The work includes the addition of an excavated front basement entrance with railing, steps and a door, and the build-down and installation of front entry door. In 2022 and 2023, the Department of Licenses and Inspections issued several violations and a stop work order for unpermitted basement excavation and enlarging of openings at the rear. In April 2024, a consultant working for the property owner submitted this application seeking to legalize the unpermitted work. The front façade of 242 Christian Street has been without original or historically appropriate windows and doors since at least 1956, prior to historic designation, based on a photograph from that year. SCOPE OF WORK: • Legalize basement entrance and front door replacement. 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 construction of the basement entry removed historic material and altered historic features and spaces. The replacement of the front door with a smaller door in a built- down opening altered historic features and spaces. The work does not satisfy Standard 2. • Standard 6: Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. o The replacement of the front door with a smaller door in a built-down opening does not
requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. o The replacement of the front door with a smaller door in a built-down opening does not satisfy Standard 6. The new door does not replicate the historically appropriate door. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Denial of the legalization of the basement entry and replacement front door, pursuant to Standards 2 and 6. Approval of the basement entry if the basement door is replaced with a door that references the historic basement window and the basement window is replaced with a historically appropriate window, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standard 6. The staff can approve a historically appropriate front door, if such a door is proposed. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 9 recommend denial, pursuant to Standards 2 and 6. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:15:10 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Chantry presented the application to the Historical Commission. • No one represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • No one attended to represent the application at the Architectural Committee and Historical Commission meetings. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The construction of the basement entry removed historic material and altered historic features and spaces. The replacement of the front door with a smaller door in a built- down opening altered historic features and spaces. The work does not satisfy Standard 2. • The replacement of the front door with a smaller door in a built-down opening does not satisfy Standard 6. The new door does not replicate the historic door. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to deny the application, pursuant to Standards 2 and 6. Ms. Washington seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. ITEM: 242 Christian St MOTION: Denial MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Washington VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Kindt (DPD) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Treat (DPD) X Total 7 4 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 10 ADDRESS: 2040 CHRISTIAN ST Proposal: Convert church to
Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Kindt (DPD) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Treat (DPD) X Total 7 4 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 10 ADDRESS: 2040 CHRISTIAN ST Proposal: Convert church to residential building Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: 2040 Christian Street LLC/Tierview Development, Inc. Applicant: Ian Toner, Toner Architects History: 1870; Church of the Holy Apostles, Shiloh Baptist Church; 2030-38 Christian Street: 1903; Richard Newton Memorial Building; Duhring, Okie & Ziegler 2040 Christian Street: 1870; Church of the Holy Apostles, Shiloh Baptist Church; Frazer, Furness & Hewitt; tower added, 1901, G.W. & W.D. Hewitt Individual Designation: 11/6/1980 District Designation: None Staff Contact: Kim Chantry, kim.chantry@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application proposes to convert the former Church of the Holy Apostles, later Shiloh Baptist Church, and associated buildings to multi-unit residential use. Of the five buildings on the site, four are designated as historic, having been constructed and altered between 1868 and 1903. Fronting onto Montrose Street at the rear, the Phillips Brooks Memorial Building, to be known as the Boy Scout Building, is not designated as historic. The proposed exterior scope includes masonry repair and replacement, construction of an ADA ramp, insertion of skylights and dormers, and replacement of windows. New clear glazed aluminum windows are proposed in all locations where apartment units are located, including the church and Richard Newton Memorial Building. The main entryway of the complex adjacent to the Richard Newton Memorial Building is proposed to retain its existing leaded glass, as is the existing rose window at the narthex of the church. At its 10 November 2023 meeting, the Historical Commission reviewed an in-concept application for a nearly identical scope of work and voted to approve the application in-concept, pursuant to Standards 2 and 9, and the Accessibility Guideline Recommendation. The only design change to this application for final approval is the addition of a door in the non-historic one-story addition on the Richard Newton Memorial Building. This application has also been supplemented with window color samples. SCOPE OF WORK: • Convert church complex buildings to residential use. • Replace windows. • Insert skylights and dormers. • Replace asphalt shingles with Slateline asphalt shingles. • Repair and replace masonry. • Construct ADA ramp. • Demolish non-historic one-story addition at rear of church. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the
WORK: • Convert church complex buildings to residential use. • Replace windows. • Insert skylights and dormers. • Replace asphalt shingles with Slateline asphalt shingles. • Repair and replace masonry. • Construct ADA ramp. • Demolish non-historic one-story addition at rear of church. 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. • The proposed scope retains and preserves the overall historic character of the PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 11 church complex. • 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 exterior scope proposed to convert the buildings to residential use is minimal. The stained glass is being retained where possible. The stained glass which is to be removed shall be framed and backlit in display installations within the corridors of the building. • Accessibility Guideline | Recommended: Complying with barrier-free access requirements in such a manner that the historic building’s character-defining exterior features, interior spaces, features, and finishes, and features of the site and setting are preserved or impacted as little as possible. o The proposed ADA ramp allows for retention of and access through historic entrance doors. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval, pursuant to Standards 2, 9, and the Accessibility Guideline recommendation. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend approval, pursuant to Standards 2, 9, and the Accessibility Guideline. ACTION: See Consent Agenda. ADDRESS: 627 N 16TH ST Proposal: Construct addition Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: 627 N 16th LLC Applicant: Ian Toner, Toner Architects, Sam Katovitch, Anthony Mascieri History: 1875 Individual Designation: None District Designation: Spring Garden Historic District, Contributing, 10/11/2000 Staff Contact: Alex Till, alexander.till@phila.gov BACKGROUND: This application proposes to construct a three-story rear addition on an Italianate twin at a contributing property in the Spring Garden Historic District. It also proposes to cut out a portion of the sidewalk in front of the building and expand an existing window opening
Contact: Alex Till, alexander.till@phila.gov BACKGROUND: This application proposes to construct a three-story rear addition on an Italianate twin at a contributing property in the Spring Garden Historic District. It also proposes to cut out a portion of the sidewalk in front of the building and expand an existing window opening for a new basement egress well. The building was constructed in 1875 and is three stories tall with a pitched roof, prominent cornice, and marble water table. The addition will be located at the rear of the building and extend to the north property line while leaving a narrow space on its south side. The application proposes to demolish the three-story rear wall of the building along with a one-story rear shed addition and construct a new addition at the rear of the building that will expand the extend approximately 17 feet beyond the existing rear wall and sit slightly higher than the current rear ell of the historic building. It will be clad in brick on the walls that are visible from nearby Wallace St and fiber cement panels on the walls that face the neighbor to the north and shared alleyway to the west. The rear of the building is visible both obliquely from the front on 16th Street looking down the side of the building and prominently from the side and rear along neighboring Wallace Street and the addition will be visible from both streets. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 12 The applicants submitted an earlier application for an addition that was significantly larger, extended to both north and south property lines, and featured a much larger blank wall presented to the Wallace Street point of view, that was denied by the Historical Commission at its 12 April 2024 meeting. Since their first proposal, they have reduced the size of the addition by more than half, pulled it away from the south property line, proposed using brick cladding in place of fiber cement panels for portions of the addition, and added windows to the south wall based on previous comments from the Architectural Committee and Historical Commission. SCOPE OF WORK: • Construct a three-story rear addition. • Add a basement egress well. 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
comments from the Architectural Committee and Historical Commission. SCOPE OF WORK: • Construct a three-story rear addition. • Add a basement egress well. 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 With the revisions, the size, scale and proportion, and massing of the proposed addition satisfy Standard 9. Philadelphia has a long tradition of enlarging rowhouses and twins by extending the rear ells. Pushing the addition to the north, away from the south property line, allows for windows in the south façade of the addition, improving its appearance from the public right-of-way. o The proposed fiber cement panels on the north and east walls of the addition do not meet Standard 9. The material is not compatible with the historic materials or features of the building. The cladding should be replaced with an alternate material like lap siding that is more appropriate for a rear addition on a historic building. o The proposed basement egress well will satisfy Standard 9 if the window is designed to include a horizontal mullion at the position of the former sill so that the upper piece of glass replicates the size and proportion of historic basement window. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends approval, provided the cladding material is changed to a lap siding instead of panels for the north and east walls of the addition and the front egress window is designed to appear like the historic basement window above grade, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standard 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Standard 9. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:18:09 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Till presented the application to the Historical Commission. • Architect Ian Toner represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Andrew Biggin, the co-owner of the adjacent property at 629 N. 16th Street, opposed the application. He described the siding choices as being out of character with the district and opposed the placement of the addition along the north property line. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024
PUBLIC COMMENT: • Andrew Biggin, the co-owner of the adjacent property at 629 N. 16th Street, opposed the application. He described the siding choices as being out of character with the district and opposed the placement of the addition along the north property line. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 13 • Lisa Ernst, the co-owner of the adjacent property at 629 N. 16th Street, opposed the application. She was also opposed to the placement of the addition along the north property line. • Justino Navarro of the Spring Garden Community Development Corporation and Spring Garden Civic Association opposed the application. He agreed that the zoning rules were dictating the placement of the proposed addition in this case and stated that the Spring Garden Civic Association would also support the applicants in seeking a zoning variance to overcome this problem. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The revised design is an improvement over the original design and features a reduced size that fits better with the historic massing of the historic building and more appropriate brick cladding materials and lap siding. • The positioning of the proposed addition is along the north property line as opposed to the south adjacent to its attached neighbor as is typically seen on twin homes such as this one. • The atypical placement of the addition along the north property line is being proposed owing to zoning requirements and the applicants could apply for a zoning variance to avoid these requirements. • The Historical Commission could write a letter to the Zoning Board in support of a variance for this property to allow for a more typical and historically appropriate rear addition. • The addition will be highly visible from the public right-of-way on Wallace Street and somewhat visible down the side of the house from 16th Street. • If the applicants submit a new application with the addition shifted over to align with the property line to the south, the staff can likely approve that application. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The proposed new addition does not meet Standard 9. The proposed alignment along the north property line is not compatible with the historic massing and scale of the property or district. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to deny the application, pursuant to Standard 9. Ms. Cooperman seconded the motion, which
• The proposed new addition does not meet Standard 9. The proposed alignment along the north property line is not compatible with the historic massing and scale of the property or district. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to deny the application, pursuant to Standard 9. Ms. Cooperman seconded the motion, which passed by a vote of 6 to 1 with 1 abstention. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 14 ITEM: 627 N 16TH ST MOTION: Denial MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Cooperman VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Kindt (DPD) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Treat (DPD) X Total 6 1 1 0 3 ADDRESS: 613 S HANCOCK ST Proposal: Construct addition Review Requested: Review In Concept Owner: Mark and Sally Forester Applicant: Ian Toner, Toner Architects History: 1765; John Fullerton House Individual Designation: 6/24/1958 District Designation: None Staff Contact: Daniel Shachar-Krasnoff, daniel.shachar-krasnoff@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This in-concept application proposes to demolish a highly altered rear ell and construct a rear addition that encloses a portion of the rear of the main block at 613 S. Hancock Street. No work is proposed to the front façade. The addition features a side-gable roof with skylights and facades clad in cementitious panels with one-over-one windows. The ridge of the rear addition is taller than the main block but will not be visible from S. Hancock Street. The rear ell of 613 S. Hancock Street faces the 600 block of S. Howard Street, a short, dead- end alley used primarily for parking. Three non-historic buildings with first-floor garages stand on the east side of S. Howard Street, across from the rear of 613 S. Hancock Street. The rears of the buildings facing the west side of S. Howard Street have been significantly altered. There is a history of building demolition on the 600 block of S. Howard Street that has diminished its historic significance. The 1917 Sanborn map shows a now demolished five-story building that would have obscured the view of the rear of 613 S. Hancock Street. SCOPE OF WORK: • Demolish rear ell • Construct three-story rear addition STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF
the view of the rear of 613 S. Hancock Street. SCOPE OF WORK: • Demolish rear ell • Construct three-story rear addition STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 15 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 No work is proposed to the historic front façade. The rear of 600 S. Hancock Street, including the ell, is highly altered. • 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 scale of the proposed addition is large, but it does not diminish the designated properties facing S. Hancock Street and there is no historic fabric on S. Howard Street. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends approval in concept, pursuant to Standards 2 and 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Standard 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Standard 9. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:55:53 PRESENTERS: • Dan Shachar-Krasnoff presented the application to the Historical Commission. • Sam Katovitch of Toner Architects represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The proposal addresses water run-off. • The proposal will be subject to a final review by the Architectural Committee and Historical Commission • The additional review will allow for further consideration of the adequacy of the front gutter and other drainage components to manage storm water. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The in-concept proposal satisfies Standards 2 and 9. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to approve the revised application in concept, pursuant to Standards 2 and 9. Ms. Carney seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 16 ITEM: 613 S Hancock St MOTION: Approval in concept MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Carney VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse
Standards 2 and 9. Ms. Carney seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 16 ITEM: 613 S Hancock St MOTION: Approval in concept MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Carney VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Kindt (DPD) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Treat (DPD) X Total 8 3 ADDRESS: 208-12 VINE ST Proposal: Construct building Review Requested: In-Concept Approval Owner: John Stortz Applicant: Agata Reister, Landmark Architectural Design History: Existing structures approved for demolition, 2023 Individual Designation: 12/31/1984 District Designation: Old City Historic District, Contributing, 12/12/2003 Staff Contact: Ted Maust, theodore.maust@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application proposes constructing a six-story building with roof deck. The Historical Commission previously approved the demolition of the former John Stortz and Son complex of buildings, pending the approval of plans for a new building. The proposed building would include 35 residential units and a seven-car garage accessed from New Street. The exterior of the building would be clad in a mix of brick, vertical metal siding, and fiber cement siding, with metal bands and cornices. Windows would be metal-clad wood. SCOPE OF WORK: • Construct a six-story building with roof deck. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: • 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 massing of the proposed building is compatible in scale with the immediate surroundings, which is comprised of primarily newly constructed apartment buildings. o The use of brick along Vine Street responds to the immediate surroundings as well as the historic district as a whole. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 17 o Using more brick on the secondary elevations, particularly along New Street, would make this building fit better into the surrounding district. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends approval, provided the cladding materials are refined, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standard 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, owing to incompleteness. START
particularly along New Street, would make this building fit better into the surrounding district. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends approval, provided the cladding materials are refined, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standard 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, owing to incompleteness. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 01:02:10 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Maust presented the application to the Historical Commission. • Architect Agata Reister represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Oscar Beisert of the Keeping Society commented in opposition to the application. • Jacob Peck commented in support of the application. • Steven Peitzman commented in opposition to the application. • David Traub of Save Our Sites commented in opposition to the application. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The area next to the garage door along New Street could use some articulation. • The sixth floor of the elevation along New Street should be further differentiated from the rest of the facade. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The scale of the project meets Standard 9. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to approve the revised application in concept, pursuant to Standard 9. Ms. Carney seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 18 ITEM: 208-12 Vine St MOTION: Approval In Concept MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Carney VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Kindt (DPD) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Treat (DPD) X Total 8 3 ADDRESS: 7600 GERMANTOWN AVE Proposal: Construct new buildings Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Cresheim Green Associates Applicant: Scott Seibert, Cresheim Green Associates History: 1916, St. Martin's Coal Company Office; 1966 rear addition Individual Designation: 8/13/2021 District Designation: None Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov BACKGROUND: This application seeks final approval for the construction of eight single-family attached houses and a parking structure at 7600 Germantown Avenue. The proposed development will stand behind the former St. Martin’s Coal Company Office. Although the full parcel was designated in 2021, the nomination focused on the 1916 Colonial Revival style building directly fronting Germantown Avenue. No part of the historic building will be demolished or moved as part of the new construction. The eight three-story buildings will have contemporary fenestration and
Company Office. Although the full parcel was designated in 2021, the nomination focused on the 1916 Colonial Revival style building directly fronting Germantown Avenue. No part of the historic building will be demolished or moved as part of the new construction. The eight three-story buildings will have contemporary fenestration and be clad in yellow-brown brick and neutral tone stucco. The gable roofs will be green roofs. Windows and doors will be aluminum. In between the historic building at the front of the property and the new houses, a metal frame parking structure is proposed with rooftop solar panels. The parking structure will be set back approximately 10 feet from the historic building’s 1966 addition. As part of the overall redevelopment of the site, the historic building will be repurposed for a new use. The rehabilitation of the historic building is not part of this application. Historically, the narrow lot behind the office building has served industrial uses. Images and maps from the early twentieth century show coal bins and related company structures along the length of the property. This property is adjacent to a former rail line that allowed coal to be delivered directly to St. Martin’s Coal Company. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 19 SCOPE OF WORK: • Construct seven-story building. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include: • Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. o The proposed new construction does not alter or connect with the historic building. Historically, the site was populated by various industrial type structures. Therefore, the addition of a parking structure and new residential homes does not have a negative impact on the historic character of the 1916 building. The massing, size, scale, and materials are compatible with the overall site. In general, the proposed application meets Standard 9. • 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 will be unimpaired. The proposed
site. In general, the proposed application meets Standard 9. • 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 will be unimpaired. The proposed new construction does not alter or connect with the historic building. Historically, the site was populated by various industrial type structures. Therefore, the addition of a parking structure and new residential homes does not have a negative impact on the historic character of the 1916 building. The massing, size, scale, and materials are compatible with the overall site. In general, the proposed application meets Standard 9. • The proposed new construction could be removed from the historic site in the future, leaving all surrounding contributing structures intact; therefore, the proposal meets Standard 10. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends approval, pursuant to Standards 9 and 10. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend that the Historical Commission consider this an in-concept application, not an application for final approval. The Architectural Committee suggested that the applicant reconsider the height of the new buildings relative to the historic building, reconsider the parking structure with solar panels, and provide more detailed drawings of the elevations, materials, and window sizes. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 01:47:15 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Mehley presented the application to the Historical Commission. • Developers Scott Seibert and G.C. Seibert and architect Jim Cassidy represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Oscar Beisert spoke in support of the project. He commented that the removal of the proposed solar parking structure was a visual improvement. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 20 HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The revised application removed the parking structure with solar panels from the proposed scope of work. The residential building closest to the historic building and Germantown Avenue was repositioned to allow for a further setback of the highest point of the roof. These two revisions addressed the Architectural Committee’s key concerns. • The proposed project is an excellent reuse of the industrial site. • A parking structure with solar panels could be added to the site in the future if the design was revised to show a lighter structure and refined details. They noted that objection to this was
key concerns. • The proposed project is an excellent reuse of the industrial site. • A parking structure with solar panels could be added to the site in the future if the design was revised to show a lighter structure and refined details. They noted that objection to this was not related to the solar panel array but its close proximity to the historic building and the heavier, industrial design shown in the original application. • Redeveloping the property presents numerous challenges including extensive review by the Philadelphia Water Department (PWD). The Commissioners acknowledged that specific design changes at this point in the project, such as altering the gable roof pitch, would trigger new PWD reviews that have already been completed. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The proposed new construction does not alter or connect with the historic building. Historically, the site was populated by various industrial type structures. The revised application shows landscaping and buffer space between the historic building and new construction. Therefore, the addition of new residential homes does not have a negative impact on the historic character of the 1916 building. The massing, size, scale, and materials are compatible with the overall site. In general, the proposed application meets Standard 9. • The proposed new construction could be removed from the historic site in the future, leaving all surrounding contributing structures intact; therefore, the proposal meets Standard 10. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to approve the revised application, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 9 and 10. Ms. Washington seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 21 ITEM: 7600 Germantown Ave MOTION: Approve as revised MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Washington VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Kindt (DPD) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Treat (DPD) X Total 8 3 ADDRESS: 341 N FRONT ST Proposal: Construct three-story addition on three-story building Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: John Scorsone Applicant: Brett Harman, Harman Deutsch Ohler Architecture History: 2002 District Designation: Old City Historic District, Non-contributing, 12/12/2003 Individual Designation: None Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov OVERVIEW: The property at 341 N. Front Street is a three-story, two-bay, brick, vernacular house constructed ca. 2002 and is classified as non-contributing
John Scorsone Applicant: Brett Harman, Harman Deutsch Ohler Architecture History: 2002 District Designation: Old City Historic District, Non-contributing, 12/12/2003 Individual Designation: None Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov OVERVIEW: The property at 341 N. Front Street is a three-story, two-bay, brick, vernacular house constructed ca. 2002 and is classified as non-contributing in the Old City Historic District. The upper bays at the N. Front Street façade appear to be clad in vinyl siding. The ground-story of the rear or Water Street façade is also brick and has a garage, with the upper floors clad in vinyl siding. A deck and railing are visible on the roof of the second story. This application proposes to construct a three-story addition on top of the existing building. The third story of the N. Front façade is proposed to be reconstructed and clad in a gray brick veneer to match existing. Aluminum composite panels are proposed to clad the upper floors. At the rear or Water Street façade, the floors of the addition are proposed to be clad in the same aluminum composite panels. Covered balconies are proposed at the top floors of both the N. Front and Water Street facades. Glass guardrails are proposed throughout. Aluminum-clad wood windows are also proposed throughout both facades. A similar application was reviewed by the Architectural Committee and Historical Commission in 2022. The Historical Commission approved the application in May 2022 and the approved scheme is shown in the current application. This review focuses on the revisions to the approved version, specifically to the cladding materials and windows. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 22 SCOPE OF WORK: • Construct three-story addition on a three-story building. 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 Because this structure is not historic fabric on this structure, no historic material will be destroyed, satisfying Standard 9. o The proposal changes the red brick to dark gray brick and aluminum panels on the front and rear facades. The window placement and configuration
the property and its environment. o Because this structure is not historic fabric on this structure, no historic material will be destroyed, satisfying Standard 9. o The proposal changes the red brick to dark gray brick and aluminum panels on the front and rear facades. The window placement and configuration have also been updated. The revisions as proposed are not compatible in terms of scale, fenestration, and materials with the district as a whole. For these reasons, the proposal does not satisfy Standard 9. • Standard 10: New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall 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 There is no historic fabric to protect, therefore the proposal satisfies Standard 10. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Denial, pursuant to Standard 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Standard 9. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 02:10:30 PRESENTERS: • Ms. DiPasquale presented the application to the Historical Commission. • Architect Rustin Ohler represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The application was revised to include a reduced cast-stone base and removal of a front-façade, third-floor window. The revisions were based on the Architectural Committee’s comments at the June 2024 meeting. • Although photographs of nearby buildings with similar materials were included in the application, the Commissioners observed that the buildings were either on a different street or outside the boundary of the historic district. They observed that the 300 block of N. Front Street is primarily composed of red brick buildings. • The configuration of the third-floor windows on the front façade is not compatible with the historic windows in the district. However, the owner has privacy concerns because the windows are located in shower areas. • All changes in the proposed design could be approved with the exception of the brick color. The gray brick must be red to ensure compatibility with the Old City Historic PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 23 District. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The application could satisfy Standard 9 if the brick color is revised to red to allow for better compatibility with the historic district. • The application satisfies Standard 10 as there is
14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 23 District. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The application could satisfy Standard 9 if the brick color is revised to red to allow for better compatibility with the historic district. • The application satisfies Standard 10 as there is no historic fabric to protect. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to approve the revised application, provided red brick, not gray, is used, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standard 9. Ms. Washington seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. ITEM: 341 N FRONT ST MOTION: Approval, provided brick is red MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Washington VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Kindt (DPD) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Treat (DPD) X Total 8 3 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 22 MAY 2024 ADDRESS: 3343 W SCHOOL HOUSE LN Name of Resource: Samuel Tobias Wagner House Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Thomas Jefferson University Nominator: East Falls Historical Society Staff Contact: Laura DiPasquale, laura.dipasquale@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 3343 W. School House Lane as historic and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the stone and shingle house designed by Horace Trumbauer for Samuel Tobias Wagner in 1896 is significant under Criteria for Designation D, E, and J. Under Criterion D, the nomination asserts that the property embodies distinguishing characteristics of the Queen Anne and Shingle styles and was designed by prominent Gilded Age architect Horace Trumbauer, satisfying Criterion E. The nomination further asserts that the property is significant under Criterion J as an example of the country estates that once lined West School House Lane. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 24 property at 3343 W. School House Lane satisfies Criteria D and E, but not Criterion J. The nomination admits that the house and ownership are aberrant for the street; simply being constructed along it does not necessarily mean it is significant in the development of the community. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 3343 W. School House
and ownership are aberrant for the street; simply being constructed along it does not necessarily mean it is significant in the development of the community. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 3343 W. School House Lane satisfies Criteria for Designation D and E. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 02:26:12 PRESENTERS: • Ms. DiPasquale presented the nomination to the Historical Commission. • Steven Peitzman represented the nomination. • No one represented the property owner. Ms. DiPasquale noted that a representative of the property owner had informed the Historical Commission that the owner did not intend to oppose the designation or to participate in the reviews. PUBLIC COMMENT: • David Traub of Save Our Sites supported the nomination. • Oscar Beisert of the Keeping Society supported the nomination. • Allison Weiss of SoLo Civic Association supported the nomination. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The house was designed by Horace Trumbauer for Samuel Tobias Wagner in 1896 and is similar to other residential designs of Trumbauer in Overbrook Farms, St. Davids, and Wayne. • The house is unusual along Schoolhouse Lane in terms of earlier and later development. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The nomination demonstrates that the property embodies distinguishing characteristics of the Queen Anne and Shingle styles, satisfying Criterion D. • The nomination demonstrates that the property is the work of Horace Trumbauer, an architect whose work significantly influenced the development of the City, satisfying Criterion E. • The nomination does not make a cogent argument for the satisfaction of Criterion J. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 3343 W. School House Lane satisfies Criteria for Designation D and E and to designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Washington seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 25 ITEM: 3343 W. SCHOOL HOUSE LN MOTION: Designate; Criteria D and E MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Washington VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Kindt (DPD) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Treat (DPD) X Total 8 3 OLD
D and E MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Washington VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Kindt (DPD) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Treat (DPD) X Total 8 3 OLD BUSINESS ADDRESS: 1424-26 CHESTNUT ST Name of Resource: Jacob Reed’s Sons’ Store, Main Sales Floor Review: Reconsider Designation on Remand Property Owner: Sunny Spring LLC Appellant: Michael Phillips, Esq., Klehr Harrison Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes the designation of the first-floor interior of the building at 1424-26 Chestnut Street, historically known as the Main Sales Floor of the Jacob Reed’s Sons’ Store, for a second time. The Historical Commission first designated the interior in May 2022. The owner of the property appealed the designation to the Court of Common Pleas, which vacated it and remanded the nomination to the Historical Commission for a new review. The Historical Commission designated the exterior of the building in 1966. The nomination argues that the interior satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, E, and F. It argues under Criterion E that the Main Sales Floor of the Jacob Reed’s Sons’ Store is the primary public interior space in this landmark building designed by prominent Philadelphia architect William L. Price for Alan H. Reed, successor to one of the leading menswear merchants of the nineteenth century in Philadelphia. Under Criteria C and D, the nomination contends that the store, built in 1904 and 1905, was the first commercial building in Philadelphia constructed of reinforced concrete, a structural system expressed by the public interior space of the Main Sales Floor. The nomination also argues that the Main Sales Floor is also the only major Arts and Crafts style commercial interior in Philadelphia, serving as a significant early example of Price’s influential ideas on the appropriate expression of materials, structure, and labor. Finally, under Criterion F, the nomination asserts that the interior space features craftsmanship and artistry in the form of tilework from Henry Chapman Mercer’s Moravian Pottery and murals by local artist Gertrude Monaghan, which reflect Price’s thinking on architecture and its relationship with ornamentation. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 26 The Committee on Historic Designation reviewed the nomination for a second time in November 2022 and voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates
Gertrude Monaghan, which reflect Price’s thinking on architecture and its relationship with ornamentation. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 26 The Committee on Historic Designation reviewed the nomination for a second time in November 2022 and voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the interior satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, E, and F. The second review of the nomination by the Historical Commission has been on hold at the request of the property owner since late 2022 but is ready to proceed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the interior main floor of 1424-26 Chestnut Street satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, E and F. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the first-floor interior of the building at 1424-26 Chestnut Street, historically known as the Main Sales Floor of the Jacob Reed’s Sons’ Store, satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, E, and F and should be designated as historic and listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 02:36:00 PRESENTERS: • Ms. DiPasquale presented the nomination to the Historical Commission. • Hanna Stark and Paul Steinke of the Preservation Alliance and Kevin McMahon represented the nomination. • Attorney Michael Phillips represented the property owner. PUBLIC COMMENT: • David Traub supported the nomination. • Oscar Beisert of the Keeping Society supported the nomination. • Steven Peitzman supported the nomination. • Allison Weiss of SoLo Germantown Civic Association supported the nomination. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The owner of the property appealed the interior designation to the Court of Common Pleas. In its decision, the court vacated the designation but notified the owner that the nomination was being remanded to the Historical Commission for another consideration. • The Main Sales Floor interior space is one of the most important interiors of this period in Philadelphia. • The number of interior spaces listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places is small. If designated, this would only be the fifth designated interior space on the Register and the second privately owned commercial space. • Although the interior designation would put limitations on the types of changes a new tenant can enact within the space, it would not prohibit a retail business from operating successfully as
would only be the fifth designated interior space on the Register and the second privately owned commercial space. • Although the interior designation would put limitations on the types of changes a new tenant can enact within the space, it would not prohibit a retail business from operating successfully as previous businesses in the retail space have shown. The historic integrity of the space could be seen as an asset to attract retail tenants to the property rather than a burden. • The Historical Commission’s Rules and Regulations provide guidance for the staff, Architectural Committee, and Historical Commission when reviewing alterations to interior spaces. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 27 The Historical Commission concluded that: • The Main Sales Floor of 1424-26 Chestnut Street is the only major Arts and Crafts- style commercial interior in Philadelphia, satisfying Criterion C. • Constructed between 1904 and 1905, 1424-26 Chestnut Street was the first commercial buildings in Philadelphia constructed of reinforced concrete, a structural system that is expressed by the public interior space of the Main Sales Floor, satisfying Criterion D. • The Main Sales Floor was designed by prominent Philadelphia architect William L. Price and serves as a significant early example of Price’s influential ideas on the appropriate expression of materials, structure, and labor, satisfying Criterion E. • The Main Sales Floor features craftsmanship and artistry in the form of tilework from Henry Chapman Mercer’s Moravian Pottery and murals by local artist Gertrude Monaghan, satisfying Criterion F. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the interior of the Main Sales Floor at 1424-26 Chestnut Street satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, E, and F and to designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Carney seconded the motion, which passed by a vote of 7 to 0. ITEM: 1424-26 Chestnut St MOTION: Designate; Criteria C, D, E, and F MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Carney VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Kindt (DPD) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Treat (DPD) X Total 7 4 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 28 ADJOURNMENT START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 03:31:50 ACTION: At 12:49 p.m., Ms. Cooperman
Kindt (DPD) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Treat (DPD) X Total 7 4 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 28 ADJOURNMENT START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 03:31:50 ACTION: At 12:49 p.m., Ms. Cooperman moved to adjourn. Ms. Washington seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. ITEM: Adjournment MOTION: Adjourn MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Washington VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Kindt (DPD) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Treat (DPD) X Total 8 3 PLEASE NOTE: • Minutes of the Philadelphia Historical Commission and its advisory committees are presented in action format. Additional information is available in the video recording for this meeting. The start time for each agenda item in the recording is noted. • Application materials and staff overviews are available on the Historical Commission’s website, www.phila.gov/historical. CRITERIA FOR DESIGNATION §14-1004. Designation. (1) Criteria for Designation. A building, complex of buildings, structure, site, object, or district may be designated for preservation if it: (a) Has significant character, interest, or value as part of the development, heritage, or cultural characteristics of the City, Commonwealth, or nation or is associated with the life of a person significant in the past; (b) Is associated with an event of importance to the history of the City, Commonwealth or Nation; (c) Reflects the environment in an 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, PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 14 JUNE 2024 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 29 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
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.