Historical Commission — Apr 10, 2015

PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2015 1 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES THE MINUTES OF THE 632 ND STATED MEETING OF THE PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION FRIDAY, 10 APRIL 2015 ROOM 18-029, 1515 ARCH STREET SAM SHERMAN, CHAIR PRESENT Sam Sherman Jr., chair Richardson Dilworth III, Ph.D. Dominique Hawkins, AIA, NCARB, LEED AP, chair Rosalie Leonard, Esq., Office of City Council President Melissa Long, Office of Housing & Community Development John Mattioni, Esq. Thomas McDade, Department of Public Property Sara Merriman, Commerce Department R. David Schaaf, RA, Philadelphia City Planning Commission Robert Thomas, AIA Betty Turner, M.A. Jonathan E. Farnham, Executive Director Randal Baron, Historic Preservation Planner III Kim Broadbent, Historic Preservation Planner I Erin Cote, Historic Preservation Planner II Laura DiPasquale, Historic Preservation Planner I ALSO PRESENT John Manton Jessica Resinger, Joseph B. Callaghan, Inc. Bryan Hanes, Studio Bryan Hanes Rebecca Klein, Studio Bryan Hanes Theresa Al Damlouji, Al Damlouji + Parker Architects Patrick Grossi, Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia Stephen Maffei, Abitare Design Logan Dry, Abitare Design Steve D’Agostino Georgene Parks Steven Cobb, Office of Councilman Johnson Leonard F. Reuter, Esq. Richard Thom PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2015 2 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES CALL TO ORDER Mr. Sherman, the chair, called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. Commissioners Dilworth, Hawkins, Leonard, Long, Mattioni, McDade, Merriman, Schaaf, Thomas, and Turner joined him. MINUTES OF THE 631 ST STATED MEETING OF THE PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION ACTION: Ms. Leonard moved to adopt the minutes of the 631st Stated Meeting of the Philadelphia Historical Commission, held 13 March 2015. Ms. Turner seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. THE REPORT OF THE ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE, 24 MARCH 2015 Dominique Hawkins, Chair CONSENT AGENDA Mr. Farnham introduced the consent agenda and explained that it included applications for 2026 Rittenhouse Square, 3220-60 South Street, and 1631-37 Arch Street. Mr. Sherman asked if any Commissioners had comments on the Consent Agenda. No one offered comments. Mr. Sherman asked if the audience had comments on the Consent Agenda. No one offered comments. ACTION: Ms. Merriman moved to adopt the recommendations of the Architectural Committee for the applications for 2026 Rittenhouse Square, 3220-60 South Street, and 1631-37 Arch Street. Mr. Schaaf seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. AGENDA ADDRESS: 2309 MADISON SQ Project: Legalize windows Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Jack Wallace and Georgene Parks Applicant: Georgene Parks History: 1872; Charles Leslie, developer

Architectural Committee for the applications for 2026 Rittenhouse Square, 3220-60 South Street, and 1631-37 Arch Street. Mr. Schaaf seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. AGENDA ADDRESS: 2309 MADISON SQ Project: Legalize windows Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Jack Wallace and Georgene Parks Applicant: Georgene Parks History: 1872; Charles Leslie, developer Individual Designation: 9/28/1971 District Designation: None Staff Contact: Randal Baron, randal.baron@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend that the vinyl windows do not satisfy Standard 6. OVERVIEW: This application proposes to legalize the installation of vinyl windows on the front façade of the house at 2309 Madison Square. The house had vinyl windows for many years before it was recently damaged by fire. The owners hired a contractor to repair the building after the fire. The homeowners’ contract for the rehabilitation work stated that the contractor was responsible for obtaining all necessary permits and approvals. However, the contractor did not obtain permits and approvals, installed square-head vinyl windows in arched openings, and has refused to correct the illegal work. The contractor was paid with insurance proceeds following the fire. The owners claim that replacing the windows with the historically appropriate windows would create a financial hardship and have submitted documentation seeking an unnecessary hardship exemption. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2015 3 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES When an application claims unnecessary hardship, the Rules & Regulations direct the staff to confidentially review tax and other records documenting the applicant’s financial circumstances and then certify whether the applicant is eligible for an unnecessary hardship exemption. The Rules stipulate that the Architectural Committee “shall limit its review to design and refer the matter to the Commission.” The staff has reviewed documentation of the owners’ income and extraordinary medical expenses and certifies that the owners qualify for an exemption under the unnecessary hardship provision. The staff also contends that the vinyl windows do not satisfy Standard 6 of the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. DISCUSSION: Mr. Baron presented the application to the Historical Commission. Property owner Georgene Parks and Steven Cobb, Esq., Director of Legislation for Councilman Kenyatta Johnson, represented the application. Ms. Merriman commented that the current vinyl windows clearly do not satisfy Standard 6; she noted, however, that the staff had certified that replacing the windows would constitute an unnecessary hardship for the property owner. She asked about fashioning a motion that would legalize

Councilman Kenyatta Johnson, represented the application. Ms. Merriman commented that the current vinyl windows clearly do not satisfy Standard 6; she noted, however, that the staff had certified that replacing the windows would constitute an unnecessary hardship for the property owner. She asked about fashioning a motion that would legalize the current windows during the current owner’s possession of the house, and also about monitoring and enforcing the illegal condition once the ownership changed. Mr. Baron responded that Ms. Parks intends to will the property to a relative; the motion might stipulate that the windows are legalized until “such time as the property passes by deed.” Mr. Farnham responded that the staff will monitor the ownership of the property and address the windows with the new owner when it reviews the first application after the change in ownership. Mr. Baron noted that the current windows may require replacement before the ownership change; in that case, the staff could review the proposed windows to ensure that they satisfy the Standards. Ms. Parks stated that the property shall remain in her family. She noted that the house had similar vinyl windows when it was purchased in 1978, and the majority of other houses on the block have vinyl windows. She explained that her house suffered from a fire. A contractor installed new vinyl windows to match the windows in the house prior to the fire. ACTION: Ms. Merriman moved to legalize the front façade windows until such time as the property passes by deed to another owner. Ms. Leonard seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2015 4 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ADDRESS: 2026 RITTENHOUSE SQ Project: Construct rear addition Review Requested: Review In Concept Owner: CFNV Charitable Real Estate Applicant: A. Charles Peruto, Peruto Development, LLC History: 1900 Individual Designation: None District Designation: Rittenhouse Fitler Residential Historic District, Contributing, 2/8/1995 Staff Contact: Randal Baron, randal.baron@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend approval in concept, provided that mock-ups of the addition and deck railing demonstrate that they will be inconspicuous from the public right-of-way, pursuant to Standard 9 and the Roofs Guideline. OVERVIEW: This in-concept application proposes to convert a former carriage house or garage into a residence. The applicant proposes building a two-story rooftop addition set back 40 feet from the front façade. Much of the roof would be demolished

the public right-of-way, pursuant to Standard 9 and the Roofs Guideline. OVERVIEW: This in-concept application proposes to convert a former carriage house or garage into a residence. The applicant proposes building a two-story rooftop addition set back 40 feet from the front façade. Much of the roof would be demolished for this addition as well as a sunken deck, which would sit back 16 feet 3 inches from the front façade. The applicant proposes to retain the front 16 feet of the roof structure, which would hide the addition and deck. ACTION: See Consent Agenda. ADDRESS: 418 AND 420 WOOD ST Project: Demolish non-historic rear, rehabilitate and add to building, construct building Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: William Nadu Applicant: Logan Dry, Abitare Design Studio History: 1750; third floor added, c. 1855 Individual Designation: None District Designation: Old City Historic District, Significant, 12/12/2003 Staff Contact: Randal Baron, randal.baron@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial of the fourth-floor addition on 418 Wood Street; approval of the new building provided the height is reduced, the railing is pulled back, and the garage on N. 5th Street is eliminated, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standard 9. OVERVIEW: This application proposes to modify a building that has been altered several times. The original c. 1750 house had its roof and dormer removed and an Italianate third floor and cornice added about 1855. In the twentieth century, a large garage door was inserted in the front facade and large workshop addition constructed at the rear. The adjacent building at 420 Wood was demolished for the construction of the 5th Street underpass under the Ben Franklin Bridge and the lot on which it stood was narrowed to a sliver. This application proposes to demolish the one-story rear structure and construct additions on the historic building and also construct a new house along 5th Street. An addition to the historic building would be constructed on the sliver of a lot and a mansard fourth story with roof deck would be constructed on the historic building. The garage opening in the historic building would be reconfigured. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2015 5 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES A four-story structure in a contemporary style would be constructed along 5th Street, behind the historic building. The Commission has full jurisdiction over this new construction because the site is

the historic building would be reconfigured. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2015 5 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES A four-story structure in a contemporary style would be constructed along 5th Street, behind the historic building. The Commission has full jurisdiction over this new construction because the site is not considered undeveloped; the non-historic rear addition to the historic building stood on the site. The new house would be differentiated from the old, but would be compatible in massing and rhythm of openings. It would have its own identity, which is appropriate for a building that is neither an addition nor part of a row or intact streetscape. The Architectural Committee reviewed an earlier iteration of this project in January 2015 and recommended denial but offered numerous suggestions. The architects have modified the design to incorporate many of the suggestions. The mansard proposed for the old structure has been reduced in height and modified to be a true wrap-around mansard. Documentation showing many examples of mansards in Old City, mansards over a bracketed wood cornices, and mansard additions approved by the Commission has been provided as justification for this design. The old structure and its addition would now be linked by a glass element rather than a metal element as first proposed and rejected during the earlier review. The addition has been simplified to be more modern. The new house along 5th Street is shown in two variations, both of which are more closely tied to the architecture of the addition. DISCUSSION: Mr. Mattioni excused himself momentarily from the meeting. Mr. Baron presented the application to the Architectural Committee. Architects Stephen Maffei and Logan Dry represented the application. Mr. Baron noted that the architect supplied revised drawings to the Commission at the start of this meeting. These drawings are revised to include additional comments from the Architectural Committee, including the removal of cresting, a reduction in the height of the mansard, and the addition of glazing to the garage doors. Mr. Baron explained that the staff had recommended approval, owing to the fact that the historic building is made up of fragments of former buildings, and the building is situated on a corner such that a roof addition cannot be inconspicuous. Ms. Hawkins thanked the applicant for working hard to incorporate many comments from the Architectural Committee. She stated that she is still opposed to the mansard and a

up of fragments of former buildings, and the building is situated on a corner such that a roof addition cannot be inconspicuous. Ms. Hawkins thanked the applicant for working hard to incorporate many comments from the Architectural Committee. She stated that she is still opposed to the mansard and a garage door on the new building. Mr. Maffei clarified that this site is zoned CMX-3, which permits the garage entrance. He noted that he was unsure of the garage zoning at the time of the Architectural Committee meeting. He noted that there is no parking on that side of the street, so this garage is not eliminating any public street parking. He added glazing to the garage doors in an attempt to make them appear less like a solid wall. The historic building has only about 600 square feet of living space, and the lot at 420 Wood Street is only ten feet wide. Working within these constraints, the architects felt it was best to provide rear yards for both properties, but they were not able to have garage access at the rear. He noted that there are many taller buildings nearby, and there is no height restriction with this zoning classification, yet they still reduced the height of the mansard by thirty inches in order to reflect comments from the Architectural Committee. Mr. Thomas commented that one city agency’s review may conflict with another city agency’s review, and that the Historical Commission may not be in favor of something that is permitted by zoning. He agreed that the historic building is a remnant of construction at several times, and that adding to this building with sensitivity makes sense. The design of the garage doors is helped by the addition of glazing, and by the fact that the new garage door on N. 5th Street is PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2015 6 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES not overly wide. He noted that the stucco color and texture for the exposed party wall is an important detail to be worked on with the staff. Rich Thom, former Chair of the Zoning Committee for Old City Civic Association, but speaking as an individual, noted that Old City has been overwhelmed with garage entrances over the last few years. He stated that he is in favor of the mansard addition and feels that it is not out of character

Chair of the Zoning Committee for Old City Civic Association, but speaking as an individual, noted that Old City has been overwhelmed with garage entrances over the last few years. He stated that he is in favor of the mansard addition and feels that it is not out of character for the neighborhood. He summarized that this site has remained undeveloped for years, and there was always a concern that someone would apply for a financial hardship in order to demolish the historic building. He stated that he is in favor of this proposal. Mr. Thom referred to garages in the fronts of new townhouses on the south side of the 200-block of Arch Street. He asked why the Commission approved them and why the Zoning Board of Adjustment granted variances for them. Mr. Farnham clarified that new townhouse construction at 240-46 Arch Street was also zoned CMX-3 and therefore the garages were permitted with no variance. He confirmed that the Historical Commission did not approve the garages; the Commission’s authority was comment only. He observed that a recent Hidden City Philadelphia article on the development was factually incorrect with regard to the Commission’s jurisdiction and the zoning. He explained that the Commission commented that “the garage entrances on the front façades particularly and the single-family residential scale and appearance of these buildings generally are incompatible with the surrounding streetscape and historic district.” He cautioned Mr. Thom and the audience that Hidden City articles are routinely factually incorrect. ACTION: Mr. Thomas moved to approve the revised application as presented to the Historical Commission at its meeting of 10 April 2015, with the staff to review details. Ms. Merriman seconded the motion, which passed by a vote of 9 to 1. Ms. Hawkins dissented. ADDRESS: 120-24 RACE ST Project: Construct 10 townhouses Review Requested: Review and Comment Owner: National Investors Applicant: Jose Hernandez, JKR Partners History: vacant lot Individual Designation: None District Designation: Old City Historic District, Non-contributing, 12/12/2003 Staff Contact: Laura DiPasquale, laura.dipasquale@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE COMMENT: The Architectural Committee commented that the applicant should explore: maintaining darker color panel along Front Street elevation to a three- story height in lieu of the champagne-colored ribbed panel, and the possibility of carrying that around to the façade on Race Street; adjusting the window proportions at the corner building from the currently proposed narrow ribbon window to the full height of the

along Front Street elevation to a three- story height in lieu of the champagne-colored ribbed panel, and the possibility of carrying that around to the façade on Race Street; adjusting the window proportions at the corner building from the currently proposed narrow ribbon window to the full height of the panel; and ensuring that the mechanical equipment is not visible from the street. OVERVIEW: This application proposes to construct ten, four-story, single-family townhouses on a currently vacant lot. The Commission’s jurisdiction is limited to Review and Comment. The first floors of the proposed townhouses would be clad in brick, while the upper floors would be clad in metal and stucco panels, and would feature dark grey metal bay windows. The roof level would feature roof decks with pilot house access. Nine of the proposed townhouses would face N. Front Street, and be accessed through recessed front entries. Rear garages would be accessed via a shared drive connecting to Race Street. The proposed rear drive would extend PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2015 7 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES behind the townhouses from Race to Quarry Street. One townhouse would be freestanding and would face Quarry Street. Following the Architectural Committee meeting, the applicant revised the drawings to incorporate the Committee’s suggestions, including using dark red panels in lieu of champagne- colored panels on the upper floors, and adjusting the window proportions at the corner building. It should be noted that construction has already begun on these properties, as a permit was issued in error by the Department of Licenses & Inspections without the Historical Commission’s review. Despite having a valid permit in hand, the applicant has chosen to submit for review and comment. DISCUSSION: Mr. Mattioni returned to the meeting. Ms. DiPasquale presented the application to the Architectural Committee. Architect José Hernandez represented the application. Mr. Schaaf asked about the distance the proposed stairs would extend onto the sidewalk. Mr. Hernandez responded that the buildings would be stepped back from the property line along N. Front Street to accommodate the stairs, allowing for a sidewalk generally ranging from eight to ten feet in width from the edge of the stairs. Mr. Hernandez noted that the existing sidewalk is five feet in width to the property line, and that only one of proposed townhouses would have a step that encroached into the sidewalk, and it would only do so

eight to ten feet in width from the edge of the stairs. Mr. Hernandez noted that the existing sidewalk is five feet in width to the property line, and that only one of proposed townhouses would have a step that encroached into the sidewalk, and it would only do so approximately six inches. Ms. Hawkins commended the applicant for incorporating the comments of the Architectural Committee. Mr. Sherman voiced his favor and appreciation of the rear-loaded garages. Other members of the Commission concurred. Mr. Sherman opened the floor to public comment, of which there was none. ACTION: Ms. Hawkins moved to comment that the revised application as presented to the Historical Commission at its meeting of 10 April 2015 satisfies preservation standards. Ms. Turner seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2015 8 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ADDRESS: 151-59 N 02ND ST Project: Construct 7 townhouses Review Requested: Review and Comment Owner: Phil McFillin Applicant: Nichole Howell, JKR Partners History: vacant lot Individual Designation: None District Designation: Old City Historic District, Non-contributing, 12/12/2003 Staff Contact: Laura DiPasquale, laura.dipasquale@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE COMMENT: The Architectural Committee commented that the proposed design is generally compatible with the Old City Historic District, but asked the applicant consider: dividing the stone base to create a more articulated base with a field area above; reevaluating the design and proportions of the windows on the northern building; replacing the Hardie-board for upper floors of northern building with a more compatible material such as brick; and reevaluating the relationship of fourth floor of southern building to brick of center building to create relief of the height such as through the use of a cornice. OVERVIEW: This application proposes to construct seven single-family townhomes on a vacant lot. The Commission’s jurisdiction is limited to Review and Comment. The proposed townhomes would be accessed from a shared drive running off N. 2nd Street. The N. 2nd Street elevation is divided into three visual masses. The elevation of the northernmost mass is three stories in height and features a stone base and two vertical windows. The original application submitted to the Architectural Committee included upper floors composed of light brown fiber cement panels with narrow windows on the second floor and square windows on the third floor, with red fiber cement accents between the two. The revised application submitted to the Historical Commission

vertical windows. The original application submitted to the Architectural Committee included upper floors composed of light brown fiber cement panels with narrow windows on the second floor and square windows on the third floor, with red fiber cement accents between the two. The revised application submitted to the Historical Commission was revised to feature brick upper floors and wider windows. The central mass is four stories in height and features a ground floor entry and three windows of varying widths. The upper floors are clad in brick, and have punched window openings. A black metal cornice tops the building. The southern building is four stories in height and features a stone base with a vehicle entry portal to the townhomes behind. The second and third floors are clad in brick and feature an off- center dark grey metal bay window. The fourth floor is clad in light brown fiber cement paneling, with three punched windows. The interior court, which is accessed from N. 2nd Street, features five townhomes. The ground floor of each townhome is clad in stone, and features a garage and entry door. The upper floors are clad in brick and fiber cement panels. Each townhome features a metal bay window and at second and third floors. DISCUSSION: Ms. DiPasquale presented the application to the Architectural Committee. Architect José Hernandez represented the application. Mr. Thomas commented that an important element of the Old City Historic District is the presence of Belgian block pavers that create a sense of human scale. He noted that interior courts/drives found throughout the city, such as those in Queen Village, are far more successful when they utilize pavers or stamped concrete rather than smooth concrete or asphalt paving. He commented that a small change of adding texture to the driveway and interior court in the PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2015 9 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES form of stamped concrete would have a huge impact visually on the long-term enjoyment of the property and the compatibility with the historic district. Mr. Sherman noted that he appreciated the use of an interior drive rather than front-loading garages. Mr. Sherman opened the floor to public comment, of which there was none. ACTION: Ms. Hawkins moved to comment that the revised application as presented to the Historical Commission at its meeting of 10 April 2015 satisfies preservation standards, but also noted that the

interior drive rather than front-loading garages. Mr. Sherman opened the floor to public comment, of which there was none. ACTION: Ms. Hawkins moved to comment that the revised application as presented to the Historical Commission at its meeting of 10 April 2015 satisfies preservation standards, but also noted that the applicant should consider using a textured paving on the interior court. Ms. Leonard seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. ADDRESS: 117-31 QUARRY ST Project: Contruct 10 townhouses Review Requested: Review and Comment Owner: Phil McFillin Applicant: Nichole Howell, JKR Partners History: vacant lot Individual Designation: None District Designation: Old City Historic District, Non-contributing, 12/12/2003 Staff Contact: Laura DiPasquale, laura.dipasquale@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE COMMENT: The Architectural Committee concurred with the staff comment that the proposed new construction is incompatible with the Old City Historic District in scale, massing, materials, and features. OVERVIEW: This application proposes to construct ten townhouses on a currently vacant lot. The Commission’s jurisdiction is limited to Review and Comment. The proposed townhouses would be constructed in two sets of five, facing inward towards a driveway accessed through a curb cut off of Quarry Street. The ground floor of each unit would be clad in brick and feature a garage and entry door. The upper floors would be clad in dark grey and beige metal panels, fiber cement panels, and grey stucco. The first floor level facing Quarry Street would be clad in brick, with high, horizontal windows flanking the driveway, and two punched openings at the far ends of the proposed construction. DISCUSSION: Ms. DiPasquale presented the application to the Architectural Committee. Architect José Hernandez represented the application. Mr. Schaaf reiterated Mr. Thomas’s comments from the previous review of 151-59 N. 2nd Street, noting that the interior court between the two sets of buildings presents an opportunity to create a pattern in the asphalt, or to even use actual pavers in appropriate locations to enhance the quality of the entrance. Mr. Sherman opened the floor to public comment, of which there was none. ACTION: Ms. Hawkins moved to comment that the revised application as presented to the Historical Commission at its meeting of 10 April 2015 satisfies preservation standards, but also noted that the applicant should consider using a textured paving on the interior court. Ms. Turner seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2015 10 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES

Historical Commission at its meeting of 10 April 2015 satisfies preservation standards, but also noted that the applicant should consider using a textured paving on the interior court. Ms. Turner seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2015 10 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ADDRESS: 1631-37 ARCH ST Project: Remove windows, install louvers Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Bell Telephone Co. of PA Applicant: Theresa Aldamlouji, Aldamlouji & Parker Architects History: 1915; Bell Telephone Building; John Windrim, architect Individual Designation: 12/12/2008 District Designation: None Staff Contact: Laura DiPasquale, laura.dipasquale@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend approval, provided that the frame, sash and muntin system are retained or recreated, with the louvers installed behind and painted a dark color, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 2, 5, and 9. OVERVIEW: This application proposes to install louvers in four windows on the 12th floor of the building, three on the (east) 16th Street elevation, and one on the (south) Arch Street elevation. The current application proposes to retain the window frames, but to remove the sash, which the firm of O’Donnell & Naccarato has confirmed are galvanized steel. The building is currently used to house telecommunications equipment for Verizon. ACTION: See Consent Agenda. ADDRESS: 3220-60 SOUTH ST Project: Install ADA ramp, lower grade and alter wall Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Trustees, University of Pennsylvania Applicant: Richard Russell, University of Pennsylvania History: 1899; Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, UPenn; Wilson Eyre, Frank Miles Day, Cope & Stewardson, architects Individual Designation: 2/28/1961 District Designation: None Staff Contact: Kim Broadbent, kim.broadbent@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend approval, provided the applicant submits information about the ramp railing, with the staff to review masonry cleaning and pointing samples, pursuant to Standard 9 and the Accessibility Guideline. OVERVIEW: This application proposes repair and alterations to site walls along 33rd and South Streets at the University of Pennsylvania’s Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. Along South Street, an ADA ramp would be installed to convey people from the public sidewalk along the street up about eight feet to the garden level. The installation of the ramp would require the removal of two small sections of existing walls. In addition to the construction of the ramp, the work along South Street would include the cleaning and pointing of various brick site walls.

the street up about eight feet to the garden level. The installation of the ramp would require the removal of two small sections of existing walls. In addition to the construction of the ramp, the work along South Street would include the cleaning and pointing of various brick site walls. The application also proposes to alter the area adjacent to the museum along 33rd Street to bring more light into the lower level of the building. A garden to the west of the museum building was removed and the area regraded about 1958, when 33rd Street was continued south of South Street. A non-historic platform with brick site walls, where a statue of Provost Smith stood after the 1958 reconfiguration of the area until the statue was relocated to Smith Walk in the PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2015 11 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 1970s, would be removed. The land between 33rd Street and the building would be regraded and a site wall creating wells around windows would be altered. The area would be replanted and the sidewalk along 33rd Street replaced. ACTION: See Consent Agenda. THE REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 26 MARCH 2015 720-22 CHESTNUT STREET Nominator: Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia Owner: Various condominium owners COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the 722 Chestnut Street portion of the parcel at 720-22 Chestnut Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A, C, D, E, F, G, I, and J, should be designated as historic, and listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the 722 Chestnut Street portion of the parcel at 720-22 Chestnut Street as historic and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the property satisfies Criteria for Designation A, C, D, E, F, G, and J. The Henry C. Lea Building is an ornate terra cotta Renaissance Revival-inspired commercial building constructed in 1897, designed by the architectural firm of Collins & Autenrieth. The building was commissioned by Henry Charles Lea, a prominent Philadelphia publisher, author, historian, and civic leader in nineteenth-century Philadelphia. The Lea Building survives as an example of ornamental terra cotta and the use of bay windows in commercial “street architecture” of the late nineteenth century. The property is classified as significant to the National Register East Center City Commercial

Philadelphia publisher, author, historian, and civic leader in nineteenth-century Philadelphia. The Lea Building survives as an example of ornamental terra cotta and the use of bay windows in commercial “street architecture” of the late nineteenth century. The property is classified as significant to the National Register East Center City Commercial Historic District. DISCUSSION: Ms. Coté presented an overview of the nomination and the Committee on Historic Designation recommendation to the Historical Commission. The Commissioners agreed that the building at 722 Chestnut Street merits designation. ACTION: Mr. Schaaf moved to find the 722 Chestnut Street portion of the parcel at 720- 22 Chestnut Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A, C, D, E, F, G, I, and J, designate it as historic, and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Hawkins seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2015 12 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 721 CHESTNUT STREET Nominator: Young Friends of the Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia Owner: Katy Dog LLC COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the property at 721 Chestnut Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A, B, C, D, E, I, and J, should be designated as historic, and listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 721 Chestnut Street as historic and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the property satisfies Criteria for Designation A, B, C, D, E, and J. The Quaker City National Bank building, which was originally owned and occupied by the Chestnut Street National Bank, was built in 1889 and designed by Willis G. Hale. The building is the site of one of the most notable and consequential bank failures in Philadelphia during the 1890s. After the Chestnut Street National Bank’s second president, William M. Singerly fraudulently borrowed large sums of money from the bank in 1897 without the knowledge of the other directors; the Chestnut Street National Bank was unable to meet its obligations to its depositors. On Christmas Eve of that year, the bank was forced to close, shocking the city and making national headlines, owing to the prominence of its directors. This building is classified as significant to the National Register East Center City Commercial Historic District. DISCUSSION: Ms. Coté presented an overview of the nomination and the

of that year, the bank was forced to close, shocking the city and making national headlines, owing to the prominence of its directors. This building is classified as significant to the National Register East Center City Commercial Historic District. DISCUSSION: Ms. Coté presented an overview of the nomination and the Committee on Historic Designation recommendation to the Historical Commission. The Commissioners agreed that the building at 721 Chestnut Street merits designation. ACTION: Ms. Turner moved to find that the property at 721 Chestnut Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A, B, C, D, E, I, and J, designate it as historic, and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Hawkins seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. 723 CHESTNUT STREET Nominator: Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia Owner: Sam Rappaport COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the property at 723 Chestnut Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A, C, D, E, F, G, I, and J, should be designated as historic, and listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 723 Chestnut Street as historic and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the property satisfies Criteria for Designation A, C, D, E, F, G, and J. The former W.H. Horstmann Company building is an example of the structurally expressive, Italianate-influenced style of commercial loft construction developed and promoted in the 1850s in Philadelphia by Stephen Decatur Button, Joseph C. Hoxie, and other leading architects of the era. Originally designed as a tripartite commercial block occupying 723-725-727 Chestnut Street, the building at 723 survives today as the sole extant portion of the original design and one of only a handful of surviving examples of an architectural style and building type deemed “Philadelphia Functionalism.” The building at 723 Chestnut Street is attributed to architect Stephen Decatur PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2015 13 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES Button, constructed around 1855, and was first occupied by original tenant W.H. Horstmann & Sons by 1855. This building is classified as significant to the National Register East Center City Commercial Historic District. DISCUSSION: Ms. Coté presented an overview of the nomination and the Committee on Historic Designation recommendation to the Historical Commission Mr. Sherman stated that, if this property is designated, any proposal to alter the first-floor storefront

is classified as significant to the National Register East Center City Commercial Historic District. DISCUSSION: Ms. Coté presented an overview of the nomination and the Committee on Historic Designation recommendation to the Historical Commission Mr. Sherman stated that, if this property is designated, any proposal to alter the first-floor storefront would be reviewed by the Historical Commission. Ms. Turner asked about Criterion for Designation I. Ms. Cote responded that the Committee on Historic Designation recommended that the property satisfies Criterion I in addition to the Criteria cited in the nomination. Mr. Farnham stated that Douglas Mooney, an archeologist and a member of the Committee on Historic Designation, informed the Committee that this was the site of an important late eighteenth-century estate and therefore is likely to contain archeological artifacts from that period. He stated that Mr. Mooney suggested that, if the current building was demolished, for example, after a fire, then it would be important to investigate the archeological potential at the site. Mr. Mattioni asked if the owner of the property consented to historic designation. Ms. Coté stated that the property owner did not contact the Historical Commission despite being notified in writing about the consideration of the nomination. ACTION: Ms. Turner moved to find that the property at 723 Chestnut Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A, C, D, E, F, G, I, and J, designate it as historic, and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Mr. Schaaf seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. Mr. Mattioni abstained. 725 CHESTNUT STREET Nominator: Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia Owner: 725 Chestnut Street Development LLC COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the property at 725 Chestnut Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A, C, G, I, and J, should be designated as historic, and listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 725 Chestnut Street, the former Philadelphia Blueprint Company building, as historic and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the property satisfies Criteria for Designation A, C, G, and J. The building was original constructed around 1855 as a six-story commercial building. In 1903, it received a French Renaissance façade designed by Chester H. Kirk. In 1935, the top four stories were removed and architect Carl F. Otto reconfigured the storefront. The building is essentially

A, C, G, and J. The building was original constructed around 1855 as a six-story commercial building. In 1903, it received a French Renaissance façade designed by Chester H. Kirk. In 1935, the top four stories were removed and architect Carl F. Otto reconfigured the storefront. The building is essentially a “cropped” 1903 French Renaissance-inspired Beaux Arts design with 1930s commercial signage and a circa 1855 rear elevation. This building is classified as contributing to the National Register East Center City Commercial Historic District. Regardless of the Historical Commission’s decision on this nomination, the building at 725 Chestnut Street will be altered again. The property owner obtained a building permit to construct a two-story addition prior to the issuance of the Historical Commission’s notice of the nomination PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2015 14 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES review. Even though the work has not yet been undertaken, the Historical Commission does not have the authority to review the permitted work. DISCUSSION: Ms. Coté presented an overview of the nomination and the Committee on Historic Designation recommendation to the Historical Commission. Ms. Merriman asked how the permitted work would affect the building. Ms. Coté responded that the extant portion of the façade would not be altered but a three-story addition would be constructed n the existing building. She asked Commissioner Schaaf to speak about the project, which was reviewed by the City Planning Commission. Mr. Schaaf stated that the existing two- story facades will not be altered. Upper floors will be added, but they will be very sensitive to the tripartite division of the building. He stated that the building will be clad in appropriate materials. He opined that the addition will be very successful. ACTION: Mr. Schaaf moved to find that the property at 725 Chestnut Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A, C, G, I, and J, designate it as historic, and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Turner seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. 3948-50 WALNUT STREET, WEST PHILADELPHIA BRANCH OF THE FREE LIBRARY Nominator: Philadelphia City Planning Commission Owner: Free Library, City of Philadelphia COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the property at 3948-50 Walnut Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, E, H, and J, should be designated as historic, and listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. OVERVIEW: This

Library, City of Philadelphia COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the property at 3948-50 Walnut Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, E, H, and J, should be designated as historic, and listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 3948-50 Walnut Street as historic and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the property satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, E, H, and J. The West Philadelphia Branch of the Free Library, a Carnegie branch library building, was designed by Clarence C. Zantzinger and constructed in 1906. It is an excellent example of a Carnegie library. DISCUSSION: Ms. Coté presented an overview of the nomination and the Committee on Historic Designation recommendation to the Historical Commission. The Commissioners agreed that the library merits designation. ACTION: Ms. Turner moved to find that the property at 3948-50 Walnut Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, E, H, and J, designate it as historic, and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Mr. Schaaf seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2015 15 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 8711 GERMANTOWN AVENUE, CHESTNUT HILL BRANCH OF THE FREE LIBRARY Nominator: Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia Owner: Free Library, City of Philadelphia COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the property at 8711 Germantown Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, E, H, and J, should be designated as historic, and listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 8711 Germantown Avenue as historic and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the property satisfies Criteria for Designation A and E. The Chestnut Hill Branch of the Free Library, a Carnegie branch library building, was designed by the prominent architectural firm Cope & Stewardson and constructed in 1908. It is an excellent example of a Carnegie library. This building is classified as significant to the National Register East Chestnut Hill Historic District. DISCUSSION: Ms. Coté presented an overview of the nomination and the Committee on Historic Designation recommendation to the Historical Commission. The Commissioners agreed that the library merits designation. ACTION: Mr. Schaaf moved to find that the property at 8711

as significant to the National Register East Chestnut Hill Historic District. DISCUSSION: Ms. Coté presented an overview of the nomination and the Committee on Historic Designation recommendation to the Historical Commission. The Commissioners agreed that the library merits designation. ACTION: Mr. Schaaf moved to find that the property at 8711 Germantown Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, E, H, and J, designate it as historic, and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Turner seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. 601 W. LEHIGH AVENUE, LEHIGH (LILLIAN MARRERO) BRANCH OF THE FREE LIBRARY Nominator: Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia Owner: Free Library, City of Philadelphia OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 601 W. Lehigh Avenue as historic and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the property satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, E, and H. The Lehigh or Lillian Marrero Branch of the Free Library, a Carnegie branch library building, was designed by the prominent architectural firm of Hewitt & Hewitt and constructed in 1906. It is an excellent example of a Carnegie library. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the Lehigh (Lillian Marrero) Branch of the Free Library on the property at 601 W. Lehigh Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, E, H, and J, should be designated as historic, and listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. DISCUSSION: Ms. Coté presented an overview of the nomination and the Committee on Historic Designation recommendation to the Historical Commission. The Commissioners agreed that the library merits designation. ACTION: Mr. Schaaf moved to find that the Lehigh (Lillian Marrero) Branch of the Free Library on the property at 601 W. Lehigh Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2015 16 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES E, H, and J, designate it as historic, and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Turner seconded the motion which passed unanimously. 365 GREEN LANE Nominator: John Manton Owner: Roger Ross COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the property 365 Green Lane satisfies Criteria for Designation A, G, H, I, and J, should be designated as historic, and listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the Benjamin

ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the property 365 Green Lane satisfies Criteria for Designation A, G, H, I, and J, should be designated as historic, and listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the Benjamin Kenworthy House at 365 Green Lane as historic and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the property satisfies Criteria for Designation A, G, H, and J.The Benjamin Kenworthy House sits prominently on the southeast corner at the intersection of Green Lane and Manayunk Avenue. It was built in 1871 by William F. Raynor, an English stonemason, for Benjamin Kenworthy and his family. Kenworthy was an affluent and a prominent member of the Roxborough and Manayunk community, who owned textile businesses. The Committee on Historic Designation reviewed a nomination for this property at its November 2014 meeting. However, that nomination was withdrawn prior to the Historical Commission’s review. The current nomination was submitted in late December 2014 by a different nominator. DISCUSSION: Ms. Coté presented an overview of the nomination and the Committee on Historic Designation recommendation to the Historical Commission. John Manton represented the nomination. John Manton, the nominator, informed the Commission that this is one of ten houses in this section of Roxborough that he will be nominating. He stated that these houses, which are in close proximity to one another, were owned and occupied by two prominent mill-owning families. Mr. Farnham noted that the property owner did attend the Committee on Historic Designation meeting and did not object to the historic designation of his property. He informed the Commission that the owner has obtained a building permit for an addition at the rear of this building. He stated that all who have reviewed the plans for the addition agree that is very sympathetic with the character of the building. He stated that the building will change but in a way that is appropriate. ACTION: Mr. Schaaf moved to find that the property 365 Green Lane satisfies Criteria for Designation A, G, H, I, and J, designate it as historic, and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Leonard seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2015 17 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 145 SUMAC STREET Nominator: Jeffrey Allegretti Owner: John Messing COMMITTEE

H, I, and J, designate it as historic, and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Leonard seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2015 17 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 145 SUMAC STREET Nominator: Jeffrey Allegretti Owner: John Messing COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the Historical Commission table the nomination for 145 Sumac Street and refer the nomination back to the Committee on Historic Designation for review at a subsequent Committee meeting, at which time the nominations for 145 and 147 Sumac Street can be reviewed together. OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 145 Sumac Street as historic and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the property satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, and H. The house is associated with an important individual, Manayunk mill owner James Z. Holt, son of Edward Holt, who was among the first Manayunk mill owners. Holt and other second-generation mill owners provided much of the impetus for the development of the Wissahickon neighborhood. The Holt House is an extraordinary example of Eastlake Victorian styling, with ornamentation and trim with geometric patterns and incised lines. It is only one of a few remaining examples in Wissahickon, a neighborhood developed when the Queen Anne style was in vogue. The Holt House is an established visual feature in the neighborhood and for the community, not only for its architectural character, but also for its role in the streetscape resulting from its ample grounds, especially when combined with its adjoining twin at 147 Sumac Street. Together, the two houses occupy nearly three-quarters of an acre of ground in this otherwise densely developed urban neighborhood. A nomination for the other half of this structure, the twin at 147 Sumac Street, was submitted and withdrawn, then re-submitted, but not in time to be included on agenda for this meeting of the Committee on Historic Designation. The nomination for 147 Sumac will be included on the agenda of the next Committee on Historic Designation meeting. Prior to the issuance of the Historical Commission’s notice of the nomination review, the property owner applied for a demolition permit. As the date of application predates the date of notice and the start of the Historical Commission’s jurisdiction, the Commission does not have the authority to

Historic Designation meeting. Prior to the issuance of the Historical Commission’s notice of the nomination review, the property owner applied for a demolition permit. As the date of application predates the date of notice and the start of the Historical Commission’s jurisdiction, the Commission does not have the authority to review the demolition permit application. DISCUSSION: Ms. Coté presented an overview of the nomination and the Committee on Historic Designation recommendation to the Historical Commission. Mr. Farnham stated that representatives of the owner are present and did attend the Committee on Historic Designation meeting. He stated that the owner’s attorney requests that the Commission table the nomination to allow the owner to retain the services of an expert to analyze the merits of the nomination and that the Commission remand the nomination to the Committee on Historic Designation so that the nominations of 145 and 147 Sumac, the two halves of the twin, can be reviewed simultaneously. ACTION: Ms. Hawkins moved to table the nomination for 145 Sumac Street and remand it to the Committee on Historic Designation for review at a subsequent Committee meeting, at which time the nominations for 145 and 147 Sumac Street can be reviewed together. Mr. Mattioni seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 APRIL 2015 18 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ADJOURNMENT ACTION: At 10:10 a.m., Ms. Hawkins moved to adjourn. Ms. Merriman seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES CITED IN THE MINUTES Standard 2: The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinct materials or alterations of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. Standard 5: Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved. 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. 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

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. Accessibility Guideline: Recommended: Providing barrier-free access that promotes independence for the disabled person to the highest degree practicable, while preserving significant historic features. Accessibility Guideline: Not Recommended: Altering, damaging, or destroying character- defining features in attempting to comply with accessibility requirements. Accessibility Guideline: Not Recommended: Making access modifications that do not provide a reasonable balance between independent, safe access and preservation of historic features. Accessibility Guideline: Not Recommended: Designing new or additional means of access without considering the impact on the historic building and its setting. Roofs Guideline: Recommended: Designing additions to roofs such as residential, office, or storage spaces; elevator housing; decks and terraces; or dormers or skylights when required by the new use so that they are inconspicuous from the public right-of-way and do not damage or obscure character-defining features.