THE MINUTES OF THE 368TH STATED MEETING OF THE PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION 9 December 1992 City Council Caucus Room Room 401 City Hall Present Wayne S. Spilove, Chairman David Brownlee, Ph.D., Architectural Historian James Cuorato, First Deputy Director Of Commerce Department Barbara Kaplan, Executive Director, City Planning Commission Scott Wilds, Executive Assistant, Office of Housing & Community Development Stephanie Wolf, Ph.D., Historian Carmen A. Torres-Rodriguez, Community Organization Arlene Matzkin, AIA, Chairperson of the Architectural Committee Richard Tyler, Historic Preservation Officer Randal Baron, Preservation Planner Ira Kauderer, Executive Secretary Also Richard Thom, AIA, Historic East Market Street Daniel S. Greenstein, attorney THE MINUTES of the 367TH Meeting of the Philadelphia Historical Commission held on 14 October 1992, Wayne S. Spilove, Chairman. THE REPORT of the Meeting of the Architectural Committee held on 28 October 1992, Arlene Matzkin, Chairwoman. THE REPORT of the Meeting of the Architectural Committee held on 1 December 1992, Arlene Matzkin, Chairwoman. Approval 1520 Spruce Street, The Touraine: This proposal, which the Committee has seen twice before, involves a railing and windscreen for the rooftop deck of the penthouse of the Touraine Building. Mr. Workman altered the design previously presented so that it no longer includes the pergola. Also, in this new proposal the railing attaches to the back of the flower boxes and benches instead of to the parapet. Mr. Workman intends to minimize the visual impact of this railing by painting it grey. Drawings still show the windscreen at the edge of the building. The Committee considered the design of the windscreen and agreed [HANDWRITTEN NOTES: Top of page: handwritten annotation "368TH" (appears to be a correction or clarification, with "36" struck through and "368" written above)] that the southernmost portion should be reconfigured so that it is not visible from Pine Street. With this change they recommended approval of the plans as presented. Ms. Matzkin moved that the Commission approve the plans as presented to the Committee. Dr. Brownlee seconded the motion which passed unanimously. 3424-30 Sansom Street, White Dog Cafe: This proposal calls for adding a stairower in the areaway between the rear els of two buildings. The stairower will project out further than the rears of the buildings and will be visible from the food court of the Shops at Penn. The Committee suggested that the architect simplify the design by using fewer materials and changing the shape of the proposed pentagonal window
of two buildings. The stairower will project out further than the rears of the buildings and will be visible from the food court of the Shops at Penn. The Committee suggested that the architect simplify the design by using fewer materials and changing the shape of the proposed pentagonal window near the top of the stairtower. The architect has since submitted plans that reflect these suggestions. Ms. Matzkin moved that the Commission approve the plans as resubmitted. Dr. Brownlee seconded the motion which passed unanimously. 1115-41 Market Street, Reading Terminal Trainshed: Ms. Gutterman came to the Committee to get input on issues such as: the detail of the intersection of the glass wall with the roof truss, the windows for the outside of the trainshed and the colors for several surfaces. Ballroom Curtainwall: Ms. Gutterman presented a drawing showing a 19" member at the intersection of two planes of glass that intersect in front of the roof truss. The Committee approved this as presented. Color for skylight and clerestory: Presented with a choice of several grays, the Committee chose the darkest one for the end wall of this structure. Color for north curtainwall: The section representing the void will be inset five feet and colored dark grey. The curtain wall above will be in two tones of lighter grey to represent the glass divided by the pattern of the mullions. The existing ironwork will be painted a tone of brown determined historic through paint analysis. Replacement Windows: Architects have discovered that profile of the window frames on the second and third floor levels differ from the frames on the first floor level. The Committee approved the architect's plan to re-mill all replacement window frames to a single profile. The one not chosen will be recorded for the Commission's records. The Commission accepted the Committee's recommendation and unanimously voted to approve these alterations. 3 230 Pine Street: This proposal calls for legalizing a garage door installed without a permit. The door replaces a metal ceiling garage door at this location also installed without a permit. Though the staff would generally recommend a side swinging gate, they agreed that this door is considerably better than the first. A representative of the Society Hill Civic Association attended the Committee meeting and did not object to legalizing this garage door. The Committee voted to recommend approval of the existing wooden garage door, but focused
a side swinging gate, they agreed that this door is considerably better than the first. A representative of the Society Hill Civic Association attended the Committee meeting and did not object to legalizing this garage door. The Committee voted to recommend approval of the existing wooden garage door, but focused attention on how it could be improved. They recommend that two mismatched boards that comprise a header be replaced with a single larger board of uniform stained color. Dr. Brownlee moved to approve this proposal, contingent on the applicant properly presenting a permit to the Staff. The motion passed unanimously. 21-25 North Second Street: This proposal calls for the complete demolition of an 1898 commercial building designed by Collins and Autenrieth for the Library Company of Philadelphia. Ms. Matzkin explained that this distinguished building retains his historic integrity above a 1950-51 storefront. The building consists of two portions. A three story portion is about 60 feet deep and fronts on Second Street. A one story rear portion is about 140 feet deep. A fire has destroyed this rear portion. Ms. Matzkin reported that the applicant's engineer, Mr. Tantala, described the ruin of the rear building as "imminently dangerous" and the front building as sound, though it suffered water damage and has a leaky roof. The Department of Licenses and Inspections issued a demolition permit for the rear imminently dangerous portion of the building. At the time, Church Street was under construction, so access to the rear building could only be had from Second Street. Given the dangerous condition at the rear, Dr. Tyler approved a permit to demolish the front building, based on the P.D.'s condition of the rear building and the problem of inaccessibility. The same day the demolition permit was issued, it emerged that the reconstruction of Church Street would be finished before bids could be put out for the demolition of the Second Street building. Dr. Tyler spoke to Licenses and Inspections who stated that the demolition permit was only issued for the imminently dangerous building at the rear. If the permit included more than that, public notice would have to been posted. The owner was apprised of the need to submit a second permit for the front part of the building. This application was submitted, and was taken up by the Architectural Committee at its last meeting. The Committee found no architectural reason for the demolition
notice would have to been posted. The owner was apprised of the need to submit a second permit for the front part of the building. This application was submitted, and was taken up by the Architectural Committee at its last meeting. The Committee found no architectural reason for the demolition of the building. It referred further consideration of demolition to the Committee on Hardship, which will convene upon receipt of additional information. The applicant was asked to prepared a ten year pro forma addressing adaptive reuse of the property. This should address three different reasonable reuse schemes such as all residential, all commercial and mixed use. All expenses and income should be stated. The analysis should factor in the Historic Tax Credit and the City's Tax Abatement Program. Proceeds from the fire insurance should also be listed. Mr. Daniel Greenstein, counsel for the applicant, addressed the Commission. Mr. Greenstein stated that he believes that both portions of the Second Street building were the subject of the original demolition permit issued by the Department of Licenses and Inspections. Moreover, Mr. Greenstein reported that the owners of the building had told him they had never received notice when the Historical Commission listed the building on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Mr. Greenstein also took issue with the concern of the Architectural Committee that demolishing the subject building would adversely affect neighboring historic buildings. Mr. Greenstein said that the applicant's engineer made no statement that would warrant that conclusion. Mr. Richard Thom, an architect representing the Old City Civic Association and Historic East Market Street, addressed the Commission. He stated that the community feels that the building is an important contributor to the context of Old City. Mr. Thom presented plans that show the rear portion of the property being developed for parking and urged that the front part be redeveloped or "mothballed." Ms. Matzkin moved that the rear, imminently dangerous portion of the building be demolished immediately, and the front building be secured. Mr. Wilds seconded the motion which passed unanimously. The Committee deferred further consideration of demolition to the Hardship Committee. Old Business In response to questions about 907 Race Street posed by Ms. Kaplan, Mr. Baron reported that he has arranged a meeting with the owner of the building. Ms. Kaplan stated that she has spoken with an associate who could translate information related to the responsibilities of owners
Committee. Old Business In response to questions about 907 Race Street posed by Ms. Kaplan, Mr. Baron reported that he has arranged a meeting with the owner of the building. Ms. Kaplan stated that she has spoken with an associate who could translate information related to the responsibilities of owners of historic buildings into Chinese. This information could be published in a newsletter and otherwise be made available in Chinatown. *Certified Local Government, Educational Session, Colonial Architecture in Philadelphia, Richard Tyler, Historic Preservation Officer. To maintain Certified Local Government status the National Park 5 Service requires the Philadelphia Historical Commission to present eight hours of preservation education per year. In partial fulfillment of this obligation Mr. Tyler presented Commission members with a lecture on Colonial Architecture in Philadelphia. Respectfully submitted, Ira Kauderer