THE REPORT OF THE ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE OF THE PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION Arlene Matzkin, Chairperson Commission Conference Room Suite 1301, 1401 Arch Street 31 May 1994 Present Arlene Matzkin, AIA, Chairperson Tony Atkin, Tony Atkin & Associates Penelope H. Batcheler, Historical Architect J. William Cornell, J.S. Cornell & Sons, Inc. David Hollenberg, Historical Architect, National Park Service Herbert Levy, GBQC Suzanne Pentz, Keast and Hood Richard Tyler, Historic Preservation Officer Randal Baron, Historic Preservation Planner Lori Plavin Salganicoff, Historic Preservation Specialist Jeffrey Barr, Historical Research Technician Also Michael Baron, Penn Mutual Life Insurance Company Frank Lump, Penn Mutual Life Insurance Company Joseph P. Clearkin, James J. Clearkin Inc. James J. Clearkin Inc, James J. Clearkin Inc. Scott Duenow, Vitetta Group George Skarmeas, Vitetta Group Hyman Myers, Vitetta Group Lisa Soderberg, Vitetta Group Ray Grenald, Grenald Associates Annette Hzadio, Grenald Associates Michael Hauptman, Brawer & Hauptman Architects Reverend Monsignor Richard J. Skelly, Archdiocese of Philadelphia Carle Alen, Archdiocese of Philadelphia Herbert Kramer, Herbert Kramer & Associates Charles L. Hancock, Charles L. Hancock Architect Tony Mitchell, T. Twoddel Warren Bradway, 345 S. Camac Street Cliff Northrop, NPS Bonnie Halda, NPS Bill Brookover, NPS Rich Varela, NPS Report of the Architectural Committee 31 May 1994 Meeting 510 WALNUT STREET Anthony Colciaghi, Diversified Interior Design PROPOSAL: Alterations behind Egyptian Facade This proposal calls for altering the facade of the Mitchell Guirgola-designed building behind the marble Egyptian Revival facade. The contemporary building is set back from the marble facade wall in a manner which creates a dark, cavernous, and windy entrance space. Additionally, stairs located behind the marble facade that go to a basement bistro are unprotected from the elements and poorly lit. The Applicant seeks to extend the recessed entrance forward to the sidewalk, to a point adjacent to the marble facade, with a clear glass foyer capped by a band of black glass. This black glass band would continue 3' back from and for the entire width of the marble facade, which has window openings but no sash, to offer some protection and light to the bistro's stairs. With some discussion of whether the capping band should be black or clear, members of the Committee approved the foyer design. The Committee declared, however, that the band behind the marble facade would alter the facade's appearance owing to its reflectivity behind one band of window openings. As a design alternative, Committee members suggested that a
capping band should be black or clear, members of the Committee approved the foyer design. The Committee declared, however, that the band behind the marble facade would alter the facade's appearance owing to its reflectivity behind one band of window openings. As a design alternative, Committee members suggested that a non-visible roof be built behind the facade to shield the stairway, and that the foyer structure should end where the marble facade begins. This roof could be connected to the facade's non-historic concrete support structure, and should slope away from the facade for drainage. The Committee recommended approval of the foyer design, advocating, however, a different treatment than that proposed for basement stair protection. Rather than a continuation of the new foyer's capping band, the Committee recommended a non-visible shed roof be connected to the marble facade's concrete support structure in a manner which allows for drainage away from the facade. 220 QUEEN STREET, ST. PHILIP DE NERI CHURCH Joseph Clearkin, Contractor PROPOSAL: Cornice/Gutter Replacement The Applicants propose to replace the Church's roof, removing the pole gutter, and the highly visible side cornice. The new hanging "k" gutter would be installed within a new aluminum cornice that approximates but does not match the profile of the original wood cornice. This difference occurs because the original cornice has not been measured or professionally recorded to inform the replacement design, and the contractor is not able to manufacture the correct ogee curve in aluminum. Mr. Atkin noted that since the roof is to be replaced, it may be possible to build the new gutter into the edge of the roof and then create a new cornice in aluminum that better matches the existing. It was also noted that since s-curves are difficult to produce in aluminum, that fiberglass be considered. After much discussion of the design of these elements, the Committee concluded that the Applicant should produce measured drawings of the existing and proposed cornice and gutter systems, as well as cost estimates for producing the cornice in both fiberglass and a combination of fiberglass and aluminum. Committee members expressed a concern that a cornice of original design should not be replaced with something so different. The Committee recommended denial of the proposal and asked that the Applicant return with measured drawings of the existing and proposed cornice and gutter systems. Cost estimates for producing the cornice in fiberglass and/or fiberglass and
that a cornice of original design should not be replaced with something so different. The Committee recommended denial of the proposal and asked that the Applicant return with measured drawings of the existing and proposed cornice and gutter systems. Cost estimates for producing the cornice in fiberglass and/or fiberglass and aluminum should also be required. Report of the Architectural Committee 3 31 May 1994 Meeting CITY HALL, BROAD AND MARKET STREETS Lisa Soderberg, Vitetta Group Ray Grenald, Grenald Lighting Associates PROPOSAL: East Pavilion Facade Lighting The Applicant proposes night illumination of the East Pavilion of City Hall with banks of lights mounted atop the Wanamaker and the One East Penn Center buildings across Juniper Street. Daylight light quality and color would be imitated. Mr. Grenald described his company's lighting design philosophy with a slide presentation of previous projects and designs. These projects have included the lighting of the Pennsylvania Avenue Old Post Office in Washington DC with concealed fixtures designed by Grenald and mounted on the backs of 40' high swan-neck street lights, illuminating the National Archives with sources behind each setback, as well as lighting Conversation Hall with well-concealed fixtures. The Applicant stated that mounting lights on existing streetlights or on poles would not work well owing to the height of City Hall. The Applicant chose to place lightbanks atop surrounding buildings since City Hall could be so easily lit this way. Committee and staff members were concerned with overlighting City Hall, the effect of these lightbanks on pedestrians -- who might be able to see the bright lights from west Market Street -- and their effect on the historic buildings on which they would be mounted. On the Wanamaker building, for instance, since items as small as windows might size have been reviewed, the impact of possibly visible 15'-wide banks of bright light cannot be ignored. And with bright lights sitting well in front of it, the PSFS building may not be visible from west Market Street. Committee members also asked why the lighting must approach daylight in brightness and were told that people learn to see in daylight and therefore perceive that to be normal lighting. To answer these questions, Mr. Grenald proposed to prepare a mockup by placing a light atop the Wanamaker Building for Committee and Commission view. This was heartily endorsed by the Committee. The mockup will be installed in 6-8 weeks, pending approval
daylight and therefore perceive that to be normal lighting. To answer these questions, Mr. Grenald proposed to prepare a mockup by placing a light atop the Wanamaker Building for Committee and Commission view. This was heartily endorsed by the Committee. The mockup will be installed in 6-8 weeks, pending approval of the extra cost. Committee members voted to defer approval and to recommend that the Applicant return with sections drawn to demonstrate the angle and path of the proposed lights. Furthermore, the Applicant should prepare a mockup of one light on the Wanamaker Building for Committee and Commission review. 260 NORTH 4TH STREET, ST. AUGUSTINE'S CHURCH Mike Hauptman, Brawer and Hauptman Architects PROPOSAL: Tower Reconstruction This proposal calls for the replacement of the steeple, severely damaged in a recent storm and subsequently removed. The brick cover beneath is now capped with a flat roof to prevent water infiltration. By the time of this storm, the removed steeple had been stripped of much of its ornament. The Applicant proposes to reconstruct the steeple in aluminum, with its original detail reproduced based on historic photographs and other documentation. The proposal is to replace the 70' steeple with aluminum forms that will be bent, pressed, and spun into form, with poured urethane details. The Kentucky-based manufacturer of the steeple has had extensive experience in building and reconstructing steeples, towers, cupolas, etc. out of aluminum and urethane. The steeple will be built in Kentucky based on the Applicant's drawings and shipped in a few large pieces, complete with internal framing. The steeple would come with a 20-year Crylon Report of the Architectural Committee 4 31 May 1994 Meeting coating and may be repainted. The manufacturer's workers would install the steeple. The church, however, must fit the brick tower with a steel frame to support the steeple above and have it roofed. Fiberglass was considered for this project as well; however, in addition to having UV problems, fiberglass manufacturers would not assemble what they produce and would require the Applicant to seek another contractor to build the steeple support structure. The Committee recommended approval for this project. Penny Batchelor submitted suggestions for slight changes to elevation profiles to the Applicant. 343-345 SOUTH CAMAC STREET, AKA 1221 PINE STREET Warren Bradway, Owner PROPOSAL: Storefront Cornice Removal and Bargeboard Replacement This proposal was seen several months ago by the Architectural Committee and the Commission, having come about
this project. Penny Batchelor submitted suggestions for slight changes to elevation profiles to the Applicant. 343-345 SOUTH CAMAC STREET, AKA 1221 PINE STREET Warren Bradway, Owner PROPOSAL: Storefront Cornice Removal and Bargeboard Replacement This proposal was seen several months ago by the Architectural Committee and the Commission, having come about in response to a violation for Demolition by Neglect that was issued on behalf of the Commission. When it left the Committee last time, there was a recommendation to allow the storefront cornice to be removed and replaced with individual cornices. The actual design, however, was rejected and the staff was to work with Mr. Bradway to come up with an alternative design based on research to look at other such cornices and storefronts. The staff found that all the cornices on the storefront windows of the c. 1860 period had either full building-width cornices if they were in mid-block or wrap-around cornices if they were on corners. With this information the Commission rejected the Committee's recommendation and asked Mr. Bradway to retain the existing cornices until another wraparound cornice was designed and approved with the help of the staff. Mr. Bradway objected, saying that he was not notified before the Commission meeting about the staff information on the cornice and would now like a chance to show that he still should be allowed to install individual cornices rather than a wrap-around. In addition, the Commission asked him to submit a drawing of the bargeboard that he has been ordered to replace. Mr. Bradway has submitted a picture of the existing bargeboard but no drawing. Although the Commission staff received no submission from Mr. Bradway for this meeting, a selection of copied photographs that he had submitted at an earlier meeting with staff at the Law Department was included in the Committee packet. At this meeting, Mr. Bradway presented the Committee with additional photographs. The dates of these buildings and their details were not substantiated, however. Early photographs in the files of the Historical Commission show the current cornice, but with evidence in the brick above of a heavier wraparound cornice. Mr. Bradway asserted that this was perhaps the mark of a large awning. Also presented by Mr. Bradway was a bargeboard-replacement mockup which consisted of two pieces of wood attached at a perpendicular to each other with a wood dowel in the crook and painted dark green. Committee members
cornice. Mr. Bradway asserted that this was perhaps the mark of a large awning. Also presented by Mr. Bradway was a bargeboard-replacement mockup which consisted of two pieces of wood attached at a perpendicular to each other with a wood dowel in the crook and painted dark green. Committee members looked at the photo of an existing piece of the bargeboard and said that the mockup was not a good match. It was suggested that a drawing of the existing could be made with a molding comb to take an impression of the existing. The Committee saw the need for more information, including a drawing of the current bargeboard configuration and investigation beneath the existing storefront cornice for evidence of earlier treatments. The Committee voted to approve Mr. Bradway's proposal with the requirement that he submit profile details of current and future bargeboard and cornices, and that he work with Commission staff to come up with the original details for the bargeboard and a proper detail for the individual storefront cornices. Report of the Architectural Committee 5 31 May 1994 Meeting INDEPENDENCE SQUARE GROUP OF BUILDINGS Vitetta Group, National Park Service PROPOSAL: Utility Improvement Project As a result of the 27 May 1994 Special Meeting of the Architectural Committee, Commission consultants Michael Henry and Stephen Finkelman met with George Skarmeas on 30 May 1994, and on 31 May 1994 Commission staff, several members of the Architectural Committee, and these consultants met at 10 a.m. with the National Park Service, the Vitetta Group, and their consultants. The purpose of these technical meetings was to identify acceptable means to improve the HVAC systems of the buildings while preserving as much historic building fabric and character as possible. During this meeting, Michael Henry and Stephen Finkelman, mechanical engineering consultants to the Commission, questioned the proposed 20-63% relative humidity and 65-78°F parameters for the project and the extent of new air handlers and duct runs proposed. Both stressed that for so important an intervention, a more substantial basis than ASHRAE standards is obligatory. Indeed, the New Orleans Charter mandates that any intervention which affects historic fabric must be justified by current damage and balanced against an existing system. No damage caused by mechanical systems has yet been reported in these buildings, and the existing system has not been sufficiently tested. Since replacement of air handling systems at or proximate to their present locations would
historic fabric must be justified by current damage and balanced against an existing system. No damage caused by mechanical systems has yet been reported in these buildings, and the existing system has not been sufficiently tested. Since replacement of air handling systems at or proximate to their present locations would not further damage building fabric, Mr. Henry and Mr. Finkelman suggested that the Commission and the Applicant consider replacing the air handlers, increasing air flow, but using only existing duct systems in this part of the utilities improvement project. This system would then be monitored by professionals experienced with monitoring historic buildings for a period of three (3) years. If found to be insufficient, the National Park Service and the Historical Commission would revisit the issue. This supplement would, of course, be reviewed in a timely manner by the Historical Commission. Independence National Historic Park is undergoing an 8-year improvement project. Mr. Brookover acknowledged during the morning meeting that while visitor comfort was a tertiary consideration behind the buildings and their collections, it did still remain a consideration. According to Mr. Brookover, Independence National Historic Park will accept this conservative approach so long as the noise from increased air flow through existing ducts was not too great. With this statement, consensus was found between the meeting parties. With some changes, the recommendations resulting from this technical meeting were adopted by the full Committee and are recounted below. In Congress Hall the Committee recommended that there be no new penetrations in the truss wall of the Senate Chamber. At the regular meeting, the Committee also dealt with two loose ends from the previous meeting -- louvers on Independence Square cellar windows and the lighting of the buildings. The need for removing a window and design of proposed cellar louvers was approved. Lighting of historic spaces, described by the Applicant as currently causing very bright and very dark spots, is proposed to be enhanced using greater amounts of dimmer incandescent fixtures. As is currently the practice, these fixtures will either be concealed (in cabinetry, doors, balconies, etc.), or light will come from free-standing torchieres of modern design. To date, only basement fixtures have been selected; others are still under development. Approval is sought for these basement fixtures and for wiring for other new fixtures. Report of the Architectural Committee 6 31 May 1994 Meeting The Committee, in agreement with the National Park
free-standing torchieres of modern design. To date, only basement fixtures have been selected; others are still under development. Approval is sought for these basement fixtures and for wiring for other new fixtures. Report of the Architectural Committee 6 31 May 1994 Meeting The Committee, in agreement with the National Park Service and their consultants, revised and adopted the recommendations of its technical sub-committee. The recommendations are as follows: Criteria, in rank order: 1. preservation and conservation of the buildings 2. curation of collections 3. visitor comfort. Operational criteria: run so as to permit no formation of condensation. Temperature will follow accordingly. The Committee recognizes that the existing equipment has outlived its usefulness and effectiveness. The Committee recommends the approval of: 1. the replacement of existing equipment with modern equipment at or proximate to the existing locations, 2. in general, the use of the existing ductwork with modifications, e.g. 1) new registers and returns in Independence Hall's second floor using existing in-floor ducts, and 2) changes in duct runs at the basement of Congress Hall, 3. the enhancement of the supply and return systems on the first floor of Independence Hall as shown in Alternate 2 of the 22 April 1994 working drawings, 4. the enhancement of the supply and return systems on the second floor of Independence Hall as long as the existing in-structure ductwork systems are not changed in size or location, 5. double walling for all new water-filled pipes and vertical chases above finished spaces, 6. replacement of the single air handling unit in the Congress Hall attic with a new larger unit in a new location, 7. the replacement of roofs in kind to abate asbestos problem and install "knock-out" panel in the roof of Congress Hall for equipment installation and access, 8. the structural component of the Applicant's proposal, described in previous minutes, 9. the installation of wiring for lighting fixtures, 10. the presence and design of proposed cellar window louvers in Independence Hall, 11. the submission of contract documents for review by sub-committee of three, i.e. Matzkin, Henry and Finkelman; basement lighting fixtures will be reviewed with this submission. The Committee recommends the approval in concept of: 1. testing and monitoring the updated system in Congress Hall and Independence Hall for effectiveness and performance for a period of three years. The Applicant must meet with technical consultants to the Commission and members of the Committee
reviewed with this submission. The Committee recommends the approval in concept of: 1. testing and monitoring the updated system in Congress Hall and Independence Hall for effectiveness and performance for a period of three years. The Applicant must meet with technical consultants to the Commission and members of the Committee and Commission staff to better define this project, 2. lighting fixtures. Final design, placement, quantity, etc. must come back to the Committee and Commission for approval. Ms. Pentz abstained from vote as a member of this project's design team; Mr. Hollenberg abstained owing to his employment with the National Park Service. Report of the Architectural Committee 31 May 1994 Meeting There being no further business, the Committee adjourned at 5:30 pm. Respectfully submitted, Lori Plavin Salganicoff [HANDWRITTEN NOTES: Signature of "Lori Plavin Salganicoff" appears in cursive handwriting above the typed name at the bottom of the page.]