) J REPORT OF THE ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION Present Arlene Matzkin, Chair commission Conference Room Suite 13 o·:1, 14 o 1 Arch street 28 October 1997 Arlene Matzkin, Chair Tony Atkin Herbert Levy Daniel Mccoubrey Randal Baron, Assistant Historic Preservation Officer R. Scott Jacob, Historic Preservation Specialist Richard Tyler, Historic Preservation Officer Also Robert Desilets, Robert L. Desilets Architect Christian Busch, Robert L. Desilets Architect William Algie, William Algie Architect Peter Cahill, Sealoflex Karl Jandrey Marguerite Casale Samuel Attias Dan Bailey, w. s. Cumby and Son David Schoenhard, Partridge Tackett Architects Leslie Gerstein, Fleischer, Fleischer and Gerstein Tom Ferrick, Philadelphia Inquirer James Quesenberry Arthur Jones, Architect, Bower Lewis Thrower Robert Powers, Powers Company, Inc. Allison Kelsey, Preservation Alliance William J. Burke, Art Commission Stephen Verner Alan Heilman Mark Jackson, Chris Beardsley Architects Margaret MacLaren, Center city Residents Association Ms. Matzkin called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. 925 Chestnut Street, Federal Reserve Bank Jefferson Hospital - Rothman Institute, Owner Robert Desilets, Architect/Applicant DATE: 1925 PROPOSAL: New door on Chestnut street; mechanical penthouse; alleyway addition - final approval This proposal entails the removal of pipes from the existing penthouse to make it a rental space, and extending a mechanical penthouse toward 10th Street. Christian Busch, an architect for the project, explained that they designed the proposed addition to sit flush with the existing penthouse. The architects plan to have the building constructed in white or beige brick. Mr. Tyler suggested the Committee recommend approval for the mechanical building, with staff to review details for the screen wall. r . The proposal also includes final approval of the addition at the rear of the alleyway for the new elevator tower. The architects for the project submitted drawings detailing how the window configuration and materials .on the north end of the elevation reflect the design of the Bunting and Shrigley building, while the southern portion of the addition follows the fenestration pattern of the Cret building. The architects explained that they may use cast-stone on the alleyway addition to match the existing stone. Mr. Levy requested that staff review a sample of the cast-stone prior to final approval. The owner also wishes to remove the non-historic front door and install a rounded sliding door that more closely resembles the look of Cret's original revolving door. Mr. Levy objected to the extension of the drum-type frame created by the rounded doors
sample of the cast-stone prior to final approval. The owner also wishes to remove the non-historic front door and install a rounded sliding door that more closely resembles the look of Cret's original revolving door. Mr. Levy objected to the extension of the drum-type frame created by the rounded doors beyond the existing door frame. Mr. Busch stated that installing retractable mechanical doors would require sacrificing a small bathroom, electrical closet, and historic interior material. The Committee voted unanimously to recommend approval of the mechanical penthouse, with staff to review details of the brick; the alleyway addition, with staff to review and approve a cast stone sample, and new door. 409 south 12th street Karl Jandrey and Michael Kent, Owners/Applicants DATE: c. 1810 PROPOSAL: New windows and shutters This proposal entails replacing wood, six-over-six windows with windows that have applied muntins on the interior and exterior with a spacer bar between the panes of glass. The proposed muntin width is 7/8 of an inch. Committee members took exception to installing new frames within the existing, which would close down the windows, and recommended installing new sash into the old frames, thus eliminating the need for a box. The applicant explained that an earlier rehabilitation built-up the sills with concrete and added a wood in-fill piece to the jamb. The Committee preferred restoring the windows with six-over-six, true divided light sash, with joints hidden behind the frame. The proposal also includes installing shutters that exist in the basement. Mr. Baron stated that an old photograph affirms the similarity of the old and proposed shutters. The owner stated that the shutters will fit with and use historic hardware. 2 ) The Committee voted in favor of approving the shutters if made to fit with the old hardware, and to approve in concept six-over- six, true muntin windows installed in jamb liners within the existing frames. It voted unanimously to recommend denial of the proposed windows. 115-117 North 3rd Street CLR Design, Owner Dan Bailey, Contractor/Applicant DATE: c. 1845 PROPOSAL: Storm windows This proposal involves installing exterior metal triple- track storm windows on the third floor to match those on the second floor. Mr. Baron pointed out that whoever installed the second floor storm windows did so without a permit. Mr. Leyy objected to approving new storm windows to match illegal existing ones. He added that the glare from exterior storm windows, screens,
the third floor to match those on the second floor. Mr. Baron pointed out that whoever installed the second floor storm windows did so without a permit. Mr. Leyy objected to approving new storm windows to match illegal existing ones. He added that the glare from exterior storm windows, screens, and their frames obscure window details. The Committee recommended installing storm windows with removable half-window screens to permit visibility at least half the year. Mr. Baron suggested that the Commission has approved storms with thinner frames, single or double track, and painting them the color of the window trim to minimize their impact. The Committee voted unanimously to recommend approval of storm windows with thinner, single or double track frames, removable half-window screens, and painted to match existing window trim. 401 North Broad street Robert Boothroyd, Jr., Applicant DATE: 1929-31 PROPOSAL: Air-intake vent This proposal involves removing the panes of a large side window on the tenth floor to install an air-intake vent. Mr. Baron recommended keeping the sash in place and installing louvers within it. Mr. Levy pointed out that removing the sash and placing the louvers behind the frame could accommodate a larger vent if needed. The Committee voted unanimously to recommend approval, pending an elevation drawing. 8226 Germantown Avenue James and Marguerite Casale, Owners/Applicants DATE: c. 1760 PROPOSAL: Light fixture The owner wishes to install a huge lantern-style light fixture next to the front door. The fixture measures 12 inches J wide, 26 inches in height, with a projection of 15 inches. The 3 Committee questioned the appropriateness of such a large lamp on this small 18th-century residence. They said that the building will now be characterized and known by its large lantern. Marguerite Casale, the owner, assured the Committee that the top of the fixture will match the height of the top bf the transom, which the application does not specify The Committee voted unanimoµsly to recommend approval, with the top of fixture in line with' top of transom. 236 Market street Samuel Attias, Owner/Applicant DATE: c. 1895 ~ PROPOSAL: Storefront alterations This proposal entails removing a layer of stucco to re- expose a prism glass transom, and install a new aluminum and glass door to accommodate a separate entrance to the upper levels. Mr. Baron suggested the applicant frame the new storefront in wood. Mr. Levy preferred wood and glass doors. The owner expressed his
a layer of stucco to re- expose a prism glass transom, and install a new aluminum and glass door to accommodate a separate entrance to the upper levels. Mr. Baron suggested the applicant frame the new storefront in wood. Mr. Levy preferred wood and glass doors. The owner expressed his willingness to comply with the Committee's recommendations. The Committee asked for clearer drawings of the proposed alterations for staff to review before the next Commission Meeting. The Committee voted unanimously to recommend approval of two doors in concept, stucco removal, exposure and repair of prism glass, and requested clearer drawings. 9-15 Bank street Strawberry Court Corporation, owner Leslie Gerstein, Applicant DATE: c. 1870 PROPOSAL: New windows in former party wall This proposal involves the installation of three aluminum frame windows in a former party wall. The proposed first floor windows match the design of existing windows on the upper levels. The applicant explained that the creation of an apartment in a former studio space necessitates the new windows. The Committee voted unanimously to recommend approval. 710 Pine street James Quesenberry, Owner/Applicant DATE: c. 1810 • PROPOSAL: Repair chimney and reroof This proposal includes either the repair or replacement of the chimney, and a new roof. The applicant explained that a previous owner had the deteriorated chimney covered with stucco to stabilize it. The Committee recommended rebuilding the 4 . , 7 chimney in brick to match existing. Mr. Atkin suggested that facing the existing stuccoed chimney with smooth stucco constitutes an acceptable alternative. Mr. Baron asked the applicant to use terracotta chimney pots instead of stainless steel, if he wants to line the chimney. The Committee voted unanimously to recommend approval of rebuilding the chimney in b~ick to match existing, or repairing it with smooth stucco. It also recommended approving weathered- wood-colored asphalt shingles. 239 Arch street, Betsy Ross House City of Philadelphia, Owner William Algie, Architect/Applicant DATE: c. 1750 PROPOSAL: Sealant coating on east facade This proposal entails coating a former party wall with a special sealant to inhibit further water infiltration. Ms. Matzkin explained that the growing rising damp does not necessarily stem from exterior leakage. The Committee expressed concern that the sealant might retain water that seeps up from below. Pete Cahill, representing Sealoflex, the makers of the proposed sealant, explained that the product allows moisture to escape. Mr. Baron pointed out that stuccoed, former party walls
damp does not necessarily stem from exterior leakage. The Committee expressed concern that the sealant might retain water that seeps up from below. Pete Cahill, representing Sealoflex, the makers of the proposed sealant, explained that the product allows moisture to escape. Mr. Baron pointed out that stuccoed, former party walls do not warrant the same amount of concern as historic facades, where the sealant would likely cause more damage. ) The Committee voted unanimously to recommend approval. ) 327 Spruce Street Ellen Metz, Owner/Applicant DATE: 1812 PROPOSAL: Replace front door with original The owner discovered the original historic door in her home, and wants to restore and reinstall it. The Committee voted unanimously to recommend approval. 1424-30 Diamond street Jon Weiss, Owner/Applicant DATE: c. 1885 PROPOSAL: Brownstone repair This proposal involves repairing damaged brownstone watertables with brownstone-colored mortar. Mr. Baron stated that he has advised the applicant concerning the appropriate method of repair. The Committee voted unanimously to recommend approval, with staff assistance. 5 118 Market Street Len Scannapieco, Owner/Applicant DATE: c. 1880 PROPOSAL: New railing around basement entrances, change two windows This proposal entails installing gated iron fences around two basement openings, Le~.Scannapieco, the owner, stated that he needs the railings and gates to accommodated egress requirements for his basement tenants. He proposed either an iron picket fence, or a horizontal railing. The Committee preferred pipe railing. The proposal also inbludes replacing two first-floor fixed sash with a casement and a hinged awning window. The applicant explained that the new windows will provide greater air circulation. Mr. Baron asked if the change in the windows would create a larger frame. The-applicant assured him it would not. The Committee voted unanimously to approve the proposed window changes, and pipe-style railings. 12 South 12th Street, PSFS Building 12th Street Hotel Association, L. P., owner/Applicant Arthur Jones, Bower Lewis Thrower, Architect Robert Powers, Consultant R. F. Driscoll Company, Contractor DATE: 1932 PROPOSAL: Masonry restoration, addition, remove signage at street level, add canopy and sign on Market street, in concept. This proposal has several aspects for conceptual approval. Arthur Jones, architect for the project, explained the proposal to modify the PSFS building for use as a hotel/ conference center. Prior to the discussion of exterior issues and the addition, the Committee asked that Mr. Jones and Robert Powers, the preservation consultant, discuss· proposed alterations and design considerations of the interior, which the Committee
project, explained the proposal to modify the PSFS building for use as a hotel/ conference center. Prior to the discussion of exterior issues and the addition, the Committee asked that Mr. Jones and Robert Powers, the preservation consultant, discuss· proposed alterations and design considerations of the interior, which the Committee recognized as outside their jurisdiction. In response to Mr. Atkin's question, Mr. Jones explained that an attempt has been made to retrieve some of the building's original furniture from the Philadelphia Museum of Art where it resides in storage. Mr. Jones and Mr. Powers also stated that the rehabilitation allows for the continued retail use of the first floor, retains the original main banking hall as an open, uninterrupted space serving a public function as a ballroom, and that the 33rd-floor boardroom's lavish design elements and finishes shall be restored and preserved. The architect described the necessity of making some changes to the elevators, while retaining their original appearance. 6 ◄ \ ..... ) J The proposal includes a three-story addition, constructed along the building's south elevation, to house the hotel's kitchen, an additional ballroom, and conference rooms. Mr. Jones stated that the addition's design, fenestration, and exterior masonry work serve to complement ·the original building. Mr. Atkin took exception to using "Moderne" design elements in the addition, pointing out that additions should not appear too similar to the original bui}ding. Mr. Tyler disagreed, noting the appropriateness of designing an addition that complements, but does not mimic the original structure. Mr. Levy objected to the fenestration on the second floor, citing the tack of continuity with the existing building as particularly objectionable. Ms. Matzkin suggested the addition should sit back farther in from the·street to minimize its impact. The Committee asked the architect to submit more drawings of the proposed addition reflecting color and scale, and demonstrating the overall effect the addition would have. The proposal calls for cleaning and restoring the exterior of the building. Mr. Powers described the cleaning of the masonry and metal facade elements with the gentlest and most effective method, spot pointing where necessary, and removal and replacement in kind of deteriorated masonry and metal. The Committee found no objection to the methods and products described in the proposal. The proposal entails rehabilitating the storefront windows to resemble more closely their original appearance based on surviving original features and elevation drawings, repairing and replacing where
removal and replacement in kind of deteriorated masonry and metal. The Committee found no objection to the methods and products described in the proposal. The proposal entails rehabilitating the storefront windows to resemble more closely their original appearance based on surviving original features and elevation drawings, repairing and replacing where necessary sections of the stainless steel and "black" glass bands with new materials to match existing and installing two new entrances on the 12th street facade approximately where the original drawings show their location. The original entrances shall remain in their existing locations with new doors where required to suit the hotel's needs. The new occupant does not require the concourse entrance, so they have plans to fill it in with new granite to match adjacent existing. The Market Street doors do not meet modern hotel or building code requirements, warranting their replacement with modern doors compatible in design with the originals. Mr. Tyler reminded the architects to avoid mimicking the originals too closely when installing non-historic structural elements. Mr. Powers described the proposed glass and steel canopy planned for the main Market Street entrance. It has cantilevers to allow for the retention of the original sign supports and minimize the impact on the historic facade. The canopy design includes a Loews Hotel sign, similar to the historic signage. The proposal includes cleaning, repair, and replacement in kind of several windows throughout the building. Mr. Jones stated that because the windows constitute highly visible and important features of the building's exterior and interior, the 7 proposed windows match the existing, except in the few instances where minor exterior flashing provides much needed weather protection. He added that the sash and frames will have the bright metal finish of the originals. Lastly, the proposal involves the removal of the Lerner's sign, and masonry patching where required. Mr. Jones explained that new Loews signage here~- which complements the style of the building, should cover the holes left from the old sign. He also wants to use an original sign board that contains three rows of thin, narrow, stainless steel strips on which the original back- lighted letters hung. The proposal calls for the retention and restoration of the rooftop and street-level PSFS signs and the historic address signs. 0 The owner may want to introduce their name into the signage at rooftop level, but has no intention of removing the famous PSFS
the original back- lighted letters hung. The proposal calls for the retention and restoration of the rooftop and street-level PSFS signs and the historic address signs. 0 The owner may want to introduce their name into the signage at rooftop level, but has no intention of removing the famous PSFS sign. The Committee voted unanimously to recommend approval of an addition in concept; masonry restoration with staff to review and approve method; replacement in kind and restoration of windows; entrances in concept; canopy with sign on Market Street; removal of some street level signage and restoration of historic back-lit signage. 2135 Green street Shawn Drey, owner Richard Neal, Contractor/Applicant DATE: c. 1860 PROPOSAL: Legalize cleaning and pointing This proposal includes legalizing cleaning and pointing. The contractor cleaned and pointed the building without a permit. Mr. Baron stated that staff has looked at the cleaning and pointing sample, and finds them quite acceptable. The Committee voted unanimously to recommend approval. 1839-1841 Spruce Street Howard and Anna Sacks, Owners Chris Beardsley, Architect/Applicant DATE: 1924 PROPOSAL: rooftop deck and stairwell enclosure This proposal calls for the installation of a rooftop deck and enclosed stairwell. The penthouse of this building includes rooftop rights, and the owners wish to install a staircase leading to the roof. Mark Jackson, representing the architect for the project, explained that the owners want to use teak for the construction of the deck. The Committee objected to the Dryvit faux stucco proposed for the stairwell enclosure, preferring the use of real stucco. Mr. Jackson explained that the enclosure's placement in the center of the rooftop minimizes visibility from the street, and asked what the Committee found 8 ..,. .. 7 _) objectionable about using the cost-saving Dryvit. Mr. Atkin explained that this material does not hold up well, and damages easily. The Committee members also noted that such a well designed deck, constructed of rare and expensive teak, merits better quality siding on the enclosure. The Committee voted unanimously to recommend approval of the rooftop deck and the stairw~ll enclosure, using cream-painted stucco instead of Dryvi t. ·: • 1835 Delancey street Gary and Janet Swartz, owners Alan Heilman, Applicant • DATE: 1895 PROPOSAL: Brick-in two rear windows, replace window This proposal entails the removal of two highly visible, third-floor rear windows and bricking-in the openings. The applicant explained that the owners wish to eliminate the two windows, no longer
Delancey street Gary and Janet Swartz, owners Alan Heilman, Applicant • DATE: 1895 PROPOSAL: Brick-in two rear windows, replace window This proposal entails the removal of two highly visible, third-floor rear windows and bricking-in the openings. The applicant explained that the owners wish to eliminate the two windows, no longer accessible from the interior, because of air leakage. The Committee recommended sealing the windows better and closing the shutters over them. The proposal also calls for the replacement of a non- historic metal "greenhouse-style" window on the rear of the first floor with a wood "greenhouse" window of the same proportions. Mr. Baron noted that the original window was probably a six-over- six, true muntin, wood window. The applicant showed a catalog illustration of the proposed window, which the Committee found acceptable. The Committee voted unanimously to recommend retaining and resealing the windows and covering them with existing shutters instead of bricking them in. It also recommended approval of the wood "greenhouse" window. 2041-2043 Chestnut street Harvey Robin, Owner Neil Rosenberg, Applicant DATE: c. 1860 PROPOSAL: Legalize sign This proposal involves the legalization of a flat wall sign, which was installed by the owner without a permit or Commission approval. Although the sign encompasses 64 square feet, its location within the non-historic fabric of the facade's first floor does not obscure anything of architectural or historic significance. The sign fits the scale of the window below it. The Committee voted unanimously to recommend approval. 9 2042 Locust street Chuck Karnes and Jim Hess, Owners Harold Murray, Applicant DATE: 1901 PROPOSAL: New windows The Committee did not review this proposal because no one represented the applicant a~ the meeting or arranged for staff to do so. It recommended that· the Commission table the application for six months. Respectfully submitted, ~~~AA-- R. Scott Jacob ?/v- v-• Y 10 ..:.. ..