THE MINUTES OF THE 462nd STATED MEETING OF THE PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION 14 February 2001 Commission Conference Room 18th Floor, 1515 Arch Street Stephanie G. Wolf, Ph.D., Vice-Chair Present Stephanie G. Wolf, Ph.D.,Vice-Chair David Brownlee, Ph.D. William Fox, Assistant Director, Department of Commerce Melissa Heller Batzer, Office of City Council President, Director of Economic Development Joseph James, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Public Property Ernest Leonardo, Director of Policy and Strategic Planning, City Planning Commission David J. Perri, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Licenses and Inspections Michael Sklaroff, Esq. Robert Thomas, AIA Scott Wilds, Assistant Director, Office of Housing and Community Development Randal Baron, Assistant Historic Preservation Officer Diane M. Hughes, Executive Secretary Richard Tyler, Historic Preservation Officer Mark Zecca, Esq., Senior Attorney, City of Philadelphia Law Department Also Terence Sullivan, Schooley Caldwell Associates Cynthis Tedeschi, Esq., 401 North Broad Street Barbara Dertouzos, 401 North Broad Street Jerald Batoff, 401 North Broad Street Steve McCann, 360 Networks (USA) Incorporated Robert Graves, Bower Lewis Thrower Architects Deena Parham, Philadelphia City Planning Commission Kiki Bolender, Schade and Bolender Architects Virginia Rynning, 203 South Sartain Street Thomas Howley, Beneficial Bank, 530 Walnut Street Kenneth Andrayo, Capital Sign Company, 530 Walnut Street Charles Tonetti, National Park Service Linda Harris, Philadelphia Inquirer Te Chow Lei, T.C. Lei and Associates Stephanie G. Wolf, Vice-Chair, recognized the presence of a quorum and called the 462nd Stated Meeting of the Philadelphia Historical Commission to order at 9:15 A.M. Minutes of the 461st Stated Meeting of the Philadelphia Historical Commission. Upon a motion made by Mr. Leonardo and duly seconded, the Commission approved the minutes of the 461st Stated Meeting of the Philadelphia Historical Commission held 10 January 2001. 1 THE REPORT of the Architectural Committee, 30 January 2001. 401 North Broad Street, SE corner of Noble Street Gerald S. Kaufman Corporation, Owner Michael Hansen, Applicant DATE: 1921-31 PROPOSAL: Rooftop HVAC and ground floor generator The Architectural Committee recommended the delegation to staff of approval of future installation so long as they also remain lower than the top of the Noble Street historic iron fence. This proposal involves legalizing the installation of a generator at the track level and mechanical cooling units on the building rooftop. The Committee voted last month to recommend approval of the HVAC and denial of the generators. The building management has hired a lawyer who asked for a continuance and now wishes to hear the comments
of a generator at the track level and mechanical cooling units on the building rooftop. The Committee voted last month to recommend approval of the HVAC and denial of the generators. The building management has hired a lawyer who asked for a continuance and now wishes to hear the comments of the Committee in person. The applicant wishes to demonstrate that the generator falls outside the boundaries of the designation. The staff recommended approval of the rooftop units per Standard 9, with the Commission to decide the issue of jurisdiction on the generator placement. If the Commission finds that it has jurisdiction, the staff divided on the question of denial or approval of the generator placed on the ground. Mr. Tyler stated that in the nomination form the verbal boundary description includes only the footprint of the building; however, the text of the description cites the distance from the corner of Callowhill Street to Noble Street as the same dimension as the building. Owing to the real distances being greater, he believed this an error, and recommended that the jurisdiction of the building should end on the north wall and not extend into the project area. Jerald Batoff, counsel for the applicant, presented a survey of the building and stated his acceptance of the Committee’s recommendation; however, he said that he is unable to make any representation for other tenants. The Commission addressed the issue at hand and deferred the question of jurisdiction. Mr. Sklaroff made a motion to accept the Committee’s recommendation. Mr. Wilds seconded the motion which carried with 10 votes. Mr. James opposed the motion. Mr. Leonardo made a motion to approve the rooftop HVAC. Mr. Fox seconded the motion which carried with 10 votes. Mr. James opposed the motion. 203 South Sartain Street Virginia Rynning, Owner/Applicant DATE: 1817-19 PROPOSAL: Cut new window in visible side wall The Architectural Committee recommended approval with staff to review and approve window details. This application calls for cutting a new window in the north elevation of this brick rowhouse. Plans show the 54” by 30” window cut into the first floor of the stucco-faced north elevation, 2 14’9” away from the primary façade. The applicant proposes a wood, double-hung window as well as a flower box. Mr. James questioned the ownership of the adjacent property; it was determined that the Redevelopment Authority owns the site. Mr. Leonardo made a motion
floor of the stucco-faced north elevation, 2 14’9” away from the primary façade. The applicant proposes a wood, double-hung window as well as a flower box. Mr. James questioned the ownership of the adjacent property; it was determined that the Redevelopment Authority owns the site. Mr. Leonardo made a motion to accept the Committee’s recommendation. Mr. Brownlee seconded the motion which carried unanimously. 1600 Arch Street, SW corner of 16th Street SAS-1600 Arch Street, LP, Owner Robert B. Graves, Applicant DATE: 1925 PROPOSAL: Steel window replacement and restoration, lengthen 16th floor windows The Architectural Committee recommended approval with the staff to review details. This application calls for the replacement and restoration of the more ornate metal windows on the upper floors of the building. In addition, the applicant proposes cutting the stone sills and lengthening the large arched windows on the 16th floor to provide a better view from a lower vantage point inside the building. The architect proposes working with the staff on the window details as they become available. The staff recommended approval of the window restoration per Standard 6 but denial of the cutting of the window sills per Standard 9. The applicant stated that raising the sills would entail the loss of historic fabric; however, raising the floor would have yet more impact on the interior historic fabric. In addition, he also stated that the State Historic Preservation Office has approved the proposal. Mr. James made a motion to accept the Committee’s recommendation. Mr. Leonardo seconded the motion which carried with 10 votes. Mr. Sklaroff abstained. 2226 Green Street Alson Alston, Owner/Applicant DATE: c. 1866 PROPOSAL: Revised development of multi-family dwelling The Architectural Committee recommended approval. The applicant returned to the Committee with a revised plan for developing a multi-unit residence at 2224 Green Street. This plan reduces the depth of the new building and pulls it farther away from the west property line at the rear of the property. The staff recommended approval per Standards 9 and 10. The applicant requested a continuance in writing. 2300-2348 Grays Ferry Avenue, Biddle Hall at Naval Square Toll Brothers, Owner Elliot J. Rothschild, Applicant 3 DATE: 1827-44 PROPOSAL: Conversion to apartments, HVAC and cut windows into doors The Architectural Committee recommended the following: 1. Approval of cutting windows into doors, subject to a revised design with three panes across, a thinner frame, a solid base, and symmetrical placement;
Brothers, Owner Elliot J. Rothschild, Applicant 3 DATE: 1827-44 PROPOSAL: Conversion to apartments, HVAC and cut windows into doors The Architectural Committee recommended the following: 1. Approval of cutting windows into doors, subject to a revised design with three panes across, a thinner frame, a solid base, and symmetrical placement; 2. Approval of a low metal railing between the porch units with the staff to review all details. Application for the placement of the air conditioning units considered incomplete. This proposal involves the rehabilitation of Biddle Hall into rental residential units. The exterior alterations in this proposal include cutting windows into doors to reach the porch, providing porch dividers and placement of HVAC units in a concrete trough on the ground behind a berm in front of the structure. Other work involves restoration of stucco walls and metal roofing. The applicant seeks the Committee’s support in appealing the requirement to make alterations to the decorative metal porch railings before the Board of Building Standards. The staff recommended approval of the cutting of windows into the doors provided they be modified to look more like the windows on both the east and west elevations, and the porch dividers lowered and more like the existing porch railings per Standard 9. The Commission can verify for the Board of Building Standards that the building has historical significance and listing; however, the Commission does not endorse variances from the life-safety code. Mr. Baron stated that the applicant relayed by phone, that the Board of Buildings Standard has granted a variance for the railing height. Mr. Leonardo made a motion to accept the Committee’s recommendation. Mr. Wilds seconded the motion which carried unanimously. 315 South Philip Street Catherine Apothaker, Owner/Applicant DATE: 1972 PROPOSAL: Install bollards and replace sidewalk in-kind The Architectural Committee recommended approval. This application calls for the repair or replacement of the brick sidewalk in kind as well as the placement of six 3’6” tall steel bollards on the sidewalk in front of the property. The staff recommended approval of the bollards per Standard 10. Mr. Leonardo made a motion to accept the Committee’s recommendation. Mr. James seconded the motion which carried unanimously. 3-5 Strawberry Street Milo Investment, Owner Marc Cohen, Applicant DATE: c. 1830 PROPOSAL: Legalize stucco on rear wall 4 The Architectural Committee recommended approval. This application calls for the legalization of stucco on the rear, east façade, second, third and
Committee’s recommendation. Mr. James seconded the motion which carried unanimously. 3-5 Strawberry Street Milo Investment, Owner Marc Cohen, Applicant DATE: c. 1830 PROPOSAL: Legalize stucco on rear wall 4 The Architectural Committee recommended approval. This application calls for the legalization of stucco on the rear, east façade, second, third and fourth floors of the 19th century commercial building. The applicant’s first permit for stucco specifically limited the work to the first floor, which the applicants chose to ignore. The staff recommended approval because a new structure now restricts visibility to that wall. Mr. Brownlee made a motion to accept the Committee’s recommendation. Mr. Leonardo seconded the motion which carried with 9 votes. Mr. James opposed the motion. 208 North 35th Street, International House, Drexel University Drexel University, Owner Cathy Wolfe, Applicant DATE: c. 1830 PROPOSAL: Legalize work and exterior rehabilitation The Architectural Committee recommended approval of the following: 1. Replace front and side windows in wood to match original but legalization of the vinyl windows on the rear ell; 2. Doors replaced with historic doors; 3. Stained glass windows replaced in the bay, and 4. Restoration of the shingled bays and the stucco. With staff to review all details, including details of the stain glass. This application calls for partial correction and legalization of alterations made to the exterior of this Drexel University residential structure without permits. Plans show alternative proposals both of which include general restoration made to the east, west and north facades including new shingles, repainting trim, new doors, scraping, patching and repairing cornices and quoins. In addition, the applicant proposes a combination of new true divided light wood windows and the retention and painting of illegally installed vinyl windows. The two plans differ in that Alternate 2, calls for reinstalling many of the wood windows in the front and side elevations in place of restoration work on the cupola. All work, except on the rear ell, has visibility. The staff recommended approval of exterior restoration per Standard 6. Denial of vinyl window legalization per Standard 6, except for those areas on the rear ell, invisible from the street. The Committee should not legalize the removal of the stained glass windows from the side bay. Drexel should replace any windows removed from the cupola for new ductwork with new wood windows. Mr. James questioned the removal of the shutters; however, the designation photographs do not show the
the street. The Committee should not legalize the removal of the stained glass windows from the side bay. Drexel should replace any windows removed from the cupola for new ductwork with new wood windows. Mr. James questioned the removal of the shutters; however, the designation photographs do not show the existence of shutters. Mr. James made a motion to accept the Committee’s recommendation with the inclusion of retaining the vinyl windows on the rear ell. Mr. Wilds seconded the motion which carried unanimously. 321 Chestnut Street, National Liberty Museum Irvin Borowsky, Owner/Applicant DATE: c. 1905 5 PROPOSAL: Install video screen on front façade The Architectural Committee recommended denial. This application calls for the alteration of a window on the museum’s primary façade to accommodate the installation of a plasma video screen and two speakers. Plans show the removal of an existing grille on the bottom one-fourth of the window as well as removal of an existing mullion and glass. The applicant proposes the placement of a 48” by 27” video screen behind replacement glass. In addition, plans call for the installation of two, 1’2” speakers flanking the screen mounted to the exterior of the existing window frame. The staff recommended denial of the application per Standards 9 and 10. The applicant requested to be taken off the agenda. 232-54 Philip Place, 233-55 South 3rd Street 281-93 Locust Street, 284-92 St. James Place Society Hill Townhouses Common Area James Cooke, President Washington Square Townhouse Council, Owner DATE: 1962 PROPOSAL: Courtyard paving and renovation The Architectural Committee recommended approval with staff to review samples and details. This application calls for renovations to the common area enclosed by the Society Hill Townhouses designed by I. M. Pei in 1962. The plans show re-paving with salvaged or matching brick, enlarged pits for four existing trees, asphalt resurfacing, repainting parking lines and new light poles. The applicant further proposes construction of a more substantial raised planter bed, with salvaged or matching brick and cast stone, to protect the Lachaise sculpture located in the center of the courtyard. Plans provide for the removal of existing trees around the planter and the installation of new plantings and bollards around the center island. The staff recommended approval per Standard 9. Mr. Brownlee made a motion to accept the Committee’s recommendation. Mr. Wilds seconded the motion which carried unanimously. 520-30 Walnut Street, SE corner of 6th Street Lincoln Property
around the planter and the installation of new plantings and bollards around the center island. The staff recommended approval per Standard 9. Mr. Brownlee made a motion to accept the Committee’s recommendation. Mr. Wilds seconded the motion which carried unanimously. 520-30 Walnut Street, SE corner of 6th Street Lincoln Property Company, Owner Fred Berger, Applicant DATE: 1914; altered 1930-31 PROPOSAL: Signage and sign posts The Architectural Committee recommended approval of the bronze plaques with the proportions and dimensions to be reviewed by staff but denial of the sidewalk signs. This application calls for new signage for a bank located in the Penn Mutual Building at the corner of Walnut and 6th Streets. The proposal involves three bronze plaques measuring 42” by 66” with one plaque located on the 6th Street elevation and two flanking the Walnut Street entrance. The owner has presented photographs of comparably sized bronze signage across the street. In addition, plans show two 10’ tall aluminum posts with 2’ by 3’ hanging, non- 6 illuminated pylon signs; one placed on the sidewalk in front of the Walnut Street entrance and one on the 6th Street elevation sidewalk. The staff recommended denial of the pole signs per Standard 9 and 10 but approval of somewhat smaller bronze plaques. Mr. Leonardo made a motion to accept the Committee’s recommendation. Mr. Wilds seconded the motion which carried unanimously. 238 Stamper Street Geno Sena, Owner Sabrina Soong, Applicant DATE: 1785-94; altered c. 1970 PROPOSAL: Rear addition and new dormers The Architectural Committee recommended approval of the addition subject to the review of an engineer’s report on the condition of the historic house prior to permit approval. It recommended denial of the dormers pending further investigation to determine what existed previously. This proposal calls for combining two 18th century town houses into a single structure. The plans show the removal of the wall and chimney between the houses. A large addition will be attached to the visible rear façade. An as yet undetailed structure in the attic will support a chimney above the roofline. The applicant also proposes two front dormers on this gambrel roof. The staff recommended approval of the addition but denial of the dormers per Standard 9 and 10. An engineer’s report presented at the Commission meeting proposes keeping only the front wall, removing the chimney and internal walls. The Commission had great concern about the stability of the
this gambrel roof. The staff recommended approval of the addition but denial of the dormers per Standard 9 and 10. An engineer’s report presented at the Commission meeting proposes keeping only the front wall, removing the chimney and internal walls. The Commission had great concern about the stability of the exterior as a result of this demolition. Therefore, Mr. Tyler recommended that the architect and engineer submit revised plans to the Architectural Committee and the Commission agreed. Mr. James made a motion to reject the Committee’s recommendation and deny the proposal entirely. Mr. Wilds seconded the motion which carried unanimously. 2028 Chancellor Street Jan Rubin, Owner Kiki Bolender, Architect DATE: c. 1895 PROPOSAL: Cut garage in rear façade The Architectural Committee recommended that in the interest of performing a restoration, the applicant carefully examine the building’s brickwork to determine evidence of any pre-existing openings in either the front or rear. The Committee also recommended that Mr. Baron conduct a site visit and discuss alternatives with the architect, since cutting a garage on the rear elevation would mean the loss of historic fabric and the moving of a door. Ultimately, the Committee did not object to cutting a garage in the rear, owing to the secondary nature of the façade, in the event that a restoration scheme proves infeasible. This application calls for cutting a new garage door on the St. James Street elevation of this two- story brick structure. Plans show the new garage opening would replace original brick and a bricked up window, and reroute a downspout. Additional work shown on the plans will be 7 addressed on a different permit application. The staff recommended approval of the garage door per Standard 9 and recommended a wood garage door with staff to review details. Mr. Baron spoke with the architect and determined that there is no evidence of pre-existing openings on the front or the rear except the former front carriage opening. The applicant requested the rear as the location for the garage door location and the allowance of a steel garage door. Mr. Wilds made a motion to reject the Committee’s recommendation but to approve the proposal as submitted, including a steel garage door. Mr. James seconded the motion which carried unanimously. 1706 Delancey Street Jeffrey Yablonovitz, Owner/Applicant DATE: c. 1850 PROPOSAL: Legalize revised roofdecks and stair The Architectural Committee recommended denial of the 4th and 5th floor
reject the Committee’s recommendation but to approve the proposal as submitted, including a steel garage door. Mr. James seconded the motion which carried unanimously. 1706 Delancey Street Jeffrey Yablonovitz, Owner/Applicant DATE: c. 1850 PROPOSAL: Legalize revised roofdecks and stair The Architectural Committee recommended denial of the 4th and 5th floor decks as well as the stairway between both per Standard 9. This application calls for the legalization of a rear porch, a deck on the rowhouse’s top floor, and a circular metal access stair between the decks. The applicant has modified the design for the roof deck following the Commission’s rejection of the existing deck at the 13 December 2000 meeting. In the revised plans, the applicant will pull the deck railing away four feet from the east wall and an additional five feet from the north façade. Photographs show visibility of the decks from all sides of the building. Mr. Baron’s site visit determined that even with the additional setbacks, the roof deck will have visibility from Delancey and 17th Streets. The staff recommended denial of the roof deck and stair tower per Standards 9 and 10 but approval of the rear 3rd floor deck per Standards 9 and 10. Mr. Wilds questioned the visibility of the 4th floor deck and its appropriateness. Mr. James made a motion to accept the Committee’s recommendation. Mr. Leonardo seconded the motion which carried with 7 votes. Mr. Wilds abstained owing to his belief that the 4th floor deck is not inappropriate. 237 South 18th Street, NE corner of Rittenhouse Square Street The Barclay Harvey Kimmel, Owner Wesley Wei, Applicant DATE: 1928 PROPOSAL: Window alteration on visible courtyard façade The Architectural Committee recommended denial. This application calls for the alteration of windows on the 16th floor of this high-rise condominium building. Plans show the removal of the original 25-light, two leaf metal casement 8 window and its replacement with paired, one over one wood windows. Visibility of the window exists from Locust Street. The staff recommended denial per Standard 6. Mr. Leonardo made a motion to accept the Committee’s recommendation. Mr. James seconded the motion which carried with 6 votes. Mr. Fox opposed the motion and Ms. Wolf abstained. 206-08 Market Street Hyo Kim, Owner Tei Chow Lei, Architect DATE: c. 1835 PROPOSAL: Storefront restoration The Architectural Committee recommended approval with the staff to review details. This application involves restoring the storefronts of
the motion which carried with 6 votes. Mr. Fox opposed the motion and Ms. Wolf abstained. 206-08 Market Street Hyo Kim, Owner Tei Chow Lei, Architect DATE: c. 1835 PROPOSAL: Storefront restoration The Architectural Committee recommended approval with the staff to review details. This application involves restoring the storefronts of these commercial buildings and installing a restaurant. The work includes removing a recessed 1940s storefront and reinstalling the stone columns and double leaf doors of the early 19th century storefront as described in an insurance survey dated 1849 for the buildings. The staff recommended approval based on the restoration Standards. The look of the original has good documentation and the owner has already restored the upper floors of the building to the early 19th century appearance. Mr. Leonardo made a motion to accept the Committee’s recommendation. Mr. James seconded the motion which carried unanimously. THE REPORT of the Activities of the Historical Commission Staff, January 2001. Mr. Tyler asked if members of the Commission had any questions about the report. There were none. NEW BUSINESS Certified Local Government Comment on National Register of Historic Places Nominations: 1. Awbury Historic District This nomination meets criteria A and C for its architecture and landscaping and place in the history of parks and open space conservation. Mr. Wilds made a motion to recommend the listing of Awbury Arboretum on the National Register. Mr. Leonardo seconded the motion which carried unanimously. 2. Upper Roxborough Historic District This nomination meets criteria A, C and D with its agricultural, industrial, social and its importance to transportation. However, after a lengthy discussion, the Commission thought the need for further review exists owing to the questions about the proposed district’s boundaries. In addition, some members thought that the community was not informed about this nomination adequately. The Commission decided to decline making formal comments. Mr. Sklaroff made a motion to decline comment. Mr. Wilds seconded the motion which carried with 10 votes. Mr. James opposed the motion. 9 3. Harris/Laird, Schober and Company Building, 2121-41 Market Street This nomination meets criteria A and C for its building’s technology and its role in the history of the shoe, printing and men’s clothing industries. Mr. Wilds made a motion to recommend entry on the National Register. Mr. James seconded the motion which carried unanimously. HARRY A BATTEN MEMORIAL FUND Mr. Tyler asked the Commission to approve expenditure for the Architectural
and its role in the history of the shoe, printing and men’s clothing industries. Mr. Wilds made a motion to recommend entry on the National Register. Mr. James seconded the motion which carried unanimously. HARRY A BATTEN MEMORIAL FUND Mr. Tyler asked the Commission to approve expenditure for the Architectural Committee lunches. Mr. Wilds made a motion to accept the $7.76 expenditure. Ms. Batzer seconded the motion which carried unanimously. Ms. Batzer made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Wilds seconded the motion which carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 10:40 A.M. Respectfully submitted, Diane M. Hughes Executive Secretary 10