THE MINUTES OF THE 406th STATED MEETING OF THE PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION 12 June 1996 City Council Caucus, Room 401 City Hall Wayne Spilove, Chair Present Wayne Spilove, Chairperson David Baldinger, City Planning Commission Robert Barnett, Commissioner, Department of Licenses and Inspections David Brownlee, Ph.D. Joseph James, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Public Property Arlene Matzkin Michael Sklaroff, Esq. Scott Wilds, Office of Housing and Community Development Caroline Wischmann Richard Tyler, Historic Preservation Officer Randal Baron, Assistant Historic Preservation Officer Jeffrey R. Barr, Historic Preservation Technician Laura M. Spina, Historic Preservation Specialist Also, with affiliation and/or project Gersil Kay, Building Conservation International Ellen Emmons, Lutheran Church-Holy Communion Walt Crimm, Crimm & Associates, Architects Joe Garbarino, University of the Arts Frank Eorio Richard Winston, Becker Winston Architects Judith Eden, Center City Residents Association (CCRA) Constance Carino, The Wellness Community, Ridgeland Mansion Henry Magaziner, AIA John Andrews, Architect - AOLB Brent Kauffman, Architect Bobbye Burke, Preservation Alliance Janine Flora, Jaeger International Esther M. Klein Peter Solmssen, University of the Arts Rev. Louis Temme, Trinity Memorial Church Charles Robin Neil Stein, Striped Bass David Rios, Ballard Spahr Andrew Ingersoll Hal Wheeler, Wheeler Equities William Wheeler, Wheeler Equities Wayne Zukin, Esq. Kelly Byrd Steven Katchman John Vanore, 1511 Spruce Street James Ruckmann George Brodie, President, CCRA 2 Suzanne Cohen, 1420 Locust Street Larry Snyder, Fairmount Park Historic Preservation Trust (FPHPT) John Cox, FPHPT Nathan Gaerstein, Philadelphia, Inc. Milton Marks, Preservation Alliance Wayne Spilove, Chair, recognized the presence of a quorum and called the 406th Stated Meeting of the Philadelphia Historical Commission to order at 10:10 A.M. MINUTES of the 405th Stated Meeting of the Philadelphia Historical Commission. Upon a motion made by Mr. Brownlee and duly seconded, the Commission unanimously approved the Minutes of the 405th Stated Meeting of the Philadelphia Historical Commission held on 8 May 1996, Wayne Spilove, Chair. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE REPORT, 28 May 1996, Arlene Matzkin, Chair 2901-2951 Market Street, 30th Street Station Sherman Aronson, Architect PROPOSAL: Lights for Regional Train Platform Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval of the light fixture with the exterior louvers and with the louvers made longer. Ms. Matzkin reported that the architect presented two light fixtures for the train platform. The fixtures would be attached to the platform canopy and painted the same color. The Committee recommends the fixture with louvers because they hide the source of the light. The fixture will shine onto the edge of the
reported that the architect presented two light fixtures for the train platform. The fixtures would be attached to the platform canopy and painted the same color. The Committee recommends the fixture with louvers because they hide the source of the light. The fixture will shine onto the edge of the tracks. Mr. Brownlee made a motion to accept the recommendation of the Architectural Committee. Mr. Wilds seconded the motion which carried unanimously. 3419 Baring Street John Strong, Contractor PROPOSAL: Porch and cornice restoration Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval with Ms. Matzkin going to the site for final approval. Ms. Matzkin reported that Mr. Strong will replace any damaged ornamentation on the cornice and porch, working with the original profiles and details. Since she lives across the street she will make a final inspection. Mr. Brownlee made a motion to accept the recommendation of the 3 Committee. Mr. Wilds seconded the motion which carried unanimously. 1830 Manning Street Michael Resnic, Owner/Architect PROPOSAL: Roof deck Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval. Ms. Matzkin stated that the owner wanted a roof deck. Installation of the deck on the existing parapet could damage the terra cotta coping. To avoid this, Mr. Resnic designed a cantilevered deck over the parapet. Mr. Wilds made a motion to accept the recommendation of the Committee. Mr. Brownlee seconded the motion which passed by a unanimous vote. 858 N. Broad Street, Metropolitan Opera House Robert Barnett, Licenses & Inspections PROPOSAL: Abate imminently dangerous conditions Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval. Ms. Matzkin explained that John Konick, architect, outlined the work that will be performed on the building to cure the imminently dangerous violations issued by the Department of Licenses and Inspections. The Department of Licenses and Inspections has court approval to demolish the building if the imminently dangerous conditions persist after 30 June. Mr. Konick is working with a church that is providing the funds for the work. The work includes four major areas: repair of the parapet walls; inspection the exterior walls and replacement of all loose brick; removal and storage of any loose trim at the stringcourse and balustrade; stabilization of the marquee and rebuilding the panels. The Committee was happy to see that the work will be done to save the building. Mr. Barnett stated that work had begun and should be finished by the 30 June deadline set by the Department of Licenses and Inspections. He stated that the removal
marquee and rebuilding the panels. The Committee was happy to see that the work will be done to save the building. Mr. Barnett stated that work had begun and should be finished by the 30 June deadline set by the Department of Licenses and Inspections. He stated that the removal of signs and vegetation from the building improved its appearance. Gersil Kay, from Building Conservation International, stated that the building is sound and should not be demolished. The theatre can be an important aspect for tourism in Philadelphia. It houses 5,000 seats, offering a large facility for the city. Mr. Brownlee made a motion to accept the recommendation of the Committee. Mr. Wilds seconded the motion which passed unanimously. 4 1931 Manning Street Michael Murtha, Owner PROPOSAL: Window, pointing, cleaning Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval of the glass panel, with the changes made by the Committee and staff approval. Staff will also review the cleaning and pointing of the brickwork. Ms. Matzkin explained that the owner wants to install a glass window on the second floor, so that the dutch door can be opened to allow light into the sixty-foot long room. The Committee recommends approval of the window, but with a wood frame and horizontal rail to break the expanse of glass. The brick facade will also be cleaned and pointed, with staff approval. The architect resubmitted a drawing for the window that meets the requirements of the Committee. Mr. Wilds made a motion to accept the recommendation of the Committee. Mr. Brownlee seconded the motion which carried unanimously. 1714 Walnut Street John Lois, Owner PROPOSAL: New storefront Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval. Ms. Matzkin stated that the owner had resubmitted a proposal for the storefront. The revised proposal incorporates the design of the Armand Carroll facade that was installed in the 1940's. Mr. Wilds made a motion to accept the recommendation of the Committee. Mr. Brownlee seconded the motion which passed by a unanimous vote. 2200 Spruce Street, Trinity Memorial Church John Andrews, Architect PROPOSAL: New doors Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval of the glass doors without the horizontal rail, but stressed that the original doors be used as often as possible, especially to lock the church at night after all activities. Ms. Matzkin reported that the congregation wanted glass doors so that the church would be more inviting to the public. 5 The original wood doors will be put in
stressed that the original doors be used as often as possible, especially to lock the church at night after all activities. Ms. Matzkin reported that the congregation wanted glass doors so that the church would be more inviting to the public. 5 The original wood doors will be put in pockets created in the stone facade, installing the glass doors behind the originals. The Committee asked for glass doors without a horizontal rail. The architect has submitted new drawings that incorporate the Committee's changes. The Committee asked that the original wood doors be used as often as possible. Mr. Barnett stated that the decision of the Commission should only approve the installation of the glass doors. The usage of the original wood doors should not be dictated by the Commission. Mr. Sklaroff stated that requesting the usage of the doors may violate the Federal law protecting the freedom of religion. Mr. Wilds stated that the Commission does not want to get into the business of monitoring the usage of the doors, to see if the church fulfill the condition. It would waste staff's time. Mr. Tyler clarified the recommendation for approval by saying that the Commission could require the pocketing of the doors so that they are not removed. Mr. Barnett agreed on validity of the requirement to keep the doors. Mr. Sklaroff stated that the requirement even to keep the doors may not be legal. He requested a statement from the law department to clarify the federal statute regarding religious institutions. Mr. Barnett made a motion to approve the glass doors only. The use of the original wood doors would not be a condition for the approval. Mr. Wilds seconded the motion which passed unanimously. 1500 Pine Street, University of the Arts Vahe Ashodian, Architect PROPOSAL: Entrance, windows, masonry Architectural Committee Recommendation: approval of the entrances with its recommendations, and the painting of the terra cotta. The Committee voted to recommend denial of the window design as proposed and would like to see new details of the windows showing true muntins, stepped heads, and the panning to match the current width of the posts. Ms. Matzkin reported that the proposal incorporated four parts. First, the owner wants to seal the original 15th Street entrance using cast stone to mimic the terra cotta bands of the first floor. The brackets and details around the doors would remain. The Committee asked
current width of the posts. Ms. Matzkin reported that the proposal incorporated four parts. First, the owner wants to seal the original 15th Street entrance using cast stone to mimic the terra cotta bands of the first floor. The brackets and details around the doors would remain. The Committee asked that the sides of the steps remain also and the stone recessed to show that an entrance had existed. Second, the entrance on Pine Street, which had been cut out and framed in marble, will be refurbished, replacing lost elements in cast stone to mimic the terra cotta. Third, all of the terra cotta would be painted a color to match the original white glaze that has suffered extensive deterioration. Fourth, the proposal included the replacement of all the wood windows with aluminum 6 sash with applied muntins and panning for the frames. Many of the proposed windows varied from the originals in dimensions and muntin widths. The Committee believed that the plans for the windows asked for too many changes from the originals to be satisfactory. Mr. Peter Solinsen, President of the University of the Arts, testified that the university had solicited funds for the restoration of the building as a dormitory. The windows form an important aspect of the restoration, but are very costly and the University is working on a tight budget. Walter Crimm, of Crimm & Associates, Architects, testified that he researched the windows with various companies and that the requirement of true muntins poses a heavy financial burden for the University. The profiles of the panning and muntins could be refined to meet the Committee's standards, but he asked for a waiver of the true-muntin requirement. Mr. Tyler commended the University for keeping the terra cotta details of the building which make the building unique. Mr. Wilds made a motion to accept the recommendation of the Committee for the entrances and the painting of the terra cotta, and to approve applied muntins for the windows, with staff and Chair of the Architectural Committee to approve the details of the panning and muntins. Mr. Sklaroff seconded the motion which passed unanimously. Mr. Barnett stated that in the cases when the details are left to the Committee for final approval, if a solution cannot be reached, the applicant may ask the Commission itself for approval. 1511 Spruce Street John Vanore, Applicant PROPOSAL: Storefront alteration Architectural Committee Recommendation:
the motion which passed unanimously. Mr. Barnett stated that in the cases when the details are left to the Committee for final approval, if a solution cannot be reached, the applicant may ask the Commission itself for approval. 1511 Spruce Street John Vanore, Applicant PROPOSAL: Storefront alteration Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval with the modified door. Ms. Matzkin reported that the owner wanted to install two doors that would open into the building so that he can have a separate take-out area within the store. The storefronts of the building are not original, except for the stone sill. The Committee requested that the doors have a metal panel at the bottom to continue the horizontal line of the stone sill. Mr. Barnett commended the Architectural Committee for 7 recognizing the difference between design and zoning issues. George Brodie, President of the Center City Residents Association, testified that the residents opposed the storefront alteration. The building appears as "contributing" to the Rittenhouse-Fitler Historic District and the loss of the original limestone base should not be allowed. Mr. Barnett made a motion to accept the recommendation of the Committee. Mr. Wilds seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of seven to two. Mr. Sklaroff and Mr. James dissented. 251-257 S. 17th Street Michael Gilger, Architect PROPOSAL: Window vent Architectural Committee Recommendation: Denial. Ms. Matzkin stated that the owner did not attend the Committee meeting and would like a chance to present his proposal. Mr. Gilger asked that the proposal be returned to the Architectural Committee. Mr. Wilds made a motion to table the vote until the Architectural Committee has seen the revised proposal. Mr. Brownlee seconded the motion which passed unanimously. 1811 Walnut Street, Rittenhouse Club David Polatnick, Architect PROPOSAL: Awnings, new construction Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval of the awnings without the notches. Approval of the canopy, with the finials removed, attached to the new jamb of the transom. Approval of the revised rear addition with the door moved to under the windows and the arch over the roll-down gate to be made of metal and set back from the main facade. The brick cladding of the party wall should also receive a brick return. Revision to be reviewed by Committee. Ms. Matzkin reported that the proposal had two parts. The architect proposed a glass and bronze canopy for the front door on the Walnut Street facade. The canopy would be
facade. The brick cladding of the party wall should also receive a brick return. Revision to be reviewed by Committee. Ms. Matzkin reported that the proposal had two parts. The architect proposed a glass and bronze canopy for the front door on the Walnut Street facade. The canopy would be located at the new transom that would be installed when the steps are removed and the doors dropped. The Committee was pleased with the canopy design, but asked that the finials not be included. The awnings on the windows that flank the door will not have the notch, but will be installed at the window frames. The revised proposal for the rear facade reflects an improvement from the last proposal. The Committee made several changes that included: make the arch over the roll-down gate metal instead of brick and set it back 8 from the main facade; the door should be moved to under the windows; and the brick cladding of the party wall should receive a brick return. Mr. Wilds asked if this was the final proposal for the project. Mr. Tyler explained that the front facade treatment is in place but the Committee had requested more drawings for the rear of the building that would include the rear of the extant Rittenhouse Club. The proposal is not complete for a final vote. Mr. Barnett stated that the entire proposal should come to the Commission next month, and the discussion should be for the whole project. Esther Klein, long-time resident of Rittenhouse Square, commended the Commission for taking time to review the proposal thoroughly and voiced her support for the reuse of the building. Henry Magaziner, AIA, said that a structural analysis of the rear building should be made before the Commission approves its demolition. Mr. Brownlee stated that in a meeting with the public, the developer made an off-the-cuff statement that the stability of the rear building was questionable. Mr. Brownlee reiterated the fact that the structural integrity of the rear building has never been questioned and that neither the Committee nor the Commission has heard otherwise. Mr. Magaziner testified that the presence of the SuperFresh would make Walnut Street more congested. As taxis and cars wait for shoppers to emerge with groceries, Walnut Street would be reduced to one lane and make driving on the square unbearable. He also asserted that the historic interior would be lost.
Magaziner testified that the presence of the SuperFresh would make Walnut Street more congested. As taxis and cars wait for shoppers to emerge with groceries, Walnut Street would be reduced to one lane and make driving on the square unbearable. He also asserted that the historic interior would be lost. Mr. Barnett noted that the Commission does not have jurisdiction over use or interiors and that only exterior design issues were before the Commission. Judith Eden, Vice-President of the Center City Residents Association, replied that a newspaper article had reported on the instability of the rear of the Rittenhouse Club. Mr. Barnett stated that the Architectural Committee and Commission can only make a judgment based on the evidence submitted by the architect and cannot rely on newspaper articles. Mr. Brownlee made a motion to table a vote until a proposal for the entire project is presented which should be at the next meeting. Mr. Wilds seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Ms. Wischmann asked if the Commission could visit the site to see first-hand the impact of the proposal on Rittenhouse Square and Sansom Street. 9 244 S. 3rd Street, Powel House Theodore Nickles, Applicant PROPOSAL: Roof Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval of the Timberline shingle in the weathered wood color in the maximum thickness possible. They also said that the installers should look to see if the house had nail holes showing clapboards on the dormer cheeks and reinstall them if historically appropriate. Ms. Matzkin reported that Mr. Nickles and the Committee chose an asphalt shingle that resembles weathered shake for the roof of the Powel House. Installers will look at the cheeks of the dormers and replace clapboards if they find evidence of clapboarding instead of shingles. Mr. Brownlee made a motion to accept the recommendation of the Committee. Mr. Wilds seconded the motion which passed unanimously. 1700 Montgomery Avenue John Blatteau, Architect PROPOSAL: Skylight, roof Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval. Ms. Matzkin explained that the Wagner Free Institute will restore the skylight and install new exterior gutters that will be brought back into the basement to meet the drain. Presently the gutters are on the interior. Mr. Wilds made a motion to accept the recommendation of the Committee. Mr. Brownlee seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. #1 Boathouse Row Lisa Armstrong, Architect PROPOSAL: Cost-cutting revisions Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval. Ms. Matzkin explained the
meet the drain. Presently the gutters are on the interior. Mr. Wilds made a motion to accept the recommendation of the Committee. Mr. Brownlee seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. #1 Boathouse Row Lisa Armstrong, Architect PROPOSAL: Cost-cutting revisions Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval. Ms. Matzkin explained the three main parts of the proposal being changed because of insufficient funds: elimination of the skylights from the headhouse and the end skylights on the multi- purpose space; straightening the curved glass wall on the south (water) side; elimination of the trellis on the north side. Landscaping has been designed with trees along the north side, serving the same purpose as the trellis. These changes are necessary to lower the costs of the project. Mr. Brownlee made a motion to accept the recommendation of the 10 Committee. Mr. James seconded the motion which passed unanimously. Mr. Spilove stated that the project was on-going and he hoped to see construction begin soon. 139 Pemberton Street Richard Winston, Architect PROPOSAL: Alterations Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval of the removal of the sundeck and replacement of the windows. Approval of the trellis. Approval of dryvit only on the small, south, wall facing the rear of the yard, at the first floor of the ell (under the trellis) and at rear addition. Clapboarding on the second floor of the rear addition. All other facades must retain the exposed original brickwork. Ms. Matzkin reported that the owner wishes to remove the sundeck on the roof in the front; replace the windows on the front with six-over-six wood sash and on the ell with clad sash; install a trellis over the doors of the ell; and replace the cornice with profiles that are as close to the original as possible. The owners also want to cover all of the facades of the ell with dryvit because some of the infill brick does not match and to add insulation. The Committee believed that the upper two stories of the ell were still in good condition and the historic fabric should not be covered. The Committee recommended approval of dryvit on the wall facing the rear of the lot, the first floor of the ell (under the trellis), and the first floor of the rear addition, and clapboarding on the second floor of the rear addition. Mr. Wilds made a motion to accept the recommendation of the Committee. Mr.
dryvit on the wall facing the rear of the lot, the first floor of the ell (under the trellis), and the first floor of the rear addition, and clapboarding on the second floor of the rear addition. Mr. Wilds made a motion to accept the recommendation of the Committee. Mr. Brownlee seconded the motion which carried unanimously. 123-129 Chestnut Street Phillipe Daouphars, Applicant PROPOSAL: Doorway Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval of a single-leaf wood and glass door with a more classical handle, with staff approval of the final design. Approval of the sign, on the condition that it is attached with screws in the mortar joints and does not damage the brick facade. Ms. Matzkin reported that the applicant is putting in a restaurant in the old Corn Exchange building and proposed an aluminum, single-leaf door. The Committee requested a wood door which is more in keeping with the architecture of the building 11 and a more classical door handle. The sign will be in the shape of an artist's palate and should be affixed to the building with screws in the mortar joints so that the brick is not damaged. Mr. Wilds made a motion to accept the recommendation of the Committee. Mr. Barnett seconded the motion which passed by a unanimous vote. 5535 Ridge Avenue Steven Sendzik, Owner PROPOSAL: 3 houses on rear of lot Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval on the condition that trees are replanted. Ms. Matzkin reported that the three houses are clearly separate from the historic building which is delineated by a stone wall. The view of the houses from the street will be blocked by trees that will be planted. Mr. Barnett questioned the need for trees to be planted to block the view of the new houses from the historic house. Ms. Matzkin explained that the trees were for a barrier of the view from the street not from the historic house. Mr. Brownlee made a motion to accept the recommendation of the Committee. Mr. Wilds seconded the motion which passed unanimously. 1217 Locust Street Rosanne Kozlow, Applicant PROPOSAL: Facade alterations Architectural Committee Recommendation: Denial. Ms. Matzkin explained that after the removal of the Tennessee stone facing, the owners found a wood arch that was installed in 1922. The design that the owners had made was a muddled restoration of the 1922 design. The owner, since the Committee meeting, submitted an architect's drawing that
Denial. Ms. Matzkin explained that after the removal of the Tennessee stone facing, the owners found a wood arch that was installed in 1922. The design that the owners had made was a muddled restoration of the 1922 design. The owner, since the Committee meeting, submitted an architect's drawing that changed some of the elements from the initial design, removing the stone base and adding a wood cornice, and was more appropriate. Mr. Brownlee made a motion to approve the new design submitted to the Commission. Mr. Wilds seconded the motion which carried unanimously. 232 Montrose Avenue Jeffrey Powell, Owner PROPOSAL: Alterations, addition Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval of the proposal 12 except the two second-floor vinyl windows which should be replaced with two-over-two wood windows. Ms. Matzkin noted that the project had proceeded without a building permit. The owners added a third floor to the ell, installed glass block and vinyl windows, and added a balcony on the third floor. The Committee suggested the replacement of the two vinyl windows installed under the balcony with wood, two- over-two windows. Mr. Brownlee stated that the shutters and the storm door on the front of the house were inappropriate and should be removed. Ms. Matzkin stated that the Committee mentioned the removal of the storm door, but the owners are concerned with safety. Mr. Brownlee made a motion to accept the recommendation of the Committee. Mr. Wilds seconded the motion which passed unanimously. Ridgeland Mansion Amy Freitag, Applicant PROPOSAL: Glazed porch, ADA access Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval of a wooden ramp and the raising of the front porch behind the columns. Approval of the enclosure of the rear porch in concept only, with details to be approved by the Committee. Approval of the parking lots. Ms. Matzkin reported that the proposal had three parts: the ramp to the front door, the glazing of the rear porch, and two new parking lots. The Committee recommended approval of a wooden ramp and the raising of the front porch behind the columns. The Committee, with regrets, approved the glazing of the porch in concept. The parking lots are necessary for the new tenant and would not be seen easily from the house. The architect submitted new drawings for the glazing of the porch, but the Committee has not reviewed them. Mr. Brownlee made a motion to approve the ramp and the parking lots, and approval
parking lots are necessary for the new tenant and would not be seen easily from the house. The architect submitted new drawings for the glazing of the porch, but the Committee has not reviewed them. Mr. Brownlee made a motion to approve the ramp and the parking lots, and approval of the glazing of the porch with details to be approved by the Architectural Committee. Mr. Wilds seconded the motion which passed with a unanimous vote. The Report of the Activities of the Historical Commission Staff, May 1996, Richard Tyler. Old Business 13 2108-2114 Chestnut Street Bob Kauffman, Applicant PROPOSAL: Concrete ramp Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval Ms. Matzkin explained that the Commission had approved a concrete ramp for the building. When the concrete ramp proved cost-prohibitive, the Commission approved a wooden ramp. Now the applicant has the funds for the concrete ramp and would like a renewed approval. Mr. Barnett made a motion to approve the concrete ramp. Mr. Brownlee seconded the motion which carried unanimously. New Business Mr. Tyler asked for a $600 advance for expenses for the National Trust for Historic Preservation Annual Meeting from the Harry A. Batten Memorial Fund. Mr. Brownlee made a motion to extend Mr. Tyler a $600 advance from the Harry A. Batten Memorial Fund. Mr. Wilds seconded the motion which passed unanimously. Mr. Brownlee encouraged other Commission members to donate their stipends to the Batten Fund. Mr. Tyler announced that the Personnel Department has received eighteen applications for the two historic planner positions open on staff. Mr. James requested an opinion from the Law Department on the federal Religious Freedom Act. Mr. Tyler stated that a search was made on cases referring to the statute, but since the statute is young there are not a lot of citations. Ms. Matzkin asked about the Rules and Regulations. Mr. Tyler stated that he has comments from everyone. He will make the necessary changes and will be presenting it to Committee soon. Ms. Matzkin also stated that Sunoco will have a grand opening on Monday, 17 June to unveil the murals at 23rd and Walnut Streets and invited the Commission members to attend. The meeting adjourned at 12:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Laura M. Spina 14