Historical Commission — Jan 10, 2025

PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 JANUARY 2025 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 1 THE MINUTES OF THE 749TH STATED MEETING OF THE PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION FRIDAY, 10 JANUARY 2025, 9:00 A.M. REMOTE MEETING ON ZOOM ZACHARY FRANKEL, CHAIR CALL TO ORDER START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:00:00 Mr. Frankel, the Chair, called the meeting to order at 9:07 a.m. and announced the presence of a quorum. The following Commissioners joined him: Commissioner Present Absent Comment Zachary Frankel, Chair (Real Estate Developer) X Kimberly Washington, Esq., Vice Chair (Community Development Corporation) X Ibriz Muhammad (Commerce Department) Donna Carney (Philadelphia City Planning Commission) X Emily Cooperman, Ph.D., Committee on Historic Designation Chair (Historian) X Thomas Holloman (City Council) X John P. Lech (Department of Licenses & Inspections) X Dan McCoubrey, AIA, LEED AP BD+C, Architectural Committee Chair (Architect) X Stephanie Michel (Community Organization) X Arrived 9:53 a.m. Kyle O’Connor (Department of Public Property) X Franz Rabauer X Robert Thomas, AIA (Architectural Historian) X Matthew Treat (Department of Planning and Development) X The meeting was held remotely via Zoom video and audio-conferencing software. The following staff members were present: Jonathan Farnham, Executive Director Kim Chantry, Historic Preservation Planner III Kristin Hankins, Historic Preservation Planner I Heather Hendrickson, Historic Preservation Planner II Izzy Korostoff, Community Initiatives Specialist Ted Maust, Historic Preservation Planner II Allyson Mehley, Historic Preservation Planner III Leonard Reuter, Esq., Law Department Dan Shachar-Krasnoff, Historic Preservation Planner II Alex Till, Historic Preservation Planner II PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 JANUARY 2025 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 2 The following persons attended the online meeting: Allison Weiss, SoLo Germantown Civic Association Aaron Moselle, WHYY News Abbey Lewis Adrienne Carpenter Alan Lindy, Sedgwick Gardens Alex Gauzza Ashley Maass, Chestnut Hill Conservancy Bertha Sarmina Bill Klotz Danny McGoldrick Brian Phillips, Interface Studio Architects Daniel Trubman David Fecteau, Philadelphia City Planning Commission David Gest, SquareSpace David Traub, Save Our Sites Eileen Smith Elizabeth Milroy Frank Lindy, Sedgwick Gardens Frank Boyer German Yakubov, Haverford Square Hanna Stark, Preservation Alliance James Blumgart Jay Farrell Julia Hayman Kathy Dowdell Kevin McMahon, Powers & Co. Kimberly Haas, Hidden City Philadelphia Krista Gebbia, Chestnut Hill Conservancy Kristin Demarco Max Frankel Meg Cavanagh, PCPC Staff Michael Phillips, Esq., Klehr Harrison Michael Ramos Monica Gonzalez Nino Cutrufello Oscar Beisert, Keeping Society Paul Steinke, Preservation Alliance Sherman Aronson, West Mt. Airy Neighbors Steven Peitzman Suzanna Barucco Suzanne Ponsen, West Central Germantown Neighbors

City Philadelphia Krista Gebbia, Chestnut Hill Conservancy Kristin Demarco Max Frankel Meg Cavanagh, PCPC Staff Michael Phillips, Esq., Klehr Harrison Michael Ramos Monica Gonzalez Nino Cutrufello Oscar Beisert, Keeping Society Paul Steinke, Preservation Alliance Sherman Aronson, West Mt. Airy Neighbors Steven Peitzman Suzanna Barucco Suzanne Ponsen, West Central Germantown Neighbors PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 JANUARY 2025 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 3 ADOPTION OF MINUTES, 748TH STATED MEETING, 13 DECEMBER 2024 START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:06:20 DISCUSSION: • Mr. Frankel asked the Commissioners, staff, and members of the public if they had any suggested additions or corrections to the minutes of the preceding meeting of the Historical Commission, the 748th Stated Meeting, held 13 December 2024. No comments were offered. ACTION: Mr. Thomas moved to adopt the minutes of the 748th Stated Meeting of the Historical Commission, held 13 December 2024. Mr. McCoubrey seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. ITEM: Adoption of the Minutes of the 748th Stated Meeting of the PHC MOTION: Adopt minutes MOVED BY: Thomas SECONDED BY: McCoubrey VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Frankel, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Muhammad (Commerce) X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Holloman (City Council) X Lech (L&I) X McCoubrey X Michel X O’Connor (DPP) X Rabauer X Thomas X Treat (DPD) X Total 12 1 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 JANUARY 2025 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 4 REPORT OF THE ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE, 17 DECEMBER 2024 CONSENT AGENDA START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:07:00 DISCUSSION: • Mr. Frankel asked the Commissioners, staff, and public for comments on the Consent Agenda. None were offered. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to adopt the recommendation of the Architectural Committee for the application for 1108 S. Front Street. Ms. Washington seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. ITEM: Consent Agenda MOTION: Adopt Architectural Committee recommendation for Consent Agenda item MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Washington VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Frankel, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Muhammad (Commerce) X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Holloman (City Council) X Lech (L&I) X McCoubrey X Michel X O’Connor (DPP) X Rabauer X Thomas X Treat (DPD) X Total 12 1 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 JANUARY 2025 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 5 AGENDA ADDRESS: 510 E WILDEY ST Proposal: Legalize work to front facade Review

(City Council) X Lech (L&I) X McCoubrey X Michel X O’Connor (DPP) X Rabauer X Thomas X Treat (DPD) X Total 12 1 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 JANUARY 2025 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 5 AGENDA ADDRESS: 510 E WILDEY ST Proposal: Legalize work to front facade Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: GLY Investments LLC Applicant: German Yakubov, Haverford Sq GC LLC History: 1840 Individual Designation: 2/28/1967 District Designation: None Staff Contact: Kim Chantry, kim.chantry@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application proposes to legalize work to the front façade of 510 E. Wildey Street that does not comply with plans for a rear addition and selective front façade work approved by the Historical Commission in 2020 and 2023, or an electrical permit approved in 2024. The approved plans called for wood six-over-six double-hung windows in existing openings, the existing (non-historic) front door to remain, and no exterior electrical work. The completed work includes vinyl windows with grilles between the glass in openings which appear slightly larger than the former openings, a new front door that is not based on historic documentation, and the electric meter and associated conduit installed on the front façade. The residential building permit included the following “PHC Staff Review” conditions, none of which were met: The approved plans called for Hardie Plank siding to bring the front façade closer to the original wood clapboard appearance, and it appears that this product was indeed used although a sample was not provided to the staff for review. The Department of Licenses and Inspections issued a violation for the exterior work at the request of the Historical Commission’s staff, prompting this request for legalization from the property owner/developer. SCOPE OF WORK: • Legalize work to front façade. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include: • Standard 6: Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. o The vinyl windows and entrance door do not match the old in design or materials. The Historical Commission’s staff routinely approves electrical permit applications PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 JANUARY 2025 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 6 where

features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. o The vinyl windows and entrance door do not match the old in design or materials. The Historical Commission’s staff routinely approves electrical permit applications PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 JANUARY 2025 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 6 where the meter is located on the interior or an otherwise inconspicuous location. This application fails to satisfy Standard 6. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Denial, pursuant to Standard 6. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Standard 6. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:08:10 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Chantry presented the application to the Historical Commission. • Property owner and developer German Yakubov represented the application and explained that cost was what drove him to do work that did not conform with the Historical Commission’s conditions on the earlier approvals. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The approved plans from 2020 and 2023 called for wood, six-over-six, double-hung windows in existing openings, the existing, non-historic front door to remain, and no exterior electrical work. The completed work includes vinyl windows with grilles between the glass in openings which appear slightly larger than the former openings, a new front door that is not based on historic documentation, and the electric meter and associated conduit installed on the front façade. • This could be considered a self-inflicted hardship, owing to the fact that the applicant did not comply with the conditioned approvals. • The Historical Commission has a process to evaluate claims of financial hardship and may relax its standards with a finding of hardship. The process requires the submission of a complete financial hardship application. A successful hardship application would demonstrate that the owner would incur a financial hardship if he were unable to sell the property, owing to the violation and the costs of the new door and windows and relocation of electrical equipment, and that there is no financially feasible way to achieve those changes and still obtain a reasonable rate of return on his investment in the property. • The property can be sold with the violation in place. However, the new owner would be responsible for correcting the violations. • The applicant could work with the Historical Commission’s staff on a solution for appropriate windows and entry door that would allow the violation to be

the property. • The property can be sold with the violation in place. However, the new owner would be responsible for correcting the violations. • The applicant could work with the Historical Commission’s staff on a solution for appropriate windows and entry door that would allow the violation to be complied quickly after the work is complete. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The vinyl windows, window casing, entrance door, and siding exposure do not match the old in design or materials. The electrical meter and conduit were installed in a conspicuous location on the front facade. This application fails to satisfy Standard 6. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to deny the application, pursuant to Standard 6. Ms. Washington seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 JANUARY 2025 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 7 ITEM: 510 E Wildey St MOTION: Denial MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Washington VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Frankel, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Muhammad (Commerce) X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Holloman (City Council) X Lech (L&I) X McCoubrey X Michel X O’Connor (DPP) X Rabauer X Thomas X Treat (DPD) X Total 12 1 ADDRESS: 1108 S FRONT ST Proposal: Legalize rear addition, replace windows, restore cornice Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: DML Worldwide LLC Applicant: William Klotz, Restoration Development Group History: 1800 Individual Designation: 3/30/1965 District Designation: None Staff Contact: Ted Maust, theodore.maust@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application seeks to legalize a rear addition built without the Historical Commission’s review, at 1108 S. Front Street. The as-built addition is presently three-stories in height and clad in vinyl siding. The Historical Commission denied two previous versions of this application. At the Architectural Committee’s November 2024 meeting, the applicant presented a plan which would remove the roof deck and pilot house but keep the full three stories as constructed. The Committee recommended denial of the application with comments that the size and massing remained an unresolved issue. The revised application presented today addresses the key concerns of the Architectural Committee. The submitted plans show the full removal of the third-floor roof deck, pilot house, and a large section of the third floor. The vinyl siding will be removed and replaced with a synthetic stucco finish. A roof deck above the second floor is also proposed, with a black metal picket railing. The revised scope shows a proposed

of the third-floor roof deck, pilot house, and a large section of the third floor. The vinyl siding will be removed and replaced with a synthetic stucco finish. A roof deck above the second floor is also proposed, with a black metal picket railing. The revised scope shows a proposed rear addition that is more compatible in terms of historic materials, features, size, and massing with the historic property and neighboring buildings. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 JANUARY 2025 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 8 SCOPE OF WORK: • Legalize unpermitted rear addition • Alter front cornice and dormer • Replace of windows and door on front elevation STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include: • Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. o The rear addition is very large in comparison to the historic structure. Removing the pilot house and roof deck is an improvement, but the rear addition is still very visible from the public right-of-way and changes the established spatial relationships of the property. o The bright white siding of the rear addition is out of keeping with the neighboring masonry structures. o A two-story masonry addition with a roof deck on the rear ell rather than the main block may be able to satisfy this Standard. • Standard 10: New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. o From the submitted floor plans, it appears that at least some of the existing rear walls were demolished without the Historical Commission’s approval. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standard 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend approval, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standard 9. ACTION: See Consent Agenda. OLD BUSINESS ADDRESS: 1902, 1927 AND 1942 DIAMOND ST Proposal: Construct buildings on three lots Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Callahan Ward Applicant: Nino Cutrufello, Callahan Ward History:

RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend approval, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standard 9. ACTION: See Consent Agenda. OLD BUSINESS ADDRESS: 1902, 1927 AND 1942 DIAMOND ST Proposal: Construct buildings on three lots Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Callahan Ward Applicant: Nino Cutrufello, Callahan Ward History: 1902: c. 1889, demolished before designation; 1927: built 1889, attributed to Willis G. Hale, significant, demolished after designation; 1942: c. 1889, contributing, demolished after designation. Individual Designation: None District Designation: Diamond Street Historic District, 1/29/1986 Staff Contact: Heather Hendrickson, heather.hendrickson@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application proposes to construct three buildings on three vacant lots in the Diamond Street Historic District. The applicant is proposing a consistent development program PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 JANUARY 2025 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 9 with one building design that would be constructed on multiple lots. One project will be reviewed under “review and comment” jurisdiction, while the other two will be reviewed under full review jurisdiction by the Historical Commission. The Diamond Street Historic District was designated in 1986 and at that time the lot at 1902 Diamond Street was vacant, and therefore, the building proposed for 1902 Diamond Street will be considered under “review and comment” jurisdiction only. At the time of district designation, there were buildings standing at 1927 and 1942 Diamond Street, so the Historical Commission will have full jurisdiction over those proposed building designs. The properties at 1902 and 1942 Diamond Street are lots within rows of typical Philadelphia three-story rowhouses. However, the property at 1927 Diamond Street was located within a more elaborate and ornate row attributed to Willis G. Hale and classified as “significant” to the district. The building at 1927 was a three-story rowhouse with a mansard roof, rectangular gothic windows, and an open full width front porch tucked under the second and third stories. Unfortunately, only three buildings in this row survive, and only one survives that resembles the building that stood at 1927 Diamond Street. SCOPE OF WORK: • Construct three buildings on three vacant lots. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include: • Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features

for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include: • Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. o The proposed design for 1927 Diamond is not compatible with the buildings in the Willis G. Hale-designed row. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends approval of the applications for 1902 and 1942 Diamond Street, pursuant to Standard 9. The staff recommends denial of the application for 1927 Diamond Street but notes that it would recommend approval of a design that is more reflective of the massing and detailing of the surviving buildings on that row, pursuant to Standard 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial of the three applications, pursuant to Standard 9. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:42:12 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Hendrickson presented the revised application to the Historical Commission. • Owner’s representative Nino Cutrufello and architects Brian Phillips, Alex Gauzza, and Kristin DeMarco represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT: • David Traub, representing Save Our Sites, offered suggestions to improve the design. • Steven Peitzman offered suggestions to improve the design. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 JANUARY 2025 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 10 The Historical Commission found that: • The applicants successfully revised their original application, taking into account many comments from the Architectural Committee’s meeting. • Owing to large scale loss of building fabric, the revised design for 1927 Diamond Street is an appropriate infill building within the Willis G. Hale-designed row. • Some revisions that would improve the designs include: o adding glazing to the front door, o adjusting the first floor to have two double hung windows, o expressing basement windows with inset areas, o lowering the cornice slightly at 1927 Diamond to be more in line with the roof line of the historic building, and, o establishing a water table line. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The revised application for 1902 Diamond Street is subject to “review and comment” jurisdiction only and the revised application satisfies Standards 9 and 10. • The revised application for 1927 Diamond Street satisfies Standards 9 and 10. • The revised application for 1942 Diamond

The Historical Commission concluded that: • The revised application for 1902 Diamond Street is subject to “review and comment” jurisdiction only and the revised application satisfies Standards 9 and 10. • The revised application for 1927 Diamond Street satisfies Standards 9 and 10. • The revised application for 1942 Diamond Street satisfies Standards 9 and 10. ACTION: Ms. Carney moved to approve the application for 1927 Diamond Street, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 9 and 10. Mr. Lech seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. ITEM: 1927 Diamond St MOTION: Approval MOVED BY: Carney SECONDED BY: Lech VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Frankel, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Muhammad (Commerce) X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Holloman (City Council) X Lech (L&I) X McCoubrey X Michel X O’Connor (DPP) X Rabauer X Thomas X Treat (DPD) X Total 13 ACTION: Ms. Carney moved to approve the application for 1942 Diamond Street, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 9 and 10. Ms. Washington seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 JANUARY 2025 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 11 ITEM: 1942 Diamond St MOTION: Approval MOVED BY: Carney SECONDED BY: Washington VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Frankel, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Muhammad (Commerce) X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Holloman (City Council) X Lech (L&I) X McCoubrey X Michel X O’Connor (DPP) X Rabauer X Thomas X Treat (DPD) X Total 13 NORTHWEST PHILADELPHIA APARTMENTS THEMATIC HISTORIC DISTRICT Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Multiple Nominator: West Mount Airy Neighbors Staff Contact: Ted Maust, theodore.maust@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the Northwest Philadelphia Apartments Thematic Historic District. The proposed district includes 30 properties in Northwest Philadelphia, all of them apartment buildings within close proximity to the Chestnut Hill West Line of SEPTA Regional Rail. The nominators have focused on the period 1910 to 1940, when many apartment buildings were constructed in this part of the city. The nomination argues that the proposed district meets Criteria for Designation A, D, F, and J. Under Criteria A and J, the nominators argue that these apartment buildings brought about a transformation of this area of Philadelphia into a bustling suburb populated in large part by middle-class residents, thus having significant character as part of the development and heritage of the community

D, F, and J. Under Criteria A and J, the nominators argue that these apartment buildings brought about a transformation of this area of Philadelphia into a bustling suburb populated in large part by middle-class residents, thus having significant character as part of the development and heritage of the community as well as the city as a whole. The nomination also argues that the proposed district embodies distinguishing characteristics of various distinctive architectural styles, meeting Criterion D. Among those styles cited in the nomination are Tudor Revival, Colonial Revival, Neoclassical, Italian Renaissance, Beaux Arts, and Art Deco/Moderne. Finally, the nomination cites Criterion F, arguing that properties in the district contain elements of design, detail, materials or craftsmanship which represent a significant innovation. The authors note that many of these buildings differ from more urban apartment structures in that they forego maximum density in favor of more suburban siting, with landscaped courts, open lawns, and other site features which related to the surrounding tree-lined streets. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 JANUARY 2025 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 12 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates the proposed Northwest Philadelphia Apartments Thematic Historic District satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, and J, but that a stronger case would need to be made for Criterion F if it is to be included. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the proposed Northwest Philadelphia Apartments Thematic Historic District satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, and J. START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 01:11:25 RECUSAL: • Ms. Cooperman recused from the reviewing, owing to the fact that she owns a unit in one of the buildings in the proposed historic district. PRESENTERS: • Mr. Maust presented the nomination to the Historical Commission. • Attorney Michael Phillips and Alan and Frank Lindy represented Lindy Communities, owner of Sedgwick Gardens, 6907 McCallum Street. They spoke against the inclusion of that property in the proposed thematic historic district. • Bertha Sarmina, a member of Vernon House Inc., which operates Vernon House as a cooperative apartment building, spoke against the inclusion of that property in the proposed thematic historic district, emphasizing the organization’s limited resources. • Sherman Aronson, one of the authors of the nomination and a member of the Historic Preservation Initiative of West Mount Airy Neighbors, represented the nominator and spoke in favor of

building, spoke against the inclusion of that property in the proposed thematic historic district, emphasizing the organization’s limited resources. • Sherman Aronson, one of the authors of the nomination and a member of the Historic Preservation Initiative of West Mount Airy Neighbors, represented the nominator and spoke in favor of a designation. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Paul Steinke of the Preservation Alliance of Greater Philadelphia spoke in favor of designation. • David Traub of Save Our Sites spoke in favor of designation. • Kathy Dowdell spoke in favor of designation. • Steven Peitzman spoke in favor of designation. • Suzanne Ponsen of West Central Germantown Neighbors spoke in favor of designation. • Allison Weiss of SoLo Germantown spoke in favor of designation. • Oscar Beisert of the Keeping Society spoke in favor of designation. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The nomination makes a significant contribution to the understanding of the built environment along the Chestnut Hill West Line. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The historic district satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, F, and J. FAILED MOTION: Mr. Lech moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the Northwest Philadelphia Apartments Thematic Historic District satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, F, and PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 JANUARY 2025 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 13 J, and to designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places, with the exclusion of Sedgwick Gardens at 6907 McCallum Street and Vernon House at 6445 Greene Street. Mr. Frankel seconded the motion, which failed by a vote of 4 to 8. ITEM: Northwest Philadelphia Apartments Thematic Historic District MOTION: Designate; exclude Sedgwick Gardens and Vernon House MOVED BY: Lech SECONDED BY: Frankel VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Frankel, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Muhammad (Commerce) X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Holloman (City Council) X Lech (L&I) X McCoubrey X Michel X O’Connor (DPP) X Rabauer X Thomas X Treat (DPD) X Total 4 8 1 ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the Northwest Philadelphia Apartments Thematic Historic District satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, F, and J, and to designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Washington seconded the motion, which passed by a vote of 10 to 1. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 JANUARY 2025 PHILADELPHIA’S

Philadelphia Apartments Thematic Historic District satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, F, and J, and to designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Washington seconded the motion, which passed by a vote of 10 to 1. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 JANUARY 2025 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 14 ITEM: Northwest Philadelphia Apartments Thematic Historic District MOTION: Designate; Criteria A, D, F, and J MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Washington VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Frankel, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Muhammad (Commerce) X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Holloman (City Council) X Lech (L&I) 1 McCoubrey X Michel X O’Connor (DPP) X Rabauer X Thomas X Treat (DPD) X Total 10 1 1 1 NATIONAL REGISTER COMMENT ADDRESS: 225-31 N 15TH ST AND 216-48 N BROAD ST Resource: Hahnemann Medical College and Hospital Complex Historic District Proposed Action: National Register Comment Property Owner: Various Nominator: Heritage Consulting Group Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov OVERVIEW: The Pennsylvania Historical & Museum Commission (PHMC) has requested comments from the Philadelphia Historical Commission on the National Register nomination of 225-231 N. 15th Street and 216-248 N. Broad Street, located in Center City Philadelphia and historically known as Hahnemann Medical College & Hospital Complex. PHMC is charged with implementing federal historic preservation regulations in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, including overseeing the National Register of Historic Places in the state. PHMC reviews all such nominations before forwarding them to the National Park Service for action. As part of the process, PHMC must solicit comments on every National Register nomination from the appropriate local government. The Philadelphia Historical Commission speaks on behalf of the City of Philadelphia in historic preservation matters including the review of National Register nominations. Under federal regulation, the local government not only must provide comments, but must also provide a forum for public comment on nominations. Such a forum is provided during the Philadelphia Historical Commission’s meetings. The Hahnemann Medical College & Hospital Complex is a collection of related buildings, some of which have served Philadelphia for nearly a century as a prominent fixture in the city’s medical community. This nomination proposes significance under Criterion A in the areas of health and medicine. During the twentieth century, Hahnemann Hospital transformed from a small homeopathic college to one of the city’s most “modern” medical institutions. The complex, PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 JANUARY

a prominent fixture in the city’s medical community. This nomination proposes significance under Criterion A in the areas of health and medicine. During the twentieth century, Hahnemann Hospital transformed from a small homeopathic college to one of the city’s most “modern” medical institutions. The complex, PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 JANUARY 2025 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 15 which was constructed between 1928 and 1979, encompasses a full city block and contains five contributing buildings and two non-contributing structures. Contributing buildings include the Hospital Building (1928 South Tower/1979 North Tower addition), the New College Building (1938/1970), the Nurses’ Residence (1963), the Myer Feinstein Polyclinic Building (1908/1967), and the Bobst Building (1967). Non-contributing structures include a surface parking lot and a mechanical enclosure. The individual buildings generally consist of mid-rise and high-rise towers that display popular architectural styles of their respective dates of construction applied to hospital and educational buildings. As a whole, the proposed Hahnemann Medical College & Hospital Complex Historic District conveys its historic integrity through its location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. The period of significance is 1928- 1979, beginning with the construction of the original hospital building in 1928 and ends with the construction of the hospital’s North Tower in 1979. The properties at 222-48 N. Broad Street and 225-31 N. 15th Street were listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places in 2021 and 2022. The local designations focused on the 1928 hospital building and the 1938 Klahr Auditorium. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 02:11:57 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Mehley presented the nomination to the Historical Commission. • No one represented the nominator. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. DISCUSSION: • Ms. Cooperman said she was pleased to see the complex proposed for National Register listing. She commented that the nomination was likely being proposed in advance of a historic preservation tax incentives project, which would be welcome at this site. Ms. Cooperman said that she was disappointed, and also curious, that Criterion C was not proposed for the hospital complex. She recognized that Criterion A was proposed and stated the applicant made an effective argument for this criterion in the nomination. • Mr. Frankel agreed with Ms. Cooperman’s comments and said he looks forward to potential redevelopment at this site. • The Commissioners supported the nomination and agreed the property should be designated to the National Register of Historic Places. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION,

effective argument for this criterion in the nomination. • Mr. Frankel agreed with Ms. Cooperman’s comments and said he looks forward to potential redevelopment at this site. • The Commissioners supported the nomination and agreed the property should be designated to the National Register of Historic Places. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 JANUARY 2025 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 16 ADDRESS: 3935-61 GERMANTOWN AVE Resource: Interstate Storage Warehouse Proposed Action: National Register Comment Property Owner: Olympian QOZB LLC Nominator: Powers & Company Inc. Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov OVERVIEW: The Pennsylvania Historical & Museum Commission (PHMC) has requested comments from the Philadelphia Historical Commission on the National Register nomination of 3935-61 Germantown Avenue located in the Nicetown neighborhood of North Philadelphia and historically known as the Interstate Storage Warehouse. PHMC is charged with implementing federal historic preservation regulations in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, including overseeing the National Register of Historic Places in the state. PHMC reviews all such nominations before forwarding them to the National Park Service for action. As part of the process, PHMC must solicit comments on every National Register nomination from the appropriate local government. The Philadelphia Historical Commission speaks on behalf of the City of Philadelphia in historic preservation matters including the review of National Register nominations. Under federal regulation, the local government not only must provide comments, but must also provide a forum for public comment on nominations. Such a forum is provided during the Philadelphia Historical Commission’s meetings. Constructed in 1924, the Interstate Storage Warehouse is significant at the local level under Criterion C in the area of architecture as a major Philadelphia example of the household storage warehouses designed by the architectural firm of Moores & Dunford. During the 1910s and 20s, Moores & Dunford became nationally known for their warehouse and storage buildings and were among the authorities in this field, earning a reputation for their scientific approach to the design and construction of warehouses. Between 1913 and 1929, the firm designed more than one hundred storage warehouses in cities across the United States and Canada, and their work appeared frequently in industry periodicals and architectural magazines. The building showcases influential ideas about the architectural treatment of warehouses that emerged in Chicago after 1900, ideas that helped to make the storage warehouse an important visual feature in the American urban landscape during the early twentieth century. The period of significance is

in industry periodicals and architectural magazines. The building showcases influential ideas about the architectural treatment of warehouses that emerged in Chicago after 1900, ideas that helped to make the storage warehouse an important visual feature in the American urban landscape during the early twentieth century. The period of significance is 1924, the year the building was completed. This property is not listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 02:17:50 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Mehley presented the nomination to the Historical Commission. • Kevin McMahon of Powers and Company represented the nominator. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. DISCUSSION: • Ms. Cooperman said the nomination was extremely informative and she learned a lot about storage buildings from it. She commented that the building is a remarkably interesting combination of public presence and storage facility. Ms. Cooperman added that the nomination provides a thorough explanation of the prominence of storage facilities in Philadelphia’s urban landscape but wondered why Criterion A PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 JANUARY 2025 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 17 was not included along with Criterion C. • The Commissioners supported the nomination and agreed the property should be designated to the National Register of Historic Places. ADJOURNMENT START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 02:21:45 ACTION: At 11:45 a.m., Ms. Cooperman moved to adjourn. Ms. Washington seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. ITEM: Adjournment MOTION: Adjourn MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Washington VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Frankel, Chair X Washington, Vice Chair X Muhammad (Commerce) X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Holloman (City Council) X Lech (L&I) X McCoubrey X Michel X O’Connor (DPP) X Rabauer X Thomas X Treat (DPD) X Total 13 PLEASE NOTE: • Minutes of the Philadelphia Historical Commission and its advisory committees are presented in action format. Additional information is available in the video recording for this meeting. The start time for each agenda item in the recording is noted. • Application materials and staff overviews are available on the Historical Commission’s website, www.phila.gov/historical. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 10 JANUARY 2025 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 18 CRITERIA FOR DESIGNATION §14-1004. Designation. (1) Criteria for Designation. A building, complex of buildings, structure, site, object, or district may be designated for preservation if it: (a) Has significant character, interest, or value as part of the development, heritage, or cultural characteristics of

PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 18 CRITERIA FOR DESIGNATION §14-1004. Designation. (1) Criteria for Designation. A building, complex of buildings, structure, site, object, or district may be designated for preservation if it: (a) Has significant character, interest, or value as part of the development, heritage, or cultural characteristics of the City, Commonwealth, or nation or is associated with the life of a person significant in the past; (b) Is associated with an event of importance to the history of the City, Commonwealth or Nation; (c) Reflects the environment in an era characterized by a distinctive architectural style; (d) Embodies distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style or engineering specimen; (e) Is the work of a designer, architect, landscape architect or designer, or professional engineer whose work has significantly influenced the historical, architectural, economic, social, or cultural development of the City, Commonwealth, or nation; (f) Contains elements of design, detail, materials, or craftsmanship that represent a significant innovation; (g) Is part of or related to a square, park, or other distinctive area that should be preserved according to a historic, cultural, or architectural motif; (h) Owing to its unique location or singular physical characteristic, represents an established and familiar visual feature of the neighborhood, community, or City; (i) Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in pre-history or history; or (j) Exemplifies the cultural, political, economic, social, or historical heritage of the community.