1 THE MINUTES OF THE 449th STATED MEETING OF THE PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION 12 January 2000 Commission conference Room, 18 th Floor, 1515 Arch Street Wayne S. Spilove, Chair Present Wayne S. Spilove, Chair David Brownlee, Ph.D. Teresa M. Mulligan, Assistant Deputy Director, Department of Commerce Joseph James, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Public Property Barbara Kaplan, Executive Director, City Planning Commission Michael Sklaroff, Esq. Robert Thomas Dennis Ward III Scott Wilds, Assistant Director, Office of Housing and Community Development Caroline Wischmann Stephanie G. Wolf, Ph.D. Shelly Merhige, Office of City Council President 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 Norman Barson, Fineman & Bach Daniel Clancey, Voegele Mechanical Dave Macken, ERRA Construction Co. Joe Serratore, Joseph Serratore Architects & Assoc. George Restrepo, Owner 2006 Chancellor Street Anton Jung, Owner 2219 Bainbridge Street Marianna Thomas, Marianna Thomas Architects Dennis Kaiser, 2120 Locust Street Lenore Millhollen, Center City Residents Assoc. / Preservation Alliance Sally Elk, Eastern State Penitentiary T. O=Connor, S.O.S.H. Architects Janet Potter, Philadelphia Historic Northwest Coalition (PNWC) Charles Denny, Philadelphia Streets Department Robert Wright, Philadelphia Streets Department Catharine Franklin, Penn-Knox N.A. and PNWC Wayne Spilove, Chair, recognized the presence of a quorum and called the 449th Stated Meeting of the Philadelphia Historical Commission to order at 9:00 A.M. 2 MINUTES of the 448th Stated Meeting of the Philadelphia Historical Commission. Upon a motion made by Mr. Wilds and duly seconded, the Commission unanimously approved the minutes of the 448th Stated Meeting of the Philadelphia Historical Commission held on 8 December 1999, Wayne Spilove, Chair, with the addition that Mr. Sklaroff recused himself from the Park Mall, Temple University project. Mr. Spilove welcomed Ms. Mulligan of the Commerce Department to the Commission. REPORT of the Architectural Committee, 28 December 1999, Robert Thomas, Chair. 220 W. Washington Square, nw corner Locust Street Jack Noonan, Owner/Applicant DATE: c. 1911 PROPOSAL: New entry and windows Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval with staff to review details for approval. The proposal includes a new entryway on Locust Street in a former loading dock and new aluminum windows. Mr. Baron stated that the proposed windows will match the existing muntin pattern and brick molds, but have applied muntins with correct dimensions and half screens. Mr. Thomas stated that the proposal meets The Secretary of the Interior=s Standards for
Street in a former loading dock and new aluminum windows. Mr. Baron stated that the proposed windows will match the existing muntin pattern and brick molds, but have applied muntins with correct dimensions and half screens. Mr. Thomas stated that the proposal meets The Secretary of the Interior=s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. Mr. Brownlee moved to accept the Committee=s recommendation for approval. Mr. Sklaroff seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. 1216-20 Arch Street Modern Video, Owner George Voegele, Contractor/Applicant DATE: 1902 PROPOSAL: Vents cut into south facade windows Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval of vents on several conditions in order to meet the Standards: vents must be placed behind the sash and muntin grid, with a bird screen; vents must be painted a dark color; louvers must have smaller slats, and staff must review and approve details. The proposal calls for two vents on the south side of the building, one for air intake and one for exhaust. In view of the thorough analysis of optional locations, the Committee recommended approval of the vents with several conditions in order to meet the Standards. The vents must be placed behind the sash and muntin grid, with a bird screen; vents must be painted a dark color; louvers must have smaller slats, and staff to review the details for approval. Mr. Wilds moved to accept the Committee=s recommendation for approval. Ms Wolf second the motion, which carried unanimously. College Hall, University of Pennsylvania Marianna Thomas, Architect / Applicant DATE: 1870-72 3 PROPOSAL: Window and door alterations; remove fire escapes Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval of removing three fire escapes and restoring non-historic doors to windows; Approval of the hexagonal operating window, with a flat frame that is painted out; Approval of the vent in the gable, but denial of removing the tracery until the Committee sees an engineer report and revisits the proposal; Approval of the new double-leaf doors and sidelights, but denial of the removal of the historic transom; Approval of the new single-leaf doors; Staff to review details for approval. The applicant seeks to remove three fire escapes and to reestablish these former fire exits as windows. In the three-point tracery window, the architect plans to fit a hexagonal operating window in the center. Ms. Thomas, architect, plans to install louvers within the gable end rose window, to remove the glazing and to cut the circular tracery into a
to reestablish these former fire exits as windows. In the three-point tracery window, the architect plans to fit a hexagonal operating window in the center. Ms. Thomas, architect, plans to install louvers within the gable end rose window, to remove the glazing and to cut the circular tracery into a quatrefoil design. At grade, an entryway will accommodate wider ADA accessible doors by rebuilding a reconfigured version of the historic frames and transoms. The exterior modifications include: 1. the removal of non-historic fire escapes and the restoration of the fire exits as windows; 2. the re-glazing of a large triangular window with intricate tracery; 3. the reduction of the extent of mason tracery in the gable rose window for the installation of a louvered vent to provide air to a HVAC unit. The Architectural Committee had questioned the need to remove the tracery and suggested that placement of the louvers on a different plane or an increase in velocity would yield an adequate flow of air. Ms. Thomas submitted a letter from William J. Trefz, mechanical engineer, reaffirming the need to execute the design as presented. Commission members asked that the Architectural Committee consider Mr. Trefz=s letter, and Mr. Tyler recommended a review of the proposal by a mechanical engineer retained by the Commission. 4. the installation of ADA compliant doors at the east elevation entrance. Although neither the existing doors nor the horizontal transom above it are historic, the upper transom is. This proposal entails the removal of that upper transom and its replacement with a similar one dimensioned to accommodate the vertical elements of the new ADA doors. This provoked considerable discussion about the design and importance of preserving the historic fabric of the transom. 5. the installation of new single-leaf doors facing Houston Hall and the new plaza. Ms. Wolf moved to accept the Committee=s recommendation for approval of most aspects of the proposal, denial of removal of the historic transom, and tabling the vote on louvers in rose 4 window. The motion carried with 7 votes. Ms. Mulligan and Mr. James dissented , and Mr. Brownlee and Mr. Sklaroff recused themselves. 7913 Oxford Avenue Wawa, Inc., Owner Peter Kelsen, Esq., Applicant DATE: 1840 PROPOSAL: Complete demolition Architectural Committee Recommendation: Denial The proposal calls for the demolition of a wood frame house that is part of the historic village of Fox Chase. The house has sustained inappropriate
and Mr. Sklaroff recused themselves. 7913 Oxford Avenue Wawa, Inc., Owner Peter Kelsen, Esq., Applicant DATE: 1840 PROPOSAL: Complete demolition Architectural Committee Recommendation: Denial The proposal calls for the demolition of a wood frame house that is part of the historic village of Fox Chase. The house has sustained inappropriate modification without Historical Commission review, but with a building permit. The site would become a landscaped area for a recently constructed commercial structure. The Committee recommended against the approval of the demolition application on architectural and preservation grounds. Mr. Wilds moved to accept the Committee=s recommendation for denial. Ms. Wolf seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. 2219 Bainbridge Street Anton Jung, Owner Dan Ioseb, Contractor / Applicant DATE: c. 1868 PROPOSAL: Legalize window, bay and door alterations Architectural Committee Recommendation: Denial The proposal involves legalizing changes that the applicant made to the property in the course of renovating this rowhouse. The applicant had restoration plans approved by the staff, but strayed from these plans in several ways. One over one square windows replaced segmental arched two over two windows. The base of the front bay has received a rough cast stucco treatment and glass block windows. The bay itself now features a diamond pattern on the wood base in place of the full-length windows. The owner, Anton Jung, acknowledged his mistakes and described the very deteriorated condition of the house before his renovation. Ms. Wolf stated that the doors were not historical and were inappropriate. Ms. Kaplan said that the Commission should consider asking owners to sign as received a letter that explains their obligations. The work as executed violates Standards 2, 5 and 6. Mr. James moved to accept the Committee=s recommendation of denial. Mr. Ward seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 10 to 1. Ms. Mulligan dissented. 219 South 9 th Street Wills Eye Hospital, Owner DATE: c. 1815 PROPOSAL: Brace façade indefinitely 5 Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval of the bracing for a period not to exceed nine months. The proposal to put a brace on the front façade is only a temporary solution for this property, which has clearly been neglected. Wills Eye Hospital owns several buildings in this row and has left them vacant for a number of years. The Department of Licenses and Inspections has issued several violations. There was much discussion by the Commission. Mr. James expressed great concern over the
this property, which has clearly been neglected. Wills Eye Hospital owns several buildings in this row and has left them vacant for a number of years. The Department of Licenses and Inspections has issued several violations. There was much discussion by the Commission. Mr. James expressed great concern over the possibility that at some point Licenses and Inspections would order the demolition of this building without consulting the Commission. Ms. Kaplan suggested the possibility of meeting with high level officials about this matter, and that the hospital should consider giving the properties to The Redevelopment Authority if it has no current plans to develop them. It was suggested that Ms. Merhige and Mr. Tyler talk to City Council President Anna C. Verna, who sits on the Board of City Trusts and the Board of the Hospital. Mr. Brownlee questioned if the Commission is bound by Licenses and Inspections= decision, or can we review it on a month to month basis. Mr. Zecca suggested injunctive relief, if the owner does not cooperate, and to meet with Licenses and Inspections and the Law department to discuss possible remedies. No decision; further investigation of this matter will occur. 2128 Locust Street Edward & Sunny Lee, Owners Dennis Kaiser, Architect/Applicant DATE: c. 1900 PROPOSAL: Introduce garage at rear, rooftop deck and stair tower Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval with staff to review details. The proposal involves a roof deck and stair enclosure that will sit back out of public view and the introduction of a garage at the back of the property on a service alley. Houses do not face this block. Mr. James questioned the garage construction. The work will have only a minimal impact on the public right-of-way. Ms. Wischmann moved to accept the Committee=s recommendation for approval. Mr. Ward seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. 2114 Chancellor Street a.k.a. 222 Van Pelt Street Craig Hedland, Owner / Applicant DATE: c. 1875 PROPOSAL: Replace deck, door, windows Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval with staff to review details for approval. The proposal calls for rebuilding a deck, adding a visible railing at the front of the building, and installing a new door and two windows in a modern façade of the building. The addition pre-dates the creation of the Rittenhouse-Fitler Residential Historic District which includes this property. The new railing will be reduced in thickness to minimize its visibility. 6 Mr. Wilds moved to accept
the building, and installing a new door and two windows in a modern façade of the building. The addition pre-dates the creation of the Rittenhouse-Fitler Residential Historic District which includes this property. The new railing will be reduced in thickness to minimize its visibility. 6 Mr. Wilds moved to accept the Committee=s recommendation for approval. Mr. Brownlee seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. 226 South 16 th Street, nw corner of Locust Street James M. Dwyer, Owner Thomas O=Connor, S.O.S.H., Architect/Applicant DATE: c. 1929 PROPOSAL: New doors, marquees, penthouse addition Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval with staff to review details for approval. The proposal calls for converting the offices of the Jewish Federation, originally the University Club, into a residential suite hotel. There are three parts to the proposal. First, the replacing of the non-historic entrance on South 16th Street with multi-light doors and the reopening of the historic entrance on Locust Street using multi-light doors. The muntin patterns on the doors will be the same as the windows. Both entrances will have new metal and glass marquees. Second, the proposal includes a penthouse addition, set back from the front walls, next to the extant mechanical tower. This addition will prove only slightly visible. Third, the central windows on the Locust Street façade will be altered. The plan involves dividing the interior which necessitates partitions at the central window mullion; to mask these one-hour fire rated partitions, the muntins must be wider. Mr. Brownlee noted the college names carved in the stone façade of the University Club; they have a link to the building=s history. In the event they survive, they should be preserved. Mr. James moved to accept the Committee=s recommendation for approval. Mr. Ward seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. 2006 Chancellor Street George Restrepo, Owner/Applicant DATE: c. 1860 PROPOSAL: Doors, windows, rooftop deck and stair tower Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval of stair enclosure and roof-deck; Approval of new multi-light window on rear façade with balconette, new one-over-one windows on rear 1st floor and new wrought-iron balcony on 2nd floor; Approval of new one-over-one windows on side elevation, removing non-historic door, cutting down original window to meet sill height of other windows; Approval of new front door, new multi-light door in hayloft door with wrought-iron flower box, new window in former carriage door with three vertical mullions and four lower panels; Denial of replacing three arched windows on front
non-historic door, cutting down original window to meet sill height of other windows; Approval of new front door, new multi-light door in hayloft door with wrought-iron flower box, new window in former carriage door with three vertical mullions and four lower panels; Denial of replacing three arched windows on front façade; Staff to review and details for approval. The proposal calls for installing new windows and doors on three facades of this carriage house as well as constructing a roof-deck and stair enclosure. 7 On the front façade, the owner wishes to install new windows to match the existing except that the thinner muntin bar in the four-over-four windows will be an applied muntin. He proposes to install a new fixed window in the former carriage door opening. This window will have three vertical muntins and panels at the bottom to simulate the old bi-fold doors. The submission also includes an arched door to replace the existing non-historic door and transom. On the side facade, the owner plans the alteration of nine-over-one into six-over-six sash windows to match the single existing historic window on that facade. He wants yo do this with a double glazed window with a 1 and 1/8 inch wide maintain. He seeks to fill in an existing non- historic door opening and cut a new window above that and to cut down the only historic window to match the sill height of the other windows on the facade. On the rear facade, the owner plans to remove various utility lines, install a new balcony, fill in a casement window and create a new ground floor french door with a balconied. On the roof, the owner plans a deck and stair enclosure, well set back from all facades. The owner proposed windows with insulated glass; however, this would prevent matching the dimensions of the muntins. The center maintain would be a true maintain, but the horizontal muntins would have to be applied, owing to the glass thickness. The owner is willing to leave the pre-existing windows, and to install interior storm sash. The Committee recommended approval of the windows on three facades as well as the roof-deck and stair enclosure. Ms. Wolf moved to accept the Committee=s recommendation for approval of doors, one-over-one windows, the deck and stair enclosure, and denial of installing three new windows on the front facade. Ms. Merhige seconded the motion, which carried
the windows on three facades as well as the roof-deck and stair enclosure. Ms. Wolf moved to accept the Committee=s recommendation for approval of doors, one-over-one windows, the deck and stair enclosure, and denial of installing three new windows on the front facade. Ms. Merhige seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. 2100 Sansom Street Lutheran Church of Holy Communion, Owner Christian David, Applicant DATE: 1890 PROPOSAL: Two banners 10' x 5' Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval The proposal calls for the installation of two ten foot long banners, one to advertise the Shakespeare Festival, the other the church. The banners would be attached with poles and would hang six inches below the second floor. Ms. Merhige moved to accept the Committee=s recommendation for approval. Mr. Ward seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. 2017 Sansom Street Victoria & Slavko Brkich, Owners/Applicant 8 DATE: 1885 PROPOSAL: Sansom Street facade alterations Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval of the window, front door and awnings as proposed; approval of wood double-leaf carriage doors with staff to review and approve details. This proposal calls for minor facade alterations, including restoring several one-over-one wood windows and a lintel, altering the type of roll down garage door to a partially open link variety, and installing a flat wall sign and canvas canopy. The Committee recommended a double-leaf door with overhead windows that would be appropriate for ventilation. The owners= representative at the Architectural Committee meeting indicated agreement with this. Mr. Wilds moved to accept the Committee=s recommendation for approval. Mr. Brownlee seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. 2951 Market Street Amtrak, Owner Dan Peter Kopple, Architect / Applicant DATE: 1929-34 PROPOSAL: Metal canopy on Market Street elevation in concept; addition of a bridge over Arch Street in concept. Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval in concept of a metal canopy on Market Street with a more rectilinear design; approval in concept of the bridge addition with the bridge brought out further from the building and a glass ceiling. There are two proposals. The first involves constructing a metal and glass canopy on the Market Street facade of the building. At the Architectural Committee meeting, the architect provided three options: one based on the design of the canopy structure over the commuter rail tracks, the second a simplified version of that design, and the third a 1950s modern design. The Committee urged a more rectilinear treatment. The second proposal calls for building a
Committee meeting, the architect provided three options: one based on the design of the canopy structure over the commuter rail tracks, the second a simplified version of that design, and the third a 1950s modern design. The Committee urged a more rectilinear treatment. The second proposal calls for building a bridge over Arch Street to contact the Station with a new parking garage. The Commission supported the Committee=s recommendation that the bridge be brought away from the building and have a glass roof. Ms. Merhige moved to accept the Committee=s recommendation for approval in concept. Mr. Brownlee seconded the motion, which carried with 10 votes. Mr. Wilds recused himself. 251-153 South Camac Street George Lutz, Owner DATE: c. 1830 PROPOSAL: Canvas awning Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval 9 The proposal calls for an awning over the door and steps leading to the restaurant, owing to the dangerous conditions of the marble steps in bad weather. Mr. Baron expressed the owner=s apology for being unable to attend the meeting. Mr. James made a motion to accept the Committee=s recommendation for approval. Ms. Merhige seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. 2100 block Fairmount Avenue, Eastern State Penitentiary City of Philadelphia, Owner Sally Elk, Applicant DATE: 1825; altered 1889 PROPOSAL: Re-roof Link to Cellblock One Architectural Committee Recommendation: Approval subject to the submission of engineer=s drawings and report after initial investigation and with the Commission to approve the new roof design. The proposal, which calls for removing the deteriorated fold-seam metal roof, installing a temporary roof during investigation by an engineer, and re-roofing with an EPDM rubber roof on the link connecting the Rotunda and Cellblock One. The Department of Licenses and Inspections closed the link, owing to its dangerous condition. Mr. Wilds made a motion to accept the Committee=s recommendation for approval subject to the submission of engineer=s drawings and report after initial investigation. Ms. Wolf seconded the motion, which carried with 10 votes. Mr. Brownlee recused himself. THE REPORT of the Special Committee for Germantown Avenue, 4 January 2000, Robert Thomas, Chair Germantown Avenue, 3700 B 4000 blocks City of Philadelphia, Owner Charles Denny, Department of Streets, Applicant PROPOSAL: Removal of asphalt from shoulders, repair of underlying granite block and Replacement of the granite block trolley track area with concrete. The Special Committee for Germantown Avenue=s Recommendation: Approval of the removal of the asphalt in the shoulders, repair of the underlying granite
Charles Denny, Department of Streets, Applicant PROPOSAL: Removal of asphalt from shoulders, repair of underlying granite block and Replacement of the granite block trolley track area with concrete. The Special Committee for Germantown Avenue=s Recommendation: Approval of the removal of the asphalt in the shoulders, repair of the underlying granite block, installation of new girder rail and the use of untinted concrete in the track area. This portion of Germantown Avenue appears on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places as part of the Historic Street Paving Thematic District and currently consists of granite block between the trolley tracks and asphalt extending from the trolley tracks to the curbs. This proposal calls for the removal of asphalt from the shoulders, and the repair of the underlying granite block between the trolley tracks with concrete. A great deal of discussion took place regarding the use of girder rail as opposed to T-rail. 10 The Commission decided on the use of girder rail as a compromise to losing the block between the trolley tracks. The Commission also discussed the use of concrete versus asphalt in the track area. After much discussion the Commission determined that concrete would be the preferable replacement material since it is more in keeping with the other stretches of Germantown Avenue that have undergone a similar treatment. Although the removal of the granite block from the track area violates The Secretary of the Interior=s Standards for Rehabilitation, the exposure and repair of the block in the shoulders mitigates the loss of granite block in the track area. This decision is not meant to establish a precedent for other streets with trolley tracks; they will be reviewed on a case by case basis. Mr. Wilds made a motion to accept the Committee=s recommendation for approval. Mr. James seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. THE REPORT on the Activities of the Historical Commission Staff, December 1999. Mr. Tyler asked if members of the Commission had any questions about the report. Mr. Wilds made a motion to adjourn. Ms. Mulligan seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 11:25 A.M. Respectfully submitted, Diane M. Hughes Executive Secretary