Historical Commission — Aug 11, 2023

PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 1 THE MINUTES OF THE 732ND STATED MEETING OF THE PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION FRIDAY, 11 AUGUST 2023, 9:00 A.M. REMOTE MEETING ON ZOOM ROBERT THOMAS, CHAIR CALL TO ORDER START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:00:00 Mr. Thomas, the Chair, called the meeting to order at 9:02 a.m. and announced the presence of a quorum. The following Commissioners joined him: Commissioner Present Absent Comment Robert Thomas, AIA, Chair (Architectural Historian) X Donna Carney (Philadelphia City Planning Commission) X . Emily Cooperman, Ph.D., Committee on Historic Designation Chair (Historian) X Mark Dodds (Department of Planning and Development) X Erin Kindt (Department of Public Property) X Sara Lepori (Commerce Department) X John P. Lech (Department of Licenses & Inspections) X John Mattioni, Esq. X Arrived 9:08 am Dan McCoubrey, AIA, LEED AP BD+C, Architectural Committee Chair (Architect) X Stephanie Michel (Community Organization) X Jessica Sánchez, Esq. (City Council President) X Kimberly Washington, Esq. (Community Development Corporation) 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 Laura DiPasquale, Historic Preservation Planner III Shannon Garrison, Historic Preservation Planner II Heather Hendrickson, Historic Preservation Planner I Ted Maust, Historic Preservation Planner I Allyson Mehley, Historic Preservation Planner II Leonard Reuter, Esq, Law Department Dan Shachar-Krasnoff, Historic Preservation Planner II Alex Till, Historic Preservation Planner I PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 2 The following persons attended the online meeting: Allison Weiss, SoLo Germantown Amy Lambert, University City Historical Society Blaise Tobia Brett Feldman, Esq., Klehr Harrison Brett Mapp Bridget Novielli Carolyn Klepser Chris Lezenby C.W. Lewis David Fecteau, Philadelphia City Planning Commission David Traub, Save Our Sites Deborah Gary, Society to Preserve Philadelphia African American Assets Debra McCarty Dennis Carlisle Devon Beverly, Esq., Ballard Spahr Eloise Flood Fred Morrison George Poulin Hanna Stark, Preservation Alliance Helma Weeks Hsing-Yuan Chen, Sky Design Studio PC Ian Litwin, Philadelphia City Planning Commission Jackie Tileston Janice Sykes-Ross, West Philadelphia Cultural Alliance Jay Farrell Jerry Roller, JKRP Architects Job Itzkowitz, Old City District Justin Detwiler Oscar Beisert, Keeping Society Ken Weinstein, Philly Office Retail Kimberly Haas, Hidden City Philadelphia Kirk McCarthy Liam Presser Linda Farrow Lucy Davis Marissa Howard Mark Brack Michael Lopsonzski Mirai Yasuyama, Sky Design Studio PC Naché Patoir Nancy

Jay Farrell Jerry Roller, JKRP Architects Job Itzkowitz, Old City District Justin Detwiler Oscar Beisert, Keeping Society Ken Weinstein, Philly Office Retail Kimberly Haas, Hidden City Philadelphia Kirk McCarthy Liam Presser Linda Farrow Lucy Davis Marissa Howard Mark Brack Michael Lopsonzski Mirai Yasuyama, Sky Design Studio PC Naché Patoir Nancy Pontone Nate Torok Patrick Colgan Robert Gurmankin Sarah Mitchell Shimi Zakin, Atrium Design Group Snežana Litvinović, Atrium Design Group Stephanie Boggs Magagna, Esq., Klehr Harrison Stephanie Pennypacker Steven Peitzman PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 3 Gary Vernick Vernoca L. Michael Virginia Maksymowicz Wen Lin, Lui Consulting and Construction LLC William J. O'Brien, Esq., Manayunk Lawyer Yvonne Haskins, Esq. ADOPTION OF MINUTES, 731ST STATED MEETING, 14 JULY 2023 START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:05:40 DISCUSSION: • Mr. Thomas 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 731st Stated Meeting, held 14 July 2023. No comments were offered. ACTION: Mr. Thomas moved to adopt the minutes of the 731st Stated Meeting of the Philadelphia Historical Commission, held 14 July 2023. Ms. Washington seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. ITEM: Adoption of the Minutes of the 731st Stated Meeting of the PHC MOTION: Adoption of minutes MOVED BY: Thomas SECONDED BY: Washington VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Kindt (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 10 2 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 4 REQUESTS FOR CONTINUANCES ADDRESS: 150 AND 160 W WASHINGTON LN Name of Resource: Cranford Proposed Action: Designate Property Owner: 150: G13 Residences, LLC; 160: Sapphire Corp. Nominator: The Keeping Society Staff Contact: Laura DiPasquale, laura.dipasquale@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate two properties, 150 and 160 W. Washington Lane, as historic, listing them on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The property at 150 W. Washington Lane includes a Colonial Revival brick house constructed in 1893 and expanded in 1909. The property at 160 W. Washington Lane is an undeveloped parcel surrounded by a stone retaining wall. The nomination argues that the properties are significant under Criteria A and D. Under Criterion A, the

W. Washington Lane includes a Colonial Revival brick house constructed in 1893 and expanded in 1909. The property at 160 W. Washington Lane is an undeveloped parcel surrounded by a stone retaining wall. The nomination argues that the properties are significant under Criteria A and D. Under Criterion A, the nomination argues that the properties are significant for their association with Charles F. Jenkins, a prominent Quaker businessman, historian, and publisher, who impacted the cultural and social development of the Germantown community and larger Philadelphia area. Under Criterion D, the nomination argues that the properties represent a distinctive example of the Colonial Revival style. The nomination, which was submitted under a combined address of 150-160 W. Washington Lane but updated by the staff, does not appear to accurately reflect the history of the parcel at 160 W. Washington Lane, instead conflating it with that of 150 W. Washington Lane and identifying it as a side yard and garden. The undeveloped parcel at 160 W. Washington Lane was part of Edward Cope property that fronted on W. Tulpehocken Street and extended along Greene Street to W. Washington Lane until Cope’s death in 1911. At that time, the parcel was conveyed to Cope’s daughter, Maria C. Jenkins and her husband Charles F. Jenkins, who had purchased a portion of the property that would become 150 W. Washington Lane from Cope and a portion from David H. Livezey in 1893 and constructed the house in question at 150 W. Washington Lane. Charles and Maria Jenkins sold the property with the house at 150 W. Washington Lane to Elizabeth and E. Naudain Simons in 1917, and the undeveloped parcel at 160 W. Washington Lane to the same in 1919. While the Jenkins family may have used the parcel at 160 W. Washington Lane as a garden prior to the death of Edward Cope in 1911, the nomination does not provide evidence to support this claim. The only historic reference to a garden at the Jenkins property is a 1902 photograph of a sundial, whose location is not identified in the nomination. The nomination does not discuss the stone retaining wall that runs the length of the 160 W. Washington Lane parcel. It is likely a remnant of the Edward Cope property. The stone wall abuts a Colonial Revival brick retaining wall along 150 W. Washington Lane, and corresponds to historic maps, none of which

not discuss the stone retaining wall that runs the length of the 160 W. Washington Lane parcel. It is likely a remnant of the Edward Cope property. The stone wall abuts a Colonial Revival brick retaining wall along 150 W. Washington Lane, and corresponds to historic maps, none of which are provided in the nomination. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 150 W. Washington Lane satisfies Criteria for Designation A and D but does not demonstrate that the property at 160 W. Washington Lane satisfies any criteria. SEE BELOW. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 5 ADDRESS: 8835 GERMANTOWN AVE Name of Resource: Julia Hebard Marsden House Review: Designation Property Owner: Chestnut Hill Hospital LLC Nominator: Chestnut Hill Conservancy Staff Contact: Jon Farnham, jon.farnham@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the former Julia Hebard Marsden residence and stable, two buildings on the Chestnut Hill Hospital campus, at 8835 Germantown Avenue and list them on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the buildings satisfy Criteria for Designation C, D, E, and J. Under Criteria C and D, the nomination argues that the house and stable are representative examples of the Colonial Revival “country houses” that appeared in Chestnut Hill following the 1876 Centennial Exhibition in Philadelphia. Under Criterion E, the nomination contends that the buildings were designed by the nationally significant and Philadelphia-born architect Charles Barton Keen. Under Criterion J, the nomination argues that the residence and stable contributed to the neighborhood’s status as an elite residential enclave at the turn of the twentieth century. Temple University Health System, Redeemer Health, and Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine have formed a consortium and are attempting to purchase Chestnut Hill Hospital from Tower Health, the current owner. Tower Health and the hospital have faced significant financial challenges in recent years and the sale may prevent the closure of the facility, which provides essential services to the community. The nominator, the Chestnut Hill Conservancy, and the property owner’s attorney have been discussing a possible compromise that would reduce the extent of the designation, allowing the non-profit hospital to expand in the future with fewer constraints. Correspondence between the nominator and the hospital is included. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the site at 8835 Germantown Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D,

would reduce the extent of the designation, allowing the non-profit hospital to expand in the future with fewer constraints. Correspondence between the nominator and the hospital is included. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the site at 8835 Germantown Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, E, and J. The staff also recommends that the Historical Commission seek a compromise designation that would allow the not-for-profit health care provider, which provides essential services to the community, to reuse the site effectively while protecting and preserving the most important historic resources at the site. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the Julia Hebard Marsden House at 8835 Germantown Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation C, D, E, and J and should be designated as historic and listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places, with the boundary amended to exclude the large non-historic parking garage structure. SEE BELOW. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 6 ADDRESS: 208-12 VINE ST Proposal: Demolish buildings Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: John Charles Stortz Applicant: Michael Phillips, Klehr Harrison Harvey Branzburg LLP History: 1780; John Stortz and Son Store; Building at 210 Vine St, c. 1870. Rear building added at 207 New St, 1948. Older buildings cut down at 211 New St, 1941, and 209 New St, 1943. Individual Designation: 12/31/1984 District Designation: Old City Historic District, Contributing, 12/12/2003. Staff Contact: Jon Farnham, jon.farnham@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application proposes to demolish completely a complex of interconnected buildings at 208-12 Vine Street, on the south side of Vine west of 2nd Street in the Old City Historic District. The application claims that the buildings cannot be reasonably adaptively reused and therefore requests that the Historical Commission approve the demolition pursuant to the financial hardship exception in the historic preservation ordinance. The complex consists of three buildings facing Vine Street (208, 210, and 212) and three buildings facing New Street (207, 209, 211), all of which are internally connected. The buildings at 208 and 212 Vine Street were constructed about 1780. The building at 210 Vine Street was constructed about 1870. The one-story garage building at 207 New Street was constructed in 1948. The one-story buildings at 211 and 209 New St were created by cutting down and altering older buildings in 1941 and 1943 respectively.

Street were constructed about 1780. The building at 210 Vine Street was constructed about 1870. The one-story garage building at 207 New Street was constructed in 1948. The one-story buildings at 211 and 209 New St were created by cutting down and altering older buildings in 1941 and 1943 respectively. The Historical Commission individually designated the property at an undocumented date prior to the adoption of the current preservation ordinance in 1984, hence the 31 December 1984 individual designation date. The Historical Commission classified five components of the property separately in the inventory for the Old City Historic District when it designated the district on 12 December 2003. It classified the structures at 208, 210, and 212 Vine Street and at 209-11 New Street as contributing and the structure at 209 New Street as non-contributing. Philadelphia’s historic preservation ordinance expressly prohibits the Historical Commission from approving demolitions of historic buildings unless it determines that: • the demolition is necessary in the public interest; and/or, • the building cannot be used for any purpose for which it is or may be reasonably adapted. In the first instance, the ordinance authorizes the Historical Commission to approve demolitions for public policy reasons, when the public interest advanced by the demolition greatly outweighs the public interest in the preservation of the building. In the second instance, the ordinance authorizes the Commission to approve demolitions when preservation regulation of the property denies all economically viable use of it and thereby inflicts a financial hardship on the owner. This application asks the Historical Commission to approve the demolition because the complex of buildings cannot be used for any purpose for which it is or may be reasonably adapted. The application includes: 1. Affidavit of Thomas S. Bond, Real Estate Broker 2. Appraisal Report 3. Condition Assessment Reports from O’Donnell & Naccarato A. Supplemental Condition Assessment, 2/27/2023 B. Supplemental Field Invest Report, 1/12/2018 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 7 C. Visual Condition Assessment, 11/3/2017 4. Construction Cost Estimates, Becker & Frondorf 5. Conceptual Approval Submission, 2014 6. Developer Letters 7. Photographs of Property 8. Photographs of Surrounding Neighborhood 9. Aerials and Maps 10. Zoning File for 244-58 N 2nd Street 11. Articles on John Stortz & Son Inc The application details efforts to market the property for adaptive reuse since 2014. In 2014, the Historical Commission approved an application

7. Photographs of Property 8. Photographs of Surrounding Neighborhood 9. Aerials and Maps 10. Zoning File for 244-58 N 2nd Street 11. Articles on John Stortz & Son Inc The application details efforts to market the property for adaptive reuse since 2014. In 2014, the Historical Commission approved an application in concept to rehabilitate the buildings on Vine Street and construct a large addition on the buildings on New Street for residential use. Several developers sequentially entered into sales agreements for the property and evaluated residential conversions during their due diligence periods. In the end, all the developers who considered purchasing the property determined that adaptive reuse was infeasible and abandoned the projects. The application includes several assessments of the condition of the property by a structural engineer. It also includes construction cost estimates for four scenarios: to stabilize the buildings; to stabilize the buildings and convert the space to a “vanilla box,” presumably unfinished but code-compliant interior space; stabilization and residential fit-out in the existing buildings; and stabilization and residential fit-out in the existing buildings plus the addition approved in concept in 2014. The application includes letters from two real estate developers asserting that they have reviewed the in-concept redevelopment scheme, conditions assessments, construction cost estimates, and other materials and have concluded that the property cannot be developed in a way that provides a reasonable return on investment. SCOPE OF WORK: • Demolish all structures. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: • Standard 2: The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. • Standard 5: Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved. o The complete demolition of the structures fails to satisfy Standards 2 and 5. • Section 14-1005(6)(d) of the City’s historic preservation ordinance: No building permit shall be issued for the demolition of a historic building, structure, site, or object, or of a building, structure, site, or object located within a historic district that contributes, in the Historical Commission’s opinion, to the character of the district, unless the Historical Commission finds that issuance of the building permit is necessary in the public interest, or unless the Historical Commission finds that the building, structure, site, or object cannot be used for any purpose for which it is

the Historical Commission’s opinion, to the character of the district, unless the Historical Commission finds that issuance of the building permit is necessary in the public interest, or unless the Historical Commission finds that the building, structure, site, or object cannot be used for any purpose for which it is or may be reasonably adapted. In order to show that building, structure, site, or object cannot be used for any purpose for which it is or may be reasonably adapted, the owner must demonstrate that the sale of the property is impracticable, that commercial rental cannot provide a reasonable rate of return, and that other potential uses of the property are foreclosed. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 8 o The application seeks to prove that the buildings at 208-12 Vine Street cannot be used for any purpose for which they are or may be reasonably adapted. • Section 14-1005(5)(b)(.7) of the historic preservation ordinance: The Historical Commission may further require the owner to conduct, at the owner’s expense, evaluations or studies, as are reasonably necessary in the opinion of the Historical Commission, to determine whether the building … has or may have alternate uses consistent with preservation. • Section 9.2.b of the Rules and Regulations: As provided by Section 141005(5)(b)(.7) of the Philadelphia Code, the Commission may also require the owner to conduct, at the owner's expense, evaluations and studies, as are reasonably necessary in the opinion of the Commission, to determine whether the building … has or may have alternative uses consistent with preservation. If the Commission requires an owner to conduct additional evaluations and studies, these shall, at a minimum, include: 1. identification of reasonable uses or reuses for the property within the context of the property and its location; 2. rehabilitation cost estimates for the identified reasonable uses or reuses, including the basis for the cost estimates; 3. a ten year pro forma of projected revenues and expenses for the reasonable uses or reuses that takes into consideration the utilization of tax incentives and other incentive programs; 4. estimates of the current value of the property based upon the ten year projection of income and expenses and the sale of the property at the end of that period, and 5. estimates of the required equity investment including a calculation of the Internal Rate of Return based on the actual

of the current value of the property based upon the ten year projection of income and expenses and the sale of the property at the end of that period, and 5. estimates of the required equity investment including a calculation of the Internal Rate of Return based on the actual cash equity required to be invested by the owner. o The application identifies and provides cost estimates for a reuse and then offers the opinions of experts contending that the reuse is not viable, but it does not provide a 10-year pro forma that documents all the assumptions regarding hard and soft costs, incentives, expenses, and revenues and then estimates the net present value of the development project. Such a pro forma should be provided because it would allow all assumptions to be interrogated. For example, a pro forma would allow the assumptions to be tested with sensitivity analyses. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the Historical Commission require the submission of a 10-year pro forma that will allow the assumptions behind expenses, revenues, and incentives for the residential rehabilitation project to be tested and confirmed. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial. COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL HARDSHIP RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Financial Hardship voted to recommend that the Historical Commission table the matter to allow for the submission of additional materials and to remand the matter to the Committee on Financial Hardship for additional review. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 9 START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:06:50 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Farnham presented the continuance requests to the Historical Commission. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. ACTION: Mr. Thomas moved to continue the review of 150 and 160 W. Washington Lane to the September 2023 Committee on Historic Designation meeting, and the reviews of 8835 Germantown Avenue and 208-12 Vine Street to the September 2023 Historical Commission meeting. Ms. Washington seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. ITEM: Continuances MOTION: Approve continuances MOVED BY: Thomas SECONDED BY: Washington VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Kindt (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 11 1 REPORT OF THE ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE, 27 JUNE 2023 CONSENT AGENDA START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:09:00 DISCUSSION: • Mr.

X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Kindt (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 11 1 REPORT OF THE ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE, 27 JUNE 2023 CONSENT AGENDA START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:09:00 DISCUSSION: • Mr. Thomas asked the Commissioners, staff, and public for comments on the Consent Agenda. None were offered. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. ACTION: Mr. Thomas moved to adopt the recommendation of the Architectural Committee for the application for 1601 Mt. Vernon Street. Ms. Washington seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 10 ITEM: Consent Agenda MOTION: Approval of the Consent Agenda MOVED BY: Thomas SECONDED BY: Washington VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Kindt (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 11 1 AGENDA ADDRESS: 3733 LANCASTER AVE Proposal: Construct rear addition with roof deck Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Henry Pemberton Applicant: Wen Lin, Lui Consulting and Construction LLC History: 1875 Individual Designation: None District Designation: Powelton Village Historic District, Contributing, 11/10/2022 Staff Contact: Alex Till, alexander.till@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application proposes to construct a four-story rear addition on a contributing property in the Powelton Village Historic District. The addition will also include two roof decks, one at the front on the main block of the house and another at the rear of the addition. The building was constructed in 1875 and is three stories tall with a flat roof. The rear of the building is not visible from any public rights-of-way, but the front is largely visible along views down Lancaster Avenue as well as at the nearby intersection of 38th Street and Lancaster Avenue. The application proposes to demolish the rear wall of the property, including a rear bay window, and construct an addition at the rear of the building that will expand the footprint and extend one extra story above the historic building. The fourth story of the addition and proposed front roof deck will be visible from long views down Lancaster Avenue and from the intersection at 38th Street and Lancaster Avenue. SCOPE OF WORK: • Construct a four-story rear addition. • Construct two roof decks. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL

above the historic building. The fourth story of the addition and proposed front roof deck will be visible from long views down Lancaster Avenue and from the intersection at 38th Street and Lancaster Avenue. SCOPE OF WORK: • Construct a four-story rear addition. • Construct two roof decks. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 11 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 to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. o The proposed new addition does not meet Standard 9. It is too large and is not compatible with the massing, size, and scale of the historic building. • Roofs Guideline | Recommended: Designing rooftop additions, elevator or stair towers, decks or terraces, dormers, or skylights when required by a new or continuing use so that they are inconspicuous and minimally visible on the site and from the public right-of-way and do not damage or obscure character-defining historic features. o The front deck does not meet the Roofs Guidelines because it will be visible from the public rights-of-way at front of the building. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends denial, pursuant to Standard 9 and the Roofs Guideline. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Standard 9 and the Roofs Guideline. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:10:35 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Till presented the revised application to the Historical Commission. • Architect Wen Lin represented the revised application. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Virginia Maksymowicz, a resident on the block, opposed the application and commented about the depth of the addition. • Jackie Tileston, a resident on the block, opposed the application and commented about the size of the addition. • George Poulin, a neighbor, opposed the application and suggested that the revised application be remanded to the Architectural Committee. • Debra McCarty, a neighbor, opposed the application and commented about the size and compatibility of the addition. • Patrick Colgan, a neighbor, opposed the application and commented about materials and windows. • Mark Brack, of the Powelton Village Civic Association, opposed the application and

remanded to the Architectural Committee. • Debra McCarty, a neighbor, opposed the application and commented about the size and compatibility of the addition. • Patrick Colgan, a neighbor, opposed the application and commented about materials and windows. • Mark Brack, of the Powelton Village Civic Association, opposed the application and suggested an additional reduction in length of the addition. • Chris Lezenby, a neighbor, opposed the application and commented that the addition will encroach on their rear yard. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The visibility of the rear of the building is mostly obscured from the public right-of- way, but the front is largely visible along views down Lancaster Avenue as well as at the nearby intersection of 38th Street and Lancaster Avenue. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 12 • The revised design reduces the height by eliminating the previously proposed fourth story and front deck. It also reduces the overall length of the addition by five feet. • The rear of the proposed addition encroaches upon open space behind the building and is longer than any of the existing neighboring properties. • The windows on the new addition are small when compared to the historic building. • The materials proposed for the addition are not in keeping with the historic nature of the building. • The application would be improved by further reducing the length of the addition, using larger widows on the new construction, using materials that are compatible with the historic character of the historic building, and including a landscape plan for the rear yard. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The proposed addition does not meet Standard 9. It is too large and is not compatible with the massing, size, and scale of the historic building and the Powelton Village Historic District. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to deny the revised application, pursuant to Standard 9 and the Roofs Guideline. Ms. Kindt seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. ITEM: 3733 LANCASTER AVE MOTION: Denial MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Kindt VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Kindt (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 11 1 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD

Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Kindt (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 11 1 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 13 ADDRESS: 27 AND 29 S 2ND ST Proposal: Rehabilitate buildings, replace storefronts Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: JFK Hospitality, US LP Applicant: Hsing-Yuan Chen, Sky Design Studio PC History: 1840 Individual Designation: 10/7/1976 District Designation: Old City Historic District, Contributing, 12/12/2003 Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application seeks final approval to renovate the buildings at 27 and 29 S. 2nd Street to include two ground-floor retail spaces and 12 residential units on the upper floors. The four-story masonry buildings were constructed in 1840. The buildings are individually designated and are contributing resources to the Old City Historic District. The original storefronts were significantly altered between 1957 and 1972 with new window and door openings and wood clapboard. The applicant seeks approval to install new storefronts. Additional exterior changes include the removal of a fire escape, mechanical structure on roof, and first-floor metal shutters. SCOPE OF WORK: • Remove existing storefronts and install new storefronts. • Remove fire escape and install Juliet balconies. • Demolish mechanical shed on roof. • Remove existing first floor shutters. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include: • Standard 2: The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. o To satisfy Standard 2, the applicant should remove the clapboard on the front façade to determine if any historic architectural details or materials are present underneath. o Removal of later and non-historic alterations such as the fire escape and mechanical shed meets Standard 2. More information should be provided about the first-floor metal shutters, which may have historical significance. • 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 If historic

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 If historic details and materials survive underneath the existing storefronts, these elements should be incorporated into the new storefront design to meet Standard 6. o If the new windows and doors proposed for installation are historically appropriate in configuration and detail, this project element will meet Standard 6. • 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 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 14 architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. o The proposed storefronts must be compatible with the historic building and district. If no historic materials survive behind existing clapboard on the storefronts, the applicant should propose storefront replacements that are sensitive in massing, size, scale, and architectural features to the historic building and compatible with similar buildings in the historic district to meet Standard 9. The proposed storefronts do not meet Standard 9. o The installation of the new Juliet balconies in place of the fire escape meets Standard 9. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Denial, pursuant to Standards 2, 6, and 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial as presented with the following suggestions for approval: • Revise the storefront designs based on historic photographs and removal of existing siding to provide information regarding the historic appearance. • Revise the Juliet balcony railings to be more compatible with the historic buildings. • Revise the height of the Juliet balcony doors and transom openings. All transoms should have similar proportions. • Show the mechanical equipment on the roof plan. • Retain the metal shutters along the alley in an open position. • Revise the front façade window appearance based on historic photographs. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:41:55 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Mehley presented the revised application to the Historical Commission. • Architect Mirai Yasuyama represented the revised application. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: •

façade window appearance based on historic photographs. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:41:55 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Mehley presented the revised application to the Historical Commission. • Architect Mirai Yasuyama represented the revised application. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The height of the Juliet balcony doors and transom openings has been addressed. The three transoms now have similar proportions. • The Juliet balcony railings are now more compatible with the historic buildings. • Mechanical equipment is now shown on the roof plan. • The metal shutters along the alley will remain in place and be secured in an open position. • The front façade windows have been revised to historically appropriate six-over-six, double hung windows. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The applicant will work with staff on the design and details of a new storefront based on historic fabric, documentation, and similar storefronts in the historic district in order to meet Standard 2. • The removal of later and non-historic alterations such as the fire escape and mechanical shed meets Standard 2. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 15 • The retention of historic metal shutters, secured in an open position, meets Standard 2. • If historic details and materials survive underneath the existing storefronts, these elements should be incorporated into the new storefront design to meet Standard 6. • The proposed new windows and doors are historically appropriate in configuration and detail and satisfy Standard 6. • The proposed storefronts must be compatible with the historic building and district. If no historic materials survive behind existing clapboard on the storefronts, the applicant should propose storefront replacements that are sensitive in massing, size, scale, and architectural features to the historic building and compatible with similar buildings in the historic district in order to meet Standard 9. • Installation of the new Juliet balconies and doors with transoms in place of the fire escape meets Standard 9. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to approve the revised application except the storefront alterations, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 2, 6, and 9. Ms. Sanchez seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. ITEM: 27 and 29 S 2ND ST MOTION: Approval MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Sanchez VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman

staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 2, 6, and 9. Ms. Sanchez seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. ITEM: 27 and 29 S 2ND ST MOTION: Approval MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Sanchez VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Kindt (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 11 1 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 16 ADDRESS: 230-36 VINE ST Proposal: Salvage mosaic, construct mixed-use building Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Groom Investments LLC Applicant: Shimshon Zakin, Atrium Design Group History: 1949 Individual Designation: None District Designation: Old City Historic District, Non-contributing, 12/12/2003 Staff Contact: Jon Farnham, jon.farnham@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application proposes to salvage a mosaic mural by Isaiah Zagar from the Painted Bride building, demolish the non-contributing building, construct a mixed-use building, and reinstall parts of the mosaic. The property is located on the south side of the 200-block of Vine Street and runs along N. Bodine Street, a narrow service alley, back to New Street. The building was constructed as a parking garage in 1949, converted for office and warehouse use in 1953, and converted to the Painted Bride Arts Center in the 1980s. The Zagar mosaic was installed in 1991. The new building would be six stories and 65 feet in height. It would be H-shaped in plan, essentially two buildings connected by a circulation tower with open courtyards to the east and west. The building would be clad in metal panels with cement panels at the circulation tower. In style, the new building would be contemporary. Parts of the salvaged mosaic would be reinstalled at the first floor. The area around the site in Old City has seen extensive new construction in the last 10 or 15 years. There are several new buildings in the immediate area and several others planned. The proposed building is compatible with those buildings in size, scale, and massing. Moreover, the architectural features of the proposed building are differentiated from but compatible with the context. Although contemporary in design, the proposed building would be compatible with the area because it would serve as a reminder of the Painted Bride, a contemporary arts organization that was fundamental to the revitalization of Old City as an arts community

building are differentiated from but compatible with the context. Although contemporary in design, the proposed building would be compatible with the area because it would serve as a reminder of the Painted Bride, a contemporary arts organization that was fundamental to the revitalization of Old City as an arts community in the late twentieth century. ScOPE OF WORK: • Salvage mosaic mural; • Demolish non-contributing building; • Construct mixed-use building; and, • Reinstall parts of the mosaic. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: • 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 building is differentiated from yet compatible with the architecture of the historic district. o The massing, size, and scale of the proposed building satisfy Standard 9. o The architectural features of the building, which are drawn from the mosaic and the memory of the Painted Bride arts organization, reflect the importance of contemporary art to the neighborhood and satisfy Standard 9. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 17 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends approval, pursuant to Standard 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Standard 9. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:50:39 RECUSAL: • Mr. Mattioni recused because his law firm had represented the applicant on a related matter. PRESENTERS: • Mr. Farnham presented the application to the Historical Commission. • Architects Shimi Zakin and Snežana Litvinović represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Oscar Beisert opposed the application. • Robert Gurmankin, president of Franklin Bridge North Neighbors, asked the Historical Commission to require the project to preserve the mosaic. • David Traub of Save Our Sites offered some suggestions for improving the design. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The area around the site in Old City has seen extensive new construction in the last 10 or 15 years. There are several new buildings in the immediate area and several others planned. • The proposed building is compatible with the nearby buildings in size, scale, and massing. • The architectural features of the proposed building are differentiated from but compatible with the context. Although contemporary

10 or 15 years. There are several new buildings in the immediate area and several others planned. • The proposed building is compatible with the nearby buildings in size, scale, and massing. • The architectural features of the proposed building are differentiated from but compatible with the context. Although contemporary in design, the proposed building would be compatible with the surrounding area. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The proposed building satisfies Standard 9. ACTION: Ms. Carney moved to approve the application, with the staff to review the exterior cladding color, pursuant to Standard 9. Mr. Lech seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 18 ITEM: 230-36 VINE ST MOTION: Approve revised design MOVED BY: Carney SECONDED BY: Lech VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Kindt (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 10 1 1 ADDRESS: 4432, 4436-42, 4400R, AND 4436R MAIN ST Proposal: Construct mixed-use residential and commercial buildings and bridge Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Rock Venice, LLC Applicant: Jerry Roller, JKRP Architects History: Vacant lots and non-historic building Individual Designation: None District Designation: Main Street Manayunk Historic District, Non-contributing, 12/14/1983 Staff Contact: Laura DiPasquale, laura.dipasquale@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application proposes to demolish non-contributing buildings on four parcels and to construct a new large-scale development with frontage on Main Street as well as Venice Island. The new construction on Main Street would be two stories in height and clad in red brick with large-scale storefront windows. A dark metal and glass bridge would span the drive aisle to the island. On Venice Island, a five-story 181-unit residential development with ground-level parking is proposed. The buildings would be clad in vertical and horizontal corrugated metal with terra cotta colored metal accents above an elevated ground-floor set on pedestals. A pedestrian bridge would connect the buildings on Venice Island and Main Street at the second level. Historically, a large mill complex known as Ripka Mills occupied this stretch of Venice Island. At its July 2023 meeting, the Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Standard 9, suggesting that setbacks of the Venice Island building from the Manayunk bridge be increased to reduce the visual impact on the bridge, that additional consideration be

Ripka Mills occupied this stretch of Venice Island. At its July 2023 meeting, the Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Standard 9, suggesting that setbacks of the Venice Island building from the Manayunk bridge be increased to reduce the visual impact on the bridge, that additional consideration be given to the materials and features of the Venice Island construction, as well as the color palette, and that the drive aisle remains too vehicle-centric. Following the Committee meeting, the applicants further revised the design to increase the setbacks from the bridge, update the orange color to a more accurate terra cotta color, and increase the pedestrian experience on the street-level bridge. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 19 SCOPE OF WORK: • Construct two-story building on Main Street • Construct five-story buildings on Venice Island 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 to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. o The proposed construction would not destroy historic materials and the proposed buildings are differentiated from the old. Along Main Street, the height, massing, scale, and features are compatible with the district, as is the use of red brick. The district is characterized by terra-cotta-colored brick, natural stone, and light-colored stucco facades. The scale and massing of the Venice Island construction is consistent with that of the historic district. The application meets Standard 9. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval, pursuant to Standard 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Standard 9. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 01:38:01 PRESENTERS: • Ms. DiPasquale presented the application to the Historical Commission. • Attorney Stephanie Boggs Magagna and architect Jerry Roller represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The revised application addresses many of the concerns of the Architectural Committee, including increasing the setbacks from the Manayunk bridge, clarifying the accent color as a rich terra cotta color, and creating a more pedestrian-friendly experience at the drive aisle bridge. • The Historical Commission’s approval

Commission found that: • The revised application addresses many of the concerns of the Architectural Committee, including increasing the setbacks from the Manayunk bridge, clarifying the accent color as a rich terra cotta color, and creating a more pedestrian-friendly experience at the drive aisle bridge. • The Historical Commission’s approval is being sought prior to seeking Army Corps of Engineers approvals, which are required for the vehicular bridge. The bridge design may change as a result of the federal review. • The proposed project does not cut off access to the railroad line, which will eventually become a rail trail with public access through this property. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The proposed construction would not destroy historic materials and the proposed buildings are differentiated from the old. Along Main Street, the height, massing, scale, and features are compatible with the district, as is the use of red brick. The PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 20 district is characterized by terra-cotta-colored brick, natural stone, and light-colored stucco facades. The scale and massing of the Venice Island construction is consistent with that of the historic district and the setbacks from the Manayunk bridge protect the integrity of the surrounding environment. The application meets Standard 9. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to approve the revised application, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standard 9. Ms. Carney seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. ITEM: 4432, 4436-42, 4400R, and 4436R MAIN ST MOTION: Approval of revised design MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Carney VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Kindt (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 11 1 ADDRESS: 1601 MOUNT VERNON ST Proposal: Restore main block, construct rear addition Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Mt. Vernon Commons LLC Applicant: Hsing-Yuan Chen, Sky Design Studio PC History: 1859; Robert Purvis House; storefront, 1920 Individual Designation: None District Designation: Spring Garden Historic District, Significant, 10/11/2000 Staff Contact: Dan Shachar-Krasnoff, daniel.shachar-krasnoff@phila.gov OVERVIEW: The property at 1601 Mount Vernon Street is significant in the Spring Garden Historic District, owing to its association with Robert Purvis, a Black anti-slavery activist, writer, and lecturer who resided at the property from c. 1875 to 1898. Over the last few decades, the property

Dan Shachar-Krasnoff, daniel.shachar-krasnoff@phila.gov OVERVIEW: The property at 1601 Mount Vernon Street is significant in the Spring Garden Historic District, owing to its association with Robert Purvis, a Black anti-slavery activist, writer, and lecturer who resided at the property from c. 1875 to 1898. Over the last few decades, the property has languished and has been subject to multiple violations, proposed but unimplemented projects, and court orders, culminating in an Act 165 conservatorship. The City demolished the rear ell to abate a dangerous condition in 2012. After years of deterioration and legal proceedings, the property is finally in new hands. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 21 This application for final approval proposes restoring the front façade of the surviving main block to its appearance during the ownership of Robert Purvis. The work includes removing the later storefront and restoring the building’s residential appearance. A new marble base, stoop, door surround, and lintels would be installed on the front façade. A new door, windows, and cornice would be fabricated in wood to match the historic features. On the side of the main block, new windows are proposed for each floor. At the rear, the application proposes to construct a new three-story ell to replace the ell that was demolished a decade ago. The rear portion of the addition would have a roof deck and pilot house. A developer seeking to purchase the property in 2022 submitted an in-concept application proposing to rehabilitate the main block and to construct a rear addition with garage. The Historical Commission denied that application, owing to objections to the garage. The current application does not include a garage. SCOPE OF WORK: • Rehabilitate main block; and • Construct rear addition. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include: • Standard 6: Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. o The only remaining portion of the building, the main block, had a storefront installed c. 1920. That intervention removed the original entryway and marble base. Two large openings for storefront windows were cut into the masonry on the front façade

features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. o The only remaining portion of the building, the main block, had a storefront installed c. 1920. That intervention removed the original entryway and marble base. Two large openings for storefront windows were cut into the masonry on the front façade and side wall at the first story, and a new corner entrance was constructed. Decades of neglect have also led to the loss of the cornice and have caused the masonry to deteriorate. o The application proposes to rehabilitate the main block by replicating the lost features in their original materials. A marble base, stoop, door surround, and lintels would be installed to reverse the storefront alteration. A wood cornice, door, and windows would also be installed. The work complies with Standard 6. • 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 While the application does not propose to reconstruct the rear ell to its historic appearance, the proposed addition is compatible in massing, size, scale, and features, and complies with Standard 9. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 6 and 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend approval, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 6 and 9, provided: PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 22 • The front entrance, windows, side door, and cornice details are provided to staff for review. • A metal railing is used in lieu of a brick parapet on the rear addition. • The stone base wraps the rear of the addition approximately 12 to 16 inches. • The connector link at the first floor is set back a full brick course. • Hardie siding in a darker color is used for the pilot house cladding. ACTION: See Consent Agenda. ADDRESS: 10 S FRONT ST Proposal: Legalize installation of sign Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: RCI Inc. Applicant: Mahir Atak, Golden Fox Sign LLC History: 1835 Individual Designation: 10/7/1976 District Designation: Old City Historic District, Contributing, 12/12/2003 Staff Contact: Ted Maust, theodore.maust@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application proposes to legalize a sign installed

10 S FRONT ST Proposal: Legalize installation of sign Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: RCI Inc. Applicant: Mahir Atak, Golden Fox Sign LLC History: 1835 Individual Designation: 10/7/1976 District Designation: Old City Historic District, Contributing, 12/12/2003 Staff Contact: Ted Maust, theodore.maust@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application proposes to legalize a sign installed without Historical Commission approval at 10 S. Front Street. The property is a four-story commercial loft building with storefront, which was individually designated in 1976 and which is classified as contributing to the Old City Historic District. In March 2023, a violation was issued for an unpermitted sign with illuminated letters, which had been installed without permits and approvals. The sign reads “LILLY’S FERRY” in 18-inch-tall channel letters joined by a raceway, and “BAR & GRILL” on a 10-inch-tall lit panel below. The sign elements are 10 feet and 7 feet long respectively. The upper sign is mounted with “z-hooks” and screws, and the lower sign is hung from the upper one. SCOPE OF WORK • Legalize sign installed without permits. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include: • Standard 9: New addition, 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. • Storefronts Guidelines: Using new, over-scaled, or internally lit signs unless there is a historic precedent for them or using other types of signs that obscure, damage, or destroy character-defining features of the storefront and the building. o The installed sign is large in scale compared to the existing spatial relationships of the storefront and the lower portion obscures character-defining transom windows. It also features internally lit components. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends denial, pursuant to Standard 9 and the Storefronts Guidelines. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 23 ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Standard 9 and the Storefronts Guidelines. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 02:05:08 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Maust presented the application to the Historical Commission. • No one represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:

to recommend denial, pursuant to Standard 9 and the Storefronts Guidelines. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 02:05:08 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Maust presented the application to the Historical Commission. • No one represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The sign was installed without permits and the prerequisite Historical Commission review and approval. • The sign obstructs the storefront at 10 S. Front Street, which is designated both individually and as a Contributing resource in the Old City Historic District. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The installed sign is large in scale compared to the existing spatial relationships of the storefront and the lower portion obscures character-defining transom windows. The signage as installed does not meet Standard 9 and the Storefronts Guidelines. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to deny the application, pursuant to Standard 9 and the Storefronts Guidelines. Mr. Mattioni seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. ITEM: 10 S FRONT ST MOTION: Denial MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Mattioni VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Kindt (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 11 1 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 24 ADDRESS: 1423, 1424, 1425, 1428, AND 1629 DIAMOND ST Proposal: Legalize replacement of doors Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Michael P. Loponzski Applicant: Michael P. Loponzski History: 1886-1889 Individual Designation: None District Designation: Diamond Street Historic District, Contributing, 1/29/1986 Staff Contact: Heather Hendrickson, heather.hendrickson@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application proposes to legalize five non-historic front doors that were installed at 1423, 1424, 1425, 1428, and 1629 Diamond Street without approval from the Historical Commission. These five properties are contributing to the Diamond Street Historic District and were built in the 1880s. The current doors were installed after the historic doors were stolen within the past few years, which has been a reoccurring issue in this district. The current doors do not fill the doorway opening and are incompatible with this historic district in size and materiality. The applicant has included a letter in his application describing his situation to the Historical Commission. The door violations are preventing him from renewing his rental license, and he believes replacing the doors with historic replicas will

doorway opening and are incompatible with this historic district in size and materiality. The applicant has included a letter in his application describing his situation to the Historical Commission. The door violations are preventing him from renewing his rental license, and he believes replacing the doors with historic replicas will encourage further theft and danger for his tenants. He seeks legalization of the five doors he has replaced. SCOPE OF WORK • Legalize doors. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include: • Standard 5: Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved. • 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 current replacement doors do not fill the doorway openings and are incompatible with these historic buildings in size, design, and materials. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends denial, pursuant to Standards 5 and 9, but approval of a stock door with glazing in similar proportions to the historic doors, provided the doors are installed symmetrically in the openings and the doors, infill, and frames are painted brown, with the staff to review details. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Standards 5 and 9. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 2:07:33 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 25 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Hendrickson presented the application to the Historical Commission. • Property owner Michael Lopsonzski represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The replacement doors are not in keeping with the Diamond Street Historic District. • A wood door would be preferred but a custom hollow metal or fiberglass door would be acceptable if it filled the entire opening and resembled the historic door. • The dimensions of the doorways were not provided with the application materials. • An appropriate replacement door for this historic district could be found which filled the doorway openings without necessarily replicating the intricate historic details of the original doors.

filled the entire opening and resembled the historic door. • The dimensions of the doorways were not provided with the application materials. • An appropriate replacement door for this historic district could be found which filled the doorway openings without necessarily replicating the intricate historic details of the original doors. • Appropriate hardware would prevent future theft of the doors. • The replacement doors should have glazing. • A potential solution would be one large single door which fills the opening but has a faux center mullion to give the appearance of double doors. • Mr. Lech, designee for the Department of Licenses and Inspections, offered to assist the applicant in the matter of renewing his rental licenses while the applicant works to correct the violations for door replacement. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The application fails to satisfy Standard 5 because the replacement doors do not preserve the distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques of the historic doors. • The application fails to satisfy Standard 9 because the replacement doors do not fill the doorway openings and are incompatible with the Diamond Street Historic District. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to deny the application, with the recommendation that the applicant continue working with the Historical Commission’s staff to find appropriate replacement doors. Ms. Carney seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 26 ITEM: 1423, 1424, 1425, 1428, and 1629 DIAMOND ST MOTION: Denial MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Carney VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Kindt (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 11 1 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION, 21 JUNE 2023 ADDRESS: 1523-29 BAINBRIDGE ST Name of Resource: Hotel Brotherhood, USA Proposed Action: Designate Property Owner: The Hotel Brotherhood of the USA Nominator: Historical Commission staff Staff Contact: Kim Chantry, kim.chantry@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 1523-29 Bainbridge Street as historic and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the purpose-built garage and meeting hall, constructed in 1920 for the Hotel Brotherhood USA and reconstructed in 1937 after a fire, satisfies Criteria for Designation A and B. Under Criterion A, the nomination contends that the

and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the purpose-built garage and meeting hall, constructed in 1920 for the Hotel Brotherhood USA and reconstructed in 1937 after a fire, satisfies Criteria for Designation A and B. Under Criterion A, the nomination contends that the property has significant value as part of the development and cultural characteristics of the City and Nation, as the headquarters of the Hotel Brotherhood USA, one of the earliest unions representing Black workers in the United States which was founded in Philadelphia in 1883 to provide medical and death benefits for Black hotel workers. Under Criterion B, the Hotel Brotherhood USA is associated with an event of importance to the history of the City and Nation, the 1885 protest organized by the Brotherhood against wage discrimination for Black hotel workers that led to a retraction of the proposed pay differential by the hotel proprietor. This marked the beginning of the Brotherhood as an organization structured along labor union lines for the advancement of Black hotel workers and later restaurant wait staff, and then private and domestic servers in the United States. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 1523-29 Bainbridge Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A and B. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 1523-29 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 27 Bainbridge Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A and B, with the circa 2010 stucco coating to be considered a non-contributing element of the building. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 02:21:40 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Chantry presented the nomination to the Historical Commission. • Ms. C.W. Lewis, historian for the Hotel Brotherhood, USA, represented the property owner. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Deborah Gary, representing the Society to Preserve Philadelphia African American Assets, commented in support of the designation. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The property at 1523-29 Bainbridge Street is a purpose-built garage and meeting hall, constructed in 1920 for the Hotel Brotherhood USA and reconstructed in 1937 after a fire. • The stucco coating on the façade dates to circa 2010 and was applied over brick. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The property has significant value as part of the development and cultural

hall, constructed in 1920 for the Hotel Brotherhood USA and reconstructed in 1937 after a fire. • The stucco coating on the façade dates to circa 2010 and was applied over brick. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The property has significant value as part of the development and cultural characteristics of the City and Nation, as the headquarters of the Hotel Brotherhood, USA, one of the earliest unions representing Black workers in the United States which was founded in Philadelphia in 1883 to provide medical and death benefits for Black hotel workers, satisfying Criterion A. • The Hotel Brotherhood, USA is associated with an event of importance to the history of the City and Nation, the 1885 protest organized by the Brotherhood against wage discrimination for Black hotel workers that led to a retraction of the proposed pay differential by the hotel proprietor, satisfying Criterion B. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 1523-29 Bainbridge Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A and B, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places, with the circa 2010 stucco coating to be considered a non-contributing element of the building. Ms. Michel seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 28 ITEM: 1523-29 BAINBRIDGE ST MOTION: Designate; Criteria A and B MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Michel VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Kindt (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 11 1 ADDRESS: 6670 KEYSTONE ST Name of Resource: Vacant Lot (formerly St. Leo the Great Roman Catholic Church) Proposed Action: Rescind Property Owner: Paul Street Real Estate LLC Applicant: Historical Commission staff Staff Contact: Kim Chantry, kim.chantry@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application requests the rescission of the individual designation of the property at 6670 Keystone Street. The property was individually designated on 10 May 2019, under an incorrect address of 6658 Keystone Street, which Commission staff has corrected as a clerical error. At the time of designation, the former St. Leo the Great Roman Catholic Church, which had closed in late 2018, stood on the site. On 9 May 2021, the church building was destroyed by arsonists and what remained of the structure was demolished. The

has corrected as a clerical error. At the time of designation, the former St. Leo the Great Roman Catholic Church, which had closed in late 2018, stood on the site. On 9 May 2021, the church building was destroyed by arsonists and what remained of the structure was demolished. The property is currently a vacant lot. Section 5.14.b.1 of the Historical Commission’s Rules & Regulations authorizes the Commission to remove entries from the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places when the qualities that caused the original entry on the Register have been lost or destroyed. In this case, the building was designated for its architect and for exemplifying the heritage of the community. Those qualities were lost with the demolition. There is no longer a basis for the designation. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the Historical Commission rescind the individual designation of 6670 Keystone Street and remove it from the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places, pursuant to Section 5.14.b.1 of the Commission’s Rules & Regulations, because the qualities that caused its original entry have been destroyed. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the Historical Commission rescind the individual PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 29 designation of 6670 Keystone Street and remove it from the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places, pursuant to Section 5.14.b.1 of the Commission’s Rules & Regulations, because the qualities that caused its original entry have been destroyed. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 02:27:30 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Chantry presented the rescission to the Historical Commission. • No one represented the property owner. PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The property was individually designated on 10 May 2019. At the time of designation, the former St. Leo the Great Roman Catholic Church stood on the site. The building was designated for its architect and for exemplifying the heritage of the community. • On 9 May 2021, the church building was destroyed by arsonists and what remained of the structure was demolished. The property is currently a vacant lot. The Historical Commission concluded that: • There is no longer a basis for designation because the qualities that caused the original entry have been destroyed owing to the fire and subsequent demolition of what remained on the site. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to rescind

property is currently a vacant lot. The Historical Commission concluded that: • There is no longer a basis for designation because the qualities that caused the original entry have been destroyed owing to the fire and subsequent demolition of what remained on the site. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to rescind the individual designation of 6670 Keystone Street and remove it from the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places, pursuant to Section 5.14.b.1 of the Commission’s Rules & Regulations, because the qualities that caused its original entry have been destroyed. Mr. Mattioni seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. ITEM: 6670 KEYSTONE ST MOTION: Rescind designation MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Mattioni VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Kindt (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 11 1 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 30 ADDRESS: 4949 AND 4951 WALNUT ST Name of Resource: Paul Robeson House and Museum Proposed Action: Designate Property Owner: West Philadelphia Cultural Alliance Nominator: University City Historical Society, Preservation Alliance, West Philadelphia Cultural Alliance Staff Contact: Heather Hendrickson, heather.hendrickson@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the properties at 4949 and 4951 Walnut Street and list them on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the two rowhouses satisfy Criteria for Designation A, D, and E. The nomination contends the dwellings meet Criterion A through their association with acclaimed African American activist and entertainer Paul Robeson. Under Criterion D, the nomination argues the properties are a representative example of middle-class, speculative development in an eclectic mix of revival styles at the turn of the last century. The nomination maintains the properties satisfy Criterion E through their association with prolific rowhouse architect E. Allen Wilson. The period of significance begins in 1910, the year the buildings were constructed, and ends in 2015, the year Frances Aulston, the founder of the West Philadelphia Cultural Alliance and champion of the Paul Robeson House and Museum, passed away. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates the properties at 4949 and 4951 Walnut Street satisfy Criteria for Designation A, D, and E. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the properties at 4949 and

passed away. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates the properties at 4949 and 4951 Walnut Street satisfy Criteria for Designation A, D, and E. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the properties at 4949 and 4951 Walnut Street satisfy Criteria for Designation A, D, and E. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 02:30:25 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Hendrickson presented the nomination to the Historical Commission. • Amy Lambert and Hanna Stark represented the nomination. • Janice Sykes-Ross, Executive Director of the West Philadelphia Cultural Alliance, and Vernoca L. Michael, former Executive Director of the Paul Robeson House and Museum and niece of Paul Robeson, represented the property owner. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Oscar Beisert, representing the Keeping Society, commented in support of the nomination. • Deborah Gary, representing the Society to Preserve Philadelphia African American Assets, spoke in support of the nomination. • David Traub, representing Save Our Sites, commented in support of the nomination. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • 4949 and 4951 Walnut Street is home to the Paul Robeson House and Museum. • 4949 and 4951 Walnut Street serves as a museum with accompanying service space. • Acknowledging the work of Frances Aulston, founder of the West Philadelphia Cultural Alliance and champion of the Paul Robeson House and Museum, is an PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 31 important aspect of this nomination. Frances Aulston was the visionary behind this museum and purchased these properties in the 1980s. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The nomination demonstrates that the Paul Robeson House and Museum is associated with the highly significant Paul Robeson, satisfying Criterion A. • The nomination demonstrates that the property satisfies Criterion D because the buildings are examples of middle-class speculative development in an eclectic mix of revival styles at the turn of the last century. • The nomination demonstrates that the property satisfies Criterion E through its association with E. Allen Wilson, a prolific rowhouse architect. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the properties at 4949 and 4951 Walnut Street satisfy Criteria for Designation A, D, and E, and to designate them as historic, listing them on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Washington seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent.

Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the properties at 4949 and 4951 Walnut Street satisfy Criteria for Designation A, D, and E, and to designate them as historic, listing them on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Washington seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. ITEM: 4949 AND 4951 WALNUT ST MOTION: Designate; Criteria A, D, and E MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Washington VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Kindt (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 11 1 ADDRESS: 4811 GERMANTOWN AVE Name of Resource: Adamson Mansion; St. Michael of the Saints Roman Catholic Church Proposed Action: Designate Property Owner: Germantown Revitalization Now Two, LP Nominator: Germantown Revitalization Now Two, LP Staff Contact: Heather Hendrickson, heather.hendrickson@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate a portion of the property at 4811 Germantown Avenue and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the former campus of St. Michael of the Saints Roman Catholic Church which includes the Adamson Mansion, the Church, the Convent, and the Grotto, satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, H, and J. Under Criterion A, the nomination contends that the Adamson PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 32 Mansion was home to William Adamson, an important manufacturer and philanthropist who contributed greatly to Germantown and the larger City of Philadelphia. Under Criterion D, the nomination argues that the Adamson Mansion, built between 1874 and 1876, embodies distinguishing characteristics of the Second Empire style. Under Criterion H, the nomination points to the property’s visually commanding site location which comprises an established and familiar visual feature of Lower Germantown and the larger Germantown neighborhood. The nomination contends that the satisfaction of Criterion J is twofold. First, it contends that the Adamson Mansion of the Adamson family, who made significant contributions to the Germantown and Philadelphian communities, satisfies the Criterion. Second, it contends that the contributions of St. Michael of the Saints to the historic Italian immigrant community of Lower Germantown, Nicetown, and the vicinity, satisfy the Criterion. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the proposed portion of the property at 4811 Germantown Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, H, and J. COMMITTEE

Michael of the Saints to the historic Italian immigrant community of Lower Germantown, Nicetown, and the vicinity, satisfy the Criterion. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the proposed portion of the property at 4811 Germantown Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, H, and J. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 8411 Germantown Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, H, and J, with the addition of Criterion I, and with the period of significance to be adjusted from the start of the Woodland period in 1000 BC to c. 1982. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 02:45:14 PRESENTERS: • Ms. Hendrickson presented the nomination to the Historical Commission. • Oscar Beisert represented the nomination. • Ken Weinstein, of Philly Office Retail, represented the property owner. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Hanna Stark, representing the Preservation Alliance, commented that the requests from the property owner and nominator for the exclusion of Criterion I were reasonable and should be carefully considered by the Historical Commission. • Deborah Gary, representing the Society to Preserve Philadelphia African American Assets, spoke in support of the nomination and the inclusion of Criterion I. • David Traub, representing Save Our Sites, commented in support of the nomination. • Allison Weiss, representing SoLo Germantown Civic Association, spoke in support of the nomination and the inclusion of Criterion I. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • Both the nominator and the property owner requested that the Historical Commission adopt the nomination as written and not include Criterion I in the designation. • The Committee on Historic Designation recommended the addition of Criterion I for the archaeological potential of the property but noted that the nomination did not explicitly argue for that Criterion. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The property satisfies Criterion for Designation A for its association with William Adamson, famous Philadelphian industrialist. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 33 • The property satisfies Criterion for Designation D, owing to the Adamson Mansion possessing distinguishing characteristics of the Second Empire style. • The property satisfies Criterion for Designation H, owing to its visually prominent location on a hill, making it a visual landmark on Germantown Avenue. • The property satisfies Criterion for Designation J, owing to the contributions

owing to the Adamson Mansion possessing distinguishing characteristics of the Second Empire style. • The property satisfies Criterion for Designation H, owing to its visually prominent location on a hill, making it a visual landmark on Germantown Avenue. • The property satisfies Criterion for Designation J, owing to the contributions of the Adamson family to Philadelphia and the contributions of St. Michael of the Saints to the historic Italian immigrant community of Lower Germantown, Nicetown, and the vicinity. ACTION: Ms. Carney moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 4811 Germantown Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation A, D, H, and J, and to designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Mr. Lech seconded the motion, which passed by a vote of 6 to 5. Commissioners Cooperman, Kindt, McCoubrey, Michel, and Washington dissented. ITEM: 4811 GERMANTOWN AVE MOTION: Designate; Criteria A, D, H, and J MOVED BY: Carney SECONDED BY: Lech VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Kindt (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 6 5 1 ADDRESS: 401 N SALFORD ST Name of Resource: Wilt Chamberlain Childhood Home Proposed Action: Designate Property Owner: Latiechrie White Nominator: Historical Commission staff Staff Contact: Jon Farnham, jon.farnham@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination contends that the property at 401 N. Salford Street, known as the Wilt Chamberlain Childhood Home, is historically significant and should be listed individually on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination asserts that the property satisfies Criterion for Designation A; it “is associated with the life of a person significant in the past,” Wilt Chamberlain, one of the all-time greatest basketball players. Wilt Chamberlain was born in 1936 and moved to the house at age 3 in 1939, when his parents purchased the twin to accommodate their growing family. He resided at 401 N. Salford Street until leaving to attend PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 34 the University of Kansas in 1955. Called “Dipper” by his friends, Wilt Chamberlain was a basketball star at Overbrook High School who went on to rewrite the National Basketball Association’s record books and forever redefine the game. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the property at 401 N. Salford Street satisfies Criterion

of Kansas in 1955. Called “Dipper” by his friends, Wilt Chamberlain was a basketball star at Overbrook High School who went on to rewrite the National Basketball Association’s record books and forever redefine the game. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the property at 401 N. Salford Street satisfies Criterion for Designation A for its association with basketball legend Wilt Chamberlain. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 401 N. Salford Street satisfies Criterion for Designation A. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 03:14:50 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Farnham presented the nomination to the Historical Commission. • No one represented the property owner. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Amy Lambert, representing the University City Historical Society, commented in support of the designation. • Oscar Beisert, representing the Keeping Society, commented in support of the designation. • Deboray Gary, representing the Society to Preserve Philadelphia African American Assets, commented in support of the designation. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • Wilt Chamberlain was born in 1936 and moved to the house at 401 N. Salford Street at age 3 in 1939, when his parents purchased the twin to accommodate their growing family. He resided at the house until leaving to attend the University of Kansas in 1955. • Wilt Chamberlain was one of the all-time greatest basketball players. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The property at 401 N. Salford Street, known as the Wilt Chamberlain Childhood Home, is associated with the life of Wilt Chamberlain, a person significant in the past, and therefore satisfies Criterion for Designation A. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 401 N. Salford Street satisfies Criterion for Designation A and to designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Washington seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 35 ITEM: 401 N SALFORD ST MOTION: Designate; Criterion A MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Washington VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Kindt (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 11 1 ADDRESS: 731 S BROAD ST Name of

BY: Washington VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Kindt (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 11 1 ADDRESS: 731 S BROAD ST Name of Resource: Provident Home and Life Insurance Company Proposed Action: Designate Property Owner: Philadelphia Area Labor Management Committee Nominator: Historical Commission staff Staff Contact: Ted Maust, theodore.maust@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 731 S. Broad Street as historic and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the building, constructed as a house in 1879 and converted for commercial use in 1947, satisfies Criteria for Designation A, C, D, and J. The property was the headquarters of the Provident Home Industrial Mutual Life Insurance Company from 1947 to 1974, one of the state’s largest Black-owned companies. The nomination argues that the property satisfies Criteria for Designation A and J for exemplifying the social and economic history of the city. The nomination further argues that the distinctive architectural elements of both the original structure, which is visible along Fitzwater Street, and the renovated façade on S. Broad Street satisfy Criteria for Designation C and D. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 731 S. Broad Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A, C, D, and J. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 731 S. Broad Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A, C, D, and J. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 03:20:50 PRESENTERS: • Mr. Maust presented the nomination to the Historical Commission. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 36 • No one represented the property owner. PUBLIC COMMENT: • Oscar Beisert, representing the Keeping Society, commented in support of the nomination. • Deborah Gary, representing the Society to Preserve Philadelphia African American Assets, commented in support of the nomination. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The Provident Home Industrial Mutual Life Insurance Company is an important part of Philadelphia’s history. • The Fitzwater Street façade of 731 S. Broad Street, characterized by decorative brick and an artful bay, is a distinctive work of architecture without easy comparison in Philadelphia.

The Historical Commission found that: • The Provident Home Industrial Mutual Life Insurance Company is an important part of Philadelphia’s history. • The Fitzwater Street façade of 731 S. Broad Street, characterized by decorative brick and an artful bay, is a distinctive work of architecture without easy comparison in Philadelphia. The building is a distinctive architectural specimen and noteworthy in its immediate context. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The property satisfies Criteria for Designation A and J, as an important site for the history of Philadelphia’s African American insurance companies. • The property satisfies Criteria for Designation C and D, reflecting distinctive architectural styles of the late nineteenth and mid twentieth century within the S. Broad Street corridor. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 731 S. Broad Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A, C, D, 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 unanimous consent. ITEM: 731 S BROAD ST MOTION: Designate; Criteria A, C, D, and J MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Washington VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Kindt (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 11 1 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 37 ADDRESS: 37-39 N 2ND ST Name of Resource: Surface parking lot Proposed Action: Rescind Individual Designation Property Owner: 37 N. 2nd Street Philadelphia (USLCF I) LP Applicant: Matt McClure, Esq., Ballard Spahr Staff Contact: Laura DiPasquale, laura.dipasquale@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This application proposes to rescind the individual designation of the property at 37- 39 N. 2nd Street. At its 6 January 1977 meeting, the Historical Commission individually designated several dozen buildings in Old City, including the property at 37-39 N. 2nd Street, which at the time included a four-story, nineteenth-century commercial building, known historically by various names including the Second Street House, Madison House, and Gould & Co. Furniture/Union Depot. In April 1985, the property was ravaged by a six-alarm arson fire, and subsequently declared Imminently Dangerous and ordered demolished by the Department of Licenses. The building was demolished soon thereafter, and the property has been used as a surface parking lot since 1985. The property was

Co. Furniture/Union Depot. In April 1985, the property was ravaged by a six-alarm arson fire, and subsequently declared Imminently Dangerous and ordered demolished by the Department of Licenses. The building was demolished soon thereafter, and the property has been used as a surface parking lot since 1985. The property was a vacant lot at the time of the Old City Historic District designation in 2003 and is classified as non-contributing in the district inventory. Pursuant to Section 5.14 of the Historical Commission’s Rules and Regulations, the Commission may rescind the designation of a building and remove its entry from the Philadelphia Register if: a. The resource has ceased to satisfy any Criteria for Designation because the qualities that caused its original entry have been lost or destroyed; b. Additional information shows that the resource does not satisfy one or more Criteria for Designation; or, c. The Commission committed an error in professional judgment when it determined that the resource satisfied one or more Criteria for Designation. In the case of 37-39 N. 2nd Street, the individual resource that was designated in 1977 has ceased to satisfy any Criteria for Designation because the qualities that caused its original entry have been lost. The property remains in the Old City Historic District with a classification of non- contributing. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the Historical Commission rescind the individual designation of 37-39 N. 2nd Street, pursuant to Section 5.14.b.1.a of the Historical Commission’s Rules & Regulations, as the resource has ceased to satisfy any Criteria for Designation because the qualities that caused its original entry have been removed through demolition. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the Historical Commission rescind the individual designation of 37-39 N. 2nd Street, pursuant to Section 5.14.b.1.a of the Historical Commission’s Rules & Regulations, as the resource has ceased to satisfy any Criteria for Designation because the qualities that caused its original entry have been removed through demolition. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 03:24:50 PRESENTERS: • Ms. DiPasquale presented the recission request to the Historical Commission. • Attorney Devon Beverly represented the request and the property owner. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 38 PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • A four-story building at 37-39 N. 2nd Street was individually

• Attorney Devon Beverly represented the request and the property owner. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 38 PUBLIC COMMENT: • None. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • A four-story building at 37-39 N. 2nd Street was individually designated in 1977. • The building was destroyed by fire in 1985 and its demolition ordered by the Department of Licenses & Inspections. • The property at 37-39 N. 2nd Street was a parking lot at the time of the Old City Historic District designation in 2003 and is classified as non-contributing in the Old City Historic District inventory. • The property remains in the Old City Historic District with the classification of non- contributing. • No archaeological significance is ascribed to the property in the Old City Historic District inventory. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The qualities that caused the original individual entry for 37-39 N. 2nd Street in the Philadelphia Register have been removed through demolition. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to rescind the individual designation of 37-39 N. 2nd Street, pursuant to Section 5.14.b.1.a of the Historical Commission’s Rules & Regulations, as the resource has ceased to satisfy any Criteria for Designation because the qualities that caused its original entry have been removed through demolition. Mr. Mattioni seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. ITEM: 37-39 N 2ND ST MOTION: Rescind individual designation MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Mattioni VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Kindt (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 11 1 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 39 HOUSE OF ST. MICHAEL AND ALL ANGELS HISTORIC DISTRICT Proposed Action: Designate Property Owner: Multiple Nominator: University City Historical Society Staff Contact: Alex Till, alexander.till@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate a historic district consisting of three parcels on the southeast corner of N. 43rd and Wallace Streets in West Philadelphia. The three parcels are comprised of two consolidated Italianate twin houses and a brick church building and are identified in the inventory as five resources. The church building was individually designated on 10 November 2017. The nomination argues that the House of St. Michael and All Angels Historic District is significant

three parcels are comprised of two consolidated Italianate twin houses and a brick church building and are identified in the inventory as five resources. The church building was individually designated on 10 November 2017. The nomination argues that the House of St. Michael and All Angels Historic District is significant under Criteria for Designation A and J. The period of significance for the district begins in 1887 with the creation of an organization founded to provide medical and social services to African American children with physical disabilities and ends in 1938 with its dissolution. Under Criteria for Designation A and J, the nomination argues that the House of St. Michael and All Angels was one of the first institutions of its kind established in the nation. It further argues that, collectively, the properties represent a rare surviving historic campus of an institution that exclusively served the African American community in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries in Philadelphia. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the House of St. Michael and All Angels Historic District satisfies Criteria for Designation A and J. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the House of St. Michael and All Angels Historic District satisfies Criteria for Designation A and J. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 03:28:25 PRESENTERS: • Alex Till presented the nomination to the Historical Commission. • Amy Lambert and Oscar Beisert represented the nomination. • No one represented the property owner. PUBLIC COMMENT: • David Traub, representing Save Our Sites, commented in support of the nomination. • Deborah Gary, representing the Society to Preserve Philadelphia African American Assets, commented in support of the nomination. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that: • The properties were owned and managed by the House of St. Michael and All Angels from 1887 until 1938, an organization founded to provide medical and social services to African American children with physical disabilities. The Historical Commission concluded that: • The properties satisfy Criterion A for their connection to the House of St. Michael and All Angels, one of the first institutions founded to provide medical and social services to African American children with physical disabilities in the nation. • The properties satisfy Criterion J because, collectively, they represent a rare surviving historic campus of an institution that exclusively

the House of St. Michael and All Angels, one of the first institutions founded to provide medical and social services to African American children with physical disabilities in the nation. • The properties satisfy Criterion J because, collectively, they represent a rare surviving historic campus of an institution that exclusively served the African PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 40 American community in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries in Philadelphia. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the House of St. Michael and All Angels Historic District satisfies Criteria for Designation A and J and to designate it as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Mr. McCoubrey seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. ITEM: House of St. Michael and All Angels Historic District MOTION: Designate; Criteria A & J MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: McCoubrey VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Kindt (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 11 1 ADJOURNMENT START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 03:41:25 ACTION: At 1:25 p.m., Mr. Mattioni moved to adjourn. Mr. McCoubrey seconded the motion, which was adopted by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 41 ITEM: Adjournment MOTION: Adjourn MOVED BY: Mattioni SECONDED BY: McCoubrey VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Carney (PCPC) X Cooperman X Dodds (DPD) X Kindt (DPP) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lech (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Michel X Sánchez (Council) X Washington X Total 11 1 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. 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

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; PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 11 AUGUST 2023 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES 42 (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.