Historical Commission — Oct 9, 2020

PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 1 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES THE MINUTES OF THE 698TH STATED MEETING OF THE PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION FRIDAY, 9 OCTOBER 2020 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 9:00 a.m. and announced the presence of a quorum. The following Commissioners joined him: Commissioner Present Absent Comment Robert Thomas, AIA, Chair X Emily Cooperman, Ph.D., Committee on Historic Designation Chair X Mark Dodds (Division of Housing & Community Development) X Kelly Edwards, MUP X Steven Hartner (Department of Public Property) X Labaron Lenard-Palmer (Dept. of Planning & Development) X Josh Lippert (Department of Licenses & Inspections) X John Mattioni, Esq. X Dan McCoubrey, AIA, LEED AP BD+C, Architectural Committee Chair X Jessica Sánchez, Esq. (City Council President) X Sara Lepori (Commerce Department) X Betty Turner, MA, Vice Chair X Kimberly Washington, Esq. X Owing to public health concerns surrounding the COVID-19 virus, all Commissioners, staff, applicants, and public attendees participated in the meeting 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 II Shannon Garrison, Historic Preservation Planner I Meredith Keller, Historic Preservation Planner II Allyson Mehley, Historic Preservation Planner II Leonard Reuter, Esq., Law Department Megan Cross Schmitt, Historic Preservation Planner II PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 2 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES The following persons attended the online meeting: George Poulin Patrick Grossi, Preservation Alliance Zackary Curran Adam E. Laver, Esq., Blank Rome LLP Brandon Cohen Harrison Haas Bao Hong Bonnie Halda Tony Bracali Kate McGlinchey, Old City District Blair Sweeney Alice Reyes David Gest, Esq., Ballard Spahr Ernesto Betancourt Eimi Younan Michael Mattioni, Esq., Mattioni Ltd. Nancy Pontone Steven Peitzman Paul Boni, Esq. Randal Baron J M Duffin Michael Hernandez Mary Purcell Dan Schwartz Ben She David Lorenzo Robert Francis Teresa Corso Eve Kootchick Robert Gurmankin Venise Whitaker Andrew Zakroff Meghan Foster Valeriya Logvynenko Oscar Beisert Nick Maggetti Nicholas Maggetti Kristina Springman David Devanna Darren Brown Sergio Coscia Isaac Slepner German Yakubov Chris G. Mejia-Smith, ELS-PHI Anthony Cerone Susan Lucci Bilge Uzun Kemelbek Tashkulov Melissa Depestre PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 3 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES Michael Phillips, Esq., Obermayer Mykaela Valentin Hasiynah

Maggetti Nicholas Maggetti Kristina Springman David Devanna Darren Brown Sergio Coscia Isaac Slepner German Yakubov Chris G. Mejia-Smith, ELS-PHI Anthony Cerone Susan Lucci Bilge Uzun Kemelbek Tashkulov Melissa Depestre PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 3 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES Michael Phillips, Esq., Obermayer Mykaela Valentin Hasiynah Mohammed Adonis Torres J. Moss Dana Fedeli Andrew Miller Esmeralda Perez Gregory Curran Elizabeth Dale Charles Long Malak Hatem Aleksandra Minkh Rich Villa Job Itzkowitz Mason Carter Alicia Renee Ball Chuck Long Kiara Figuereo Marques Ebo Alan Williams Richard Stewart Jourdan McLeod Christian Busch Paul Steinke, Preservation Alliance Matthew Marchini Eugene Naydovich Lorna Katz Marilyn David Traub Mike Harvey Mary McGettigan Gideon Fink Shapiro Marc Kaplin, Esq. Alex Balloon Selena Chen Daniel Sablosky Dane Bombara London Woodbury-Thompson Christina Mack Larry Spector Nathan Farris Xin Sheng Liu PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 4 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ADOPTION OF MINUTES, 697TH STATED MEETING, 11 SEPTEMBER 2020 START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:05:05 DISCUSSION:  Mr. Thomas asked the Commissioners, staff, and members of the public if they had any additions or corrections to the minutes of the preceding meeting of the Historical Commission, the 697th Stated Meeting, held 11 September 2020. No corrections were offered. ACTION: Mr. Thomas moved to adopt the minutes of the 697th Stated Meeting of the Philadelphia Historical Commission, held 11 September 2020. Ms. Turner seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. ITEM: Minutes, 697th Stated Meeting MOTION: Adoption of minutes MOVED BY: Thomas SECONDED BY: Turner VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lenard-Palmer (DPD) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Lepori(Commerce) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 12 1 CONTINUANCE REQUESTS ADDRESS: 1533-39 N 7TH ST Name of Resource: Trinity Reformed Church Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: 99 Real Estate LLC Nominator: The Keeping Society of Philadelphia Staff Contact: Meredith Keller, meredith.keller@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 1533-39 N 7th Street and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the former Trinity Reformed Church satisfies Criteria for Designation D, E, and J. Under Criterion D, the nomination argues that the church exemplifies the “inexpensive, but expressive” form of Gothic ecclesiastical architecture. Under Criterion E, the nomination contends that the church

Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the former Trinity Reformed Church satisfies Criteria for Designation D, E, and J. Under Criterion D, the nomination argues that the church exemplifies the “inexpensive, but expressive” form of Gothic ecclesiastical architecture. Under Criterion E, the nomination contends that the church was PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 5 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES designed by influential Philadelphia architect Samuel Sloan, who included an illustration of the building in his 1868 publication of The Architectural Review and American Builders’ Journal. The nomination further argues that the modest but expressive design reflects the cultural, economic, and social heritage of Philadelphia’s working-to-middle-class residents. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 1533-39 N 7th Street satisfies Criteria for Designation D, E, and J. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that 1533-39 N. 7th Street satisfies Criteria for Designation D, E, and J, and that the property should be designated as historic and listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:05:55 PRESENTERS:  Ms. Keller presented the continuance request to the Historical Commission.  Xin Sheng Liu represented the property owner.  Selena Chen, a Mandarin interpreter retained by the City of Philadelphia, assisted Mr. Liu with his request to continue the review of the nomination for his property. DISCUSSION:  Ms. Edwards inquired about the reason for the request. She noted that a number of property owners have made multiple continuance requests, and she suggested that in some cases the buildings have deteriorated during continuances. She contended that some owners were neglecting their properties. She then clarified that she was not necessarily speaking about the property owners making requests today, but was raising a general concern. o Mr. Liu responded through Ms. Chen that his daughter, who is a fluent English speaker and who has assisted him with this matter in the past, is currently out of the country and unable to attend the meeting. He asked that the Historical Commission to continue the review of the nomination to January 2021. PUBLIC COMMENT:  None. ACTION: See below. ADDRESS: 5250 UNRUH AVE Name of Resource: Tacony Worsted Mills Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: 5250 Unruh Avenue Assoc. Nominator: Alexander Balloon, Tacony Community Development Corp. Staff Contact: Megan Cross Schmitt,

Historical Commission to continue the review of the nomination to January 2021. PUBLIC COMMENT:  None. ACTION: See below. ADDRESS: 5250 UNRUH AVE Name of Resource: Tacony Worsted Mills Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: 5250 Unruh Avenue Assoc. Nominator: Alexander Balloon, Tacony Community Development Corp. Staff Contact: Megan Cross Schmitt, megan.schmitt@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 5250 Unruh Avenue and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the building satisfies Criteria for Designation E and J. Under Criterion E, the nomination argues that the Tacony Worsted Mills is an early and intact example of an industrial complex designed by PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 6 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES Walter Harvey Geissinger, a prolific architect who designed several commercial and industrial buildings throughout Philadelphia. Under Criterion J, the nomination contends that the Tacony Worsted Mills was considered locally and nationally to be one of the finest and largest worsted yarn mills of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 5250 Unruh Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation E and J. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 5250 Unruh Avenue satisfies Criteria for Designation E and J. START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:20:25 PRESENTERS:  Ms. Schmitt presented the continuance request to the Historical Commission.  No one represented the property owner.  Alex Balloon of the Tacony Community Development Corporation represented the nominator. DISCUSSION:  Mr. Balloon did not object to the continuance request, but asked that the matter be heard at the November 2020 meeting of the Historical Commission. He also noted that one of the buildings on the site was recently cited as Imminently Dangerous. ACTION: See below. ADDRESS: 801-15 N 4TH ST AND 319 BROWN ST Name of Resource: St. Agnes Roman Catholic Church, Parish House, and School Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: St. Agnes-St. John Nepomucene Parish/Archdiocese of Philadelphia Nominator: Northern Liberties Neighbors Association/Keeping Society of Philadelphia Staff Contact: Jon Farnham, jon.farnham@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate as historic St. Agnes Roman Catholic Church, rectory, and school at 801-15 N. 4th Street and 319 Brown Street and list them on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. In 1980, owing to declining membership, St. Agnes

of Philadelphia Staff Contact: Jon Farnham, jon.farnham@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate as historic St. Agnes Roman Catholic Church, rectory, and school at 801-15 N. 4th Street and 319 Brown Street and list them on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. In 1980, owing to declining membership, St. Agnes and St. John Nepomucene, a Slovak parish in South Philadelphia, merged and the church is now called St. Agnes-St. John Nepomucene. The nomination claims that the properties at 801-15 N. 4th Street and 319 Brown Street satisfy Criteria for Designation A and J. The nomination identifies a period of significance running from 1910, when the church construction began, to 1982. The choice of the endpoint in 1982 is not explained in the nomination. The church building stands at the northeast corner of 4th and Brown Streets. The church building is described as a “basement church.” In fact, the congregation began to construct a large church in 1910, but only completed the foundations and basement level (stone-faced section) before abandoning the plan, presumably for financial reasons, and then temporarily constructing a wood superstructure over the central nave section. The nomination proposes the designation of the temporary church, which still stands today. The nomination incorrectly refers PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 7 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES to the church as evidencing the Greek Revival and Egyptian Revival styles; the incomplete building has no real architectural style, but the temporary superstructure may perhaps evidence some aspects of the strain of the Classical Revival style found throughout Eastern Europe. The rectory stands to the east of the church, at the northwest corner of N. Orianna and Brown Streets. The rectory building was constructed about 1890 as a rowhouse with first-floor commercial space and converted for use as a rectory about 1918. The school building stands to the east of the church and north of the rectory, facing N. Orianna Street. The school was constructed in 1926. It is three stories in height and housed school facilities on the lower floors and a convent on the upper floor. The school closed in 1969. The nomination claims that the properties satisfy Criterion J (exemplifies the cultural, political, social, or historical heritage of the community) because they include the oldest remaining purpose-built church for the Slovak community in Philadelphia and the only school built by that community. The nomination claims that the properties

in 1969. The nomination claims that the properties satisfy Criterion J (exemplifies the cultural, political, social, or historical heritage of the community) because they include the oldest remaining purpose-built church for the Slovak community in Philadelphia and the only school built by that community. The nomination claims that the properties satisfy Criterion 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) because this institutional complex grew over time and therefore represents “a thread of the larger development of Philadelphia.” STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff contends that the nomination fails to demonstrate that the properties satisfy Criteria for Designation A and J and do not merit designation and listing on the Philadelphia Register. Regarding Criterion A, the fact that the institution expanded its campus over time does not in and of itself indicate any historical significance. If it did, every institution that bought or built a second building would automatically qualify for designation, an untenable assertion. Regarding Criterion J, the nomination presents no evidence that these properties “exemplify” the cultural, political, social, or historical heritage of the Slovak community. The nomination presents a brief, incomplete history of the congregation, but makes no attempt to explain how this group of buildings exemplifies the heritage of the Slovak community. Unlike the case made for the linkage between St. Laurentius Church, the Polish-American community, its identity and heritage when it was nominated, no such case is made in this instance. START TIME IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:22:53 PRESENTERS:  Mr. Farnham presented the continuance request to the Historical Commission.  No one represented the property owner.  Oscar Beisert represented the nominator. DISCUSSION:  Mr. Beisert stated that he does not object to the continuance request. ACTION: Mr. Thomas moved to grant the continuances of the reviews of the nominations for 1533-39 N. 7th Street to the January 2021 Philadelphia Historical Commission meeting, and 5250 Unruh Avenue and 801-15 N. 4th Street and 319 Brown Street to the November 2020 Philadelphia Historical Commission meeting. Ms. Turner seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 8 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ITEM: Continuance of reviews of designation matters MOTION: Adoption MOVED BY: Thomas SECONDED BY: Turner VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent

Philadelphia Historical Commission meeting. Ms. Turner seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 8 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ITEM: Continuance of reviews of designation matters MOTION: Adoption MOVED BY: Thomas SECONDED BY: Turner VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lenard-Palmer (DPD) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Lepori (Commerce) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 12 1 CONSENT AGENDA START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN AUDIO RECORDING: 00:23:50 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 revised application for 510 E. Wildey Street. Ms. Turner seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 9 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ITEM: Consent agenda MOTION: Approval MOVED BY: Thomas SECONDED BY: Turner VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lenard-Palmer (DPD) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Lepori (Commerce) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 12 1 REPORT OF THE ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE, 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 ADDRESS: 510 E WILDEY ST Proposal: Construct rear addition with balcony Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Mary MacLeod Applicant: German Yakubov, Haverford Square Designs LLC History: 1855; William Cramp frame house Individual Designation: 2/28/1967 District Designation: None Staff Contact: Meredith Keller, meredith.keller@phila.gov, 215-686-7660 BACKGROUND: The William Cramp frame house is part of a row of four mid-nineteenth-century frame buildings located on E. Wildey Street in Fishtown. Each building includes a two-story main block with a front-sloping half-gable roof and a two-story rear ell. At some point in the past, all four frame buildings were clad in stucco. The massing and form of the buildings largely remain intact, though the majority of the buildings have acquired one-story additions to their rear ells. At its 13 March 2020 meeting, the Historical Commission denied an application for a rear addition that also proposed to raise the roof of the existing rear ell. In that proposal, the existing roof slope would have been altered in its entirety. While the Commission concluded that it may be

At its 13 March 2020 meeting, the Historical Commission denied an application for a rear addition that also proposed to raise the roof of the existing rear ell. In that proposal, the existing roof slope would have been altered in its entirety. While the Commission concluded that it may be possible to raise the roof of the rear ell and construct an addition, it noted that the proposed design was not sensitive to the original character of the building, because it did not maintain any part of the existing roof slope. The current application proposes a similar addition; however, the new design proposes to maintain 48-inches of the current roof slope to satisfy the Commission’s request to retain a portion of the character-defining feature. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 10 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES SCOPE OF WORK:  Alter roof of rear ell;  Demolish one-story rear addition;  Construct two-story addition with balcony; and  Install new windows. 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 This application proposes to raise a portion of the existing roof of the two-story rear ell to create useable space at the interior. The roof currently peaks at the east where it attaches to the rear ell of 512 E. Wildey Street and slopes west. At the lowest point, the interior height is currently 5-feet 7-inches. To achieve additional height at the interior, a portion of the roof would be demolished, and the west wall raised. The application proposes to retain 48-inches of the original roof slope adjacent to 512 E. Wildey Street. The work would alter much of the roofline but would maintain the existing fabric of the east wall. The work complies with this standard. o The application further proposes to demolish the non-original one-story rear addition and to construct a two-story addition in its place. Most of the rear ell is not visible from a public right-of-way, though a portion of the addition would be visible from E. Eyre Street. The proposed two-story

standard. o The application further proposes to demolish the non-original one-story rear addition and to construct a two-story addition in its place. Most of the rear ell is not visible from a public right-of-way, though a portion of the addition would be visible from E. Eyre Street. The proposed two-story addition complies with this standard. o New one-over-one double-hung windows would be installed at the front façade. Wood windows in the historic configuration should be installed to comply with this standard. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval, provided that a material such as HardiePlank siding is used to clad the addition and that the front façade windows are an appropriate material and configuration, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standard 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial as proposed, but approval with the following revisions, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standard 9:  the footprint of the proposed addition and balconies are acceptable;  the first 18 to 24-inches of the rear wall of the addition should replicate the original slope of the ell;  a material such as HardiePlank siding should be used to clad the addition; and,  the front façade windows should be an appropriate material and configuration. ACTION: See Consent Agenda PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 11 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ADDRESS: 232-36 WALNUT ST Proposal: Demolish non-contributing building; construct eight-story building Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Marie F. Cerone Applicant: Rich Villa, Ambit Architecture History: 2000; Martin Jay Rosenblum, architect Individual Designation: None District Designation: Society Hill Historic District Historic District, Contributing, 3/10/1999 Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov BACKGROUND: This application for final approval proposes to construct an eight-story building at the southeast corner of Walnut Street and S. 3rd Street. The existing single-family residence on the property was constructed in 1999 and is non-contributing to the Society Hill Historic District. The application proposes full demolition of the three-story brick residence and garage and construction of an eight-story, 100’ tall building. The proposed building will house a hotel and a first-floor commercial space. An earlier version of this application was reviewed by the Architectural Committee at the 28 July 2020 meeting. The original version proposed a 15-story, 184’ tower. The Committee recommended denial of the application, pursuant to Standards 8 and 9. The applicant requested a one-month continuance to revise their proposal and the Historical

version of this application was reviewed by the Architectural Committee at the 28 July 2020 meeting. The original version proposed a 15-story, 184’ tower. The Committee recommended denial of the application, pursuant to Standards 8 and 9. The applicant requested a one-month continuance to revise their proposal and the Historical Commission reviewed the updated design on 11 September 2020. The updated design is eight stories and 100 feet in height; it is seven stories and 89 feet to the cornice line, with an eighth story set back from the facades. At the conclusion of their discussion, the Historical Commission voted to remand the application to the Architectural Committee for an additional review, owing to the degree of change from the original design. Although the existing buildings are non-contributing to the historic district, the lot is considered Contributing for archaeological potential. This application is subject to full plenary review by the Historical Commission. The property does not meet the conditions for an undeveloped site, as defined in Section 2.23 of the Historical Commission’s Rules and Regulations. SCOPE OF WORK  Demolish existing building.  Construct 8-story, 100’ building. The revised application reflects the following changes to the original proposal:  Building overall height is reduced by 84’  Upper cornice height went from 174’ to 89’  Main exterior material is now red brick  Top treatment of the arch is now a true half round  Building is set farther back from Walnut Street than originally proposed  Plan to use the existing front foundation wall and propose no new excavation north of that wall STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include: PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 12 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES  Standard 8: Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. o The applicant should engage an archaeologist to assess property for archaeological potential in order to satisfy Standard 8. An initial assessment has not been submitted with application.  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

application.  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 revised design is more compatible with the historic district in massing, size, scale, and materials. o Further reduction in height could be achieved by reducing floor height rather than reducing the number of floors. o The proposed cladding materials successfully differentiate the building from the Merchants Exchange building and are more harmonious with the historic district. o Architectural features, such as the floor to ceiling windows, could be further refined to be more appropriate within the historic district. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval, with modifications to height and architectural details for better compatibility with historic district, pursuant to Standards 8 and 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Standards 8 and 9. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 00:25:00 PRESENTERS:  Ms. Mehley presented the application to the Historical Commission.  Architect Rich Villa, property owner Anthony Cerone, and attorney Marc Kaplan represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT:  Paul Steinke, Preservation Alliance of Greater Philadelphia, opposed the application.  Mary Purcell, vice president of Society Hill Civic Association, opposed the application.  Bonnie Halda opposed the application.  Oscar Beisert, Keeping Society of Philadelphia, supported the application.  Ben She, 5th Square, supported the application.  Alex Balloon supported the application. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  The design of the building was revised significantly in response to multiple reviews by the Architectural Committee, most notably by reducing the building height and revising architectural details to be more compatible with the historic district.  Although the proposed building is taller than some buildings in the Society Hill Historic District, there are buildings of a similar height and mass nearby along the northern edge of the historic district. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 13 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES  Although the property is considered Contributing to the Society Hill Historic District for archaeological potential, a large portion of the property was excavated down 17 feet during the construction of the existing building in 1999.  The application must be evaluated based on

PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES  Although the property is considered Contributing to the Society Hill Historic District for archaeological potential, a large portion of the property was excavated down 17 feet during the construction of the existing building in 1999.  The application must be evaluated based on the review criteria set forth in the historic preservation ordinance and Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, not the zoning code. The Historical Commission is tasked with implementing the historic preservation ordinance, not the zoning code, which is enforced by other agencies. The Historical Commission concluded that:  The proposed building is differentiated from yet compatible with the Society Hill Historic District as well as the neighboring structures, the surroundings, and streetscape, pursuant to Section 14-1005(6)(e) of the preservation ordinance and Standard 9.  The final application must account for the for archaeological potential to comply with Standard 8. FAILED MOTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to deny the application. Ms. Cooperman seconded the motion, which failed by a vote of 3 to 8. ITEM: 232-36 Walnut St MOTION: Denial MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Cooperman VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lenard-Palmer (DPD) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Lepori (Commerce) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 3 8 1 ACTION: Mr. Lippert moved to approve the application as revised, pursuant to Standards 8 and 9. Mr. Mattioni seconded the motion, which passed by a vote of 8 to 3. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 14 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ITEM: 232-36 Walnut St MOTION: Approval MOVED BY: Lippert SECONDED BY: Mattioni VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lenard-Palmer (DPD) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Lepori (Commerce) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 8 3 1 ADDRESS: 502 WOOD ST Proposal: Construct six-story multi-family residential apartment building Review Requested: Review and Comment Owner: Wood Street Associates LP Applicant: Richard Stewart, JKRP Architects History: vacant lots Individual Designation: None District Designation: Old City Historic District, Non-Contributing, 12/12/2003 Staff Contact: Megan Cross Schmitt, megan.schmitt@phila.gov BACKGROUND: This Review and Comment application proposes to construct a six-story multi-family apartment building on several vacant, undeveloped parcels within the Old City

Associates LP Applicant: Richard Stewart, JKRP Architects History: vacant lots Individual Designation: None District Designation: Old City Historic District, Non-Contributing, 12/12/2003 Staff Contact: Megan Cross Schmitt, megan.schmitt@phila.gov BACKGROUND: This Review and Comment application proposes to construct a six-story multi-family apartment building on several vacant, undeveloped parcels within the Old City Historic District. The lots at 313, 315 and 317 N. Randolph Street; 504-08 Wood Street; and 312, 314, 316 and 318 N. 5th Street will be consolidated as 502 Wood Street. SCOPE OF WORK:  Construct six-story multi-family apartment building. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Historical Commission has review-and-comment jurisdiction over this site. The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include:  Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new works shall 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. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 15 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES o The design of this building does not relate to the context of the Old City Historic District. The building is to be clad in metal panels of various shades of grey and one described as having a “wood look.” o The materials and rhythm of the fenestration do not appear to reference any of the architecture seen within the Old City Historic District. In this regard, the design is differentiated from the historic fabric, however it fails to achieve the compatibility that is required by this standard.  Standard 10: New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in a manner such that, if removed in the future, the essential for and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. o As the lots are currently vacant, there would be no adverse impact on the surrounding buildings or on the historic district if this property were to be removed in the future. STAFF COMMENT: The proposed new construction is not compatible with the historic district and does not satisfy Standard 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE COMMENT: The Architectural Committee commented that, other than its massing, the proposed design is not compatible with its environment, pursuant to Standard 9. The façade should integrate masonry and a more

The proposed new construction is not compatible with the historic district and does not satisfy Standard 9. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE COMMENT: The Architectural Committee commented that, other than its massing, the proposed design is not compatible with its environment, pursuant to Standard 9. The façade should integrate masonry and a more cohesive fenestration design in order to reflect the context of the Old City Historic District more successfully. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 01:45:50 PRESENTERS:  Ms. Schmitt presented the application to the Architectural Committee.  Property owner Daniel Sablosky and architects Dane Bombara and Richard Stewart represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT:  Ben She spoke in support of the application.  Robert Gurmankin expressed concern that the design of the building did not include red brick to better reflect the nature of the surrounding buildings. He expressed concern for the precedent this could set for the future development of other vacant lots in the historic district.  Oscar Beisert spoke in support of the development of surface parking lots but also cautioned that new buildings should be compatible with their surroundings.  Alice Reyes spoke in support of the development of surface parking lots but also cautioned that new buildings should be compatible with their surroundings.  Steven Peitzman spoke in support of the development of surface parking lots but also cautioned that new buildings should be compatible with their surroundings. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  The revised design addressed comments from the Architectural Committee regarding the pedestrian experience at the ground floor, including the use of brick rather than cast stone as was originally proposed.  The introduction of masonry helped simplify the revised design.  The façade had a more cohesive design, owing to the revised alignment of the window openings. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 16 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES The Historical Commission concluded that:  The revised plans successfully addressed the comments of the Architectural Committee. HISTORICAL COMMISSION COMMENT: The Historical Commission agreed that the revised plans successfully addressed the comments of the Architectural Committee. ITEM: 502 Wood St MOTION: Adoption of comments MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Turner VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lenard-Palmer (DPD) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Lepori (Commerce)

Committee. ITEM: 502 Wood St MOTION: Adoption of comments MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Turner VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lenard-Palmer (DPD) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Lepori (Commerce) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 11 2 ADDRESS: 917-33 CHESTNUT ST Proposal: Install LED screens and temporary event tent in courtyard Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Thomas Jefferson University Applicant: Christian Busch, 20th Century Preservation, LLC History: Federal Reserve Building of Philadelphia, 1931; East wing and garden, 1941; Paul Cret, architect Individual Designation: 9/26/1961 District Designation: None Staff Contact: Kim Chantry, kim.chantry@phila.gov BACKGROUND: This application proposes to install an event tent and LED displays inside the Garden Court located within the former Federal Reserve Bank building complex at 10th and Chestnut Streets. Paul Cret designed the building and added the east wing and garden in 1941. Thomas Jefferson University, the owner of the property, intends to utilize the outdoor space for events of varying size. The proposed tent and LED displays will allow for flexibility of the site, and also for donor recognition, which is the driving force behind the LED displays. Much of the work proposed to bring a use to the Garden Court site was approved administratively by the staff, including lighting, fencing, paving, planters, and other minor site improvements. The two items remaining PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 17 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES for review by the Architectural Committee and Historical Commission are the event tent and LED displays. SCOPE OF WORK  Install event tent, to be in place 179 days during the year.  Install 17 LED displays; revised to 13 LED displays STANDARDS FOR REVIEW: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines include:  Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall 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 proposed event tent is temporary and will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The proposed LED displays, both moveable and fixed,

with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. o The proposed event tent is temporary and will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The proposed LED displays, both moveable and fixed, are largely independent of the historic material and will not destroy historic fabric. However, the sheer quantity of LED displays may alter the features and spatial relationships of the Garden Court.  Standard 10: New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. o The proposed event tent and LED displays can be removed in the future without impact to the historic integrity of the property. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval, provided the LED screens are reduced to the locations at the rear half of the courtyard, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standards 9 and 10. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial as presented, pursuant to Standard 9, with the recommendation to reduce the number of LED displays per the Architectural Committee’s comments. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 02:03:50 PRESENTERS:  Ms. Chantry presented the revised application to the Historical Commission.  Architect Christian Busch and designer Eve Kootchick represented the application. PUBLIC COMMENT:  Elizabeth Dale, Chief Development Officer and Executive Vice President for Philanthropy for Thomas Jefferson University, commented on the importance of being able to recognize and honor Jefferson’s philanthropic community in this new outdoor space. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  The proposed event tent is acceptable, owing to its transparency and temporary nature, and that shade screening installed on the underside of the roof would be acceptable. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 18 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES  The proposed south LED displays are moveable and will be wheeled into storage when not in use. The Historical Commission concluded that:  The quantity of LED displays has been reduced from the original application, and now does not alter the features, spatial relationships, and views of the Garden Court, satisfying Standard 9.  The proposed event tent and LED displays can be removed in the future without impact to the historic integrity of

quantity of LED displays has been reduced from the original application, and now does not alter the features, spatial relationships, and views of the Garden Court, satisfying Standard 9.  The proposed event tent and LED displays can be removed in the future without impact to the historic integrity of the property, satisfying Standard 10. ACTION: Mr. McCoubrey moved to approve the revised application, provided the south LED displays along the fence are only in place during events, with the staff to review details including shade screening, pursuant to Standards 9 and 10. Mr. Lenard-Palmer seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. ITEM: 917-33 Chestnut St MOTION: Approval of revised application MOVED BY: McCoubrey SECONDED BY: Lenard-Palmer VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lenard-Palmer (DPD) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Lepori (Commerce) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 11 2 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 19 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES OLD BUSINESS ADDRESS: 1700-06 N HOWARD ST Proposal: Demolish stable and shed addition buildings; alter and convert main building into mixed-use Review Requested: Final Approval Owner: Urban Conversions LLC Applicant: Sergio Coscia, Coscia Moos Architecture History: 1876; Gillinder & Sons’ Franklin Flint Works Decorating Plant Individual Designation: 7/10/2020 District Designation: None Staff Contact: Allyson Mehley, allyson.mehley@phila.gov BACKGROUND: This application for final approval proposes to redevelop the historic property located 1700-06 N. Howard Street as part of a larger mixed-use development that will extend north along N. Howard Street and Waterloo Street. The structures on the site are the former decorating plant of Gillinder & Sons Franklin Flint Glass Works. The company occupied the property from 1876 to 1914 and was an important glass manufacturing company in Philadelphia. The property was designated last month, on 10 July 2020. The historic property includes three connecting buildings: 1. Decorating Block (1872-1876), 2: Stable (1872-1876), and 3. Shed Addition (1895-1901). All three sections of the building are considered contributing with a Period of Significance of 1876-1914. The Committee on Historic Designation concluded during the review of the property’s nomination that Building 3, the Shed Addition, was contributing although it appeared to have been significantly modified. The application proposes to rehabilitate Building 1 and incorporate it into the overall new construction. As part of the Building 1’s scope

Committee on Historic Designation concluded during the review of the property’s nomination that Building 3, the Shed Addition, was contributing although it appeared to have been significantly modified. The application proposes to rehabilitate Building 1 and incorporate it into the overall new construction. As part of the Building 1’s scope of work, plans include a two-story rooftop addition and the insertion of storefronts on the east and south elevations. Buildings 2 and 3 would be demolished and replaced with a seven-story infill section. SCOPE OF WORK  Rehabilitate Building 1 and create new commercial storefronts, install roof deck, and construct two-story rooftop addition.  Demolish Buildings 2 and 3. Construct new seven-story infill building. 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 The removal of multiple window and door openings from the first floor at Building 1 and the replacement with oversized storefront systems does not meet Standard 2.  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. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 20 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES o The incorporation of the historic property into a new development requires the demolition of two contributing sections, and the proposed replacement building is incompatible in height and massing, therefore does meet Standard 9.  Standard 10: New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. o The demolition of Building 2 and 3 would permanently alter the historic building and would be irreversible, and therefore does not meet Standard 10. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Denial, pursuant to Standards 2, 9, and 10. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Standards 2, 9, and 10. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 02:33:36 PRESENTERS:  Ms. Mehley presented the revised

irreversible, and therefore does not meet Standard 10. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Denial, pursuant to Standards 2, 9, and 10. ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Architectural Committee voted to recommend denial, pursuant to Standards 2, 9, and 10. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 02:33:36 PRESENTERS:  Ms. Mehley presented the revised application to the Historical Commission.  Architect Sergio Coscia and attorney Adam Laver represented the application. DISCUSSION:  Ms. Cooperman and Mr. McCoubrey observed that the revised application still proposed the demolitions of Buildings 2 and 3. Ms. Cooperman noted that the approval of this level of demolition without a finding of hardship or public interest would set a precedent.  Mr. Coscia and Mr. Laver provided information on the condition and adaptability of Buildings 2 and 3 within the context of their project. Mr. Laver requested that the applicant’s letter dated 2 October 2020 be entered into the record for this meeting. This letter was submitted as part of the revised application and provides a description of the conditions of Buildings 2 and 3.  Mr. Farnham pointed out that the development project depicted in the applicants’ materials includes both the designated site and other land to the north. The buildings proposed for the land to the north are not within the Historical Commission’s jurisdiction. The Commission should focus its review on the structures proposed for the property at 1700-06 N. Howard St only.  Mr. Farnham advised the Commissioners that the preservation ordinance defines a demolition as “the razing or destruction of whether entirely or in significant part of a building.” He added that it is your prerogative today to decide if Buildings 2 and 3 represent a significant part of the designated property and noted that it is within the Commissioners’ discretion to make a decision either way.  Mr. Reuter advised the Commissioners to bifurcate their decision for this application. He explained that the Commission should first determine if the removal of Buildings 2 and 3 is considered a demolition under the ordinance. He continued that once this decision is voted on, then the Commissioners must then determine if the application meets the preservation guidelines including the Secretary of Interior’s Standards. PUBLIC COMMENT:  Ben She, 5th Square, supported the application.  Oscar Beisert, Keeping Society of Philadelphia, did not oppose the application. Mr. Beisert expressed concern about the precedent set by the removal of two

then determine if the application meets the preservation guidelines including the Secretary of Interior’s Standards. PUBLIC COMMENT:  Ben She, 5th Square, supported the application.  Oscar Beisert, Keeping Society of Philadelphia, did not oppose the application. Mr. Beisert expressed concern about the precedent set by the removal of two PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 21 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES contributing sections of the building but appreciated the reuse of Building 1 in the applicant’s overall project.  Patrick Grossi, Preservation Alliance of Greater Philadelphia, did not oppose the application. Mr. Grossi stated that the Preservation Alliance had toured the site and met with the applicant to discuss the project. He said the Alliance recognizes the challenges and practical realities of redeveloping this site. Mr. Grossi noted the sensitive treatment of Building 1 and stated the Preservation Alliance does not oppose the application’s overall concept.  Steven Peitzman said that he is concerned about the precedent set of demolishing Buildings 2 and 3. Mr. Peitzman noted that he found the demolition of Building 3 acceptable but urged the Commission to not approve the demolition of Building 2.  Jim Duffin said that he agreed with previous comments by Oscar Beisert and Patrick Grossi but urged the Commission to apply demolition standards that have been required of past applicants. He noted that perhaps the Commission could approve parts of the application but require demolition to be reviewed under a separate process.  Venise Whitaker stated that said that she agreed with previous comments by Oscar Beisert and Patrick Grossi. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  The applicant revised the design with the following changes: o Removal of the storefront opening on N. Howard Street, o Decrease in the height of storefront openings on Cecil B. Moore Avenue, and o Retention of the existing “ghost sign” on the corner of Building 1.  Buildings 1 is the character-defining, historically significant portion of the industrial complex at 1700-06 N. Howard Street. Buildings 2 and 3 are not character-defining or historically significant portions of 1700-06 N. Howard Street The Historical Commission concluded that:  The removal of Buildings 2 and 3 is not a razing or destruction in whole or significant part of the industrial complex at 1700-06 N. Howard Street.  The revised design satisfies Standard 9. ACTION: Mr. Mattioni moved to find that

N. Howard Street The Historical Commission concluded that:  The removal of Buildings 2 and 3 is not a razing or destruction in whole or significant part of the industrial complex at 1700-06 N. Howard Street.  The revised design satisfies Standard 9. ACTION: Mr. Mattioni moved to find that Buildings 2 and 3 are not historically significant and therefore their removals do not constitute a razing or destruction of the historic resource in significant part; their removals are not a demolition. Ms. Sanchez seconded the motion, which passed by a vote of 6 to 4. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 22 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ITEM: 1700-06 N Howard St MOTION: Removals of Buildings 2 and 3 not a demolition MOVED BY: SECONDED BY: VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lenard-Palmer (DPD) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Lepori (Commerce) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 6 4 3 ACTION: Mr. Mattioni moved to approve the revised application, with the staff to review details, pursuant to Standard 9. Mr. Lenard-Palmer seconded the motion, which passed by a vote of 6 to 4. ITEM: 1700-06 N Howard St MOTION: Approve revised application MOVED BY: SECONDED BY: VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lenard-Palmer (DPD) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Lepori (Commerce) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 6 4 3 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 23 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ADDRESS: 2501-61 N 15TH ST Name of Resource: Thirteenth & Fifteenth Street Passenger Railway Company’s Depot, Car House, & Stable Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: TAC CG Philadelphia LLC Nominator: Keeping Society of Philadelphia Staff Contact: Kim Chantry, kim.chantry@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 2501-61 N. 15th Street and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the former Thirteenth & Fifteenth Street Passenger Railway Company’s Depot, Car House, and Stable satisfies Criteria for Designation A and J. Under Criterion A, the nomination contends that the Thirteenth & Fifteenth Street Passenger Railway Company is an early and significant example of the evolution and development of passenger railway companies, and public

& Fifteenth Street Passenger Railway Company’s Depot, Car House, and Stable satisfies Criteria for Designation A and J. Under Criterion A, the nomination contends that the Thirteenth & Fifteenth Street Passenger Railway Company is an early and significant example of the evolution and development of passenger railway companies, and public transit in Philadelphia. The facility was expanded as public transit moved from horse cars, to cable cars, to motorized buses. Under Criterion J, the nomination contends that the expansion of public transit was one reason for the residential development of this area of North Philadelphia, exemplifying the historical heritage of the community. The property owner purchased the property prior to the submission of this nomination, with the intention of demolishing the building and constructing a multi-story self-storage facility on the block, and was therefore initially opposed to historic designation. However, the property owner no longer opposes the historic designation, owing to the time granted by the Commission's approval of several continuance requests, which allowed the owner and their representatives to work with the Commission staff to develop a proposal that the staff has approved administratively. This proposal allows for the retention of the building and its conversion into a self-storage facility in its current massing and form. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 2501-61 N. 15th Street 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 property at 2501-61 N. 15th Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A and J, and that the property should be designated as historic and listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 03:47:50 PRESENTERS:  Ms. Chantry presented the nomination to the Historical Commission.  Attorney David Gest represented the property owner and confirmed that the property owner no longer opposes historic designation, owing to the adaptive reuse application approved by the staff. He acknowledged attorney Matt McClure’s significant efforts to find a preservation-minded solution that would both save the building and allow their client to open his business. He praised Mr. McClure and noted that, without him, this building would have been lost to demolition.  Oscar Beisert represented the nominator and thanked the staff, property owner, and owner’s representatives for reaching an approval of an adaptive reuse of the building. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL

client to open his business. He praised Mr. McClure and noted that, without him, this building would have been lost to demolition.  Oscar Beisert represented the nominator and thanked the staff, property owner, and owner’s representatives for reaching an approval of an adaptive reuse of the building. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 24 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES PUBLIC COMMENT:  None. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  The property owner is to be commended for working with the staff on a resolution which allows for the adaptive reuse of the building in its current massing and form. The Historical Commission concluded that:  The Thirteenth & Fifteenth Street Passenger Railway Company is an early and significant example of a passenger railway company facility and documents the evolution and development of passenger railway companies and public transit in Philadelphia, satisfying Criterion A.  The expansion of public transit was one reason for the residential development of this area of North Philadelphia, exemplifying the historical heritage of the community, and thereby satisfying Criterion J. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 2501-61 N. 15th Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A and J, and to designate it at as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Mr. Lippert seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous consent. ITEM: 2501-61 N 15th St MOTION: Designate, Criteria A and J MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Lippert VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lenard-Palmer (DPD) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Lepori (Commerce) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 10 3 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 25 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ADDRESS: 3412 AND 3414 HAVERFORD AVE Name of Resource: Frame Twin Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: 3412 Haverford Ave, Mary E. Drummond 3414 Haverford Ave, LINA Holdings LLC Nominator: University City Historical Society Staff Contact: Megan Cross Schmitt, megan.schmitt@phila.gov OVERVIEW: These nominations proposes to designate the properties at 3412 and 3414 Haverford Avenue and list them on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nominations contend that the twin building satisfies Criterion for Designation J, in part because they are representative of “the historical heritage of the neighborhood’s initial period of

nominations proposes to designate the properties at 3412 and 3414 Haverford Avenue and list them on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nominations contend that the twin building satisfies Criterion for Designation J, in part because they are representative of “the historical heritage of the neighborhood’s initial period of development, as well as the economic and social history” of the community’s founders. The nominations also contend that “the subject propert[ies are] representative of the early development of the Mantua neighborhood, as well as a once common house type that has largely vanished from the built environment of West Philadelphia.” STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nominations demonstrate that the properties at 3412 and 3414 Haverford Avenue satisfy Criterion for Designation J. The staff, however, recommends against naming the resource for its associated developer, Julia A.A. Blodget Britton. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the nominations demonstrate that the properties at 3412 and 3414 Haverford Avenue satisfy Criterion for Designation J, and that the name of the resource should be changed to “Frame Twin.” START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 03:51:31 RECUSAL:  Mr. Mattioni recused because his law firm represents the property owner. PRESENTERS:  Ms. Schmitt presented the nomination to the Committee on Historic Designation.  Attorney Michael Mattioni, architectural historian Gideon Fink Shapiro, and engineer Jim Clancey represented the property owner. The property owner, Eugene Naydovich, was also in attendance.  George Poulin and Oscar Beisert represented the nomination. DISCUSSION:  Mr. Mattioni asked Mr. Shapiro several questions about the accuracy of the claims made in the nomination. Mr. Shapiro stated that the nomination did not adequately support the arguments for significance. Mr. Shapiro said that the nomination compared the subject properties to other wood frame houses in neighborhoods such as Fishtown rather than in Mantua. Mr. Shapiro disagreed with the nominator’s claim that the subject properties were exemplary of the early development of the Mantua neighborhood. PUBLIC COMMENT:  Jim Duffin spoke in support of the nomination. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 26 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES  Venise Whitaker spoke in support of the nomination.  Dana Fedeli spoke in support of the nomination.  Oscar Beisert of the Keeping Society spoke in support of the nomination.  David Traub of Save Our Sites spoke in support of the nomination. HISTORICAL

PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES  Venise Whitaker spoke in support of the nomination.  Dana Fedeli spoke in support of the nomination.  Oscar Beisert of the Keeping Society spoke in support of the nomination.  David Traub of Save Our Sites spoke in support of the nomination. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  The building at 3412 Haverford Avenue was constructed between 1850 and 1853.  The house should not be named for the owner of the property at the time of construction, Julia A.A. Blodget Britton. The Historical Commission concluded that:  Wood frame houses such as the subject property represent working-class Philadelphians, further contributing to its significance under Criterion for Designation J. ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 3412 Haverford Avenue satisfies Criterion for Designation J, that the name of the resource should be changed to “Frame Twin,” and to designate it at as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Mr. McCoubrey seconded the motion. Mr. Mattioni recused. ITEM: 3412 Haverford Ave MOTION: Designate, Criterion J MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: McCoubrey VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lenard-Palmer (DPD) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Lepori (Commerce) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 9 1 3 ACTION: Ms. Cooperman moved to find that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 3414 Haverford Avenue satisfies Criterion for Designation J, that the name of the resource should be changed to “Frame Twin,” and to designate it at as historic, listing it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. Ms. Turner seconded the motion. Mr. Mattioni recused. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 27 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ITEM: 3414 Haverford Ave MOTION: Designate, Criterion J MOVED BY: Cooperman SECONDED BY: Turner VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lenard-Palmer (DPD) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Lepori (Commerce) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 9 1 3 ADDRESS: 1045-49 SARAH ST Name of Resource: Otis Elevator Company Boiler and Engine Room Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Antal Group Inc. Nominator: Keeping Society of Philadelphia Staff Contact:

X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Lepori (Commerce) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 9 1 3 ADDRESS: 1045-49 SARAH ST Name of Resource: Otis Elevator Company Boiler and Engine Room Proposed Action: Designation Property Owner: Antal Group Inc. Nominator: Keeping Society of Philadelphia Staff Contact: Laura DiPasquale, laura.dipasquale@phila.gov OVERVIEW: This nomination proposes to designate the property at 1045-29 Sarah Street and list it on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places. The nomination contends that the former boiler and engine house of the Otis Elevator Company, built in 1904, satisfies Criteria for Designation A, C, G, and J. Under Criteria A and J, the nomination argues that the property is significant in the development of Fishtown/Kensington as part of the Morse Elevator Works and the Otis Elevator Company. Under Criterion C, the nomination contends that the building is representative of industrial power plant design of the early twentieth century. Under Criterion G, the nomination argues that the building is part of the earliest, extent, coherent industrial complexes in Fishtown, but does not propose to designate the complex as a district. Many of the other properties associated with the former Morse and Otis Elevator Companies were individually designated in 2015 and 2016. The Committee on Historic Designation reviewed this nomination on 12 March 2019 and recommended that the property satisfies Criteria D and J. The owner, who did not attend the Committee’s review, requested that the Historical Commission remand the nomination to the Committee to provide him with an opportunity to participate in the review. The Commission granted the initial request and several subsequent requests. Each time the Historical Commission granted a request from the owner to remand the nomination to the Committee on Historic Designation for a second review, the owner declined to participate in the Committee's review and requested yet another continuance and remand. To move the process along, the Historical Commission eventually declined to grant another request to remand the nomination and instead continued the matter to the first in-person meeting of the Historical Commission, at PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 28 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES which the Commission would review the nomination without a second recommendation from the Committee. In light of the Historical Commission's decision at its August 2020 meeting to terminate indefinite continuances, the nomination will be reviewed at the Historical Commission's October 2020 meeting with the

PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES which the Commission would review the nomination without a second recommendation from the Committee. In light of the Historical Commission's decision at its August 2020 meeting to terminate indefinite continuances, the nomination will be reviewed at the Historical Commission's October 2020 meeting with the Committee's March 2019 recommendation. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the nomination demonstrates that the property at 1045-49 Sarah Street satisfies Criteria for Designation A, C, and J, but not Criterion G. COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC DESIGNATION RECOMMENDATION, MARCH 2019: The Committee on Historic Designation voted to recommend that the property satisfies Criteria for Designation D and J. START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 04:44:27 PRESENTERS:  Ms. DiPasquale presented the nomination to the Historical Commission  No one represented the property owner.  Oscar Beisert represented the nominator. PUBLIC COMMENT:  Dana Fedeli spoke in support of the nomination.  Mason Carter spoke in support of the nomination.  Venise Whitaker spoke in support of the nomination.  Ms. DiPasquale noted that the Commission received three additional emails in support of the nomination this morning. HISTORICAL COMMISSION FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The Historical Commission found that:  The Historical Commission and its advisory Committee on Historic Designation provided the owner numerous opportunities to participate in the designation process and to present arguments to both bodies.  The Historical Commission concurs with the Committee on Historic Designation’s original evaluation of the nomination. The Historical Commission concluded that:  The argument made in the nomination for the building’s significance as representative of industrial power plant architecture satisfies Criterion D rather than Criterion C.  The nomination did not satisfactorily demonstrate that the property satisfied Criteria A or G.  The nomination demonstrated that the property is significant as part of the industrial development of the neighborhood, satisfying Criterion J. ACTION: Ms. Turner moved to find that the property at 1045-49 Sarah Street meets Criteria for Designation D 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. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 29 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ITEM: 1045-49 Sarah St MOTION: Designate, Criteria D and J MOVED BY: Turner SECONDED BY: McCoubrey VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner

unanimous consent. PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 29 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ITEM: 1045-49 Sarah St MOTION: Designate, Criteria D and J MOVED BY: Turner SECONDED BY: McCoubrey VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lenard-Palmer (DPD) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Lepori (Commerce) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 10 3 ADJOURNMENT START TIME OF DISCUSSION IN ZOOM RECORDING: 04:54:20 ACTION: At 1:57 p.m., Ms. Cooperman moved to adjourn. Mr. Mattioni seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. ITEM: Adjournment MOTION: Adjourn MOVED BY: SECONDED BY: VOTE Commissioner Yes No Abstain Recuse Absent Thomas, Chair X Cooperman X Dodds (DHCD) X Edwards X Hartner (DPP) X Lenard-Palmer (DPD) X Lepori (Commerce) X Lippert (L&I) X Mattioni X McCoubrey X Sánchez (Council) X Turner, Vice Chair X Washington X Total 10 3 PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION, 9 OCTOBER 2020 30 PHILADELPHIA’S PRINCIPAL PUBLIC STEWARD OF HISTORIC RESOURCES PLEASE NOTE:  Minutes of the Philadelphia Historical Commission 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.