MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE OF THE PHILADELPHIA HISTORICAL COMMISSION 16 December 1981 Herbert W. Levy, A.I.A., Chairman Present: Theodore T. Bartley, Jr., A.I.A., Preservation Committee, American Institute of Architects, Philadelphia Chapter. Penelope H. Batcheler, Architect, Independence National Historical Park. Russell Milnor, A.I.A., Philadelphia Redevelopment Authority Richard Tyler, Historian Patricia Siemiontkowski, Architectural Historian Sara Reiter, Student Intern, Great Lakes College Association Also: Michael Hauptman, Architect with Baker, Rothschild, Horn & Blyth, to present plans for the restoration of 303 and 318 South 10th Street and 523 and 525-27 South 9th Street. Jack Dundon, Architect with Alesker and Reiff, to present plans for the rehabilitation and adaptive re-use of Berndoll Brewery Building #5. Irv Shapiro to present a preliminary proposal for alterations to 707 Pine Street and to discuss with the Committee several inappropriate alterations to 912-914 Spruce Street. Margot Gonzalez of Dapit Saylor, Architects, to present plans for alterations to 1818-20 Chestnut Street. Michael Glowa to present his proposal for the restoration of the front facade of 813 South Hancock Street. SUBMISSIONS FOR ALTERATIONS 308 and 318 South 10th Street, Baker, Rothschild, Horn & Blyth, Michael Hauptman, Architect. Mr. Hauptman submitted to the Architectural Committee for review a set of revised drawings calling for the restoration of the front facades of 308 and 318 South 10th Street. Following some discussion, the Committee agreed to recommend the approval of the submission subject to the correction of the shutter details. The Committee found the stiles on both the paneled and louvered shutters to be too narrow and suggested that the architect examine the shutters at 916 Spruce Street for the appropriate dimensions. Mr. Hauptman was asked to prepare a revised shutter detail and to submit it to the Historical Commission staff for a final review and approval. [HANDWRITTEN NOTES: Top right corner: "2482" in handwritten numerals Left margin, near "308 and 318 South 10th Street" section: "/" (single forward slash mark)] Architectural Committee 2 16 December 1981 SUBMISSIONS (Cont'd) 523 South 9th Street, Baker, Rothschild, Horn & Blyth, Michael Hauptman, ARchitect. The Committee reviewed Mr. Hauptman's proposed restoration of the front facade of 523 South 9th Street and recommended an approval of the plans subject to two minor revisions. The Committee suggested that the position of the ground floor windows be raised three courses of brick and that the entablature over the doorway be dropped a few inches by
the front facade of 523 South 9th Street and recommended an approval of the plans subject to two minor revisions. The Committee suggested that the position of the ground floor windows be raised three courses of brick and that the entablature over the doorway be dropped a few inches by reducing the size of the transom bar. The architect agreed to correct his drawing and submit a revised elevation to the Commission staff for a final review and approval. 525-27 South 9th Street, Baker, Rothschild, Horn & Blyth, Michael Hauptman, Architect. The Committee members reviewed this submission and, again, recommended an approval subject to a revision of the doorway details. The Committee suggested that the architect examine the houses in the 1000 block of Clinton Street and model his doorways at 525-27 South 9th Street on them. A better proportion and design could be achieved by refining the door frame, diminishing the transom and by increasing the height and width of the door itself. Again, the architect agreed to revise his elevation drawing and submit it to the Historical Commission staff for a final review and approval. Bergdoll Brewery, Building # 5, Alesker & Reiff, Jack Dundon, Architect. Mr. Dundon presented to the Committee members his plans for the rehabilitation of Bergdoll Brewery #5. Owing to light and air requirements for residential use, new openings in the existing masonry fabric are required. The Committee members found the architect's treatment of the building to meet these requirements acceptable and recommended an approval of the project. The architect was asked to make one change, however. On the west elevation, the Committee members asked that the sash within the large arched opening be milled to fit the opening either with a curved sash or a curved top rail. Finally, the Committee also suggested the preparation of test panels to determine the best method for cleaning the masonry surfaces. 912-914 Spruce Street, Irving Shapiro, Architect. Mr. Shapiro appeared before the Architectural Committee at the request of the Commission staff to explain recent inappropriate altera- tions to 912 and 914 Spruce Street. [HANDWRITTEN NOTES: Checkmarks (✓) appear in the left margin at the following locations: - Before "523 South 9th Street" - Before "525-27 South 9th Street" - Before "Bergdoll Brewery" - Before "912-914 Spruce Street"] Architectural Committee 3 16 December 1981 SUBMISSIONS (Cont'd) Mr. Shapiro explained that the cornice, incorrectly restored by the contractor,
(✓) appear in the left margin at the following locations: - Before "523 South 9th Street" - Before "525-27 South 9th Street" - Before "Bergdoll Brewery" - Before "912-914 Spruce Street"] Architectural Committee 3 16 December 1981 SUBMISSIONS (Cont'd) Mr. Shapiro explained that the cornice, incorrectly restored by the contractor, was being repaired in accordance with the original design. Unfortunately, the repointing done to the building cannot be corrected. The grey Portland cement used in the repointing process cannot be removed without damaging the bricks and, therefore, must remain as it stands. Finally, the Committee agreed that the metal chimneys intruded through the roof of the buildings could remain in place provided they are painted to match the color of the stucco on the masonry chimneys. The marble steps currently in place should be cleaned and reset and not replaced. Of course, neither 912 nor 914 Spruce Street can be eligible for the receipt of either Historical Commission plaque. 707 Pine Street, Irving Shapiro, Architect. Mr. Shapiro presented to the Committee his proposal for the demolition of a portion of the rear section of 707 Pine Street and the construction of a new addition across the width of the property thereby eliminating the existing side yard. Following considerable discussion, the Committee agreed that all original, existing fabric at the rear of the property must be retained and that the plan and execution of the back buildings clearly reflect Philadelphia rowhouse design of the mid-nineteenth century and should not be destroyed. If elimination of the side yard and an increase in useable floor space are required, the members agreed to consider a solution which retains the original character of the building by preserving the existing structure. They suggested, for example, the construction of a greenhouse addition which abuts the back buildings and keeps the original form of the rear extension intact. Such a treatment could be given favorable consideration. Moreover, the Committee suggested that the Redevelopment Authority be advised of any proposal to alter 707 Pine Street and asked to have its Technical Review Committee evaluate any plan to substantially alter the existing building. Peale House, 1818-20 Chestnut Street, Dagit-Saylor, Margot Gonzalez, Architect. Ms. Gonzalez presented to the Committee for review plans for the complete rehabilitation of 1818-20 Chestnut Street for use by the Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts. Following a lengthy discussion of the project, the Committee voted to
the existing building. Peale House, 1818-20 Chestnut Street, Dagit-Saylor, Margot Gonzalez, Architect. Ms. Gonzalez presented to the Committee for review plans for the complete rehabilitation of 1818-20 Chestnut Street for use by the Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts. Following a lengthy discussion of the project, the Committee voted to recommend its approval. [HANDWRITTEN NOTES: Two checkmarks appear in the left margin: one next to "707 Pine Street" and one next to "Peale House, 1818-20 Chestnut Street"] Architectural Committee 4 16 December 1981 SUBMISSIONS (Cont'd) 813 South Hancock Street, Albert Taus, Architect and Mike Glowa, Owner. Mr. Glowa presented the architect's drawing for the restoration of the facade of 813 South Hancock Street, a small, Frame building. Following some discussion of the proposal, the Committee voted to recommend its approval subject to the removal of the light fixture on the facade and a revision of the shutter panel arrangement. In addition, the Committee asked that the owner and architect examine the fabric of the building when work begins and make any necessary adjustments to the size and placement of the openings based on evidence uncovered when the front is dismantled. Mrs. Batcheler also asked Mr. Glowa to make a photographic record of the interior of the building for the Commission's files. She suggested photographing the south wall at each floor level as well as the stairwell and chimney breasts. The Committee also agreed to allow the installation of sloped wire glass in the bulkhead area if desired by the owner. Provident Bank, 6th and Spring Garden Streets, Knabb Associates. The Architectural Committee reviewed and recommended the approval of Mr. Knabb's plans for the rehabilitation and reuse of the Provident Bank at Sixth and Spring Garden Streets. 219-221 Market Street, David Beck, Architect. The Committee reviewed Mr. Beck's revised drawings for the rehabilitation of 219-221 Market Street and made two suggestions. They asked that the panels above the windows in the areas of new construction be simplified and that a more simple reveal be employed in the plaster design. Moreover, the Committee members recommended that the Commission not allow the reproduction of architectural elements using styrofoam coated with resin and then painted. Instead, the Committee recommended that the architect be asked to duplicate all new architectural forms in cast-iron or fiberglass. The submission of a corrected elevation drawing and details is required before a final approval is granted. 149 North 3rd
of architectural elements using styrofoam coated with resin and then painted. Instead, the Committee recommended that the architect be asked to duplicate all new architectural forms in cast-iron or fiberglass. The submission of a corrected elevation drawing and details is required before a final approval is granted. 149 North 3rd Street, John Gordon Nilsen, Architect. The Committee reviewed the elevation drawing submitted for the rehabilitation of the front facade of 149 North 3rd Street. The Committee determined the submission to be incomplete and asked that another submission be prepared which includes details and specifications for the work to be done. In addition, the architect or contractor should appear before the Committee to present his submission and to answer any questions which may arise concerning the project. [HANDWRITTEN NOTES: Three check marks (✓) appear in the left margin next to the following entries: - "813 South Hancock Street" entry - "Provident Bank" entry - "149 North 3rd Street" entry] Architectural Committee 5 16 December 1981 SUBMISSIONS (Cont'd) Stenton Mansion, John Dickey, Architect. The Committee once again considered Mr. Dickey's proposed treatment of the roof at Stenton Mansion. The members agreed to accept Mr. Dickey's method of insulating the roof as described in his letter of 14 December 1981 but with several recommendations. Where insulation is to be blown in, the Committee recommended that it be done from above. In addition, where there is some danger of damage to the original plaster, the shingle lath should be lifted slightly and bats slipped in under it. It was agreed that there must be extreme care taken in the insulation of the roof to prevent damage to the original fabric of the structure. REHABILITATION SPECIFICATIONS 736-738 Pine Street, Redevelopment Authority Rehabilitation Specifications, Russell Milnor, Architect. Mr. Milnor presented two schemes for the proposed rehabilitation of 736 and 738 Pine Street. Following some consideration of both proposed treatments of the property, the Architectural Committee agreed to recommend the approval of Scheme 2 because of its proposed retention of the original masonry mass of the buildings. In addition, the Committee recommends, in accordance with the recommendation of a National Park Service architect, the retention of the existing metal bay and turn-of-the- century cornice at 738 Pine Street along with the installation of large, one-over-one light sash in all window openings. This treatment essentially recognizes the later changes to the corner building and calls for their preservation.
of a National Park Service architect, the retention of the existing metal bay and turn-of-the- century cornice at 738 Pine Street along with the installation of large, one-over-one light sash in all window openings. This treatment essentially recognizes the later changes to the corner building and calls for their preservation. The Committee asks also that the existing ironwork on the 8th Street elevation be preserved in its present location and not moved to the rear of the property as proposed in the specifications. PLAQUES 266 South 9th Street. Both Mr. Bartley and Mrs. Eitcheler agreed to inspect this property to determine its eligibility for receipt of a Commission plaque. There is no recommendation at this time. [HANDWRITTEN NOTES: Two checkmarks appear in the left margin: - One checkmark before "Stenton Mansion" (top of submissions section) - One checkmark before "736-738 Pine Street" (beginning of Rehabilitation Specifications section)] Architectural Committee 6 16 December 1981 DEMOLITIONS Germantown Avenue Reading Depot. Owing to a recent fire in the Germantown Avenue Reading Depot at Germantown Avenue and Price Street, the Department of Licenses and Inspections examined the structure and issued a violation calling for its repair or demolition within 10 days. Because of some expressed interest in the building, the oldest railroad station in the city, the Architectural Committee recommended that the staff explore the possibility of the structure's reuse and, if feasible, request an extension for compliance with the L&I violation. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 5:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Patricia Siemiontkowski Architectural Historian