ZcZ7 Historic Resource Survey Form ER# 2004-8006-101 Key# PENNSYLVANIA HISTORICAL AND MUSEUM COMMISSION Bureau for Historic Preservation
Name, Location and Ownership (Items 1-6; see Instructions, page 4)
HISTORIC NAME Port Richmond Historic District
CURRENT/COMMON NAME
STREET ADDRESS ZIP LOCATION Port Richmond Neighborhood in Northeast Philadelphia
MUNICIPALITY Philadelphia COUNTY Philadelphia
TAX PARCEL #IYEAR Multiple USGS QUAD Camden NJ-PA
OWNERSHIP Private Public/Local E Public/County LI Public/State LI Public/Federal OWNER NAME/ADDRESS Multiple CATEGORY OF PROPERTY LI Building fl Site 0 Structure 0 Object Z District TOTAL NUMBER OF RESOURCES
Function (Items 7-8; see Instructions, pages 4-6)
Historic Function Subcategory Particular Type Domestic Single Dwelling Rowhomes Domestic Multiple Dwelling Apartments Education School Religion Religious Structure Churches Commerce/Trade Business
Current Function Subcategory Particular Type Domestic Single Dwellin Rowhomes
Domestic Multiple Dwelling Apartments Education School Religion Religious Structure Churches
Commerce/Trade Business
Architectural/Property Information (Items 9-14; see Instructions, pages 6-7)
ARCHITECTURAL CLASSIFICATION
Late Victorian Vernacular Gothic Revival Italian Renaissance
EXTERIOR MATERIALS and STRUCTURAL SYSTEM
Foundation
Walls Brick
Roof Asphalt
Other Structural System Brick
WIDTH (feet) or (# bays) DEPTH ______(feet) or (# rooms) STORIES/HEIGHT
Key #______ER# 2004-8006-101
Property Features (Items 15-17; see Instructions, pages 7-8)
Setting Urban neighborhood Ancillary Features
Acreage 340 (round to nearest tenth)
I Historical Information (Items 18-21; see Instructions, page 8)
Year Construction Began 1682 0 Circa Year Completed iQ M Circa Date of Major Additions, Alterations 1842 Li Circa 1959 Li Circa Li Circa
Basis for Dating Z Documentary 0 Physical Explain Based on historic maps and aerial photographs, primary and secondary sources, and an examination of
the resource. Cultural/Ethnic Affiliation(s) Associated Individual(s)
Associated Event(s) Architect(s)
Builder(s) -
Submission Information (Items 22-23; see Instructions, page 8)
Previous Survey/Determinations None Threats Li None Li Neglect 0 Public Development Li Private Development Li Other Explain The resource is located within the Area of Potential Effect of the 1-95 Reconstruction: Ann Street to Wheatsheaf
Lane Project This submission is related to a LI non-profit grant application Li business tax incentive 0 NHPA/PA History Code Project Review Li other
Preparer Information (Items 24-30; see Instructions, page 9)
Name & Title Lindsey Allen, Architectural Historian
Date Prepared February 2013 Project Name 1-95 Reconstruction: Ann Street to Wheatsheaf Lane Project Organization/Company CHRS, Inc. Mailing Address 451 N. Cannon Ave., Suite bOB. Lansdale, PA 19446
Phone 215-699-8006 Email [email protected]
03/08 PA Historic Resource Survey Form 2
Key #______ER# 2004-8006-101
National Register Evaluation (Item 31; see Instructions, page 9) (To be completed by Survey Director, Agency Consultant, or for Project Reviews ONLY.) fl Not Eligible (due to LI lack of significance and/or LI lack of integrity) Eligible Area(s) of Significance Criterion A and C Criteria Considerations Period of Significance 1842-1940 E] Contributes to Potential or Eligible District District Name
Bibliography (Item 32; cite major references consulted. Attach additional page if needed. See Instructions, page 9.)
See attached
Additional Information The following must be submitted with form. Check the appropriate box as each piece is completed and attach to form with paperclip. Z Narrative Sheets—Description/Integrity and History/Significance (See Instructions, pages 13-14) Z Current Photos (See Instructions, page 10) Z Photo List (See Instructions, page 11) LI Site Map (sketch site map on 8.5x11 page; include North arrow, approximate scale; label all resources, street names, and geographic features; show exterior photo locations; See Instructions, page 11) LI Floor Plan (sketch main building plans on 8.5x1 1 page; include North arrow, scale bar or length/width dimensions; label rooms; show interior photo locations; See Instructions, page 11) USGS Map (submit original, photocopy, or download from TopoZone.com; See Instructions, page 12)
Send Completed Form and Additional Information to: National Register Program Bureau for Historic Preservation/PH MC Keystone Bldg., 2nd Floor 400 North St. Harrisburg, PA 17120-0093
03/08 PA Historic Resource Survey Form 3 Key #______ER# 2004-8006-101 Photo List (Item 33) See pages 10-11 of the Instructions for more information regarding photos and the photo list. In addition to this photo list, create a photo key for the site plan and floor plans by placing the photo number in the location the photographer was standing on the appropriate plan. Place a small arrow next to the photo number indicating the direction the camera was pointed. Label individual photos on the reverse side or provide a caption underneath digital photos.
Photographer name Lindsey Allen
Date April - May 2012 Location Negatives/Electronic Images Stored CHRS. Inc. files
Photo # Photo Subject/Description Camera Facing 1 View looking southwest down Livingston Street at Clearfield Street. Note the narrow width of the SW street. 2 View looking west-southwest along Cedar Street at Allegheny Avenue. Note the wider two-way W-SW street and limited street trees. 3 View looking southwest along Aramingo Avenue at Ann Street. Note the wide avenue. SW 4 View looking northwest along Allegheny Avenue, the widest thoroughfare in the Port Richmond NW Historic District. 5 View looking southwest down Tilton Street at Ontario Street, showing common rear alleyways. SW 6 View looking west-southwest at the intersection of Richmond and Ann Streets. 1-95 cuts through the W-SW
southeastern part of the Port Richmond neighborhood. 7 View looking southeast along Ann Street at Edgemont Street. Varying heights located in the oldest SE
section of the neighborhood. 8 View looking southeast along Somerset Street at Mercer Street. Note the varying heights. SE 9 View looking east-northeast along Richmond Street at Wishart Street. E-NE 10 View looking south-southwest along Mercer Street at Allegheny Avenue. Note the intact metal S-SW cornices. 11 View looking west-southwest down Weikel Street at Allegheny Avenue. Note the various changes to W-SW exterior materials. 12 View looking east-northeast along Richmond Street at Clearfield Street, Simple three-story E-NE residential row. 13 View looking northeast along Tilton Street near Ontario Street NE 14 View looking east along Chatham Street at Clementine Street. E 15 View looking north on Thompson Street near Clearfield Street N 16 View looking southwest along Schiller Street at Almond Street. SW 17 View looking southwest at detailed rowhome on Allegheny Avenue near Chatham Street. Note the SW original cornice, bay window materials, porch roof and columns, and arched window. 18 View looking southwest along Aramingo Avenue at Cambria Street. Note the small front garden SW
space. 19 View looking east at a mixed residential and commercial property at the corner of Almond and E Westmoreland Streets. 20 View looking north at a former corner store at Ann and Cedar Streets. N 21 View looking north at commercial property on Richmond Street near Wishart Street. N 22 View looking south at a portion of the Octavia Hill Association development at Monmouth and Gaul S Streets. 23 View looking east-northeast at the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary church on the corner of E-NE Allegheny Avenue and Miller Street. 24 View looking north-northeast at the Nativity B.V.M. rectory. N-NE 25 View looking north at the former Nativity B.V.M. convent. N 26 View looking east at the former Nativity B.V.M. parish school. E
03/08 PA Historic Resource Survey Form 4 Key
Photo List (continued): ER# 2004-8006-101
Photo # Photo Subject/Description Camera Facing 27 View looking west at the Our Lady of Help of Christians church on the corner of Allegheny Avenue W and Gaul Street. 28 View looking west-southwest at the former Our Lady of Help of Christians school on the corner of W-SW Allegheny Avenue and Chatham Street. The brick addition can be seen on the left. 29 View looking north-northwest at the Our Lady of Help of Christians rectory. N-NW 30 View looking north-northeast at the St. Adalbert church and rectory on Allegheny Avenue between N-NE Thompson and Edgemont Streets. 31 View looking west at the St. Adalbert school, now the Our Lady of Port Richmond school. The 1953 W
addition can be seen on the right side of the photograph. 32 View looking west at the James Martin Public School at Richmond and Ontario Streets. The 1896 W section is on the right and the 1922 wing is on the left. 33 View looking west at the Charles Carroll Public School near the corner of Auburn and Salmon W Streets. The later additions can be seen to the left and right of the historic core. 34 View looking west at the John Paul Jones Junior High School near the corner of Ann and Memphis W Streets. 35 View looking north at the Richmond Public School on the corner of Ann and Belgrade Streets. N 36 View looking east at the Northeastern Hospital on Allegheny Avenue between Tulip and Memphis E Streets. 37 View looking west-southwest at the Free Library of Philadelphia-Richmond Branch on Indiana W-SW
Street. 38 View looking southwest at Commissioners Hall on the corner of Belgrade and Clearfield Streets. SW 39 View looking east-northeast at the Lithuanian Music Hall on Allegheny Avenue and Tilton Street. E-NE 40 View looking south at the former Richmond Theater on Richmond Street. i S
03/08 PA Historic Resource Survey Form Key #______ER# 2004-8006-101
Physical Description and Integrity (Item 38) Provide a current description of the overall setting, landscape, and resources of the property. See page 13 of the Instructions for detailed directions. Continue on additional sheets as needed. Suggested outline for organizing this section: Introduction [summarize the property, stating type(s) of resource(s) and function(s)] Setting [describe geographic location, streetscapes, natural/man-made landscape features, signage, etc.] Exterior materials, style, and features [describe the exterior of main buildings/resources] Interior materials, style, and features [describe the interior of main buildings/resources] Outbuildings/Landscape [describe briefly additional outbuildings/landscape features found on property, substitute Building Complex Form if preferred; See Instructions, page 18] Boundaries [explain how/why boundaries chosen, such as historic legal parcel, visual natural features such as tree lines, alley separating modern construction, etc.] Integrity [summarize changes to the property and assess how the changes impact its ability to convey significance
Port Richmond is located in the River Wards section of Philadelphia, an area just northeast of downtown Philadelphia where the Delaware River makes its first major turn northeastward. Historically, Port Richmond was limited to the area southeast of Richmond Street, with frontage on the Delaware River, while Richmond referred to the area northwest; today, the entire neighborhood is considered to be Port Richmond. The Philadelphia City Planning Commission (PCPC) identifies the boundaries of the neighborhood as Frankford Creek or the Betsy Ross Bridge on the northeast, the Delaware River on the southeast, the CONRAIL railroad corridor on the southwest, and Kensington Avenue on the northwest (PCPC 2012:57). The Port Richmond Historic District encompasses an area smaller than the PCPC- designated neighborhood. The Port Richmond Historic District excludes a large modern shopping center in the east-central section of the neighborhood, the industrial land south of 1-95 along the Delaware River, and the residential area north of the visually divisive rail line along Trenton Avenue, leaving a core, mixed-use residential neighborhood in the west-central area of Port Richmond.
Within the Port Richmond Historic District is a densely developed residential neighborhood, consisting almost entirely of working-class rowhouses interspersed with churches, schools, factories, and small commercial buildings. The scale of the neighborhood is generally two and three stories tall; church steeples and a few additional school or hospital buildings can be seen rising above the smaller residential structures. Like much of Philadelphia, Port Richmond was laid out on a strict rectilinear street grid. The streets are oriented at an approximate 45-degree angle, parallel and perpendicular with the Delaware River. Most of the neighborhood consists of one-lane streets, just wide enough to allow parking on one or both sides of the street (Photograph 1). The larger two-lane thoroughfares include Somerset, Clearfield, Allegheny, Westmoreland, Ontario and Tioga running northwest-southeast, and Richmond, Cedar, and Aramingo running northeast-southwest (Photographs 2 through 4). Alleyways between the larger streets provide access to rear garages and have a utilitarian use (Photograph 5). At the southern corner of the Port Richmond Historic District, 1-95 veers westward into what was once the oldest part of the neighborhood (Photograph 6).
RowhouseArchitecture
The southern corner of the neighborhood, near Richmond and Ann Streets, can be traced back to an early nineteenth-century village. Limited development occurred during the mid-nineteenth century and it was generally in the area surrounding Somerset, Ann and Richmond Streets. The entire neighborhood's streets were planned out as early as 1850, but the majority of the neighborhood was built between 1880 and 1930. The southern, oldest, section of the neighborhood is characterized by blocks of mixed two- and three- story rowhouses. These structures were built individually or in small groups of three or four; speculative development was not yet used. Many of the mid-to-late nineteenth-century structures are scattered among the late nineteenth- and early twenty-first-century rowhouses (Photographs 7 through 9).
03/08 PA Historic Resource Survey Form 6 Key#______Physical Description and Integrity (continued): 2004-8006-101
During the last two decades of the nineteenth century, Port Richmond grew eastward to Westmoreland Street but stayed mostly south of Aramingo Avenue (which was then a canal). This southeastern part of Port Richmond is generally characterized by two-story brick rowhouses, with some three-story rowhouses along the major thoroughfares of Allegheny Avenue and Richmond Street. The two-story rowhouses were simple. Except for corner stores, which were a bit more elaborate than the rest of the block, most of the rowhouses had unadorned facades, simple stoops, and stamped metal cornices. They were two bays wide and would have likely had a wood paneled door and a transom light at the front entrance. Some rows contained slightly arched stone lintels or a rusticated stone foundation (Photographs 10 through 12).
By 1910, Port Richmond had begun expanding east of Westmoreland and Ontario Streets, and north of Aramingo Avenue up to the Trenton Railroad line, converging with the southward development of the adjacent Kensington neighborhood. This phase of development produced slightly more elaborate, albeit vernacular, rowhouses. Still two stories tall, the turn-of-the-twentieth-century rowhouses now featured second-story bay windows and/or one-story front porches. The porches range from simple shed roofs supported by wrought iron posts to gabled roofs supported by square or fluted stone pillars. The second- story bay windows are three-sided octagonal or rectangular bays (Photographs 13 through 17). Most rows are positioned so that the porch abuts the public sidewalk; along Aramingo Avenue, however, the dwellings were set back far enough from the sidewalk to provide for a small garden or fenced area (Photograph 18).
Corner stores were historically scattered throughout the entire neighborhood to provide residents with a variety of services; however, their use has declined with the advent of larger consolidated commercial stores. Several corner stores do still exist within the neighborhood. If the store was converted to residential use, their historic function can often still be identified because they generally embody a slightly larger size and more elaborate architectural style, evidence of a larger first-floor showcase window, and they abut the sidewalk to provide the maximum available interior space (Photographs 19 and 20).
In addition to corner stores, concentrations of commercial businesses were located along Richmond Street and along Allegheny Avenue. Like the corner stores, the business would occupy the ground floor while the upper floor functioned as a residence (Photograph 21).
Within the southwestern part of the Port Richmond Historic District, surrounding the intersection of Cambria and Chatham Streets is a two-block residential development called Octavia Hill (Photograph 22). Built in 1915 by the Philadelphia Model Homes Company, an offshoot of the Octavia Hill Association, the development was innovative at the time, with two-story townhomes surrounding a central courtyard (Octavia Hill Association 2012).
Religious Architecture
Three landmark Catholic churches and several smaller churches of varying denominations are scattered throughout the Port Richmond Historic District. The Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Our Lady of Help of Christians, and St. Adalbert are the most easily recognized churches in the neighborhood due to their elaborate designs, tall steeples, and central location on Allegheny Avenue. Mother Divine Grace is located deeper within the neighborhood and, although significant as an Italian Catholic parish, does not have as imposing of a design.
The Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary (Nativity B.V.M.) is located on the corner of Allegheny Avenue and Miller Street. It was constructed in 1886 in the Richardsoman Romanesque style. Standing two stories tall, the brownstone church is three bays wide and nine bays deep. The large copper cupola on the squared tower, the oversized copper cornice, and the large stone rose window are the major architectural
03/08 PA Historic Resource Survey Form 7 Key #______
Physical Description and Integrity (continued): ER# 2004-8006-101 details on this Irish Catholic church. In each of the bays of the main, southwestern elevation are pairs of original wood paneled doors surmounted by decorative, arched wood panels. The doors are accessed by a concrete staircase that extends across the width of the church. In the second story of the center bay is a large rose window with decorative stone tracery and a marble surround. The second-story outer bays contain arched windows with marble/sandstone tracery within elaborate brownstone surrounds and entablatures. Smaller brownstone entablatures on the corners of the elevation contain marble statues. The tower extends two stories upwards from the center bay of the main elevation. Arched window openings with louvered windows are located on both the belfry and the cupola. The copper cornice wraps around the entire church and is elaborated on the side elevations by enclosed gables which are topped with gold crosses (Photograph 23).
The Nativity B.V.M. parish also contains a rectory, a former convent, and the former school building. The rectory, constructed in 1886, is a four-story Richardsonian Romanesque building that is attached to the church by a one-story hyphen. The rectory has an asymmetrical façade with a four-story rounded bay, and a complex Mansard roof with hipped dormer windows. Many of the windows are grouped into twos or threes and have arched stone lintels. All of the windows have been replaced (Photograph 24). The former convent is located behind the church and rectory. Constructed in 1903, the brick building was designed in a modest Italian Renaissance style, with details including a rusticated first floor, a central tower, an elaborate arched portico, small arched windows on the third story, a porte-cochere, and stone belt courses between each floor (Photograph 25). The former school building is located diagonally across the street from the church, on Madison Street. Constructed in 1918-19, the three-story brick building is five bays wide and four bays deep. The central three bays on the main, southwestern, elevation are recessed. The entrance is located in the center bay and is elaborated by a simple stone entablature. All of the windows consist of large, multi-pane metal windows. A large banded cornice wraps around the building (Photograph 26). The Nativity B.V.M. parish complex is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (Key# 155758).
At the corner of Allegheny Avenue and Gaul Street is the Gothic Revival church of the German parish, Our Lady of Help of Christians, constructed in 1885. This church stands two stories tall, is three bays wide and five bays deep. It is constructed of cut stone with granite detailing and sits upon a stone foundation. The church's multiple cross gables, elaborate Gothic detailing, and tall pointed steeple atop the bell tower set it apart from the other landmark churches on Allegheny Avenue. The complex roof features steep cross gables and wall dormers with stone crockets, stone finials atop the gables and buttresses, and a carved stone cornice. At the center rear roofline is a pointed cupola with copper louvered openings. The squared bell tower sits in the center of the main, northeast elevation. Tall copper louvered openings mask the bells located within the tower. The steeple base is stone and contains a clock on all four sides; the peak is adorned with a cross finial. At the rear of the church is the apse, which is flanked by small, one-story rooms. On the northwestern elevation is a one-story stone transept. All of the windows are either pointed arch or rose windows containing tracery and stained class (Photograph 27).
Also within the Our Lady of Help of Christians campus is a three-story stone former school building, constructed in 1898, according to its date stone. It has a gable front roof and modest Gothic Revival detailing, including pointed arch windows and stone tracery. Appended to the rear of the school is a Second Empire, three-story addition. Constructed of brick, the building is five bays wide and features a slate Mansard roof on its main, northeast elevation (Photograph 28). The church rectory is located behind the church on Gaul Street. It is three stories tall, four bays wide and two rooms deep. Constructed of stone in the Second Empire style, the building features a Mansard roof, a brick corbelled chimney, and a three-story bay (Photograph 29).
03/08 PA Historic Resource Survey Form 8 Key #______
Physical Description and Integrity (continued): ER# 2004-8006-101
The third major church in the Port Richmond Historic District is St. Adalbert, on the corner of Allegheny Avenue and Thompson Street. The building was constructed in 1908 in the Gothic Revival style to service the Polish Catholic community. Its identifying features include the twin bell towers and steeples and the extensive use of copper on the steeples, finials, and roof. The church is three bays wide and eight bays deep. At the corners of the main, southwestern elevation are the twin bell towers. Both are four stories tall and are topped by copper steeples which have been elaborated by copper finials and crockets and cross pinnacles. The center bay features an elaborate entrance on the main floor composed of a center door and flanking pointed arch windows set within a carved stone archivolt. Above the entranceway is a large pointed arch stained glass window with stone tracery. The bay is capped by a gabled parapet which features a series of small copper pinnacles. Near the northeastern end of the church are gabled transepts on the side elevations and a two-story stone apse flanked by one-story rooms (Photograph 30).
The former St. Adalbert school sits along Madison Street behind the church building. The school is made up of three sections: the original 1908 building, a 1953 wing, and a detached ca. 1960 auditorium or gymnasium. The original building is located in the eastern corner of the block, diagonal from the church. It was constructed of the same rough-cut stone as the church building. The elevation facing Edgemont Street has a cross gable on a hipped roof, a pedimented dormer window, a one-story bay window, and an entrance. Along Madison Street are a narrow four-story segment and an eight-bay, three-story segment which contains an entrance at the western end. Nearly all the windows in the 1908 building have been replaced with vinyl one-over-one windows. Attached to the western end of the eight-bay segment is the 1953 addition. It is also three stories tall and was constructed of similar rough-cut stone. The windows consist of large openings that contain rows of modern one-over-one windows. The main entrance to the school is on the northwestern elevation of the addition (Photograph 31). The auditorium is a one-story, brick structure located between the school and the church. In 2008, the Philadelphia Diocese merged the neighborhood's three catholic schools—Nativity B.V.M., Our Lady of Help, and St. Adalbert—into the St. Adalbert school, renaming it Our Lady of Port Richmond Regional School. Based on similar form and materials, the St. Adalbert Rectory appears to have been constructed at the same time as the 1953 addition (Photograph 30).
Institutional Architecture
The Port Richmond Historic District contains four public schools, one public library, one hospital, one police station, and several cultural institutions.
The oldest public school building in the neighborhood is the James Martin Public School on Ontario and Richmond Streets. It was constructed in 1892-26 and has two 1922 wings. The original section of the school fronts Ontario Street and was designed by Joseph Anschutz, the School District's tenured architect at the time. The 1922 wings extend along Richmond and Salmon Streets and were designed by Irwin Catherine, the District's tenured architect who would later design both the John Paul Jones and Richmond Public Schools in the neighborhood. The original section was designed in the Romanesque Revival style, with a rusticated foundation, a brownstone exterior, and several arched windows. A metal plaque on the southeast elevation of the original section reads "JAMES MARTIN PUBLIC SCHOOL 1892." The 1922 wings were designed with respect to the original building—the height, massing, and materials are very similar. The Richmond Street wing is nine bays wide and the Salmon Street wing is two bays wide. Overall, the school is three stories tall and has a backwards C plan. The exterior elevations are constructed of cut stone while the interior courtyard elevations are constructed of brick (Photograph 32). The school is individually listed in the National Register of Historic Places (Key# 095020).
The Charles Carroll Public School was constructed in 1922 on Auburn Street between Edgemont and Salmon Streets. It originally consisted of a two-story, brick, Jacobean style school, but has since been
03/08 PA Historic Resource Survey Form 9 Key #______
Physical Description and Integrity (continued): ER# 2004-8006-101 expanded with one-, two-, and three-story, ca. 1970, brick additions on the northwest, southwest, and southeast elevations. The original core features Flemish bond brick, stone sills and keystones, a stone water table and patterned brick insets. The original entrance, no longer used, is in the center of the Auburn Street elevation. It consists of a stone surround with an elaborate stone entablature supported by large scroll brackets and surmounted by a decorative stone carving. "CHARLES CARROLL PUBLIC SCHOOL" is inscribed in a panel on the parapet (Photograph 33).
Built in 1923-24 on the corner of Memphis and Ann Streets is the John Paul Jones Junior High School. Irwin T. Catherine, the District's architect at the time, designed the school in the Georgian Revival style. It is three stories tall, 17 bays wide, and has a rectangular plan. The main, southeast, elevation features a projected three-bay pavilion which contains the front entrances to the school. The pavilion has a rusticated first floor with three arched openings each containing a pair of modern metal doors. The upper two stories are elaborated with an entablature supported by Doric columns and topped with a stone balustrade. "JOFfl'T PAUL JONES JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL" is inscribed on the frieze. The rest of the building is constructed of brick with stone detailing. A wide stone cornice and brick parapet wrap around the building. All of the windows were replaced in the mid-twentieth century (Photograph 34). The school is individually listed in the National Register of Historic Places (Key# 096046).
The Richmond Public School, located at Belgrade and Ann Streets, was constructed in 1928-29 in the Late Gothic Revival style by Irwin T. Catharine. It is three stories tall, nine bays wide and seven bays deep. Each bay contains three mid-twentieth-century replacement windows. The central bay on the main, southeast elevation features a projecting stone entryway with a carved Tudor arch surround. "RICHMOND PUBLIC SCHOOL" is inscribed within the entablature. The doors have been replaced with modern metal doors (Photograph 35). The school is individually listed in the National Register of Historic Places (Key# 096035).
Located on Allegheny Avenue between Tulip and Memphis Streets is the Northeastern Hospital, constructed in a Neoclassical style. The two-story western wing was constructed in 1917, followed by the three-story central section in 1925, and then the three-story eastern wing in the 1940s. Both wings are eleven bays wide and three bays deep; the center section is three bays wide and projects slightly from the two flanking wings. The central section is emphasized by a two-story, entablature with Corinthian columns and "NORTHEASTERN HOSPITAL" inscribed on the frieze. All of the windows have been replaced with metal one-over-one windows. There are mid-twentieth-century additions to the third story of the western wing and to the rear of the building. Large six and seven story buildings were constructed in the late twentieth century behind the three-story hospital building (Photograph 36).
The Free Library of Philadelphia-Richmond Branch was constructed in 1908-10 on Indiana Street between Almond and Mercer Streets. It was designed in the Gothic Revival style and contains many common stylistic details including castellated turrets, stone parapets, stone label molds, grouped windows, and stone tracery. The main entrance is an elaborate stone archivolt containing a stone entablature with "THE FREE LIBRARY OF PHILADELPHIA-RICHMOND BRANCH" inscribed on the frieze. The cross gable roof is sheathed in terra cotta shingles and the walls are constructed of Flemish bond brick (Photograph 37).
On the north corner of Belgrade and Clearfield Streets is the former 20' District Police Station. Built Ca. 1915, the Colonial Revival building is two stories tall and constructed with a Flemish bond brick pattern. The building has an H plan, with pedimented gables at each of the four corners. It's main elevation faces Clearfield Street and features a three-bay, pedimented front-gable section and flanking two-bay wings. The original entrance was within a one-story, one-bay, stone portico supported by Doric columns. All of the
03/08 PA Historic Resource Survey Form 10 Key
Physical Description and Integrity (continued): ER# 2004-8006-101 windows and doors have been partially filled in or otherwise altered (Photograph 38). The building now Functions as the headquarters to the Police Athletic League of Philadelphia.
Other notable buildings in the Port Richmond Historic District include the Lithuanian Music Hall on Allegheny Avenue and Tilton Street. Although the windows and doors have been altered, the tall, two-story, yellow-brick building stands out among the surrounding commercial architecture (Photograph 39). On Richmond Street near Wishart Street is the former Richmond Theater, constructed in 1915 (Photograph 40).
The Port Richmond Historic District retains integrity of location, setting, feeling, and association as it remains to be a working class, riverfront neighborhood containing a large concentration of middle and eastern European immigrants. The physical composition of the neighborhood—two-story rowhouses, corner stores, scattered institutional and industrial buildings—has remained the same since the height of the neighborhood, successfully conveying the neighborhood's historical association. The Port Richmond Historic District retains much of its building stock; limited demolition has occurred but the neighborhood overall remains cohesive. Despite cosmetic alterations on many of the rowhouses, including window and door replacements, vinyl siding applications, and porch alterations, Port Richmond as a historic district retains integrity of design. The street grid and the mixed-use and small-scale nature of the buildings are original to the planning and design of the neighborhood. The majority of the landmark buildings also retain integrity of materials and workmanship.
03/08 PA Historic Resource Survey Form 11 Key #______ER# 2004-8006-101 History and Significance (Item 39) Provide an overview of the history of the property and its various resources. Do not substitute deeds, chapters from local history books, or newspaper articles. See page 14 of the Instructions for detailed directions. Continue on additional sheets as needed. Suggested outline for organizing this section: History [Summarize the evolution of the property from origin to present] Significance [Explain why the property is important] Context and Comparisons [Describe briefly similar properties in the area, and explain how this property compares]
Before the arrival of European settlers, the area now known as Port Richmond was frequented by Delaware (Lenape) Indians, who are believed to have occupied several villages along Frankford Creek. They used the surrounding land for hunting and agricultural purposes. Settlement by Europeans—primarily British immigrants—began to occur soon after William Penn's arrival in 1682. One of the first settlers was William Ball, who purchased "Hope Farm" in 1728. A settlement, initially called "Ball Town" formed around the farm; soon after, Ball gave it the more elegant name, "Richmond Hall" (Philadelphia Evening Ledger 1931:n.p.; Philadelphia Evening Bulletin-Post 1940:n.p.).
A road extending from Second and Vine Streets in downtown Philadelphia approximately 6 miles northeastward to the mouth of Frankford Creek was depicted on a map of the Philadelphia vicinity published in 1750. Present-day Richmond Street follows the approximate alignment of this colonial thoroughfare, which was known during the eighteenth century as "Point Road." The area northeast of Philadelphia along the Delaware River was identified as "Point No Point or Richmond" (Scull and Heap 1750). Soon after Point Road was laid out, stagecoach service was established along its length (Freitag and Silcox 1994:2).
During the first half of the nineteenth century, Port Richmond was a "small village" on the eastern bank of the Delaware River in what was then known as Northern Liberties Township. As of 1830, there were about "20 dwellings, 2 taverns, and a small store" in "Richmond" (Gordon 1832:396). Within the next few decades, however, Port Richmond evolved into a center of industry. It began slowly, with only a few companies establishing factories in Port Richmond along the Delaware River. In 1834, the Philadelphia and Trenton Railroad, which extended from a depot on Front Street and Frankford Avenue in Kensington to Morrisville, New Jersey, opened to the public (Scharf and Westcott 1884:2183). It traveled northeastward through what was then Northern Liberties Township, less than a mile northwest of the small village of Richmond. In 1842, the Philadelphia and Reading Railroad Company (P&RRC) constructed a rail line from Port Carbon, Schuylkill County to Port Richmond in order to transport anthracite from the Schuylkill County coal region to the Delaware River (Teatsorth 1951). The depot at the riverside would grow to become a 275-acre railroad complex, built by the P&RRC along the west side of the Delaware River, the largest privately-owned tidewater terminal in the world (Teatsorth 1951; Oliver Evans Chapter of the Society for Industrial Archaeology 1990:Sec. 14-4).
A map created a year after the P&RRC line was constructed still depicts "Richmond" as a small community in Northern Liberties Township. At the time of the map, Richmond comprised approximately eight blocks, between Ann Street (then called "Richmond Lane") and Cambria Street, from Salmon Street to the Delaware River. A small number of individual properties are identified on Richmond Street (then called "Point No Point Road") northeast of Richmond. Although no industries are yet depicted in the area except for the P&RRC "Depot," the development was soon forthcoming (Ellet 1843). On the basis of its industrial, commercial, and residential growth, "Richmond" was incorporated as a "District"—a minor political division—on February 27, 1847 (Campbell 1942:95, 104). A mere three years later, 5,750 residents were residing in the District of Richmond (Campbell 1942:94). The Richmond District boundaries consisted of Norris Avenue on the southwest; Frankford Avenue on the northwest; Westmoreland Street, Salmon Street and Wheatsheaf Lane on the north and northeast; and the Delaware River on the southeast. The Richmond
03/08 PA Historic Resource Survey Form 12 Key #______History and Significance (continued): ER#2004-8006-101
District was surrounded by Kensington on the south and west, the Northern Liberties and Aramingo on the north, Bridesburg the northeast, and the Delaware River on the southeast (Sydney 1849; Smith 1853)
A map of the area published in 1849 (Sydney 1849) revealed that a network of roads had been laid out and more were planned in the Richmond District as far to the northeast as Westmoreland Street. Development was growing in the area surrounding the P&RRC terminal, but was still generally limited to the area west of Ann Street, from Salmon Street to the Delaware River. With the exception of the coal depot, no industrial concerns were depicted on the 1849 map (Sydney 1849). Richmond's era as an independent district was about to end. In 1854, nine Districts—including Richmond-6 Boroughs, and 13 Townships were consolidated into the City of Philadelphia (Campbell 1942:95).
On a map published in 1862, eight years after consolidation, Port Richmond is shown to have been fully planned with streets extending northwestward to meet with the Kensington neighborhood and northeastward to connect to the neighborhood of Bridesburg (Smedley 1862). Although most of the development still surrounded the P&RRC terminal, which then contained approximately 15 piers and was labeled "Coal Wharves," some construction was occurring northwestward along Somerset and William (now Cambria) Streets, northeastward along Richmond and Salmon Streets, and in an area near Tioga Street and Duke Street (now Thompson Street). In this northernmost pocket of development, the 1862 map depicts "Fox Square" and a "German Burial Ground" flanking the intersection of Tioga and West (now Belgrade) Streets, and a "Dye Works" at Tioga and Richmond Streets. Elsewhere in the neighborhood were a public school at Edgemont and Freemont (now Auburn) Streets, a brewery at Ann and Edgemont, and two churches near Richmond and Aim Streets. At Clearfield and West (now Belgrade) Streets stood "Commissioners Hall," the town hail from when Richmond was a separate district of Northern Liberties (Smedley 1862). Some development was speculative, with entire blocks constructed at one time; however, most notations on the map still consisted of individual buildings.
In its early days, Port Richmond was inhabited mostly by Irish immigrants. It was around 1870 that first wave of Polish immigrants settled in the Port Richmond area—displacing the Irish population and establishing the strong and tight-knit ethnic community that has survived into the present day. Port Richmond, with newly established industries, offered an opportunity for jobs and housing to new immigrants. Poles at the time were portrayed as being "incapable of white-collar work, better suited to the long hours of unskilled labor" and much of the new work in Port Richmond was located in undesirable dye, chemical, and glue factories (Welcoming Center for New Pennsylvanians 2004).
By 1875, Port Richmond was developing into a major industrial center, with the proliferation of industries having been accompanied by worker housing and public facilities, as reflected on a map of Philadelphia published in that year (Hopkins 1875). The P&RRC Coal Wharves, by 1875, contained over 20 piers. Several companies had constructed factories in the blocks surrounding the intersections of Richmond and Westmoreland Streets, Richmond and Tioga Streets, and Venango Street and the Delaware River. The majority of industry consisted of dye works, chemical works, or glue factories; only a handful of other industries, such as a chain and iron works and a foot oil factory, are depicted on the 1875 map. Residential development was also growing. Speculative rowhouse construction was becoming more common, replacing or filling in the older, individually constructed structures. Development was concentrated around Richmond Street, the neighborhood's commercial corridor. Construction was still sparse northeast of Ann Street and north of Thompson and Almond Streets. Several pockets of development existed around Richmond and Venango Streets, Richmond and Tioga Streets, and Richmond and Westmoreland Streets, though large swaths of vacant land separated them all. Farther to the northeast, closer to Bridesburg and Frankford Creek, the area was less intensely developed. The northwestern border of the neighborhood, around Trenton Avenue, was also experiencing significant growth, primarily due to its proximity to the railroad and to
03/08 PA Historic Resource Survey Form 13 Key #______History and Significance (continued): ER# 2004-8006-101
Frankford Avenue in Kensington, which itself was experiencing an economic boom. Numerous cultural and public amenities began to pop up as the neighborhood grew. Approximately five churches and two schools are denoted on the 1875 map. The German Burial Ground denoted in 1862 was expanded and renamed "The Redemptionist Fathers of Philad' Burying Ground" by 1875 (Hopkins 1875).
Maps of the area published in 1886 and 1888 depict continued development in the neighborhood (Hopkins 1886; Baist 1888). More rowhouses were constructed to accommodate the growing number of factories in the neighborhood. There were still several dye and glue factories, but industry diversified with the introduction of several hosiery works, a carpet factory, a paper mill, a fertilizing works, a desiccating works, and a gas works. A short-line railroad was constructed to connect several of the factories near Delaware River to the Philadelphia and Trenton Railroad via tracks on Tioga Street. By this time, residential development had slowly grown north and westward from Richmond and Somerset Streets. Small pockets of development further north and northwest remained generally the same. Still, large swatches of land remained empty (Hopkins 1886).
The next major influx of Polish immigrants began in the mid-1880s and lasted into the early 1900s. Two significant churches were constructed by this time: the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary at the corner of Allegheny Avenue and Belgrade Street in 1882, and Our Lady of Help of Christians two blocks north at Allegheny Avenue and Gaul Street in 1885. Both Catholic, the Nativity B.V.M. church first served a German parish. Quickly outnumbered by Irish parishioners, the Germans established Our Lady of Help to serve the German population (Archdiocese of Philadelphia 2012; Anonymous 2009).
The rate of growth in Port Richmond began to increase during the years leading up to the twentieth century. An atlas published in 1895 shows noticeable residential development between Cedar and Richmond Streets, from Somerset to Westmoreland Streets (Bromley and Bromley 1895). Between Aramingo Avenue and the Philadelphia and Trenton Railroad and in the areas northeast of Westmoreland and Venango Streets, the land still remained largely vacant. The most noticeable change in the landscape was the burying of the Aramingo Canal and the construction of several railroads, including the Philadelphia Belt-Line Railroad and a branch of the Pennsylvania Railroad, along the western shoreline of the Delaware River. Another short- line rail was constructed along Westmoreland Street to connect the "Riverdale Glue Works" on Richmond Street to the Philadelphia and Trenton Railroad. Newer industries typically consisted of dye and chemical works (Bromley and Bromley 1895).
By 1910, vacant lots between Somerset, Westmoreland, Cedar and Melvale Streets were almost entirely developed (Bromley and Bromley 1910). Residential construction also proliferated by this time north of Aramingo Avenue, between Ann Street and Allegheny Avenue; however, a ten-block gap still existed between Cambria and Ann, from the Philadelphia and Trenton Railroad to Gaul. Two major Catholic parishes were established by this time. St. George was founded in 1902 for the Lithuanian community and St. Adalbert was founded in 1904 for the Polish community. New cultural amenities were also established. The Richmond Branch of the Free Public Library was constructed in 1908-10 (Anonymous 2012). A new school, the James Martin Public School, was constructed during the end of the nineteenth century at the corner of Ontario and Richmond Streets to accommodate the gradual northeastern development.
Although still dominated by dye, glue, and chemical works, industry in Port Richmond continued to diversify. By 1910, there existed an iron foundry, several paper manufacturers, a coconut oil works, two pottery companies, a leather works, and a sheet iron works. Along the Delaware River, the P&RRC expanded their Coal Wharves and coal storage yard by constructing numerous additional rail lines which ran parallel to the river and ended at Allegheny Avenue, effectively dividing the riverfront from the
03/08 PA Historic Resource Survey Form 14 Key #______History and Significance (continued): ER#2004-8006-101 neighborhood. Very little changed northeast of Westmoreland except for the addition of several factories; residential development in that part of the neighborhood was slow (Bromley and Bromley 1910).
It is clear that by 1925, Port Richmond was in the height of its growth. A newspaper article published in 1926 describes several of the major improvements of the area:
. . the elevation of the Reading's approach to [the Port Richmond] terminal, the change of trade on the line of the "Pennsy" [Pennsylvania Railroad] that cuts through part of the district, and th[e] construction of the Frankford "L" which has given it better transit connection with the rest of the city. More recently, too, there have come the widening and northward extension of the Delaware avenue, linking Richmond directly with the central and lower waterfront by a new marginal way which appears to be growing every day in the amount of traffic it accommodates. Although the cost of [improving Aramingo Avenue] may be beyond the capacity of the city to undertake at this time, the growth of travel along Richmond Street and other thoroughfares serving as outlets or approaches to Delaware avenue demonstrates that some betterment of highway facilities in that section will have to come. Richmond Street, at least in some of its congested stretches, is too much of a bottle-neck for a territory of growing importance (Philadelphia Evening Bulletin-Post 1 926:n.p.).
Many new industries were established throughout the neighborhood. Four major centers of industry became obvious: the area between Cambria Street and Allegheny Avenue, from the Philadelphia and Trenton Railroad to Janney Street; between Ontario and Tioga Streets, from the Philadelphia and Trenton Railroad to Weikel Street; along Tioga Street from Tulip to Almond Streets; and between Edgemont and Richmond Streets, from Schiller to Venango Streets. These four areas alone contained approximately 37 businesses; almost as many as the number of industries individually identified on the 1910 atlas in all of Port Richmond. Many of the companies new to the neighborhood were related to the textile industry, including yarn, knitting, fiber, spinning and thread companies. Other companies included a candy and chocolate company, a vegetable oil manufacturer, an ice producer, a charcoal company, a distilling company, and various metal and machinery shops (Bromley and Bromley 1925).
All of the vacant blocks around Aramingo Avenue and those between Ann and Cambria Streets were filled with continuous stretches of rowhouses by 1925. In 1915, a two-block, 48-unit, residential development was constructed by the Philadelphia Model Homes Company, an offshoot of the non-profit Octavia Hill Association. The social advocacy organization sought to improve the lives of the city's poor and disadvantaged by providing "clean, sanitary, and safe living" (Octavia Hill Association 2012). To support the growing industrial development along Ontario and Tioga Streets, between Edgemont and the Delaware River, residential development increased in the area between Westmoreland and Schiller Streets, from Richmond to Almond Streets. Several new public and cultural amenities throughout the neighborhood were also now established. The Northeastern Hospital was constructed at the corner of Allegheny Avenue and Tulip Street. A fourth public school, the John Paul Jones Public School, was constructed on Ann Street and Memphis Streets. The Cohocksink Playground, with a recreation center and a public pool, was established between Ann, Cambria, Cedar, and Gaul Streets. Three theaters are denoted on the atlas, including the Richmond Theater, the Arcade Palace Theater, and the New Clearfield Theater. The number of churches nearly doubled; many denominations were present by this time, including Evangelical Lutheran, Presbyterian, Baptist, Methodist Episcopal, Roman Catholic, and Presbyterian Episcopal. Another Catholic parish, Mother of Divine Grace, was established in 1926 for the Italian community. Comprising almost 30 square blocks between Richmond Street and Delaware Avenue, from the Pennsylvania and New Jersey Railroad almost to Castor, the Northeast Sewage Treatment Works was constructed in 1923. A year later, the Philadelphia Electric Company built its Richmond Generating Station along the Delaware River at the
03/08 PA Historic Resource Survey Form 15 Key #______History and Significance (continued): ER#2004-8006-101 northern end of the neighborhood (Bromley and Bromley 1925). As one journalist described, "Despite the barricades of the railroads, which crossed the region with total disregard of its future needs, [Port Richmond] is now one of the most thickly populated areas of the city. In all its history, it has not known as much constructive activity, public and private, as in the past decade or two" (Philadelphia Evening Bulletin- Post 1926:n.p.).
Newspapers from that time reference the large middle-European population—made up of mostly Poles, Hungarians, and Austrians—which had "long ago" replaced German and Irish households in the neighborhood (Philadelphia Evening Bulletin-Post 1926:n.p.). By 1931, Port Richmond apparently contained a population comprising 60 percent Poles, 20 percent Lithuanian and "a little Italian settlement" (Philadelphia Evening Ledger 1931 :n.p.).
The northeastern part of the neighborhood, past Venango Street between Richmond Street and the Philadelphia and Trenton Railroad, was slower to develop. In a 1934 appraisal map, few demarcations were made in this section of the neighborhood, indicating the lack of housing or industrial properties (Brewer 1934). Piecemeal development is shown to have occurred by 1942, primarily in the northeastern section of the neighborhood where vacant land was still available (Works Progress Administration [WPA] 1942). Housing was constructed on the streets between Gaul and Edgemont Streets from Venango almost to Pickwick Streets. Some industrial development filled in the gaps around Aramingo Avenue and Westmoreland Street. Still, most of the land along Castor Avenue and northeastward to Bridesburg remained vacant. On the 1942 map, nine blocks between Butler Street and the northeastern border of the neighborhood are labeled "FARM," though no owner is shown (WPA 1942). It is clear that by 1942, growth in Port Richmond had slowed significantly.
Twenty years later, little had changed. The western and southern parts of Port Richmond were still densely developed; the industrial centers remained inhabited, if not productive; the P&RRC still owned a significant amount of land along the Delaware River; and, although some new businesses moved in, several large lots of land remained undeveloped in the northeastern section of the neighborhood (WPA 1962).
In the 1960s, Port Richmond underwent a major physical change with the construction of the Delaware Expressway (also known as 1-95). Running along—and at points over—Richmond Street, the Delaware Expressway demolished approximately 30 square blocks of residential and industrial buildings. The need for improved transportation routes in the area was expressed as early as the 1920s during the height of neighborhood industry; the Philadelphia City Planning Commission even proposed an elevated express industrial highway in 1937. Since construction would interfere too heavily with port operations, the plan was abandoned until the late 1940s (Eastern Roads 2012). The Philadelphia City Planning Commission explained the purpose of the Delaware Expressway as follows:
The great industrial area that runs from the Trenton area south to the Wilmingon area is clustered largely along the banks of the Delaware River. The critical need of the area is a north- south express highway, running close to the Delaware River, which will link together this great industrial complex.
Merely listing the various sites that are tied together by the Delaware Expressway makes self-evident the tremendous advantages of the proposed highway. It connects with the U.S. Steel plant at Morrisville; with the Levittown, Fairless Hills and other rapidly expanding residential areas of lower Bucks County; and with the Pennsylvania Turnpike, which in turn will link through a new bridge with the New Jersey Turnpike, thus providing rapid access from Philadelphia into New Jersey and New York.
03/08 PA Historic Resource Survey Form 16 Key #______History and Significance (continued): ER# 2004-8006-101
The Delaware Expressway will provide quick access into the downtown Philadelphia area from the populous Northeast; connect all the industrial plants along the Delaware River; connect through interchanges with the Tacony-Palmyra, Philadelphia-Camden (Benjamin Franklin) and Philadelphia-Gloucester (Walt Whitman) bridges; connect with Port of Philadelphia with the whole area; provide rapid access to Philadelphia International Airport from the entire region; and provide a rapid highway from New York into the Wilmington and Baltimore-Washington areas (Eastern Roads 2012).
The route for the Delaware Expressway was approved in 1947 and construction was expected to be completed by 1960. Construction on the highway did not begin, however, until 1959, in Delaware County and lower Bucks County (Eastern Roads 2012). The expressway in Port Richmond was situated between the dense residential neighborhood northwest of Richmond Street and the large industrial land along the Delaware River. It was not until 1961 that the properties scheduled to be taken by the expressway in Port Richmond were even condemned (Anonymous 196 1:n.p.). Construction in Port Richmond began in ca. 1963 and was completed within the following six years; by 1969, a non-stop route was opened to traffic from Trenton, New Jersey southward to Girard Avenue. Additional segments opened in the 1970s and early 1980s and the entire 51-mile Delaware Expressway through Pennsylvania was finally complete in December 1985 (Eastern Roads 2012).
The strong ethnic community was sustained in Port Richmond during the mid-twentieth century. In the 1960s and 1970s, while many Philadelphia neighborhoods were experiencing major demographic shifts, the middle European population of Port Richmond remained. A newspaper article about new residential development, published in 1973, describes the neighborhood as possessing a "togetherness" not found elsewhere, a "hard core that don't want to leave these communities" (Smyth 1973:n.p.). Another article several years later explains that the "Philadelphia neighborhood bordering the Delaware River houses a closely-knit group consisting primarily of white, Polish, Catholics. . They work, largely, in blue-collar jobs" (McCauley 1978:n.p.); a description used to describe the neighborhood for nearly a century.
NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES EVALUATION
The Port Richmond Historic District was evaluated according to criteria set forth in the National Register Bulletin: "How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation" (National Park Service 1997). The period of significance for the Port Richmond Historic District is from ca. 1842, when the Philadelphia & Reading Railroad Company (P&RR Company) constructed the railroad from Port Carbon to Port Richmond and thereby spurred industrial growth and early immigrant settlement, through ca. 1940, the approximate time when the neighborhood stopped expanding.
Port Richmond was first established by Europeans in the early eighteenth century. For nearly 150 years, the area was a rural community on the outskirts of a quickly growing Philadelphia. Due to railroad construction, notably the P&RR in 1842, Port Richmond began growing into one of the city's major working class, industrial neighborhoods. Between 1850 and 1880, Philadelphia experienced major growth, particularly in the manufacturing sector where the production of bricks, chemicals, mixed textiles, woolens, shipbuilding and dyeing and finishing dominated. Because of the neighborhood's proximity to the rail line and large shipping port, an array of these manufacturers were established in this area, spurring the construction of the network of housing, shops, and public buildings required for workers. German, Irish and Polish immigrants began to flock to Philadelphia in the 1870s and found employment in the many factories
03/08 PA Historic Resource Survey Form 17 Key #______National Register Evaluation (continued): ER# 2004-8006-101 in Port Richmond. While the German and Irish immigrants have left their marks on the landscape, most notably in their Catholic churches on Allegheny Avenue, it is the Polish community that has had a lasting effect to the residential areas of Port Richmond. The inability of most of the Polish immigrants to speak English, combined with prevailing attitudes toward Poles as "incapable" of other work, prevented them from finding employment in other sectors. Through the 1880s and early 1900s, Port Richmond continued to expand its industrial base, which caused a dramatic increase in the construction of row homes and civic buildings. A second influx of Polish immigrants into Port Richmond at this time solidified its status as a Polish neighborhood—a distinction which it still carries. The Port Richmond Historic District is composed of the residential, religious, and institutional buildings constructed to support the residents working the neighborhood's many industries.
The history of the community is reflected in part at the core of the District along Allegheny Avenue. Three Catholic Churches, one Polish, one German, and one Irish, are the most visible elements identifying the importance of the immigrant community in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The churches are interspersed with commercial and residential properties that maintain the feeling and association of a tight-knit community. The buildings within the District have integrity of location, design, and setting. Although there has been infilling at some locations, and individual buildings have been altered during the second half of the twentieth century, the Port Richmond Historic District still possesses integrity of materials and workmanship. The District exhibits a wide range of inexpensive row houses, built to house working class families, in diverse styles and building materials. The diversity of materials and styles reflect the often haphazard development of the residential community in late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries around the core of the District on Allegheny Avenue. The Port Richmond Historic District also possesses integrity of feeling and association. The physical features of the District, taken together, convey the District's historic character as a working class residential neighborhood that was dominated by specific immigrant groups. The row houses, resulting from nineteenth- and twentieth-century speculative development, also exhibit a variety of styles reflective of the changing preferences in urban, working-class architecture, conveying a sense of the historical forces that formed the neighborhood. The placement of these buildings interspersed with religious and commercial buildings along the core of the District provide a sense of the vibrant local immigrant experience of the twentieth century.
The Port Richmond Historic District is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion A for its role in the settlement and growth of Philadelphia and as an area that is significant to the cultural traditions of the Polish immigrant community. During the industrial growth years of the late nineteenth century, Port Richmond became home to countless immigrants, among them many Poles. The modest brick row houses, built in large sections by speculators are largely a response to the sudden influx of these immigrants. As they became settled, Poles began to build their own businesses and religious structures. St. Adalbert' s, constructed in 1908 by subscription from the largely Catholic Polish immigrants, remains in use by this group and is a very visible anchor for the Polish community. Businesses such as banks and markets continue to sell Polish food and cater to residents for whom Polish is a native language. From its period of significance up until the present day, Port Richmond has been continuously populated by both Polish Americans and by new Polish immigrants who seek familiarity in a new country, making it a major center of Polish heritage in the Eastern United States.
The Port Richmond Historic District is not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion B as it is not associated with lives of persons significant in the nation's past.
03/08 PA Historic Resource Survey Form 18 Key #______ER# 2004-8006-101 National Register Boundary Justification and Description
The boundary for the property was prepared in accordance with guidelines set forth in National Register Bulletin: "Defining Boundaries for National Register Properties" (Seifert et al. 1997). The residential, commercial, religious, and cultural buildings, built between 1842 and 1940 within the proposed National Register Boundary, are considered to be contributing resources to the Port Richmond Historic District. Industrial properties and buildings constructed outside the period of significance are considered to be non-contributing resources. Additionally, land within the public right of way—including roads and sidewalks—are excluded from the Port Richmond Historic District. The attached Photograph Location Map identifies the contributing and non-contributing resources.
The boundaries of the Port Richmond Historic District are defined by the railroads around which the community developed between 1842 and 1940. On the west, the boundary follows the eastern edge of the former Philadelphia & Reading Railroad Company (P&RR Company) along Seltzer and Somerset Streets. On the north, the boundary of the resource follows the southern edge of the former Pennsylvania Railroad right-of-way along Trenton Avenue. The eastern edge of the district lies along the western side of Tioga Street following the path of the former Pennsylvania Railroad line that ran down the center of Tioga Street into the 1960s. The southern boundary of the resource follows the northern edge of Interstate 95.
REFERENCES CITED:
Anonymous 1961 "Delaware Expressway May Be Opened in Sections." Article published in unidentified newspaper, edition of April 4, 1961. In the "Delaware Expressway—Advisory Committee" folder of the Citizen's Council on City Plan Collection, at the Urban Archives, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
2009 "Description of Nativity B.V.M. Parish, Addendum to ER 09-2134-01-A." In the files of the Nativity Blessed Virgin Mary, Key# 155758, at the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission.
2012 "Branch History." Brief History of the Richmond Branch of the Free Library published online at
Archdiocese of Philadelphia 2012 "Complete Alphabetical Parish Listing." Index published by the Archdiocese of Philadelphia. Online at
Baist, G. Wm. 1888 Baist 's Atlas of the City of Philadelphia, Penna. Complete in One Volume. Philadelphia: G. Wm. Baist.
Brewer, J. M. 1934 1 M Brewer's Map of Philadelphia, 1934. Philadelphia: J. M. Brewer.
03/08 PA Historic Resource Survey Form 19 Key #______References Cites (continued): ER# 2004-8006-101
Bromley, George W. and Walter S. Bromley 1895 Atlas of the City of Philadelphia, Complete in One Volume. Philadelphia: G.W. Bromley and Co.
1910 Atlas of the City of Philadelphia, Complete in One Volume. Philadelphia: G.W. Bromley and Co.
1925 Atlas of the City of Philadelphia (North Phila.), Lehigh Ave. to Wingohocking St., Wards 25, 33, 37, 38, 43 and 45. Philadelphia: G.W. Bromley and Co.
Campbell, William Bucke, A.M. 1942 Old Towns and Districts of Philadelphia. An Address Delivered before the City History Society of Philadelphia February 23, 1941. Philadelphia: City History Society of Philadelphia.
Eastern Roads 2012 "Delaware Expressway: Historic Overview." Webpage
Ellet, Charles 1843 A Map of the County of Philadelphia from Actual Survey. Philadelphia: Charles Ellet.
Freitag, Alicia M. and Silcox, Harry C. 1994 Historical Northeast Philadelphia: Stories and Memories. Second Edition. Holland, PA: Brighton Press, Inc.
Google Earth 2011 Aerial photograph taken on October 7, 2011. Accessed via Google Earth
Gordon, Thomas F. 1832 A Gazetteer of the State of Pennsylvania. Philadelphia: T. Belknap.
Hopkins, G.M. 1875 City Atlas of Philadelphia by Wards. Complete in seven volumes. Philadelphia: G.M. Hopkins. 251h 1886 Atlas of the City of Philadelphia, Ward. Philadelphia: G.M. Hopkins.
McCauley, Mary Beth 1978 "Almost Every House in Port Richmond is Owner Occupied." Article published in the House- Home Supplement of the Philadelphia Evening Bulletin-Post, edition of December 1, 1978. In the "Bulletin Feature Folder" of the "Port Richmond (Section) Description, History, etc." Manuscript Clippings collection, at the Urban Archives, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
National Park Service 1997 "How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation." National Register Bulletin 15. Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, U.S. Government Printing Office.
03/08 PA Historic Resource Survey Form 20 Key #______References Cites (continued): ER# 2004-8006-101
Octavia Hill Association 2012 "Octavia Hill History." Webpage
Oliver Evans Chapter of the Society for Industrial Archaeology 1990 Workshop of the World: A Selective Guide to the Industrial Archaeology of Philadelphia. Wallingford, Pennsylvania: Oliver Evans Press.
Philadelphia City Planning Commission (PCPC) 2012 The Political and Community Service Boundaries of Philadelphia. Guide prepared by Philadelphia City Planning Commission. Published online at Philadelphia Evening Ledger 1931 "Port Richmond Carries On, Its Glory Days Long Grown Dim." Article published in the Philadelphia Evening Ledger, edition of February 8, 1931. In the "Bulletin Feature Folder" of the "Port Richmond (Section) Description, History, etc." Manuscript Clippings collection, at the Urban Archives, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Philadelphia Evening Bulletin-Post 1926 "Men and Things: Milestones in the Development of Port Richmond." Article published in the Philadelphia Evening Bulletin-Post, edition of March 9, 1926. In the "Bulletin Feature Folder" of the "Port Richmond (Section) Description, History, etc." Manuscript Clippings collection, at the Urban Archives, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 1940 "Old Cramp's Shipyard Has Washington Link." Article published in the Philadelphia Evening Bulletin-Post, edition of April 18, 1940. In the "Bulletin Feature Folder" of the "Port Richmond (Section) Description, History, etc." Manuscript Clippings collection, at the Urban Archives, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Scharf, John Thomas and Thompson Westcott 1884 History of Philadelphia, 1609-1884. Volume 3. Philadelphia: L.H. Everets & Company. Scull, N. and Heap, G. 1750 A Map of Philadelphia and parts adjacent. Philadelphia: N. Scull and G. Heap. Republished by Benjamin R. Boggs, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 1893. Seifert, Donna, Barbara J. Little, Beth L. Savage, and John H. Sprinkle, Jr. 1997 National Register Bulletin, "Defining Boundaries for National Register Properties." U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, National Register of Historic Places, 1995, Revised 1997. Smedley, Samuel L. 1862 Atlas of the City of Philadelphia, 1862. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott & Co. Smith, R.P. 1853 Map of the Vicinity of Philadelphia from Actual Surveys. Philadelphia: R.P. Smith. 03/08 PA Historic Resource Survey Form 21 Key #______References Cites (continued): ER# 2004-8006-101 Smyth, Jack 1973 "New Development Lures Homeowners Back to Port Richmond." Article published in the Philadelphia Evening Bulletin-Post, edition of December 17, 1973. In the "Miscellaneous Folder" of the "Port Richmond (Section) Description, History, etc." Manuscript Clippings collection, at the Urban Archives, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Sydney, J.C. 1849 Map of the City of Philadelphia Together With All The Surrounding Districts. Philadelphia: Smith & Wistar. Teatsorth, Ralph 1951 "Port Richmond—A Proud Neighborhood Where Big Industry Hums." Article published in The Evening Bulletin, edition of March 8, 1970. In the "Bulletin Feature Folder" of the "Port Richmond (Section) Description, History, etc." Manuscript Clippings collection, at the Urban Archives, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. United States Geological Survey (USGS) 1995a Camden, NJ-PA Quadrangle. 7.5 minute series. Topography compiled 1965. Planimetry derived from imagery taken 1990 and other sources. Photoinspected using imagery dated 1995. Denver, Colorado: United States Geological Survey. 1995b Philadelphia PA-NJ Quadrangle. 7.5 minute series. Topography compiled 1965. Planimetry derived from imagery taken 1990 and other sources. Photoinspected using imagery dated 1995. Denver, Colorado: United States Geological Survey. 1997a Frankford, PA-NJ Quadrangle. 7.5 minute series. Topography compiles 1947. Planimetry derived from imagery taken 1983 and other sources. Photoinspected using imagery dated 1997. Denver, Colorado: United States Geological Survey. 1997b Germantown, PA Quadrangle. 7.5 minute series. Topography compiles 1950. Planimetry derived from imagery taken 1981. Photoinspected using imagery dated 1997. Denver, Colorado: United States Geological Survey. Welcoming Center for New Pennsylvanians 2004 Immigrant Philadelphia: From Cobblestone Streets to Korean Soap-Operas. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Welcoming Center for New Pennsylvanians Works Progress Administration for Philadelphia (WPA) 1942 Philadelphia Land Use Map, 1942. Philadelphia: Plans & Registry Division, Bureau of Engineering Surveys & Zoning, Department of Public Works, Federal Works Progress Administration for Pennsylvania. 1962 Philadelphia Land Use Map, 1962. Philadelphia: Plans & Registry Division, Bureau of Engineering Surveys & Zoning, Department of Public Works, Federal Works Progress Administration for Pennsylvania. 03/08 PA Historic Resource Survey Form 22 L • JLLJ1y 08, J P CPM )ayground I /(roufld - APO ; 1(çnd.#>'8 27I! th/ lu e N 2< m 4f HN IN g; \\ \\'' /\ -\V)<,. • ) d I IN Port Richmond Ji al - 4 - Coal r' Ca m:'- • '-k 1 • I \I - - J • • •. ,' co 1 tPenn ¼) / /. I I PROPOSED NATIONAL REGISTER BOUNDARY / • ______QUADRANGLE LOCATION SCALE SOURCE iPENNSYLVANIA USGS 1995a CAMDEN, NJ-PA 1 Oft 2000ft USGS 1995b PHILADELPHIA, PA-NJ 7' Om 609.5m USGS 1997a FRANKFORD, PA-NJ USGS 1997b GERMANTOWN, PA N Prepared by CHRS, Inc. RESOURCE LOCATION MAP - PORT RICHMOND HISTORIC DISTRICT MATCH TO MAP B - -.-J. U LU1LI 11 CLEAll FIELD 111_ 1 11 STREET Jill1 12 MMISSIONEEE 14 4in Z=1 ILL 15 Lu ui LU Ir co U) Lu ELKHA T, StREET bLJL INDIANA STREET ANNsrR LJ : IL/i Ii/iJ Et liff Ix H LU f-•i ! hi LL/JJJjj;; I Tij Lu ,TTir17i - r JT[77 I 111H !1f LP! 11[ (J /1 II p 35 H H / BIRCH STL u1/ u1/ 1 t/17fj/J L _ONMOUTH STREET L - - CAMBR STREET • -- •- - 18 L / I 111/ IJH - QZ AUBURET Ill N STREET Ef Lu uj . ii I • 14 U - r to t~l'. 1ii'i71 1i SETSTREE LThTh\ W1J1 f1TH )I1 rj il!1 I H EHI L SCALE I PROPOSED NATIONAL REGISTER BOUNDARY I I NON-CONTRIBUTING RESOURCES I I I CONTRIBUTING RESOURCES Tl [7 M Oft 477ft I PHOTO LOCATION Om 97.4m Prepared by CHRS, Inc. PORT RICHMOND HISTORIC DISTRICT - PHOTOGRAPH LOCATION MAP A TIOGA STREET ftj - Ll LU J, JL 16 SCHILLER STREET H _ = Lu InirT P1_ U ------I It w LF 0 A-. EE IiI L LF I _ WESTMORELAND STREET Lu I- Lu 0 m CID MADISON STREET - 25 24 LU 28 - 27 J 36 ALLEGHENYAVENUE # _ 30 39 - I I PROPOSED NATIONAL REGISTER BOUNDARY I I NON-CONTRIBUTING RESOURCES 21 I I CONTRIBUTING RESOURCES 4-0 PHOTO LOCATION TINE AVENUE I SCALE I CLEARFIELD STREET Oft 477ft r I MATCH TO MAP A Om 145.6m 14k; PORT RICHMOND HISTORIC DISTRICT Prepared by CHRS, Inc. - PHOTOGRAPH LOCATION MAP B V riwilv pu At Z'm jwrh I 'it,:' Vt4 Z" - - , • i' I ii'ik "Norr . fill j. II 4 II $j) _ I r I"''' • to __---iZ \ ii f : p / Atvl AA . .- I . .. if1,•i I/i½/??' I .- - ra, .- ftj,/1,/f,ff ' " 71, , I 4 P ()] LJJJ 1 Jr j4aj ,m( J;iw/ 13 1 ifl '14- JJj / 7IthJJ I 4f(L -I J ?/J 1'?VV / / SCALE I SOURCE I SCULL AND HEAP 1750 NOT TO SCALE Prepared by CHRS, Inc. PORT RICHMOND CIRCA 1750 ± 'ks, :• 7 ~ I I /,Ls ç \\ OL • 4 I 4 4% .' . \ '44 ' - ~ / ! ;4•I S 'All -S \ --, 4,01 'v• •!'• -4 \' I I SCALE I SOURCE I ELLET 1843 NOT TO SCALE C) I Prepared by CHRS, Inc. PORT RICHMOND CIRCA 1843 '4 11 7L, 44 e t Tf y, MW i * wl It's I IW : vow" I * I IL VV \ IF foo SCALE SOURCE SMITH 1853 N NOT TO SCALE Prepared by CHRS, Inc. PORT RICHMOND CIRCA 1853 - - — ------— is LPVAOMF I IT - \ I LI - ANNE V iL-- ST L W C C C - S /- — I ------' --- -—------• - ____i___ .------. ------ :. C. L I — — L------— ——------ ______------L---- . ------—— '- ---- si tMPI1I° ST \//-I------L ------I - I L I / 11 T I I / lj / I sor CLROt •- - .r I I S- ' LE' _LLL - U Il LbLI Ll , L- L —' C t I C r — — - -i ILL (D&L MU S I — L 1 2 LL__U LL !:.i L /lli -;- 7777-~ TT:° I SCALE SOURCE t'CMflt/T -- - - - Oft 574.2ft HOPKINS - 1 1875 I I PROPOSED NATIONAL REGISTER BOUNDARY I Om 17rn - - dip, - - - C) Prepared by CHRS, Inc. PORT RICHMOND HISTORIC DISTRICT CIRCA 1875 TTN- 4RENTQ SEPVIVA It - *ITTt - Wit L / \ r - I i - 46 -1 ULIP '1 - ' 1JLJp V AGATE W. MMPHI$ (i:- • it - 'G -- MEMPHIS ' d it RAN - 1 - A ARMINGO LOA R ST . CEDAR 7 57. 1r" x I — 27 - Z I — " - •' — -- I GAut , - ---- E - - \ I\\ \ *14 - L IL - - -T ------BELGRADE __ — I I f-' 1 OF 'I I It'i '- ALMOND op. cAsor tit'. MERCER iT - 1\ LL JL T - - II1 - EDGEMONT - - LE MO N _, •_. i L •- .- •• '@jL 1 ii 1LL41 L It. IJ It :1 1 ' J4 t jL1JD J jJ - •' a'LMO N i.'L ''' 'F :JIT1" .iT, i,. ,:.'- - , [ - - 57. RPIN 57. It - : IF F? - - - -' I - - SCALE SOURCE ST :- •- BATH Oft 534ft BROMLEY AND BROMLEY r I I PROPOSED NATIONAL REGISTER BOUNDARY Om 162.8m ' 4, I - Prepared by CHRS, Inc. PORT RICHMOND HISTORIC DISTRICT CIRCA 1895 : — -;$• 4- - -- — ---p j---'--- t T.. 011 V i __ '4- I iLIkL LJllHtfIILilI k Lr I I 4- •- I I' L- I - III k - TULIP '- - I ST. TULI P I A ST 1( L J \ M E M PH I S k.- - — - Ij: Fi - - :. 21 4 - AF AMINGO - - z. AVE. -• — 1 " I I r MIN,j L I H N - r- CEDAR - ST. S. r - '; -,iI lap ~Pwlm -/ -(,AUL '- zi 7I Ii - - - 0j. , H -1HL1L.j C .1I6 L'L I 4r 24* 4j4-T t4tIftlIr f [ ------'DF 41 P j1itiw__ Liir i mirmuiL '- H 4- Wig/i411 r ' ' .II4 4-Lth II 2 I ".4 I r - I 41 1 47/ L~i 4il4- 2!nnII1i2$4 AL M .! L __. - MI 11 IA\ ... L - I 1I1fli IIUIliu1hL UkbL L j I k6 It i/ . LL_ -- JflJ IIII ImtH1q - ;:.v - - - w jgffii1 'jTii1FCi!' - I J - - j. r . - I ç ' THOMPSON I Im wool 22 H I II1 $fU SI' : ik /,. 1 //j/,'7 7I N r I -I LAO LLJ1 i Li. . LUGEMONT L. t - -- L * - I DC .N ON T - * - ..;. .... - -: . - I-: -•: - 'z -- I - IV,.4.I flil,Iii 2 Iu114i1 4 4HI. II I1N1. 1 -J 2 2 I! kiaLil I --cr ------JAL MON -- 14, AT P o/2' I - IlI iiLflA Jk1_ A _-' •- _____ —.;- -- 2 SCALE SoURCE - - ______- IV - CQ IJ ER FH TII T L_, Oft bzfft BROMLEY AND BROMLEY 1010 / I I PROPOSI-fl NA i IUNAL REGISTER BOUNDARY A.. - Om 191m Prepared by CHRS, Inc. PORT RICHMOND HISTORIC DISTRICT CIRCA 1910 \• .1 :'.i 1-4 - - - — - i- z. , ------ I I r ------.- -. - - A A Ii — 5 - c Nmod A4A 444 . 4 I px - : - 4i &4L r'-- I -- -""---r------j S 4 4 - -- tv h1 4 . Us s 4 k - A•'- - 4 :- F L. - p 40 Wr 4 -1 t [ j • * t Ulu; 4 9 4 - lk 4A - TT Pt* I I I Alk Ii - WA; ••-.•w---..-- -i . -•-• - .• •. - I I 41 t j SCALE SOURCE ~4 I Oft 683 6ft BROMLEY AND BROMLEY 1925 I I I PROPOSED NATIONAL REGISTER BOUNDARY Om 208.3m Prepared by CHRS, Inc. PORT RICHMOND HISTORIC DISTRICT CIRCA 1925 . H H i. 11 L ••jj • • .. • t - rTr -- - r • - - r PINNA P EPVIVA . si • / ST - JLTT] Liii[ st' T t - LII It T 1 1 2 1 pT71T I E L s - •$•.-' - .21L.L .._. 1IJI iiii2 2i'I EIII1I. Y I 3 - . - ST if, ILI it wi L1 'IEizTE[Jir . - -• f I y•-i - :. :--' •il XL1L i1H 141 MPIIS I -h 1 -- : .IEMPNIS :ljLHu1H -• r I Y ' TE1c Ii ; - J glT Lit! 12, 11~ i 2 1 1 iJTIillTllfJJiT iL — l\\1r112 I i - r: ST CD 1 ;gff 4LL - Lj T1 IC hi ,F V_1 L I UY Li r r T3 t - - M[ 9. -- t.L$khE 1LI JLL721LtJ !:;Lj;I g '4 TT Fl J GH1 W1 OR! ST FATHERS - pII ., C F A El I J1i! JJL U ! J=iikJi!u j' jjjjfjffj - fows ST -, T'TTH ¶TiTJJ1J l • - •• •• - T! !1 -' ri -- fl [ !L!IIIlH II IL hH L J - ITi I Ll PL ST flI - ; IJ ETI1111f 11UIrL I JiJfl[' r-- I H LLITT - 1 ii ___ I1TLTO C, EONT 'i LjT fT t 4 r;S:L1ii I~LM Pill. 44 , w., - J L I '11' fl ii 4IILj - - -- P 5ALM11 - ______r1-r _j 3 J'ili 1 H I!j - Lj _t niftui±' TiIll r I1' r JiI!1 I I - I LI ••• -- - - - 1 • I -• I•• . • . Ci. A SCALE I I • SOURCE I Oft 613ft WPA 1942 om 187m I I PROPOSED NATIONAL REGISTER BOUNDARY • • O Prepared by CHRS, Inc. PORT RICHMOND HISTORIC DISTRICT CIRCA 1942 I Alt "f IL o 10 4 : 4 ,A ft q Al *40 9 it ge T.4117 ol, Alp I W AL J N04 ke E VIL A. IN SCALE SOURCE ) Oft 880ft GOOGLE EARTH 2011 ______Om 268.4m r I PROPOSED NATIONAL REGISTER BOUNDARY Prepared by CHRS, Inc. PORT RICHMOND HISTORIC DISTRICT CIRCA 2011 Port Richmond Historic District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania - d • r ' Photograph 1: View looking southwest down Livingston Street at Clearfield Street. Note the narrow width of the street. ?' Photograph 2: View looking west-southwest along Cedar Street at Allegheny Avenue. Note the wider two-way street and limited street trees. Port Richmond Historic District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Photograph 3: View looking southwest along Aramingo Avenue at Ann Street. Note the wide avenue. a Photograph 4: View looking northwest along Allegheny Avenue, the widest thoroughfare in the Port Richmond Historic District. Port Richmond Historic District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Photograph 5: View looking southwest down Tilton Street at Ontario Street, showing common rear alleyways. -S led - !'', T-4M."MM Photograph 6: View looking west-southwest at the intersection of Richmond and Ann Streets. 1-95 cuts through the southeastern part of the Port Richmond neighborhood. Port Richmond Historic District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Photograph 7: View looking southeast along Ann Street at Edgemont Street. Varying heights located in the oldest section of the neighborhood. Photograph 8: View looking southeast along Somerset Street at Mercer Street. Note the varying heights. Port Richmond Historic District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania / II PS Photograph 9: View looking east-northeast along Richmond Street at Wishart Street. N. - Photograph 10: View looking south-southwest along Mercer Street at Allegheny Avenue. Note the intact metal cornices. Port Richmond Historic District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 4çui _ ! - Photograph 11: View looking west-southwest down Weikel Street at Allegheny Avenue. Note the various changes to exterior materials. Photograph 12: View looking east-northeast along Richmond Street at Clearfield Street, Simple three- story residential row. Port Richmond Historic District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania a, 1172 I... -' Photograph 13: View looking northeast along Tilton Street near Ontario Street ZI In Photograph 14: View looking east along Chatham Street at Clementine Street. Port Richmond Historic District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania - --"r" .- -- 4 I Photograph15: View looking north on Thompson Street near Clearfield Street Photograph 16: View looking southwest along Schiller Street at Almond Street. Port Richmond Historic District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Photograph 17: View looking southwest at detailed rowhome on Allegheny Avenue near Chatham Street. Note the original cornice, bay window materials, porch roof and columns, and arched window. Port Richmond Historic District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania I - r I (Ill Photograph 18: View looking southwest along Aramingo Avenue at Cambria Street. Note the small front garden space. 6A Photograph 19: View looking east at a mixed residential and commercial property at the corner of Almond and Westmoreland Streets. Port Richmond Historic District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Photograph 20: View looking north at a former corner store at Ann and Cedar Streets. >7z t loll - : 77 Photograph 21: View looking north at commercial property on Richmond Street near Wishart Street. Port Richmond Historic District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Photograph 22: View looking south at a portion of the Octavia Hill Association development at Monmouth and Gaul Streets. Port Richmond Historic District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Photograph 23: View looking east-northeast at the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary church on the corner of Allegheny Avenue and Miller Street. Port Richmond Historic District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Photograph 24: View looking north-northeast at the Nativity B.V.M. rectory. Port Richmond Historic District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Photograph 25: View looking north at the former Nativity B.V.M. convent. Port Richmond Historic District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Photograph 26: View looking east at the former Nativity B.V.M. parish school. Port Richmond Historic District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Photograph 27: View looking west at the Our Lady of Help of Christians church on the corner of Allegheny Avenue and Gaul Street. F14 _ IMM i r1t Photograph 28: View looking west-southwest at the former Our Lady of Help of Christians school on the corner of Allegheny Avenue and Chatham Street. The brick addition can be seen on the left. -- - Photograph 29: View looking north-northwest at the Our Lady of Help of Christians rectory. Port Richmond Historic District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania L N AC S H 4 I Photograph 30: View looking north-northeast at the St. Adalbert church and rectory on Allegheny Avenue between Thompson and Edgemont Streets. Photograph 31: View looking west at the St. Adalbert school, now the Our Lady of Port Richmond school. The 1953 addition can be seen on the right side of the photograph. Port Richmond Historic District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Photograph 32: View looking west at the James Martin Public School at Richmond and Ontario Streets. The 1896 section is on the right and the 1922 wing is on the left. N Photograph 33: View looking west at the Charles Carroll Public School near the corner of Auburn and Salmon Streets. The later additions can be seen to the left and right of the historic core. Port Richmond Historic District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Photograph 34: View looking west at the John Paul Jones Junior High School near the corner of Ann and Memphis Streets. ..—..' -- .rrrr 1fl - II. 4 •• 11111ifil Ill 11111 1 1 1A 1.111,11111111111111 11111111111161A III Is IrlI Ill I I]I I I Ill Is Photograph 35: View looking north at the Richmond Public School on the corner of Ann and Belgrade Streets. Port Richmond Historic District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Photograph 36: View looking east at the Northeastern Hospital on Allegheny Avenue between Tulip and Memphis Streets. Photograph 37: View looking west-southwest at the Free Library of Philadelphia-Richmond Branch on Indiana Street. Port Richmond Historic District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Photograph 38: View looking southwest at Commissioners Hall on the corner of Belgrade and Clearfield Streets. 2 Photograph 39: View looking east-northeast at the Lithuanian Music Hall on Allegheny Avenue and Tilton Street. Port Richmond Historic District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Ai Ip low L. Photograph 40: View looking south at the former Richmond Theater on Richmond Street. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission Bureau for Historic Preservation Commonwealth Keystone Building, 2nd Floor 400 North Street Harrisburg, PA 17120-0093 www.ph,nc.siaie.,:a. us 2 December 2013 R. Wayne Willey, P.E. Bureau of Project Delivery PA Department of Transportation P 0 Box 2966 Harrisburg, PA 17105 Re: ER 2004-8006-101-E (MPMS 47813) 1 95, Section AFC 1-95 Reconstruction: Ann Street to Wheatsheaf Lane City of Philadelphia Request for More Information: Port Richmond historic District (Key No. 200627) Dear Mr. Willey: Thank you for submitting information concerning the above referenced project. The Bureau for Historic Preservation (the State Historic Preservation Office) reviews projects in accordance with state and federal laws. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, and the implementing regulations (36 CFR Part 800) of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, is the primary federal legislation. The Environmental Rights amendment, Article I, Section 27 of the Pennsylvania Constitution and the Pennsylvania History Code, 37 Pa. Cons. Stat. Section 500 et se (1988) is the primary state legislation. These laws include consideration of the project's potential effects on both historic and archaeological resources. Additional information is required for us to complete our review of the Port Richmond Historic District. Please clarify if any of the rail lines were passenger-only and the type of impact they had on the neighborhood especially in regard to the proposed National Register boundary of the district. More information is also needed to confirm the period of significance. While the neighborhood may have stopped physically expanding c.1940, was it still a vibrant ethnic working class neighborhood with productive industries, into the 1950s, or 1960s? Was the c.1963 construction of 1-95 through Port Richmond a turning point in the neighborhood's identity and viability, and would that be a better end date? Or, did earlier post-war changes negatively impact the local Port Richmond industrial economy and shift the ethnic groups living here, so the end date would be c.1950? Based on the information provided, especially regarding the Polish immigrant influence, it seems appropriate to extend the period at least to the 50 year guideline, as the neighborhood apparently remained recognizable and retained a strong cultural identity at least to c.1975, if not later. The narrow residential streets and alleyways found throughout the neighborhood, contrasting with the fewer wider streets, apparently contribute to the potential district's sense of place. A concern was raised regarding a statement made in the first paragraph on page 19. This type of National Register district would not exclude "land within the public right of way—including roads and sidewalks" from the boundary. That land cannot be drawn out of the boundary or ignored. Streets, alleys, and sidewalks should be generally described as uncounted landscape features that are important to recognize as part of the setting and appearance of a district. They would not be individually identified/inventoried as counted resources nor assessed any contributing status, unless the material or design was somehow integral to the case for significance or an essential physical feature (block-long slate sidewalks in a Northampton community that produced slate for building materials, for example, might warrant identification as counted resources). Perhaps the intent of the statement was not to exclude them from the boundary, but to convey that while the appearance and scale of the streets and alleys found in Port Richmond add to the overall setting and character of the neighborhood, they are not inventoried resources with specific contributing/non-contributing assessments? Page 2 3 December 2013 Mr. Willey 2004-8006-101-E To resolve the eligibility of the Port Richmond Historic District, we also request a site visit. The site visit will enable staff to better understand boundary selection, especially the Tioga Street and 1-95 sides. More information is needed to understand the evolution of the industrial properties within the district. Those that retain integrity should be considered as contributing resources, as they were an integral part of the neighborhood. Parks and playgrounds should be identified, as should any evidence of remnants of the canal. Rail resources that were integral to the development of the neighborhood should be considered for inclusion within the boundary. Integrity concerns regarding modern materials on residential stock can also be addressed by a site visit. Please contact Barbara Frederick at (717) 772-0921 for further information regarding this review or to schedule a date for a site visit. Sincerely, V 1 Douglas C. McLearen, Chief Division of Archaeology & Protection DCMIbcf Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission Bureau for Historic Preservation Commonwealth Keystone Building, 2"' Floor 400 North Street Harrisburg, PA 17120-0093 www.phmc. state. pa. it 2 December 2014 Brian Thompson, Director Bureau of Project Delivery Attn: Monica Harrower PA Department of Transportation P 0 Box 2966 Harrisburg, PA 17105 Re: ER 2004-8006-101-M and N (MPMS No. 47813) 1-95 Reconstruction: Ann Street to Wheatsheaf Lane City of Philadelphia Determination of Eligibility. Richmond Street Historic District (Key No. 103008); Richmond Industrial Historic District (Key No. 103014) Dear Mr. Thompson: Thank you for submitting information concerning the above referenced project. The Bureau for Historic Preservation (the State Historic Preservation Office) reviews projects in accordance with state and federal laws. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, and the implementing regulations (36 CFR Part 800) of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, is the primary federal legislation. The Environmental Rights amendment, Article 1, Section 27 of the Pennsylvania Constitution and the Pennsylvania History Code, 37 Pa. Cons. Stat. Section 500 et (1988) is the primary state legislation. These laws include consideration of the project's potential effects on both historic and archaeological resources. We concur that the properties identified as the Richmond Street Historic District (Key No. 103008) do not constitute a National Register-eligible historic district. However, the properties (3101- 3179 Richmond Street) are considered eligible as contributing resources to the National Register- eligible Port Richmond Historic District (Key No. 200627). We concur that due to recent demolitions, the district identified as the Richmond Industrial Historic District (Key No. 103014) has lost integrity and is no longer eligible for the National Register. Some of the properties within the Richmond Industrial Historic District are currently considered contributing to the National Register-eligible Port Richmond Historic District (Key No. 200627). In addition, some of the properties within the Richmond Industrial Historic District may be individually eligible for the National Register but have not been individually evaluated. Based on the current map of the Port Richmond Historic District, properties south of Richmond Street and within the blocks bounded by Westmoreland, Allen, and Tioga streets are within the National Register-eligible district. Properties north of Richmond Street, east of Tioga, have not been Pennsylvania Historical & Museum Commission torn Cortwct. Governor Andrew F. Masictr, Chairrn,r, James t51. Vaughan. Luectitive Director 2004-8006-101-M and N B. Thompson Page 2 of 2 individually evaluated and were noted for potential inclusion within the Port Richmond Historic District dependent upon further research. Our determination of eligibility is based upon the information provided and available in our files for review. If National Register designation for the Port Richmond Historic District is sought in the future, additional documentation of the property's significance and integrity may be required to both verify this determination of eligibility and satisfy the requirements of the National Park Service (36 CFR Part 60). Thus, the outcome of the National Register listing process cannot be assured by this determination of eligibility. If you need further information concerning historic structures, please contact Emma Diehl at (717) 787- 9121. Sincerely, Andrea L. MacDonald, Chief Division of Preservation Services ALM/ekd Pennsylvania Historical & Museum Commission is- torn Corbctt. Girnernor Aiidrcxv V. Ma,ich, Chairman James Xi. Vasihan. Executive Director Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission Bureau for Historic Preservation Commonwealth Keystone Building, 2nd Floor 400 North Street Harrisburg, PA 17120-0093 www.i,hmc.stczte.pa. us 13 June 2014 Thomas Macioce, P.E., Acting Bureau of Project Delivery PA Department of Transportation P 0 Box 2966 Harrisburg, PA 17105 Re: ER 2004-8006-101-K (MPMS 47813) 195, Section AFC- 1-95 Reconstruction: Aim Street to Wheatsheaf Lane City of Philadelphia Determination of Eligibility: 3901-4005 Richmond Street Boundary Clarification: Port Richmond Historic District (Key No. 200627) Dear Mr. Macioce: Thank you for submitting information concerning the above referenced project. The Bureau for Historic Preservation (the State Historic Preservation Office) reviews projects in accordance with state and federal laws. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, and the implementing regulations (36 CFR Part 800) of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, is the primary federal legislation. The Environmental Rights amendment, Article 1, Section 27 of the Pennsylvania Constitution and the Pennsylvania History Code, 37 Pa. Cons. Stat. Section 500 et seq. (1988) is the primary state legislation. These laws include consideration of the project's potential effects on both historic and archaeological resources. We are in receipt of the documentation of the residential subdivision at 3901-4005 Richmond Street and are in agreement with the agency finding of not eligible. The subdivision was evaluated using the criteria set forth in the National Register Historic Residential Suburbs bulletin. Thank you for the January 8, 2014 site visit and for providing updated information on the Port Richmond Historic District to us. We concur with the proposed period of significance and boundary for the Port Richmond Historic District. The Port Richmond Historic District (Key No. 200627) is eligible under Criterion A (an industry-based neighborhood with strong eastern European and other ethnic communities) with a period of significance from c.1842-c.1964. In addition to residential properties, the district retains important commercial, religious, industrial and other types of resources that help convey the history and importance of the Port Richmond area. The currently-defined boundary is justified based on current information; future research may establish boundary expansions due to historic associations, or reductions based on loss of integrity. Please note that a previously-determined eligible industrial district has been identified (Key No. 103014) that includes resources both inside and outside the Port Richmond Historic District boundary, and there may be individually-eligible industrial or other resources on the east side of Tioga Street, just beyond the current boundary for the Port Richmond Historic District (Key No. 200627). Page 2 13 June 2014 Mr. Macioce 2004-8006-101-K Based on the expanded period, the contributing status of certain individual resources may need to be reassessed. It is likely that some of the industrial buildings near the intersection of Schiller and Melvale Streets, for example, may now be considered "contributing." Contributing status of resources should be assessed as needed for the project and should be based on the limits of the Area of Potential Effect. Please contact Barbara Frederick at (717) 772-0921 for further information regarding this review. Sincerely, Andrea L MacDonald, Chief Division of Preservation Services ALM/bcf Historic Preservation Services SINCE 1981 Arcl,aeoloc'i, • Historic Preservat May 21, 2014 Monica Harrower PennDOT District 6-0 7000 Geerdes Blvd. King of Prussia, PA 19406 RE: Revised Boundary Description/Statement of Period of Significance in response to PHMC comments received Port Richmond Historic District S.R. 0095, Section AFC Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania Dear Monica, Below is a revised statement of the Period of Significance and a revised boundary description for the Port Richmond Historic District. These revisions are based on comments received from the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission (PHMC) in a comment letter dated December 2, 2013 and during a field view of the Historic District on January 8, 2014. Period of Significance The period of significance for the Port Richmond Historic District is from ca. 1842, when the Philadelphia & Reading Railroad Company (P&RR Company) constructed the railroad from Port Carbon to Port Richmond and thereby spurred industrial growth and early immigrant settlement, to 1964. Although the neighborhood stopped expanding in 1940, the neighborhood was still a vibrant ethnic working-class neighborhood with productive industries into the mid-1960s, and the Polish immigrant influence is still present. National Register Boundary Justification and Description The boundary for the property was prepared in accordance with guidelines set forth in National Register Bulletin: "Defining Boundaries for National Register Properties" (Seifert et al. 1997). The residential, commercial, religious, and cultural buildings, built between 1842 and 1964 within the proposed National Register Boundary, are considered to be contributing resources to the Port Richmond Historic District. Industrial properties and buildings constructed outside the period of significance are considered to be non-contributing resources. The attached maps identify the contributing and non-contributing resources as well as the boundary of the resource. The boundaries of the Port Richmond Historic District are defined by the railroads around which the community developed. On the west, the boundary follows the eastern edge of the former th\KENDOCUMENTs\I-95-AC\I-95-AFC-PORT-RICHMOND-BOtJNDAR?-MEMO.DOC 451 N. Cannon Ave., Suite 100 B Tel.: 215-699-8006 Lansdale, PA 19446-2256 Fax: 215-699-8901 www.chrsinc.com Email: [email protected] Philadelphia & Reading Railroad Company (P&RR Company) along Seltzer and Somerset Streets. On the north, the boundary of the resource follows the southern edge of the former Pennsylvania Railroad right-of-way along Trenton Avenue. The eastern edge of the community lies along the western side of Tioga Street following the path of the former Pennsylvania Railroad line that ran down the center of Tioga Street into the 1960s. However, because of the large number of modern buildings in the northeastern corner of the community, the boundary has been altered as follows: from a point at the southwestern corner of Allegheny Avenue and the southern edge of the former Pennsylvania Railroad right-of-way thence south to the southern corner of Allegheny Avenue and Tulip Street; thence east along the southern edge of Tulip Street to the southwestern corner of Westmoreland Street; thence south along the western side of Westmoreland Street to a point midway between Miller Street and Belgrade Street; thence along the rear of the properties along the north side of Belgrade Street to the western side of Ontario Street; thence south to the southern side of Belgrade Street; thence east along the southern side of Belgrade Street to Schiller Street; thence south along the western side of Schiller Street to the south side of Livingston Street; thence east along the southern edge of Livingston Street to Tioga Street. From the southwestern corner of Livingston Street and Tioga Street, the boundary is the western side of Tioga Street to a point at the northwestern corner of Tioga Street and Allen Street. The southern boundary of the resource was formed by the construction of Interstate 95. Starting at a point at the northwestern corner of Tioga Street and Allen Street, the boundary follows the northern edge of Allen Street to a point on the northeastern corner of Allen and Wensley Streets; thence north along the eastern edge of Wensley Street to the northern edge of Melvale Street; thence west to the northeastern corner of Melvale Street and Westmoreland Street; thence north along the eastern side of Westmoreland Street to Emery Street; thence west along the north side of Emery Street to the western side of Allegheny Avenue; thence south along the western side of Allegheny Avenue to a point at the edge of the property adjacent to the 1-95 ramp; thence west along the rear of the property lines of the , buildings facing on Richmond Street to East Wishart Street; thence west along the northern edge of Melvale Street to a point on the southwestern corner of East Clearfield Street; thence west along the rear property lines of the buildings to a point 150 feet west of the western edge of Indiana Street; thence north to a point on the northern side of Richmond Street; thence west along the northern edge of Richmond Street to a point approximately 220 feet west of the western edge of Ann Street; thence north approximately 120 feet to the rear of the properties facing on Salmon Street; thence in a westerly direction following the rear of the properties facing Salmon Street to the place of beginning. If you have any questions concerning this submission, please contact me. Sincerely, KennethJ.asalik, e Ph.D. President -CHRS, Inc. U:KEN\DOCUMENTS\I-95-AFC\I-95-AFC-PORT-1ICHMOND-BOUNDARY-MEMO.DOC Tel.: 215-699-8006 451 N. Cannon Ave., Suite 100 B Fax: 215-699-8901 Lansdale, PA 19446-2256 www.chrsinc.com Email: [email protected] Historic Preservation S J11( Services Archaeoloc'ii Historic Preservnt March 6, 2014 Monica Harrower PennDOT District 6-0 7000 Geerdes Blvd. King of Prussia, PA 19406 RE: Response to PHMC comments received Port Richmond Historic District S.R. 0095, Section AFC Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania Dear Monica: Below is our response to the December 2, 2013 letter you provided concerning PHMC comments to the Pennsylvania Historic Resources Survey Form prepared for the Port Richmond Historic District as part of the S.R. 0095, Section AFC project in Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania. The text in bold is the comment from the PHMC, our response follows in standard text. Comment 1. Please clarify if any of the rail lines were passenger-only and the type of impact they had on the neighborhood especially in regard to the proposed National Register boundary of the district. Response: The rail lines were freight line. No passenger-only lines were present. Comment 2. More information is also needed to confirm the period of significance. While the neighborhood may have stopped physically expanding c.1940, was it still a vibrant ethnic working class neighborhood with productive industries, into the 1950s, or 1960s? Was the c.1963 construction of 1-95 through Port Richmond a turning point in the neighborhood's identity and viability, and would that be a better end date? Or, did earlier post-war changes negatively impact the local Port Richmond industrial economy and shift the ethnic groups living here, so the end date would be c.1950? Based on the information provided, especially regarding the Polish immigrant influence, it seems appropriate to extend the period at least to the 50 year guideline, as the neighborhood apparently remained recognizable and retained a strong cultural identity at least to c.1975, if not later. Response: The neighborhood was still a vibrant ethnic working class neighborhood with productive industries into the mid-1960s. The Polish immigrant influence extends to the present. We will revise the period of significance to end at 1964 (50 year guideline) as suggested by the PHMC. U:\ KEN\ DOCUMENTS\I-95-AFC\1-95-AFC-PHMC-COMMENT-RESPONSE.DOC Tel.: 215-699-8006 451 N. Cannon Ave., Suite 100 B Fax: 215-699-8901 Lansdale, PA 19446-2256 www.chrsinc.com Email: [email protected] Comment 3. The narrow residential streets and alleyways found throughout the neighborhood, contrasting with the fewer wider streets, apparently contribute to the potential district's sense of place. A concern was raised regarding a statement made in the first paragraph on page 19. This type of National Register district would not exclude "land within the public right of way— including roads and sidewalks" from the boundary. That land cannot be drawn out of the boundary or ignored. Streets, alleys, and sidewalks should be generally described as uncounted landscape features that are important to recognize as part of the setting and appearance of a district. They would not be individually identified/inventoried as counted resources nor assessed any contributing status, unless the material or design was somehow integral to the case for significance or an essential physical feature (block-long slate sidewalks in a Northampton community that produced slate for building materials, for example, might warrant identification as counted resources). Perhaps the intent of the statement was not to exclude them from the boundary, but to convey that while the appearance and scale of the streets and alleys found in Port Richmond add to the overall setting and character of the neighborhood, they are not inventoried resources with specific contributing/non-contributing assessments? Response: The intent of the statement was not to exclude them from the boundary, but to convey that while the appearance and scale of the streets and alleys found in Port Richmond add to the overall setting and character of the neighborhood, they are not inventoried resources with specific contributing/non-contributing assessments. We will revise the boundary description to clarify this. Comment 4: To resolve the eligibility of the Port Richmond Historic District, we also request a site visit. Response: A site visit was undertaken on January 8, 2014. At that Field View, the PHMC requested that the National Register boundary be revised based on observations and discussions during the Field View. The revised boundary description and mapping will be submitted separately. We will also submit a revised period of significance statement that will be included with the revised National Register boundary. Sincerely. KennethJ~'asalik, e Ph.D. President -CHRS, Inc. U: \KEN\DocUMNTs\I-95-AFc\I-95-A1'C-PHMC-COMMENT-REsPoNsE.DoC 451 N. Cannon Ave., Suite 100 B Tel.: 215-699-8006 Lansdale, PA 19446-2256 Fax: 215-699-8901 www.chrsinc.com Email: [email protected] Port Richmond Historic District Site Visit January 8, 2014 April Frantz & Barbara Frederick, BHP Monica Harrower, PennDOT, and Ken Baslik, CHRS Following the site visit, BHP staff had these recommendations to PennDOT re: the district and the HRSF submitted for eligibility review: Extend the period of significance to at least c.1960. Based on the information provided, additional information reviewed online by our staff, and the number of resources viewed in the recent tour reflecting the ongoing influence of the Polish community, the extension of the period can be supported and better reflects the actual period of significance for this neighborhood. Reconsider contributing status for district's resources based on expanded period. Seltzer Street, between Somerset and the RR line, doesn't show on the boundary map V' provided, but would be included within the boundary. The boundary should show "Seltzer" street on the map, and the houses accessed by Seltzer. The area of modern commercial and retail development in the northwestern portion of the proposed district is too intensive and does not retain integrity to contribute to the district. We recommend removing a large portion of this area from the district, based roughly on the attached map. The final boundary should be adjusted following a re- evaluation of post-1940 resources based on the extension of the period of significance. The area to be excluded would roughly extend from Tioga Street west, north of Belgrade Street, to Schiller Street, north to Gaul, west to Westmoreland, north to Tulip, and west to Allegheny. Consider the dates of resources along those potential "edge" streets in light of the expanded period, then finalize appropriate boundary. We support using 1-95 as a boundary, as it is such a visual and physical disruption between the River and the remaining neighborhood. However, the resources between V Richmond Street and 1-95, between Tioga and Westmoreland Streets, should be included within the boundary. In this area, the district should extend beyond Richmond Street to 1-95, including the primarily industrial resources along Melvale and Allen. Note that an industrial historic district was previously determined eligible for this specific area, including businesses clustered around Richmond and Tioga (1994), some that are north of Tioga. You may wish to consult the file for Key#103014, Richmond Industrial District, for additional (though brief) history of the industries in this area. The boundary should extend across Tioga to include the resources between Tioga and Venango, north to the cemetery. Contact local community groups to help justify an appropriate boundary. Current local V explanations of "Port Richmond" vary. One description uses Tacony Creek, Aramingo Avenue, Cumberland Street, and 1-95 and Delaware River to define the "Port Richmond" neighborhood. Other descriptions exist. Factoring in the information gathered from the community, and integrity assessments, focus the boundary justification on what area best conveys the history and significance of the Port Richmond neighborhood related to the proposed area(s) of significance. Contact local groups and churches to establish if the St. Peters cemetery (Tioga Street and Belgrade) was used by residents of Port Richmond for burials. If the cemetery was used locally within the period, and relates to the area(s) of significance, we would recommend adjusting the Tioga Street boundary to include the cemetery. It may also be appropriate to include the industrial resources east of the cemetery (some of which were previously included within the Industrial District). This may result in the inclusion of some recent residential construction, but would not negate the overall district's integrity. Note that in this area is St. Georges Catholic Church, at the corner of Salmon and Venango, which was the community's Lithuanian Church. While the Polish influence in Port Richmond may be most-obvious, apparently the Lithuanian presence was also strong. Other cultures and ethnic groups were also present in Port Richmond. Contributing status does not need to be limited to resources that have only a specific Polish connection. For Northeastern Hospital, we recommend including only the hospital building that fronts onto Allegheny Street as contributing, not the associated parking lots or independent buildings that post-date the period. (Confirm dates of buildings and assess integrity first.) The parking lot across Tulip Street should be completely excluded from the boundary. In the future, for all districts, it would be very helpful for a version of the site map to denote vacant and/or parking lots and distinguish those from non-contributing buildings or structures. Parks and playgrounds or similar open space should be coded separately from vacant or parking lots. A A ' Ii A I' 'I. A " NO A A ' A *LTT1 A A' 'S A' ••" A S A A. A (11 •' A sA" 1'C4h1 Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission Bureau for Historic Preservation Commonwealth Keystone Building, 2' Floor 400 North Street Harrisburg, PA 17120-0093 www.phmc. state. pa. its 2 December 2013 R. Wayne Willey, P.E. Bureau of Project Delivery PA Department of Transportation P0 Box 2966 Harrisburg, PA 17105 Re: ER 2004-8006-10 1 -E (MPMS 47813) 1 95, Section AFC 1-95 Reconstruction: Ann Street to Wheatsheaf Lane City of Philadelphia Request for More Information: Port Richmond Historic District (Key No. 200627) Dear Mr. Willey: Thank you for submitting information concerning the above referenced project. The Bureau for Historic Preservation (the State Historic Preservation Office) reviews projects in accordance with state and federal laws. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, and the implementing regulations (36 CFR Part 800) of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, is the primary federal legislation. The Environmental Rights amendment, Article 1, Section 27 of the Pennsylvania Constitution and the Pennsylvania History Code, 37 Pa. Cons. Stat. Section 500 et sea. (1988) is the primary state legislation. These laws include consideration of the project's potential effects on both historic and archaeological resources. Additional information is required for us to complete our review of the Port Richmond Historic District. Please clarify if any of the rail lines were passenger-only and the type of impact they had on the neighborhood especially in regard to the proposed National Register boundary of the district. More information is also needed to confirm the period of significance. While the neighborhood may have stopped physically expanding c. 1940, was it still a vibrant ethnic working class neighborhood with productive industries, into the 1950s, or 1960s? Was the c.1963 construction of 1-95 through Port Richmond a turning point in the neighborhood's identity and viability, and would that be a better end date? Or, did earlier post-war changes negatively impact the local Port Richmond industrial economy and shift the ethnic groups living here, so the end date would be c.1950? Based on the information provided, especially regarding the Polish immigrant influence, it seems appropriate to extend the period at least to the 50 year guideline, as the neighborhood apparently remained recognizable and retained a strong cultural identity at least to c.1975, if not later. The narrow residential streets and alleyways found throughout the neighborhood, contrasting with the fewer wider streets, apparently contribute to the potential district's sense of place. A concern was raised regarding a statement made in the first paragraph on page 19. This type of National Register district would not exclude "land within the public right of way—including roads and sidewalks" from the boundary. That land cannot be drawn out of the boundary or ignored. Streets, alleys, and sidewalks should be generally described as uncounted landscape features that are important to recognize as part of the setting and appearance of a district. They would not be individually identified/inventoried as counted resources nor assessed any contributing status, unless the material or design was somehow integral to the case for significance or an essential physical feature (block-long slate sidewalks in a Northampton community that produced slate for building materials, for example, might warrant identification as counted resources). Perhaps the intent of the statement was not to exclude them from the boundary, but to convey that while the appearance and scale of the streets and alleys found in Port Richmond add to the overall setting and character of the neighborhood, they are not inventoried resources with specific contributing/non-contributing assessments? Page 2 3 December 2013 Mr. Willey 2004-8006-101-E To resolve the eligibility of the Port Richmond Historic District, we also request a site visit. The site visit will enable staff to better understand boundary selection, especially the Tioga Street and 1-95 sides. More information is needed to understand the evolution of the industrial properties within the district. Those that retain integrity should be considered as contributing resources, as they were an integral part of the neighborhood. Parks and playgrounds should be identified, as should any evidence of remnants of the canal. Rail resources that were integral to the development of the neighborhood should be considered for inclusion within the boundary. Integrity concerns regarding modem materials on residential stock can also be addressed by a site visit. Please contact Barbara Frederick at (717) 772-0921 for further information regarding this review or to schedule a date for a site visit. Sincerely, Douglas C. McLearen, Chief Division of Archaeology & Protection DCMJbcf