Gallery's suggestions singularly focus on preservation to the exclusion of both common sense and utility as well as the good of broad st itself.
Historical Commission gives conceptual go-ahead to Toll Bros. New Market project | PlanPhilly: Planning Philadelphia's FutureThe day's other big project concerned the proposed 25,000-square-foot Rodeph Sholom extension, to be erected on what is now a surface parking lot on the building's south side...The extension, designed by KieranTimberlake, will house offices, an early learning center, additional worship spaces, and a new entrance...in opposing the design, John Gallery of the Preservation Alliance, pointed out that the addition does impact on this side, and that the new building should be pushed further back from Broad Street ...Gallery also contended that the new building — which features a limestone facade on Broad, a glass piece at the corner, and portico on the south side — "visually competes" with the landmark and doesn't "take any cues" from it and so is not in conformance with Secretary of the Interior standards. ..James Timberlake explained that the short bit of plain limestone frontage was intended as an "honorific" referencing the older building's dominant material, and that the use of glass was intended not only to differentiate it from the synagogue — in conformance with historic preservation standards — but to bring light and a sense of openness to the entire complex.
in no way, shape, or form is moving the building back from broad st a good idea. I wouldn't mind if it were glass entirely on broad (dropping the limestone) but what would they put in the setback, parking? gallery, stfu.