 |
| The building as it looks today |
STATEMENT
What is this really about? We're talking about saving
buildings that nobody has raised a finger to help or preserve in this community
for decades. Buildings doomed for the wrecking ball. Any other developer would
be pushing to have the buildings we work on condemned. The orphan asylum at 620 State, the armory
houses on North Fifth—is anyone else coming forward to salvage these
buildings? Should they sit as they are
and rot until they are condemned? My
client has financed the stabilization and restoration of many structures in
this city that—if not for him—would be all but lost.
The building we’re talking about isn’t one
architectural style or form—it has evolved over time. At one time it looked like a Greek
Revival. Additions that would’ve been
deemed inappropriate by today’s rules were added as well as a sprawling front
porch. In its most recent form, it
looked like a Gothic-style farm house.
Those details are gone now—stripped long before my client owned the
building. We are left with a mass that,
after years of deferred maintenance, is on the brink of total loss.
I want to share a quote with you from my close friend
and mentor, Michael Devonshire. Mike is
a principal at Jan Hird Pokorny Associates in Manhattan, a commissioner on the
New York Landmarks Preservation Commission, and on SHPO’s panel that considers
and approves applications to the NRHP.
He is also a big fan of this city and intimate with my work here:
“Historic
preservation is, ultimately, not about buildings, it is about culture – which
is about humanity. Our cultural trajectories result in our understanding of the
technologies that permit us to shape Earth-formed materials into buildings.
Buildings become the shelters and settings in which we enrich ourselves more
fully. Cultural preservation – in all of its diverse forms – is as important as
the preservation of buildings, if we are to fully understand what it is to be
human. The saving and passing on of buildings of significance helps us to
resist cultural stagnation and fosters sustained renewal.” |
| Rendering of plan proposed |
We’re not trying to raze the structure and build new in
its place. We are not applying to
replace the fenestration with vinyl replacement windows, or the cladding with
vinyl siding. Nor are we asking to use
inappropriate materials for the porticos, doors, and stairs. Another colleague, Jean Carroon, FAIa, of the firm Goody Clancy in Boston
said in April of this year:
"Stewardship
is the heart of the environmental movement. The only way we can really take
care of nature is by taking care of what is all around us and believing in the
power of preservation. Every time we extend the service life of a
building, we avoid the environmental impacts of creating something new, we
avoid the environmental impacts of our throwaway culture."
My client is proposing a design that is tasteful and
wholly appropriate when examined in context with neighboring structures. We are proposing a plan that reuses original
building fabric—the foundation, framing and chimneys. A plan that doesn’t add to the landfill or
dump; a plan with minimum carbon footprint.
I earned my master’s degree in historic preservation at the University
of Massachusetts in Amherst where I studied under Dr. Max Page. Max’s focus is on the history and theory of
the preservation movement. Recently, Max
testified before a committee that was tasked with considering the demolition of
Lyman Terrace, a public housing complex built in the 1930’s in Holyoke:
"Historic
preservationists are ultimately interested in the preservation of
communities. We believe that by
honoring the past – by protecting the key buildings and landscapes of our
communities, telling their stories, and keeping them in use – we build a more
sustainable and just world. Without the
evidence of the past, and without examples of past achievements in
architecture, our cities and towns would be lifeless. Even as we build for today, we must maintain
continuity with the past."
This plan respects the structure in its many forms, the
neighborhood, and those who have called the building home for the last 160
years. This is a proposal that would be
welcomed—embraced—in communities elsewhere throughout the Hudson and Mohawk
River Valleys. I urge you, the
commissioners, to consider the benefits to the neighborhood; a neighborhood that
could stand to benefit from turning a boarded-up wreck into an economically
viable and attractive structure. When I
was an undergrad I recall learning about James Q. Wilson’s “Broken Windows”
theory. The theory states that maintaining and
monitoring urban environments in a well-ordered condition may stop further
vandalism and escalation into more serious crime; a boost that the corner of
North Fifth and State could certainly benefit from.
Thank you for your consideration.
______________________________________________________________
City of Hudson, New
York
Historic Preservation Commission
Historic Preservation Commission
Application
for a
Certificate of Appropriateness
Certificate of Appropriateness
CONTEXT
The Galvan Foundation seeks a Certificate of Appropriateness to
salvage the building located at 67-71 North Fifth Street and convert a blighted
structure into an historically appropriate townhouse block in the Armory
Historic District. This proposal seeks
to save a structure once slated for the wrecking ball and to preserve the
masonry foundation, framework and fabric to the extent possible. The boundaries
of the Armory Historic District[1]
were chosen because “they delineate a rather compact suburban neighborhood
which is rather rare in Hudson.” It lies
outside of the Proprietor’s original grid plan, north of State Street, on a
road (now North Fifth Street) that originally led to Fairview Avenue.[2] The evolution of architectural styles in this
neighborhood follows a chronological order as one travels north through the
district. This is analogous to Byrne
Fone’s observations when walking from the river to “further up the hill,” as 18th
and 19th century structures give way to mid- and late-nineteenth
century buildings.[3]
BACKGROUND
On 08 June 2012, Galvan Foundation Executive Director Tom Swope
applied for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) before the Hudson
Preservation Commission (HPC). While the
application was technically deemed incomplete because it lacked the
measurements of proposed windows and doors, the HPC denied the application based
on “period of significance.” Further, it was stated that the changes proposed
would make the building incompatible with the surrounding neighborhood, which
one commissioner described as "very Victorian." This area of the
district is not, in fact, representative of Victorian building styles. Further, short of a significant individual or
event being associated with this structure, the period of significance is
generally identified as the date of construction.
Evidence was presented that demonstrated that the original
structure is a circa 1840-50, Grecian-style, temple front building similar to
neighboring Greek Revival residential structures. The HPC cautioned against
"interpreting what it might have been at an older time" and
recommended that they "keep it closer to what we know it as." No provision exists in the Historic
Preservation law that directs commissioners to ignore evidence of a structure’s
history. Nor should the evidence considered
be limited to images captured in surviving black and white photographs. This was—originally—a Greek Revival building
in an enclave of Greek Revival structures.
PROPOSAL
The photographic and documentary evidence in this application will
demonstrate that this block of the Armory Historic District contains a variety
of structures compatible and consistent with the proposed alteration to 67-71
North Fifth Street. Just as the other
nineteenth century, vernacular structures are not pure forms in this block,
67-71 North Fifth Street will depict an evolving form. The proposed façade imagines a transitional
phase in architecture that mirrors neighboring buildings—a Federal style
townhouse block with Greek Revival details.
The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Rehabilitation
of Historic Structures clearly define four approaches:
•
Preservation focuses
on the maintenance and repair of existing historic materials and retention of a
property's form as it has evolved over time;
•
Rehabilitation
acknowledges the need to alter or add to a historic property to meet continuing
or changing uses while retaining the property's historic character,
•
Restoration is
undertaken to depict a property at a particular period of time in its history,
while removing evidence of other periods; and,
•
Reconstruction
re-creates vanished or non-surviving portions of a property for interpretive
purposes.
Galvan’s proposal seeks to preserve
the mass of the structure in its evolved form, rehabilitate the interior into living space, restore the façade to an appropriate Federal style/Greek Revival-like
appearance by reconstructing
architectural details that are entirely consistent with neighboring structures. These are extraordinary measures to save an
otherwise lost structure in an historic district.
Historic districts typically have contributing and
non-contributing structures. In fact,
language in Hudson’s preservation law differentiates between the two and
provides definitions of each. Yet no
delineation exists between the two within the document that created the Armory
Historic District. This would indicate
that all of the structures are contributing and, hence, should be considered on
the basis of significance. Significance
is based on four criteria:
- Criterion A, "Event," the property must make a contribution to the major pattern of American history;
- Criterion B, "Person," is associated with significant
people of the American past;
- Criterion C, "Design/Construction," concerns the
distinctive characteristics of the building by its architecture and
construction, including having great artistic value or being the work of a
master; and,
- Criterion D, "Information potential," is satisfied if
the property has yielded or may be likely to yield information important
to prehistory or archaeological history.
There is absolutely no evidence or indication that this structure
is significant because of a connection to a person or event in history, nor is
there any indication of archaeological value.
Therefore we must examine the structure for significance related to its
architectural value under criterion C: “For architecturally significant
properties, the period of significance is the date of construction and/or the
dates of any significant alterations and additions.”[4] This reinforces our proposal to recognize the
structure’s original style and integrate it into a plan for appropriate rehabilitation
that respects the neighboring, Greek Revival structures. We have examined the portions of the historic
preservation law that speak to the questions of appropriateness and
compatibility.
Application of Hudson’s Historic
Preservation law
§ 169-6.
Criteria for approval of certificate of appropriateness.
A. In
passing on an application for a certificate of appropriateness, the Historic
Preservation Commission shall not consider changes to interior spaces unless
they are specifically landmarked. The Commission's decision shall be based on
the following principles:
(1)
Properties that contribute to the character of the historic district shall be
retained, with their historic features altered as little as possible;
The historic characteristics and features of
this structure, as a Greek Revival that was expanded and “Victorianized,” are
gone—removed before Galvan purchased the property. Galvan is not seeking to alter any aspect of
the structure’s historic features. The
Secretary of the Interior's Standards for
the Treatment of Historic Properties states that “Changes to a property that
have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and
preserved.”[5] Whether or not any of the long since gone
“Victorianized” details or features “acquired historic significance in their
own right” is a non-issue because they’re gone. What remains is a mass, devoid of
architectural style or characteristics that require preservation.
(2) Any
alteration of existing properties shall be compatible with their historic
character, as well as with the surrounding district; and,
The details that may have defined the
structure as a “Victorianized” Greek Revival are gone. Several structures, all Greek Revivals, all
within fifty yards of 67-71 N Fifth Street, and on the same street, are offered
in exhibits below. All are Greek Revivals
or Federal style with Greek Revival stylings and decoration. The proposed façade for the townhouse block,
similarly, imagines a transitional phase from Federal style to Greek Revival.
Not applicable.
B. In
applying the principle of compatibility, the Commission shall consider the
following factors:
(1) The
general design, character, and appropriateness to the property of the proposed
alteration or new construction;
The proposed rendering depicts a structure
wholly compatible with others in the immediate vicinity. These structures are of the Federal and Greek
Revival styles—not Victorian.
(2) The
scale of the proposed alteration or new construction in relation to the
property itself, surrounding properties, and the neighborhood;
The proposed project does not extend beyond
the footprint of the structure in situ.
The mass of the building is re-used and incorporated directly into the
revised plan.
(3) Texture,
materials, and color and their relation to similar features of other properties
in the neighborhood;
The proposal calls for cedar clapboard
siding and wood trim for the exterior cladding.
Colors will be historically appropriate and can be resolved through a
design workshop with the HPC and/or dialogue with Jack Alvarez, architect for
the HPC.
(4) Visual
compatibility with surrounding properties, including proportion of the
property's front facade, proportion and arrangement of windows and other
openings within the facade, roof shape, and the rhythm of spacing of properties
on streets, including setback; and,
Compatibility with surrounding properties is
immediately evident once the neighborhood is actually examined. “Proportion of the property's front facade,
proportion and arrangement of windows and other openings within the facade,
roof shape, and the rhythm of spacing of properties on streets, including
setback” is virtually unchanged. The
sole exception is the roof. Years of
water infiltration has compromised the structural integrity of the roof. Wholesale removal/replacement is
necessary. The proposed change calls for
a largely non-visible, low-sloped roof that pitches to the rear. This roof system is compatible and
appropriate to others in the area.
(5) The
importance of historic, architectural, or other features to the significance of
the property.
The historic architectural features of the
structure that created a “Victorianized” dwelling were lost through decades of
neglect. What remains is a mass and form
which does not need to be altered significantly to produce an appropriate,
finished product. The Secretary of the
Interior’s Standards direct us to respect the changes to the structure over
time, and not to discount their significance, if appropriate. We submit that this structure continues to
evolve, and that the proposed alterations represent the next chapter in the
history of this structure.
APPENDIX - NEIGHBORING STRUCTURES
Above: A white vinyl sided house, with Greek Revival
doorway, at 87 North 5th.
Below is a white house with an ornately
bracketed front porch.
Above - 108 North 5th Street: A yellow house with a front porch and a flat
roof not visible from the street.
Above: Greek Revival across the street from the proposed project location with
possible original federal-style wing.
Note the Grecian-style portico and flat roof of the structure on the
right.
Above - Detail of Greek Revival across the street.
Above: 82 North 5th Street. Currently under renovation, the HPC permitted
this owner to center the doorway and change the size of the windows. It still preserves its original it Greek
revival two story porch featuring squared columns; the roof line was changed to
make the attic into living space and it was turned into a gambrel roof. The original configuration of the Greek
revival portico survives.
Above is a photo of the entry door of 70 North
5th, which shows typical Greek revival features such as side lights
and squared pilasters. The door itself
is a later, early 20th Century replacement.
Above is an image of 87 North 5th
Street which features a Greek Revival entry way, but with a porch that goes is
Victorian appearance. The house now has
an Italianate appearance overall. It
started out as a Greek revival which has been changed in the intervening years.
Above: Detail showing the Greek Revival door with its
squared pilasters and side lights.
Above - Beyond Hudson:
The Samuel Lay House in Essex, Connecticut (ca. 1754 with significant
mid-nineteenth century alterations.)
Erected in the Federal style with Greek Revival alterations.
[1] It
should be noted that the Armory Historic District lies outside of the Hudson
Multiple Resource Area and, hence, is not part of the Hudson Historic District
(NRHP 85-003363)
[2]
Teale, Jamison. Historic district
application form: Armory Neighborhood
Historic District. 27 January 2006
[3]
Fone, Byrne. Historic Hudson: An Architectural Portrait. 2005
[4]National Register Bulletin: Ho
w to Complete the National Register Registration Form. Guidelines for Selecting the Periods of Significance. US Department of Interior, National Park Service http://www.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/nrb16a/nrb16a_III.htm#statement
[5] Weeks, Kay D., and Grimmer, Anne E. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Illustrated Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1995
| |
Your Blogs are awesome. I'm amazed that i could find it on internet.
ReplyDeleteGlass Entry Doors
Cheap Window Installation
Windows And Doors Phoenix
Cost Of Replacement Windows