Tag Archives: historic preservation

Five Questions with PMA’s Summer Intern, Skyla Leavitt

This summer Skyla Leavitt had the opportunity to participate in a paid internship at PMA in our Portland office. In addition to working as an intern, Skyla is working at the University of Oregon (UO) in Portland as a Student Services Assistant. Her position at UO includes fielding emails from incoming students, organizing orientation and a field trip that the incoming class takes, and giving tours for both the architecture and historic preservation programs. Additionally, Skyla is the first and only student to pursue concurrent Masters in the Architecture and Historic Preservation programs at the UO Portland campus. She holds a Bachelors of Science in Architecture from The Ohio State University: Knowlton School of Architecture, a Masters of Architecture from the University of Oregon: College of Design in Portland, and is currently finishing her Master of Science in Historic Preservation from the University of Oregon: College of Design in Portland. It has been a delight to have Skyla working with all levels of staff at PMA on renovation projects for existing and historic properties.

Describe something new you learned while at PMA during your internship?
I came to PMA with some professional experience in architecture and a fundamental knowledge of historic preservation. However, in the 7 years since I have started this career path, I have somehow never learned Revit, let alone how Revit is used in conjunction with an existing building. I have been developing my Revit skill-set during my internship, and I think it has been particularly helpful to learn this program through the lens of preservation, as this is how I will continue to use it throughout my career. The use of 3D laser scans and point clouds, technology I had never previously been exposed to, has not only been interesting, but also eye opening to the ways this field is effectively utilizing technology.

What have you enjoyed working on while at PMA?
I have been allowed the opportunity to partake in a variety of work in my short time at PMA, which I am very grateful for! The process of carrying out condition assessments and documenting the current state of a historic building, as well as how we might address its issues, is very satisfying to me. I have also enjoyed developing enclosure details, which has exposed me to the numerous and specific challenges architects face when working on historic buildings.

Has your internship changed your perspective on historic preservation, or working with existing resources?
I wouldn’t say my perspective has changed, rather that it has been validated. My internship has confirmed for me that I am in the right field and that I have found my niche, so to speak. I have always wanted a specialization, and new construction has never appealed the same way adaptive reuse or renovation work has. Preservation was a natural fit for me and sits well with my tendencies towards the nostalgic.

How will your internship experience influence your studies when you return to school?
When I return to school this autumn, I plan to write my Master of Science in Historic Preservation thesis about the intersection of architecture and historic preservation in practice, specifically the interdisciplinary negotiations and compromises that allow a building to maintain its historic integrity, while also achieving improved technical functionality and code compliance. I believe our ability as architects to successfully facilitate these conversations is integral to sustaining not only the physical longevity of a historic site, but also the relevance and importance it holds within the community by allowing it to serve users in new or improved capacities.

Do you have a favorite aspect about architecture or historic preservation?
I am very interested in building enclosures and how we marry modern concepts with historic practices when we make an intervention in a historic building envelope. Masonry in particular, as opposed to wood, fascinates me as it is both fragile and enduring.

BONUS: Anything fun you did in PDX this summer?
The highlights of my summer have been tubing down the Clackamas River, berry picking at Sauvie Island, attending a few concerts at the Moda Center, and hiking the Tom, Dick, and Harry Trail on a clear day when I could see Mt. Hood, Mt. Adams, Mt. Rainier, Mt. St. Helens, and Mt. Jefferson all at once. But I also just hang out with my cat, Olive, a lot!

fountain-place-apt-pmapdx-home-forward-rendering

Fountain Place Apartments Seismic Renovation

Constructed in two distinct phases in 1911, the Fountain Place Apartments were originally named the Wheeldon Annex. The building occupies a quarter-block lot in downtown Portland, Oregon, at the corner of SW Salmon Street and SW 10th Avenue. Fountain Place is one of the earliest surviving examples of a U-shaped residential apartment/hotel in downtown Portland. It is a 5-story brick structure with intact Italian Renaissance Revival features such as a decorative bracketed cornice, buff brick body with corbeled details and rusticated base, and an upper level treated as a paneled frieze. The property is owned by Home Forward. There are 80 total units, with studio, one and two bedroom homes. The residents it serves have incomes of 30% of the area median income.

Working with Lorentz Bruun Construction, we are delivering a design-build project to improve the life safety of Fountain Place Apartments, while retaining its historic character. To learn about how the redevelopment of Fountain Place Apartments revives a historic building by providing critical infrastructure for current residents and new arrivals, please visit: Fountain Place Apartments PDX

Condensation Analysis for Historic Window Replacements

Window alterations for original single pane glass or new insulated glazing units with new interior storm windows, are growing requests from building owners of historic commercial properties. Two items we recommend to consider regarding these types of alterations: the potential for condensation as a result of the alterations, and the required review processes that may be triggered by exterior alterations to the historic building. In addition, installing a mock-up of proposed window alterations provides the opportunity to accurately measure and document existing and proposed conditions, and review the location of sealant joints and proposed glass types in order to accurately simulate the risk of condensation.

CONDENSATION ANALYSIS
Installation of new storm windows typically reduces the potential for condensation at the interior face of the glass as the surface is kept warmer. However, interior storms can lead to condensation within the interstitial space between the existing window and the new storm window. The condensation is a result of the warm humid air inside the building leaking into the colder interstitial space. As air leaks into the interstitial space, it cools and it can condense on the interior surface of the exterior glazing unit. Moisture/condensation within the interstitial space can cause deterioration of the wood surfaces and obscure views to the exterior.

For this type of condensation analysis, PMA uses THERM, a tool for modeling 2-dimensional heat transfer and WINDOW, a tool for calculating window performance to analyze the windows. The purpose is to understand how the addition of storm windows will impact heat transfer and window performance in order to gauge the potential for condensation. The focus of this type of simulation is determining if the temperature of the air within the interstitial space would reach its dewpoint – indicating water would condense. Following the analysis results, PMA provides recommendations for mitigating and minimizing condensation based on the condensation simulations.
condensation-analysis-historic-window-replacement
LIMITATIONS
It should be noted that no single tool exists for modeling all of the variables associated with moisture and heat transfer through windows. Hygrothermal analysis (transfer of heat and moisture), is typically limited to 1-dimensional simulation which is inadequate for the complexities of a window which has wood, air, glass, sealant, etc. The 2-dimensional software that has been verified is not currently capable of simulating the complexities associated with heat transfer/soar heat gain through glass surfaces and air. The software we use for window analysis studies is designed to provide the following information:

U-Values
Solar Heat Gain Coefficient (SHGC)
Condensation Resistance Index
Surface Temperature Map of the Entire Window
2-Dimensional Heat Transfer

Additionally, the potential for condensation is directly related to air temperature and relative humidity. Depending on the use of the commercial building, the interior air temperature and relative humidity are expected to vary greatly. The simulations performed as part of this study cannot account for all of the potential temperature/relative humidity variations that may occur. The results may vary depending on different interior/exterior conditions.
condensation-analysis-historic-window-replacement
MODEL SET UP
For this type of analysis we develop cross-section drawings for the window head, sill, upper jamb, lower jamb, and meeting rail. The sections are developed based on field measurements (note, sometimes we only have access to interior measurements, making exterior ones approximate). The sections are imported into THERM and modeled to simulate heat flow through the window. We then select glazing systems from the extensive glass library. The systems are selected to match the properties of the proposed materials as closely as possible.

Simulations are set up to run according to the National Fenestration Rating Council (NFRC) standards which specify conditions for simulating the interior and exterior environments. The required exterior temperature is at 0 °F and the interior at 70 °F. These temperatures provide information on more severe conditions than Portland, Oregon, however, they can be used to conservatively predict when condensation is possible. Once the cross sections has been modeled and simulated in THERM, the results are imported into WINDOW to calculate the full window performance, including SHGC, Condensation Resistance Index, U-Value, and temperature Map.
condensation-analysis-historic-window-replacement
CONCLUSION
While simulations cannot definitively predict the location and quantity of condensation, the results can be interpreted to predict the probability of condensation occurring. Sometimes our analysis shows the possibility that water will condense within the interstitial space, which happens primarily for the following reasons:

The air temperature within the interstitial space is significantly colder than the room air temperature. Any water within air infiltrating into this space may condense under the right conditions. This is exacerbated by the fact that the room temperature and relative humidity may vary greatly and cannot be strictly controlled.

The simulation for predicting condensation on the interior face of the IGU indicated that condensation was possible when the air within the interstitial space matched the properties of the interior air. Under actual conditions, the air within the interstitial space will likely be cooler and more humid than the interior air. The cooler, wetter air will have an even greater potential for condensation.

Condensation within the interstitial space between an existing and storm window is common and several methods are available to reduce the potential for condensation and mitigate any water within the cavity. For clients we provide recommendations with our analysis of window alterations for original single pane glass.

Written by Halla Hoffer, AIA, Assoc. DBIA

Laurelhurst Neighborhood-NRHP-Listing-Instagram-Post

Laurelhurst Neighborhood Historic District

Laurelhurst is a 442-acre residential neighborhood in Portland, Oregon, located thirty-two city blocks east of the Willamette River. Most of the neighborhood is in northeast Portland, with only the southernmost quarter, below E Burnside Street, in southeast Portland. César E Chávez Boulevard, originally called NE 39th Street, runs north to south, dividing the neighborhood into two halves. César E Chávez Boulevard intersects with NE Glisan Street at Coe Circle at the center of the neighborhood, forming a large roundabout. Main entrances to Laurelhurst, characterized by their historic sandstone gates, are located in four locations; two on Glisan east of 32nd, two on SE Cesar E Chavez Boulevard north of Stark, two on Burnside east of 32nd, and one at Peerless Place south of Sandy.

The historic district nomination for Laurelhurst is supportable under the “Historic Residential Suburbs in the United States, 1830-1960” Multiple Property Documentation (MPD) Form. PMA recommended that the criteria used to nominate the district include both A, for the district’s significance in the planning and development of Portland and possibly for its influence outside of Portland , and C, for the collection of architectural resources in the district. The district fits within the definition and context of a planned Streetcar Suburb, and illustrates the planning principles of the City Beautiful movement. The Laurelhurst Historic District was listed March 18, 2019, on the National Register of Historic Places.

The History of PPS McDaniel (formerly Madison) High School

At the end of January, PMA was invited to give a presentation to students at Portland Public Schools McDaniel (formerly Madison) High School. “The History of Madison High School” turned out to be engaging for many of the students in two back-to-back social studies classes taught by Mr. Jason Miller, and fun for the presenter from PMA (Kristen Minor) as well. PMA is part of the multi-disciplinary team for the PPS McDaniel High School Modernization project.

Below are highlights from the presentation illustrating changes over time in the vicinity of the school, an area that is quite familiar to the students. Old photographs of a place remind us how radically our environment changes, even though it feels (especially to a high school student) that change is s-l-o-w. The presentation also covered basic facts about the school, including its design in the International Style, a subset of Modernism, and what that means in comparison to pre-war “traditional” architectural styles. Madison was constructed in 1957 and designed by the firm of Stanton Bowles Maguire & Church, who also designed Marshall High School in SE Portland a few years later in 1960.
PPS-Madison-HS-PMAPDX-Lecture
PRE-SETTLEMENT HISTORY
Much of East Portland, especially the northerly portions along the Columbia, was Chinook tribal territory. These peoples were decimated by diseases from contacts with European and American exploration, colonialization and fur trappers in the period between the 1780s and the 1850s. Oregon Trail pioneers began to come to the area to settle by the early 1840s. The Donation Land claim act of 1850 divided the western territories into quarter mile grid sections and deeded the land to individuals (up to 320 acres) and couples (up to 640 acres), as long as you would live on and farm the land. That’s why the distribution of land by the federal government is clearly visible in the grid pattern of streets of our western cities, with anomalies like Sandy Boulevard and Foster usually being remnants of older tribal pathways.

TRANSPORTATION
This image shows 82nd Avenue where it crosses Halsey in 1916, when the train tracks crossed the roadway at grade. This location is a little more than half a mile south of the school. In 1916, people were getting around by horse and carriage, streetcar, train, walking, bicycling, and for a lucky few, driving (Model T’s went on the market in 1908). By the mid-1920s most families were able to purchase a car, but people didn’t take them everywhere like they do today.

PPS-Madison-HS-PMAPDX-Lecture

– Transportation –


LAND USE
These three photos, all looking north on 82nd Ave, are from the early 1930s. The lower right photo illustrates the 1934 construction of a viaduct for the train line, so 82nd could finally extend over the train lines. The upper photo shows early development along a segment of 82nd in the Montavilla area, with mostly houses visible along the roadway in 1932. By 1937, Portland re-zoned the entire 82nd corridor to be commercial or industrial, so all of these houses were later demolished or heavily altered. Finally, the lower left photo shows 82nd being widened in 1934, with the Madison school site at the left at the very top of the hill on the horizon. Large areas of land were still completely rural, either undeveloped or producing crops. By the 1920s and 1930s, most of the farms that had once been in this area (many originally owned by Japanese immigrant farmers around Montavilla) had given way to increased development.
PPS-Madison-HS-PMAPDX-Lecture

– Land Use –


HOUSING BOOM
The same Halsey Street intersection in 1947 is shown at the center of the photo, with 82nd Avenue stretching almost up to the Madison school site (just off the upper right of the image). None of the major freeways had been constructed yet, so the gully still only carried long-distance train tracks. After the war, housing development really took off, which resulted in an immediate need for schools in the area.
PPS-Madison-HS-PMAPDX-Lecture

– Housing Boom –


SCHOOL DESIGN AND EFFICIENCY
From 1945 to 1970, Portland Public Schools constructed 51 new schools! The district had to be efficient and smart about costs under all the pressure to create schools in such a short period of time. Modernism as a style, with its emphasis on functionality, repetition, and horizontality, worked well for the district to ensure that they could construct the most building area for the least cost. Schools were designed in standardized materials and in expandable forms, allowing maximum flexibility.
PPS-Madison-HS-PMAPDX-Lecture

– School Design and Efficiency –


As McDaniel High School moves closer to its construction start date for the PPS Modernization project, it is worth remembering that the school is a highly intact example of the mid-century International Style design aesthetic, but that the new iteration of the school will preserve portions of this design. Students in the updated school will hopefully have an appreciation for both the changes and the past design, with a glimpse into the history of change at the school and in the area surrounding the school.



Written by Kristen Minor, Associate / Preservation Planner

Post-Modern Higher Education Facility Assessment

BACKGROUND
Construction means and methods of masonry veneer walls, and particularly flashing systems needed for protection from water intrusion of those veneer walls, was well known in the Post-Modern era (circa 1980’s – 1990’s). Many professional organizations and industries (e.g. Brick Institute of America) published technical documents as guides to proper construction of masonry veneer walls.

PMA was retained to conduct a building envelope enclosure assessment of a Post Modern masonry veneer building, over the Owner’s concern of advanced deteriorated conditions of precast window sills. The purpose of the assessment was to provide the Owner an understanding of the extent of the precast failures, whether or not any other materials were impacted by the failed conditions, and to provide an analysis of potential cause and a rough order of magnitude cost of potential mitigation. The Owner also sought an evaluation of the effectiveness of a proposal to install sheet metal over the sills to prolong the life of the precast for another forty years.
PoMo-EME-Building-Assessment-WSU
The circa 1984 Post Modern masonry veneer building links two existing historic academic classroom buildings and functions as both laboratory space and faculty offices. The building is an off-set “T” in plan with the leg of the T forming the link between the existing academic structures. A six-story faculty office tower, rises between the existing structures on the east end of the leg. The majority of the window openings occur along the bar of the T on the west elevation. The building wall cross section, from exterior to interior, is comprised of a single course of masonry veneer, a 1.5 inch air gap, an 12 inch thick cast in place concrete structural frame, a 4 inch air gap, steel stud framing, and one layer of interior gypsum board. Given the laboratory program, there is a strong interior positive air pressure that creates significant air flow within the interior air gap between the gypsum board and concrete frame. There have been no major renovations of the building since its construction.

ASSESSMENT PROCESS
PMA conducted a two-part assessment program. Part 1 consisted of a visual only assessment performed on the precast window sills, precast window headers, masonry veneer mortar joints, sealant joints, and interior gypsum board adjacent to the aluminum window sill corners. Review of the 1984 original design documents and detail book were used to augment the on-site observations.

Visual observations of the exterior face of the veneer identified the extent of the aforementioned pre-cast sill damage, previous repairs and subsequent further cracking to the pre-cast window headers, mortar popping out of the joints, sealant failure along masonry control joints, rust staining corresponding to the veneer ledgers, and weeps were not visible along the ledger locations. In addition, dirt, debris, and other exterior material had blocked the built-in aluminum window frame weep holes.

In review of the design documents, it was noted that not all details followed industry standards. In specific, flashing was absent from some details. Other details indicated an incomplete flashing system for adequate protection of veneer walls. No three dimensional drawings for indicating flashing termination were included.

Part 2 of the assessment involved creating openings in the wall system both on the exterior and the interior. The purpose of the invasive openings was to verify that the wall was constructed as designed, to confirm if additional flashing was installed, and to determine if water intrusion was contributing to the visible damage. Given the degree of deterioration observed on the exterior, target locations for wall openings were performed of the interior face of the gypsum board immediately adjacent to the interior aluminum window sills.
PoMo-EME-Building-Assessment-WSU
FINDINGS
The results of the invasive openings were significant in providing evidence of how lack of proper flashing can damage wall components while high internal positive air pressure can limit the damage to interior systems and protect veneer building envelope enclosure systems from extensive water intrusion.

The as‐built conditions, in some locations, varied considerably from the design details. No flashing was installed below the pre-cast window sills and no flashing was installed along the interface between the vertical window system and veneer walls. An outer layer of backer rod behind the vertical sealant joint and inner layer of backer rod behind the gypsum board were the only line of defense against water intrusion. Adequate and substantial copper flashing protected the steel ledger but all rope weeps (a common Post-Modern era construction material for veneer walls) were installed at proper spacing but did not extend to the exterior thereby trapping water against the ledger angles. Beyond the initial outer layer of defense against water intrusion (sealant system, veneer wall, and aluminum window system) there is no back up / secondary protection in place.

No interior finish systems appear to be damaged. The lack of adequate flashing does not currently create interior water intrusion. Current water intrusion is isolated to materials outward of the concrete structural frame. The lack of damage to the interior can be attributed to the high positive air pressure which in turn creates high volume of air flow within the interior air gap inward of the concrete frame. This positive pressure acts as a mitigating element against bulk water intrusion. Combined with the thickness of the concrete structural wall (approximately 12 inches), water intrusion is isolated to the masonry veneer system. Even at the aluminum window frame interface, the two layer of backer rod are sufficient to block water intrusion with a positive air pressure environment.
PoMo-EME-Building-Assessment-WSU
Recently installed new roof coping provided the means to mitigate the lack of through wall flashing along the parapet and greatly reduced water intrusion in the veneer wall air cavity. Given the age of the building, and visual observations, damage has already occurred prior to the new roof coping. In addition, the lack of flashing increases the need to routinely replace deteriorated sealant systems and maintain weeps on both the veneer wall and the aluminum window system. The extensive existing damage to the pre-cast components will require full replacement. During replacement, further assessment of structural components can be made and adequate flashing and weeps can be installed. The pre-cast replacement process may also serve as an opportunity to mock up potential secondary defense systems at the aluminum window frame/veneer wall interfaces. At this time the laboratory use requiring positive air pressure is protecting the interior. However, should the use of the building coincide with lowering of the pressure and air flow, a secondary means to prevent water intrusion will be required. For now, the large amount of air flow with in the cavity provides sufficient temperature and flow volume to adequately dry the cavity space.

Veneer systems, especially those constructed during the Post-Modern era require attention to the flashing details and corollary protective systems like sealant joints, weep holes, and preventive maintenance procedures to prolong the life of the structure and reduce the need for substantial repairs.


Written by Peter Meijer, AIA, NCARB / Principal, and PMA architectural staff.

pioneer-courthouse-portland

Pioneer Courthouse Seismic and Historic Renovation

As the second oldest federal building on the west coast and the third highest ranked historic structure in the General Service Administration’s portfolio, Pioneer Courthouse is a significant historic sandstone structure. Peter Meijer Architect, PC (PMA) acted as the Preservation Conservator hired directly by the General Service Administration to consult the construction team engaged in the base isolation seismic upgrade and historic renovation of the circa 1875 Pioneer Courthouse. PMA revised the means and methods associated with the preservation specifications, represented the Owner, and provided CA services on issues affecting the historic property.

AWARDS & RECOGNITION
Preservation in Action Award Pinnacle Award
Architectural Heritage Center/Bosco-Milligan Foundation, 2008

Craftsmanship Award
AIA Portland Chapter, 2006

Top Project
Daily Journal of Commerce (DJC Oregon), 2005

At A Glance: Preservation of Modern Built Heritage

Associate, Halla Hoffer, AIA, Assoc. DBIA, recently participated in a three-day course on the preservation of modern built heritage from the Getty Conservation Institute: Conserving Modern Architecture Initiative, in partnership with the National Center for Preservation Training and Technology (NCPTT), and with support from the National Trust for Historic Preservation. The course included lectures regarding the technical challenges of preserving modern heritage within the framework of historic preservation practice and philosophy, laboratory sessions, and visiting one of LA’s most iconic modern houses.

Mid-century modern era structures are approaching historic status, if not already there. This status necessitates finding the best option(s) for renovation and rehabilitation – from integrating current energy conservation standards, to updating components to meet current code and seismic regulations – because aesthetic impacts to a historic resource must be kept to a minimum.

OVERVIEW OF COURSE LEARNING OBJECTIVES
– Understanding the importance of following preservation methodologies when working with modern heritage.
– Using case studies as examples, understand how to apply these to actual modern buildings and sites
– Understand how developing successful preservation solutions depend on thorough and detailed analysis of the site.
– Learn how to assess the cultural significance of modern building.
– Understand the historical development of reinforced concrete.
– Learn about the material characteristics of reinforced concrete.
– Understand the most common decay mechanisms of reinforced concrete.
– Understand the principles for conserving historic reinforced concrete.
– Understand the historical development and building typologies of the modern era.
– Explore the challenges to preserving buildings from the modern era.
– Learn how existing preservation standards and charters are applied to modern buildings.
– Learn about the listing and protection of modern buildings.
– Learn about the development of glass used for 20th century windows.
– Learn about glass making techniques and how to determine the fabrication techniques.
– Learn about glazing types such as IG units, and film applications.
– Learn how various metals in windows weather and how to treat them.
– Learn in a lab session how to identify corrosion as it is expressed in different metals.
– Understand how saving a work of modern heritage is different from saving the heritage of other
eras.
– Learn how to decide, prioritize, and build support for protecting and preserving modern places.
– Explore the issues involved in determining how modern resources can be saved.
– Explore how to evaluate significance relative to the vast number of modern buildings that exist
today.
salk-east-pmapdx-getty-conference
COURSES AT A GLANCE
The three day course began with an overview of the history, designation, and conservation methodology of our built heritage of the modern era. A highlight included a case study presented by Sara Lardinois – Utilizing the Conservation Methodology, Salk Institute for Biological Studies. The Salk case study focused on the restoration of the teak window wall assemblies, from significance to performing an integrity evaluation of the window wall assemblies. The Salk Institute is an international masterpiece of architecture from the modern era. The treatment recommendations had to stop fungal biofilm from further damaging the window wall assemblies, improve performance, abate hazardous materials, all the while preserving the integrity original teak structural members.

Day two was focused on windows and curtain walls – something especially interesting to PMA. Stephen Kelley led lectures and a lecture/lab on the history of modern windows and curtain walls, European and American precedents, fabrications, types, common problems, field testing, fabrication practices, history of sealants, and engineered sealant joints. Day three closed-out the course with a special day at the Eames house. Participants learned about the conservation planning and building materials case study created for the house.
eames-case-study-house-pmapdx-getty
COURSE HANDOUTS
15 Preservation Briefs – Preservation of Historic Concrete
Salk Institute Report
Eames House Case Study

Written by Halla Hoffer, AIA, Assoc. DBIA / Architect

Residential Architectural Styles in the Laurelhurst Neighborhood

PMA is surveying and documenting the Laurelhurst neighborhood for a current project. Below is an overview of the typical residential architectural styles found throughout the neighborhood, with a brief introduction on its development.

Laurelhurst is a 442-acre residential neighborhood in Portland, Oregon, located thirty-two city blocks east of the Willamette River. Most of the neighborhood is in northeast Portland, with only the southernmost quarter, below E Burnside Street, in southeast Portland. César E Chávez Boulevard, originally called NE 39th Street, runs north to south, dividing the neighborhood into two halves. The original 1909/10 plat boundaries of the Laurelhurst neighborhood were generally bounded by NE 32nd and 44th Avenues, and NE Halsey and SE Stark Streets. Construction of the Banfield Freeway (I-84) has had a major impact on the northern portion of the neighborhood, separating the northeastern corner of the original plat from the rest of Laurelhurst.
Historic-Photo-Laurelhurst-PDX-Glisan-Street
DEVELOPMENT
The development of the neighborhood was a result of the extension of city streetcar lines to the east side of the river, enabling a tremendous population increase in this area right before 1909. The layout and development of the Laurelhurst neighborhood was strongly influenced by the national City Beautiful movement. This social movement was initially a crusade for reforms in many facets of public and private life, pushing for food and water systems, schools, and cities to be more healthful and science-based in the period after the Industrial Revolution.

The neighborhood demonstrates the results of Portland’s early transit system that triggered the city’s expansion and enabled family life to be removed from the center of the city yet efficiently connected to the downtown hub of business and commerce. In this sense it was a true suburb, representing an idealized plan for residential living. The curvilinear streets were laid out with an eye for beauty as well as harmony between the structures and the environment. Laurelhurst remains one of Portland’s oldest intact East Side neighborhoods, and illustrates an era of tremendous suburban growth in Portland’s history, made possible by streetcar networks.

Economic Trends 1900 – 1970
The Lewis & Clark Exposition, in 1905, marked the beginning of a period of prosperity and growth for Portland. Portland’s population almost doubled in the single five-year period from 1905-1910, from 110,929 to 207,214 residents.[1] Laurelhurst’s population continued to increase until the onset of the Great Depression in 1929, when homebuying and development reached a low once again until just after 1940. This mirrored the trend across the United States during the Depression years, with a 95% drop in new home construction from 1925 to 1933. The 1940’s marked a period of major economic development, mainly due to advancements in the automobile industry. As a result of the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1921, the rising popularity of cars in the 1930’s, and the post-WWII recovery from the Great Depression, residents of Portland could live much further away from their jobs than they could even with the development of streetcars only thirty years prior. Suburban development and lifestyles became even more appealing. Portland experienced another period of economic decline during the Vietnam War from 1955 to 1975. In particular, property values in Laurelhurst plummeted in the 1970’s, to below average at best, and often below the cost of affordable low-income housing in the city.
Laurelhurst-1937-Sandy-Blvd
ARCHITECTURE
Building restrictions maintained Laurelhurst’s reputation as a desirable neighborhood. The homes encompassed a controlled variety of architectural styles, so much so that a brochure was given to families upon purchasing a lot for the types of styles that were recommended for development. Recommended styles in Murphy’s promotional materials of the time included “Pure Italian, Japanese, Old English, Swiss Chalet, Colonial, New England, or Spanish Mission.”[2] This variety of architectural styles contributed to Laurelhurst’s reputation as a “neighborhood of character”; this aesthetic holds true as the majority of styles and examples in Laurelhurst retain their material and stylistic integrity.

A single block, located in the southeastern quadrant of the neighborhood between SE Ash and E Burnside, was developed by the Laurelhurst Company as a showcase for bungalows.[3] This block was named Fernhaven Court, called “bungalow fairyland,” and still has many of its original features today. Some of these 1915-1925 Fernhaven Court bungalows have a noticeable Japanese design influence. The block also has a twenty-foot alleyway through the middle, one of only two alleys in Laurelhurst.

In the southwestern quadrant, the west end of the block bounded by NE Couch, NE Davis, NE Laurelhurst Place, and NE Cesar E. Chavez Blvd was designed as “The Laurelhurst Group of Cottages,” nine homes laid out and designed by architects Ellis Lawrence and W.M. Holford with George Otten, landscape designer. Five of these were built by 1919, with a “central garden” divided by shrubs and specifying “service uses” screened by lattice. The homes, constructed by the Laurelhurst Company, are in English Cottage style.

Paul Murphy’s own house at 3574 E. Burnside, also designed by Lawrence & Holford, received accolades for its “picturesque” design in the July 1919 issue of “The House Beautiful.” By November of that year the house was named one of the ten best examples of architecture in Portland by that same publication.[4]
Laurelhurst-Architectural-Styles-PMAPDX-001
Typical Neighborhood Architectural Styles
A majority (88%) of resources in Laurelhurst date between 1910 and 1932, and the architectural styles of the neighborhood reflect that majority; the first property owners of Laurelhurst were restricted in their choices for designs, which aimed to create a cohesive and more desirable neighborhood appearance. The most prevalent architectural styles identified in Laurelhurst are Craftsman (42%), Colonial Revival (36%), and English Cottage (19%). Some houses do have a combination of styles so percentages will add up to more than 100% of resources. Other identified styles from that era include Prairie School, Tudor Revival, Mediterranean Revival, Neo-Classical; later architectural styles observed within Laurelhurst include Minimal Traditional, World War II-Era Cottage, and Ranch.
Laurelhurst-Architectural-Styles-PMAPDX-002
Prevalent Building Use and Typology
Across the United States from the 1890s into the 1920s as the ideal suburban home was being refined and developed, houses were becoming more technologically innovative and less formal in layout. Two principal house typologies emerged during this period, the bungalow and the American Foursquare. Both of these were often mass-produced and offered for sale by catalog. Bungalows offered an affordable house type for a family without servants. The typical bungalow is one or one-and-a-half stories, with a broad, shallowly-pitched roof and a wide open front porch across the full front or most of the front of the house. While bungalows can be in English Cottage or Mission Revival styles, they are most often associated with the Craftsman style and the California Arts and Crafts movement. A typical Foursquare is boxy and more vertical in form, usually two to two-and-a-half stories in height. A single-height porch runs across most or all of the front of the house, and the layout is generally four major rooms on each level. Like bungalows, Foursquare houses can appear in a variety of styles.[5] The Colonial Revival style predominates in some areas, but in the Pacific Northwest the Craftsman Foursquare is by far the most prevalent style.

After WWI, the trend for single-family homes across the U. S. was generally smaller. A variety of period revival styles appeared in the 1920s as bungalows or period cottages. Most common were the English Cottage or English Tudor as well as Colonial revival styles ranging from Dutch, English, French, and Spanish. A period cottage is generally no more than one-and-a-half story, and has a small street–fronting façade but may extend back on its lot to create a long, narrow footprint.

Written by Kristen Minor / Associate, Preservation Planner with Marion Rosas / Designer

Download Laurelhurst Architectural Styles.

Footnotes
1. K. Zisman et al, Portland Oregon’s Eastside Historic and Architectural Resources, 1850-1938 (United States Department of the Interior, 1988, as amended 2012, edited by Timothy Askin and Ernestina Fuenmayor), E:10.
2. “Laurelhurst and its Park,” 22.
3. A bungalow can be described as a small house, low and broad in form, with a wide front porch and spreading eaves. They are most often Craftsman in style.
4. Rene Marshall, “In Portland, Oregon,” The House Beautiful vol 46, July 1919, 30-31 and Helen Eastham, “Best Examples of Architecture in Portland, Oregon,” The House Beautiful vol. 46, Nov 1919, 308-310, 336.
5. McClelland et al, 56.

Part II | Toward More Robust Practice Theory in Public Sector Historic Preservation: Getting Started

Part II of II guest blog post by Betsy Bradley, Historian and Historic Preservationist.

WHO IS THIS PUBLIC MEANT TO BE SERVED BY HISTORIC PRESERVATION?
While many can agree we need to involve the public in a meaningful way, we don’t often do so. But, who is the public we serve with public sector heritage work? The term public is left unqualified in most sections of the NHPA and 36 CFR 800. The phrase “general public” appears often, while “interested public” is used in sections referring to Tribal properties. Agencies are to seek and consider the views of the public and to consider the “likely interest of the public” in addressing effects to historic properties. In short, the regulations assume that the public will be notified and provided information about the identification and evaluation of historic resources and invites “the public to express views on resolving adverse effects.” How easily this process devolves into a Decides, Informs, Implements scenario with some paperwork.

Consequently, we have the freedom to almost ignore the public even as we make the process somewhat transparent and provide information to those who ask. Conversely, we can identify various publics who could actively participate in the process and who can be involved in identifying and evaluating historic properties, as well as creating and using mitigation projects. We must go beyond the consideration of the public as the whole body politic, or all citizens.

Situational theorists working within the public relations field tell us there are three types of publics that have some interest and likely involvement in a topic or process, the:

1. Latent public becomes interested due to a certain project.
2. Aware public has interest in resources/topics before a project.
3. Active public is aroused to organization and action by a project.

I can easily further parse further the publics that we might serve as: the current public, future public, public affected by the undertaking, single-issue public, broader picture public, Historic Preservation public, and the general public. We must design consultation and mitigation projects to affect as many of these publics as we can, or have a good justification for serving a smaller segment of the public.

Currently, we act on the weak premise that—if some undefined member of the future public someday goes to the archives or museum storage facility and accesses documentation about a property that no longer exists—we are working in the public interest. However, we must note that the staff of the ACHP charged with the oversight of the Section 106 process has included in a policy statement that academia and academic associations are not considered to be “the public” for the purposes of the archaeological component of the Section 106 process. Even if this is not guidance that has widespread implementation, we must take this reading of the definition of the public to heart. It speaks to the need to serve more than one segment of the public.

My recent experience is that if authority is shared in the Section 106 process, it is likely that the public becomes problematic for bureaucrats. A portion of the affected and interested public in St. Louis faced with a large redevelopment project does not see history ending 50 years ago, the timeframe we use as for evaluating historic resources. This public saw the federal undertaking in the continuum of depriving African Americans of their neighborhoods that began with Urban Renewal and that remains unacknowledged. This public also did not separate history from activism; the insistence that our history project was totally separate from politically-charged protest of the use of Eminent Domain did not resonate. I find these points of view valid and worth taking to heart. The mitigation proposed by this public departed from the standard projects and some at the table were eager to dismiss them out of hand as not what we do. Even when part of this public participated in a public history project, some professionals wanted to control and approve of that work. Despite all this, a meaningful participatory public history project was completed.

The St. Louis project was a consultation process that exposed our inadequacy in consulting with the intent to respond to the affected public’s standpoints and recommendations for mitigation. We must learn how to respond differently to make affected publics valued partners in Section 106. It is us who must transform, not various publics, in order to share authority. My experience is that this will be both harder and more rewarding for all involved.

Will you be commit to a renewed effort to include various segments of the public in historic preservation consultation? What practice theories and methods can you bring to the conversation? Let’s work on this together.

FURTHER READING
Laurajane Smith coined the term authorized heritage discourse. Her Uses of Heritage (2006) and subsequent books and articles have been foundational in the Critical Heritage Studies field.

Randall Mason Mason has been a leader in decentering the physical attributes of resources in order to elevate the meaning and values we assign to resources. His important essay in Places, “Fixing Historic Preservation: A Constructive Critique of ‘Significance,’” is available here.

Jeremy Wells takes the position that our policies based on regulations cannot be adapted for more effective work; he also positions further study of historic preservation in social science research. Wells’ website Conserving the Human Environment, provides links to many of his papers. This link takes readers to the page where he explores Rebooting Environmental Compliance.