Tag Archives: PMA Findings

Project Update: Fountain Place Apartments

Progress photos from our Fountain Place Apartments project for Home Forward

Part of extending the operational life of this existing and historic building is a seismic upgrade. Pictured is the opening up of the floor structure on Levels 1 through 5 to facilitate the installation of a new central egress stair and elevator, which will support accessibility to all levels of the building and provide additional means of egress. Two of the six proposed braced frames will be installed adjacent to this elevator and stair. The braced frames are supported by piles at the foundation and will be tied to a new plywood diaphragm at each floor and the roof which will provide most of the seismic stability required for the building, affording structural safety to future occupants and ensuring the life-cycle of this historic building is extended for another 50+ years.
fountain-place-apts-home-forward-renovation

fountain-place-apts-home-forward-renovation
SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS
The project is meeting the secretary of the interior’s standards for redevelopment, reviewed and approved by the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office and the National Park Service. Federal tax incentives were used, and as part of the process the building was listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
fountain-place-apt-home-forward-renovation
LEARN MORE ABOUT THIS HISTORIC AND SEISMIC UPGRADE PROJECT
To learn more about how our team is reviving a historic building by providing critical infrastructure for current residents and new arrivals, please visit: Fountain Place Apartments.

fountain-place-apts-seismic-bracing

Written by Kate Kearney, Associate, Marketing Manger

Part II: Tropical Modernism in a Multicultural Context at the Docomomo US National Symposium

In PART I we discussed the University of Hawaii at Manoa campus (especially the stunning Jefferson Hall), presentations on traditional architecture to mid-century modernism and Asian influences on the built environment in Hawaii, and the Residences of Wimberly and Cook. For Part II we are hopping back into the Aloha Spirit by discussing the regal Hawaii State Capitol Building, presentations on historic preservation and how Hawaii was influential and integral to international tropical resort design.
hawaii-state-capitol-bldg
HAWAII STATE CAPITOL BUILDING
I have only been to about ten state capitols across the U.S., but the Hawaii State Capitol building is unlike any I have experience. It is a truly welcoming structure, which is something unique among monumental civic structures (looking at you Boston City Hall). The Hawaii State Capitol was designed by Belt, Lemmon & Lo in association with John Carl Warnecke. While design of the building began in 1961, construction didn’t break ground until 1965, and the building was formerly dedicated on March 15, 1969. The Hawaii State Capitol celebrated its 50th anniversary in 2019.

An excerpt from Democracy by Design. The Planning and Development of the Hawaii State Capitol, with text by Don J. Hibbard states it best:

“Monumentally presiding over an eight acre site mostly carpeted by lawn, the Capitol is surrounded by a pool of water, evoking Hawaii’s island situation. The truncated cones of the legislative chambers, clad in cast stone made of crushed lava rock, rise from the reflecting pool, reminiscent of the volcanic origins of the islands. Also rising from the water are forty columns, bereft of capitals, instead flaring out of their crown like coconut palms. Standing almost sixty feet in height, the columns form a peristyle and support the extra-large fourth story, which cantilevers out beyond the columns. Serving as a cornice, the fourth story is distinguished by its open work frieze of pre-cast fins set in groups of eight, recalling the eight major islands of Hawaii. Placed free of the windows, the fins serve as decorative elements as well as sun screens. The recessed second and third floors are suspended from the fourth story, which also serves as the roof of the capital, with the governor and lieutenant governor’s offices in penthouses on top of the roof. Rising above the penthouses, the blue crown of the central rotunda echoes a volcanic crater, a graceful interpretation of the traditional statehouse dome.” (1)

hawaii-state-capitol-building-details
PARADISE PARADIGMS
DeSoto Brown
Kiersten Faulkner

These two presentations were an interesting pair. DeSoto Brown presented in a style reminiscent of informational videos produced in the 1950’s and 1960’s that were designed to encourage travel to the islands of Hawaii by showing the Aloha Spirit and all Hawaii has to offer. All the photos presented were from the archives. It wasn’t until after his presentation that he mentioned a majority of the structures pictured have since been demolished or severely altered. Remember, Hawaii was aggressively built up only since post-World War II!
downtown-honolulu
This made for a great transition into Kiersten Faulkner’s presentation on the threats and challenges of preservation and tropical modernist design – how to preserve architecture from so recent in the past. Turns out the issues (for the most part) mainland preservationist have are the same Hawaii preservationists experience. Similar to Oregon and elsewhere, that 50 year historic threshold causes a lot of havoc at times. What happens when a resource is 46 years of age in integral to our built heritage, but threatened with demolition because, sorry it’s not 5-0 historic! Kiersten also described how there is anger and hurt around some mid-century resources (mainly spiritual structures) because they replaced older structures on the same site. Interestingly enough, Hawaii doesn’t have a leg-up on mainland solutions for the intersection of preservation, sustainability, and climate change. I was a bit surprised when I asked a colleague that worked in the preservation community in Hawaii if they did anything specific to mitigating resources going directly to the landfill from demolition since they were on an island. The full answer was “No.”

DESIGNING PARADISE
Don J. Hibbard
Ron Lindgren

Designing Paradise focused on resort design in post-war Hawaii, specifically how it influenced tropical resort design throughout the world. The design and development of the Mauna Kea Resort and Ed Killingsworth Hawaii resort designs: Halekulani, Kapalua Bay Hotel, Mauna Lani Resort, Ihilani Hotel, and renovation of the Kahala Hilton Hotel were discussed. Don and Ron explained how the distinctive and elegant approaches to resort design seen at Mauna Kea Resort and the others would ultimately set the standards for tropical resort design throughout Hawaii and the world.

The Ed Killingsworth designs discussed were divine. The attention to detail Killingsworth incorporated into his creations was phenomenal to see and learn about. Those concrete spider legs that became a staple of his residential, commercial and resort designs are stunning architectural geometries for the eyes. Killingsworth was a planner for the City and County of Honolulu pre and post-World War II. While his resorts were interesting to learn about, Ron Lindgren discussed at length his residential designs in California.
waikiki-beach-diamond-head
Killingsworth personal residence was breathtaking. If only every house was designed with the level of attention, detail, and space planning that brings the indoors out and vice versa that Killingsworth executed. What caught my attention was how Killingsworth designed the kitchen at his personal residence in California. He had floating wood lower cabinets, which looked more like beautiful pieces of furniture than storage for kitchen-wares. Also, he did not use a backsplash – genius! Behind the floating cabinets with the kitchen sink, a full ceiling-to-floor window was used, including underneath the floating cabinets. This played a trick on the eye, with the abundance of natural light flooding from above and below the cabinets the space looked larger and lighter. Also, why are we SO obsessed with back-splashes and kitchen islands? His designs make the case for neither. His interpretations of lanai living was on full display in his California residence.

The Mauna Kea Resort. Laurance Rockefeller was the developer that brought the world to Kauna’oa beach, and ushered in a new era of tourism to Hawaii. The Mauna Kea Resort opened in the summer of 1965, and was designed by SOM in the most sophisticated mid-century style. Concrete has never looked as elegant as it disappears into the surrounding natural landscapes. It was the first resort along the coastline of Hawaii’s Big Island. Mauna Kea Resort also features a prominent art and artifacts collection. The contributions to the Big Island that Rockefeller enabled in the mid-century are still thriving today.
IBM-building-honolulu
Tropical Modernism in a Multicultural Context at the Docomomo US National Symposium was a delight to experience. The closing reception was at the Ossipoff designed IBM building (1962). Talk about an iconic Honolulu mid-century building. The exterior façade grille is retro yet timeless architectural elegance. And, it was fitting to have the opening and closing receptions at two distinct mid-century buildings in Honolulu designed by one of the most prolific architect’s in Hawaii.

I wouldn’t be able to end this two part blog without mentioning the hotel that hosted several social events, part of the symposium programming: the Surfjack. From the beautiful lanai, delicious restaurant with fantastic mai tai’s, to the quaint yet stylish rooms, the POOL, and welcoming staff. The Surfjack felt like a home away from home in the heart of downtown Waikiki.

For designers, architects, planners, preservationists, and those generally interested in mid-century design, Docomomo US National Symposium is a MUST on your list of mid-century focused events.
surf-jack-hotel

Written by Kate Kearney, Associate.

1. The Hawaii State Foundation on Culture and the Arts in accordance with the recommendation of The Task Force to Plan and Coordinate the Celebration of the Fiftieth Anniversary of the Hawaii State Capitol. Democracy by Design. The Planning and Development of the Hawaii State Capitol, by Don. J. Hibbard. Honolulu, 2019.

PART I: Tropical Modernism in a Multicultural Context at the Docomomo US National Symposium

Tropical Modernism was showcased, explored, and celebrated at the sixth annual Docomomo US National Symposium in late September 2019. Docomomo US/Hawaii chapter hosted, and as the current Docomomo US/Oregon chapter president I had the opportunity to experience all things tropical and modern in Oahu, Hawaii.

Honolulu (2)-pmapdx

For those unfamiliar with the mouthful that is Docomomo (documentation for the conservation of the modern movement), it’s a national (technically international) non-profit dedicated to the preservation of modern architecture, landscape and design. At the Oregon chapter we take this mission a bit further by including art from the core era of modernism and one of the most controversial architectural movements: post modernism. But let’s get back to the oasis that is Oahu. First, if you have the opportunity to visit this island – DO IT. It is a multicultural, dense cosmopolitan city yet rural surf-town, absolute food heaven, post-war architectural wonderland where tropical resort design began, all rolled into one island that has weather far superior than what we ever get in the state of Oregon. Why do we all live in the cold and rain?!

The symposium kicked-off with a welcome reception at the Outrigger Canoe Club. The building is situated right along the Waikiki coast and was designed by Vladimir Ossipoff in 1941. Ossipoff had a prolific Honolulu-based firm, Ossipoff Snyder Architects. A common theme I was unware would take a central role throughout the symposium was about tropical outdoor/indoor living, or better known as lanai.

honolulu-beach

UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII AT MANOA
University of Hawaii at Manoa hosted the first day of symposium presentations at Jefferson Hall. While there are several mid-century buildings across the campus, Jefferson Hall is an architectural gem among them. Completed in 1963 and designed by Chinese-American architect I.M. Pei with Young & Henderson. Jefferson Hall was the last building constructed of the East-West Center (EWC) campus. The EWC helped put Hawaii on an international stage, connecting Asia and the West. Jefferson Hall in particular “combines the austere symmetry of the New Formalism with hints of Chinese traditional architecture to convey the links between Asia and the West envisioned by the center’s multiple champions and founders.” (1.)

HAWAII OVERVIEW – from traditional architecture to mid-century modernism
Glenn Mason
Graham Hart

Bit perplexed that native Hawaiian architecture was breezed over and barely mentioned. The presentation began with thatched houses, then quickly jumped to the first Western-style frame houses being shipped to Hawaii in the 1820s. These were the type of structures the Missionaries were accustomed to. From there we learned that basalt quarries were developed in the 1880s, and the California Gold Rush really opened up west coast trade to Hawaii. For the first time Douglas Fir was shipped from the mainland to Hawaii. Mason then explained that while Hawaii had designers, they did not have architects, but architects from Australia or the mainland came to Hawaii and contributed to the beaux-arts and neo-classical styled structures. It wasn’t until the early 1900’s that a regional style began to express itself in Hawaii, and across the mainland. Hawaii regional style elements include: double pitched roof, lanai, local materials, and an overhang roof.

Towards the end of the 1930s change thinking happens and international style references begins to be expressed in architecture. Hawaii sees an influx of younger architects from Europe that were schooled in modernist design. The late 1930s had a stream of construction on military bases (several designed by Albert Kahns office), but by the time of WWII, 99% of architects on the island went to work for the military. From the 1930s through the 1960s there is a shift in the architecture vocabulary in Hawaii. It begins with regional style with a hint of modern, then modern used to reinterpret regionalism. Modern architects of note in Hawaii from that era:

Vladimir Ossipoff
Peter Wimberly
Lemmon, Freeth, Haines, and Jones
Edwim Bauer
Alfred Preis
Johnson & Perkins

The shift in the architecture vocabulary in Hawaii continues from the 1940s through the 1970s. Now we begin to see the environmental influences on modernism, even though rural landscapes are being transformed into cosmopolitan centers with smaller, steep, tight sites or housing. Materials used for modern design now includes concrete, cast concrete, lava rock, coral, local woods, and aggregates. Modern architecture in Hawaii also embraces the natural environment. This is most reflective in architect’s obsessions with lanai. This obsession found its way from residential homes to large developments. The East-West Center (1962-1963) at the University of Hawaii Manoa, designed by I.M. Pei, is a phenomenal example of a monumental, institutional piece of architecture that embraced the lanai.

Jefferson-Hall-001

ASIAN INFLUENCES
Alison Chiu and Alissa Carson
Lorraine Minatoishi
Luca Guido

This group of presentations focused on different facets of Asian influences and how the contributions were interwoven in post-war architectural design throughout Hawaii. Lorraine Minatoishi focused on Japanese temple architecture influence of modern design post-war. There were distinct temple styles developed throughout their history in Hawaii:

Japanese Traditional Style (late 1800s – early 1900s)
Plantation Style (late 1800s – early 1900s)
Hawaii Eclectic Style (early 1900s – 1950s)
East-West Style (1918 – 1950s)
Post-War Modernism (led by second-generation Japanese architect Niser)
Post-War Traditional

Luca’s presentation took it a step further by discussing an obscure architect from the mid-century modern era, Bruce Goff, and how he also influenced local architects to Hawaii. I had not heard of Bruce Goff like most, but Luca Guido explained why this figure in the realm of modernism was obscured until now.

RESIDENCES OF WIMBERLY AND COOK
Following presentations at the University of Hawaii and a self-guided walking tour of other mid-century campus resources, I chose to attend the Residences of Wimberly & Cook Tour. Pete Wimberly of Wimberly & Cook designed two residences situated above the Manoa Valley. Wimberly designed some of the most iconic mid-century modern buildings in Hawaii. Wimberly came to Hawaii in 1940, and post-war his career flourished. His designs embodied tropical modernism, spaces that blurred indoor and outdoor living. The residential designs we toured both featured indoor/outdoor living, natural cross-ventilation, elegant interior details and finishes, and a smart use of natural light. However, they were completely different in essence, aesthetic, style, and state.
Cook-Residence-PMAPDX
The Japanese style pavilion house was like walking into a meticulously cared-for time capsule. There wasn’t even dust on the book shelves that displayed artifacts collected and arranged by the original homeowner! However, there were a few signs of wear-and-tear on the interior Japanese style floor mats, kitchen cabinets along their frames, and slight dry-rot peppered across the original wood deck. Otherwise the home was pristinely maintained. Wimberly’s private residence across the street was a different story.

Wimberly’s private residence was constructed in 1945. This is an insane date for residential construction due to World-War II ending the same year, and the majority of architects/contractors in Oahu were working on military projects. With the Japanese style pavilion home, you enter by walking down slightly winding stone steps. With Wimberly’s private residence, you enter by climbing up stone steps that deliver visitors to a small landing, and then up more exterior stairs. The second set of stairs (wood planks suspended by cables) makes for a swoon-worthy entry sequence that looks like something Dwell or Architectural Digest would gobble up for a feature article.
Wimberly-Residence-PMAPDX
From the now faded red door, redish-pink painted wood paneled ceilings, decorative animal sculptures situated within the header above the door that leads from the dining area into the kitchen, to ornate light fixtures and various metal finishes throughout the space, Wimberly’s private residence utilized design elements that reflected the multicultural diversity of Hawaii. The residence is also quintessential mid-century design: natural cross-ventilation, sliding wall panels to completely open up or section off the main-floor living, dining and lounge areas, and a technological savvy (for its time) kitchen. From the perspective of how we design kitchens today, it is real sad and small, save for the to-die-for view of the lush tropical garden from the kitchen window over the sink.

Wimberley’s private residence also showed signs of being well lived-in, yet not maintained with any desired vigor. The wood framed windows on either side of the structure are rotting like the planks along the entry façade deck, and there are several cracked panes of window glass. Structural settling has made itself known, and the kitchen is retro in a manner no one would want for daily use. Most of the interior painted walls or ceilings have faded into softer hues of their original bold colors. And, when we visited, it looked as though someone was living there, yet possibly setting up an estate sale for interior items. There were some true mid-century interior design gems scattered in the clutter piled up from the floor I wish I could have packed in my suitcase for the return trip.

Hope you enjoyed PART I: Tropical Modernism in a Multicultural Context at the Docomomo US National Symposium! In Part II we will discuss the Hawaii State Capitol, and presentations on Historic Preservation in Hawaii and Tropical Resort Design.

Written by Kate Kearney, Associate.

1. Shen, Haigo and Irene. Tropical Modernism At University of Hawaii At Manoa. Docomomo US National Symposium, Oahu, Hawaii, September 2019.

History of Fountain Place Apartments, formerly Wheeldon Annex

Back in April, we introduced an exciting on the boards project – Fountain Place Apartments Seismic Upgrade. 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. Completed in 1914 and originally named Wheeldon Annex, Fountain Place is a five-story unreinforced brick apartment building located in downtown Portland, owned and operated by Home Forward. There are 74 total units, with studio, one-and two-bedroom homes. The unit mix is 5 at 40%, 5 at 50% and the rest restricted at 60% area median income (AMI). While the project is progressing on schedule, we will be discussing below the architectural significance of this historic resource as it relates to our built environment.
historic-1916-fountainplace-wheeldon-annex
OVERVIEW
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. The Wheeldon Annex 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. Character-defining wood double-hung multi-pane windows have been retained throughout and appear to be well maintained. Alterations to the exterior have been quite minimal.

The interior of the Wheeldon Annex has good integrity; although a number of units have been altered or divided, the general layout with U-shaped double-loaded corridors at every floor remains, and many units still contain at least some original features, materials, and layouts. These include primary rooms with original oak flooring and in some cases, the original built-in furniture with pull-out beds and fold-down desks; kitchens with wood cabinetry and trim; and bathrooms with claw foot tubs and built-in ventilation and cabinetry. While there are many units that have been divided, the alterations (primarily in the mid-1930s but continuing into the 1990s) have generally left original features in place.
detial-fountain-place-home-forward

The history of Wheeldon Annex is engrained in Portland’s and Oregon’s social history and practice of systemic racism. From Oregon’s statehood in 1859, the Black population were marginalized and segregated from the White population. Oregon’s State Constitution included Article 1, Section 35, “No free negro or mulatto not residing in this state at the time of the adoption of this constitution, shall come, reside or be within this state or hold any real estate, or make any contracts, or maintain any suit therein.” With the 14th and 15th Amendments, in 1868 and 1870, respectively, the Article should have been nullified, but the practices within restrictive covenants, discriminatory real estate sales, and racist zoning practices overwhelmingly prevented Black people in Oregon from accessing jobs, housing, and other vital resources.

In 1910, one year before Wheeldon Annex opened, the Black population in Oregon was 1,492 while the state’s total population was 672,765. In Portland, the Black population was 775 while the city had a total of 90,246 inhabitants. The legal and systemic provisions put in place by the White majority were working to the detriment of Black people in Oregon.

DESIGN OF WHEELDON ANNEX
When Ernest MacNaughton was commissioned to design an apartment building for Frank Warren, he would have been quite familiar with the large apartment blocks built for well-off tenants on the east coast. MacNaughton’s design for the 1911 Wheeldon Annex illustrates a residential apartment block form with front courtyard protected on three sides. This form created an outdoor area but with restricted access, a pragmatic response to the more urban condition in downtown Portland.

The Wheeldon Annex, with its front entry court, appears to be among the first buildings in Portland to use a residential apartment typology in the downtown setting. There are only two earlier examples of a U-shaped apartment-style building constructed closer to downtown than those listed above; one of these is now demolished: the 1910 Beaux-Arts style Rose-Friend Apartments at 1307 SW Broadway. The other comparable downtown example pre-dating the Wheeldon Annex is the 1908 Nortonia Hotel (now Mark Spencer Hotel) at 409 SW 11th Avenue. The 6.5-story building was designed by Josef Jacobberger and has, atypically for a hotel, individual rooms along the ground floor rather than storefront with more commercial or public uses. The building exhibits a U-shaped plan with a central front pedestrian entry court and has a restrained style, with some Tudor elements and some Italian Renaissance Revival decorative touches. It is worth mentioning that there was another much larger but well-known hotel that may have been inspirational in its massing and layout. The opulent full-block Portland Hotel, which opened in 1890 and was demolished in 1951, was a 6-story building with H-shaped plan including a large forecourt for carriage drop-off.
fountain-place-home-forward
SIGNIFICANCE
Designed by MacNaughton & Raymond for owner Frank M. Warren, the Wheeldon Annex is locally significant for its illustration of the newly acceptable, and even fashionable, shift towards high-end residential apartment living in downtown Portland. The building is one of the earliest downtown examples of a U-shaped residential apartment block form, which later proliferated across Portland, including in the downtown setting. It was completed in 1911, using a U-shaped layout first seen as early as 1907 in high-class apartments in the exclusive “Nob Hill” residential district to the west of downtown Portland. The Wheeldon Annex is associated with Portland’s exponential growth during the ten-year period starting with the Lewis and Clark Exposition. During this time, apartment buildings were introduced in Portland as a new type of construction and use targeted towards the wealthier class.

The Wheeldon Annex is also locally significant because it is a highly intact work of the well-regarded Portland architectural partnership of MacNaughton and Raymond. The building displays distinctive characteristics of the Italian Renaissance Revival style in its division into three parts; the rusticated base, middle, and decorative cornice. The Wheeldon Annex was conceived as a high-end venture; and its use of modern built-in, fold-away furniture, single bathrooms for every apartment, dumbwaiters, and tenant services gave the building a highly respectable and up-to-date reputation as soon as it was completed in 1911. While not all of these interior features, especially in individual units, are still present, the building still has good integrity overall. The building is still in its original and primary residential use, although it no longer has “hotel” functions. The building maintains its original location, design, setting, materials, and workmanship and still conveys its overall historic feeling and association.
1920-wheeldon-annex-oregonian
The incredible boom in apartment and hotel construction in the first decade of the 20th century in Portland took place primarily in downtown and in northwest Portland. What is significant about the Wheeldon Annex is that it was one of the first to take the new apartment building block form, the largest and newest residential typology, and put it downtown without any ground floor commercial or significant public uses. Rather, the building featured a residential-style front courtyard. Almost all earlier forecourt apartment block examples in Portland were located significantly west of downtown. The Wheeldon Annex was constructed as an apartment-hotel, offering limited services to guests who might be permanent or temporary.

The building is locally significant for its association with the period of explosive growth starting with Portland’s Lewis and Clark Exposition in 1905. It is one of the earliest existing representations of a building typology that was to become all but ubiquitous. The size, scale, and general footprint of the building spawned hundreds of structures across Portland using a similar size, scale, and front court entry well into the 1930s. The building was designed by MacNaughton & Raymond for Frank Manley Warren, a man who made his fortune in the salmon packing and canning industry and died on the Titanic in 1912; one of only two Oregon residents to perish in the disaster. The building design features highly intact Italian Renaissance Revival exterior features such as a projecting decorative cornice with grouped brackets, a rusticated brick base, and multi-pane wood double-hung windows. It is therefore also locally significant for its architecture; as a well-crafted example of the style by a highly regarded Portland architectural firm.
HF-Fountain-Place-PMAPDX-LBC
MACNAUGHTON & RAYMOND ARCHITECTS
Ernest Boyd MacNaughton was an architect in Portland who practiced successfully for several decades. However, he also succeeded in becoming, through his own efforts, one of Portland’s powerful and influential banking and civic leaders. MacNaughton was born in Cambridge, Massachusetts, in 1880. MacNaughton arrived in Portland and was employed by Edgar M. Lazarus for three years until he formed his own office in 1906 with his brother-in-law, Herbert Raymond, an engineer. In 1907, only a few years after he had arrived in Portland without appreciable money or family connections, MacNaughton began to make speculative real estate transactions, riding the incredible growth in land values at that time in Portland.

In 1913, E. B. MacNaughton’s reputation took a hit when he was fired by Henry Pittock, publisher of the Oregonian. MacNaughton had been hired to renovate the Marquam building at Sixth and Morrison, but the east wall of the building collapsed when renovations were attempted and the building ultimately had to be demolished. By some accounts, the building was poorly constructed with defective materials.

By 1928, MacNaughton became involved with the First National Bank of Portland. He became president of the bank in 1932, and by 1947 chairman of the board. MacNaughton also sat in a position of leadership with many Portland institutions.

Across his design career, MacNaughton’s work shows an excellent sensitivity to scale and composition and a propensity towards a muted, 20th Century Commercial aesthetic perhaps most evident in his later warehouses. He did not have his classmate and early partner Ellis Lawrence’s facility with asymmetrical compositions or charming English styles, but MacNaughton showed a more than competent talent for the design of urban, commercial structures. Many of his buildings use tripartite “Chicago” windows, and almost all are brick.

Written by PMA staff, edited by Kate Kearney, Associate, for clarity.

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

On the Boards: Fountain Place Apartments Seismic Upgrade

HF-Fountain-Place-PMAPDX-LBC

Built in 1914 and originally named Wheeldon Annex, Fountain Place is a five-story unreinforced brick apartment building located in downtown Portland, owned and operated by Home Forward. There are 80 total units, with studio, one and two bedroom homes. The residents it serves have incomes between 40% and 80% of the area median income. The building is listed in the City of Portland Historic Resource Inventory, with an III ranking for its architectural significance. Fountain Place was built in the Second Renaissance Revival style with a raised basement, bracketed sheet metal cornice, and belt course with brick corbels. The building has a basement and courtyard. Presently, PMA is working with Lorentz Bruun Construction on a design-build project to improve the life safety of the building, while retaining its historic character.

Within the need for seismic upgrade lies a number of challenges our team has the solutions to resolve. Seismic upgrades within historic buildings are disruptive to existing electrical systems, mechanical systems, plumbing systems, and impact existing resident walls and units. The design-build team understand the challenge of minimizing the disruption and how to navigate current City of Portland URM retrofit standards as they relate to potential future mandates for these types of buildings.

While the project is in its preliminary stages, the team has reviewed the existing conditions at Fountain Place, including the extensive previous documentation and visited non-occupied spaces within the building. Up next for the team are additional investigations into the existing conditions that go beyond research and visual observations.

FOUNTAIN PLACE TEAM
Lorentz Bruun
Peter Meijer Architect
KPFF
Reyes
GLUMAC
Salazar Architect, Inc.

HF-Fountain-Place-PMAPDX-LBC

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.

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.

Design Considerations for Accessory Dwelling Units

“The City of Portland’s Zoning Code allows Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) to be added to a site accessory to a house, attached house, or manufactured home in all Residential zones, all Commercial zones, and the Central Employment (EX) zone as described in Chapter 33.205 of the City Zoning Code.” [1]

Many established traditional single family neighborhoods provide opportunity for new exterior ADUs via conversion of garages or the building of a new structure. The maximum size of an ADU may be no more than 75% of the living area of the house or 800 square feet, whichever is less. Zoning limits the height and site placement, which may reduce the area to less than 800 SF. ADU roof ridges are limited to 20 feet, and if kept lower than the main house, this will help increase the compatibility of the new ADU to the existing house and regulate its form and massing.

In general, the exterior finish materials, roof pitch, trim, eaves, window orientation and dimension must be the same or visually match those of the primary house in type, size and placement. In other words, be compatible with the design and aesthetics of the main house. New ADUs can seamlessly blend into the context of the street when the scale, massing, and exterior materials reflect the neighborhood context.
Accessible-Dwelling-Unit-pmapdx-002
Creative design solutions can develop ways to maximize allowable heights and remain compatible with the main house. If an ADU shares a wall with the main house, it is considered attached and its height can exceed 20 feet depending on the zoning’s height limit. Fire codes require one hour fire separation between the units, so existing walls within the main house may need to be modified.

Another important design consideration is limitations on the entry sequence. Only one main entrance may be located on the street-facing facade of the house, meaning an attached ADU must have a front door on a side or rear elevation. Entry stairs, porches, or decks can extend into the side setback if not higher than 2 ½ feet, otherwise a 3 feet side yard setback is required. Detached garages are typically converted into ADUs, which can be a loss of an amenity for the main house. For the Peerless project, there was opportunity to develop a below grade garage that connects at the basement level of the house. This below grade development allowed the ADU to maintain an appropriate height, keep the homes’ garage, and provide 800 SF of living space above the garage.
Accessible-Dwelling-Unit-pmapdx
New ADUs provide great opportunity to build low energy units. Setting Net Zero or Passive energy goals increase the construction costs approximately 10% but will provide long-term utility and energy savings for both the ADU and the main house. Since an ADU cannot exceed 800 square feet in size, there is usually only small mechanical units and one bathroom, keeping utility usage at a minimum.

ADUs are permissible in residential Historic districts. Any exterior ADU will require additional design review by City of Portland staff, or possible the Portland Historic Landmarks Commission. However, if the general guidance of proper massing, scale, set-back, and material choices are followed, the compatibility of the new ADU to the historic district will likely be achieved and approval provided.

Written By Peter Meijer, AIA, NCARB / Principal, and Hali Knight / Designer

[1] Zoning code information comes from the City of Portland, Bureau of Development Services, Accessory Dwelling Units Program Guide.

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.