What the City Council Proposals Really Mean

Posted on: April 30th, 2012

The City Council is holding a public hearing at on Wednesday, May 2 at 10am at 250 Broadway to contemplate 11 bills which, if passed, will greatly change the workings of the Landmarks Preservation Commission in some very damaging ways. The first batch of bills are ones which were previously proposed and have been sitting in committee for a number of years. They are as follows: Intro 20 (CM Mendez, lead sponsor) – which empowers LPC to intercede in cases where unused Buildings permits are still active on Landmark buildings.  HDC supports this bill. Intro 80 (CM Koppell, lead sponsor) – requiring better monitoring of construction near landmark buildings.  HDC supports this bill. Intro 220 (CM Lappin, lead sponsor) – requiring the LPC to maintain a survey department. HDC questions if this bill is especially necessary, as many of the departments within LPC are not mandated by law and there is no funding necessarily attached to it. Intro 357 (Public Advocate De Blasio, lead sponsor) – allowing more flexibility about “green” rooftop mechanicals on landmark buildings.  HDC does not support this bill since we feel that all rooftop mechanicals on landmark buildings should be positioned to be as minimally visible as possible.   Then there are four bills which together seek to impose a strict timeline on the LPC’s deliberation of potential landmarks and historic districts. Intro 222A (CM Lappin, lead sponsor)– requires LPC to respond to Requests for Evaluation within a maximum of 180 days (6 months). Intro 532A (CM Garodnik, lead sponsor) – mandates a publicly accessible online database of RFEs and dictates language for LPC’s responses to requests Intro 849 (CM Lander, lead sponsor) – creates an appeals process for denied RFEs Intro 850 (CM Lander, lead sponsor) – creates a 21/33 month maximum timeline for landmark and historic district designations.   These bills would seem to answer the longtime community complaints about lack of attention to community requests.  In truth,  if these bills are adopted in tandem as written, they would risk overwhelming the LPC scant resources and could result in thousands of potential buildings in dozens of historic districts being rejected out of hand. Currently, there are literally thousands of buildings in potential historic districts across the city including:

Bainbridge Avenue				Kew Gardens
Bedford Stuyvesant				Madison Square North
Boerum Hill				Morningside Heights
Broadway Flushing				Moshulu Parkway
Bruckner Boulevard				Mount Morris
Carroll Gardens				Murray Hill
City Island				Park Slope
Clinton Hill				Parkway Village
Crow Hill				Richmond Hill
Crown Heights North				Ridgewood
Far Rockaway				Riverdale
Fort Greene				the Bowery
Fort Hill				the Grand Concourse
Greenpoint				the Upper East Side
Greenwich Village				the Upper West Side
Inwood				Victorian Flatbush
Jackson Heights				Wave Hill
Jamaica Estates				Westerleigh

to name only the ones which spring immediately to mind.  Imagine if the LPC HAD to make decisions and designate all those districts in 33 months.  They couldn’t even if they wanted to – and that would result in thousands of buildings being permanently prevented from becoming landmarks based on a mandated schedule rather than merit. Please also note that there is no funding guaranteed to actually provide for the staff necessary to enact this scheme. This plan is almost ensured to create paralysis at the agency. If this timeline was currently in place, one could easily imagine that Crown Heights North,  the Park Slope Extension, the Grand Concourse, Douglaston Hill, Murray Hill NoHo,  and Dumbo would have never been designated since all of those designations took longer than 33 months to complete. This is clearly a case of an attempt to legislate around a concern where the cure is much more damaging than the problem. For a full timeline of what we think this will look like, see here. Finally, there are two bills which seek to inhibit LPC’s powers to designate or regulate properties. Intro 845 (CM Comrie, lead sponsor) – allows for replacement materials on landmark buildings to be those present at time of designation. Intro 846 (CM Comrie, lead sponsor) – mandates City Planning Commission to analyze economic impact of designation on the development potential of proposed landmark and instructs City Council to strongly regard this analysis in their deliberations.  The bill also requires the LPC to issue very detailed draft designation reports  early in the public hearing process and promulgate rules for historic districts immediately after designation. These bills are aimed at making the LPC ineffectual and providing faulty intellectual rationales for the Council to reject designations at the behest of developers. Intro 845, the Replacement Materials Bill, undermines the basic benefit of LPC oversight in helping to gradually return areas to a more historically-appropriate condition.  With the advent of new material technologies and the growth in skilled building artisans, it is easier and cheaper than ever before to replace failing building materials with appropriate replacements of high quality.  What this bill would result in would be the endless replacement of white vinyl windows in designated historic districts with more of the same. Intro 846, the Economic Argument Bill, deliberately misconstrues the economic value of landmark designation by emphasizing the false value of “property strictly as development ”. By enabling the sole criteria of economic value to be the highest use of a site,  the bill strives to denigrate the economic value of landmark designation to property value. The most highly valued and most desirable property in New York City falls within historic districts. There are a number of factors why these areas are so successful and one of them is their landmark protection.  People want to live where there is certainty and protection.  Under this bill, the recent Park Slope extension could be found to have an negative economic effect on the neighborhood because it could potentially affect the FAR of rowhouse blocks, whereas commonsense and actual real world data will show the opposite to be true. This is a deliberate attack on the Landmarks Law , which was intended by its drafters to “stabilize and improve property value; protect and enhance the city’s attractions to tourists and visitors and the support and stimulus to business and industry thereby provided; and strengthen the economy of the city”.  This is how Landmark designation worked in 1965, and it’s how Landmark designation works today. That the City Council is hearing all these bills with almost no notice is very disturbing.  That each speaker is only going to have THREE MINUTES to comment on 11 bills is outright appalling. Regardless of the merit of these bills, the concerned public of New York City’s neighborhoods deserves a real opportunity to discuss the issues raised by these bills.  Under these circumstances, any germ of good policy in these bills simply cannot have a fair hearing or thoughtful discussion whereas the bad ideas risk slipping through unchallenged. HDC urges you to come to 250 Broadway on Wednesday, May 2 at 10am and tell the City Council firmly – this is bad public policy, bad for preservation and bad for New York! Written testimony is also permitted and should be brought to the hearing or sent to CM Comrie and Speaker Christine Quinn at 250 Broadway, New York, NY 10007. You can contact Speaker Quinn on the Council website at http://council.nyc.gov/d3/html/members/home.shtml or send your testimony to gbenjamin(at)council.nyc.gov

---

Best-Kept Homes

Posted on: April 23rd, 2012

Taking Guardianship of a Historic Home

By Iyna Bort Caruso for Sotheby's International Realty Entering a home from a bygone era is like crossing a threshold in time. “Historic residences are profound works of both art and craft,” says Katherine Malone-France, director of outreach, education and support at the National Trust for Historic Preservation in Washington, D.C. “They tell us a lot about ourselves, what people liked, what was important to them and how their lives were structured.” Across the board and around the globe, buyers have long been drawn to the pleasures of owning a moment in time. Not every older home can measure up. Only those deemed to have historical, cultural or aesthetic value are eligible for special designation. That “value” can be based on architecture, of course, but it can also be tied to an event associated with the home or to an individual who once lived there. More than anything, owners of historic homes buy for love. Love of the artisanship, architectural details and even the quirks. Still, it’s a smart investment. A landmark plaque on a residence increases property value. It assures buyers the qualities that attracted them to the home in the first place will endure over time. What’s more, “historic homes are incredibly sturdy and solidly built,” says Malone-France. “They have so many more hand-driven fasteners, they contain woods that are no longer available to us but were specifically selected because of their strength and properties for different elements, whether as rafters or floor joists. They were built to breath, to adapt, to last.” Yes, there are some unconventional layouts in older homes and, yes, owners must follow certain prescribed guidelines when making changes or improvements. That comes with the territory. Preservation guidelines are intended to safeguard character-defining elements and protect against inappropriate alterations. Owners are tasked with keeping the structure in good repair and obtaining prior approval before performing work. Based on the governing body, the guidelines can be as specific as the choice of paint colors and the selection of foliage. Would-be buyers are sometimes intimidated by the prospect, feeling they may be required to spend exorbitantly on the maintenance of a landmarked home. Not so, says Malone-France. “The best preservation work is often the most economical. You basically strengthen the places that need to be strengthened and make sure the exterior envelope is solid. It doesn’t have to be a tremendously expensive or invasive process.” Historical preservation organizations are a good source for architect, contractor and artisan referrals. Eran Chen is the founder and creative director of ODA–Architecture in New York, a firm with an extensive portfolio of historic projects. He considers the city’s preservation commission a partner in the design. The firm worked on a Union Square condominium building discovered to have been designed for Tiffany & Company in the late 19th century. Encased—and forgotten—behind brick walls were beautiful cast-iron arches. That finding “changed everything” about the development of the project, Chen says. “There’s always a lot of discovery,” he says. “The process is full of surprises. In some old structures, there are really treasures hidden in the walls and in the floors.” There are historic homes and then there are homes located in historic districts like the Gaslamp Quarter in San Diego, Calif., and the French Quarter of New Orleans, La. In New York City alone, there are dozens of historic districts. Louise Beit of Sotheby’s International Realty in New York frequently handles properties with landmark designation. The homes are typically located on gracious, tree-lined streets. Many were designed by prominent architects of the 1920s. “They are a fabulous investment,” Beit says. “They go up in value exponentially.” While buyers don’t necessarily seek out landmarked properties, she says they consider it a bonus when a home they love happens to be designated as one. It means that a governing entity, in this case the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission, is looking out for the property’s—and neighborhood’s—best long-term interests. “Buyers can be assured the residence will always be saleable and in excellent architectural and aesthetic taste.” Most countries have programs intended to protect buildings of architectural or historic distinction. Like the U.S., homes of exceptional interest in Mexico, for instance, have registries at the federal, state and local municipal levels. Residences in historic districts such as Mexico City’s downtown Zócalo neighborhood, San Miguel de Allende, Guanajuato, Mérida and Querétaro are in especially high demand, says Graciela Zamudio Conde of Guadalajara Sotheby’s International Realty in Mexico. Read more... http://online.wsj.com/ad/article/sir-insights?WC=HPInsThumb  

---

Deep Energy Retrofits for Existing Buildings

Posted on: April 23rd, 2012

The Green Lab is partnering with New Buildings Institute on a project called Deep Energy Savings in Existing Buildings, which will provide guidance for owners of smaller commercial buildings to achieve deep energy savings (50 percent and greater) through energy retrofits. We know that small and medium buildings matter as a critical (but as yet underserved) market for efficiency gains, representing 95% of all buildings and half of the commercial floorspace.  These buildings require simplified turn-key approaches that deliver deep sets of efficiency solutions requiring little time, knowledge or direct financial investment from the owners. The primary product of this project will be a free, online retrofit tool that will allow building owners to select retrofit strategies that are customized to their building’s size, features, climate and uses for deep energy savings without the need for computer energy modeling that is often cost prohibitive for owners of modestly sized buildings. In the first phase of this project, the Green Lab helped New Buildings Institute investigate 11 examples of energy retrofits in existing commercial buildings that, on average, use 50% less energy than the national average – most with an energy use intensity (EUI) of less than 40 kBtu per square foot. The Project Profiles for each building include motivations, technologies and practices, energy performance, financial information, overall project results and quotes from owner and design teams. A Meta Report contains the aggregated results of the case studies plus findings from an initial group of 50 buildings with 30% or more energy savings. This research was made possible by support from the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, the Kresge Foundation and the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA). In the project’s second phase, the Green Lab is describing the market for the online retrofit tool, so that we can target our work to buildings and owners most likely to take advantage of the resource. Defining the “smaller buildings retrofit market” is no easy task. We are segmenting the building stock to identify “market clusters” of buildings that are: most in need of energy retrofits; under-served in the current marketplace; culturally and economically valuable or endangered; and that represent a substantial portion of the existing building stock smaller than 50,000 square feet. This is a new approach to market segmentation with emphasis on both smaller buildings and physical characteristics, and we think it will change the way smaller buildings are considered as opportunities in the marketplace by technical experts and financing entities. As part of this work, we co-hosted the Deep Energy Savings in Existing Buildings Summit, bringing more than 80 industry experts together to discuss strategies for delivering deep savings to existing buildings. In the final phase, the Green Lab will be involved in piloting of the retrofit tool once it is complete and is exploring with NBI opportunities for a second phase of this work that will focus on retrofits of multi-family buildings. Look for a chance to help us test the tool in your community. To learn more about Deep Energy Savings in Existing Buildings please go to the New Building Institute webpage or contact Ric Cochrane, Project Manager of the Preservation Green Lab.

---

The Environmental Value of Building Reuse

Posted on: April 23rd, 2012

A report produced by the Preservation Green Lab of the National Trust for Historic Preservation provides the most comprehensive analysis to date of the potential environmental benefit of building reuse. This groundbreaking study, The Greenest Building: Quantifying the Environmental Value of Building Reuse, concludes that, when comparing buildings of equivalent size and function, building reuse almost always offers environmental savings over demolition and new construction. The report’s key findings offer policy-makers, building owners, developers, architects and engineers compelling evidence of the merits of reusing existing buildings as opposed to tearing them down and building new. Those findings include:

• Reuse Matters. Building reuse typically offers greater environmental savings than demolition and new construction. It can take between 10 to 80 years for a new energy efficient building to overcome, through efficient operations, the climate change impacts created by its construction. The study finds that the majority of building types in different climates will take between 20-30 years to compensate for the initial carbon impacts from construction.
• Scale Matters. Collectively, building reuse and retrofits substantially reduce climate change impacts. Retrofitting, rather than demolishing and replacing, just 1% of the city of Portland’s office buildings and single family homes over the next ten years would help to meet 15% of their county’s total CO2 reduction targets over the next decade.
• Design Matters. The environmental benefits of reuse are maximized by minimizing the input of new construction materials. Renovation projects that require many new materials can reduce or even negate the benefits of reuse.
• The Bottom Line: Reusing existing buildings is good for the economy, the community and the environment. At a time when our country’s foreclosure and unemployment rates remain high, communities would be wise to reinvest in their existing building stock. Historic rehabilitation has a thirty-two year track record of creating 2 million jobs and generating $90 billion in private investment. Studies show residential rehabilitation creates 50% more jobs than new construction.

---

Preservation Green Lab

Posted on: April 23rd, 2012

By the Numbers

By Elizabeth McNamara | From Preservation | Spring 2012  42 Duration, in minutes, of the Preservation Green Lab press conference, held Jan. 24, 2012, during which the National Trust reported on the environmental and economic value of reusing buildings. Six different building typologies were tested across four U.S. cities—Phoenix, Chicago, Atlanta, and Portland, Ore.—each representing a different climate zone 98.003 quadrillion Total amount of energy, in BTUs, used in the United States each year 3:51 Time, in minutes and seconds, President Barack Obama dedicated to renewable energy and climate change in his 2012 State of the Union address, in which he stated, “The easiest way to save money is to waste less energy,” and proposed giving businesses incentives to upgrade their buildings $20 billion Amount of money that would be saved in the United States if the energy efficiency of commercial and industrial buildings improved by 10 percent 925 million Square footage of building space demolished in the United States in 1996 1 billion Estimated square footage of building space demolished and replaced with new construction in the United States each year 82 billion Estimated square footage of space the Brookings Institution projects Americans will demolish and replace with new construction between 2005 and 2030, representing 25 percent of today’s existing building stock 46 Maximum percentage of energy saved through building reuse instead of new construction, comparing buildings with the same energy performance level 42 Time, in years, for the average new, energy-efficient commercial office building in Portland, Ore., to cancel out the negative climate change effects of its construction 50 Time, in years, for the average new, energy-efficient single-family house in Portland to cancel out the negative climate change effects of its construction 231,000 Metric tons of CO2 not emitted in Multnomah County, Ore., if, over the next decade, 1 percent of existing commercial office space and single-family houses is retrofitted and reused instead of demolished, amounting to 15 percent of Multnomah County’s target     Elizabeth McNamara is an assistant editor for Preservation.

---

It’s A Steel

Posted on: April 23rd, 2012

Steel windows present a challenge in many restoration projects. By Martha McDonald When restoring historic buildings, the question of what to do with the existing steel windows is often a serious concern. Architects may want to turn to replacement windows for energy conservation reasons, and there are firms that can provide historically accurate new windows. On the repair side of the argument is John Seekircher, owner and founder of Seekircher Steel Window Repair, Peekskill, NY. The firm repairs and restores thousands of steel windows every year, for commercial and residential projects. The family-owned and operated firm has been in business since 1977, and has a long list of projects to its credit, including Frank Lloyd Wright's Fallingwater. One of the advantages of repair versus replacement, Seekircher notes, is that it is usually quite a bit less expensive, "and the craftsmanship and lifespan of historic and steel windows is really unmatched by most replacement windows on the market today. Once restored, the historic windows are as good as new, even better." One such recent example is Ely Hall at Vassar College, Poughkeepsie, NY, where Seekircher restored 24 steel windows of various sizes ranging from 4x5-ft. to 7x11-ft. "Here at Vassar College, we make a great attempt to restore our historic building envelope systems," says Jeff Horst, Director of Special Projects at the college. "Many of our buildings are older so that involves masonry restoration, replacing roofs, and either refurbishing or replacing the windows. One of the considerations is improving energy efficiency. Ely Hall has a mix of window sizes, some with divided lites, and some with no divided lites." "The work is the same in all of the jobs," says Seekircher. "The windows are primed by hand, (we don't spray paint) and putty-glazed by hand, the same way it was done years ago. Then we add two finish coats and clean the glass and you have windows that are as good as new. The alloys in those windows are incredible. At Vassar, we only replaced about six feet of steel. The windows were still in very good shape. That's what we come across generally." "The task was to restore the envelope system, the copper roof and the masonry," Horst notes. "The windows – both wood and steel – were a bit of a challenge. There was no question about the wood windows – they had to be replaced. At first we decided to replace the steel windows, but after further investigation, we found that the steel was in good condition; the paint and the glass were not." "Seekircher made it clear that these windows were certainly worthy of restoration. He told us that the steel from this era is very good. We saw very little rust," says Horst. "The bottom line is that Seekircher completely restored the windows, with paint the same color as the original. We have gotten many compliments on the windows. They look really good, just like the original windows." The college brought in CVM Engineering, a Philadelphia building restoration consultant for the project. "Vassar is one of the older campuses in the country and they have a lot of historical buildings," notes Matt Ridgway, architectural engineer, CVM. "Ely Hall is not on the National Landmark list, but it was built in 1889, with an addition in 1906. Our understanding is that the windows were original to the building." "Our preference is always to salvage historic fabric in these historic buildings," he adds, "but one of the big questions is energy efficiency. What are you sacrificing energy-wise with restoration?" CVM looked at different options, including new thermally-broken aluminum windows that would replicate steel, and offer increased insulation values. He found that the cost of replication was two to four times the cost of restoring the historic steel windows. A decision was made to use laminated glass, rather than single-page glass, to provide more energy efficiency. "The steel windows at Ely Hall were in fair condition, needing only to be scraped down, primed and painted," he notes. "So we restored them all in place. Fortunately, Seekircher also had a collection of historic hardware for replacements where needed." "When looking at historic windows, there is always that decision to see if something is worth salvaging from financial standpoint and how important is original fabric. This project married these two thoughts. When we can, we like to try to get the best of both worlds." While the windows at Vassar were restored on site, those at Columbia University Hospital in New York City were removed from the building and restored in the Seekircher shop. Another difference was the pricing structure – it was more expensive to restore rather than replace the windows, but the decision was made to restore because of the significance of the historic material. "The Physicians and Surgeons Building is the flagship building for Columbia University Medical Center, and is the main entrance to the center," says Richard H. MacDowell, CSI, CDT, partner, Grenadier Corp., Bronx, NY, the general contractor for the project. "It is also one of the earliest buildings, constructed in the mid-1920s. The three monumental windows are right in the front. They are enormous – three stories high." Richard Pieper, director of preservation at Jan Hird Pokorny Associates, NYC, the architect for the Columbia University Medical Center project, notes: "We are a preservation firm, so we are very, very sensitive to changes in design. In this case, we felt very strongly that aluminum extrusion windows would significantly impact the look of the building. We spoke to the client about it and they agreed." "These are definitely the biggest steel windows we have worked on," says Seekircher. "It was a challenge taking them apart. When they are this big, it is usually easier to work in place, but because they had to do some repairs on the limestone, we would have been in the way, so the work was done in the shop." The windows were dismantled, loaded into Grenadier trucks and taken to the shop. "We made several trips to the shop to monitor the work and talk about certain repairs," MacDowell notes. "At some point, a decision was made to replace all of the glass rather than just broken planes." Grenadier workmen set the repaired steel windows in place and then Seekircher did the final painting and glazing (1/4-in. laminated glass) on site. "The client was thrilled," says MacDowell. "We got so many comments from people who said they were such beautiful windows. They didn't realize that they were the old windows. Even some engineers thought they looked like new windows. John also added some new hardware. The windows really stood out. It was a big 'wow' factor." TB

---

Preservation and Sustainability

Posted on: April 23rd, 2012

The restoration of historic buildings in Charleston, SC, shows how sustainability and preservation issues can be solved. By Ralph C. Muldrow, RA Historic Charleston, SC, has weathered more than its share of traumas since its founding in 1670. The city has survived numerous fires, frequent hurricanes, bombardments, a major earthquake and a hot, humid climate. Like many southern cities, Charleston experienced burgeoning growth in the post-World War II era, not only because of the Naval Yard as an employer but also, importantly, because of the new availability of air conditioning that facilitated growth throughout the South, although at the price of increased energy use. All along the way, Charleston's ethos has been intertwined with the veneration of the past, especially the architecture. The seal of the city has a Latin phrase that translates, "She guards her buildings, manners and laws." Charleston created the first historic district in America in 1931, and continues to stringently guard the buildings of the old and historic district. Protecting the historic buildings is a sustainable practice, utilizing the 'embodied energy' that it took in terms of materials and labor to build and maintain this sought-after historic city. Of course, the buildings do present a range of styles, but the pervasive typology is that of the single house. In the 18th and 19th centuries, the single house was the dominant typology. The plan has the narrow end facing the street with a false door which leads to a real front door half way down the side of the house. This was greatly augmented by about 1800 when the false door became the entryway to a long, often double-height side porch, called a 'piazza' in Charleston. We find this floor plan recurring from the Georgian period, through the Adam (Federal) Style, the Greek Revival Style, Victorian styles, etc., but in all of these exotic garbs the floor plan, fenestration and formality remain constant, with only a few elements giving the house a discernable 'style.' The distinct urbanism created by the repetition of the single house is a very sustainable model in and of itself. The survival of the underlying form of the single house over large areas of the city is an embedded 'sustainable' urban form. These older blocks provide a syncopated rhythm to the street, with the sustained intervals of house, piazza, garden, house, piazza, garden, etc. Post-Bellum Charleston was not a prosperous place. The local saying was, "too poor to paint, to proud to whitewash." Yet these weathered remainders of times gone by largely remained standing. Thus in the 1920s there was a phenomenon now called 'the Charleston Renaissance,' wherein the crumbled stucco and naked wood siding of the day became a tourism magnet. Spurring this movement were the evocative etchings of Elizabeth O'Neill Verner, the lyricism of "Porgy and Bess," and even the African-American derived dance, "The Charleston," with its raw energy. It was in that era that many gardens were designed for the single houses – beautiful parterres with shaped boxwoods and trellises. This glorious layer veils the truth about these back yards, which historically usually functioned as 'urban plantations,' with cows and hogs and chickens raised at the homes. This 'weathered city' utilized her unique, long-standing architectural layout of houses turned longways into their sites to create a shelter appropriate to the climate. The piazzas all face south and west, which allows them to catch prevailing breezes and allows for the shading of windows when the sun is high in the summer. And in winter the sunbeams drench the house with much needed warmth. There is a 'louver effect' in which the houses themselves provide shade to the neighboring house and/or garden, just as the louvers of a vent shade each other. The side garden also functioned as a firebreak. The formal fenestration allows for numerous windows on the south and west sides of the house (facing the prevailing breeze) which feed the few windows (mostly in the staircase) of the north-facing side, allowing for cooling breezes through the single room depth of the house. And despite earnest attempts by the government throughout Charleston's history to require the use of brick for fire resistance, many houses are wood frame, clapboarded houses built originally with no insulation to allow cooling air movement within their walls. Even the chimney stacks, which facilitate air movement, aided in cooling the single house in the summer. Case Studies For the purposes of this study, "sustainability" will be defined as an approach to construction that strives for efficiency in its use of energy, water and other resources. It is also an approach that favors occupant health and improved employee productivity, and it strives to reduce waste, pollution and environmental degradation. Green products are those that further the cause of sustainability through recycling and low environmental impacts. Even green products may cause some friction with sustainable building. For example, should one buy a 'green' adhesive product from California? Or should you instead purchase a normal adhesive locally, saving the carbon footprint associated with the transportation of the product, and promoting the economic health of the community? Should you buy the adhesive product at a national chain store like Home Depot for a slightly lower price than the locally owned building supply store, or should you pay the extra money to sustain the viability of a local company? Now add to the equation a host of preservation issues involved in a building rehabilitation project and other questions arise. The preservation approach to a significant historic building would be to save as much of the extant fabric as possible, or to agree on a period of significance to aim for in the course of making rehabilitation decisions. Which priority trumps the other? This inevitably differs from one project to the next. Preservation approaches include issues that are less quantifiable but just as important in their own right. For instance, aesthetic considerations may not be optimizing energy use but may instead be highly important for the perpetuation of a building, avoiding demolition, which negates all of the embodied energy in such a structure. The same goes for significance. For instance, a plain cinderblock structure may be an iconic talisman for the civil rights movement. Should we load up the roof with photovoltaic panels to lower the use of electricity, or will that be an unacceptable incursion on the historic structure? #93 and #97 Broad Street Some current construction projects in Charleston are grappling with marrying sustainability with preservation – two important but sometimes differing agendas for the betterment of society. A high profile case in point is the two-building project at #93 and #97 Broad Street. The first building, #93 Broad Street, was constructed ca.1800, while #97 was built in 1835. The goals for the much altered and deteriorated buildings were that they may be used as offices and that they will be historically correct and constructed sustainably with 'green' products. In addition, appropriate reconstructions should be based on historic photos (rather than expanding over every last square footage on the site). The two buildings were extremely deteriorated and had been unoccupied for many years. One example of sustainability and preservation is exemplified by the mechanical systems. Instead of one or two large condensers, #93 Broad has been fitted out with six condenser units, all with a SEER rating of '16.' They are mounted on heavy timber dunnage with rubber blocks to dampen the inevitable vibrations. A filtering system dehumidifies the sultry summer Charleston air and cleans it as well. This number of condensers allows for them all to operate at about 60 percent of their full strength so as not to wear out easily. This also allows for a number of different zones in the building that can then be adjusted as necessary for specific needs instead of cooling the entire building needlessly. Many other sustainability items have been addressed with the target being LEED Silver certification. Meeting preservation requirements as well has been a challenge. The windows, for instance, have all been repaired instead of being replaced, including matching glass panes where the original ones are missing. This painstaking work is appropriate for such prominent historic structures, and it fulfills sustainability goals concerning 'embodied energy,' respecting the reuse of the windows instead of sending them to a landfill. The original windows were made from slow-growth wood, which is much sturdier than most wood today. The sills were replaced with solid mahogany – a wood that resists decay naturally. They are connected to the jamb with mortise-and-tenon connections. Yet with all of that going for them in the preservation process, a purely sustainable approach might encourage the provision of new windows with higher R-values, to save energy. One way to meet both goals would be to apply interior storm windows. The historic brick was another issue. An important part of reusing and re-pointing historic brick is the understanding that early bricks were softer than later 19th-century machine-made bricks. Conservation practice emphasizes the need for lime-based mortar which would have been used initially, rather than the Portland cement-based mortar. The latter is harder than the soft bricks and can lead to spalling. The use of lime mortar, however, is not a 'fix all' in every case, and it carries with it a higher need for maintenance in our present day market where labor is very expensive. (The hands that built the brick walls worked for lower wages and probably included slaves). The solution was to use salvaged bricks from a ruined 19th-century addition, with equal amounts of Portland cement and lime in the sand aggregate. The use of Portland cement will significantly extend the life of the mortar with these harder, machine-made bricks. Insulation is obviously an important component of the energy-saving approach advocated by LEED. #93 Broad has a new rear addition which is a replica of the earlier addition that was a ruin. In the new addition Charleston-based Meadors Construction used spray foam insulation on the back of the roof sheathing. In the historic section, rigid insulation was used to create airspace to allow airflow through the rafter plenums. Closed-cell spray insulation was used to provide a redundant layer of waterproof material and to prevent mold. The roofing is standing-seam copper on plywood sheathing with insulation as described above. Copper has a long life expectancy and is historically accurate, but it costs significantly more than an asphalt shingled roof and comes from distant sources, possibly even from China. Sustainability precepts would recommend that materials be local or at least from within a 300-mile radius, minimizing the fossil fuel costs to transport the material. Instead the copper has a big 'carbon footprint' due to the transportation factor. However, preservation precepts call for the historically correct roofing material, and it could be argued that the copper roofing is a 'sustainable' product because of its long life. Green products used in the rehabilitation of these severely damaged historic buildings included a fire-rated water-resistant sheathing made by National Gypsum Company, the use of stainless-steel screws to strongly secure the framing in perpetuity, lumber purchased from local forests, low-flush toilets, hot water on demand (to keep from having a hot water heater going all of the time), electrical elements such as lights are on a clock or a timer, insulated ductwork and numerous others. The exterior walls are thick brick coated with true lime stucco and painted with mineral pigment paint which allows for vapor to exit the wall. In terms of the sitework, a silt fence contains run-off of pollutants from the construction site. Metal scraps were recycled and plaster was sent out to be crushed and reused. This high-profile site may serve as a model for others. Conclusion: As these case studies indicate, sustainability and preservation don't always go hand-in-hand, but knowledgeably made decisions allow us to utilize new technologies and materials to allow sustainability goals for historic structures. Perhaps a new LEED category for historic structures should be created. The Charleston single house has built-in sustainable characteristics out of necessity. We can learn from the sustainable aspects of historic buildings and we can then augment their sustainability with emerging 'green' technologies. TB  

---

Ralph C. Muldrow, RA, is the Simons Chair Professor of Architecture and Preservation at the College of Charleston. He has degrees in architecture and preservation from the University of Pennsylvania and undergraduate degrees from the University of Virginia. He has worked at a number of preservation architecture firms including John Milner Associates. He teaches architectural design and architectural history and has lectured widely on architectural and preservation topics.

---

L&L seeks architect for new Park Avenue tower

Posted on: April 23rd, 2012

April 23, 2012 08:30AM

---

Casting Call – Traditional Buidling Magazine

Posted on: April 19th, 2012

By Eve M. Kahn Victorian cast-iron façades were the first curtain walls, maximizing natural light and column-free interior space. When poorly maintained, they can become unstable sieves. Scott Henson, the head of a five-person preservation architecture firm in New York City, Scott Henson Architect, LLC, spent part of the past four years overseeing the disassembly and reconstruction of a ten-story sieve. The cast-iron 1890s front of 648 Broadway, in Manhattan's trendy NoHo neighborhood, has been brought back from the brink of crumbling to watertight and structurally secure status. The longtime owners originally hired Henson just to inspect the façade after a chunk of cast iron fell, but the assignment grew into a $1.2 million overhaul. Tenants can now gaze across NoHo's higgledy-piggledy water towers through noise-blocking double-paned windows framed by metal rosettes, wreaths, dentils, balusters, and volutes. (Much of the intricate ornamentation is new, made by Robinson Iron in Alexander City, AL, and CCR Sheet Metal in Brooklyn, NY.) Henson was drawn to the commission partly because so many innovative Belle Epoque buildings survive nearby, including Louis Sullivan's leafy Bayard Building and McKim, Mead & White's Romanesque-arched Cable Building. "The historic and current development of the NoHo district is built upon progressive architectural experimentation," he says. The original name of 648 Broadway was the Banner Building, after its millionaire developer, Peter Banner. A wholesale clothing merchant, he also put up commercial and residential structures, including luxury apartment blocks on Central Park West. For the first phase of 648 Broadway, he hired Cleverdon & Putzel, prolific architects of everything from Harlem row houses to a crematory in nearby Queens. Tenants, mostly clothing manufacturers and sellers, filled Cleverdon & Putzel's eight floors soon after the Banner Building opened around 1892. Six years later, Banner brought in Robert T. Lyons (the architect of several Banner apartment buildings) to add a two-story penthouse. Lyons echoed Cleverdon & Putzel's arched windows and Classical vocabulary, and the top two floors serve as a lacy six-bay capital for the four-bay plainer base and shaft. Banner was prominent enough that his daughter Rosalie married a Bloomingdale department store heir (and that couple's son married a Rothschild baroness). But the developer apparently overextended himself. By 1906, 648 Broadway was embroiled in his bankruptcy proceedings. The current owner's family acquired it in the 1940s, and its tenant roster has evolved over the decades from handbag makers to a jazz club to designers, theater and film professionals and other creative types. The building is now loftily called Bleecker+Bond (after the adjacent side streets). Henson and the contracting team (Soho Restoration, Brooklyn, NY; subcontractor: MJE Contracting, Corona, NY) ended up removing unfortunate 20th-century accretions. Underneath a 1970s aluminum storefront, they found fluted pilasters, reliefs of lions' heads and an 1890s advertising plaque for the Cornell brothers' Manhattan iron foundry. Leaky window air conditioners had fostered decay in the wood sash and helped corrode the wrought-iron bolts that held together the cast iron. Lyons' sheet-metal upper floors were severely deteriorated, pocked with dents and punctures. The façade had to be literally taken apart. "Cast-iron construction is a complex assembly, a very heavy, unwieldy, brittle puzzle that demands meticulous care," says Henson. Soho Restoration dismantled the façade and patched the salvageable iron with epoxy from Belzona of Glen Cove, NY. Robinson Iron and CCR fabricated and installed new elements. The fasteners are now stainless steel, and the joints are soldered. J. Scott Howell, Robinson's general manager, is a veteran of such replication projects, and reports that New York's 19th-century foundries supplied an astonishing variety of compatible patterns that clients could mix and match. "Everybody wanted something a little special about their particular location," he says. Viles Contracting Corp. of Newark, NJ, used Cathedral Stone mortars to repair the eroded brownstone trim at the former Banner Building. JPadin of Newark installed Spanish cedar-framed, insulated-glass windows in double-hung and pivoting formats. New HVAC was woven throughout the ten floors, with mechanical equipment hoisted onto the roof, all while the offices remained occupied. Coal storage spaces on the ground floor, still full of container-loads of coal, were cleared out to adapt into a fire stair egress leading to a back alley. Henson and project subcontractor Julio Mejia recently toured a reporter through the building, starting at its foundations on granite blocks and brick ziggurats. In a basement cavity, a brick vault arches over the adjacent subway tunnel. (A train rattled ominously through, just in time for the tour.) A petaled leaded-glass transom illuminates the lobby's white marble walls. An ADA-compliant steel ramp, fitted snugly over a basement lateral beam, now leads to the ground floor's deli. Floral and ribbon motifs recur there in the pressed-metal ceiling, exposed column capitals and penny round tile floors. On the shaft for the venerable Otis freight elevator, Eastlake florals and stripes are incised on each floor's door latches. Iron asters and scrollwork trail down the back stair's railing. Construction debris from the 1890s still lurk in a strange windowless half-floor between the Cleverdon & Putzel base and Lyons' addition. Henson has developed a kind of sub-specialty in such dusty crannies and daring vintage architectural materials around New York City. In recent years he has secured the envelopes of everything from Flemish Revival stepped parapets to Colonial Revival limestone corner quoins, copper mansards, Beaux-Arts gilded domes, 1930s skylights, 1960s concrete balconies and 1980s curtain walls. Clients keep coming in with unique building conditions compromised by weather, time and gravity, or building components in some unexplained state of duress. "Those are the kinds of challenges I love," he says, "and that are important to me for my work as a preservation architect."  TB

---

On Block in Harlem, Neighbors’ Push for Restoration Will End in Demolition

Posted on: April 16th, 2012

By CARA BUCKLEY

Published: April 15, 2012

Gentrification, or at the very least prettification, has reshaped block after block in Harlem, but it has not fully arrived at East 126th Street between Madison and Park Avenues.

---