APT - Changing Perspectives on Appropriate Change

Responding to Context: Changing Perspectives on Appropriate Change in Historic SettingsAuthor(s): Caroline R. AldersonSource: APT Bulletin, Vol. 37, No. 4 (2006), pp. 22-33Published by: Association for Preservation Technology International (APT)Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40003213 .Accessed: 17/08/2011 09:35

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Association for Preservation Technology International (APT) is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserveand extend access to APT Bulletin.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aptech

http://www.jstor.org/stable/40003213?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

Responding to Context: Changing Perspectives on Appropriate Change in Historic Settings

CAROLINE R. ALDERSON

Is preservation growing up or selling out? A 25-year review suggests

differing philosophies on how

preservation standards should be

applied to new construction in

historic settings.

Debate between agents of change and advocates for continuity is inevitable as culture and technology evolve. A gener- ation ago the incursions of automobile infrastructure and urban renewal were shifting the focus of preservation from saving individual monuments to protecting historic areas. Today the focus is again shifting as the cumulative impact of incremental changes prompts growing concern. New tensions stem from the maturing profession of preservation, bringing greater diversity to an arena once the stronghold of a protective elite. No longer the avocation of individuals and groups primarily concerned with protecting cultural identity, preservation has emerged as principal player guiding the physical and economic shape of the built environment. One result is a shift in how preservation standards are applied in assessing response to context.

European standards that were initiated in 1931 for conservation and restoration evolved in America into rehabilitation standards to guide a multi- tude of interventions, including new construction within historic contexts. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and the related Cana- dian Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places encourage contemporary construction sympa- thetic with historic contexts, on the basis that integrity of historic structures is better maintained through visual distinction and with standards flexible enough to encourage meaningful new architectural contributions.

As preservation review bodies move toward a broader perception of compatible change in order to consider more abstract responses to context, the ability of preservation standards to support both economic vitality and historic character increasingly depends on effective processes for examining proposed changes within the larger town or urban context. Peer-guided design-excellence programs, such as those developed by the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) and the UK's Commission on Architecture and the Built Environment, help to foster the best of both worlds.

At the symposium Patrimony and Pragmatism: Design Excellence and Preservation Standards, held in conjunc- tion with APT's annual conference in Galveston in November 2004, Frederick Bland, of Beyer Blinder Belle Architects, and Richard Archer, of Overland Part- ners, explored the conflicting themes of architectural deference and differentiation in historic-building additions constructed during the past nine decades. Drawing extensively from Paul Spencer Byard's seminal book, The Architecture of Additions: Design and Regulation, Bland examined an array of additions to

Fig. 1. One Poultry, London, designed by John Belcher, 1870s. Contemporary postcard published by J. Beagles & Co., London. Postcard views of the newly completed flatiron illustrate the architect's exuberant response to historic setting and site, reflected in the building's wedge shape, rich surfaces, corner orientation, and cupola-topped tower.

22

RESPONDING TO CONTEXT 23

Fig. 2. Mansion House Square concept for One Poultry, designed by Mies van der Rohe, 1967. Developer Lord Polumbo's redevelopment vision supplanted local eccentricity with the progressive image of corporate interchangeability. Courtesy of the James Stirling Fonds, Collection Centre Canadien d'Architecture/Canadian Centre for Architecture, Montreal.

Fig. 3. One Poultry, designed by James Stirling in 1988, completed 1998. Public controversy over the International-style tower and plaza scheme prompted a more contextual redevelopment responding to the lot's wedge shape, sculptural surroundings and surface detail, though no historic buildings were saved. Photograph by Daniel Boulet.

historic buildings, provoking the question, If it's really good, does it matter whether the standards are met?1 Archer's presentation revealed an evolving view toward contextual design in his firm's changing approach to additions at the San Antonio Art Museum in the city's historic brewery complex.2

A test of success illustrated in Byard's work is that thoughtfully designed additions contribute value when one building affects the meaning of another to produce a combined expression greater than the sum of its parts.3 Setting the standard for visionary contributions to historic contexts are projects that embrace a higher goal of reaching beyond the property line to achieve a greater urban purpose.

Preservation Standards on Responding to Context

The basic premise established in the 1931 Charter for the Restoration of Historic Monuments, known as the Athens Charter, and expanded upon in the 1964 International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Mon- uments and Sites (the Venice Charter), is that the value of a significant historic structure rests in its authenticity.4 Guide- lines that followed these seminal works and used throughout Western culture stress protecting authenticity through repairs that conserve original materials and design, scientific methods that

ensure historically accurate restoration, regulations for protecting historic settings, reversible alterations, and respectful new construction that distinguishes new from old. With regard to context, the Venice Charter (the principal source for the guidelines that followed) is un- equivocal: Article 1 defines the historic monument as embracing "not only the single architectural work but also the urban or rural setting in which is found the evidence of a particular civilization, a significant development, or an historic event." The same holds as true for "modest works of the past which have acquired cultural significance with the passing of time" as for "great works of art."

Concerning alterations to accommodate contemporary use, the Venice Char- ter is at once practical and uncompro- mising, acknowledging that while "the conservation of monuments is always facilitated by making use of them for some socially useful purpose," such use "must not change the lay-out or decoration of the building" (Article 5). Article 6 insists that "wherever a traditional setting exists, it must be kept." New construction, demolition, or modifica- tions that would disrupt the historic setting's relation of mass, color, and scale are not allowed (Article 6). Vari- ants of the charter were subsequently adopted by ICOMOS national commit- tees in Australia, New Zealand, and Canada.

In the United States, the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilita- tion, initially issued in 1976 as the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Historic Preservation Projects, adapted the principles of the Venice Charter to determine the appropriateness of work on registered properties in federal grant- in-aid and preservation tax-credit programs.5 The standards have since been adopted by states and historic districts throughout the nation as the principal guideline for historic-area project reviews required under federal, state, and local laws.

Anticipating that many such projects would have to accommodate challeng- ing new requirements for commercial redevelopment, the standards allow contemporary design for alterations and additions, provided that the alterations are reversible, do not destroy historic material, and are "compatible with the size, scale, color, material, and character of the property, neighborhood or environment."

Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada, issued in 2000, follows the U.S. model, focusing on conserving the heritage value of a historic place and character-defining elements, through approaches that minimize the negative effects of intervention. Guidance for additions echoes the Secretary's Stan- dards' call for compatible, reversible, and distinguishable change that is also

24 APT BULLETIN: JOURNAL OF PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY / 37:4, 2006

Fig. 4. Organization of American States General Secretariat Building, Washington, D.C., designed by Leo A. Daly Architects, 1977. Designed as a respectful backdrop to the 1825 Bacon House, the OAS building's contoured setback, low massing, and quietly articulated brick facade preserve the garden setting and prominence of the smaller landmark. Courtesy of Leo A. Daly Architects.

Fig. 5. DACOR Bacon House, Washington, D.C., 1825. The eight-story OAS building appears smaller in relation to the four-story house from the

perspective of nearby pedestrians. Photograph by Sarah Garner, courtesy of the GSA Center for Historic Buildings.

subordinate to the historic place. The Canadian standards go a step further than their antecedent documents to address the paradox established in the Venice and U.S. standards that calls for interventions to be both compatible with and different from the historic structure, with the practical clarification that any intervention needed to preserve character-defining elements should be documented for future reference and be "physically and visually compatible with the historic place and identifiable upon close inspection."6

What Preservation Standards Can and Cannot Do for Historic Contexts

Although preservation standards alone cannot save one-of-a-kind buildings, prevent out-of-scale development, or ensure well-designed alterations, their value is evidenced in projects that have changed course to be more responsive to historic context. London's controver- sial One Poultry project illustrates the relationship between standards and regulatory processes governing their application (Figs. 1 through 3).7 Gener- ation-long controversy transformed the project from Mies van der Rohe's 1967 concept of a 21 -story International-style glass tower and urban plaza to the six- story postmodern icon by architect James Stirling that occupies the site today.8 While not a preservation solution, the new building maintains the site's historic corner orientation, pic- turesque skyline, sculptural quality, and

focal apex, preserving not its authenticity but its recognizability as a very specific place in downtown London.9

Assuring the Place of Historic Structures in a New Hierarchy

Paul Byard's book on additions exam- ines combined architectural expressions involving the "protected identity" of a historic property and new hierarchies created by additions. Legal precedents support a larger view of protection that goes beyond simply preserving original building components to consider the contexts within which the buildings are seen and experienced.

In downtown Washington, D.C., public buildings, nonprofit institutions and relics of the city's bygone social aristocracy converge in more and less accommodating ways. Early examples include nineteenth-century houses at Lafayette Square, rescued by First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy for reuse in federal office expansions, and the AIA Head- quarters, designed to wrap around the historic Octagon House. A less-publi- cized example illustrating local review processes and an enlightened project team working together is Leo A. Daly's 1977 design for the Organization of American States General Secretariat building (Figs. 4 and 5). 10

Development of the OAS building design began soon after Virginia Murray Bacon, widow of the eight-term con- gressman Robert Low Bacon, bequeathed her 1825 mansion at the east end of the

block to an educational institution ded- icated to fostering international understanding. The house and setting were conceived as integral with the foundation's purpose "to provide a quiet place for decision-making meetings - unan- nounced, untaped, unreported...to facilitate international peace and understanding by bringing together leaders in the field... for the purpose of defining and resolving international problems."11

Lewis J. Goetz, then Daly's project architect, recalls that the OAS building on the west end of the block was "intended to be a backdrop for the Bacon Residence and respect the house and garden," deferring to a greater extent than the AIA had felt appropriate for their new headquarters building. The achievement of Daly's more conservative OAS structure was to create a dignified contemporary presence for the OAS at the building's street facade on the west end of the block and transition to an inconspicuous backdrop where the OAS and Bacon properties met at the east end of the block.

Adamant about the importance of setting to her property's new function as an intellectual refuge, Virginia Bacon actively participated in the development of the OAS design to ensure that mas- sive trees separating the house and its neighbor were preserved and to keep the seven-story facade behind the garden as quiet as the landscape, arguing against the conspicuously linear horizontal windows employed three years earlier at the AIA building. A landscaped terrace


Fig. 6. Lone Star Brewing Company building, San Antonio, Texas, 1904 (left). The original building was

expanded for reuse as the San Antonio Art Museum with the Nelson A. Rockefeller Center for Latin American Art (right), designed by Overland Partners, 1980. Aligned stringcourses, rusticated founda- tions, raised pilasters with contrasting concrete caps, and traditional fenestration weave together the street facades of the historic structure and the 1980 addition.

Fig. 7. San Antonio Art Museum, Asian Wing, designed by Overland Partners, 2004. This addition uses transparency to separate old and new without overpowering the original facade; a new top floor visually floats above the diminu- tive wing to maintain its subordinate relation-

ship to the central pavilion.

and pergola soften the transition from the lush setting of the four-story house to the planar surfaces of the seven-story OAS facade. The contoured glass facade overlooking the garden weaves behind the Bacon building's primary brick facade along the sidewalk to form a recessed, secondary wall, strengthening the new building's formal entrance with shadow and depth. Three decades have melded the settings as the wisteria-laden pergola and ornamental trees of the OAS garden have matured.12

Evolving Approaches to Contextual Design

During the 1980s commercial projects using federal preservation tax credits mushroomed in the U.S. as construction economics started to favor rehabilitation over building new, and Modern design was falling from popular favor. Traditional urban planning and context-conscious postmodern buildings ushered in renewed interest in historic materials, detailing, shapes, and spatial relationships. At the symposium, Rick Archer recounted the 30-year evolution

of the San Antonio Art Museum in the 1884 Lone Star Brewing Company complex on the banks of the San Anto- nio River, where successive additions illustrate how interpretation of the Secretary of the Interior's Standards concerned with compatible change has shifted toward more abstract expressions of context responsiveness (Figs. 6 and 7).

Cambridge Seven's 1970s master plan, updated by Overland Partners in 1992 to double the museum facility, provided a framework for preserving relationships between buildings and site elements, including scale and orientation from inside and outside the complex. The master plan gives equal importance to historic structures, archeology, and landscape elements, which include 300- year-old oaks prized by the community. Design for adapting the historic brewery to house a museum has sought opportunities to celebrate the artistry of the historic structures, as well as the museum collection. When an original sus- pension bridge linking the two towers of the original brewery building was deter- mined unsafe, Cambridge Seven de-

signed a replacement footbridge enclosed in a glazed housing through which neon art is now displayed at night.

Overland Partners' 1990s design for an addition to house the Nelson A. Rockefeller Center for Latin American Art responded contextually to the main building's Romanesque facade with a subordinate side addition echoing the massing of the original structure and clad in color-compatible masonry integrally detailed to connect old and new. More recent changes, including a second-story glazed rooftop addition on the historic brewery building, maintain character-defining scale and relationships between structure and landscape, with greater differentiation in new facade materials, features, and detailing.

Fred Bland's symposium presentation had included examples of Beyer Blender Belle's infill projects spanning the same period, showing a similar shift in response to the historic context. In a sub- sequent exchange Bland concurred with my observation on the evolution of preservation design, recounting a general move among design professionals toward "less overtly contextual [same


Fig. 8. Galician Center of Contemporary Art, Santiago de Compostela, Spain, designed by Alvaro Siza, 1983. The new museum's massing as a

composite of rectangular blocks fanning outward from a narrowed front

respond to the hilly landscape, modest scale of the adjoining fourteenth-

century convent, and nonlinear character of the medieval city. Courtesy of Alvaro Siza.

Fig. 9. Cross-axial paths invite visitors to take in the richly embellished convent building, now the Museum of the Galician People, then stroll around the corner to the Galician Art Center's entrance between the path juncture and parking situated away from historic structures. Courtesy of Alvaro Siza.

materials, lining up horizontal courses] and more abstracted or even overtly contrasting" additions, referencing such recent works as Frank Gehry's planned addition to the Corcoran Gallery in Washington and Sir Norman Foster's recently opened diagonal-grid, glass- and-steel tower above the six-story 1929 Hearst publishing house in New York City."

A challenge of extreme abstractions illustrated in the eccentric works of Gehry and the Gherkin-like towers of Foster is that while contrasts this overt may succeed as unique and exceptional contributions in a dynamic urban environment of mixed form, texture, and scale, their impact as prototypes for spin-offs would likely have the opposite effect. In this sense the threshold between healthy differentiation and eroded character may be defined as much by the potential impact of a precedent on future interventions as by the new structure itself, pointing to the critical role of regulatory bodies in guiding how standards are applied.

Examining the trend toward abstract insertions as an expression of a broader cultural evolution, Bland sees in recent design trends "a more mature understanding of urbanism" in "how cities grow and change over time, layering new over old... It is a freer and more lenient understanding of how to add new to old so that the robust original is not expanded with a too-meek, too-referential addition."14 Greater abstraction in

applying the standards may demand more of those entrusted with preventing the new from cumulatively altering the old beyond recognition. Promising developments include preservation and urban-planning processes crafted by Britain's Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE) and English Heritage to understand what types of development will sustain or reinforce the particular values of a historic context.15

Alvaro Siza's design for the Museum of Contemporary Galician Art in Santi- ago de Compostela, Spain, illustrates such an understanding of historic context expressed in a none-too-meek-or- referential insertion (Figs. 8 and 9). Siza's strategy of breaking the large building into masses echoing the shapes and sizes of neighboring three-story, tile- roofed structures ensured that the new building could contribute functional vitality without compromising the ex- traordinary cohesiveness of the surrounding medieval village, a World Heritage site.16 Warm, variegated stone surfaces introduce color and texture connecting otherwise austere facades to their Mediterranean neighbors.

Within the surrounding historic convent, the sizable new museum pre- sents itself as overlapping rectangular masses conforming to the modestly scaled front facades of the older monuments so that the new building appears as an amiable, if distinctly different, newcomer, rather than as an aggressive

intruder. Placing the entrance in the museum's long wall allowed access for the disabled from parking spaces, which are located away from the historic convent buildings, through a deeply recessed first floor, offering a point of focus in the primary facade and shelter from the Mediterranean sun.

Context Response and Design- Excellence Programs

Preservation standards supported by a regulatory-enforcement process can protect historic buildings, encourage sensitivity to historic contexts, and allow for new contributions but cannot make a less-creative architect more creative or be counted on to bring about outstanding design solutions. Design- excellence programs initiated in the U.S. and UK use peer review and collabora- tive problem solving to raise the bar on important projects.

Concerned with the declining quality of federal architecture, President John F. Kennedy convened a special committee in 1 962 to develop Guiding Principles for Federal Architecture. Eschewing a federal architectural style, the Guiding Principles called for design reflecting "the dignity, enterprise, vigor and stabil- ity of the American National government, [placing] emphasis... on the choice of designs that embody the finest contemporary American architectural thought."17 Applied to a procurement process emphasizing economy and


Fig. 10. William J. Nealon U.S. Courthouse and Annex Site, Scranton, Pennsylvania, designed by James A. Wetmore, 1930. GSA's courthouse addition, built under the agency's Design Excellence Program, replaced an out-of-scale apartment building with a freestanding annex more in keeping with the scale and character of the 1930s courthouse and surrounding town square. Courtesy of Bohlin Cywinski Jackson Architects.

Fig. 1 1 . William Nealon U.S. Courthouse Annex, Scranton, designed by Bohlin Cywinski Jackson Architects, 1999. The new annex echoes the scale, symmetry, and formality of the historic courthouse. A recessed glass connector provides visual separation and avoids pulling the composition off balance by elongating the historic facade. Courtesy of Bohlin Cywinski Jackson Architects.

efficiency over architectural merit or construction quality, however, Public Buildings Service leaders eventually acknowledged that the standards were having little impact.18

Reaffirming the government's responsibility to construct public buildings that contribute to the nation's legacy, GSA Chief Architect Edward Feiner initiated GSA's Design Excellence Program in 1992. New construction and major repair and alteration projects now bene- fit from peer review by nationally recognized architects who participate in architect selection and are integrally involved throughout design development and construction. Peer orientations ground non-federal participants in the program's philosophy that "federal buildings are symbolic of what the Government is about, not just places where public business is conducted."19 The goal of the peer-review process is to create high-quality, cost-effective public buildings worthy of preservation for the enjoyment of future generations.20 En- gaging nationally recognized creative experts to demand the most of their colleagues has increased competitive interest in public-building commissions among leading architectural firms and raised quality expectations, evident in the number of Design Excellence projects winning architectural awards.

The program is working to restore the place of public buildings in the urban architectural hierarchy by using symbolic forms, materials, and detailing

to express civic function and dignity (Figs. 10 through 12). Moshe Safdie's Design Excellence solution for GSA's Springfield, Massachusetts, courthouse used the traditional architectural vocab- ulary of democracy and an imaginative space layout to introduce a new urban icon into contiguous institutional and residential historic settings (Fig. 12).21 In the rear corner of the property, Safdie placed judges' chambers in a parsonage- like annex that is in scale with the historic residences behind the new building. The front facade of the annex curves inward to accommodate the courthouse's colonnaded spiral main mass, which borders a historic church and civic buildings. From front to back, the roof of the courthouse tapers downward to align with roofs of the adjoining nineteenth-century houses.

Similar concern about the quality of public buildings in Great Britain has led government leaders to sound a national call for better design that is more responsive to its context. In his 1989 book, A Vision of Britain, Charles, Prince of Wales, urged planning bodies to respect historic contexts by promoting design principles and techniques that address the human experience of architecture, such as: • breaking large buildings into smaller

elements to maintain village character • using hierarchy to establishing focus

within and between buildings • maintaining the visual dominance of

important public buildings through

careful attention to scale in nearby construction

• responding to local materials and decoration

• studying street layouts and architectural rhythms to achieve harmony between new and old structures

• creating opportunities for human- scaled enclosure in large projects and planning efforts

• designing signage and lighting to complement historic architecture and landscapes

• involving the community.22 The Prince's efforts to improve the

quality and context responsiveness of British architecture heightened aware- ness among design professionals of a need to raise national standards.23 Ensu- ing guides, such as Better Public Build- ings, call on government at all levels to produce new landmark buildings and apply the "same energy and imagination to tens of thousands of everyday public buildings which play such a vital role in our lives."24

Established in 2001 to promote better public- and private-sector construction, Britain's Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment functions as an independent advisor to local planning authorities, which are encouraged to consult the experts on certain categories of projects. To complement CABE's urban- and aesthetic- design guidance, English Heritage is developing Conservation Principles,


Policies and Guidance, which focuses on sustainable management of England's historic places. Sustainable management of historic environments, explains John Fidler, conservation director for English Heritage, requires "rigorous assessment of values and significance of places" and "what might sustain or reinforce these values" in development proposals.2^ Jointly issued guides, such as Moving Toward Excellence in Urban Design and Conservation and Building in Context: New Development in Historic Areas, encourage local planning authorities to undertake "conservation area character assessments" to define what is significant and to identify areas for enhancement. "Enhancement," Fidler adds, "could of course be the erection of a fine new modern building - the heritage of tomorrow.""6

CABE-English Heritage joint advi- sory urban panels guide local authorities to promote context-responsive projects that • relate well to the topography, geogra-

phy, and history of the place • sit happily in the pattern of existing

development and routes through and around it

• respect important views • respect the scale of neighboring

buildings • use materials and building methods

that are as high in quality as those used in existing buildings

• create new views and juxtapositions that add to the variety and texture of the setting.

Online case studies, such as the East Quayside Waterfront Regeneration in Newcastle, illustrate the value of historic-area character assessments in producing a cohesive and satisfactory whole (Fig. 13). 2/

Urban Stories Told Architecturally

The preceding discussions illustrate a variety of contextual responses to historic places - projects that accommo- dated a landmark, blended with a historic building, or stood on their own while integrating with a dynamic historic context. Other works go beyond the visual-compatibility parameters of preservation standards to make deeper

Fig. 12. U.S. Courthouse, Springfield, Massachusetts, designed by Moshe Safdie and Associates, 2004. The colonnaded entry pavilion of the new courthouse spirals protectively around historic trees while responding to the scale, materials, and articulation of neighboring historic residences and institutions. Photograph by John Homer Photography, courtesy of Moshe Safdie and Associates.

connections, telling stories important in the cultural memory of a place through familiar forms or comprehensible abstractions.

Among the earliest and most note- worthy American abstractions is Robert Venturi's 1976 steel outline of Benjamin Franklin's house on the site where it once stood in Philadelphia (Fig. 14.) Painted steel posts and beams trace wall and roof edges, framing the mass of the 1 765 house to the extent that surviving historic descriptions permit. Portals on the "floor" inside the house invite visitors to look deep underground into the archeological remains of Franklin's privy, wells, and foundation. By differentiating the interpretive approach from that of surviving and well-documented landmarks, the skeletal "ghost house" makes a meaningful cultural contribution without conjecture.28

Thoughtfully crafted abstractions of missing structures or features can also help to complete a historic context in the face of insufficient resources for accurate reconstruction, code-compli- ance challenges, or interpretive complex- ities that may argue against precise replication.

After the screening of immigrants at Ellis Island in New York ceased, the property was designated a national monument, and the National Park Ser-

vice (NPS) began stabilizing the main building for reuse as a museum. Historic documentation revealed a repeatedly altered canopy layout, making it spe- cious, in the view of the project team, to return it to a particular historic moment. Rather than replicate the canopy detailing of a single-era, the National Park Service and Beyer Blinder Belle decided to express the basic form of the iron original in appropriate contemporary materials, meeting the intent of the Secretary of the Interior's Standards.29

Where documentation and budget permit, a more literal architectural homage can preserve or unearth a cultural story that would otherwise be lost in the layers of change that naturally (or unnaturally) occur in a dynamic urban environment. Beyer Blinder Belle's 1983 interpretation of the famed 1849 Bogar- dus building blends with the massing and scale of its nineteenth-century neighbors in New York's South Street Seaport, but that is only part of the story. Preservationists heralded the planned reassembly of the world's oldest surviving cast-iron building, an important prototype in the history of modular construction, at the Fulton Street site as a national triumph (Figs. 16 and 17).30 Six years later, news that much of the facade had been stolen while in storage dashed hopes for reusing the painstak-


Fig. 13. Sandgate House (1995), designed by Ryder Architects, and Baltic Flour Mill (1950s), architect unknown, built for Joseph Rank Unlimited, Newcastle, England. England's CABE-guided waterfront regeneration project, following a redevelopment masterplan by Terry Farrell and Part-

ners, converted the former Baltic Flour Mill (center) into an international center for contemporary art and introduced an art-filled waterfront prome- nade linking new public spaces with offices, a hotel, and apartments. New

buildings display undulating floor plans, sculptural facade elements, and

curving fronts appropriate to a vibrant waterfront. Photograph by Jeremy Cockayne, courtesy of Ryder HKS Architects.

Fig. 14. Benjamin Franklin House Interpretation, Franklin Court, Philadel-

phia, designed by Robert Venturi, 1976. Robert Venturis hollow recreation

of Benjamin Franklin's house near Independence Hall invites visitors to

discover the past through the clues it leaves behind. Viewing portals within

offer glimpses into archeological remains of the house and privy below.

Courtesy of Venturi, Scott Brown & Associates.

ingly dismantled components. Once scrap-iron poachers returned to complete the heist, design for the new structure, intended to support surviving portions of the facade, evolved into a

tribute to the lost landmark - and a vivid lesson in risk control.'1

Cataclysmic events invite more symbolic interventions. Hardy Holzman Pfeiffer Associates' twisted replacement

Fig. 15. Ellis Island Immigration Station, New York Harbor, designed by Boring and Tilton Architects, 1900, with 1991 canopy. Beyer Blinder Belle's glass-and-steel canopy recreates the basic form of the ornamental iron original in appropriate contemporary materials, eliminating interpretive concern with the specific details distinguishing equally significant canopies of different eras. Courtesy of Peter Aaron/Esto.

for the Wilkerson row house in Green- wich Village set a precedent at the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission by disrupting the flawless unity of Brevoort Row, dating to the 1840s (Fig. 18). Writers and artists as varied as Mark Twain, Leonard Bern- stein, Thornton Wilder, and Dustin Hoffman had lived and worked in the famously quiet Washington Square neighborhood for more than a century before young radicals accidentally deto- nated a bomb intended to blow up Columbia University's main library in 1970. Three bomb makers were killed in the explosion, which made front page news throughout the nation.

Hugh Hardy's startling infill design proposal - jacking the midsection of the row house out of alignment to sym- bolize how the property should stand out in history - perplexed members of the Landmarks Commission. With ad- justments, the design, whose other components - roofline, cornice, brick foundation, principal walls, upper-story windows, off-center stoop and entry - conformed to the building's nineteenth- century neighbors, eventually passed preservation review. Completed in 1978,


Fig. 16. Laing Stores at Washington and Murray streets, New York City, designed by James Bogardus, 1849. Courtesy of the Historic American

Buildings Survey.

Fig. 17. Cannon's Walk, South Street Seaport, Fulton Street, Manhattan,

designed by Beyer Blinder Belle, 1983. This corner infill in New York's South Street Seaport pays homage to a lost cast-iron landmark. Courtesy of Paul Warchol Photography.

it was, in time, accepted as an appropriate abstraction of "a seminal event in a very turbulent period."32

In a similar vein, Norman Foster's transparent interpretation of the twice- burned dome atop Berlin's iconic Reich- stag, or parliament building, serves multiple purposes rich in meaning to a community anxious for renewal (Fig. 19). Visitors ascend a 750-foot (230- meter) double staircase to stroll atop the building, take in a 360-degree view of reunited Berlin, and step inside the cupola to observe the work of the parliament through a glass ceiling.33 The merit of such expressions of architectural homage - not too replicative, not too abstract to be understood and enjoyed - will always be subject to debate as dialogue continues on what degrees of imitation are acceptable, outside of scholarly and appropriate reconstruction.

Achievements of Preservation and Urban Design

Preservation and urban-design collabo- rations sometimes offer opportunities to contribute to a historic context by combining new and old in imaginative ways that create new perspectives, public spaces, vistas, or connections. Byard's book details evolutionary landmarks where master architects, such as Bernini and Wren, used clever visual

techniques to create a dramatic, telescopic view, embrace a public space, or focus attention on a monument that would otherwise be dwarfed by extensions.34

Market Square, in Washington, D.C., was a project ripe with such possibility (Fig. 20). A twin office complex designed to frame the planned Navy Memorial on Pennsylvania Avenue, at the juncture at Washington's former north-south commercial corridor, created an opportunity to strengthen a cross-axial connection important to area revitalization. Before the 1902 McMil- lan Commission Plan consolidated federal buildings along the National Mall, federal offices, such as the U.S. Patent Office and the Post Office headquarters, occupied stone-faced classical monuments alongside scores of busi- nesses and boardinghouses in smaller brick row buildings. As downtown retail activity declined after World War II, the neighborhood remained physically intact but economically depressed until plans to construct a sports arena spurred the flagging retail district's redevelopment as an arts-and-entertainment corridor centered around the new arena and the National Portrait Gallery, housed in the old Patent Office.

Using the techniques of the Baroque masters, Hartman-Cox Architects em- braced the circular Navy Memorial in a bold pair of curving colonnades, de-

signed to encourage pedestrian interac- tion between the memorial and restaurants in the adjoining commercial buildings. Upper floors offer views of the memorial, with masts, fountains, and a

Fig. 18. Langworthy Residence, New York City, designed by Hardy Holzman Pfeiffer Associates, 1978. Hugh Hardy rotated the midsection of the infill rowhouse outward in memory of the

bombing that destroyed its 1840s predecessor. Courtesy of Hardy Holzman Pfeiffer Associates.


Fig. 19. Reichstag Dome, Berlin, designed by Sir Norman Foster, 1999. The glass re-creation of Berlin's Reichstag dome offers new perspectives on the transparency of government. Courtesy of Martin Kuhn.

Fig. 20. Market Square, Washington, D.C., designed by Hartman-Cox Architects, 1990. Monumental Washington's Bernini-reminiscient Market Square glorifies the 1852 Patent Office two blocks north by framing it in curving colonnades. Photograph courtesy of Peter Aaron/Esto.

map of the world executed in contrasting shades of concrete pavement. Within the memorial, visitors enjoy a telescopic view of the stately Portrait Gallery two blocks north. Strengthening the visual connection between Pennsylvania Av- enue and the emerging arts district stimulated tourist traffic between the two destination zones and encouraged downtown office workers to discover new restaurants in the old commercial district, now one of the city's most vibrant historic areas.35

Conclusion

What, then, defines design excellence with regard to historic-context response, and what makes it happen? Preservation standards provide a framework within which new projects respond to historic contexts with varying degrees of imagination to meet client requirements, pass regulatory hurdles, and, on occasion, secure financial incentives.

Federally sponsored design-excellence programs in Great Britain and the United States use peer review of design in a quality-control capacity, contributing expertise and breadth of perspective to encourage creative and achievable design solutions. Legacy-oriented urban- planning bodies, such as Washington's National Capital Planning Commission, perform a similar function, working in

concert with project teams and preservation-review groups to press for quality and promote opportunities that contribute to the vitality of historic urban areas within a broader urban vision.

Several truths emerge from acknowledged success stories: • Preservation standards alone encour-

age, but cannot cause, either preservation or design excellence in historic-context response.

• Processes that encourage interdisci- plinary collaboration between project teams and external design experts contribute to successful outcomes.

• Dynamic urban environments offer greater opportunity for highly differentiated contributions, while fragile contexts tend to call for more conservative interventions, absent an appropriate urban-design vision.

• Conserving historic character and integrity requires considering authenticity of form as well as material, since the value of preserving historic detail is lost in transformation that assumes an unrecognizable form.

• Consideration of highly differentiated contributions should include indirect effects of potential spin-offs and how they will be addressed.

• A preservation-based urban-planning vision is a must for enduring contributions to the historic context.

Sustaining a historic context requires provisions for change that maintain an appropriate balance between static and dynamic urban character, a threshold that varies from one context to another. At the extremes, highly differentiated and replicative approaches each carry risks demanding exceptional skills and resources. To succeed not only as an individual icon but also as part of a historic context, highly differentiated design requires greater imagination than can be expected of everyday infill projects to craft a solution that is also well- integrated into its period context. Repli- cative approaches, even with sufficient distinguishability to meet preservation standards, demand meticulous detailing, ample construction budgets, and effective quality control to avoid appearing as cheap send-ups of superior originals. Straightforward contextual approaches - contemporary or traditional - especially in the hands of less-gifted designers, tend to introduce the least risk of harm and have their place among rou- tine additions and alterations in historic districts.

As to the question of how many "Gherkins" or Gehrys a historic context can accommodate, construction eccen- tricities will likely place the latter in a cultural position similar to that of Hol- lywood designer Adrian, whose imagi- natively pieced evening gowns defied


mass manufacture of any except isolated components, such as his signature bell sleeve. Historic-area approval of "diagrid" interior infill solutions, on the other hand, may invite spin-offs using less innovative technology to capture the same amount of floor space on valuable urban real estate. A responsibility of historic-area review commissions, in such circumstances, is to document the particular conditions under which innovative prototypes are approved and lay the groundwork for evaluating successors.

Aside from naysayers who stand to profit from uncontrolled development, there remains public consensus on the value of preservation standards and review processes in protecting fragile historic settings. Sustained community support for construction restrictions will continue to depend on sound judgment regarding what really matters about each historic context. Nevertheless, as economic pressures in boom-and-bust environments intensify, preserving the character-defining qualities that keep a community invested becomes increasingly important. As important as economic vitality is to the endurance of living historic contexts, it is the shared legacy embodied in historic character that binds community to place, enabling it to rebound from disasters and economic setbacks, whereas economic activity alone can always relocate to another place.

CAROLINE R. ALDERSON directs the policy and technical-innovation programs of the U.S. General Services Administration's Center for Historic Buildings, which guides the use and care of over 400 historic buildings providing 53 million square feet of space for federal employ- ees throughout the nation.

Acknowledgements

I am grateful to the many firms and individuals who have contributed information, images, and editorial assistance to expand upon this session's rich theme, especially John Fidler, English Her- itage; Fred Bland, Beyer Blinder Belle Architects; Paul Spencer Byard, Columbia University; Rick Archer, Overland Associates; Steven Semes, Notre Dame University; Louis Goetz; Leo A. Daly Architects; Moshe Safdie and Associates; Michael Wilford; Venturi Scott Brown Associ- ates; Hardy Holzman Pfeiffier Associates; Hart- man-Cox Architects, Martin Kuhn; Paul Wal- chot; Peter Aaron/Esto; Daniel Boulet; Justine Sambrook, RIBA Library; and William Victor, CABE. I am also indebted to colleagues Sarah

Garner, Bayard Whitmore, and Matt Radford at GSA's Center for Historic Buildings; the APT peer reviewers; and Rolando Rivas-Camp, Dir- ector of the Center for Historic Buildings, for supporting GSA's substantive role in the symposium. Special thanks are due to symposium chair David Woodcock, who conceived the event and has tirelessly supported this extension of the conversation in print.

Notes

1. Frederick Bland, "Responding to Context" (paper presented at the APT Design Excellence and Historic Preservation Symposium, Galves- ton, Tex., Nov. 3, 2004).

2. Richard Archer, "San Antonio Museum of Art: The Changing Response to Urban Con- text" (paper presented at the APT Design Ex- cellence and Historic Preservation Symposium, Galveston, Tex., Nov. 3, 2004).

3. Paul Spencer Byard, The Architecture of Additions: Design and Regulation (New York: W.W.Norton, 1998), 9-29.

4. The Charter for the Restoration of Historic Monuments was adopted in Athens, Greece, by the First International Congress of Architects and Technicians of Historic Monuments in 1931. The International Charter for the Con- servation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites was adopted in Venice, Italy, by the International Council of Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) in 1964.

5. This document was most recently issued as the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, with Guide- lines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring and Reconstructing Historic Buildings (1995), available online at www.cr.nps.gov/hps/tps/tax/ rehabstandards.htm.

6. Peter James's commentary on Australia's Burra Charter, which was modeled on the Venice Charter, provides insight into the earlier document's intent and clues that the Canadian adaptation may not represent a departure from core principles as much as a practical reflection of how standards created to protect the great monuments of Europe ought to be applied in a nation of more recent heritage. The Venice Charter, Article 9 under "Restoration," states that "extra work which is indispensable must be distinct from the architectural composition and must bear a contemporary stamp." The Canadian distinction allows reasonable seam- lessness to maintain the visual integrity. James's criticisms were directed toward the Burra Charter's application to buildings in Australia of lesser merit than the Venice Charter sought to protect, urging a more practical approach to keep reinvestment in historic buildings from becoming prohibitively expensive. See Peter C. James, "The Burra Charter at Work in Aus- tralia," CRM 19, no. 3, (1996): 49-51.

7. The designated conservation area included nationally listed buildings and locally listed buildings of "townscape" value (as distin- guished from loftier neighbors by Soane, Hawksmoor, and Wren) and later ten-story structures that had begun to dwarf the five- to

six-story wedge. Despite public inquiry advo- cating retention, the Inspector/Secretary of State decided in favor of new construction. John Fidler, correspondence with author, June 5, 2006.

8. Byard, 96.

9. Stirling's account indicates that the developer changed course in response to public opposi- tion. Whether preservation-design standards explicitly guided Stirling's solution is unclear, but they were, by then, commonly known among context-responsive architects (Pritzker Architecture Prize, 1981 Citation and Biogra- phy, www.pritzkerprize.com/stirling.htm, accessed Jan. 5, 2005). Since its completion seven years ago, concedes Hugh Pearman, former editor of England's Building Design magazine, the One Poultry building he "admired" but "could not bring [himself] to like" now ranks with "no such doubts" as "London's best and most singular post-modern building, [being] positively magnificent." Hugh Pearman, "Stir- ling's Rising Value," www.hughpearman.com/ vaults/stirling.html, accessed May 18, 2006. See also "Mullets. White Jeans. Architecture?" in BBC News Magazine, http://news.bbc.co.uk/ l/hi/magazine/4745635.stm, Aug. 5, 2005, accessed Dec. 1, 2005.

10. The National Capital Planning Commis- sion, the central planning agency for the federal government, reviews development proposals within the city's monumental core to protect and enhance its historic, cultural, and natural resources, as well as the distinctive urban design and beauty of the nation's capital (www.ncpc.gov). The Commission of Fine Arts advises the federal and district governments on matters of art and architecture that affect the appearance of the nation's capital, reviewing proposed projects involving or adjacent to public buildings (www.cfa.gov).

11. The Bacon House Foundation merged with DACOR's Education and Welfare Foundation to form the DACOR Bacon House Foundation in 1985. DACOR (Diplomatic and Consular Officers, Retired) created the foundation "for the purpose of contributing to the development of mutual international understanding and the strengthening of ties between the people of the United States and other nations." The house was originally constructed by Tench Ringgold, President James Madison's U.S. Marshall for the District of Columbia, and served as home to numerous political celebrities prior to its donation. William D. Calderhead, "The His- tory of the Dacor Bacon House," www.dacor bacon.org/DBHF/DBHF_MAIN.htm, accessed May 20, 2006.

12. Lewis Goetz, conversation with the author, May 9, 2006.

13. Frederick Bland, conversation with the author, May 8, 2006. The addition to the Hearst building followed developmentally from a rocket-like prototype glass "diagrid" building constructed in London and popularly known as the Gherkin. See Megan Lane, "Modern Britain's Instant Icon," BBC News, April 28, 2004, http://news.bbc.co.Uk/l/hi/magazine/ 3663971. stm, accessed May 30, 2006. See also Paul Goldberger, "Triangulation: Norman


Foster's Thrilling Addition to Midtown Man- hattan," The New Yorker, Dec. 19, 2005, www.newyorker.com/critics/skyline/articles/051 29crsk_skyline, accessed May 6, 2006. Com- pare I. M. Pei's designs for the East Wing of the National Gallery of Art in Washington and his glass pyramid at the Louvre in Paris. These additions contrasted with historic icons but remained subordinate or consistent in scale.

14. Frederick Bland, conversation with the author, May 8, 2006.

15. John Fidler, correspondence with author, June 5, 2006.

16. Raymund Ryan, "Cloistered Creativity, The New Galician Center of Contemporary Arts in Santiago de Compostela, Spain," Architectural Review (Oct. 1994), www.findarticles.eom/p/ articles/mi_m3575/is_nll72_vl96/ai_1640139 0, accessed Feb. 16,2006.

17. Ad Hoc Committee on Federal Office Space, "Guiding Principles for Federal Archi- tecture," report to the President, June 1, 1962.

18. Growth, Efficiency and Modernism: GSA Buildings of the 1950s, 60s and 70s, prepared by Judith H. Robinson and Stephanie S. Foell of Robinson and Associates for the Center for Historic Buildings, U.S. General Services Administration. Sept. 2003, 6-9, 42-45, www.gsa.gov/federalmodernism.

19. Robert Peck, "Building a Legacy," preface to The Design Excellence Program Guide, U.S. General Services Administration, Aug. 2000, www.gsa.gov/designexcellence.

20. "Design Excellence Policies and Proce- dures," U.S. General Services Administration, Office of the Chief Architect, Dec. 2004, and "Design Excellence Program Guide," U.S. General Services Administration, Office of the Chief Architect, Aug. 2000, are available online at www.gsa.gov/designexcellence. See also Roger K. Lewis, "Doing More with Less Offers Creative Opportunity for GSA Designers," Washington Post, Feb. 4, 2006, F06.

21. "United States Courthouse, Springfield, Massachusetts," GSA Design Excellence Award submission by Moshe Safdie and Associates, Nov. 2004. U.S. General Services Administra- tion, Office of the Chief Architect, Design Award Program Records, 1992-2006, Washington, D.C.

22. HRH The Prince of Wales, A Vision of Britain: A Personal View of Architecture (London: Doubleday, 1989), 77-97.

23. Under the Policy and Strategy Task Group of the UK's Royal Institute of British Architects, geographically based architectural centers raise

the standard for design by creating and applying regional goals, such as urban and rural regeneration, strengthened gateways, and sustainable communities. The Royal Town Planning Institute advocates "rigorous context appraisal" policies that "establish the strategic priorities of the local planning authority and relate design to that vision." "Design-related Appeals and the Quest for Excellence," News in Planning, Journal of the Royal Town Plan- ning Institute 1543, Nov. 7, 2003, http://www .rtpl.org.uk/resources/news-in-planning/2003/ q4/1543/154302.html, accessed Dec. 1, 2005.

24. "Better Public Buildings: A Proud Legacy for the Future," Department for Culture, Media and Sport, UK, 2002, http://www.cabe .org.uk/AssetLibrary/1795.pdf, accessed May 5, 2005.

25. Available at http://www.english-heritage .org.uk/server/show/nav.9181, accessed Aug. 24, 2006.

26. John Fidler, conversation with the author, May 6, 2006. English Heritage publications on Conservation Areas are available at www .english-heritage.org.uk/server/ show/conWeb Doc.2407.

27. CABE case studies can be accessed at www.cabe.org.uk. Additional details on the East Quayside Waterfront Regeneration are available at: British Urban Regeneration Asso- ciation Awards, www.bura.org.uk; Terry Farrell Master Planning, www.terryfarrell.co.uk; Baltic Center for Contemporary Art, www.balticmill .com; Arts Council Projects, www.artscouncil .org.uk.

28. Insufficient historic records exist to recreate the exterior. "Franklin Court," www.ushistory .org. See also Betsa Marsh, "Philadelphia Loves Franklin," Philadelphia Inquirer, Feb. 5, 2006; and "Franklin Court," www.ushistory.org/tour/ tour_fcourt.htm, accessed May 6, 2006.

29. International Charter of the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites, Article 12. The canopy was apparently refig- ured every few years to accommodate changing circulation patterns. John Belle and Frederick Bland, correspondence with author, June 20, 2006.

30. The early cast-iron building slated to be reassembled at 15-19 Fulton Street was originally constructed in 1849 at the corner of Washington and Murray Streets as the Edgar Laing Stores. Significant as the oldest surviving building of its kind and representing a transi- tional technology in its use of modular combi- nation of load-bearing, modular cast-iron facades and brick walls with timber framing,

the building was documented by the Historic American Building Survey prior to disassembly in 1971. Sometime between 1973 and 1977 the cast-iron facade was stolen (and presumably sold for scrap) while awaiting reassembly. "Mid-1 9th-Century Commercial Building by James Bogardus," International Council on Monuments and Sites, Monumentum 9 (1973), www.international.icomos.org/monumentum/ vol9. Christopher Gray, "Streetscapes: Facades in Storage; Links to the Cast-Iron Era Await Reconstruction," New York Times, June 10, 1990. Christopher Gray, "James Bogardus: Inventor as an Architect and a Cast-Iron Pioneer," New York Times, Aug. 20, 1995. See also Margot Gayle and Carol Gayle, Cast-Iron Architecture in America: The Significance Of James Bogardus (New York: W. W. Norton, 1998).

31. Frederick Bland, conversation with the author, May 8, 2006. The abstracted steel frame had been carefully designed to accommodate the remaining original pieces, lost in the second theft.

32. Mel Gussow, "The House on West 11th Street," New York Times, March 5, 2005.

33. Destroyed by arsonists in 1933 and Allied bombers in 1945, the building was repaired for occasional use in 1956, later serving as a museum until the parliament's return to Berlin following German reunification. "Reichstag," Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia, http://www .wikipedia.org, May 26, 2006. "Architecture of the Reichstag," www.glasssteelandstone.com, May 2006.

34. Byard, 16-25.

35. The Pennsylvania Avenue Corporation dictated the basic shape of the competition- winning scheme, with the intent of establishing this connection. Architect George Hartman also credits the Commission of Fine Arts, National Capital Planning Commission, and the D.C. Preservation Review Board for their roles supporting the grander urban vision. George Hartman, correspondence with the author, May 30, 2006. See also Tracy Ostroff, "DC Chapter Honors George Hartman for Lifetime of Service," AIA Architect, Dec. 2005, http:// www.aia.org/aiarchitect/thisweek05/twl202/ twl202spot_hartman.cfm, accessed May 6, 2006, and "George Hartman Receives Centen- nial Award," AIA Medallion, "News from the College of Fellows," January 31, 2006, http:// www.aia.org/nwsltr_cof.cfm?pagename=cof_ nwsltr_0131066carchive=l&:, accessed May 6, 2006.

Documents

APT - Changing Perspectives on Appropriate Change