Gina Douty joined the Practical Preservation podcast to share with us her over 30 years of historic preservation experience.  Having worked in both the public and private sectors she brings a variety of experiences and knowledge to the discussion (we had a great conversation after we finished the recording about her early experiences as a young, female architect – I wished I had kept the recorder going).

Gina Douty offers historic preservation consulting in Central Pennsylvania (and beyond) her services include:

  • Federal and State Historical Rehabilitation Tax Credit applications and submissions
  • PA Historic Resource Survey Form preparation and submissions
  • National Register Nominations
  • Rehabilitation Proposals
  • Section 106 Reviews as an Architectural Historian (36 CFR Part 61)
  • Grant Writing
  • Historic Building Research, Documentation, Assessment, and General Design Guidance

Contact:

Gina M Douty, Historic Preservation Consulting, LLC 717-512-1032 or email: [email protected]

Conference: PA Statewide Conference on Heritage – No Norm Dorm Case Study 

Bio:

Gina M. Douty is a historic preservation consultant who lives and works in Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania.  Her undergraduate degree is from Penn State University in Architecture with a Special Studies in Historic Preservation.  She began pursuing a Masters in American Studies at Penn State Harrisburg, while working full-time as a Historic Preservation Specialist, then later, an Architectural Designer II with the PA Historical and Museum Commission in Harrisburg.  Gina became a mom, and she took some quality time off from my career to raise her family.  Eventually, she began to work part-time at the office and part-time at a home office, with an architectural firm in Harrisburg.  For over ten years, she was the firm’s preservationist, then later, an Associate.  In 2012, with nearly 25 years in the Historic Preservation field, she created Gina M. Douty, Historic Preservation Consulting, LCC, a certified woman-owned, small business, to assist those who desire, need, or have a passion for historic preservation consulting services.  Gina later completed her Masters degree in Historic Preservation from the Savannah College of Art and Design, and was fortunate to receive the Graduate Achievement award as Preservationist of the Year for her graduating class.

 

Chad Martin from Partners for Sacred Places met with me to discuss the work he does helping to preserve religious buildings from demolition through adaptive reuse and the creation of community resources.

Some of the topics we discussed include:

  • The economic impact of preservation.
  • How the work Partners for Sacred Places allows congregations and parishes to continue their mission as a community resource without selling their valuable real estate to developers.
  • The National Fund providing capital grants for preservation needs.  As Chad explains, when a church is choosing between giving money to programs that care for basic human needs and repairing the stained glass the restoration project goes to the bottom of the list.  The National Fund helps to insure both needs are met.

Contact information for Chad Martin plus additional resources:

Partners for Sacred Spaces
215-567-3234 x19

Facebook page Danielle referenced: https://www.facebook.com/abandonedamerica.us/

Bio: Chad Martin, Director, National Fund for Sacred Places
Prior to his role at Partners, Chad was a pastor at Community Mennonite Church of Lancaster (PA). During his pastoral tenure the congregation developed an in-house art gallery, redeveloped an award-winning parking lot in accordance with the city’s green infrastructure plan, and substantially increased building use by community partners. Prior to this, Chad was the Ceramics Studio Coordinator at the Manchester Craftsmen’s Guild (Pittsburgh, PA). He has served on several boards of directors in Pittsburgh and Lancaster, including as a founding board members of the Union Project – an example of best practice for adaptive reuse of a historic religious property – and as Assistant Moderator of Atlantic Coast Conference (MC USA). He has written articles on art and/or theology and spirituality for several publications, including Ceramics Monthly, Worship, and Conrad Grebel Review. His ordained for pastoral ministry in Mennonite Church USA. Chad is a graduate of Goshen College (BA), Pittsburgh Theological Seminary (MA), and Leadership Lancaster.

Transcript:

Announcer: Thank you for tuning into The Practical Preservation Podcast. Please take a moment to visit our website: practicalpreservationservices.com for additional information and tips to help you restore your historical home. If you’ve not yet done so, please subscribe to us on iTunes, Stitcher, and SoundCloud. And also like us on Facebook. Welcome to The Practical Preservation Podcast, hosted by Danielle Keperling. Keperling Preservation Services is a family owned business based in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, dedicated to the preservation of our built architectural history for today’s use, as well as future generations. Our weekly podcast provides you with expert advice specific to the unique needs of renovating a historic home, educating by sharing our from the trenches preservation knowledge and our guest’s expertise, balancing modern needs while maintaining the historical significance, character, and beauty of your period home.

Danielle: Thank you for coming into The Practical Preservation Podcast. We’re actually doing this interview in person. And today we have Chad Martin with us, the director of The National Fund for Sacred Places. Prior to his role at partners Chad was the pastor at Community Mennonite Church of Lancaster, Pennsylvania. During his pastoral tenure the congregation developed an in-house art gallery, redeveloped an award winning parking lot in accordance with the city’s green infrastructure plan, and substantially increased building use by community partners. Prior to this, Chad was a ceramics studio coordinator at The Manchester Craftsman’s Guild in Pittsburgh. He has served on several boards of directors in Pittsburgh and Lancaster, including as a founding board member of The Union Project, an example of best practice for adaptive reuse in the historic religious property. As an assistant moderator of The Atlantic Coast Conference MCUSA, he has written articles on art and/or theology and spirituality for several publications, including Ceramics Monthly, Worship, and Conrad Grebel Review. He is ordained for pastoral ministry in The Mennonite Church, USA.

Danielle: Chad is a graduate of Goshen College, Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, and Leadership Lancaster. Chad, thank you for joining us for The Practical Preservation Podcast.

Chad: Absolutely. It’s a delight to be with you.l

Danielle: Thank you again. How did you get started in preservation? I know you kind of came about it in a round about way.

Chad: Yeah, that’s a great question. So as I was saying kind of coming into this, I do not come at this work from a preservation background. Although I should say, I can maybe start that by saying what we do with The National Fund [crosstalk 00:02:55] for Sacred Places. So Partners for Sacred Places was formed as a nonprofit. We’re a national nonprofit organization based in Philadelphia, formed in the late 1980’s. So almost 30 years ago. At that time in the preservation world there was this kind of brewing conflict, and definitely a robust conversation going on in urban centers like New York, Boston, and Chicago where there was this tension between communities of faith, congregations and parishes, and the preservation community. It was the first time in this country where you saw development pressures for property kind of wooing congregations to consider selling their buildings, or selling heir rights, or those kinds of dynamics-

Danielle: For the real estate?

Chad: For real estate development. Congregations that may have been struggling saw this as an opportunity to endow their programs for years into the future by selling valuable property, which was of course in direct tension with historic preservationists in those very same communities saying, “Even as development pressures increase, we want to be preserving buildings that matter to the community.” So those came [crosstalk 00:04:18].

Danielle: … have stood there for how long [crosstalk 00:04:20] so much a part of the community’s history.

Chad: Exactly. So in places like New York and Boston churches that have been there for 300 years or more, in some cases. So, out of that tension, and like a lot of urban development things, New York was leading the way with some of these conversations. Out of that, Partners was formed as a nonprofit that tried to bridge that gap, and some of that tension, between the preservation community and the interests of congregations. So that’s a kind of long backstory to say that’s the backdrop of the work we do at Partners. Over the years we have had a vested interest in how preservation can enable congregations and parishes to follow their mission of serving their communities, rather than losing their buildings, or selling buildings as a way to [crosstalk 00:05:19].

Danielle: … continue their mission.

Chad: Yeah.

Danielle: I don’t know if this is something that you directly work with, but the churches that get closed in those communities, do you work with those buildings then to find a suitable reuse?

Chad: Yeah, absolutely. The program I direct is The National Fund, which is a new grant making program funded by the [00:05:43] endowment in order to make large capital grants with congregations that are thriving, that have preservation needs in their buildings.

Danielle: Okay, so you’re more that other end of the spectrum where there’s people still attending, but they just don’t have the money to upkeep necessarily that building?

Chad: Exactly. And you know, there’s a wide range of capacity in there. But, virtually every leader of a historic congregation will tell you no matter how well endowed they are there’s always a need for more. Preservation of buildings is expensive, and often for churches falls to the bottom of the list. If they’re choosing between giving money to programs that take care of basic human needs like food, clothing, shelter, if they’re choosing between that and repairing the stained glass windows, usually they’re going to do the program stuff and hope that some day they get to the windows.

Danielle: I know one thing that really opened my eyes to the role of churches and preservation, and promoting art and all of that, was St James just underwent a big restoration project where they worked on safety. I went through a presentation where they talked about all the different things they did to make it for future use, but also respecting that historic. And one of the things that Father David said … I went on a field trip where they were making the clay tiles by hand still at The Mercer Tile Works. He said churches have always promoted that kind of work, and he felt like it was his duty to be a patron and keep that skill and that craft going. And I thought, “That’s really the type work we do, too.” And it opened my eyes to the role of the church. And then I thought back of my history, of the Renaissance, and all those painters, and all of that whole thing. It kind of tied it together in my mind.

Chad: Yeah, absolutely. Historically, churches have been literally the temples at the center of civic life. The story of the 20th century, and now into the 21st century, as you kind of alluded to, is that church participation has been declining. The role of the Christian church, at least, in civic life is very different than it was 100 years ago, or 200 years ago. And yet we still have these vestiges to that era in the physical buildings. Our work is really to step into that gap and say, even as the religious landscape of the country changes, how can we continue to preserve these facilities as a community resource? And usually now it takes more than just the members of the congregation to make that happen. It takes really a full community saying, “This is a resource that matters to us.”

Danielle: And it’s important.

Chad: Yeah. Which really I’m sure puts it in line with many other preservation efforts. No preservation effort happens without a broad [crosstalk 00:08:43] coalitions.

Danielle: And there’s often a discussion of the economic impact of preservation. And I know, prepping for this, reading the economic, you even have things on the website talking about the economic impact of churches in communities, and I had never thought about that. But that really is something that is valuable and should be highlighted so that people aren’t just saying, “Oh, that’s a building that doesn’t pay taxes.” All of those things that go into those community discussions.

Chad: Yeah, absolutely. You’re hitting at the heart of a piece that has been really important at Partners. Very quickly, in it’s early days at Partners in the late 80’s and early 90’s, these conversations started emerging about, “Why should we save these buildings?” Which pushed our staff back to articulating a narrative about why these places matter. And when you’re talking about things like a tax base, and increasing revenue for cash strapped cities looking for revenue wherever they can, that quickly turned to an economic conversation. Church folks aren’t really used to speaking in economic terms about the value of what they do, but I think that’s one of the really important contributions our organization has made over the years. Going back to the mid 90’s, late 90’s, our organization helped sponsor a major research project looking at the economic value of what churches provide. I say churches, but really communities of faith of any religious tradition. So they’re a community. Really aside from everything they do that is the focus of their worship or religious life, looking at the economic impact of employing people in a community.

Chad: The effects of providing services that are often appreciated by the community but under the radar in terms of a dollar amount in the sense of what’s the true value of this? And then we did a major update to that research just in the last couple of years. And we’ve dubbed that the economic halo effect, meaning it radiates out. It’s not just what happens in the doors of the church. You know I, just a couple months ago, visited one of our awardees, which is a Catholic basilica in Milwaukee. It’s an amazing facility. This is not very typical for religious buildings. It was the most visited tourist site in Milwaukee, like the highest rated by Trip Advisor for a couple of years. So they’re definitely a major asset to that community. And we did a halos study of the economic impact of the basilica and the community. They’re a destination wedding venue because it’s such a grand space, so people will come from out of town to have a wedding there. What’s the economic impact of all the guests who come and spend the night there, buy meals there?

Danielle: Right, everything that goes into a wedding.

Chad: Yeah. All the baptisms that happen there, the extended family that come in maybe from the broader region, maybe from even hours away. And we worked to have conservative estimates of that, so this isn’t guesswork. But honestly saying, “What’s the economic activity going on around that place?” And in their case it was in the millions of dollars annually that ripple out from what they do as a basilica that’s not about the dollars spent on a baptism, or the dollars spent on a wedding, or a worship service, but it’s all the dollars spent in the community.

Danielle: The people employed and all the things that go into making the celebrations.

Chad: Yeah. So that’s become an important part of our work, to help congregations tell their story well about why they matter to the [inaudible 00:12:42]. And in some of the cases where churches close frankly they don’t matter a whole lot. They haven’t figured out how to transcend all the changes around them to stay relevant to that community. And we try to be honest with communities when they’re in that place too. But there are many historic congregations that continue to serve their communities in meaningful ways that are often under the radar, and not seen by the broader community as fully as they could be.

Danielle: It’s very interesting to me to look at it because that’s often the way that they look at restoration because restoration is so much more labor intensive than new construction. You’re going in and repairing things rather than buying new materials. You’re not just installing things. Looking at it through that lens I can definitely see how a church, I had never looked at it that way, but how a church does impact the community and all the people around it.

Chad: Yeah, absolutely. Even if folks aren’t always fully aware of what happens inside the doors of a religious space they become symbols to the community. So fi they’re lost to a community how do you quantify what the loss is? And you know, that transcends churches. That’s a historic preservation-

Danielle: Oh, yeah. And that landmark building.

Chad: Yeah, what happens when we lose these landmark buildings? And of course we can’t save all of them. The preservation community is well aware of that, we can’t save all of them.

Danielle: But there are some that are worth definitely saving and preserving so that we have them into the future.

Chad: If I could I wanted to circle back to your question about how we [crosstalk 00:14:26] churches.

Danielle: Sure, definitely.

Chad: … that are not thriving, and what happens with those buildings. Because that is really one of the emerging questions for an organization like ours. In the changing religious landscape we live in right now, increasingly I think this is probably in every community across the country, that’s definitively in every urban community across the country. There are grand historic church buildings that are in disrepair, or facing challenges because either the congregation is dwindling and dying, and ends up closing its doors. Maybe a church sees the writing on the wall and they sell the building, then another congregation steps in. These in some ways are some of the real fun success stories of the work. In some cases there’s no longer a viable congregation that makes sense for a property, but it is still seen as a community asset. So the community rallies to say, “How can we take ownership of this?” That’s really what I was part of with The Union Project in Pittsburgh 10 or 15 years ago.

Danielle: So the building, what did you transform it into? Or how did you reuse it?

Chad: That’s a great adaptive reuse story. That was a crumbling church building. The actual bricks and mortar stories of like hauling trash? That could be a whole podcast itself, just the horror stories of bringing back to life a building that’s been neglected for decades. Numbers of dead pigeons and things like that.

Danielle: Oh yeah, I’ve been there.

Chad: I’m sure you have. Probably everyone interested in this kind of conversation has been there. First of all, the group who bought it was just a group of community members who came together and had a vision for like, ‘We literally walked by this church building every day to get to the bus stop and go to work. It was a symbol of our community and yet it was just falling apart in front of our eyes.”

Danielle: Was it not being used?

Chad: Yeah, there was technically a congregation of like five people meeting around a space heater in a backroom. It clearly had become overwhelmed years ago, and it just was in total disrepair. This was years of sweat equity, but we built a nonprofit organization that was a non sectarian, non faith based, nonprofit organization. Although many of us came from a perspective of communities of faith being important to our formation. Came together to form a nonprofit organization and cast a vision of really developing it as a kind of multipurpose community center. They still exist as an organization, and they still have been taking good care of that building. The uses have kind of shifted a little bit over time as they’ve moved into their own vision, and the founders stepped away. The original vision was around arts, community and faith. So early on we did actually find a congregation that was looking for a home that was brought in as a tenant, and they’re still there. But they’re there as a tenant, they’re an equal partner at the table with all sorts of other nonprofits, community groups. So now it’s used for an event space, a wedding venue.

Chad: There are art studios in the basement, there are nonprofit offices in what would’ve been Sunday school rooms back in the day. And it really came back to life as a community resource.

Danielle: And now the building is being used, and it’s used often. It’s not just sitting there and just used one day a week. And that’s what the building is meant to do.

Chad: Yeah. So in many ways it is serving the kinds of purposes it was built to do in the first place. 150 years ago congregations had a prominence in the community where they could do that tall under their own umbrella. You know, people’s lives revolved around around the life of the church. That’s just simply not true in many cases now. So many of the same kind of services and activities happen there, but they’re under an array of organizations that all are there to serve the community. Some are faith based and some aren’t and they’ve got to find ways to work alongside each other.

Danielle: That made me think of even the parochial schools and the building sitting empty now. There is space there that could be used, and I know that probably falls outside of what you do. Do you focus just on the-

Chad: Yeah, although very closely aligned.

Danielle: I know just in Lancaster there are several buildings that are sitting empty that could have some kind of community center or support kind of thing.

Chad: Well, yeah. And I think truly Lancaster is seeing this go on in every community across the country. It is certainly happening in Lancaster. I’ve lived here 10 years, been here longer. If I think of just the 10 years I’ve been here I have seen historic churches sold by their founding congregation to another congregation. I’ve seen that happen three or four times just in the 10 years I’ve been here. I see churches that I know there are only a handful of people showing up on Sunday morning. Some day really soon that church is going to be on the market and we’re all going to wonder, “How are we going to deal with that hugs, landmark building?” And we’ve seen others. This is one of the interesting things. This certainly happens in other urban centers too. There have been at least two, and maybe three, just in Lancaster that have been converted to high end residences. So Partners vision is, it is best that these are restored as community assets of the community. But there are cases where we kind of walk alongside churches that end up being abandoned.

Chad: You know the saddest stories are wend then are demolished. But it certainly happens, and I think increasingly there’s a very real earnest reality that we have to be strategic. We, meaning everyone involved in this work, about which places can be saved with integrity, and which ones probably can’t. Because there are just too many in flux right now

Danielle: There are. I went through the parochial school in Lancaster. If you look at the number of Catholic churches that are in close proximity to each other, and because they were built for different ethnicities, or different congregations, different nationalities. That’s very hard to sustain, and those are very hard conversations to have because if you don’t have enough people attending to sustain it then you get to that point where the building’s worth preserving, but can it stay in this form or does it need to transform? I think if you go through the criteria for a national landmark I’m sure most of them would be on the register. But then you have to think, you know how Christ Church is one of the ones that you funded. That is definitely tied to our national history. But then you have the other ones that are still very important because they’re tied to people’s history, but maybe they’re not as noteworthy and they didn’t have the famous people. And that is a balance, and I think that would be really hard because the buildings are mostly all beautiful, and even in disrepair are beautiful.

Danielle: I don’t know if you’re familiar, there’s a book that’s like abandoned places. I can’t think of the author’s name, but he went into these places and there’s one church in Philadelphia that he went to every day as it was being demolished. Even those pictures are beautiful, as have the building’s gone.

Chad: Yeah, the photography can be beautiful, but the place is heartbreaking.

Danielle: Yeah, it is. So I don’t envy the position you’re in. We usually get involved when people are ready to save something. We don’t have to make those hard decisions.

Chad: Help decide. Well, and we don’t really either. Although with the grant making program we’re often in the same boat where we come alongside whenever we can. Although with the grant making program we do face these hard choices. So with the national fund, this was created to speak into all the things we’re describing, and actually get some financial resources to these congregations. But even still we’re funding like 12 across the country this year that really [crosstalk 00:23:24].

Danielle: How many applications do you get?

Chad: We’re in our second year of the program. The first years was an invitation only round. So we have about two weeks to go until our due date for the first fully open application round where we marketed this across the country. So it’s still a little bit yet to be seen, but it’s looking like we will have something like 100 plus applications for about 12 slots.

Danielle: Those are hard choices.

Chad: And behind those 100 there’s probably another 1000 that would technically qualify for our program, but do they rise to the top is the most important right now. I should tell a couple stories though.

Danielle: Oh, sure. Definitely.

Chad: [crosstalk 00:24:08]. It reminds me of the range of places we do find because you’re exactly right. We have to be strategic. We look at a couple factors. We’re going for a building that’s really significant maybe in a couple of different ways. It might be architecturally significant. The history of the congregation might be significant. So in the case of Christ Church in Philadelphia It hits both of those. But, however you want to rank that they’re in the top of both of those. Ben Franklin is buried in their burial ground, the building is this amazing Colonial era building. But the other piece that’s really important to us, and this goes back to the kind of research we were talking about earlier. I think really the whole preservation community is moving this way too, where the line I’ve even heard. Stephanie Meeks, the director of The National Trust for Historic Preservation, uses this line frequently that this is not just about bricks and mortar, and preserving these places completely outside of their context. It’s about taking care of spaces that still matter to their community.

Danielle: And I think, at least in the preservation community in Lancaster, in the organizations there’s an organization just devoted to saving places, and then one that’s devoted to the people’s stories. And I think to marry those two would really make more people realize that preservation is about all of our history, it’s collective.

Chad: So Christ Church is a great example because, for all their noteworthiness architecturally and historically, there are other churches that rise to that level in the country, but one of the real stand out features of Christ Church is they have really worked hard over the last couple decades to be completely relevant as a community resource for Philadelphia.

Danielle: I wasn’t aware of that. That’s great.

Chad: Yeah. Oh, it’s a fantastic story. One of the ways they have done that is opened their, it’s called Neighborhood House, but it would be kind of a parish house that’s adjacent to the church building, which is historic in its own right, but it’s like 155 years old or something like that. They have fully restored and updated that facility to be used as a multipurpose venue, mostly as a theater [inaudible 00:26:32].
Danielle: Oh, that’s interesting.

Chad: These numbers aren’t exact because it’s off the top of my head, but it’s something on the order of like 150 plus arts organizations have used their facility as a venue in the last year.

Danielle: Oh, that’s great. So that’s like every other day.

Chad: Yeah, it’s almost every day there is a theater group in their building either rehearsing or performing. So that’s amazing.

Danielle: Yeah, it is.

Chad: This 300 plus year old congregation that has this weight of history, that on its own it would be reasons to put [inaudible 00:27:10] into saving it. What really puts it over the top is the way they have worked. And as a former pastor this is what matters to me more than just a place that mattered in history.

Danielle: Yeah, and I was going to ask about that. Do you feel like that brings you a different perspective in [crosstalk 00:27:24]?

Chad: Yeah, totally. We have other staff who come from much more traditional preservation background. And I really respect and, as a newcomer to this work, I learn a lot from what they teach me. But that being said, my perspective is often driven by what’s the impact of these congregations now? And not just in traditional social service ways, but are they finding innovative, dynamic ways to engage with the community?

Danielle: Yeah. I think that is an interesting perspective, and I think that in this type of work, in preservation, and having the different perspectives helps everybody see that it’s not just a static place in history, it’s an evolution. And the impact now is just as important if we can balance both, and honor both.

Chad: Yeah. So that’s a real important piece for our program, we’re constantly looking for both of those pieces. And we end up saying no to some projects who don’t understand why we said no to them. [inaudible 00:28:34] like, “But don’t you understand how important this building is?” “Yes, and you’re not doing anything with it right now.” So it’s really important to us that it’s continuing to serve its community. That being said, there are also these other situations. Christ Church, that I was just describing, they’re a great example. They have lots of resources and there’s always a need for more. So we’re [crosstalk 00:28:58] but really they have access to a lot of resources. We work with some others that are in really tenuous situations. So I think of a really wonderful little African Methodist Episcopal Zion congregation in North Carolina that we’re funding this year. They got on our radar because they’ve been out of their building for 10 years because it suffered hurricane damage. They got on our radar because they were listed as one of the most endangered places by The National Trust a few years ago.

Chad: So the National Trust brought them to the table. They have capital needs beyond what they can muster themselves. Even though they have continued to thrive, they’ve been meeting off location for 10 plus years.

Danielle: And they’re still-

Chad: Yeah, they continue to thrive, continue to serve their community in lots of important ways. This is a church built by a prominent African American freedman soon after The Civil War. The congregation was formed in the Reconstruction Era after The Civil War, the church was built in the 1890’s by one of the most prominent African American families in that community in North Carolina.

Danielle: So it’s a lot of history too?

Chad: There’s a lot of history there. And it’s a more simple looking, kind of country, North Carolina church, but what an important place historically.

Danielle: And from a historical perspective, because I’m sure at that time it was the education center, and the community center, and everything else that, that Reconstruction era required.

Chad: Exactly. It’s a classic Reconstruction era story. White folks from the north came down and started the school next door, and eventually the same African American builder built he school next door. And what an amazing legacy of a community that probably was severely lacking in resources and had every obstacle, still built a beautiful little church.

Danielle: And that was probably their safe place, too?

Chad: Yeah.

Danielle: Within the community. It’s not as prominent, but it’s definitely an important piece of our history.

Chad: Yeah, and in that case the goal is to get them back in that building so that they can reestablish that sense of home.

Danielle: How do you work with the congregations? Do you do a matching funds? Or how does that process work?

Chad: Yeah, that’s a great question. Our grant making program has a couple different pieces to it. One, and this is kind of the hook for everyone, is the big capital grant. Of course, they would all love to get $250,000 from us. And anyone who’s awarded in the program, the goal is sincerely to get them that money. But along the way we do a lot of capacity building, and assistance with their project. So we have small planning grants that help pay for things like architectural fees or-

Danielle: Project development?

Chad: Yeah, project development. All those things that add up for any project along the way. And those are modest sized planning grants, but the goal is to have at least enough in the planning grants so encourage them to do all that good professional project work. And then each congregation is expected to participate in a group training. We do a couple different levels of that, but the basic on is simply like, “How do you run a good capital campaign as a church?” Many of these congregations have not done a capital campaign in a generation, or maybe ever. And you know that North Carolina church, they’re doing great. They’re a hardworking church, but they don’t have a big budget, and they’re looking at like a million dollars to be able to get back in the building.

Danielle: Right. And for a smaller congregation that’s very daunting.

Chad: That’s a big deal. So just getting the some basic tools for how do you set up an effective campaign. All the while encouraging them to get professional help with that too.

Danielle: That was what I was thinking was, could they even plan stages so that they’re protecting the building, and that’s how we [inaudible 00:33:21]. So you stop all the water and elements from getting it. And then you’re stabilized. And then you can move forward from that, and that gives people encouragement too that they’re actually making progress. 

Chad: Exactly. Some projects are a once and done thing, and some are phased. And then we also wrap in some kind of customized consulting services that are often either in the realm of capacity building or using a set of skills and expertise that our staff have to help them get a step down the road with something related to their building and their mission. That could be really wide ranging. Our staff bring a wide variety of experiences. Everything from very traditional preservation considerations, to capital campaign expertise, to expertise in training up the congregation on, “If you want to share your space more for community life, how do you do that?” Do you make that part of who you are? So we’ll step in and offer a few days of free consulting work [crosstalk 00:34:29].

Danielle: I think that’s probably very important too. Do you do that for the grant recipients?

Chad: Yeah. We were talking earlier about 12 slots out of this 100 plus or whatever. So they apply for the program and we award a cohort into the program, this year it’ll probably be 12, and then each of those 12 get everything I just described.

Danielle: That’s very, very cool. Well that’s very interesting. Did you have anything else that you wanted to share? I feel like we’ve covered a lot of things.

Chad: Great question. I don’t think so, I think that’s an okay place. We could follow lots of other trails with this, but-

Danielle: I think we’ve covered what you do, and why you do it, and why it’s so important to not just the congregation, but to the greater community. How can our audience get a hold of you?

Chad: Great question. Partners for Sacred Places is the organization I work for, and we have a website, which is sacredplaces.org. You can visit that website and learn about the array of things we do from training to consulting, to grant making. The program that I direct is The National Fund, and it has its own stand-alone website. I should say that program is in partnership with The National Trust for Historical Preservation, which is the largest national preservation organization. The website for The National Fund is fundforsacredplaces.org. My phone number is on the Partners website, my email is on both websites. I’m always glad to talk to people more about this program.

Danielle: Yes, thank you for coming in and speaking with me. I enjoyed it.

Announcer: Thanks for listening to The Practical Preservation Podcast. The resources discussed during this episode are on our website at practicalpreservationservices.com/podcast. If you received value from this episode and know someone else that would get value from it as well, please share it with them. Join us next week for another episode of The Practical Preservation Podcast. For more information on restoring your historic home visit us at practicalpreservationservices.com.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Even if you decide I’m too long-winded, or that I’m preaching to the choir, to read this entire post – MAKE SURE YOU SCROLL TO THE BOTTOM to get your free copy of a report on how to make wood windows last for generations we recently wrote.

 

Why Save Historic Wood Windows?

Did you know that historical wood windows are one of the most vulnerable and “at-risk” elements of our architectural heritage?

Historic Wood Window Restoration, Save Historic Wood Windows, Wood Windows vs. Replacement Windows

Preservation Virginia has proclaimed historical windows endangered, saying, “Historic wooden windows are destroyed daily in lieu of new, inferior windows. Salesmen convince owners and architectural review board members that replacement windows are superior to historic wooden windows when the truth is these historic windows can last longer than any new wooden window or vinyl clad window.”

Despite this, windows don’t often have a high priority on the list of things we should preserve in our built history. Yet they should. If eyes are windows into the soul, as the old adage goes, then surely windows are how we see into the soul of a historical building.

The windows in your historical building are an important contribution to how your historical building looks. Not only are they one of only a few parts of a building that serve as both and interior and exterior architectural feature, they usually make up about a quarter of the surface area of a historical building.

Many aspects of windows contribute to your building’s architectural style and historical fabric – height, width, and thickness of frames and sills, the visual design of sash components, the materials and color treatments used, and even the way light reflects off of the glass.

Muntins, historical glass, putty beading, moulding profiles, glazed opening widths, and regionally-distinct patterns and features are more distinct characteristics of original wood windows that contribute to your historical building’s façade.  And all of these varied between architectural styles and periods and from region to region, making wood windows living artifacts from history – an archeological goldmine that helps us understand and document our historical building practices and craftsmanship.

 

[sws_grey_box box_size=”630″] Beyond their importance in contributing to how your building looks, your building’s windows play an important role in how your building functions. Perhaps one of the most important of those functions is how windows serve as an integral part of a historical building’s design to “breathe” moisture. Historical buildings function as a cohesive, whole system to handle moisture infiltration and the original design, installation, and materials used – including, and especially, the windows – were all picked for your building’s specific system. Changing your windows can significantly impact how your home handles moisture – a road no homeowner wants to travel down. [/sws_grey_box]

 

Historic Wood Windows Vs. Replacement Windows

Historic Wood Window Restoration, Save Historic Wood Windows, Wood Windows vs. Replacement WindowsThese features and variances can be difficult to duplicate with modern technology. Our manufacturing and installation process is significantly different than the process used hundreds of years ago and the characteristics modern machinery and installation techniques impart create an entirely different window than the traditional building methods created when your building was originally constructed. Such a loss of historical elements is a permanent scar on your historical building.

Replacing original wood windows also often requires changing the window’s rough opening to install a window manufactured on national standards in to the non-standard opening of a building constructed during a time when there were no building standards – another mistake that permanently damages your building.

 

The Importance of Historic Wood Window Restoration

Historic Wood Window Restoration, Save Historic Wood Windows, Wood Windows vs. Replacement Windows

Just as we shouldn’t replace our historical art with modern replicas, we shouldn’t replace our historical wood windows with modern replacement windows.

Throwing out the artifacts from our built history that stand testament to how our buildings were constructed over the last several hundred years prevents future generations from a deep understanding of a piece of our history that’s just as important as all the other artifacts we work so hard to preserve.

Because once they are gone, they are gone for good.

[sws_toggle1 title=”Which Windows are Historically Significant?“]The National Park Service’s Preservation Brief #9: The Repair of Historic Wood Windows notes that windows should be considered significant to a building if they:

1) are original,

2) reflect the original design intent for the building,

3) reflect period or regional styles or building practices,

4) reflect changes to the building resulting from major periods or events, or

5) are examples of exceptional craftsmanship or design [/sws_toggle1]

[sws_toggle1 title=”What is Recommended for Historic Wood Windows?“]

The National Park Service’s Standards and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historical Windows recommend the following:

• Identify, Retain, and Preserve

• Protect and Maintain

• Repair • Accurate Restoration

• Sympathetic New Windows in Additions

• Preserving Decoration and Function

• Replacement In-Kind

• Compatible Materials

[/sws_toggle1]

[sws_toggle1 title=”What is NOT Recommended for Historic Wood Windows?“]

The National Park Service’s Standards and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historical Windows do NOT recommend the following:

• Removing Windows Important to Historical Character

• Changing Location or Size of Windows

• Inappropriate Designs, Materials, and Finishes

• Destroying Historical Materials

• Replacing Windows that Can be Repaired

• Failing to Maintain

• Replacing instead of Maintaining

• Inaccurate Historical Appearance

[/sws_toggle1]

 

How to Save Historic Wood Windows

Now that you know how important your historic wood windows, we want you to have the knowledge you need to save them.

Get your free copy of our recent report “Put Replacement Windows to Shame: 10 Tools to Make Your Historic Wood Windows Last for Generations”

 

 

 

 

 

 

Preservation Pennsylvania has released their “Pennsylvania At-Risk: Twenty-Year Retrospective of Pennsylvania’s Endangered Historic Properties, Where Are They Now” edition. It’s a fascinating look at preservation in action and we’ll be posting a look at each property in a series of posts over the next several months.

INTRODUCTION
Preservation Pennsylvania established the annual Pennsylvania At Risk list in 1992, making us the first statewide preservation organization in the United States to have an annual roster of endangered historic properties. Since 1992, we have listed and worked to
preserve more than 200 endangered historic resources, including individual buildings, historic districts and thematic resources statewide. For 2012, as we celebrate the 30th anniversary of our organization, we are presenting a 20-year retrospective edition of Pennsylvania At Risk. In this issue, we revisit some of the amazing historic places across the Commonwealth, some of which have been rescued from extinction through preservation and rehabilitation efforts, and others that still need our help.

Approximately 18% of Pennsylvania’s At Risk properties have been lost, having been demolished or substantially altered. Another 32% have been saved or are in a condition or situation where the identified threat no longer poses a problem for the historic property. Approximately 50% of the 201 At Risk resources remain in danger, or we have not been able to confirm their current status as either saved or lost.

By monitoring these properties over the past 20 years and working with individuals and organizations trying to preserve them, we have learned many valuable lessons. Those lessons are called out throughout this publication.

 

1998 – Hazleton High School, Luzerne County

Hazleton High School, Luzerne County

 

• SAVED!•

Hazleton High School, affectionately known as “The Castle on the Hill” to local residents, is one of the city’s most distinctive landmarks.  Built in 1926 in the collegiate Gothic style with elaborate medieval-=style towers and concrete parapets, the building was later converted for use as a junior high school.  Despite its continued use, the school suffered from years of deferred maintenance.  Serious structural problems resulted from water penetration; outdated heating and cooling systems resulted in broken pipes that damaged the wood floors.  When a section of the concrete parapet above the building’s main entrance fell and struct a parent, the school board voted to demolish the historic school.

With vocal opposition from the community and support by a mayor who refused to issue a demolition permit, local residents rallied and called for funding to repair and rehabilitate the building.  Following changes in the composition of the school board, claims that the building was beyond repair were questioned and its condition was reassessed.  When the building was listed in the Pennsylvania At Risk in 1998, the board was divided, and the community was polarized over the issue; many saw preservation as counter to the school’s need for improved technology and other upgrades to the educational curriculum.  After much public debate, the school board voted in May of 2004 to renovate the building for use as an elementary and middle school rather than demolish it.  Renovation of the school occurred relatively quickly, with the new Hazleton Elementary/Middle School opening in the old High School in 2007.

During this renovation, the auditorium was stabilized but not rehabilitated.  Members of the community worked to preserve the auditorium and raise funds for its rehabilitation.  Using a variety of funding sources including grants, private donations, and a large contribution from the school district, the auditorium was fitted with new seating and reproduction aisle standards, digital theater lighting, theater rigging, audio and visual systems and more, and opened as the Alice C. Wiltsie Performing Arts Center in 2011.  The facility, which is owned by the school district and leased to a nonprofit organization that operates the auditorium, received a preservation award in 2012.

To support the Wiltsie Performing Arts Center at the Hazleton School, please visit www.wiltsiecenter.org.

 

[sws_grey_box box_size=”630″]

In 1998, Preservation Pennsylvania dedicated its entire At Risk list to endangered schools.  With help from Arthur Ziegler at the Pittsburgh History & Landmarks Foundation, Preservation Pennsylvania brought attention to the fact that the Pennsylvania Depart of Education’s policies for reimbursement encouraged the construction of new schools over the continued use and preservation of existing and historic schools and began working to improve the situation.

Since 1998, Preservation Pennsylvania has continued to focus on the school issue, working with the Pennsylvania Historical & Museum Commission, the National Trust for Historic Preservation, and other partners to keep the issue of retaining historical school buildings as schools in the forefront and to encourage the smart siting of new schools in locations where at least a portion of students can walk or bike to school.  Preservation Pennsylvania just completed a policy recommendation on Capital Maintenance Reimbursement and the Joint Use of Community-Centered Schools in Pennsylvania.  The Community-Centered Schools page on our website has the most up-to-date resources and success stories. [/sws_grey_box]

 

 

 

Preservation Pennsylvania has released their “Pennsylvania At-Risk: Twenty-Year Retrospective of Pennsylvania’s Endangered Historic Properties, Where Are They Now” edition. It’s a fascinating look at preservation in action and we’ll be posting a look at each property in a series of posts over the next several months.

INTRODUCTION
Preservation Pennsylvania established the annual Pennsylvania At Risk list in 1992, making us the first statewide preservation organization in the United States to have an annual roster of endangered historic properties. Since 1992, we have listed and worked to
preserve more than 200 endangered historic resources, including individual buildings, historic districts and thematic resources statewide. For 2012, as we celebrate the 30th anniversary of our organization, we are presenting a 20-year retrospective edition of Pennsylvania At Risk. In this issue, we revisit some of the amazing historic places across the Commonwealth, some of which have been rescued from extinction through preservation and rehabilitation efforts, and others that still need our help.

Approximately 18% of Pennsylvania’s At Risk properties have been lost, having been demolished or substantially altered. Another 32% have been saved or are in a condition or situation where the identified threat no longer poses a problem for the historic property. Approximately 50% of the 201 At Risk resources remain in danger, or we have not been able to confirm their current status as either saved or lost.

By monitoring these properties over the past 20 years and working with individuals and organizations trying to preserve them, we have learned many valuable lessons. Those lessons are called out throughout this publication.

 

1997 – Coal Oil Johnny House, Venango County

Coal Oil Johnny

 

• SAVED!•

Commonly known as “Coal Oil Johnny,” John Washington Steele was the Pennsylvania oil boom’s prodigal prince.  Adopted at a young age by the McClintock family, John resided in this circa 1850 wood-frame farmhouse for much of his life.  In return for decades of helping the widow McClintock run the farm and manage oil leases on the property, John inherited the estate when Mrs. McClintock died in 1864.  His inheritance included well royalties of $2,000 to $3,000 per day, plus a huge reserve that the widow had stored in a safe in the farmhouse.

Almost overnight, John stopped working hard and started playing hard.  He left his wife of two years and young son in western Pennsylvania and adopted a flamboyant, expensive lifestyle that included extended stays in New York and Philadelphia, where he rode in a bright red carriage decorated with pictures of oil wells gushing dollar signs.  According to local lore, Johnny once spent $100,000 in a day; he bought a hotel for  a night; he lit cigars with hundred-dollar bills; and diamonds dripped from his fingers.  His life was reflective of the boom and bust of the industry.  After living the high life and drinking heavily in cities along the eastern seaboard while poorly managing his money, Coal Oil Johnny quickly depleted his fortune.  He returned to this farmhouse and his wife and son in 1866, and filed for bankruptcy in 1867.  Johnny returned to work.  After hauling other people’s oil to market and dabbling in business, he moved his family farther west, dying nearly penniless in 1921.

After sitting vacant for more than 50 years and subjected to water infiltration as well as insect and rodent infestation, the structural integrity of the building’s foundation was in jeopardy. Its support beams had rotted, and the building’s exterior cladding was damaged beyond repair.  Unable to find a new owner for the house, the owners announced plans to demolish the building in 1996.  By 1997, when the house was listed in Pennsylvania at Risk, the Oil Heritage Region, Inc. (now Oil Region Alliance) had stepped forward to coordinate emergency stabilization measures.  Making good use of both public funds and private donations, they succeeded in moving the house across Oil Creek to the Rynd Farm in Oil Creek State Park in 2001, where they were able to rehabilitate the house over the following years.  The Coal Oil Johnny House is open for special events, an annual open house, and by appointment.  The immediate threat of demolition has been overcome, and the building is currently safe from harm.  But the Oil Region Alliance could still use additional financial support for expanded programming at the house.

To support this project, please contribute to the Oil region Alliance via their website: www.oilregion.org.

 

[sws_grey_box box_size=”630″]

Lessons Learned:

Intervention tools such as grants and tax credits are helping to make preservation projects possible.

The Pennsylvania Historical & Museum Commission’s Keystone Historic Preservation grants make a significant impact on the ability of municipalities and non-profits to preserve endangered historic buildings for public use. At least 48 grants have been given to 25 of Pennsylvania’s 201 At Risk properties as a result of the Keystone Recreation, Park & Conservation Fund. The federal Save America’s Treasures program assisted at least six additional projects that were once at risk of being lost. At least nine additional endangered historic properties in Pennsylvania have benefited from grants from the National Trust for Historic Preservation (NTHP). The NTHP has invested additional funds into initiatives started to address the threats identified in Pennsylvania at Risk, such as the demolition of historic properties for construction of new, large houses and stores, and addressing problems common among specific property types, such as churches and schools.

At least 20 historic properties that were included in Pennsylvania At Risk over the past 20 years have benefited from the federal Rehabilitation Investment Tax Credit. All relatively large commercial rehabilitation projects, these projects are scattered all around the state, occurring in Allegheny, Bedford, Blair, Crawford, Dauphin, Erie, Lehigh, Luzerne, Lycoming, and Philadelphia Counties. With the new state tax credit in place, rehabilitation tax credits will certainly continue to provide important financial incentives for preserving Pennsylvania endangered historic properties in years to come. [/sws_grey_box]

 

The Central Pennsylvania Preservation Society recently hosted representatives from the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission for a presentation on the brand new state historic tax credit program.  You can read their summary of the presentation here.

 

 

 

Preservation Pennsylvania has released their “Pennsylvania At-Risk: Twenty-Year Retrospective of Pennsylvania’s Endangered Historic Properties, Where Are They Now” edition. It’s a fascinating look at preservation in action and we’ll be posting a look at each property in a series of posts over the next several months.

INTRODUCTION
Preservation Pennsylvania established the annual Pennsylvania At Risk list in 1992, making us the first statewide preservation organization in the United States to have an annual roster of endangered historic properties. Since 1992, we have listed and worked to
preserve more than 200 endangered historic resources, including individual buildings, historic districts and thematic resources statewide. For 2012, as we celebrate the 30th anniversary of our organization, we are presenting a 20-year retrospective edition of Pennsylvania At Risk. In this issue, we revisit some of the amazing historic places across the Commonwealth, some of which have been rescued from extinction through preservation and rehabilitation efforts, and others that still need our help.

Approximately 18% of Pennsylvania’s At Risk properties have been lost, having been demolished or substantially altered. Another 32% have been saved or are in a condition or situation where the identified threat no longer poses a problem for the historic property. Approximately 50% of the 201 At Risk resources remain in danger, or we have not been able to confirm their current status as either saved or lost.

By monitoring these properties over the past 20 years and working with individuals and organizations trying to preserve them, we have learned many valuable lessons. Those lessons are called out throughout this publication.

 

1994 – Huber Breaker, Luzerne County

Huber Breaker

Photo by  John-Morgan on Flickr

 

• AT RISK •

Built in 1937-1938 by the Glen Alden coal Company, the Huber coal breaker utilized state-of-the-art washing and separating technology to process the output of several collieries into 7,000 tons of marketable coal daily.  The highly efficient breaker delivered purer coal in smaller sizes, a product in high demand in the 20th century. The facility could not overcome strong trends in the energy industry – including competition from other energy sources and the switch from shaft to strip mining, which required different processing technology.  So after nearly 40 years of operation, the breaker was shut down in 1976.

This important industrial property was documented by the Historic American Engineering Record in 1991 and determined eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places in 1993.  The Huber Breaker Preservation Society, whose mission is to provide for the preservation of the Huber Breaker and for its adaptive reuse as a historic site and park, has been working for decades to preserve the property.    They hold clean-up days at the site and are building a memorial park where they will interpret its history.

Despite the fact that the Borough of Ashley, Luzerne County, and several area organizations have been supportive of its preservation, the Huber Breaker remains at risk today.  The company that owns the property is currently in bankruptcy.  The very real and imminent threat is that once the bankruptcy proceedings are finished, teh breaker may be sold for its estimated $400,000 value in scrap metal, with additional revenues generated by the mineable coal under the property.  Recongizing this threat, the deteriorating Huber Breaker was identified by leaders of historic and preservation groups as the most endangered historic landmark in Luzerne County in 2012.  If the property is to be saved, it must be acquired soon by a new preservation-minded owner with the resources to take on the monumental task of stabilizing and rehabilitating the property so that its story can be told to the public.  These needs certainly pose an additional challenge.

To support the Huber Breaker Preservation Society and help protect this historic property, please visit: www.huberbreaker.org.

 

 

 

 

Our recent blog post from Ken Roginski about the mistakes and and “no-no’s” that are so often made by well-meaning historic building owners as they attempt to preserve a house through the years reminded us very much about a project we did a few years ago.  The John Maddox Denn House project was built in 1725 and over the years it had been remodeled several times, with mistake piling on top of mistake.  By the time we were hired, a complete restoration was required to return the historic home to its original period of significance. (You can also read an excerpt of the book our own Lois Groshong wrote about the restoration of the Denn House “2001 Restoration of a Colonial Home“.)

Given how commonly restoration and renovation mistakes are made when working on historic buildings, we’re also in the process of launching our very first Preservation Primer that addresses this very subject.  Look for the announcement of that release soon, but in the meantime, the following books (taken straight from our very own bookshelves) may help you learn more about how to work on a historic building without compromising its historic fabric.

 

Collins Period House: How to Repair, Restore, & Care for Your Home by Albert Jackson and David Day

books

Collins Period House is intended for home-owners of period property who appreciate the beauty, tradition, and fine craftsmanship of their older homes and who wish to maintain and restore them in a way that is true to their individual histories.

A step-by-step guide, Collins Period House puts sympathetic restoration firmly within the grasp of all period-home owners.  Detailed instructions and nearly a thousand informative photographs and drawings explain exactly what can be done, using authentic techniques and materials.  The book also indicates what should be left well alone and when it may be necessary to call in a specialist.

The authors concentrate on the restorations of those elements that give buildings their special charm and character.  They explain how to renovate existing period fixtures and fittings, and suggest sources of authentic designs to replace those discarded or beyond repair.  And when there is little possibility of obtaining the genuine article, suitable reproductions are proposed.

Whether it is simply refinishing an antique banister or installing a period mantelpiece, Collins Period House will give readers the confidence to tackle restoration projects on their own by painstakingly guiding them through every stage in the process, until they achieve the home of their dreams beautifully restored for posterity.”

 

Building Codes for Existing and Historic Buildings by Melvyn Green, S.E.

images“Learn to apply the International Building Code and International Existing Building Code to historic buildings.  Written for architects, engineers, preservation, and code enforcement professionals, this is the only comprehensive book that examines how the International Building Code (IBC) and the International Existing Building Code (IEBC) can be applied to historic and existing buildings.  For ease of use, the book is organized to parallel the structure of the IEBC itself, and the approach is cumulative, with the objective of promoting an understanding of the art of applying building regulations to the environment of existing buildings.

Building Codes for Existing and Historic Buildings begins with a discussion of the history of building regulations in the United States and the events and conditions that created them.  Next, it provides thorough coverage of:

-The rational behind code provisions and historic preservation principles

-Major building code requirements: occupancy and use, types of construction, and heights and areas

-Building performance characteristics: fire and life safety, structural safety, health and hygiene, accident prevention, accessibility, and energy conservation

-Case study projects that reinforce the material covered

Additionally, the book includes building analysis worksheets – both blank and filled-in versions with examples – that illustrate how to develop a code approach for an individual building.  If you are a professional at any level who is working on creating a plan that meets the intent of the code for historic or existing buildings, Building Codes for Existing and Historic Buildings gives you everything that you need to succeed.”

 

Restoring Old Houses by Nigel Hutchins

!!eBhNIwBmM~$(KGrHqZ,!joE0D)bl7E9BNQvCpc6-g~~_32

“The many professional disciplines and trades required to restore a house would take lifetimes to master.  This book is not meant to teach those skills, but to aid the layman and preservationist in the process, pitfalls, and delights of this endeavor.

Evolving one’s lifestyle to suit a lifestyle of another decade or century is a challenge technically, socially, and visually.  “Preservation,” “recycle,” and “reuse” are terms we use in our day-to-day conversation.  When looking at the resource of four hundred years of domestic architecture, these axioms seem easy to follow.  Unfortunately, the process of preservation has given way first to neglect and patchwork solutions, and second to a wholesale popularizing of preservation, which in turn creates its own set of problems.

The process of neglect, while its very meaning is negative, has in many cases meant that change has not occurred.  This lack of change means details are undisturbed.  The layout of the rooms remains the same.  In fact, the vestiges of the original structure are often untouched.  The preservationist can then discern how and why restorations should take place, marrying past and contemporary.

Therefore, while neglect is bad, it is not as grave as the second problem.  The popularizing of period homes has in many cases destroyed the very elements that preservationists should be saving.  For instance, in an effort to glamorize a structure, neoclassical features may be stuck on neogothic facades, or windows may be transformed into T.V. colonial.  Often elements are replaced rather than refurbished.

The further evolution of this process is the setting apart from the general neighborhood of the “heritage” house or district.  The labeling of structures and areas as “heritage” may save them in the immediate; however, this approach also sets them apart from the general community, depriving them of their role as a working part of that particular neighborhood.  Heritage preservation should be part of the housing building process today.  The very term preserve means “to keep”.  Old does not have to be new again, but functional, both visually and technically.

It is important that we, as temporary tenants in a period house, make changes and maintain it for future generations.”

 

Restoring Houses of Brick and Stone by Nigel Hutchins

images (1)“In Restoring Houses of Brick & Stone, Nigel Hutchins has created a worthy successor to Restoring Old Houses.

This splendidly thorough work is at once a comprehensive history and a practical manual.  Its starting point is an exhortation to the well-intentioned old-home preservationist to know first and foremost the meaning of the term “restore.”  For the restorer, historical accuracy is the watchword, even if the results shatters our preferred fancies.  For the renovator, there are more options.  We may very well wish to rebuild a historic home according to our wishes for what history should have been, or we may take the earnest path and seek to return a structure to what it once was in actual fact – the important thing is that we are aware that we are making a choice.

A great wealth of pleasure accrues from a slow and sensitive reading of each chapter.  The historical introductory comments are a special treat, valuable if for no reason than to spare us the exasperation of repeating the mistakes of those who have gone before.  The historical erudition of these pages is matched by a wealth of sensible day-to-day insights regarding selection and repair of building materials, techniques of construction and reconstruction, methods of cleaning, principles of renovation and additions and invaluable discussions of things best not done at all.

For the professional and amateur alike, here is a clear-headed, wise and even witty account of a thousand useful topics.”

 

 

Practical Restorations Reports by John Leeke, American Preservationeer

Practical Restoration ReportsPractical Restoration Reports are a detailed technical series on preservation topics packed with practical methods you can use now.

The reports contain complete descriptions of useful techniques with drawings and photos that reflect the latest developments in the field of architectural preservation.  Information in each report is updated as new developments in preservation are actually used on projects around the country.  These reports are based on real projects and the author’s thirty years experience as a preservation tradesman and contractor.  He brings that experience to work for the readers of these reports.  He developed these reports in response to the needs of professionals, contractors, and homeowners for detailed and accurate information about their old and historic buildings.

Homeowners & Do-It-Yourselfers:
Use Practical Restoration Reports as do-it-yourself guides.  They give you all the information you need to talk with trades people confidently

Trades People & Contractors:
Bring your crews up-to-speed quickly on new preservation techniques with Practical Restoration Reports.  With their help, you can move into productive work with less time and hassle.

Architects & Professionals:
Refer to Practical Restoration Reports in your specifications, then just include a copy of the report.  The reports provide a hands-on approach contractors will appreciate.

 

 

 

 

Last Wednesday, the Lancaster County Planning Commission hosted strongtowns.org’s “Curbside Chat” presented by Charles Marohn at the Manheim Township Public Library.

“Curbside Chat” is strongtowns.org’s program to discuss the financial realities facing our cities, towns, boroughs, and townships.  The Chat started with the history of what Marohn called the “Suburban Experiment” of new development that shifted homes and businesses outside of towns and into outlying areas.

[sws_blockquote_endquote align=”left” cite=”” quotestyle=”style02″] We often forget that the post-World War II American pattern of development is an experiment.  We assume it is the natural order because it is what we see all around us, but our own history – let alone a tour of other parts of the world – tells a different story. -Charles Marohn[/sws_blockquote_endquote]

How New Development is Financially and Economically Unsustainable

Marohn noted that the financial viability of the  “Suburban Experiment” is based on two assumptions that have not proven to be true:

1: New growth encouraged by suburban development will continue to be ever-accelerating.
2: New growth will create enough revenue to pay off debt incurred to create the infrastructure needed to support suburbanization and pay for the maintenance of that infrastructure.

He went on to present multiple case studies that established a pattern of suburban development (through the creation of infrastructure by local governments) that would take 50 to nearly 100 years to pay off – NOT including the cost of maintenance.    These case studies were not just focused on a particular neighborhood demographic, they included examples from low-density neighborhoods, medium-density neighborhoods, high-value properties, traditional neighborhoods, industrial parks, and commercial districts set in both rural and suburban areas.

Marohn followed the growth studies with a sobering chart on the long-term financial ramifications for local governments using this type of development: after just 20-25 years, the income created by suburbanization (after the expense of maintaining the infrastructure) begins to plummet much more rapidly than it increased during the initial years.  After just 35 years, the expenses of maintaining the development becomes greater than the income it produces and never again returns to a positive cash flow.

Note: The following chart is based on new growth models that include the assumption that new development will be implemented every two years.  If new development is not implemented every two years, the results look even worse than the chart below.

Cumulative Cash Flow - MP2LC

Sobering indeed, isn’t it?

Read more about this “Growth Ponzi Scheme”, including five articles delving into the details of Marohn’s presentation.

 

How Preservation is Financially and Economically Sustainable

It’s not as thought most of us didn’t already know that historic preservation supports financial and economic growth and stability, but the second part of Marohn’s “Curbside Chat” did include solid, and sometimes surprising, evidence for how that happens.

Marohn once again had a wealth of case studies to make the case that the preservation of existing development (even when its at its worst of transient occupancy and rundown buildings, in a state he called “Old & Blighted”) has consistently demonstrated a higher assessed value (that will produce more tax revenues) than what he called the “Shiny & New” big-box model of development that typically includes a single businesses on the same size development lot that traditional development houses multiple businesses and even residences on.

Using an ROI (Return on Investment) based on property taxes and the revenue stream those taxes produce, Marohn’s case studies show that even “Old & Blighted” vernacular downtown areas are valued significantly higher, almost doubled when looking at an overall average, than the “Shiny & New” big box development.

[sws_blockquote_endquote align=”” cite=”” quotestyle=”style02″] “Our problem was not, and is not, a lack of growth. Our problem is sixty years of unproductive growth. The American pattern of development does not create real wealth; it creates the illusion of wealth. Today we are in the process of seeing that illusion destroyed and with it the prosperity we have come to take for granted.” – Curbside Chat Companion Booklet, page 5 [/sws_blockquote_endquote]

Not only that, Marohn pointed out that “Old & Blighted” development can be stimulated and improved (adding value which would increase the revenue stream) with a much lower investment than those plots that new development sits on.

Perhaps the most interesting example he gave here was an avant-garde approach used by a group of citizens in Memphis, Tennessee.  After repeatedly, and unsuccessfully, petitioning the city to paint parking spots, crosswalks, and bike lanes into a particular downtown area of small, storefront businesses to encourage the community to support those businesses – the citizens decided to take matters into their own hands.  Spending $500 on paint, they painted the parking spots, crosswalks, and bike lanes themselves. Within six months the storefronts were filled, the businesses were doing well, and one landlord reported being able to collect twice the rental fee he has previously been able to charge.  

Marohn then outlined the strategies he suggests for turning unsustainable development models into thriving economic centers that will stand up to the test of time and create a method of placemaking that yield a higher return on public investments:

STOP: Do no more “if you build it they will come” develop and instead focus on small, incremental investments in places that are already productive

TAKE STOCK: What and where is already productive?  Where is the revenue stream coming from?  What is the tax base that produces that revenue stream?  What are the tax subsidies that reduce that revenue stream?  What are the debts that impact revenue?

START TRIAGE: Ease the suffering of “most broke” development that won’t make it and isn’t sustainable and move on to treat and improve the already productive “somewhat broke” that can be sustained, saving the “least broke” development for last.

COMMIT TO ALWAYS ADDING VALUE: Adding value with placemaking strategies encourages the kind of growth that produces positive revenue streams that can be sustained, without debt.

REORIENT SYSTEMS & APPROACH TO GROWTH: Develop a capital improvements plan that takes a hard look at the scale of infrastructure inventory, maintenance obligations, when that maintenance will come due, what that maintenance will cost, and what funding sources they rely on, to create a realistic “balance sheet” of the public’s future obligations.

The “Curbside Chat” chat companion booklet is available online, and is absolutely a must-read.  As is the information, statistics, websites, and strategies for more productive growth and placemaking preservation approaches available on the strongtowns.org website.  You can also view Marohn’s presentation schedule, as well as sign up to schedule a “Curbside Chat” presentation in your town.

 

[sws_grey_box box_size=”630″]

THINGS TO THINK ABOUT

Why have we not been implementing growth based on ROI (Return on Investment)?

How can we get our cities and towns to start thinking about growth in terms of ROI (Return on Investment)?

What kinds of inexpensive changes and improvements can be made to our neighborhoods and downtowns to add value?

What “high amenity” areas offer the potential for an increased level of public investment and engagement?

How can we add value to those “high amenity” areas?

What are incremental strategies that can add value to existing development in cities and towns?

How can we articulate the ways that historic preservation continues to that value?

How can we communicate that to our towns and cities?

How does creating a sense of place with historic preservation contribute to the placemaking principles that Strong Towns advocates?

[/sws_grey_box]

The Coalition for Smart Growth will present a no-cost forum called “New Uses for Old Buildings – Making It Work for You” on Thursday, October 25th, from 6:30-9:00pm, where expert panelists will discuss their experiences reusing existing buildings.

Click here to read more or register: http://www.coalitionforsmartgrowth.org/forum-new-uses.html

 

Ever wonder what the women of the Ephrata Cloister were like?  What other local women of that era were like?  The Ephrata Cloister can show you, with their program “Mothers, Sisters, Daughters” that explores the roles, duties, responsibilities, and influences of both the celibate women of the Cloister and married women of Colonial America.  For more information, visit their website at: ephratacloister.org.