Respect and Reuse: Sustainable Preservation in Portland, Oregon," a Thesis Prepared By
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
RESPECT AND REUSE: SUSTAINABLE PRESERVATION IN PORTLAND, OREGON by BETHANY N. JOHNSON A THESIS Presented to the Interdisciplinary Studies Program: Historic Preservation and the Graduate School ofthe University of Oregon in partial fulfillment ofthe requirements for the degree of Master ofScience June 2009 11 "Respect and Reuse: Sustainable Preservation in Portland, Oregon," a thesis prepared by Bethany N. Johnson in partial fuLfillment ofthe requirements for the Master ofScience degree in the Interdisciplinary Studies Program: Historic Preservation. This thesis has been approved and accepted by: Dr. Kingston Heath, Chair ofthe Examining Committee Committee in Charge: Dr. Kingston Heath, Chair Shannon Bell Accepted by: Dean of the Graduate School 111 © 2009 Bethany N. Johnson IV An Abstract ofthe Thesis of Bethany N. Johnson for the degree of Master of Science in the Interdisciplinary Studies Program: Historic Preservation to be taken June 2009 Title: RESPECT AND REUSE: SUSTAINABLE PRESERVATION IN PORTLAND, OREGON Approved: Dr. Kingston Heath The 'culture ofsustainability' is rapidly developing across the United States and the globe. Prompted by economic and environmental crisis, the need to understand and implement sustainable practices has become the paramount objective ofthe building industry. Utilization ofhistoric preservation as a response to sustainable development is an important aspect ofthe building profession not yet fully understood, though its roots are found in the "new life for old buildings" movement ofthe 1970s. This lack of understanding is, in part, due to limited research addressing the conservation and sustainability ofthe existing building stock within the United States. This thesis will provide case study research on successful sustainable preservation strategies that have been filtered through the National Register ofHistoric Places and the LEED Green Building Rating System, helping to define the opportunities for beneficial interchange. v CURRICULUM VITAE NAME OF AUTHOR: Bethany N. Johnson PLACE OF BIRTH: Anaheim, Califomia DATE OF BIRTH: January 15,1983 GRADUATE AND UNDERGRADUATE SCHOOLS ATTENDED: University ofOregon, Eugene Brigham Young University, Provo DEGREES AWARDED: Master of Science, Historic Preservation, 2009, University of Oregon Bachelor ofthe Arts, Anthropology: Archaeology, 2005, Brigham Young University, Provo AREAS OF SPECIAL INTEREST: Sustainable Preservation Advocacy and Policy Community Impacts Adaptive Reuse PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE: Graduate Teaching Fellow, Historic Preservation Program, University of Oregon, Eugene, 2008 Graduate Teaching Fellow, Anthropology, University ofOregon, Eugene, 2007 Executive Office and Council Liaison, American Historical Association, Washington, D.C., 2005-2007 Vi PUBLICATIONS: Johnson, Bethany N. "Why We Preserve: A Student's Response." Associated Students for Historic Preservation Journal 21, no. 1 (Spring 2008): 2-5. Johnson, Bethany N. "White Stag, Green Stag: The Role of Sustainable Preservation at UO Portland." Associated Students for Historic Preservation Journal 21 , no. 1 (Spring 2008): 22-26. V11 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to express appreciation to Dr. Kingston Heath and Shannon Bell for their guidance and direction in the research and writing ofthis thesis. In addition, appreciation to all the building professionals that gave oftheir time to answer questions and offer their insight and experience is in order. I gained valuable experience and understanding by conversing with these individuals. In addition, special thanks to fellow Historic Preservation classmates for the many hours oflearning, laughing, and commiserating. V11l DEDICATION I dedicate this thesis to my parents, who always believe that I can do anything. Also, to my siblings and friends who have spent many hours encouraging and joyfully celebrated the many milestones, great and small. --------_._-- IX TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. INTRODUCTION 1 Preface 1 Overview 1 Intended Audience and Research Scope....... 2 Case Study Research 3 Accrediting Programs 4 Research Methods 5 Portland, Oregon 6 Case Study Outline 9 Notes 11 II. CONVERGING GOALS: THE NATIONAL REGISTER AND LEED 13 Elements ofSustainability 14 Environmental Responsibility 15 Economic Responsibility.................... 17 Socio-Cultural Responsibility 21 Evaluating Sustainable Preservation 22 LEED Green Building Rating System 22 National Register ofHistoric Places 24 Sustainable Preservation 25 x Chapter Page Integrating Systems . 25 Broader Implications .. 26 Notes . 27 III. ANCHORED VALUES: THE BALFOUR-GUTHRIE BUILDING . 31 Introduction , , . 31 Building Details . 32 Stakeholders .. 32 Design Team 33 Project Costs 33 Financial Incentives .. 34 Historic Context . 34 Project Description . 36 Design Process . 37 National Register Listing .. 37 LEED Accreditation . 38 Connecting the National Register and LEED .. 38 Spatial Flexibility . 38 Systems: HVAC and Lighting .. 39 Sustaining Character Defining Features . 40 Practitioner's Reflections . 42 Author's Reflections . 45 xi Chapter Page Highlights . 45 Concerns . 47 Notes . 49 IV. INTEGRATIVE LEARNING: THE WHITE STAG BLOCK .. 51 Introduction . 51 Building Details .. 52 Stakeholders . 52 Design Team 52 Project Costs and Financial Partners .. 53 Financial Incentives .. 53 Historic Context . 54 Project Description .. 56 Design Process . 58 Connecting the National Register and LEED . 60 Site . 60 Building Reuse and Materials . 61 Windows and Lighting . 64 Systems: Electrical, HVAC, and Water .. 66 Practitioner's Reflections . 67 Author's Reflections . 69 Established Relationships .. 69 Xll Chapter Page Economic and Community Impacts ,. 70 Looking Forward............................................................................................. 72 Notes 73 V. SETTING THE STAGE, RAISING THE STANDARD: FIRST REGIMENT ARMORY ANNEX 75 Introduction 75 Building Details 76 Stakeholders 77 Design Team 77 Project Costs and Financial Partners 77 Financial Incentives 77 Historic Context 78 Project Description 80 Design Process 82 Connecting the National Register and LEED 83 Building Reuse 84 Water and Lighting............................... 86 Practitioner's Reflections 87 Author's Reflections 91 Notes 95 VI. CONCLUSION 97 Advocacy 98 Xlll Chapter Page Education 98 Effective Communication and Integrated Design 100 An Evolving Practice 102 BIBLIOGRAPHY 105 XIV LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 3.1 Balfour-Guthrie Building 32 3.2 Map ofNorth- and South-west Portland. 35 3.3 Rectangular Section Removed From the First FlooL............................................ 39 3.4 South Fayade 41 3.5 Current Entrance 42 3.6 Interior Storm Windows........................................................................................ 42 3.7 Wood Form 43 4.1 Map ofthe West Side ofPortland......................................................................... 53 4.2 Map ofSkidmore/Old Town Historic District 55 4.3 Bickel Block, East Fayade 55 4.4 Italianate Cast-iron Fayade 56 4.5 Hirsch-Weis Building 57 4.6 Reconstructed and Reinforced Capitals 59 4.7 Historic Lightwell 60 4.8 Water Retention Tank 61 4.9 Victorian Gothic Cast-iron Fayade.......................................................................... 64 4.1 0 Floors ofthe Hirsh-Weis Building 65 xv Figure Page 4.11 Saw-tooth Roof ofthe Hirsh-Weis Building....................................................... 66 5.1 West Fayade ofthe First Regiment Armory Annex 76 5.2 Map ofNorthwest Portland's Pearl District 79 5.3 West Fayade 80 5.4 Bowstring Truss System........................................................................................ 81 5.5 Exposed Brick 85 5.6 Glass Elevator Shafts 86 XVI LIST OF TABLES Table Page 2.1 Embodied Energy Calculations for 1967 Construction......................................... 17 2.2 Table ofTypical Construction Materials Used in 1967........................................ 18 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Preface "We recycle newspapers but not buildings?" This is the exact phrase that came into my mind one day while on my way home from work. As a result ofriding the D.C. Metro to and from work twice a day, five days a week, on average I was walking by eight newspaper recycling bins a day. Also in my daily commute oftwo years to the American Historical Association, I walked by almost a mile ofhistoric row houses through the Capital Hill Historic District. Having grown up in one ofthe most rigidly planned cities in the nation, encircled by the suburban sprawl of Orange County, I marveled daily at the variety, individuality, and endurance ofhistoric architecture. I began to wonder why we recycled small things like newspapers, soda cans, and glass bottles fervently in the name of"saving the earth" only to demolish entire buildings with seemingly no thought ofthe environmental impact. Not to mention the resulting impact on entire communities. I continued to ponder this seemingly incongruous connection, to no avail. I simply could not grasp the logic behind it and even started to wonder ifthe connection I had drawn between recycling and buildings made much sense. This question and these thoughts led me to the University of Oregon and to the research and writing ofthis thesis. Overview "We cannot build our way to sustainability, we must conserve our way to it.,,1 This is the declaration given by architect Carl Elefante, effectively calling both building and preservation professionals to arms in the battle for truly sustainable development. Donovan Rypkema, preservationist and economic development consultant,