Treetops Feasibility Study
PART 1: OVERVIEW/CONTEXT Historical Summary Current Context
PART 2: EXISTING CONDITIONS Site Plan Ground Floor Plan Second Floor Plan Third Floor Plan
PART 3: INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITATIONS Accessibility Egress On-Site Parking Off-Site Parking
PART 4: ZONING/LAND USE PART 6: ADDITIONAL CASE STUDIES R-1 Zoning & Permitted Uses UO Watzek House R-1 Zoning Limitations & Strategy UO Cottrell House Rezoning to S-H Historic Historic Rezoning Case Study PART 7: SUMMARY Rezoning to PL-Public Land
PART 5: POTENTIAL USES/CASE STUDIES APPENDICES: Historic House Museum A1 ORS 358.653 Protection of Publicly University Administrative Office Owned Historic Properties Fact Sheet Meeting/Small Event Space A2 Historic Floor Plans of Treetops Art Gallery A3 City of Eugene Historic Landmark Ap- Faculty Club plication/Decision for the Ball House Alumni Club A4 “University-affiliated Historic House Faculty Housing Museums” - 2014 Report Public Park
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 1 Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 2 Treetops Feasibility Study
Updated November 8, 2018
C E A V M P T I F I R A R E C O L L AB O
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC 341 Main Street Springfield, Oregon 97477 www.campfirelab.com
Jenna L. Fribley, AIA, LEED AP Architect / Co-Founder UO M.Arch 2007
Kelsey Buzzell Designer / Co-Founder UO B.Arch 2008, M. Iarc 2013
Abraham Kelso UO M. Arch 2018
David Lieberman UO M. Arch 2017
Matthew Nicholson UO M. Arch 2017
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 3 Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 4 Part 1: Overview / Context
Historical Summary Current Context
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 5 PART 1: OVERVIEW/CONTEXT
Historical Summary
Known variously as the Hampton House, the Campbell Church House, and the Chancellor’s House, Treetops was built in 1910 for Alton Hampton, a local businessman. This grand craftsman house was built in what is now known as the Fairmount Neighborhood back when the estate would have been along the electric Above: Treetops under construction, ca. 1910 streetcar Fairmount Loop. Below: View from NW corner of property, ca. 1920 Portland architects Bennes and Hendricks designed the house, and George Otten, a UO graduate in lanscape architecture, designed the gardens for his thesis in 1911. At 17 rooms and 11,820 square feet, the house was the talk of the town during construction.
In 1921 the house was sold to mining baron Campbell Church, Sr., who in 1938 gifted the house to the State Board of Higher Education in memory of his wife as the acting Chancellor’s residence. It has been inhabited by 13 such Chancellors in the intervening decades.
Rooms/amenities:
Ground floor Third Floor • Living room • 3 bedrooms • Dining room • Bathroom • Entry Parlor with fireplace • Finished attic room (could be additional • Kitchen with pantry and breakfast area bedroom) • Organ landing • Unfinished attic room • Powder room Basement Second Floor • Half bathroom (toilet & sink) • Balcony atop grand stair • Boiler/furnace/utility spaces • Main bedroom suite with fireplace, exterior balcony, dressing room/porch, bathroom Exterior amenities • Study/guest room with fireplace • Wrap-around porch • 2 additional bedrooms & 1 bathroom • 1.5 acre grounds • Former maid’s quarters at intermediate level • Garage/carriage house • Pool
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 6 PART 1: OVERVIEW/CONTEXT
Current Context
In July 2015, the position of Chancellor was retired in conjunction with the dissolution of the Oregon University System governance structure. This leaves the current/future role of the Treetops property in question.
The historic character, architectural features, and social significance of Treetops makes it a both a unique asset and a challenge. As a University- owned property, any alterations must comply with certain preservation guidelines. However the history of the building is also what makes it an interesting setting for many uses and irreplaceable EC Section 9.9570 outlines policies specific to the if sold. Fairmount/U of O Special Area. The Treetops site is not actually within the boundaries of this special The building is in overall good condition, but area, however the policies reflect the Fairmount it is costly to upkeep/maintain and there are Neighborhood’s sensitivity to campus sprawl and upgrades that need to be implemented to keep increased traffic. the building habitable (for example, replacement of the plumbing supply lines). Additionally, if This section specifically mandates the City repurposed for a non-residential use, additional to “encourage the University to consolidate upgrades would likely be required for fire/life nonresidential uses that currently are scattered safety and/or accessibility. throughout the area into the portions of the plan area reserved for institutional use, returning One of the primary challenges of this property is structures thus vacated to residential use.” vehicle accessibility and parking. The site is ~1.1 miles from the center of campus, and nestled To meet the intent of the code and minimize within a hilly residential neighborhood. On-site neighborhood resistance, any submittal for parking is very limited, and the neighbors are very a proposed use should clearly articulate/ sensitive to traffic. demonstrate: (1) compatibility with the adjacent low- Zoning restrictions are the other main challenge density residential environment, for this site. The R-1 Low Density Residential (2) that the use will not generate more zoning limits allowable uses at this location, automobile trips than other low-density as it is intended primarily for single-family residential uses allowed in the zone homes. Additionally, the property is within the and that adequate off-street parking is city-recognized boundaries of the Fairmount provided, and Neighbors Association, which imposes additional (3) that the proposed use will contribute to regulations on allowable uses, on-site parking, and the neighborhood in a positive way and/or development standards. serve as a neighborhood amenity.
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 7 Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 8 Part 2: Existing Conditions
Site Plan Ground Floor Plan Second Floor Plan Third Floor Plan
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 9 PART 2: EXISTING CONDITIONS
Site Plan not to scale
FAIRMOUNT BLVD.
TREETOPS HOUSE
GARAGE
SPRING BLVD.
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 10 PART 2: EXISTING CONDITIONS
Ground Floor Plan not to scale
DINING 104 LIVING RM. 103
PARLOR KITCHEN 101 106 LANDING 102
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 11 PART 2: EXISTING CONDITIONS
Second Floor Plan not to scale
BEDRM 204 BEDRM 206
BEDRM/ STUDY BALCONY 203 202 209
BEDRM 210 BEDRM/ STUDY 201
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 12 PART 2: EXISTING CONDITIONS
Third Floor Plan not to scale
ATTIC BEDRM 304 BEDRM 305 303
BEDRM 302
BEDRM 301
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 13 Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 14 Part 3: Infrastructure Limitations
Accessibility Egress On-Site Parking Off-Site Parking
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 15 PART 3: INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITATIONS
Accessibility
Existing Lift
An existing wheelchair access lift is located on the northeast corner of the porch, providing access from the level of the driveway to the porch.
Accessibility will also have to extend into the parking area, with clear accommodations for at least one handicap-accessible van. Above: Existing exterior lift at northeast corner of New Lift/Elevator: the porch.
Depending on the proposed use and number of occupants, it is likely that an elevator/lift may not be required by the building code in many scenarios. However, as a University property, it would be best practice to find a way to retrofit an elevator/lift to allow universal access to the upper two floors of the building.
Identifying a lift location is challenging as it needs Potential to be integrated into the floor plan in such a way interior lift that does not interfere with existing structure, location room layout, and character of the building. At the same time, the lift must access the open areas of the second and third floor, leaving only a handful of viable options available. GREAT ROOM
One viable option for locating a lift in the building LIFT is shown to the right. Refer to diagrams on page LIFT 28 to see this lift location translated to the upper floors.
Toilet Rooms: ENTRANCE MEZZANINE
Though not required by code unless altering the building, it would be best practice to upgrade at least the ground floor bathroom to comply with ADA guidelines. LIFT
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 16 PART 3: INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITATIONS
Fire / Life Safety
BEDRM 204 BEDRM 206
Residential Use BEDRM/ STUDY BALCONY 203 202 No fire/life safety upgrades are required if the 209 entire house is used as a single-family dwelling (which allows up to 5 unrelated persons to live BEDRM 210 BEDRM/ there). STUDY 201 Non-Residential Use
If the building is used for a non-residential use, such as offices or meeting/gallery spaces, some fire/life safety upgrades may be required. The scope of upgrades is dependent on the calculated occupant load. Above: Second floor accessed by open, grand Because the building is 3 stories and of non-rated stair as well as narrower south stair. Stairs are too (Type VB) construction, installation of sprinklers close together to qualify as 2 means of egress. will be required for any non-residential use. (Or a possible alternative is to close the 3rd floor). Below: Third floor has only one stair for egress. Additionally, in order to use the 3rd floor for any For non-residential use, another exit stair would non-residential use, a second exit from this story likely need to be constructed. will be required.
Any room or floor with more than 49 occupants is required to have 2 exits and associated exit signage, and egress lighting and door hardware.
Unless additions or alterations are made to the ATTIC BEDRM 304 BEDRM building, change in use alone shall not require 305 303 accessibility upgrades.
BEDRM 302 Combination Residential/Non-Residential Use BEDRM 301 If a combination of uses is proposed - such as guest rooms on the upper floors and meeting/ gallery spaces on the lower floor(s) - installation of sprinklers will be required. Additionally, windows in sleeping rooms will need to be verified/ upgraded to provide a secondary means of egress (otherwise a second exit/stair from the upper floors would be required).
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 17 PART 3: INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITATIONS
On-Site Parking
Most uses for the Treetops property will TREETOPS necessitate the construction of additional parking HOUSE CARPORT area(s) on-site. Currently there are a few stalls in front of the house and an additional handful of spaces in front of the garage (if tandem parked). BIKE PARKING Options to consider are: 1. A strip of parking that could be inset along Fairmount Blvd, at the base of the site 2. Removal of the existing swimming pool to construct a parking area along Fairmount. If covered with a roof structure, the area above could be used for an event space/deck. GARAGE 3. Reconstruction of the existing driveway loop to create a large parking area, including ADA stalls.
Above: Enlarged view of area 1 3, showing one schematic 2 configuration of a new parking area at the location of the existing driveway loop. This scheme provides 17 parking stalls, including 2 accessible.
3 NOTE: The language of the code prohibits more than 2 parking stalls per R-1 lot in the Fairmount Neighborhood. It also limits the number and size of driveways, and requires parking to be perpendicular to the street. This will need to be considered/ addressed with the City in conjunction with any proposed change of use to the site/building.
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 18 PART 3: INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITATIONS
Off-Site Parking
Heart of Historically, the University had an agreement with Campus the neighboring property to use the adjacent tennis courts for overflow parking during events. This has long expired, and the tennis courts have UO Agate been removed - thus this option is no longer Playground viable. It is possible that an arrangement with Parking Lot 1/4 mi. other neighbors could be made for special radius occasions, however if any non-residential use is Treetops proposed for the building it will trigger land use code requirements for additional dedicated off- street parking.
While some of this may be achievable on-site as illustrated on the previous page, the Eugene Code does allow the flexibility of providing off- street parking spaces off-site, with a stipulation that they must be located within a 1/4 mile (1320 feet) radius of the site. (Per Eugene Code section 9.6410). Parking lots are not an allowed use in R-1 zone, so purchasing an adjacent property to convert to parking is not a viable option.
The University of Oregon’s Agate Playground and parking lot, located at Agate St. and 19th Avenue, lies within the 1/4 mile boundary and presents as a For reference, below are land use code workable location for off-site parking. requirements for the number of off-street parking stalls required for various uses: The off-site parking must be formally identified and approved as described in the following code • Artist/Gallery Studio: 1 parking space per 275 language: “All required parking shall be under the s.f. floor area same ownership as the development site served, • Neighborhood Activity Centers: 1 per 4.5 seats except through a city approved agreement that or per 28 square feet of assembly area binds the parking area to the development site.” • Museum: 1 per 275 s.f. floor area • Office Uses: 1 per 330 s.f. floor area A dedicated parking lot off-site, in combination • Single-Family Dwelling: 1 parking space with a shuttle service at specific times and/or • Hotel/motels, boarding/rooming houses, bed during special events, could be a viable solution & breakfasts: 1 per guest room for meeting parking needs. (Perhaps there is even an opportunity to pay homage to the old (Reference Table 9.6410 of the Eugene Land Use Fairmount trolley loop). Code)
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 19 Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 20 Part 4: Zoning / Land Use
R-1 Zoning & Permitted Uses R-1 Zoning Limitations & Strategy Rezoning to S-H Historic Historic Rezoning Case Study Rezoning to PL-Public Land
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 21 PART 4: ZONING/LAND USE CODE
R-1 Zoning & Permitted Uses
The Treetops property (2237 Spring Blvd.) is locat- ed within the R-1 Low Density Residential Zone, defined by the Eugene Land Use Code (9.2700) as follows:
“The R-1 zone is designed for one-family dwellings with some allowance for other types of dwellings, and is also intended to provide a limited range of non-residential uses that can enhance the quality of low-density residential areas.”
The Treetops site is also subject to regulations prescribed by the Fairmount Neighborhood as outlined in the Eugene Land Use Code.
Use R-1 Zone (Table 9.2740) Fairmount Neighborhood Club and lodge of state or national Not permitted organization Community and neighborhood center Conditional Use Permit
University or College Conditional Use Permit
Park and non-publicly owned open space use Permitted, subject to Special Development Standards Bed and Breakfast Facility Conditional Use Permit
One-Family Dwelling Permitted
Duplex Permitted Prohibited
Triplex Permitted, subject to Special Prohibited Development Standards Boarding and rooming house Not permitted
Campus Living Organization, including Not permitted Fraternities and Sororities University and College Dormitory Not permitted
C-1 Neighborhood Commercial Zone Permitted, subject to approved Permitted Uses PUD review
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 22 PART 4: ZONING/LAND USE CODE
R-1 Zoning Limitations & Strategy
Residential Uses Non-Residential Uses
The R-1 zone is intended for single-family There are a handful of non-residential uses residences. The simplest approach to repurpose allowed in the R-1 zone through a Conditional Treetops would be to treat it as a typical single- Use Permit (CUP). These include Community family rental property. and Neighborhood Centers, which encapsulate a broad range of functions, per their definitions By the code definition of “family”, the home could below: be rented to a maximum of 5 unrelated persons • Community Center: A building owned and at a time. With this language, Treetops could operated by the city or other public agency, feasibly be split internally into 4-5 bedroom and used for recreational, social, educational, suites, occupied by unrelated, visiting faculty or and cultural activities. other university-affiliated persons. Each suite • Neighborhood Activity Center: A building could include bedroom, bathroom, lounging area, or premises used for recreational, social, and even perhaps a kitchenette (microwave, mini- educational, or cultural activities, open to fridge). In this scenario, the ground floor rooms the public or a designated part of the public, must serve as common areas for the residents. which is a common destination or focal point for community activities. Includes primary and The suites cannot, however, be converted to secondary schools, neighborhood parks and individual apartments - this would bump them into playgrounds, and shopping centers. a multi-family use, which is not allowed in the R-1 zone. Other “Rooms for Rent Situations” which Re-purposing Treetops as a Community or are not allowed include: Boarding and Rooming Neighborhood Center could open up its potential Houses, Campus Living Organizations (including use for any number of activities: Gallery, Faculty Fraternities and Sororities), SROs, and University Club, Neighborhood Park (for the site itself), or and College dormitories. more generally as an Event Space.
Configurations such as duplexes and triplexes Assorted C-1 Commercial uses are also possible are specifically disallowed in the Fairmount within the R-1 zone through an intense PUD neighborhood, as are any dwellings exceeding Review/Approval process. This expands the three bedrooms - however without adding allowed uses to include: restaurant/deli, specialty bedrooms to the Treetops building, no restrictions food/beverage, art gallery/studio, dance studio, will be triggered. athletic/sports club, administrative offices, scientific & educational resource center, and various service Bed and Breakfast facilities are permittable and retail establishments. through a Conditional Use Permit, however they are required to be owner-occupied. To meet this Parking and increased traffic are major concerns requirement the University would likely need to of the neighborhood, and it is likely that the identify an “owner” representative to live on-site, above uses would meet resistance for that reason. and provide some accommodations for breakfast Solutions for parking & site access would need to to guests. be addressed as part of any proposal for the site.
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 23 PART 4: ZONING/LAND USE CODE
Rezoning to S-H Historic
The current R-1 zoning of Treetops is limiting in its possible uses. An alternative strategy is to apply for a rezoning of the property as S-H Historic.
Under S-H Historic zoning, the owner is allowed a broader range of uses in exchange for accepting more restrictive requirements regarding the preservation of the historic quality of the building. The code does not specify allowable uses for S-H, each project is reviewed on an individual basis for suitability to the building and neighborhood.
To be eligible for rezoning to S-H Historic, the site/ building must be designated a Historic Property, which is defined as a historic resource that is: (A) Designated by the city as a historic landmark; or (B) Listed in the National Register of Historic Places, or within a National Register historic district.
Designation as a local historic landmark (see EC 9.8165) is based on a determination of historic significance according to one or more of the following: As a University-owned property Treetops must (a) Is associated with events that have made comply with Oregon Revised Statute 358.653. a significant contribution to the broad This requires state agencies and all “political patterns of history. subdivisions” of the state—including counties, (b) Is associated with the lives of persons cities, universities, school districts, and local significant to our past. taxing districts—to consult with the State Historic (c) Embodies the distinctive characteristics Preservation Office (SHPO) before making changes of a type, period, or method of to any publicly owned building that is more than construction, or represents the work 50-years-old and meets one of four qualifying of a master, or possesses high artistic criteria for significance set forth by the National values, or represents a significant Register. and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual Additionally the property could be submitted to distinction. the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) for (d) Yields, or may be likely to yield, national designation. This would ensure future information important to prehistory or preservation efforts, however it would also restrict history. certain uses/alterations to the building.
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 24 PART 4: ZONING/LAND USE CODE
Historic Rezoning: Case Study
Abraham and Phoebe Ball House
The owner of this 1912 Craftsman style house, located at 1312 Lincoln Street in Eugene, OR wished to change its zoning designation from R-3 to S-H Historic so that the house could be used as commercial office space, and so that a five-unit residential building could be built on the vacant parcel associated with the property.
The site consisted of three properties encompassing approximately 25,000 square feet. The site included the Ball House at 1312 Lincoln Street, a Craftsman style house constructed in 1912; the Ball Residence at 1330 Lincoln Street, a more modest Craftsman bungalow; and a vacant lot located at 1338 Lincoln Street.
The city found the proposed office use to be a compatible use for the historic building because it would limit the need to reconfigure rooms as required for apartments. In granting the zoning change to the property, The City reserved design review authority on future construction on the vacant lot at 1338 Lincoln Street to ensure that new construction would be built in a style consistent with the existing historic structures.
Additional Examples: • Skinner House (File Z 01-13) • Kaufman Senior Center (Z 04-12) • Johansen-Moody House (Z 04-17)
Source: Public record, historic zoning application
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 25 PART 4: ZONING/LAND USE CODE
Rezoning to PL Public Land Zone
Another rezoning strategy is to convert the property to Public Land Zone, which greatly expands the allowable uses but encumbers the property with a requirement to rezone in event of a future transfer of ownership to the private sector.
The Eugene Land Use Code (section 9.2680) defines the purpose of Public Land Zone as follows: “The public land zone is intended for public and semi-public uses that are designed to implement the Metro Plan by providing areas for government services and education. Government services include the full spectrum of activities conducted by public agencies, including parks and open space.”
Allowed public/semi-public uses include: This strategy has the potential to expand options • Government & school district offices for uses with respect to the zoning/land use code. • Libraries At the current time, there are unfortunately not any • Park and recreation facilities readily available examples within the jurisdiction to • Neighborhood and community centers refer to for comparison. • Specialized housing
Additional uses are possible with a Conditional Use Permit, including the following: • Administrative, general, and professional offices not operated by a public agency • Artist Galleries/Studios • Campus Living Organizations, including Fraternities and Sororities • Parking Areas and Structured Parking • Universities and Colleges • University and College Dormitories • Combinations of the above listed uses
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 26 Part 5: Potential Uses / Case Studies
Historic House Museum University Administrative Office Meeting/Small Event Space Art Gallery Faculty Club Alumni Club Faculty Housing Public Park
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 27 PART 5: POTENTIAL USES
Historic House Museum: Potential Use
A historic house museum provides visitors a first-hand glimpse of life in a particular time and place through an immersive architectural experience. Some museums are organized around the specific occupant(s) who lived there, while others are reconstructed in order to tell the story of a particular area, social-class or historical period. Authenticity is of high priority, and historic furnishings are often displayed in a way that reflects their original placement and usage in a Caption: describe how space in photo of Treetops home. would support the function outlined here. Be specific. According to a research study of historic house museums (see Appendix A3), two trends correlate to exhibit popularity/attendance: “The museum either aims to connect to the community and Above: Treetops interior, circa 1933. county within the exhibits, or the organization has a specific, niche collection that draws visitors into Sprinklers would need to be installed and a the museum.” second exit from the 3rd floor would be required by code because a museum is a commercial use. Logistical considerations for operation of a historic Special exceptions might be possible due the house museum at Treetops include: permanent importance of retaining the historic character of vs. temporary exhibits, access/membership, the house (per OSSC Section 3409). community events/outreach, use of the outdoor space, staffing for curation/upkeep/tours, storage Parking/access needs for archives/collections, student internships/ fellowships, faculty engagement, etc. Assuming on-site parking could be increased, this would likely be sufficient for daily use by staff Another study specifically focused on University and visitors. Off-site parking/shuttle would be owned historic house museums states: “The necessary for larger tours and special events. most successful museums have a clear tie to the university mission: faculty teaching students.... Code Considerations/Strategy Developing a good mission statement that reflects the relationship between the historic house To maintain R-1 zoning, a Historic House Museum museum and the university is key.” (Appendix A4.) would likely need to be submitted as a type of Community/Neighborhood Center, and would Required upgrades require a Conditional Use Permit.
An elevator/lift would be necessary for ADA access Another option is to apply for a zone change from to the upper 2 floors (though not necessarily R-1 to S-H Historic or to PL-Public land. This would required by code unless altering the building). potentially allow for a much wider range of uses.
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 28 PART 5: POTENTIAL USES
Historic House Museum: Case Study
Wylie House at Indiana University Bloomington
Built in 1835, the Wylie House was the home of Indiana University’s first president, Andrew Wylie, and his family. Today, the Wylie House is owned and operated by Indiana University Libraries as a historic house museum recreating the Wylie home prior to 1860. The museum is open to the public for tours and supports the campus curriculum, providing students and faculty with access to the museum and its collections for course integration and research opportunities.
Activities/events held at the Wylie House include: • Daily guided tours • Parlor concerts • Music recitals • Annual antique quilt exhibit
The grounds surrounding the house are planted with flowers and vegetables of heirloom varieties that were grown in the area prior to 1875. The museum also operates a seed library program, where members can “check out” heirloom plants/seeds to cultivate at home, in exchange for returning seeds from their harvest at the end of the season.
Parking at the Wylie House is limited, with 3 paved spaces on the grounds and 3 additional spaces (gravel) across the alley. Two-hour parking is available along one street frontage; other adjacent streets are permit parking only.
Additional examples: • Fort Hill, Clemson University, South Carolina • Shelton McMurphy House, Eugene, OR • Farm House Museum, Iowa State University • Jane Addams Hull-House Museum at the Source: libraries.indiana.edu/wylie-house-museum University of Illinois at Chicago
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 29 PART 5: POTENTIAL USES
University Administrative Office: Potential Use
Historic houses under the ownership of universities are often converted to administrative offices because of the relative compatibility of the existing building. Existing plumbing provisions (aka toilets) are often sufficient for office use, and other infrastructure such as electrical/lighting is either tolerable or easily upgraded.
Treetops could be used for University of Oregon administrative offices, faculty offices, or even as the home of an academic department. The residential floor plan of the house lends itself well to office use, as bedrooms work well for typical office configurations. The larger ground floor common spaces could support more public-oriented functions, such as reception, meeting/conference space, display/recruitment areas, student support/ resource center, and/or other similar uses.
However, the proximity of Treetops to the UO campus is a challenge for its use as office space. Above: Windows in an upstairs bedroom/office. While is not geographically far, it is isolated from campus, which limits its suitability for offices that would need to be easily accessible/frequented by Parking/access needs students or faculty between classes. Assuming on-site parking could be increased, this Required upgrades would likely be sufficient for daily use by visitors, however staff would probably need to park on An elevator/lift would be necessary for ADA access campus and/or in an off-site parking area. to the upper 2 floors (though not necessarily required by code unless altering the building). Code Considerations/Strategy
Bathrooms would need to be remodeled to meet It might be possible to maintain R-1 zoning by ADA guidelines (also not necessarily required by submitting for a Conditional Use Permit as a code unless altering the building). University/College Use.
Sprinklers would need to be installed and a Another option is to apply for a zone change second exit from the 3rd floor would be required from R-1 to S-H Historic or to PL-Public land. If by code because offices are considered a approved, this could allow for a much wider range commercial use. of uses.
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 30 PART 5: POTENTIAL USES
University Administrative Office: Case Study
Wheeler House in Burlington, Vermont
The Wheeler House in Burlington, Vermont was built in 1842 for Rev. John B Wheeler, who had served as the president of the University of Vermont. Sited at a very prominent location at the northwest corner on Main Street and South Prospect Street near the University Green, the red brick, hip-roofed house, was designed in the Greek Revival style by the national known architect, Ammi Burnham Young. Wheeler used the house for his residence and office, and after his death the house stayed in the Wheeler family until 1943.
Alarmed by rumors that the property had been sold and that plans were being made to demolish the house to make way for a housing development, preservation-minded faculty, alumni and friends of the University raised the funds necessary to acquire the property and donate it to the University of Vermont in 1944. In 1975, the Wheeler House was renovated to become the home of the History Department and its graduate History Preservation Program.
The house was listed on the National Register Historic Places in 1974.
Additional examples: • Collier House, Univ. of Oregon • Lustrat House, Univerity of Georgia, Office of Legal Affairs
Source: Univ. of Vermont website
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 31 PART 5: POTENTIAL USES
Meeting/Small Event Space: Possible Use
The location away from campus and the existing ground-floor layout make Treetops a great potential venue for academic/strategic planning retreats. The dining room and living room could be used individually or in tandem to facilitate a variety of seating/table arrangements as well as smaller breakout discussion areas.
Additionally, the kitchen can support coffee service, catered lunch/dinner, and/or drinks & appetizers for evening camaraderie-building social Above: Dining room is ideal for a conference activities. room/meeting space.
The amenities mentioned above would also Below: Living room is large enough for small/mid- support small events such as luncheons, exhibits/ sized groups, with a flexible open layout. receptions, and music recitals. The University would need to determine whether the facility would be available for campus activities only or also available for rent by the public. (This could be considered an asset to the neighborhood if available for use by the public).
A compatible use of the upstairs spaces would need to be determined.
Required upgrades
Ground floor bathroom would need to be remodeled to meet ADA guidelines. Code Considerations/Strategy Sprinklers would likely need to be installed because meeting space is considered a It might be possible to maintain R-1 zoning commercial use and the building is 3-stories, non- by submitting for a Conditional Use Permit as fire-rated construction. a University/College Use or Neighborhood/ Community Center. Parking/access needs
Assuming on-site parking could be increased, this Another option is to apply for a zone change would likely be sufficient for small groups, however from R-1 to S-H Historic or to PL-Public land. If off-site parking/shuttle would be necessary for approved, this could allow for a much wider range larger groups and special events. of uses.
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 32 PART 5: POTENTIAL USES
Meeting/Small Event Space: Case Study
Littlefield House, University of Texas, Austin
The Littlefield Home was built in 1894. It was the residence of Major George Washington Littlefield and his wife, Alice. Littlefield bequeathed his home to the University, and it became part of the campus in 1935.
The house is an Austin landmark and one of the few remaining examples of the grand Victorian mansions that once peppered the University neighborhoods. 113 112 111 110
KITCHEN The upper floor is home of the University Events WOMEN UNISEX PREP Littlefield Home KITCHEN office. First Floor
The first floor of the home is available to host events for university departments and student organizations. Outside entities are not able to PANTRY reserve the space. Number of occupants is limited 105 to 75 individuals. 103
DINING ROOM
ADA FOYER ACCESSIBLE 104 ENTRANCE
SITTING ROOM 101
LIBRARY FOYER 102
PARLOR FRONT DOOR Additional examples: • Reynolds Homestead, Virginia Tech • Watzek House, Portland, University of Oregon • HaysHeighe House, Hartford Community College, Maryland • Middlesex Meetinghouse, Middlesex Source: universityevents.utexas.edu/littlefield-home Community College, Massachusetts
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 33 PART 5: POTENTIAL USES
Art Gallery: Potential Use
Converting the ground floor of Treetops into gallery space could provide a combination of short and long-term exhibition space, in a venue well- suited for semi-formal opening receptions. There is a symbiotic opportunity for the architectural environment to showcase the work on display while concurrently providing a use that showcases the rich architectural environment.
The gallery could extend up the grand stair to a Above: Connected first floor rooms support portion of the second floor. A compatible use of gallery circulation and flexible display areas. the remaining upstairs spaces would need to be determined. Below: Overlook from 2nd floor balcony.
Operationally, depending on any other uses in the building, it would need to be determined whether the space is open regular hours or only for special events. Additional considerations include: display infrastructure & lighting, use of the outdoor space, storage, staffing, public access, etc.
Required upgrades
Ground floor bathroom would need to be remodeled to meet ADA guidelines.
An elevator/lift would be necessary for ADA access to the upper 2 floors (though not necessarily required by code unless altering the building). special events. Sprinklers would likely need to be installed because gallery space is considered a commercial Code Considerations/Strategy use and the building is 3-stories, non-fire-rated construction. It might be possible to maintain R-1 zoning by submitting for a Conditional Use Permit as a Parking/access needs Neighborhood/Community Center.
Assuming on-site parking could be increased, this Another option is to apply for a zone change would likely be sufficient for staff and perhaps a from R-1 to S-H Historic or to PL-Public land. If limited amount of visitor parking. Off-site parking/ approved, this could allow for a much wider range shuttle would be necessary for larger groups and of uses.
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 34 PART 5: POTENTIAL USES
Art Gallery: Case Study
The Woods-Gerry Gallery at the Rhode Island School of Design
“Activating the entire first floor of a stately 19th- century mansion, RISD’s primary gallery for undergraduate student work features group exhibitions throughout the academic year. Students in all majors learn from the experience of preparing work for exhibition, helping to mount shows and engaging in conversations about their work and that of fellow students in the context of exhibitions open to the public.” - RISD website
The Woods-Gerry Gallery is a hilltop house-turned- gallery. “Distant” from the main campus much like Treetops, the Woods-Gerry gallery grounds are landscaped and open to the public, with a dynamic, inviting, and public gallery space.
The house features weekly events on the ground floor, with administrative functions located on upper floors.
Additional examples: • Cupples House, Saint Louis University • Gregg Museum of Art & Design, NC State University • Art Gallery of Guelph • The Carl Van Vechten Gallery, Fisk University
Source: http://www.risd.edu/campus-resources/ woods-gerry-gallery/
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 35 PART 5: POTENTIAL USES
Faculty Club: Potential Use
From 1941-2003, the Collier House on the UO campus served as the UO Faculty Club. Formerly the President’s house, it was converted to the faculty club in 1941 and retrofitted with a dining area, kitchen, billiard table and recreation room. The facility routinely hosted lunch, tea, and other faculty social events.
In 2016 the University opened a new faculty club in the Jordan Schnitzer Museum of Art, as a pilot project to determine if it could be self-sustaining. Still in its trial period, the venue is open 2 evenings a week, and offers snacks and a no-host bar. The Above: Entry landing at east end of living room. intent is “to provide a place where statutory faculty and their guests can gather in a welcoming and collegial space.” An elevator/lift would be necessary for ADA access to the upper 2 floors (though not necessarily The Treetops facility could provide an alternate, required by code unless altering the building). more dedicated location for UO’s faculty club. The ground floor of the house is a natural fit for a Sprinklers would likely need to be installed faculty club, with the current living room providing because assembly space is considered a ample space for a lounge, and the kitchen could commercial use and the building is 3-story, non- be upgraded to support luncheons, catered fire-rated construction. events, and bar service. Parking/access needs A compatible use of the upstairs spaces would need to be determined. Assuming on-site parking could be increased, this would likely be sufficient for staff, however off-site According to Gerald Marvel, the Vice President parking/shuttle would be necessary for attendees of the ACUC, identifying for a niche opportunity to regular open hours and events. within the larger University system is crucial to the success of faculty clubs. The Treetops property Code Considerations/Strategy may be able to fill the need for a nearby off- campus getaway, where faculty can take a break It might be possible to maintain R-1 zoning by from campus life, while not having to travel far submitting for a Conditional Use Permit as a from their offices. Community Center.
Required upgrades Another option is to apply for a zone change from R-1 to S-H Historic or to PL-Public land. If Ground floor bathroom would need to be approved, this could allow for a much wider range remodeled to meet ADA guidelines. of uses.
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 36 PART 5: POTENTIAL USES
Faculty Club: Case Study
Harvard Faculty Club, Harvard University
The Harvard Faculty Club was founded in 1931 in the former William and Henry James home. The building was remodeled in 1989, and in 2002 another renovation enlarged the kitchen and added a Conservatory and employee dining area.
In an effort to make the club more inclusive, access was opened to all Harvard employees in 2006, and further expanded to include all undergraduate and graduate students in 2009.
“The Harvard Faculty Club is dedicated to offering quality dining, meeting, conference, function, and lodging facilities to a broad constituency including Harvard Faculty, alumni/ae, professional staff, long service employees, members of the Cambridge business community, and their guests.”
The dining room serves breakfast and lunch Mon- Fri. Brunch and dinner are occasionally served for special holidays/events. Business attire is encouraged, and reservations are recommended.
The Club offers space for rent for meetings, luncheons, and academic events in addition to private parties and weddings. Additionally, the facility offers overnight guest rooms, with a discount for Faculty Club members.
There is no on-site or dedicated parking for the Harvard Faculty Club. Off-site parking options include metered street parking and nearby parking garages.
Additional examples: • The Brown Faculty Club, Brown University • Prospect House, Princeton University, NJ • The Cohen House, Rice University, Texas Source: https://www.hfc.harvard.edu
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 37 PART 5: POTENTIAL USES
Alumni Club: Potential Use
The University of Oregon Alumni Association has more than 231,000 members. There are 24 regional chapters in the US and 4 international chapters. There is a Lane County chapter, however there is not a dedicated “clubhouse” of any sort on/near the UO Campus. Treetops could fill this role by providing a venue for alumni to stay connected with each other and to the University. Above: Entry along north facade/living room. Facilities could include a variety of spaces such as a social lounge, a library, a gallery for display Required upgrades of art and/or UO memorabilia, event space for Ground floor bathroom would need to be small lectures, receptions and other gatherings. remodeled to meet ADA guidelines. The existing kitchen can support coffee service, catered lunch/dinner, and/or drinks & appetizers, An elevator/lift would be necessary for ADA access but a remodel would likely be in order to make it to the upper 2 floors (though not necessarily more useful/effective for event support. required by code unless altering the building).
The club amenities could extend up the grand stair Sprinklers would likely need to be installed to a portion of the second floor. A compatible use because assembly space is considered a of the remaining upstairs spaces would need to be commercial use and the building is 3-story, non- determined. fire-rated construction.
Opportunities for donor recognition could be Parking/access needs explored, perhaps through commemorative bricks at exterior walkways, or plaques on benches or Assuming on-site parking could be increased, this trees, or by naming rooms or stair treads, or other would likely be sufficient for staff, however off-site applications. parking/shuttle would be necessary for attendees to regular open hours and events. The University would need to determine whether to allow the space to be rented for private events, Code Considerations/Strategy and whether this is an exclusive benefit of Alumni Club membership or available to the general It might be possible to maintain R-1 zoning by public. (This could be considered an asset to the submitting for a Conditional Use Permit as a neighborhood if available for use by the public). Community Center.
Operationally, depending on any other uses in the Another option is to apply for a zone change building, it would need to be determined whether from R-1 to S-H Historic or to PL-Public land. If the space is open regular hours or only for special approved, this could allow for a much wider range events. of uses.
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 38 PART 5: POTENTIAL USES
Alumni Club: Case Study
Alumni House, College of William & Mary, Virginia
All graduates and former students of the College of William and Mary are considered members of the Alumni Association, an independent, nonprofit organization.
Originally knows as the Bright House, research suggests that the original portion of the house dates to the 1850s. At various points in its history, the Bright House has served as an infirmary, faculty apartments and fraternity house.
Amenities include: • Large dining room with terrace • Parlor • Conference Room • Grand Foyer & Gallery • Traditional dining room • 2 large outdoor courtyards
Anyone can rent space at the Alumni House, however preference is given to clients who have an affiliation with the College. The whole house is often rented for weddings, dinners and receptions.
Fundraising is currently underway to enable a $25M remodel and expansion of the building, which will add 35,000 s.f. to the existing 20,000 s.f. building.
Additional examples: • The Robert and Bernice Wagner Alumni House, Georgetown University • University of Vermont Alumni House (Historic Main House venue) • Quadrangle Club, University of Chicago • Annette Evans Alumni House, Wilkes University Source: http://wmalumnihouse.com
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 39 PART 5: POTENTIAL USES
Faculty/Guest Accommodations: Potential Use
5 BED The University has identified a need for short term NEW BATH accommodations for visiting lecturers/faculty and LIV other special guests to campus.
LIFT Treetops has eight existing bedrooms, all located BED on the upper 2 floors. The simplest approach to 4 repurposing this property is to maintain the entire house as a single-family dwelling. This requires LIV minimal/no upgrades from a code perspective regarding accessibility and fire/egress, however it does restrict residency to “a maximum of 5 unrelated persons.” Above - Third Floor Required upgrades Below - Second Floor An elevator/lift would be necessary for ADA access These diagrams show one possible reconfiguration to the upper 2 floors (though not req’d by code). of the existing upper floor rooms to create five bedroom suites, each with a sleeping area, living If a non-single-family-residential use is proposed area, and bathroom. on the ground floor in conjunction with residential above, sprinklers will need to be installed and egress windows verified/retrofitted. LIV/BED Parking/access needs
Parking needs for guest accommodations are BED 3 relatively low and could easily be accommodated on-site if the existing driveway loop is reconstructed to create a parking area. LIV Code Considerations/Strategy LIFT No new/additional bedrooms can be created 1 (would trigger restrictions of Fairmount area). BED 2 LIV Bed & Breakfast as alternate approach - limited to 5 guest rooms, also must be owner-occupied.
To combine residential use with other uses in the building (i.e. meeting/gathering spaces, other) would push project into commercial building code. Also still subject to zoning restrictions.
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 40 PART 5: POTENTIAL USES
Faculty/Guest Accommodations: Case Study #1 - Guesthouse
Gardner House, Brown University, Rhode Island
The Gardner House (also knows as the Joseph Haile House) is a three-story Federal style house built in 1806. In the 1930’s George Warren Gardner remodeled the house and filled it with early American furniture. The Gardners bequested the property to Brown University, which uses it as a guest house.
The Gardner house is listed on the National Register of Historic Places, which describes the layout of the house as follows: “Within, the house was originally of the four-room, center-hall plan... The first floor was modified by the Gardners, who remodeled the dividing wall between the two western rooms to create one large library-living room with a rear entrance hallway behind it on the northwest... The parlor and dining room, at the southeast and northeast respectively, remain as they probably were originally.”
The area of the building is 7943 gross s.f. (6610 interior s.f.). In 2008 the house was renovated to update the kitchen, refurbish the entryway and 3-story staircase, and to upgrade the majority of the bedrooms and living spaces. Three bathrooms were also renovated, including converting a first floor bathroom to an ADA accessible bathroom. Exterior improvements included new walkways and an accessible entrance.
Additional examples: • Carnegie Guest House, Davidson College, NC • Huegel Alumni House Annex (Guesthouse), Franklin & Marshall College, Pennsylvania • Wilder Guest House, Illinois Wesleyan Univ. • Rock Cottage Guest House, Univ. of Kansas Sources: National Register of Historic Places http://www.ggreene.com http://www.brown.edu
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 41 PART 5: POTENTIAL USES
Faculty/Guest Accommodations: Case Study #2 - Fellows House
Fiering House, Brown University
The John Carter Brown Library substantially expanded its functional space by opening a residence for its research fellows at 79 Charlesfield Street, less than four blocks from the Library.
This three-story Victorian house, built in 1869 and beautifully renovated in 2007, includes large meeting areas on the ground floor and serves as an intellectual and social center for the Library’s scholars in residence from month to month.
On October 21, 2009, the Library dedicated the house to Norman Fiering, Director and Librarian of the John Carter Brown Library from 1983 to 2006 in honor of his instrumental role in making the scholars’ residence a reality. During his tenure, the fellowship program at the Library was enlarged and invigorated.
79 Charlesfield has ten spacious bedrooms– six with private bathrooms, four with shared bathrooms. In addition, it has a special handicapped-accessible unit on the ground floor.
Additional examples: • Rooney Scholars House, Robert Morris University, Pittsburgh, PA
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 42 PART 5: POTENTIAL USES
Faculty/Guest Accommodations: Case Study #3 - Lodging/Inn
Howe-Childs Gate House, Chatham University, Shadyside Campus, Pittsburgh, PA
Constructed circa 1861, the Howe-Childs Gate House is Pittsburgh’s oldest frame house and the oldest existing house from Pittsburgh’s “Millionaires Row.” Built by General Thomas Marshall Howe, a prominent Pittsburgh industrialist, bank president and former Congressman, the Gate House and Greystone – built on the hill above the Gate House – together made up the family’s “country” estate.
In 1986, the City of Pittsburgh designated the Gate House a Pittsburgh Historic Landmark. Chatham University reacquired the house and grounds in 2000, and engaged in restoration that closely approximated its original appearance and focused on green practices.
The Gate House sits at the foot of a national arboretum at the edge of Chatham University’s Shadyside campus. The 2 1/2-story clapboard Gothic Revival building offers 5 guest suites ranging in size and amenities. Guests also have access to a spacious common area, eat-in kitchen, and executive conference room. Continental breakfast is free with lodging.
Rooms are available to the general public, with discounted rates for prospective students and Alumni.
Sources: http://www.chatham.edu/gatehouse/
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 43 PART 5: POTENTIAL USES
International Scholars Center: Potential Use
UO-managed international guest facilities give departments flexibility in bringing key global collaborators to campus. Airfare only for such visits can be quite expensive, so cost control on housing is important. Also, most local short-term rentals (3-4 weeks or longer) require the occupant to provide a social security number, which is an obstacle for many international visitors.
UO gives priority to visitors supported by the Global Oregon Faculty Collaboration Fund, a program that covers costs of a top international visitor invited by a UO faculty member for a research collaboration visit, for which a joint publication is required.
Treetops would make an ideal location for international guest facilities in combination with space for small meetings/workshops/etc. Such meetings of course need not be limited to international themes. Treetops could serve as a focal gathering space, with opportunity for informal interaction among visiting and UO Parking/access needs scholars who may, over a term or other period of time, be working on thematically related Parking needs for guest accommodations are research. In this model, Treetops could play the relatively low and could easily be accommodated intellectual community-building role akin to the on-site if the existing driveway loop is Stanford Humanities Center, while also housing reconstructed to create a parking area. international and other visitors whose presence helps leaven conversation and collaboration Code Considerations/Strategy involving both visitors and out own faculty. No new/additional bedrooms can be created Required upgrades (would trigger restrictions of Fairmount area).
An elevator/lift would be necessary for ADA access Bed & Breakfast as alternate approach - limited to to the upper 2 floors (though not req’d by code). 5 guest rooms, also must be owner-occupied.
If a non-single-family-residential use is proposed To combine residential use with other uses in the on the ground floor in conjunction with residential building (i.e. meeting/gathering spaces, other) above, sprinklers will need to be installed and would push project into commercial building egress windows verified/retrofitted. code. Also still subject to zoning restrictions.
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 44 PART 5: POTENTIAL USES
International Scholars Center: Case Study
The International Guesthouse of Darmstadt University of Applied Sciences
Situated in one of the calmest and most beautiful neighborhoods in Darmstadt called “Paulusviertel”, this mansion was constructed as a private residence in 1931/32 by the Darmstadt architect Sixtus Siegfried Grossmann. The property has been renovated to maintain the original character of the building, including historical flooring and tiling, while also sensitively retrofitting with modern conveniences and technology.
Nine fully furnished modern apartments offer a “temporary home” for guests of the university. They can either book one of six single-apartments or one of three double-apartments. The apartments are located on several levels of the building, and the furniture was custom designed to give each apartment a unique character.
Facilities for laundry, bicycles and storage areas are located in the basement. Shared amenities are on the ground floor and include a TV-room, kitchen, garden, terrace, and meeting/event room.
The meeting/event room can also be booked for small conferences, meetings and workshops (up to 35 occupants).
Additional examples: • Fiering Guest House, Brown University • International Scholars Guest Houses, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN • Visiting Scholars House, Amherst Mind and Life Institute, Charlottsville, VA
Source: https://www.ibz-deutschland.de/en/hoch- schule-darmstadt/
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 45 PART 5: POTENTIAL USES
Public Park: Potential Use
The exterior grounds of Treetops are a significant asset of the property, with 1.5 wooded acres that include many trees that are over 100 years old The former residence is at the top of the property, overlooking the grounds that slope downhill to the north and east, revealing a glimpse of Autzen stadium in the distance.
The outdoor space is a quintessentially Oregon landscape which could complement/support many of the proposed uses for the Treetops building, however it also presents opportunities to expand the uses of the site. If open to the public, the forested grounds could become a neighborhood park or arboretum, providing a picturesque setting for walks, picnics, and perhaps small gatherings. There are a couple of existing walking paths, however these could be expanded to access more of the site.
Additionally the property could serve as a friendly interface between the University and the neighborhood. While providing a public outdoor space, the property could also serve as a design- build test ground for Landscape Architecture students, or could feature sculpture from Art Department students, or regional professional artists.
Code Considerations/Strategy
Within R-1 zoning, Park and Non-Publicly Owned Another option is to apply for a zone change from Open Space uses are permitted, subject to Special R-1 to S-H Historic or to PL-Public land. Development Standards. Within these standards are “Neighborhood Parks” (EC 9.2620), intended Within PL-Public Land zoning, parks, playgrounds, to serve as the recreational and social focus of the and neighbhorhood/community centers are neighborhood. Neighborhood parks primarily allowed uses. Certain Entertainment and serve residents living within a ½ mile radius. Off- Recreation Uses (listed in EC Table 9.2630) such street parking is not generally provided/required, as amphitheaters and picnic shelters require a though including some off-street parking would Conditional Use Permit. help mitigate resistance from neighbors.
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 46 PART 5: POTENTIAL USES
Public Park: Case Study
Franklin D. Murphy Sculpture Garden, UCLA
One of the most distinguished outdoor sculpture installations in the country, the Franklin D. Murphy Sculpture Garden, spans more than five acres of UCLA’s campus with over 70 sculptures by artists such as Hans Arp, Deborah Butterfield, Alexander Calder, Barbara Hepworth, Jacques Lipchitz, Henry Moore, Auguste Rodin, and David Smith.
Firmly committed to the idea that works of art are most thoroughly enjoyed as part of everyday life, the Sculpture Garden was dedicated in 1967 by UCLA’s third chancellor, Franklin D. Murphy. Murphy worked with UCLA’s supervising architect, Ralph D. Cornell, to create an edifying environment that fosters the learning process. As a result of their vision, the Sculpture Garden transformed an area of north campus into a park-like setting for some of the finest sculpture of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.
Building on this environment, the Sculpture Garden brings together figural and abstract works that complement the landscape to create a harmonious setting for study and contemplation. Informal seating areas and open lawns were designed to invite passersby to pause, reflect, and enjoy the interplay of art and nature.
Additional examples: • F. R. Newman Arboretum and Sculpture Garden, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY • Charles B. Hayes Family Sculpture Park, University of Notre Dame, Indiana • Allerton Park and Retreat Center, The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Source: Hammer.ucla.edu.
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 47 Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 48 Part 6: Additional Case Studies
UO Watzek House UO Cottrell House
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 49 PART 6: ADDITIONAL CASE STUDIES
UO Watzek House: Case Study
1061 SW Skyline Blvd, Portland, OR
Built in 1938, the Watzek house was designed by notable architect John Yeon early in his career. The project was commissioned by lumber magnate Aubrey Watzek, as a home for himself and his mother.
The home is sited on a 2.38 acre property which affords expansive views to the north, east, and south, including views of Mount Hood.
The 4,759 s.f. house is U-shaped, centered around a formal courtyard. Two major axes organize the interior spaces, which include large living room, library, guest room, dining room, two formal bedrooms, two servants’ bedrooms, kitchen, pantry, five bathrooms, and a large basement. A garden wall and covered porch flank the courtyard on the west side, and connect the garage to the rest of the house.
In the fall of 1995, ownership of the Watzek house was passed to the University of Oregon. students who visit, rather than studied in slides and The John Yeon Center for Architectural Studies textbooks.” - www.oregonquarterly.com/spirit-of-place- was established so that this regionally significant john-yeon-and-the-making-of-oregons-architecture architectural work would continue to educate and inspire new generations of architects and The Yeon Center offers group tours of the Watzek designers. House and curates regular dinners and larger group conversations with visiting and local leaders “Today, architecture students and professors use in design and conservation. the house in many ways. Interior architecture classes have visited to perform materials studies, The house is available on a limited basis for day while other students have worked to document retreats for non-profits, foundations, and mission- the landscaping. Faculty and staff members, as related businesses. Catering at the Watzek House well as graduate assistants, have constructed is provided by the celebrated restaurant Luce. preservation and use manuals for the house, guides that are regularly utilized as the seventy- Sources: five-year-old structure receives maintenance and https://yeoncenter.uoregon.edu repairs... Perhaps most important, though, is that http://www.oregonquarterly.com/spirit-of-place-john- the house’s design can be fully experienced by the yeon-and-the-making-of-oregons-architecture
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 50 PART 6: ADDITIONAL CASE STUDIES
UO Cottrell House: Case Study
1060 SW Skyline Blvd, Portland, OR
Completed in 1951, the Cottrell House was designed by John Yeon late in his career. The home was designed for the noted orthopedic surgeon, filmmaker and adventurer George Cottrell, his wife, Margaret, and their three daughters.
The 4,871 s.f. house is sited on a seven-acre, hillside forest reserve, located across the street from the Watzek House. The interior features four bedroom suites surrounding a generous room for entertaining. Generous public rooms and the nearby forest walks make it a relaxing location for day retreats.
The home is currently closed to visitors. In the recent past it has been used to accomodate visiting UO faculty and guests.
Sources: https://yeoncenter.uoregon.edu
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 51 Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 52 PART 7: SUMMARY
SUMMARY
The Treetops facility has great potential as an interesting, satellite campus venue. There are many options for the specific use for this venue, ranging from offices to gallery/event space to faculty/alumni club to overnight/quarterly visitor accommodations.
The ideal function might actually be a combination of uses, for example a faculty club that can also be used for departmental planning retreats, music recitals, and alumni receptions, with a few visitor/ guest suites on the upper floor(s).
The biggest challenges to all of the proposed uses are: parking/access, zoning code limitations, and neighborhood sensitivities to traffic and campus expansion. All proposed changes of use will require a permitting/review process that includes public notice and opportunity for input/appeal.
For any proposed non-single-family-residential use the building will have to be upgraded with a sprinkler system. Additionally, from a land-use perspective there are basically 3 permit-strategy options:
1. Keep R-1 zoning: apply for Conditional Use Permit as a Neighborhood/Community Center or University/College
2. Rezone to S-H: expands allowable uses in exchange for preservation efforts.
3. Rezone to PL: opens the allowable uses the most, but will likely meet the most resistance by the neighborhood unless available for use by the public as a neighborhood asset (like a park)
For any proposed combinations of residential and non-residential use, the property will have to be rezoned to S-H or PL.
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 53 Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 54 Appendices
A1 ORS 358.653 Protection of Publicly Owned Historic Properties Fact Sheet
A2 Historic Floor Plans of Treetops
A3 City of Eugene Historic Landmark Application/Decision for the Ball House
A4 “University-affiliated Historic House Museums” - 2014 Report
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 55 APPENDICES
A1 ORS 358.653 Protection of Publicly Owned Historic Properties Fact Sheet
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY 56 Oregon Revised Statute 358.653 Protection of Publicly Owned Historic Properties Fact Sheet
Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) 358.653 is an Oregon state law obligating state agencies and all “political subdivisions” of the state—including counties, cities, universities, school districts, and local taxing districts—to consult with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) to avoid inadvertent impacts to historic properties for which they are responsible. Impacts are usually the result of construction projects (additions, remodeling, etc.), but may also include the transfer of properties out of public ownership.
The statute does not provide many specifics, and there are currently no clarifying administrative rules, so, as a practical matter, SHPO follows a “lite” version of a similar federal law, Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. In cases where federal funds, permits, or licenses are used, ORS 358.653 is superseded by Section 106.
This statute relates primarily to historic buildings and structures, but includes all real property that has historic significance. Protection of archaeological sites, on both public and private lands, is addressed by several other state and federal laws. See the Archaeological Services section on the SHPO’s website (oregonheritage.org) for guidance on how to comply with these laws if your project involves ground disturbance.
Who needs to comply with ORS 358.653? Any public entity, including state government, counties, cities, universities, and local taxing districts such as hospitals, schools, irrigation, and fire departments.
What qualifies as a “historic property”? Any property listed in the National Register of Historic Places or eligible for listing in the National Register qualifies for consideration under this statute. Given that only a relative handful of eligible properties have actually gone through the formal designation process, most of the properties that fall under this statute are not officially designated landmarks. In general, historic properties that meet the 50-year guideline, retain their historic appearance for the most part, and meet one of four qualifying criteria for significance set forth by the National Register.
What types of projects need review? Any project that involves a property that meets the 50-year guideline at the time of construction of the project must be reviewed under ORS 358.653. Projects include any work that physically impacts a property. For buildings, this includes, but is not limited to, window replacement, roof replacement, new additions, and major interior modifications. (Maintenance activities such as painting, cleaning, and repairing are generally exempt.) The statute also applies if an agency is selling or transferring a property out of public ownership. Proposed demolition, of course, is also subject to review.
Why should my agency comply with the law? ORS 358.653 does not include any penalties at this time for non-compliance, however, any agency failing to meet its obligations under this law is vulnerable to challenges by aggrieved
OREGON STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE 725 Summer Street NE, Salem, OR 97301 www.oregonheritage.org (revised 11/15/2010) Page 1 parties, resulting in project delays, increased administrative costs, increased staff time, and even legal fees.
How do I consult with the SHPO? Consultation is easy and can be accomplished quickly without unnecessary project delays.
1. Determine if the property is at least 50 years old. If yes, proceed to steps below. If no, then no further action is needed unless the property is close to 50 years old and has exceptional characteristics of design or historical associations. Contact the SHPO for guidance on this issue.
2. Complete an Oregon SHPO Clearance Form (available on the Review & Compliance page of the SHPO’s website: oregonheritage.org). Agencies will need to determine if their building is listed in the National Register or is eligible for listing. Please contact the Oregon SHPO for guidance on this process if not using a professional consultant.
Agencies also need to determine if the proposed project will affect the historic characteristics of the property. Be sure to include maps, photos, and drawings as necessary to illustrate what your project involves. In the event of a property sale or transfer, conveyance into private ownership is generally considered a negative impact to the property because it leaves the property without benefit of public stewardship.
3. Submit all materials to the SHPO. The review process takes up to 30 calendar days, usually less.
4. If the SHPO agrees that the property is not historic, or if it is historic and the project will not have negative impacts, the consultation process with the SHPO is complete.
5. If there will be negative impacts to the historic property, options for avoiding those impacts should be explored. Often, relatively minor changes in the work plan can minimize or eliminate negative impacts.
6. If impacts cannot be avoided then they must be “mitigated.” Mitigation is negotiated between the SHPO and the agency, often with the involvement of the local government’s landmark commission or historic preservation staff. Mitigation may include documentation, public education, protective covenants, or other historic preservation work that “gives back” to the community.
Don’t forget the local government’s historic preservation review. If the historic property in question is locally listed as a landmark or listed in the National Register, it typically falls under the purview of the local landmarks board. Contact the local planning department to determine if your property is subject to local review.
Additional questions? Please contact Ian Johnson at the SHPO: (503) 986-0678 or [email protected].
OREGON STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE 725 Summer Street NE, Salem, OR 97301 www.oregonheritage.org (revised 11/15/2010) Page 2 APPENDICES
A2 Historic Floor Plans of Treetops
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY
APPENDICES
A3 City of Eugene Historic Landmark Application/
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY FINDINGS OF HEARINGS OFFICIAL
Ball House Ensemble (Z 99-3)
Property: Tax Lots 10600, 10500, 10400; Assessor's Map 17-03-31-42
Location: The Ball House Ensemble is located at 1312, 1330, 1338 Lincoln Street, at the southwest corner of 13th Avenue.
Request: The Ball House Ensemble has been designated a City of Eugene Historic Landmark. The owners are requesting a zone change from R-3 Multiple Family Residential to H Historic District.
Applicant: Chester Pietka (Owner),David Pietka (Owner's Representative)
The following findings of fact and conclusions of law are based upon testimony presented at the public hearing of March 17, 1999, and materials and documents submitted and made part of the planning department file through the close of the record.
DECISION DATE: March 30, 1999
APPEAL DEADLINE: April 9, 1999
CONCLUSION: A zone change is granted from R-3 Multiple Family Residential to H Historic District. A copy of the Historic Zoning District for the Ball House Ensemble is attached as Exhibit "A".
DISCUSSION AND FINDINGS
Site Characteristics
The site consists of three properties encompassing approximately 25,000 square feet. The site includes the Ball House at 1312 Lincoln Street, a Craftsman style house constructed in 1912; the Ball Residence at 1330 Lincoln Street, a more modest Craftsman bungalow; and a vacant lot located at 1338 Lincoln Street. The ensemble was listed as a City ofEugene Historic Landmark by Eugene's Historic Review Board on February 25, 1999. The property is within the plan boundaries of the Jefferson-Far West Refinement Plan. The Ball House Ensemble is located in a transitional area between downtown and the Jefferson Neighborhood that is a combination of traditional single family residential, large multifamily residential, and commercial development.
Prior Related Land Use Decisions
i R Z 99-3,BALL HOUSE ENSEMBLE - DECISION March 30, 1999 Pa IoIof5 The Ball House Ensemble was designated a City ofEugene Historic Landmark on February 25, 1999 (File # HD 99-2).The Ball House was originally constructed as both residence and office of Abraham and Phoebe Ball, and was converted into apartments around 1940. The Ball at 1338 Lincoln Residence has always been a single family residential property. The vacant lot featured a vernacular gothic style residence, which burned in the 1980s.
Evaluation of Criteria
A. Zone Change
The applicant requests a zone change for the subject property to H Historic District from R-3 Multiple Family Residential. Eugene Code (EC)Section 9.2),678(sets forth the criteria for a zone change as follows:
Section 9.2)(a):678( The uses and density that will be allowed in the location of the proposed change can be served through the orderly and efficient extension of key urban facilities and services prescribed in the Metropolitan Area General Plan, and are consistent with the principles of compact and sequential growth.
Finding: The subject property is fully served by key urban facilities and services as prescribed in the Metropolitan Area General Plan. The proposed uses for the historic property are to be residential, professional offices, and specific neighborhood commercial uses. All of the proposed because will result in the uses are considered to be appropriate for this historic landmark they preservation of the historic Ball House Ensemble, and encourage compact and sequential growth through infill development. The property is conveniently located near bicycle paths and parks. Existing sidewalks to the north and east of the house allow for convenient and safe movement of pedestrians. Historic designation and zoning are intended to preserve the character defining to the features of a historic property, and the sense of place such property conveys public. Properties surrounding the Ball House Ensemble will be allowed to develop consistent with their zoning and will not be adversely impacted by this zone change.
Section 9.2)(b):678( The proposed change is consistent with the Metropolitan Area General Plan, applicable text, specific elements related to the uses listed in the proposed zoning districts, and applicable land use designations. The written text of the plan takes precedence over the plan diagram where apparent conflicts or inconsistencies exist.
the Finding: The proposed zone change to H Historic District is consistent with Policy 1 of Historic Preservation Element of the Metropolitan Area General Plan:
Adopt and implement historic preservation policies, regulations, and incentive and restoration programs that encourage the inventory, preservation, ofstructures; landmarks, sites, and areas ofcultural, historic, or archaeological significance, consistent with overall policies."Policy ( 1, Page III-I-2)
2 of 5 Z 99-3,BALL HOUSE ENSEMBLE - DECISION March 30, 1999 Page The Metropolitan Area General Plan considers the viability of some commercial type uses in residential areas through the following policies:
Investigate and when advisable, implement mixed use zoning, particularly in established neighborhoods where compatible andfunctional mixes already exist. " Policy( 15, Page III-6).A-
Encourage location ofnonresidential uses, such as neighborhood commercial and small-scale light industry, within residentially designated areas when those auxiliary uses are compatible with refinement plans, zoning ordinances, and other local controls for allowed uses in residential neighborhoods. " (Policy 16, Page III-6).A-
Zoning the Ball House Ensemble to H Historic District will allow for an appropriate mixture of uses that will ensure the preservation of the historic house, while conforming to the intent of these policies. Historic zoning is selectively used in Eugene, and is intended to allow uses that encourage the preservation of the historic resource, while considering uses and development that have occurred to the property, and its neighborhood, over time. The Ball House Ensemble application has selectively determined uses that will encourage restoration and preservation of the buildings, unique and distinctive qualities while assuring compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood.
The Metropolitan Area General Plan designates this area for R-2 Medium-Density Residential use. The property borders C-2 zoned land on its west, north, and east sides, while a strip of land zoned R-3 Multiple Family Residential extends southward along the west side of Lincoln Street. The proposed uses for the H Historic District, listed and adopted in Exhibit "A",are historically compatible to this mixed-use area, but are not allowed outright in the Plan-designated Medium- Density Residential zoning district, or the current R-3 Multiple Family Residential zoning district.
Section 9.2)(678(c):The proposed zone change is consistent with applicable adopted neighborhood refinement plans, special area studies, and functional plans. In the event of inconsistencies between these plans or studies and the Metropolitan Area General Plan, the latter is the prevailing document.
Finding: The Jefferson-Far West Refinement Plan is the adopted neighborhood refinement plan for this area. The Ball House Ensemble is located in the area described in the refinement plan as the "West 13th Avenue Commercial Node Between Washington and Lincoln Streets."The area is "recognized as a neighborhood commercial area"with a garage, a cafe with apartments above, and other small retail establishments. The proposed zone change ensures the preservation of the Ball House Ensemble, and its contribution to the historic residential character of the area, while allowing highly selective uses that are permitted in the adjoining C-2 General Commercial zoning district. The proposed H Historic District zoning will also allow single family dwelling, home occupation, and bed-and-breakfast uses.
Z 99-3,BALL HOUSE ENSEMBLE - DECISION March 30, 1999 Page 3 of 5 The historic district zoning attempts to strike a balance of uses so as to make economically viable the preservation of a historic structure, while not allowing the uses to become inconsistent with the residential designation for the area, or to result in pressure to allow other than residential or historic use of other land in the area. The Metropolitan Area General Plan supports the H Historic District zoning by reference to Policy I of the Historic Preservation Element of the plan.
B. Historic District Designation
The Eugene Code includes criteria for establishing the H Historic District at a given location, as follows:
Section 9.a):489(An H Historic District is required to provide uses that will encourage renovation and preservation of the historic landmark.
Finding: Exhibit A"" describes the uses that will be allowed within the Ball House Ensemble. These uses will encourage and result in the renovation and preservation of the historic landmark, and ensure its economic viability into the future. Professional offices are a highly compatible use for this historic building because they limit the need to reconfiguration of rooms as required for apartments. The proposed retail uses are considered to be appropriate for this particular historic property. All future proposed alterations to the exterior or landscape are subject to the regulatory authority of EC Section 9.210, Historic Properties Alteration, New Construction, and Major New Landscaping - Criteria, and the pre-development conference requirements contained in Section a).9.208( Historic alteration review will assure that all development work on the exterior of the structure and to the site, will be in conformance with recognized historic standards.
Section 9.b):489(The permitted uses and development standards applied will promote the objectives of the General Plan and other applicable city policies.
Finding: The Historic Preservation Element of the EugeneSpringfield _ Area Metropolitan Plan states:
Adopt and implement historic preservation policies, regulations, and incentive programs that encourage the inventory, preservation, and restoration ofstructures, landmarks, sites and areas ofcultural, historic, or archaeological significance, consistent with overall policies. " Policy( 1, Page III-I-2)
On February 25, 1999, the Eugene Historic Review Board found the designation of the Ball House Ensemble as a City of Eugene Historic Landmark to be consistent with this Metro Plan policy. The owners have expressed an intent to rehabilitate the designated structures, and maintain their historic integrity in accordance with this policy.
Preservation and restoration of the Ball House Ensemble is further supported by the Jefferson-Far West Refinement Plan, which states the policy to:
Z 99-3,BALL HOUSE ENSEMBLE - DECISION March 30, 1999 Page 4 of 5 Preserve and enhance elements that reflect neighborhoodfeatures and improve neighborhood identity. " (Neighborhood Commons Element, Policy 8.0)
The Ball House Ensemble, and particularly the Ball House (1912),is a well-known landmark in the Jefferson neighborhood, reflecting the historic residential character and identity of the area. The current R-3 Multiple Family Residential and C-2 General Commercial zoning in the area have altered the standards for "highest and best use"of property in this vicinity, resulting in higher density development and deterioration of the historic identity. In the absence of a change in zoning to allow the range of commercial and residential listed in Exhibit "A",the financial viability of the historic structures is doubtful.
Section 9.c):489(Permitted uses will be compatible with surrounding neighborhood.
Finding: The proposed residential, professional office, and neighborhood commercial uses for the historic Ball House Ensemble, listed in Exhibit "A",will be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood because the uses will ensure the preservation of the ensemble's Craftsman style buildings. The City will also have design review authority on future construction on the vacant lot at 1338 Lincoln Street. The preservation of the Ball House Ensemble will help to retain the existing settlement pattern in this part of the Jefferson neighborhood. The proposed uses will not result in adverse noise, pollution, or odors at the property. The eventual construction of parking, and other landscape improvements, will be subject to approval through the City's historic alteration process, further ensuring compatibility to the neighborhood and the character-defining aspects of this specific historic landmark.
CONCLUSION: The requested zone change from R-3 Multiple Family Residential to H Historic District satisfies all applicable approval criteria, and is approved. Uses will be limited to those listed in Exhibit "A",which is adopted as a part of this approval.
Respectfully submitted,
Virginia L. Gustafson HEARINGS OFFICIAL
Z 99-3,BALL HOUSE ENSEMBLE - DECISION March 30, 1999 Page 5 of 5 F+
12th Avenue
13th Avenue
c 0 a 0
a U
14;th Avenue
Ball House Ensemble Vicinity Map 1312 & 1330 Lincoln Street
Application to change zoning of Taxlots 10400, 10500, 10600 from R-3 Multiple Family Residential to H-Historic
Legend
Scale 200 0 400 Feet
Cartography: Scott Bogle and Sauls, 0211211999 Site Plan
1 - 1312 Lincoln house, Contributing""
2 - 1312 Lincoln garage, Contributing"" 3 - 1330 Lincoln house, Contributing""
4 - 1330 Lincoln shed, Non-" contributing"
5 - 1330 Lincon garage, Non-" contributing"
vv. Aw" a o
9 EXHIBIT "A"
HISTORIC ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE BALL HOUSE ENSEMBLE
1. DESCRIPTION AND PURPOSE SECTION: The Ball House Ensemble, located at 1330, and 1338 Lincoln 1312, Street, is classified as a of City Eugene Historic Landmark to the approval rendered the according by Eugene Historic Review on Board February 25, 1999. The historic landmark designation is intended to achieve the following purposes:
A. To afford the historic resource treatment special and protection so that the uses permitted and restrictions it will imposed upon preserve and allow rehabilitation of the character buildings' defining architectural features as excellent examples of the Craftsman and Bungalow styles of architecture. Recognition of historic landmarks enhances the beautification of the City, promotes the City's economic health, and preserves the value of these properties. The regulation of designated historic landmarks provides a means to view to a changes landmark and ensure that historic and architectural values are preserved.
B. The of the purpose H Historic District is to permit, after the use of appropriate review, historically significant and sites buildings for a range of uses not otherwise allowed in one of together the standard which zoning districts, often contain uses that are inappropriate while uses omitting that are appropriate to historic and specific buildings, sites, ensembles. The purpose of the H Historic District is to preserve these historic resources where their maintenance and productive use would not otherwise be economically practical, and where a standard zoning classification would not be' appropriate.
C. The H Historic District will foster the continued preservation and enhancement of the Ball House Ensemble and its site an by clearly delineating expanded of uses permitted on the range property and establishing development standards.
2. PERMITTED USES: The Ball House Ensemble is residential in but includes a vacant lot that be character, might developed in the future. The Ball House where Ensemble is located in an area general office and commercial uses are prevalent. The permitted uses for this historic property are:
RESIDENTIAL USES
Single-family Dwellings and Duplexes Home Occupation Bed-breakfastand-facilities ( maximum of three guest rooms) Multiple family units (maximum of 9 units)
Permitted uses shall allow for the conversion of commercial uses back to Medical residential uses. offices that require the installation of multiple bathrooms, sinks and plumbing
HISTORIC ZONING DISTRICT -BALL HOUSE ENSEMBLE Page 1 fixtures shall not be allowed in the Ball House, at 1312 Lincoln Street.
GENERAL OFFICE USES
Accessory buildings Accounting, auditing & bookkeeping services Administration offices Advertising agency Architects' office Appraisers' office Attorneys' offices Business & management consulting services Business offices Counseling offices Drafting, graphic & copy services Engineers' office Insurance services Interior decorating service Landscape architects' office Lumber brokers office Medical offices Opticians office Non-profit organizations' offices Real estate sales office
Scientific & educational research center Secretarial & stenographic services Stockbrokers & investment counselors' offices Title & trust companies Travel agencies
COMMERCIAL USES
Antique Shops 18 Art Supply Store; Artist Gallery & Studio Bakery-small scale/Coffee with Shop/Restaurants indoor/outdoor seating for no more than 25 people. (No drive-through service or windows permitted.) Barber Shop/Beauty Shop Book Store Candy Store Clothing Store Day care facilities (for less than 13 persons) Florist Shop Gift Shop Hobby Shop
HISTORIC ZONING DISTRICT -BALL HOUSE ENSEMBLE Page 2 Photographer's Studio Picture framing & glazing Pottery Shop Planned Unit Development (as per PUD regulations) Tailor Shop Upholstery Shop (furniture only)
The Eugene Planning Director shall determine if uses similar to the above in terms of district intent, operating characteristics, bulk and building size, parking demand, customer and traffic generation are to be types, permitted, permitted conditionally, or prohibited in the requested. district
3. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: All of the property associated with the Ball House Ensemble (Tax Lots # 10400 10600,10500, Assessor's 17 03 shall H Historic Map 3142) be included in the District, to assure the maintenance of the existing and historical relationship of the structures to their setting and its immediate neighbors, and the larger Jefferson Neighborhood area, where it is a prominent historic landmark.
The property is listed as a City of Eugene Historic Landmark and is to the preservation subject historic provisions and regulations of Section 9.200 though 9.218 of the Code. Alterations to the exterior Eugene of the building, or shall landscape, be in character with the original stylistic integrity, as appropriate to the 1912-1940 period, as described in the City Landmark Designation (HD 99-2).The pre-development conference shall be utilized to with the ensure compliance requirements of Section 9.208 Historic Property Alteration, New Construction and Major New Landscaping - Procedure.
Development standards pertaining to the R3 Multi-family Residential zoning district shall be utilized to govern this district zoning with reference to setbacks, height, heights, and maximum density, fences, building building coverage. There are instances when Section Modifications to certain 9.7)(e)204( regulations, shall override the residential ensure development standards to rehabilitation a appropriate of historic property.
The Eugene Planning Director may modify certain regulations pertaining to signs, fence and wall provisions, general provisions regarding height, yards, area, lot width, number of off-street frontage, depth, coverage, parking spaces required, and regulations must prescribing setbacks. The applicant prove that the modifications are needed by addressing the following criteria: 1. Are necessary to preserve the historic character, appearance or integrity of the proposed historic landmark, and 2. Are in accordance with the purposes of zoning and sign regulations.
HISTORIC ZONING DISTRICT -BALL HOUSE ENSEMBLE Page 3 APPENDICES
A4 “University-affiliated Historic House Museums” - 2014 Report
Campfire Collaborative: Architecture & Design, PC TREETOPS FEASIBILITY STUDY
University-affiliated Historic House Museums
A report prepared for the 1772 Foundation by Hillary Brady, Steven Lubar and Rebecca Soules
July 2014
Overview
This report considers the challenges and opportunities university-affiliated historic house museums face, offering suggestions for new ways to make these museums more useful to the university community. It includes a survey of existing practice, an analysis of recent innovations in the related areas of university art and anthropology museums and of historic house museums more generally, and an overview of other uses for historic houses on university campuses.
We thank the 1772 Foundation for its support of this project. Because of the historic connections of the 1772 Foundation with the Liberty Hall Museum, on the campus of Kean University, Union, NJ, we have included several suggestions to begin a conversation about the future of that museum. Our thanks also to the staff at the university historic house museums we spoke with, and to the staff and board members at the Liberty Hall Museum.
Many universities have museums. The Association of Academic Museums and Galleries lists hundreds of such museums, mostly museums of art, anthropology, and natural history. A much smaller number have history museums, and a smaller number still have historic house museums. This report provides information on these historic house museums, with an emphasis on the academic and financial relationships of the museum and the university. It is based on phone and email interviews with directors and curators of the historic house museums at eight universities (a total of ten museums), completed between October and December 2013.
University historic house museums are ripe for reinvention, at the intersection of two significant revolutions in museum practice:
1 1. Many universities are rethinking the relationship of their museums to the mission of the university. The past decade has seen a new interest in material and visual culture in a wide variety of academic disciplines, and a significant increase in faculty and student use of museums in education and research..
2. Many historic house museums, struggling with an aging and declining visitorship and high maintenance costs, are rethinking their mission. How might they better appeal to a larger audience? What better uses might a historic building be put to, rather than telling the story of its early owners, or the decorative arts, material culture and architecture of its era?
University-affiliated history museums, for the most part, have not changed as much as their art museum counterparts, and have lagged behind the most forward-thinking of non-university house museums. This report builds on the interviews, and recent changes in university art museums and historic house museums, to suggest some new directions for university historic house museums.
Recent Trends University historic house museums, generally sleepy places, are poised for change. University art museums and anthropology museums have rediscovered their educational roots, and are working hard to attract students and faculty back to the museum. Historic house museums are rethinking traditional modes of presentation to reach new audiences and to connect with the community. University historic house museums are uniquely positioned to benefit from both of these trends. Historic house museums
Historic house museums have a long history, dating back to the preservation of Mt. Vernon as a monument to George Washington in 1858. Today, there are an estimated 8-15,000 historic house museums. Most are very small: more than half of American historic house museums receive less than five thousand visitors each year, have annual operating budgets of less than $50,000, and have no professional staff.
Historic house museums are in crisis. Their audiences are shrinking as younger visitors find them dull and unfriendly. Their capital costs are high; old buildings need expensive repairs. There are simply too many of them. They’re too easy to open, too difficult to shut down. While museums in general are doing well, a recent article in the Economist reported, “historic houses and history museums are less popular than they used to be.”1
1 Fiammetta Rocco, “Temples of delight,” The Economist, Dec. 21, 2013, http://j.mp/JQ5YzD 2 Over the past decade leaders in local history have begun to address this crisis. Two conferences held at the Kykuit estate in 2002 and 2007, significant work by the Pew Center for Arts and Heritage, and strong guidance from funding agencies including the Institute for Museum and Library Services, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the 1772 Foundation have moved many historic house museums to reconsider their missions.2 They’ve been urged to merge, diversify, or sell, to think about how to reach new audiences or to consider repurposing the house for other ends.3 University art museums
Many universities are increasingly eager to promote interdisciplinary inquiry and offer students out-of-the-classroom intellectual experiences. That, combined with a new interest in material and visual culture in many fields, has led to the rediscovery of the university museum as an important part of a university’s curriculum.
University art museums have taken the lead in reconnecting to teaching and research. The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation is largely responsible for this, offering many large grants to university art museums to support staff dedicated to this mission.4 Many of these museums had focused on a general audiences, simply becoming the community’s art museum, or had become their own academic fiefdom. They had ignored the needs of teachers and students.
But in the past decade, that has changed in significant ways. Renovations at many museums - the Yale University Art Gallery is the best example - have provided space for classrooms in galleries and collections spaces. Gallery space has been set aside for art linked to course syllabi, and, in some cases, for faculty and students to curate. Many museums have added staff with titles like “Curator of Education and Academic Affairs” and “Curator of Academic Programs.” 5
This has extended beyond art museums. For example, Brown University’s Haffenreffer Museum of Anthropology established its CultureLab in 2012 to provide a space for faculty to teach with artifacts. The goal of the new space was to make artifacts available for class assignments and
2 Jay D. Vogt, “The Kykuit II Summit: The Sustainability of Historic Sites,” History News, Autumn 2007, pp. 17-21. http://download.aaslh.org/history+news/VogtHNSmr07.pdf 3 Julia Halperin, “Time is running out for America's historic houses,” The Art Newspaper 5 December 2013 http://www.theartnewspaper.com/articles/Time-is-running-out-for-Americas-historic-houses/31216 . 4 See Marion M. Goethals and Suzannah Fabing, “College and University Art Museum Program,” Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, November 2007. http://mac.mellon.org/CUAM/cuam_report.pdf and Stefanie S. Jandl, “The Mellon Foundation: Transforming College and University Art Museums in the U.S.,” in Stefanie S. Jandl and Mark S. Gold, eds, A Handbook for Academic Museums: Beyond Exhibitions and Education (Edinburgh and Boston: MuseumsEtc, 2012. 5 The Kress Foundation has explored factors for success in these museums: see Corrine Glesne, The Exemplary Museum - Art and Academia (Edinburgh and Boston: MuseumsEtc, 2012), and at http://www.kressfoundation.org/research/Default.aspx?id=35388. See also a Kress sponsored University of Chicago Cultural Policy Center report: Campus Art Museums in the 21st Century: A Conversation http://culturalpolicy.uchicago.edu/campusartmuseums/campusartmuseumsreport.pdf 3 for hands-on student and faculty work. A postdoctoral fellow, based on the Mellon model, was added to the staff, and given responsibility to work with faculty and students. The result has been a much closer linkage of museum and university.6
A few university museums have gone further. Declaring themselves “teaching museums,” they have focused entirely on student/faculty work. The Tang Teaching Museum at Skidmore College is the best example. It “invites curiosity and collaborative learning through active engagement with ideas, artworks, and exhibitions…. Critical to this end are direct experiential opportunities for Skidmore students to participate in integral aspects of museum practice.” Written into its mission is to “Promote active use of the museum by the college community ” and to “Foster dialogue between academic disciplines .”
The past decade’s changes in historic house museums and university museums suggest some possible paths for new directions for university-affiliated historic house museums. Suggested best practices for university historic house museums Our survey found a wide variety of organizational, financial arrangements for university historic house museums, as well as a wide variety of approaches to university teaching and research. We have tried to pull from these conversations, and from successes and failures in other university museums, some best practices. These will, of course, vary from place to place. Governance and Organizational Structure University-affiliated museums often have a complex governance structure - which can result in confusion and complications over issues of control, fund-raising, ownership of collections, and mission. Museums and their universities do not always have the same mission, and museums that are parts of universities do not have a board that is looking out only for the museum’s interest. The challenges of the university/museum combination have been in the news of late, as some universities have tried to solve financial woes by selling museum collections.7
University museums have diverse systems of governance. The simplest, of course, if for the museum to be just a part of a university, like a university department or center. But there is much to be gained with an external board, for fund-raising, for collections, for general advice, and for
6 Steven Lubar and Emily Stokes-Rees, “From Collections to Curriculum: New Approaches to Teaching and Learning,” in Stefanie S. Jandl and Mark S. Gold, eds, A Handbook for Academic Museums: Beyond Exhibitions and Education (Edinburgh and Boston: MuseumsEtc, 2012, pp. 88-119.
7 On the challenges, and some approaches, see the essays in “The Operational Relationship between the Academic Museum and its Parent Organization” section in Stefanie S. Jandl and Mark S. Gold, eds, A Handbook for Academic Museums: Beyond Exhibitions and Education (Edinburgh and Boston: MuseumsEtc, 2012), especially Andrew Simpson, “Modeling Governance Structures for University Museums and Collections.” The American Alliance of Museums now requires the parent bodies of accredited museum to specifically prohibit museum collections from being considered as disposable assets.
4 community connections, which immediately raises issues of control. If there is an external board, it’s important to be clear about its role and authority. In general, for university museums, the external board is an advisory board, not a board of trustees with fiduciary responsibility. Some university museums are 501(c)3 organizations with a single member, the university, which allows them some independence for fund-raising, but makes clear the university’s authority.
University museums, and especially university-affiliated historic house museums, fit in many different places in university organizational schemes. Some report to the library, some to the provost (chief academic officer), some to facilities or business management, a few to individual departments. This reporting structure can be complicated by the museum reporting to one part of the university (say, the provost), and faculty who direct or use the museum reporting to department heads or deans. The general advice from museum directors is that the higher they report in the university hierarchy, the better.
In many cases, it seems that museum reports to the library. This is understandable - the library has collections, the museum has collections - but does not always work. University libraries and museums have very different policies on audience, community outreach, the use and continued ownership of collections, and amount of interpretation necessary for working with collections.
In cases where the mission of the museum is more narrowly focused, reporting to a college or department makes sense. The Jane Addams Hull-House Museum, one of the most successful university-affiliated historic house museums, is part of the College of Architecture and Arts at University of Illinois - Chicago. This allows the museum to focus on a clear mission.
When there is more than one museum on campus, it makes sense for them to report to a director of museums, so that they can work together. Funding Many of the university historic house museums we examined split funding, depending on the university budget for some of their work, and staff, and especially for capital costs, but raising funds for exhibitions and programs. Universities are often jealous of fund-raising, and it’s important that the museum negotiate the ability to raise funds outside of the usual channels of the university, or be assured of university support in their campaigns. Staffing The Mellon program in university art museums found that staffing was key to a closer connection of the museum to the university. The most successful museums established a position with a title like “academic curator” whose job is to “weave the museum into the academic fabric of the campus by reaching out to the faculty and helping them incorporate the museum’s resources into their teaching.” They: ● Cultivate relationships with individual professors ● Make the collections known and accessible to faculty and students
5 ● Create opportunities to collaborate with faculty ● Curate/co-curate exhibitions with faculty.
A typical job description reads:
Responsibilities: The Coordinator will serve as a liaison between [the museum] and the academic community at [the university] by collaborating with faculty members and students on projects that engage the museum's resources. The Coordinator will be responsible for advising faculty on curriculum development, providing information about and facilitating access to Wolfsonian collection resources, collaborating with faculty members on programming exhibitions in an on-campus teaching gallery, planning a graduate student conference, promoting and advancing research using the collection, and making guest presentations in university courses.
This kind of position would be especially important at a university-affiliated historic house museum, with its narrower collections and less flexible spaces. An academic curator would need to take a very broad view of the possibilities of the house and its collections, reaching beyond the easy areas of history and decorative arts to, say, engineering, business, literature, and the arts. Program The Mellon Foundation found that the following activities were key to “increased use of the museum’s collections by faculty and/or students for educational and scholarly purposes”:
● student internships and fellowships; ● faculty incentives for development of courses using the collection; art conservation classes; and class use of collection objects from storage; ● exhibitions, ranging from small course-support shows to multi-year projects ● involving scholarly research of a collection by multiple academic partners; ● visiting scholars-in-residence; ● symposia; visiting lecturers; ● scholarly publications, including collection catalogues, exhibition catalogues, and journal articles; ● a few limited technology projects to make collection records accessible to staff, faculty and students.
Many universities with museum studies programs partner with historic house museums for hands-on learning opportunities. Brown University, for example, has reinterpreted the Stephen Hopkins Houses, an 18th-century house operated by the Colonial Dames, refreshing a traditional interpretation with new stories, and helped create interpretive plans for the Westport Historical Society’s Handy House.
6 The most extensive use of a university-related house museum for teaching purposes we know of was Prof. Laurel Ulrich’s courses at Harvard’s Artemas Ward house. Prof. Ulrich devoted a graduate seminar to the 18th-century house once owned by General Artemas Ward, part of Harvard since 1925 but little used. The class researched Ward using the houses’ furnishings as well as an extensive collection of archives, created an exhibition for the Harvard Art Museums, and helped organize a digitization project.8
The most successful museums have a clear tie to the university mission: faculty teaching students. They either have faculty on staff or have staff whose job is to work closely with faculty. This requires pro-active outreach on the part of the museum; many faculty do not know how to use museum collections or spaces in their teaching and research. Process The historic house museums we talked with show a wide array of decision-making processes. the Harford (Maryland) Community College’ Hays-Heighe House offers a good model: a joint initiative on behalf of the college and the community, though with an emphasis on the needs of the college. The Jane Addams Hull-House Museum was able to build upon its historic mission and also provide a place for university outreach to the community. Mission Statement Developing a good mission statement that reflects the relationship between the historic house museum and the university is key. Especially at historic house museums that wish to be engaged with the surrounding academic community, simply preserving the structure’s history is no longer enough. The Gorgas House Museum’s (University of Alabama) mission statement reflects such a narrow focus: “To preserve and interpret the Gorgas family legacy and their home’s significance to the history of the University of Alabama. As the first campus building, the Gorgas House Museum provides a connection between the original campus of 1831 and that of today.” This limited focus on the Gorgas family makes it difficult for the museum to engage faculty and student researchers in a process of ongoing reinterpretation.
Museums like the Hays-Heighe House (Hartford Community College) or the Farm House Museum (Iowa State University) have a much broader understanding of their mission within the surrounding academic community. Both sites see themselves as educational facilities first and foremost. As such, the historic buildings and museum collections become spaces that can “promote life-long learning, community engagement, critical thinking, and historical and cultural understanding within the context of local, national, and global issues.” At Iowa State University, the Farm House Museum is the linchpin of educational enrichment programs that move student learning beyond the classroom; today, more than 60,000 ISU students and faculty visit the Farm House Museum and the other University Museums annually.
8 See http://hul.harvard.edu/ois/ldi/resources/artemas-ward-final-report.pdf and Laurel Thatcher Ulrich, “History, Memory, and a House Museum: Artemas Ward of Shrewsbury, Massachusetts; A Harvard Seminar Looks at the Wards,” http://www.americanantiquarian.org/proceedings/44539556.pdf 7 Other uses for university historic house buildings
One of the results of the rethinking of historic house museums has been the realization that it might be more useful to the community, and better for the purposes of the preservation of the historic building, to find new uses for historic houses other than as a museum. University- affiliated historic house museums should consider this possibility, too.
Universities use historic buildings for a wide range of functions. Some maintain their historic functions as dormitories, classrooms or administrative space. Others are adaptively re-used to suit new needs. Historic houses, unless they are very large, are generally deemed unsuitable for most university functions; the costs to retrofit them for their new uses and to meet life safety, convenience, and environmental standards is very high. (Academic buildings need two fire stairs, an elevator, many toilets, heating and air conditioning, extensive wiring, etc.) Brown University is trying to reduce the number of historic houses used for academic and administrative purposes. A historic house of less than 10,000 sq. ft., Brown has decided, is best sold for housing rather than used for offices.
It might seem reasonable to use historic houses for residential purposes. Many universities have turned an old mansion into a president’s house. Some universities have renovated large houses for dormitories, and fraternities and sororities are often located in historic mansions. Many universities provide hotel and short-term residence facilities, some in historic buildings. Brown University, for instance, has the Gardner House, a university guest house. The University’s John Carter Brown Library has a house renovated for its fellows, who stay for periods from a few weeks to a few months.
Many universities are very proud of their historic buildings, making good use of them for symbolic purposes: it’s common to find top administrators housed in the university’s original building. Admissions offices are another use that can call attention to a university’s historic roots. Many older universities are listed on the National Register of Historic Places or designated as National Historic Landmarks, and thus required by local ordinance to maintain their historic exteriors.
But exterior architecture can provide many uses, and most university buildings have been repurposed for the university’s changing needs. Adaptive reuse can provide the best use for an old building. The challenge, of course, is finding the right fit between modern day academic programming and buildings designed for very different purposes.
Frances Halsband, FAIA, of Kliment Halsband Architects, specialists in the re-use of historic buildings for universities, offers some of examples of reuse of large historic houses for schools and universities recently completed by her firm:
● the renovation of an 18,000 sf townhouse for the upper school for The Spence School in New York City: Grand scale, high ceilings, large windows lend themselves to 8 transformation as classrooms. Modern systems, new up-to-code stairs and elevators make the space habitable for modern use, and distinctive historic elements including original paneling, library, historic wallpaper are restored, preserving the character of the original spaces. The mix of old and new, in the service of functional programmatic requirements, provides the best of both worlds. ● Washington Mews, renovated for New York University as a row of International Cultural Institutes: Asia House, Africa House, Deutsches Haus, etc: These small houses have found new life as separate but related institutes. The scale and atmosphere of the houses are well suited to the intimacy of small seminars and conferences. Everyone is “at home” in these spaces.
More generally she notes some good renovations of buildings for other uses:
On the subject of pure architectural opportunity, take a look at the old observatory at Wellesley, which has been converted into a new observatory with some very deft modern moves, or our renovation of the old observatory at Vassar, now the home of the Education Department, or Gilman Hall at Johns Hopkins University, in which grand old spaces are restored, new space was created out of unused library stacks and an old light well was converted into a glass roofed atrium at the heart of the building. The combination of old and new to meet modern program requirements gives new life to a ninety year old campus icon, and justifies the cost of renovating by guaranteeing a sustainable future.
Her general advice: “In each case: save what is good, and ruthlessly discard everything else.” And she gives a good example of what not to do:
An example of what not to do is the old Grey Castle at Arcadia University. When the school was started (as Beaver College) everything was under one roof: dorms, offices, classrooms. Now that the school has expanded into an entire campus, the old castle remains, soaking up renovation dollars, and generating enormous heating bills, but giving very little functional space return.
She concludes: “The house museum is one of the most difficult programs to realize: costly renovations must be justified by compelling use if the project is to be sustainable.”
A recent New York Times article about the renovation of the Phillips Exeter Chapel makes a similar point. “Phillips Church needed repairs and school policy requires that before any major renovation there be an assessment of the building’s usage and purpose, to ensure that the refurbished building will meet contemporary needs.”9
That’s a good policy for any institution.
9 Mark Oppenheimer, “At Prep School in Northern New England, a World of Religious Diversity,” New York Times, April 12, 2014, p. A22. 9
Conclusions: Liberty Hall Museum
We have not undertaken a thorough study of the Liberty Hall Museum, and so our advice is tentative. We offer here models for further study, as well as some advice on future directions. Models The Hays-Heighe House at Harford Community College sees itself as part of the College’s outreach to the community. It is a dynamic educational facility and public history site that showcases elements of Harford County’s diverse social and cultural history through exhibits, inclusive programming, and strategic partnerships. Our mission is to promote life-long learning, community engagement, critical thinking, and historical and cultural understanding within the context of local, national, and global issues
Indiana University’s Wylie House Museum offers a models for a historic house museum that focuses on teaching.
The Jane Addams Hull-House Museum is a specialized museum, carrying on the tradition of Jane Addams’ Hull House settlement house with a social justice mission and a community focus. Future Directions We suggest some possibilities that might lead to useful conversations as the museum, and the University, more ahead. These possibilities are arranged from least change to greatest change.
1. Make no changes. Liberty Hall provides an oasis for the campus, a garden spot with collections and exhibitions far removed from the day to day life of the university’s students. In a university characterized by modern buildings, and practical activities, Liberty Hall serves as a quiet reminder of an earlier day. It can continue to serve its audience as a historic house museum.
2. Liberty Hall keeps its present focus, but reaches out to students with programs and exhibitions designed to attract them. Present staff, or new staff hired for the purpose, could be encouraged to think of students as an important audience, providing programs that will draw them into the building.
3. Working on the model Mellon has provided for university art museums, Liberty Hall could hire a staff person whose job is to support faculty and student teaching and research. This would probably mean changing, or broadening, the focus of the museum, and allowing a good bit of flexibility with topics covered.
10 4. Extending (3), above: Faculty and students could be invited in to produce exhibitions and programs, working with staff hired for that purpose. Liberty Hall is large enough, and its collections diverse enough, that it could continue some of its current work and add this in.
5. Parts of the Museum’s buildings could be turned over to the university for its academic use. It might be that the newer Museum buildings (presently housing the fire engines) are best for the Museum’s work, and that the Museum moves into that building, or into a few rooms in the main building that are most historic, or most amenable to interpretation. (The entire building makes for a very large historic house museum!) Departments most related to the Museum’s work - history, or political science - could be moved into the Museum’s buildings. They might find the building an inspiration to their work, and their presence might bring a new audience of students and visitors. A hybrid use might encourage interaction between departments and inspire new kinds of work.
Old houses do not make for good academic offices without significant renovation, though, and the museum and the university would need to plan carefully and think through questions of ownership and capital expenditures. A careful plan for sharing the building, though, could provide the museum with long-term income; reduce capital costs; and make good use of presently under-utilized parts of the building.
6. Finally, the interests of historic preservation, popular history education, the memory of the family who lived in the building, and the university, might best be served by renovating the entire building for university use and using the endowment and staff of the museum to produce programs not tied to the building, but elsewhere in the community. Collections could be distributed to other museums. The building, completely renovated, would serve both as a memorial to Livingston/Kean families, and as the signature academic or administration building for the university.
11 Museum Data
Selected List of Historic House Museums
University House Name Contact Info Website Staff Average Visitation
Harford CC Hays-Heighe Iris Barnes http://www.harford.edu/com 2 part-time - House (443) 412-2495 munity/hays-heighe-house [email protected]
Harvard Artemas Ward (508) 842-8900 http://www.wardhouse.harva - - House hres_wardfarm@harvar rd.edu d.edu
Indiana U Wylie House (812) 855-6224 http://www.indiana.edu/~libw 1 - [email protected] ylie/
Johns Homewood (410) 516-5589 http://www.museums.jhu.ed 4 full-time, 3 - Hopkins House & homewoodmuseum@j u/homewood.php part time Evergreen House hu.edu [Evergreen]. Both homes share 1 developmen t staff person, 1 PR person
Loyola Cuneo Mansion (847) 362-3042 http://www.luc.edu/cuneo/ - - Chicago [email protected] u
CUNY Armstrong House (718) 478-8274 http://www.louisarmstrongho - - Queens use.org/visiting/overview.htm
Rowan Hollybush Dotte Corner http://www.rowan.edu/hollyb - - (856) 256-4240 ush/ [email protected]
U. Miss William Robert Saarnio http://museum.olemiss.edu/ 10 staff at 15,000 Faulkner's (662) 915-7202 historic-homes/ the (Rowan Rowan Oak & [email protected] University Oak) Walton-Young Museums; 1 House curator at Rowan Oak
U. of Illinois Jane Addams Lisa Junkin Lopez http://www.uic.edu/jaddams/ 11 full-time; 30,000 Hull-House (312) 355-5301 hull/ 8-10 student Museum [email protected] interns
U. West Historic Robert Overton http://www.historicpensacola - - Florida Pensacola [email protected] .org/ Village
12 St. Louis U. Samuel Cupples Petruta Lipan http://cupples.slu.edu - - House and [email protected] Gallery
Iowa State Farm House Lynette Pohlman http://www.museums.iastate 7 full-time; 7,000 - Museum [email protected] .edu/Farm%20House.html 6-10 student 10,000 interns visitors; (University 60,000 ISU Museums) members (University Museums)
Miami U. McGuffey Steve Gordon http://www.units.miamioh.ed - - Museum (513) 529-8381 u/mcguffeymuseum/ [email protected]
U. of Gorgas House (205) 348-5906 http://gorgashouse.ua.edu/ 1 full-time 2,000 Alabama Museum [email protected]
Evergreen and Homewood Museums: Johns Hopkins University, Maryland
Hours of Operation: Tuesday-Friday, 11-4; Saturday-Sunday, 12-4
Admission: $8 for adults; $7 for seniors; $5 for students, youth and Johns Hopkins alumni or retirees. The fee is waived for members, children 5 and under, or Johns Hopkins faculty, staff and students.
Mission Statement: “As teaching museums of a world-renowned university, the Johns Hopkins University Museums contribute to the advancement of scholarship and museum practice by helping to train future art historians, historic preservationists, and museum professionals. They provide curricular support to faculty through their collections, exhibitions, and programs; and offer credit-bearing courses and internships to help meet the university’s academic mission. The museums welcome members of the public to experience their collections and special exhibitions, as well as to enjoy their tours, lectures, and other programs.”
13 Johns Hopkins University owns two historic house museums. One, the Homewood Museum, on the main campus, was the country home of Charles Carroll Jr., the son of the Maryland signer of the Declaration of Independence. It is interpreted to represent the period of the Carroll family’s occupancy, from 1775-1825. The Evergreen home, about a mile off-campus, is a Gilded Age mansion with a large garden, a carriage house, and a contemporary art exhibition gallery. It displays both the Garrett’s family collections, and contemporary art. Both museums offer regularly-scheduled tours and are also available for group rentals.
Johns Hopkins, as a fairly decentralized university, has a complicated reporting system with the Evergreen and Homewood Museums. Most of the time, collaboration happens on a grassroots level and isn’t built into the university’s reporting system, which can raise some issues, Director of Johns Hopkins University’s Program in Museums and Society Elizabeth Rodini said. (The Museums and Society program, which does work to connect the museums with the university, is an independent program. As such, though Rodini has worked with museums, her role is separate--mirroring the separation between the institutions and the university itself. )
This has created a complicated system of reporting, according to Rodini. The museums come under the umbrella of the library, but the other museum on campus, the Hopkins Archaeological Museum, is under the direction of an academic department. Salaries also come out of a different university budget. If there is a joint project between the Museums and Society program, under the Arts and Sciences department, figuring out who is in charge of paying for it becomes tricky. These different responsibilities make streamlined collaboration difficult.
The museums are funded both by Johns Hopkins and separate foundations—the Evergreen House Foundation, for example, was established on the death of the home’s residents. This dual relationship was planned prior to the house’s owner’s death, and the importance of having a “second voice” of the foundation was always considered crucial, Director and Curator of Johns Hopkins’ Evergreen Museum and Library James Abbot said.
The university and foundation split annual operations for the museum. The university adds additional funding for things like roof repair and painting. The foundation goes to outside sources like private foundations for things like restoration or preservation projects. The university owns the physical museum buildings, the property that the museums sit on and some of the museum collections, although the Evergreen House Foundation owns its modern art and decorative art collections).
There has historically been a tension between the museums and the academic context in which the university wants to think about them. In the past few years, there wasn’t a natural home for the museums within the university’s academic departments. Occasionally, professors in individual departments would hold classes at the museums or use the collections, but it wasn’t systematic.
There was also the question of how to use the homes more effectively in a way that served the
14 campus “day to day,” Rodini said. The university wanted to figure out how to best use those spaces, to justify the upkeep costs that both sites imposed on the university. This was a particularly prevalent issue for the Evergreen House, since it sits a mile from campus and as such gets much less student traffic. The Homewood House is right on campus, adjacent to the main library and near the undergraduate dorms. Moreover, it is the building that inspired the whole architecture of the campus, which is called the Homewood Campus. It’s centrally located and easy to work with, so university collaboration was an easier fit.
In 2006, the university began its Museums and Society program. Now, classes are held directly in the museums and involve students in a variety of projects related to the property. These include way-finding courses, curatorial classes, Archaeology, art history and artist residencies. Most recently, a discussion centered around getting civil engineering and environmental studies student involved in surveying the grounds and designing a historically accurate and usable bridge for the Evergreen property.
Students are also involved in curating mini-exhibitions and their own programming, such as public school outreach initiatives. There are internships and graduate positions available, though they found student docent programs to be unsustainable.
Most events tend to be more publically focused, because garnering a strong student turnout is difficult, particularly for Evergreen. However, there is a lack of cross-coordination between the university and the museums, so neither of their events run with parallel themes or audience tie-ins. The museums share a marketing/PR person who does online promotion and local advertising for events, such as lecture or live music series and sculpture shows.
Farm House Museum: Iowa State University
Hours of Operation: Monday-Friday, 12-4; closed weekends and university holidays
Admission: Free, suggested donation of $3
15 Mission Statement: “The University Museums exist to foster understanding and delight in the visual arts with a focus on the creative interactions in arts, sciences and technology. The University Museums nurture knowledge of and appreciation for the University's cultural heritage and its present cultural context. The University Museums serve the Iowa State University community and the public as an educational and cultural resource.”
The Farm House Museum is located on the campus of Iowa State University in Ames, Iowa. The building was constructed in 1860, two years after the state first granted funds towards the establishment of a new state “Agricultural College and Model Farm” in Ames. The agricultural college, now Iowa State University, opened it doors to its first students in 1869. The Farm House Museum served first as the center of a working experimental farm, and later as a house where many university notables resided. In 1976, the structure, now designated as the National Historic Landmark, was reopened to the public as the Farm House Museum, charged with interpreting the cultural heritage of central Iowa and Iowa State University.
The Farm House Museum is one of five museums located on the campus of Iowa State University and jointly overseen as the University Museums. The museums are operated as an integrated, non-academic unit of Iowa State University and the Director of University Museums reports directly to the Senior Vice President of Business and Finance. All seven members of the museum staff are on the university payroll and they also teach classes in all seven colleges of the university. Each semester, between six and ten university students also work or intern at the museums.
According to the Director of University Museums, the Farm House Museum’s “primary target audience is the 33,000 students” who attend Iowa State University. As such, the University Museums programs are highly integrated into existing academic curriculum. Museum staff are strong advocates of integrated visual learning, and visits to the museums are a part of the visual literacy classes taught to university freshman and sophomores. Exhibits provide another opportunity for the University Museums to connect across disciplines and departments: new or temporary exhibits require a commitment from four different departments that will agree to co-develop curriculum materials with museum staff.
The university currently provides all financial support for the Farm House Museum. The Farm House Museum is operated jointly with the Brunnier Art Museum, Christian Peterson Art Museum, Anderson Sculpture Garden, and Art on Campus Program under the umbrella of the University Museums, with university-employed staff overseeing all five of organizations. The university also provides funds for student employment within the museums. None of the University Museums charge admission; with the museums’ clear focus on addressing students’ needs and using the collections as a teaching resource it is clear that the university views the museums as an academic resource that do not need to be financially self-sufficient.
The Farm House Museum is very much aware of the Iowa State University’s long history as a land-grant university and as the headquarters of the state’s Cooperative Extension Service.
16 Although the museum’s primary audience is ISU students, they also believe they have a wider responsibility to address the needs of the citizens of Iowa. The Farm House Museum’s location in the heart of the university’s campus does detract from casual visitation, but the University Museums as a whole draw in approximately 7,000-10,000 outside visitors each year.
Within the ISU community, the University Museums are highly invested in strengthening students’ connections to the museums, offering internship opportunities, museum jobs, and easy access to museum collections for research projects. The University Museums’ greatest challenge is that they currently do not have enough staff members to respond to all requests of the requests they receive regarding intellectual and physical access to museum collections.
Over 60,000 ISU community members visit the University museums annually. With the museum staff’s willingness to assist in developing new curriculum that integrates the museum into the university experience, the museums are used by a number of different departments. Among those who annually visit the Farm House Museum are all the students enrolled in ENGL 150, “Critical Thinking and Communication.” In October of 2013, museum staff gave fifty tours of the Farm House Museum to accommodate all of the students enrolled in the class.
Gorgas House Museum: University of Alabama
Hours of Operation: Monday-Friday, 9-12 and 1-4:30
Admission: $2 general admission; free for current University of Alabama faculty, staff, students, and members of the University Alumni Association
Mission Statement: “To preserve and interpret the Gorgas family legacy and their home’s significance to the history of the University of Alabama. As the first campus building, the Gorgas House Museum provides a connection between the original campus of 1831 and that of today.”
Vision: “As a cornerstone of the University of Alabama, the Gorgas House Museum will serve as an active community resource, committed to learning through exhibition, education, and social engagement.”
The Gorgas House Museum is the oldest building on the University of Alabama’s campus in
17 Tuscaloosa, Alabama. The structure was built in 1829, and has since served the university community as dining hall, hotel, faculty residence, and, most recently, as a historic house museum. Approximately seventy percent of the museum’s collections belonged to members of the Gorgas family who lived in the house from 1879 until 1953, reflecting the museum’s mission “to preserve and interpret the Gorgas family legacy.” The museum is regularly open to the public on weekdays. Nonetheless, outside yearly visitation is only approximately 500 people.
Although the Gorgas House Museum is the oldest building on the University of Alabama campus, and one of only seven buildings on the campus to survive the Civil War, the university at present does not fully utilize the site as a place where the university’s history can be interpreted. Although Gorgas House Museum’s exhibits do address the early history of the university, only about 2000 of the more than 30,000 students at the University of Alabama visit the site annually.
The university supports one, full-time, paid position at the museum; the house museum director answers to the executive director of the UA museums, and, like all of the other museums on campus, the Gorgas House Museum falls under the oversight of the Office of Academic Affairs. Operating expenses and building maintenance are also supported by the university, but the Gorgas House Museum does not have a budget for programming, outreach, or artifact conservation. Additional staff support is provided in the form of student employees and volunteers.
The Gorgas House Museum’s current operating hours make it difficult for the museum to offer programming that caters to the wider community. The museum’s on-campus location, with no dedicated parking, also discourages casual outside visitation. Nonetheless, the museum’s limited weekend programming has been generally well-attended by local residents.
Currently, the students who do visit the Gorgas House Museum mostly likely come as part of a class touring the building. Outside of a limited number of student volunteers who assist at the museum, there are not many avenues for student engagement. The museum is not used as the site for academic classes or programs, and, unlike staff employed at the University of Alabama’s other museums, the director of the Gorgas House Museum does not teach classes as an adjunct faculty member.
The museum’s rich collection of authentic artifacts and furnishings all relating to the Gorgas family should also be an important resource for students and faculty members interested in the site. However, the collections for all University of Alabama museums are managed by a separate collections department, limiting their accessibility for student research. In addition, the collections of the house museum were only formally inventoried and accessioned in 2013. Hopefully, the cataloguing of the objects will make them more available for future research.
18 Hays-Heighe House: Harford Community College, Maryland
Hours of Operation: Tuesday, 1-3; Friday, 10-12; 1st Saturday of the month, 10-12
Admission: Free
Mission Statement: “The Hays-Heighe House at Harford Community College is a dynamic educational facility and public history site that showcases elements of Harford County’s diverse social and cultural history through exhibits, inclusive programming, and strategic partnerships. Our mission is to promote life-long learning, community engagement, critical thinking, and historical and cultural understanding within the context of local, national, and global issues.”
The Hays-Heighe House, on the Harford Community College campus, predates the college’s existence. It dates back to 1808, when the original Hay family owned the property. Later, Robert and Ann Heighe owned the property, as a horse farm under the name Prospect Hill. One other family, the Vaughns, owned the property before selling it to Harford County fifty years ago in order to become the site of the college campus. The house is only open four hours a week for official viewings, and is open once a month for two hours on a Saturday.
The Hays-Heighe was used by the college as one of its buildings for a number of years. A separate barn on the home’s property was used for a variety of purposes by the college—at different times, it was a theater and a bowling alley. A third house that no longer stands was used as a faculty lounge. Other historic homes on the college’s campus became too dilapidated to repair, but the Hays-Heighe House is made of stone, so it held up fairly well.
The Hays-Heighe went through its own state of disrepair during the two to three years the college was not using it—during that period, the local chapter of the American Cancer Society used the building as a fundraiser showcase. Then, in 2005, the college decided that it would invest in renovating the house. While it did not invest in a full renovation, it restored for “appearance and functionality,” with an eye toward keeping reasonably being able to keep some original components of the house, Harford Community College Director of Library and Information Resources Carol Allen said.
The renovation process was a joint initiative on behalf of the college and community. Members of
19 both stakeholder groups were brought in for focus groups to talk about possible uses for the house—most suggestions, however, were considered too limited and not closely connected to the educational mission of the college, and were rejected. The college decided to focus the mission of the house on showcasing the social and cultural history of Harford County through “exhibits and inclusive programming,” showing stories of people in the area of all races, ethnicities and classes.
The building reopened in June of 2010 after a multi-million dollar, multi-year renovation process. The renovation process of the building was intimately tied to the university’s educational mission. At the beginning of that restoration period, the college had its own, short-lived building preservation and reservation program. The students in that program were involved in the early research into the house’s history and conducted archaeology digs.
The Hays-Heighe House is totally owned, funded and staffed by the Harford Community College. It is considered part of the college’s library and Hays-Heighe employees report directly to the Library Director.
The Hays-Heighe House is funded by the college. The museum has no admission charge, though it may charge fees for outside events held there. However, the house can only comfortably sit around 30 people and does not have a liquor license, so its use as a venue is limited. The Hays-Heighe seeks small grants for things like traveling exhibitions, similar to how any other part of the college could seek outside grant funding. In particular, they have been able to tap into American Library Association funding because it is part of the college’s library.
There are extensive educational opportunities available at the Hays-Heighe House, though projects tend to be “relatively ad-hoc” and generally come from professors in the anthropology, history and sociology departments, Allen said.
Several large projects include the Maryland Tradition program, funded by a grant from the Maryland State Arts Council. This program, which aimed to promote and sustain Maryland folk traditions, partnered the Hays-Heighe with the Old Line Museum in Delta, Pennsylvania. Harford Community College students in an anthropology class conducted oral history interviews, created posters and held a local exhibit in conjunction with this project. Another project out of the history department had students do research about the War of 1812 with a local focus, as several important battles took place in Harford County. The house museum exhibited abstracts of student research papers as part of an exhibit. A third project had conduct oral histories with individual who used to live or work in the house, and turn those interviews for a video displayed on site. Students in the school’s interior design program used the house to work on furnishing plans for the site, as well.
There have been other opportunities for one-on-one work study jobs and internship projects, where students work on exhibits and research. The house itself holds no real collections, besides a small photography archive.
20
Other college and community connections come from making the house available as meeting and event space. Faculty are encouraged to schedule occasional class meetings at the Hays-Heighe. In particular, the a nursing program course that has a class focused on treating people who have attempted suicide, often meets at the Hays-Heighe for this difficult one-day session. The nursing faculty reserves the entire house for the day, as a space for students to work in small groups in a warmer, more comfortable setting than a traditional classroom.
Continuing education classes and peer mentoring programs sometimes meet at the house. The student government, faculty and alumni association also reserve the space for use during special events, like holiday or retirement parties.
During the summer, youth programming, such as an American Girl camp, is held at the Hays-Heighe.
As a community college “the word community is part of who we are and what we are,” Allen said. The Hays-Heighe is set up, similarly to the college, to act as a resource for the community. As such, more of its visitors and participants come from the community, as opposed to the college. Students in community colleges are “more focused on going to class, get[ting] credentials and get[ting] out,” she said, and as such it is hard to get students to attend events that are outside of course requirements.
Jane Addams Hull-House Museum: University of Illinois, Chicago
Hours of Operation: Tuesday-Friday, 10-4; Sunday, 12-4
Admission: Suggested donation of $5 per visitor
Mission Statement: “The Jane Addams Hull-House Museum serves as a dynamic memorial to Jane Addams, the work of her associates, and the neighborhood they served. The museum embodies UIC's urban land grant commitment by preserving and developing the original Hull-House site for the interpretation and continuation of the historic settlement house vision, linking research, education, and social engagement. The programs and activities of the museum
21 support the UIC Great Cities Commitment; involve the University community, neighborhood and metropolitan area groups, and the international community; and reflect the original Hull-House settlement's commitment to social service, social change, and public intellectual life.”
The Jane Addams Hull-House Museum opened to the public as a museum in 1967, shortly after it stopped being actively used as a settlement house and community center. The University of Illinois, Chicago, which acquired the property, initially planned to tear down all of the buildings on site and use the land for university expansion. Ultimately, although eleven of the thirteen buildings that once stood on the site were demolished, community activism and support managed to preserve the last two buildings as a museum. As a result of its tempestuous beginning, interim director Lisa Junkin Lopez described the museum as “having had a contested relationship when it comes to becoming a part of the university.”
Today, the Hull-House Museum offers a range of community-oriented programming that merges the site’s history as a settlement house with its current use as a museum. With the University’s recent decision to establish a new museum studies program, the Hull-House Museum will become a valuable part of the students’ educational experience as a center for workshops, classes, and hands-on activities.
During its 40+ year history as a museum affiliated with the University of Illinois, Chicago, the Hull-House Museum has been shuffled through many different colleges and departments. Approximately fifteen years ago, the museum was placed under the jurisdiction of the College of Architecture, Design, and the Arts. The Hull-House Museum remains the only non-academic unit affiliated with the University, which occasionally places in the museum in a somewhat odd position. According to the interim director: “I think we’ve found a good home but it still feels a bit like a funny fit given that there’s not another institution like us on campus.”
Despite the museum’s contested beginning with the university, the museum’s current staff acknowledge that the museum is particularly successful because of its association with the university. Not only does the university provide stability and financial support in an era when it is increasingly difficult for independent house museums to remain solvent, but the university also provides a supportive environment of academic freedom. The Hull-House Museum frequently addresses controversial political, ethical, and moral topics in its exhibits and programming -- the support and protection of the University’s academic faculty and administration is critical to the museum’s success in this area.
The Hull-House Museum also benefits from university-paid student employees. Traditionally, the majority of the museum’s education staff were graduate and undergraduate students hired to work part-time in the museum under the direction of a trained supervisor. Although this has practice has allowed the museum to maximize its workforce, the current museum administration has some concerns about the sustainability of this process. Not only is there a considerable amount of student turnover, requiring frequent training, but students are beginning to hold positions that would previously have been filled by outside hires. The museum hopes to develop
22 a more sustainable staffing structure, where students are not simply burdened with ever-increasing workloads.
The development of the University’s new museum studies program will also change the current relationship between the school and the museum. As the museum has a long history of “operating at the highest professional levels,” the museum staff is giving a lot of thought to the ways in which Hull-House can become more of a teaching museum without sacrificing its established programs and reputation. While many of the museum studies courses will not be focused around the museum, Hull-House staff are excited about the ways in which they will be able to augment the primary curriculum. Internships, workshops, independent research projects, and other offerings by the Hull-House Museum will enhance the students’ experience and help them to develop practical skills.
Like many other university-affiliated house museums, the Hull-House Museum receives only a moderate amount of financial support from the University. At present, staff salaries are paid by the university; museum staff have concerns that the university will not maintain this support in the future, particularly as questions are raised regarding the university’s responsibility to support a museum whose primary focus is catering to the local community rather than the museum. As the University develops its museum studies program, and more Hull-House Museum staff begin to teach classes as adjunct faculty members, opportunities exist for reworking the museum’s current funding structure to integrate the staff more closely with the new program. The museum staff do have some fears that teaching responsibilities will pile up on top of their existing workload -- the museum and the university are still determining how best to balance these new pressures.
Although the university previously supported the Hull-House Museum’s programming, the museum now has to independently fund all of its programmatic activities. This is due in part to the museum’s recent overall growth and expansion. As a result, the museum frequently seeks outside funding and support -- the museum’s permanent exhibition was funded by a NEH grant.
In addition to traditional museum exhibits and programming, the Hull-House Museum embraces its past as a settlement house, maintaining a strong commitment to “social service, social change, and public intellectual life.” Although the museum is financially linked to the College of Architecture, Design, and the Arts within the university, museum staff believe that it is important for the museum to benefit the entire campus community as well as the larger public. Guided by the university’s mission of hands-on teaching and learning, the Hull-House offers lectures, panel discussions, and movie screenings that encourage community engagement and soften the stark line separating the university from the surrounding neighborhoods. The site’s unique history, and the staff’s willingness to experiment, has resulted in highly successful, one-of-a-kind programs, such as the museum’s heirloom seed library and seed exchange initiative, which began in 2013.
The Jane Addams Hull-House Museum currently stands at the forefront of the historic house museum world. Although their unique approach would not work at every site, it is particularly
23 successful at the former settlement house and should serve as an excellent model to other historic house museums looking to be more innovative in their interpretation and programming. William Faulkner’s Rowan Oak & Walton-Young Historic House: University of Mississippi
Hours of Operation: Rowan Oak: Tuesday-Saturday, 10-4; Sunday, 1-4; Walton-Young: currently closed for renovation
Admission: $5
Mission Statement: “The University Museum maintains our founders’ dedication to preserving, interpreting, and exhibiting the art and cultural heritage of Mississippi and of the American South. The University Museum is dedicated to research, education, documentation, and the presentation of art, science, and history. Activities include exhibitions, demonstrations, lectures, community events, educational workshops, and events for children, all geared to enhance learning at The University of Mississippi.”
The University of Mississippi’s museum presence includes two historic house museums with very different histories. Rowan Oak, a large Greek Revival mansion, gained its importance from its association with the noted writer William Faulkner, who lived in the house from 1930 until his death in 1962. In 1972, his heirs sold the house, located on the edge of the University of Mississippi’s Oxford campus, to the university so that Faulkner’s legacy would be preserved. Today, over 15,000 people visit Rowan Oak annually -- tour materials are offered in five languages other than English, highlighting the number of international visitors who travel to the site.
The Walton-Young House, the second building managed by the University of Mississippi Museums, has had a more diverse history of usage. Built in 1880, the house is a typical, middle-class, Victorian era home, and it served as the residence of the Walton and Young families until 1925. At that point, it was purchased by the First Presbyterian Church of Oxford and used as a parsonage. The building’s on-campus location made it a logical purchase for the university, and in 1974, it was acquired by the University of Mississippi. The building was used to house different programs and departments, serving as the location of the university’s Southern
24 Studies Center and Honors College at various times. In 1997, the building was opened to the public as a house museum, with limited visiting hours on Fridays and by special appointment. Currently, the building is closed for twelve months of lead paint abatement and architectural repairs, after which, the building’s future as a museum will be considered. Robert Saarnio, the museum’s director, is very optimistic about the building’s future: “we’re starting a very exciting options planning process for its future uses, because I’m quite convinced that what Oxford and our university do not need is another historic house museum.”
Both Rowan Oak and the Walton-Young Historic House are completely owned, operated, and staffed by the University of Mississippi. The museums significantly benefit from the reflected prestige of a major research university, while also profiting from important university-provided services like IT, landscaping, facility, and communications staff support. Without the overarching support the university provides, the museums -- with a small staff of only eight people -- would be much more limited in the programming that they provide. The museums’ director reports directly to the University Provost, from whose office the museums also receive their budget.
Although financially supported by the university, neither of the two house museums are explicitly concerned with interpreting the history of the university. At Rowan Oak, the narrative focuses on the life and literary works of William Faulkner. The Walton-Young Historic House’s previous interpretation as a house museum also did not connect the history of the site to the story of the university’s development. Instead the University relies on the sites as a resource for students, faculty, and the visiting public.
With the re-imagining of the Walton-Young Historic House in the upcoming months, the former house museum may be more fully integrated into the university community. Museum staff hope to use the house to “push the boundaries and do something very exciting that gets the university’s and the community’s attention.” Although the house will probably contain some gallery space where the museums’ collection of decorative arts can be accommodated, the remainder of the house could serve a variety of functions. Possible suggestions have ranged from an artist in residence to a visiting scholar program.
The University of Mississippi Museums receive financial support from the Provost’s Office of the university. This support includes salaries and benefits for the eight museum staff members, as well as an operating budget that covers building maintenance, utilities, and landscaping. The museums are also able to offer approximately six paid positions to students in the University's School of Education who assist with museum programming. Although Rowan Oak has a dedicated curator who oversees the building’s collections on a daily basis, University funding does not yet provide for a full-time museum-wide Curator to address issues in the university’s museum galleries or in the Walton-Young House.
The university also does not provide support for exhibitions, artifact conservation, or programming -- this is a “deep challenge” that affects the director’s work on a daily basis. To address this oversight, the museum is forced to raise outside support through grants, donors,
25 and local businesses. An auxiliary advisory board, consisting of sixteen people drawn from the membership of the “Friends of the Museum,” also provides outside financial support and fundraising assistance.
The museums of the University of Mississippi clearly recognize their dual constituencies of university students and Oxford community members. As a result, the museums offer a variety of programming that addresses both of these audiences.
Historically, museum staff have not taught classes through the university. However two staff members were recently asked to begin developing a course that can be offered through the School of Education. Many of the museums’ volunteers, interns, and student employees also come from the university’s education program, highlighting the museum’s strong focus on outreach and programming despite the small size of the staff. Rowan Oak is also a great resource that many professors utilize in their courses. Specialized tours are regularly conducted for classes from the history, southern studies, and English departments, and the site’s spacious grounds and gardens also make it a favored location for art students to sketch.
The majority of the museums’ community focus centers on outreach and programming for school-age children. The museums offer a set of travelling trunks that can be borrowed by teachers to supplement lesson plans -- one trunk focuses on Faulkner and his life at Rowan Oak. Museum education staff also conduct outreach programs, particularly to those schools in the greater Oxford area that have limited art budgets or contain at-risk youth. The university museum and historic houses also cultivate an active tiered Membership program, and additionally receive financial assistance from the Friends of the Museum fund-support auxiliary group - - a core group of constituents who organize special events to benefit the museums and the houses.
Wylie House Museum: Indiana University, Indiana
Hours of Operation: March through November: Tuesday-Saturday, 10-2
26 Admission: Free
Mission Statement: “The mission of the museum is to preserve and study the house, artifacts and documents and through them to interpret for the public our local history and domestic heritage as it is embodied by the early Wylie home.”
The Wylie House Museum, on the Indiana University campus, was the home of the university’s first president, Andrew Wylie, and his family. The house is owned by the university and operates as a historic house museum, recreating what the home looked like before 1860. The house’s collections include mid-nineteenth-century American furnishings, many of which belonged to the Wylie family.
The Wylie House is run and operated through the university’s library department. The house was originally part of its archives, because of the large collection related to the house and its former owner, the first president of Indiana University. Now the archives are under the umbrella of the library system. As such, the Wylie House archives will soon be housed in a separate, climate controlled, state-of-the-art facility alongside Indiana University special collections material. A small portion of the house’s collections will be kept on site as primary source teaching material for courses.
However, there are no faculty members that work with the Wylie House, beside Wylie House Interim Director Carey Beam. Beam is a university librarian and, as such, has faculty status. In her work with the Wylie House, she reports directly to the dean of the university libraries. There is one other staff member employed by the house—a professional administrator who acts as an outdoor interpreter. In the past, there has been an Education Director on staff, but that position was eliminated with the university libraries made staffing cut. Those responsibilities are now part of Beam’s position, which has been tricky to navigate since academic and educational access at the house has become a bigger priority.
The museum is financially supported through the university, so there is no “scrambling for members.” They do have a donor base that contributes funding, but the majority of their budget comes from the university. There is funding from the library’s general budget, which includes basic maintenance, necessities (such as electricity and phone), and staff salaries. For bigger costs, like large repairs or renovations, that money comes from a separate university-wide budget. The building itself has undergone two rounds of major renovations: one in the 1960s focused on the building’s structure and another in the early 2000s focused on interior design.
The Wylie House is not actively seeking funds, though in the past they have spearheaded their own fundraising campaigns—specifically, for the building of the site’s education center. The Indiana University library department’s development director does seek outside funding, and Beam will do small speaking engagements to help generate some donations.
The Wylie House sees itself as a “teaching lab,” Beam said. Especially with its new education
27 center, which offers new spaces for classes to meet, becoming an active resource for students and teachers has been increasingly important.
While classes don’t meet at the site regularly, there is usually a class meeting in the site’s education center weekly. Classes, such as Introduction to Museum Studies, Public Memory, Historic Textiles, Parks and Tourism, Education, or Public Art and Architecture, use the site for research projects.
There is also one paid graduate student position and regular internships and practicums available for students. With the recent addition of its education center (a separate building on the property) the number of student interns has increased from about two a year to 6-8.
Beyond its use in classes, as both a meeting space and a resource center, the house has multi-purpose spaces that are rented out for university workshops, lecture series, student musical performances, and other small events for community groups. These events include a winter open house, a spring seed sale from the house’s gardens, and a local quilt show. Local public schools also often tour the house, and community members act as docent guides.
28