The Historic 32Nd Street Baptist Church Reborn: Exploring Intersections of Adaptive Reuse and Sense of Place Linda Lyons

Florida State University Libraries

Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School

2013 The Historic 32nd Street Baptist Church Reborn: Exploring Intersections of Adaptive Reuse and Sense of Place Linda Lyons

Follow this and additional works at the FSU Digital Library. For more information, please contact [email protected] THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF VISUAL ARTS, THEATRE AND DANCE

THE HISTORIC 32ND STREET BAPTIST CHURCH REBORN: EXPLORING

INTERSECTIONS OF ADAPTIVE REUSE AND SENSE OF PLACE

LINDA LYONS

A Thesis submitted to the Department of Interior Design in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Fine Arts

Degree Awarded: Summer Semester, 2013 Linda Lyons defended this thesis on June 26, 2013. The members of the supervisory committee were:

Jill Pable Professor Directing Thesis

Karen Myers Committee Member

Jim Dawkins Committee Member

The Graduate School has verified and approved the above-named committee members, and certifies that the thesis has been approved in accordance with university requirements.

Dedicated to Gray and Grant

iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This thesis has been enriched by the participation of Elane Lee-Isa, Catherine Sloss Jones, the Reverend Victor Lewis, and the Reverend Marlon Elkington. Thank you all for your gifts of time, energy, candor and prayer. Your insights made this study possible.

I am also very grateful to the hospital-associated hospitality house residents that were so honest and gracious during difficult circumstances, and to the staff members that supported my research.

Special appreciation goes to Professor Myers and Professor Dawkins for their generous contributions of time and insight throughout this process. I also wish to acknowledge the support of The Florida State University’s Department of Interior Design, and to my fellow graduate students who have accompanied me on this journey.

I would like to sincerely thank Dr. Pable, who has been a constant source of inspiration and has challenged me in countless ways. I will be a better teacher due to her influence, and I am truly grateful for her wisdom, encouragement, humor, and guidance throughout this endeavor. .

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Tables ...... ix List of Figures ...... xi Abstract ...... xiii 1. CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 Background ...... 1 1.2 Purpose ...... 3 1.3 Justification ...... 3 1.4 Research Questions ...... 5 1.4.1 Primary Research Question...... 5 1.4.2 Questions of Adaptive Reuse...... 5 1.4.3 Questions of Sense of Place...... 6 1.4.4 Questions of Intersections of Adaptive Reuse and Sense of Place...... 6 1.5 Limitations and Assumptions ...... 7 1.6 Definition of Terms...... 7 2. CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF LITERATURE ...... 9 2.1 Introduction ...... 9 2.2 Historic Preservation ...... 10 2.2.1 Preservation...... 12 2.2.2 Conservation ...... 13 2.2.3 Restoration ...... 15 2.2.4 Adaptive Reuse ...... 17 2.3 Place Attachment and Sense of Place ...... 20 2.3.1 Territory ...... 24 2.3.2 Tinkering and Products ...... 25 2.3.3 Special Furniture ...... 25 2.3.4 Visual Themes ...... 26 2.3.5 Traces of Friends...... 27 2.3.6 Boundaries ...... 27 2.3.7 Shelter and Security ...... 28 2.3.8 Sense of Identity ...... 28 2.3.9 Social Contact ...... 29 2.3.10 Personal Growth...... 30 2.4 Hospital Associated Hospitality Houses ...... 31 2.5 Summary ...... 40 3. CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY ...... 42 3.1 Introduction ...... 42 3.2 Research Questions ...... 43 3.2.1 Primary Research Question...... 45 3.2.2 Questions of Adaptive Reuse...... 45 3.2.3 Questions of Sense of Place...... 45 3.2.4 Questions of Intersections of Adaptive Reuse and Sense of Place...... 4 6

3.3 Site Selection ...... 46 3.4 Study Procedure and Data Collection ...... 49 3.5 Sample...... 51 3.6 Instruments ...... 53 3.7 Data Analysis Methods ...... 54 3.8 Limitations, Delimitations and Transferability ...... 55 3.9 Summary ...... 56 4. CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS ...... 58 4.1 Introduction ...... 58 4.2 Survey Methodology and Demographics...... 58 4.3 Survey Results ...... 63 4.3.1 Hospitality House Residents ...... 63 4.3.1.1 Physical attributes: the kitchen space...... 64 4.3.1.2 Physical attributes: the bathroom facilities...... 65 4.3.1.3 Physical attributes: the common spaces...... 66 4.3.1.4 Sense of place: safety and security...... 67 4.3.1.5 Sense of place: privacy...... 69 4.3.1.6 Sense of place: home-away-from-home environment...... 70 4.3.1.7 Sense of place: places of sanctuary...... 72 4.3.1.8 Sense of place: personalization...... 74 4.3.1.9 Historical perspective ...... 74 4.3.1.10 Summary...... 76 4.3.2 Hospitality House Staff ...... 77 4.3.2.1 Physical attributes: the kitchen space...... 77 4.3.2.2 Physical attributes: the bathroom facilities...... 78 4.3.2.3 Physical attributes: the common spaces...... 79 4.3.2.4 Sense of place: safety and security...... 80 4.3.2.5 Sense of place: privacy...... 80 4.3.2.6 Sense of place: home-away-from-home environment...... 81 4.3.2.7 Sense of place: places of sanctuary...... 82 4.3.2.8 Sense of place: personalization...... 83 4.3.2.9 Historical perspective...... 83 4.3.2.10 Summary...... 85 4.4 Interviews ...... 86 4.4.1 Elane Lee-Isa Interview Summary...... 87 4.4.2 The Reverends Lewis and Elkington Interview Summary...... 90 4.4.3 Catherine Sloss Jones Interview Summary...... 93 4.5 Emergent Themes ...... 97 4.6 Summary ...... 99 5. CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY ...... 100 5.1 Introduction ...... 100 5.2 Emergent Themes ...... 100 5.2.1 Breaking Bread Fosters Bonding ...... 101 5.2.2 Shelter, Safety and Security are Significant ...... 102 5.2.3 Privacy, Peacefulness and Prayer are a Priority ...... 104 vi

5.2.4 Hospitality Houses Serve as a Home-Away-From-Home ...... 106 5.2.5 The Embodied Humanity of Historic Architecture may Facilitate Well-Being ...... 107 5.3 Research Questions...... 110 5.4 Suggestions for Further Research ...... 113 5.4.1 Symbiotic Relationship between Adaptive Reuse and Sustainability through the Lens of Historic Preservation...... 113 5.4.2 Creating a Sense of Place in Historic Architecture Using Other Types of Communal Living Environments as the Model...... 114 5.4.3 Diversifying the Geographic Limitations...... 115 5.5 Final Reflections ...... 116 5.6 Conclusions ...... 117 APPENDICES ...... 118

A. HUMAN SUBJECTS APPROVAL ...... 118

B. FSU BEHAVIORAL CONSENT FORM ...... 120

C. COVER LETTER TO HOSPITALITY HOUSE RESIDENTS ...... 121

D. COVER LETTER TO HOSPITALITY HOUSE STAFF ...... 122

E. EMAIL SCRIPT TO INTERVIEWEES ...... 123

F. EMAIL SCRIPT TO HOSPITALITY HOUSES ...... 124

G. TRANSCRIPT OF EARLY TELEPHONE CONTACT WITH INTERVIEWEES ...... 125

H. INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR THE OWNER AND THE DEVELOPER ...... 127

I. INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR THE PASTORS ...... 130

J. QUESTIONNAIRE FOR HOSPITALITY HOUSE RESIDENTS ...... 133

K. QUESTIONNAIRE FOR HOSPITALITY HOUSE STAFF ...... 137

L. EXPANDED SUMMARY OF INTERVIEW: ELANE LEE-ISA ...... 141

M. RENDERING OF RAYFIELD PLACE CONDOMINIUMS ...... 153

N. EXPANDED SUMMARY OF INTERVIEW: THE REVERENDS LEWIS

AND ELKINGTON ...... 154

O. PHOTOGRAPH: ORIGINAL STAINED GLASS WINDOW ...... 163

P. EXPANDED SUMMARY OF INTERVIEW: CATHERINE SLOSS JONES ...... 164

vii

Q. PHOTOGRAPH: INTERIOR OF 32ND STREET BAPTIST CHURCH ...... 173

REFERENCES ...... 174

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ...... 178

viii

LIST OF TABLES

4.1 Primary residence locations for survey participants...... 60

4.2 Age distribution of children residing in hospitality house with parent(s) who participated in the study...... 61

4.3 Hours per day residents spend at their hospitality houses...... 62 4.4 Residents estimate their current length of stay to date in a hospitality house...... 62

4.5 The demographics of the hospitality house staff participants...... 63

4.6 The kitchen space evaluated by residents for overall satisfaction...... 64

4.7 Hospitality house residents rate their overall satisfaction with the bathroom...... 65

4.8 Survey participants’ evaluations of the communal living spaces...... 66

4.9 Hospitality house residents’ perceptions of safety and security as a major consideration when choosing a place to live...... 68

4.10 The issue of privacy is rated highly by hospitality house residents...... 69 4.11 Degree of importance participants placed on feeling “at home” in their hospitality houses...... 70

4.12 Participants rate the importance of having a place of sanctuary...... 73

4.13. The kitchen facility was evaluated by staff members for the overall satisfaction they perceived to be occurring amongst the residents ...... 78

4.14 The interaction among residents using the kitchen space simultaneously was evaluated by staff members...... 78

4.15 Staff members’ perception of resident satisfaction with hospitality house bathrooms...... 79

4.16 Staff members’ perception of resident satisfaction with hospitality house common areas...... 79

4.17 Staff members’ perception of quality of resident interaction in shared common areas...... 80

4.18 Hospitality house staff rated safety and security as a major factor when choosing a place to work and providing house residents with a secure environment...... 80

4.19 Hospitality house staff members’ perceptions of the importance of privacy for residents ...... 81

4.20 Degree of importance perceived by staff members for residents feeling “at home” in their hospitality houses...... 81

4.21 Participants rate the importance of having a place of sanctuary...... 82

LIST OF FIGURES

2.1 The hierarchy and relationships of historic preservation are illustrated...... 12

2.2 Owens-Thomas house photographed at the turn of the 19th century. (Source: http://telfair.org/museum-events/slavery-and-freedom-in-savannah- symposium/ retrieved12/7/12)...... 14

2.3 The Owens-Thomas house shown in 1941. Notice that two of the shutters on the right are missing, indicating that the house was beginning to fall into disrepair. (Source: Historic American Buildings Survey)...... 14

2.4 This is a current photograph of the Owens-Thomas house. The missing shutters were replaced and new shutters were added to the second the floor in the 1950’s. As a conservation project, this addition has been embraced by the Telfair Trust as part of the building’s history. (Source: tripwow.tripadvisor .com retrieved 12/7/12)...... 15

2.5 The neglected Mount Vernon is pictured as it appeared when acquired by the Mount Vernon Ladies Association in 1858, showing architectural features that were added after Washington's death. (Source: Clements Library, University of Michigan)...... 17

2.6 The restored home of the first president of the United States. After undergoing an extensive restoration, Mount Vernon is now a preservation project funded by the Mount Vernon Ladies Association. (Source: George Washington’s Mount Vernon by Robert Dalzell, Oxford University Press, 1998)...... 17

2.7 The horse and buggy delivery wagon next to the grocery store references the era of this photograph. (Source: International Journal of Architectural Heritage)...... 19

2.8 David Trachtenberg, AIA, is the architect and developer of the Rose Street Townhouses. The “Rose Grocery” sign was added due to the original glass store front being sacrificed to make room for garage entrance doors. (Source: International Journal of Architectural Heritage)...... 19

2.9 Façade of the Ronald McDonald House in Richmond, Virginia. The historical façade cannot be altered; however the city has allowed a new kitchen addition onto the back of the house and a fire escape.(Source: www.TonyGiammarino .com retrieved 12/7/12)...... 34

2.10 The original parlor is now the reception room and features a small desk for check-in. There is also a large sofa facing the fireplace for the incoming family to sit and rest while the paperwork is completed. (Source: www.Tony Giammarino.com retrieved 12/7/12)...... 35

2.11 The living room is furnished with modern furniture designed for comfort and a large television. The original piece of art hanging over the mantel features the iconic large red clown shoe worn by Ronald McDonald (Source: Author, taken 10/11/12)...... 35

2.12 The traditional residential design of new kitchen is in keeping with the turn of the century architecture of the house. (Source: www.TonyGiammarino.com retrieved 12/7/12)...... 36

2.13 The nine pantries with locks represent one for each of the nine bedrooms (family units) occupying the Richmond hospitality house. (Source: www.TonyGiammarino.com retrieved 12/712)...... 37

2.14 The Richmond Ronald McDonald House is located directly on the historically significant and nationally recognized Monument Avenue. (Source: richmondvamls.net)...... 39

3.1 This study has sought to establish a relationship between the cultural, societal and individual benefits reaped as a result of preserving historic architecture...... 43

3.2 This study has sought to establish points of agreement and tension that exist when repurposing a building with history for a new use...... 44

3.3 The 32nd Street Baptist photographed in 1945. The Church suffered financially during the Great Depression and World War II (Source: Birmingham Public Library)...... 47

3.4 Map illustrating the church’s geographical relationship to St. Vincent’s Hospital (Source: Google Maps)...... 48

M.1 The SAS architectural firm produced this rendering for a proposed condominium project, “Rayfield Place,” that failed to develop. (Source: Artist Unknown. Courtesy of Elane Lee-Isa)...... 153

O.1 Photograph of the only surviving original stained glass window from the church, now displayed at the Civil Rights Institute in Birmingham, Alabama. (Source: Author, taken December 14, 2012)...... 163

Q.1 Detail of interior brick arch located on the ground floor. (Source: Photographer unknown. (Source: Photographer unknown. Courtesy of Sloss Real Estate Company) ...... 173

xii

ABSTRACT

Many historic buildings that were once full of life and activity now stand vacant. The

urban fabric is forever changed when those abandoned buildings are demolished, and part of the

community’s shared cultural and architectural history is lost. As a hypothetical model of historic

preservation achieved through adaptive reuse, the former 32nd Street Baptist Church in

Birmingham, Alabama, has served as the site location for this study. Repurposing this

historically significant edifice may help to preserve the work of a celebrated architect, and the

narrative of the Civil Rights Movement in the United States. This study seeks to respectfully

assign a new purpose to this landmark structure while commemorating its past.

Three realms of inquiry are brought together for the purposes of this study. Firstly, the

perceptions of study participants regarding adaptive reuse for ecclesiastical architecture are

explored. Secondly, this study seeks to identify the sense of place qualities necessary to promote

health and well-being in a temporary communal living environment; and lastly, the intersections

of these issues are investigated to reveal possible areas of agreement and tension between

adaptive reuse and sense of place goals within that environment. The hypothetical intended use

for this repurposed architecture is a hospital-associated hospitality house. This function has been

selected because of the similar community outreach mission it shares with the former church,

and the proximity of the site location to a regional hospital. The philanthropic purpose of a

hospitality house is to provide patients and their families with a residential home base when they experience a medical crisis, or must receive medical treatment far away from their primary home. In addition to providing shelter, hospitality houses may also offer food, transportation, counseling, and emotional support to their residents.

xiii

This study uses a qualitative questionnaire methodology that is guided by a framework

developed by Fritz Steele (1981) to inquire about sense of place issues with hospitality house

residents and staff. In addition, community stakeholders that are associated with the

neighborhood and/or the former church were interviewed to understand their perspectives and

priorities regarding the adaptive reuse of the church building. The subsequent findings have

provided insights about the relationships that exist between historic preservation and creating a

“home-away-from-home” environment for an at-risk population.

The results of this study indicate that meaningful historic architecture may contribute to

the well-being and “at-home” atmosphere desired by hospital-associated hospitality houses and

similar entities, while stipulating that the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems are

modern, and that interior finishes promote a healthy environment. This study’s findings have led

the author to conclude that respectfully repurposing historic architecture includes acknowledging the imbued human spirit contributed by past inhabitants, as well as considering the modern needs and desires of the present generation.

xiv

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Many historic buildings that were once full of life and activity now stand vacant. Years of abandonment and neglect have resulted in decay and vandalism, and sometimes the deterioration is past the point of salvation. This condition has negatively impacted the property value and safety of the surrounding community. Government funding for historic preservation is virtually nonexistent in the current economy (Alabama Trust for Historic Preservation, 2012).

The result is that many buildings remain empty until they are no longer structurally sound and must be demolished to ensure the safety of the public. The urban fabric is forever changed and part of the neighborhood’s shared cultural and architectural history is lost (Brand, 1994; Powell,

1999; Steele, 1981). The loss is more significant when the buildings are designated or are included on the National Register of Historic Places. These landmark structures are especially treasured because they are physical records of the past and mark the development of national heritage (Brand, 1994; Diamonstein, 1978; Powell, 1999). In the past, the National Trust for

Historic Places only supported authentic conservation and restoration projects. Due in part to the downturn in the economy and the recognition of embodied energy costs in existing architecture, adaptive reuse has become an acceptable method of preservation as well (Brand, 1994;

Diamonstein, 1978; Powell, 1999).

This thesis will apply the theories and practices of adaptive reuse to a significantly historic church building located in Birmingham, Alabama, but will also consider additional issues. Specifically, quality architectural responses recognize that in some instances, it is the structure itself that is significant; but more often, it is the social and cultural activities that took

place within the building that are worthy of preservation. This concept assigns deep meaning to

the places where human beings dwell and is identified as Sense of Place (Steele, 1981). The

objective of this thesis is to explore the intersections of adaptive reuse and the need for other

qualities - specifically, sense of place - in hopes of understanding and preserving the embedded

humanity within the architecture using the former 32nd Street Baptist Church building as the site location for this study. Chosen for its proximity to the historic church property and for the similarity of mission, which is Christian outreach and service to the community, St. Vincent’s

Hospital will serve as the theoretical client seeking to establish a hospital-associated hospitality house. This study will examine the preservation of ecclesiastical architecture through adaptive reuse; identify imperative sense of place characteristics necessary to promote health and well

being in a hospitality house environment; and explore the intersections of these issues. The hospitality house population has been selected because they are required to live far away from their primary residences while receiving medical treatment, and they are presumably experiencing emotional duress as a result of this event. These circumstances create the need for a home-like, healthy, and nurturing environment.

The intended goals of this research are multifaceted. Generally, this study will attempt to establish a link between the past and present by repurposing a culturally and socially important site in a way that respects the realities of its actual daily use. Specifically, the first goal is to explore hospital-associated hospitality houses as a potential new use for the historically significant landmark building. Hypothetically, this repurposed building could contribute to the revitalization of the blighted Lakeview District in Birmingham, Alabama. The applied preservation method will be adaptive reuse, chosen because of the current degraded state of the building, and also to conserve the embodied energy of the structure so as to adhere to sustainable

construction practices. The second goal of the research project will be to examine the

perceptions and values that hospitality house occupants assign to the elements and qualities that

characterize a sense of place in a temporary communal living environment, and will be guided by

a framework developed by Fritz Steele (1981). Lastly, this study will analyze the resulting

agreements and tensions between adaptive reuse as a method of historic preservation, sense of

place issues and the intersections of these subjects. The findings will be reported through

explanatory text and quantitative tables. Ultimately, the research study’s resulting analysis may

have applicability to other similar projects that attempt to respect the history of a place while

assigning a new and modern purpose to the architecture. Doing so may assist future preservation

projects that aspire to accomplish more than superficial renovations.

1.2 Purpose

The overall purpose of this research based thesis is to honor the past by respectfully repurposing a historically significant building, while also preserving the perceived integrity and value of the original architecture. The research will be guided by existing knowledge obtained from literature, and will explore the characteristics necessary to establish a sense of place for hospitality house residents and the implications of establishing a “home-away-from-home” environment in historic architecture. Through adaptive reuse, old buildings can become socially, culturally, and economically valuable assets to their communities once again, and may also contribute to the well-being of the occupants through the embodied human connection.

1.3 Justification

The rich variety that antiquity offered in the form of Main Street, U.S.A. is being

replaced with homogenized settings that are generally devoid of personality, surprise, or traces of

their own history and cultural development. Repurposing existing architecture protects the urban

3 fabric and conveys a sense of place, permanence, and stability (Brand, 1994; Diamonstein, 1978;

Powell, 1999). The ultimate goal of historic preservation is to breathe life back into a neighborhood, honor the past, and encourage community bonding.

In this economically challenging time for historic preservation, private development is necessary to save at-risk landmark architecture, like the 32nd Street Baptist Church located in

Birmingham, Alabama. Repurposing this structure could spark revitalization in the neighborhood by continually housing more than 50 temporary residents in a hospital-associated hospitality house. The residents and staff of this facility would have access to a pedestrian- friendly community that includes shops, restaurants and entertainment venues.

Neighborhood attachments are closely linked to personal and cultural identity, so it is important to understand the concerns, needs, and desires of current community stakeholders as well as future residents before implementing a preservation project. The author is familiar with

Birmingham and has general knowledge of the culturally rich historic merit of the church building and the surrounding community. Therefore, the intent of this study will be to further research the history of the selected site and use the information gathered to determine if there are architectural features that should be preserved to support community identity and continuity; if there are events of cultural significance that need to be acknowledged within the repurposed building in a meaningful way; if a theoretical hospital-associated hospitality house is in agreement with the original purpose and perceived value of the property according to the community stakeholders; which sense of place characteristics that contribute to well-being are present in a “home-away-from-home” environment; and what perceptions do occupants of hospitality houses hold with regards to staying in a residence with history versus newer construction.

People bond to landmark architecture on a deeper and more nostalgic level than new construction, and buildings can be beloved for their history, familiarity and humanness (Brand,

1995; Powell, 1999). The most successful transformations through adaptive reuse are respectful of the building’s history and surrounding community (Diamonstein, 1978). Affective bonds to places can help inspire action, because people are motivated to seek, stay in, protect and improve places that are meaningful to them. Consequently, these attachments to place can motivate ordinary residents to act collectively to preserve history, protect their heritage, and improve their community. This collaboration can lead to the economic resuscitation of an entire neighborhood and breathe new life into the existing community, in addition to strengthening social and cultural bonds among residents (Smertz, 1982; Brand, 1995).

1.4 Research Questions

This study will focus on three main topics of inquiry: adaptive reuse, sense of place, and the intersection of these two criteria. The research questions have been developed to gather information on these topics as they relate within the context of a historical church building selected for repurposing as a hospital-associated hospitality house.

1.4.1 Primary Research Question

How can historically significant buildings be adaptively reused with integrity and value of original purpose while fostering community and creating a sense of place in a temporary communal residence?

1.4.2 Questions of Adaptive Reuse

1. What historic elements of the project’s case study building must be acknowledged and respected according to the current stakeholders?

1a. What is the historical background and perspective of this space?

1b. What are the unique visual identifiers of this architecture?

1c. What architectural features should be saved or re-created?

1d. How can the history of a place be incorporated into a new design in a

meaningful way?

1.4.3 Questions of Sense of Place

2. What elements of the built environment contribute to a sense of place for hospital associated hospitality houses according to staff and residents of such environments?

2a. What is the perceived value of these elements within a temporary shelter?

2b. How can these elements be incorporated into a design solution which seeks to

create a new residential communal living space?

3. What intangible qualities contribute to a sense of place for hospital associated hospitality houses according to staff and residents of such environments?

3a. What is the perceived value of these qualities within a temporary shelter?

3b. How can these elements be formulated into design criteria that seeks to

create a new hospital-associated hospitality house?

1.4.4 Questions of Intersections of Adaptive Reuse and Sense of Place

4. What intersections and contrasts exist between the historical aspects of the architecture, adaptive reuse goals, and creating a sense of place as perceived by the study’s stakeholders?

4a.What criteria are used by stakeholders when evaluating an historical building for

adaptive reuse purposes? What criteria, if any, are discounted or ignored?

4b. In what ways do stakeholders seek to resolve the conflicts often presented

between respect for the history of a building and its contextual meaning within

1.5 Limitations and Assumptions

To limit the study to a manageable scope, only the major spaces located within most hospitality houses have been researched as they relate to historic preservation and sense of place issues. Those spaces include a common area, a place of sanctuary, a group kitchen, bathrooms and private bedrooms.

This thesis has limited its inquiry into the sense of place issues of safety, security, privacy, social contact, and personalization as they relate to creating a home-like environment in a hospital-associated hospitality house through repurposing an existing building. Other valuable human experience issues that could be explored relative to adaptive reuse and sense of place, such as sustainability and ownership, were not a part of this research.

It is assumed that the Lakeview District community located within the city limits of

Birmingham, Alabama will support the preservation of the 32nd Street Baptist Church due to its recent nomination as a Landmark Building on the National Register of Historic Places. This study did not seek to inquire about other possible uses for this structure.

1.6 Definition of Terms

• Historic preservation – the act or process of applying measures necessary to sustain the existing form, integrity, and materials of an historic property (National Park Service, 2013).

• National Register of Historic Places – the official list of preservation worthy architecture published by The National Trust for Historic Preservation (National Park Service, 2013).

• The National Trust for Historic Preservation – created under the jurisdiction of the National Park Service to protect national landmark architecture (National Park Service, 2013).

• Embodied energy - represents the total amount of energy that was used to produce materials during the manufacturing process and then transport them to their final destination (Hugh, 1991).

• Conservation – the act or process of protecting a property from further change, loss, or damage (National Park Service, 2013).

• Restoration - the act or process of accurately depicting the form, features, and character of a property as it appeared at a particular period of time by means of the removal of features from other periods in its history and reconstruction of missing features from the restoration period. The limited and sensitive upgrading of mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems and other code-required work to make properties functional is appropriate within a restoration project (National Park Service, 2013).

• Adaptive reuse or Rehabilitation - the act or process of making possible a compatible use for a property through repair, alterations, and additions while preserving those portions or features which convey its historical, cultural, or architectural values (National Park Service, 2013).

• Urban fabric – a collection of buildings and streetscapes that create an identifiable image (Brand, 1995).

• Sense of place – the inherent characteristics of a place and the meanings that people attach to them (Steele, 1981).

• Neighborhood/Community place attachment – the identity of the residents is closely linked to the physical manifestations of the area (Powell, 1999).

CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

2.1 Introduction

This review of literature seeks to build an academic foundation for the design criteria and

analysis presented in later chapters, which explores the ramifications of applying adaptive reuse techniques to an historic building while maintaining the perceived integrity and value of its original purpose and instilling a sense of place. A wide range of topics will be discussed that support the proposed design theories. These topics include historic preservation methods, neighborhood place attachment, creating a sense of place, and hospital-associated hospitality houses. These areas of study are linked to form a cohesive program that will inform the redevelopment of a specific historic landmark building and the design criteria necessary to repurpose the structure for use as a hospital-associated hospitality house.

The key sources for the review of literature include professional journals on the topics of

environmental psychology, social issues, urban planning, and interior design; and books on the

subject of historic preservation and adaptive reuse. Internet search engines are also being used to

locate government documents and archival information.

This chapter will begin by defining the origins of historic preservation within the United

States, followed by differentiating the subcategories of restoration, conservation, and adaptive

reuse. The topics of neighborhood place attachment and sense of place are examined to

understand the significant role that architecture plays in creating a sense of belonging and

community identity. This knowledge will be applied holistically to repurpose an historic

landmark structure into a hospital-associated hospitality house and analyze the results of

simultaneously serving adaptive reuse and sense of place goals.

2.2 Historic Preservation

Historic preservation stems from a deep psychological need for security and roots

(Powell, 1999). There is a growing societal recognition that the United States has an

architectural past with as much value, although a shorter history, as that of Europe and the

ancient civilizations (Hugh, 1991). The legislative foundation for historic preservation began

with the Antiquities Act of 1906, which gave the president of The United States the authority to

designate national landmarks on federal property (Diamonstein, 1978). The National Park

Service was created ten years later, which led to the establishment of the National Trust for

Historic Preservation in 1949 (Diamonstein, 1978). The National Trust for Historic Preservation

is a nonprofit and non-governmental organization devoted to the protection and preservation of

historically significant man-made structures, both public and private. Under their jurisdiction, the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 chartered the National Register of Historic Places and charged them with the responsibility of designating architecture, monuments, or landmarks worthy of preservation (National Park Service, 2011).

The momentum of the historic preservation movement was increased during the 1970’s, partially due to the Tax Reform Act of 1976. This landmark legislation provided tax incentives for refurbishing old buildings rather than constructing new ones, and was a natural progression from the preservation legislation of the 1960’s (Powell, 1999). Beginning with the presidency of

Jimmy Carter, federal funding for preservation initiatives increased ten-fold over a period of a few years, while major cities followed suit by creating landmark designation commissions with the power to protect local historic architecture (Powell, 1999).

The historic preservation movement also benefited in the 1970’s from the growing public concern regarding economic and environmental issues. The Organization of Petroleum

Exporting Countries (OPEC) issued oil embargoes against the United States in 1967, 1972, 1973,

1974, and 1979, which brought awareness to the public of the inherent costs associated with the

transportation of goods and services (Corollo, 2011). Every man-made structure has embodied

energy integrated into the original construction cost that is equal to the energy exerted during the

manufacturing and transportation of its materials (Brand, 1995). When a building is demolished,

significant amounts of energy are required to tear down the structure, dispose of the waste, and

the embodied energy of the original architecture is lost forever (Hugh, 1991; Brand, 1995). This

physical reality can sometimes be interpreted in specific ways when influenced by current

cultural thinking. That is, “the oil crisis of the 1970’s provided the backbone to a burgeoning

ecological movement whose principles held that demolition equaled waste” (Powell, 1999, pp. 1-

2). Consequently, a new and symbiotic relationship formed between preservationists and

environmentalists during this time.

In the field of historic preservation, there are dozens of terms used interchangeably and

often incorrectly to describe the various levels and degrees of involvement that are applied when

reclaiming historically significant architecture or other types of landmark structures. The

Department of the Interior defines preservation as the act or process of applying measures

necessary to sustain the existing form, integrity, and materials of an historic property (National

Park Service, 2011). Conservation, Restoration, and Adaptive Reuse are the more specific and preferred vocabulary set forth by the National Trust for Historic Preservation to describe the stage of preservation a property is currently undergoing or the state or condition in which a property will be preserved. Several factors determine the appropriateness of the type of preservation methods employed to rescue historic architecture and are described in the following categories of conservation, restoration and adaptive reuse, as illustrated in Figure 2.1.

HISTORIC PRESERVATION

ADAPTIVE CONSERVATION RESTORATION REUSE

Maintains Historic Returns Historic Property Repurposes Architecture Property in “As Is” to Original Condition for a Modern Use While Condition or Period of Historical Historical Integrity is Significance Respected

Figure 2.1. The hierarchy and relationships of historic preservation are illustrated.

It is possible for a project to pass through many stages of reclamation before reaching

preservation status.

2.2.1 Preservation

When applied to architecture, “preservation means the act of retaining all or any part of a

structure, even if it is moved from its original location” (Austin, 1988, p. 4). The purist

preservation philosophy states “it is better to preserve and do nothing than to repair, better to repair than to restore, and better to restore than to reconstruct” (Venturi and Rauch, 1975, p.11).

However, saving landmark architecture and structures from obliteration is at the core of every school of thought concerning preservation.

2.2.2 Conservation

The term conservation means to keep or protect something from change, loss, or damage

(Powell, 1999). Pure architectural conservationists see historic buildings as a threatened species that need protecting not only from demolition, but also from alteration (Powell, 1999).

Conservation either encourages measures that would protect and maintain buildings in their current state, or would prevent further damage and deterioration to them. Additions or subtractions to the property are not sanctioned once the property enters a conservatorship, and only maintenance to preserve the current condition is recommended. This school of thought maintains that the original design of the building is most desirable, but changes made throughout its history are acceptable and part of the fiber of the architecture (Diamonstein, 1978).

An example of historic conservation is the Owens-Thomas house located in Savannah,

Georgia. The Owens-Thomas house is considered by architectural historians to be one of the finest examples of English Regency architecture in America. Inspired by classical antiquity, this style of architecture takes its name from England’s King George IV who ruled as Prince Regent from 1811 to 1820. The house was designed in 1816 by English architect, William Jay, for local cotton merchant and banker, Richard Richardson. The Marquis de Lafayette, a Revolutionary

War hero, was a guest of the city in 1825 and stayed in the home. In 1830, George Owens, a local planter, congressman, lawyer, and mayor of Savannah, purchased the property for ten thousand dollars. It remained in the Owens family until the 1950’s when Miss Margaret

Thomas, George Owens’ granddaughter, bequeathed it to the Telfair Museum of Art. A National

Historic Landmark since 1976, the stately former residence is now a historic house museum. It boasts a decorative arts collection comprised primarily of Owens family furnishings, along with

American and European objects dating from 1750-1830. The site also includes a beautiful

English inspired parterre garden and an original carriage house that contains one of the earliest intact urban slave quarters in the South. The photographs in Figures 2.2, 2.3, and 2.4 document the minor changes that have occurred at the Owens-Thomas house since the late 1800’s to the present day.

Figure 2.2. Owens-Thomas house photographed at the turn of the 19th century. (Source: http://telfair.org/museum-events/ slavery-and-freedom-in-savannah-symposium/ retrieved 12/7/12).

Figure 2.3. The Owens-Thomas house shown in 1941. Notice that two of the shutters on the right are missing, indicating that the house was beginning to fall into disrepair. (Source: Historic American Buildings Survey).

Figure 2.4. This is a current photograph of the Owens-Thomas house. The missing shutters were replaced and new shutters were added to the second the floor in the 1950’s. As a conservation project, this addition has been embraced by the Telfair Trust as part of the building’s history. (Source: tripwow.tripadvisor.com retrieved 12/7/12).

Unlike historic restoration projects, conservation is considered an acceptable method of preservation when a building is not primarily identified with one specific historical event or one period of ownership. The history of the structure is viewed as one fluid narrative, and the changes made to the building over time add to the color and uniqueness of the architecture

(Gause, 1996). According to the Institute of Historic Building Conservation in the United

Kingdom, the goal of conservation is to maintain the status quo by prolonging the life and

integrity of the architectural character through careful maintenance. Therefore, conservation is

rarely suited to adaptive reuse goals, which may require many changes to accommodate modern

needs.

2.2.3 Restoration

Restoration focuses on the retention of materials from the most significant time in a property's history, while permitting the removal of materials from other periods. Advocates of

restoration seek to authentically restore and preserve every detail of the original structure.

Unfortunately, it is common for landmark buildings to fall into disrepair during times of

economic hardship. A shift in the neighborhood population or the re-location of business centers

can also contribute to the neglect of property maintenance and a downturn in property values

(Austin, 1988).

An example of historic restoration can be seen at Mount Vernon, Virginia. After George

Washington’s death in 1799, the ownership of his beloved Mount Vernon plantation passed

through a series of relatives who either lacked the will or the means to maintain the property.

John Augustine Washington offered the estate for sale in 1848, but the United States government

and the Commonwealth of Virginia declined to purchase the plantation and buildings. Ten years later, the Mount Vernon Ladies Association of the Union acquired the mansion and a portion of the land, rescuing it from a state of disrepair and neglect (Dalzell, 2000). Through a preserved set of architectural drawings and a meticulously kept record of purchase orders, the curators were able to determine the original materials and furnishings that were part of the home when it was the residence of the first president of the United States (Dalzell, 2000). George Washington’s home is first shown in Figure 2.5, as it appeared with changes and additions that had been made since 1799. After undergoing a 100-year restoration process funded entirely by the Mount

Vernon Ladies Association, it has been fully restored and is shown in Figure 2.6. It was designated a National Historic Landmark on December 19, 1960 and added to the National

Figure 2.5. The neglected Mount Vernon is pictured as it appeared when acquired by the Mount Vernon Ladies Association in 1858, showing architectural features that were added after Washington's death. (Source: Clements Library, University of Michigan).

Figure 2.6. The restored home of the first president of the United States. After undergoing an extensive restoration, Mount Vernon is now a preservation project funded by the Mount Vernon Ladies Association. (Source: George Washington’s Mount Vernon by Robert Dalzell, Oxford University Press, 1998).

2.2.4 Adaptive Reuse

Adaptive reuse is the recycling of old buildings to facilitate new functions and activities for which they were not originally intended (Diamonstein, 1978). Adaptation provides a link with the past and respect for the aesthetics and craftsmanship of another time (Austin, 1988) reshaped by changing cultural currents, fluctuating real estate values, and the technological requirements of a modern society (Brand, 1995). Experts in the field suggest that adapted

historic architecture synergizes the original beauty and charm of the structure with modern

technology and usage (Austin, 1988; Brand, 1995; Gause, 1996), enlivening and making historic

spaces serviceable and relevant. Kenneth Powell summarizes this philosophy in this way: “We

should not live in a bright shining new future, any more than we should hide in a comfortable

pastiche of the past. We must inhabit an ever-evolving present, and always be motivated by the

possibilities of change” (Powell, 1999, p.71).

The goal of adaptive reuse is transformation, not conservation or restoration

(Diamonstein, 1978; Powell, 1999). A successful transformation through adaptive reuse can impact the surrounding community socially and economically. Once discouraged by the

National Trust for Historic Preservation, adaptive reuse has become a preservation partner and is considered an acceptable alternative to conservation and restoration when deemed necessary and appropriate by a consensus of experts in the field (Jandl, 1982; Herbers, 1990). Although not a

requirement for adaptive reuse, salvaging a structure of historical significance makes the

building conversion even more beneficial and desirable by preserving a piece of shared history

(Diamonstein, 1978). In a speech to Congress in 1977, then President Jimmy Carter said,

In its land and in its history, a nation finds the things which give it continuity. By preserving places that have special natural, historic, and scientific value, we can insure that our children and grandchildren have a chance to know something of the America that we – and our ancestors – simply took for granted (Carter, 1977, 220.18.2).

The most successful transformations through adaptive reuse are respectful of the

building’s history and mindful of the surrounding community (Diamonstein, 1978). Old

buildings appeal to people on a deeper and more nostalgic level than new construction, and they

are beloved for their history, familiarity and humanness (Brand, 1995; Powell, 1999).

Figures 2.7 and 2.8 exhibit a conscientious adaptive reuse project in Berkeley, California, which has transformed a former neighborhood grocery store into a unique home for two families.

Figure 2.7. The horse and buggy delivery wagon next to the grocery store references the era of this photograph. (Source: International Journal of Architectural Heritage).

Figure 2.8. David Trachtenberg, AIA, is the architect and developer of the Rose Street Townhouses. The “Rose Grocery” sign was added due to the original glass store front being sacrificed to make room for garage entrance doors. (Source: International Journal of Architectural Heritage).

Historic architecture contributes complexity, texture, and diversity to the cityscape,

where old and new buildings stand side by side revealing the progression and development of a

community (Diamonstein, 1978; Powell, 1999). Collectively, there is an interaction between a

family of buildings. “The street is an urban living room bounded by buildings that have grown,

changed and modified over time. Old, new, remodeled, and ‘face-lifted,’ they represent a family of buildings and are as interdependent as a human family. As they grow older their functions may change, but their potential for contributing to the overall good remains” (Austin, 1988, p.8).

Observers experience this dialogue as the personality of a neighborhood, but residents recognize it as the familiarity of home, which contributes to the concept of place attachment and sense of place (Steele, 1981). Developing a sense of place helps people identify with their region and with each other, and can lead to more sensitive stewardship and awareness of our cultural history

and natural environment.

2.3 Place Attachment and Sense of Place

Place attachment and a sense of place are critical parts of person-environment

transactions that foster the development of community in all of its physical, social, political, and

economic aspects (Smertz, 1982). Affective bonds to places can help inspire action, because

people are motivated to seek, stay in, protect, and improve places that are meaningful to them.

Consequently, these attachments to place can motivate ordinary residents to act collectively to

preserve history, protect their heritage, and improve their community. This collaboration can

lead to the economic resuscitation of an entire neighborhood and breathe new life into the

existing community (Smertz, 1982; Brand, 1995). The essential ingredients in a successful

neighborhood plan are the community’s hopes, needs, and visions (Smertz, 1982).

Place attachment has a broader scope than sense of place and is rarely acquired in

passing. It usually encompasses entire neighborhoods or small towns along with their

inhabitants, and takes individuals on a journey from “I belong in this place,” to “this place

belongs to me” (Tuan, 1977, p. 275). To know a place well requires long residence and deep

involvement. It is possible to appreciate the visual qualities of a place during a short visit, but to

experience place attachment, one must have interacted with the environment over time (Tuan,

1977). The human history of every member of a community is preserved in the schoolhouse,

corner drug store, swimming pool, and local pub. The neighborhood’s past is enshrined and

lingers in its architectural landmarks (Tuan, 1975).

Community and environmental psychologists Riger and Lavrakas (1981) found two

dimensions of attachment that are communal in nature: first, a sense of bondedness, or feelings

of being a part of one’s neighborhood; and second, a sense of rootedness to the community.

People identify their individual sense of belonging and qualify their place attachment in the

following six ways (McMillan & Chavis, 1986):

• Biographical - being born in and living in a location.

• Spiritual - something felt, rather than created.

• Ideological - living according to moral guidelines for human responsibility to a place.

• Narrative - learning about a place through stories.

• Commoditized - choosing a place based on desirability.

• Dependent - restrained by lack of choice through economic opportunity or dependency on

another person.

If a person’s identity and values are informed by places they deem significant, then it follows that their bonds with those places will impact their engagement in such places, whether it

be to maintain or improve them, respond to changes within them, or simply to remain within

them (Pretty, Chippuer & Bramston, 2003). This is supported by research demonstrating that

residents who are more attached to their community experience higher levels of social cohesion

and fear crime less, and their neighborhoods demonstrate more outward signs of physical

revitalization (Ramati, 1981; Brown, Perkins & Brown, 2003).

Those who are more attached to their neighborhoods are also more likely to invest their time and money into the neighborhood, interact more frequently with neighbors and watch over their communities more diligently. Such activities stem from, and also create further social cohesion, no matter how diverse the community members might otherwise be (Kellogg, 2002;

Brown, Perkins & Brown, 2003).

For most people, attachment to place is often intertwined with their sense of community

(Pretty, Chippuer & Bramston, 2003). A sense of community revolves around feelings of membership or belongingness to a group, including an emotional connection based on shared histories, interests, or concerns (Perkins & Long, 2002), and is at the core of a sense of community. Place attachment can complement a sense of community. Rivlin (1982) found that place attachment to a neighborhood serves as a precondition for the development of a sense of community among neighbors. Moreover, both sense of community and place attachment manifest themselves behaviorally as participation in neighborhood activities and projects (Rivlin,

1982).

However, the sharing of a common neighborhood space by diverse groups does not inevitably lead to a sense of community. A given locality or landscape can hold widely divergent meanings for different individuals or cultures (Gruenewald, 2003). Therefore, it is essential to understand the diverse meanings that a neighborhood holds for its residents in order

to create successful places (Loukaitou-Sideris, 1995). Lowenthal (1979) has suggested that the

past exists as both an individual and collective construct, with shared values and experiences

being important within cultural groups. The whole concept of neighborhood carries special

meaning in most cultures. Group identity is thus closely linked with the history of a place,

creating a sense of place or genius loci. In classical Roman religion, genius locus is identified as

the spirit of a place (Lowenthal, 1979). Such an understanding and spiritual connection to a

place can foster community bonding among all parties who have an emotional stake in that place.

Shared physical perceptions and experiences help people from different cultural backgrounds

fashion a local culture that expresses their unity in a place. The group solidifies its identity

through celebrations and rituals, and residents express their identity spatially through the creation

of vernacular architecture and their use of space (Brandenburg, 1995; Loukaitou-Sideris, 1995).

Such practices can build a sense of community and create new and stronger attachments to place

(Lukas, 1985).

Disruption to place attachment disturbs the sense of continuity in a neighborhood and can occur due to crime, environmental disasters, and relocation. Proposed development projects can be perceived by some community members as a threat to place attachments because of the changes to the physical fabric of the neighborhood (Brown, Perkins & Brown, 2003; Jiven &

Larkham, 2003). Those who feel their relationships to their community places are threatened by

re-development may consequently resist a proposal regardless of its potential value. For some, a

change to the neighborhood signifies an erasure of their history and identity (Brown, Perkins &

Brown, 2003).

Environmental psychologists who study place attachment and identity often focus on

individual experiences and meaning. City planners while focusing on place, tend to examine the

economic and political aspects of a neighborhood (Riger & Lavrakas, 1981). Integrating these approaches to form a holistic perspective is important to understanding the values of a community and how place meanings can be honored and strengthened in the planning and design process (Lukas, 1985).

The term sense of place refers to the way a person relates to their environment and

engages with their surroundings (Steele, 1981). It is possible to feel at home in a temporary

environment if there are objects present or other sensory stimuli, such as a familiar smell, that are

reminiscent of the visitor’s primary residence and evoke a memory (Oldenburg, 1999). Creating

a sense of place with the addition of personal possessions is the most commonly used form of

personalization (Steele, 1981).

Fritz Steele (1981), author of The Sense of Place, suggests that there are six qualities that

create a spirit of space or sense of place. The six qualities are Territory, Tinkering and Products,

Special Furniture, Visible Themes, Traces of Friends, and Boundaries. These qualities have an

interconnection to four basic human needs identified by Steele (1981) as Security, Identity,

Social Contact, and Growth. Together they create a framework that facilitates understanding of

the sense of place concept. Not all qualities are present in each personal space, but combinations

of these elements are universal to most human environments (Steele, 1981). These qualities are

further detailed below, with citations in addition to Steele’s offered where appropriate.

2.3.1 Territory

Human beings have learned to be territorial (Malmberg, 1980). Territoriality is a term

associated with nonverbal communication that refers to how people use space to communicate

ownership/occupancy of areas and possessions (Beebe, Beebe & Redmond, 2008). The owner

behaves differently in their own place, and others will defer and limit their own behavior as well

(Steele, 1981). The actions associated with establishing a personal territory do not necessarily

come from ownership, but stem from a sense of guardianship and belonging (Jackson, 1994).

Just as territory can be an expression of place, so too can physical changes to a built

environment. Steele refers to this process as Tinkering and Products.

2.3.2 Tinkering and Products

Steele (1981) describes tinkering and products as actions that have occurred when a

setting has been built or altered by a resident in an attempt to leave their mark on that place. If

the resident supervised the changes or did the work personally, then the place will hold even more meaning (Steele, 1981). Pioneer psychologist Carl Jung describes the 20-year development of his house, known as The Tower, in the following passage from his book Memories, Dreams,

Reflections:

It gave me a feeling as if I were reborn in stone. It is thus a concretization of the individual process…. Only afterward did I see how all the parts fitted together and that a meaningful form had resulted: a symbol of psychic wholeness (Jung, 1963, pg. 103).

The DIY (Do-It-Yourself) concept popularized in the 20th century speaks to the fulfillment and personal satisfaction associated with creating a structure or an object. Through the creative or rehabilitative process, it is possible to develop a place attachment because of the memories created during the experience. A stakeholder who is very attached to a home after experiencing the tinkering and products phase is less likely to move, thereby strengthening the neighborhood through stability (Kopec, 2009).

2.3.3 Special Furniture

As tools for stable living patterns, pieces of special furniture often become central anchor points for personal spaces (Eshelman & Evans, 2002). People often lay claim to a particular

chair or desk that becomes their special place and the object is recognized by others as belonging

to that person. Public spaces, such as a park bench, or the desk in a classroom may also be

subject to this social rule governing ownership of a specific piece of furniture (Steele, 1981). In

a broader interpretation, entire rooms may also be construed as personal property or sanctuaries

such as a man’s study or a woman’s kitchen (Shamai, 1991). The designation or ownership of a

special piece of furniture or a room is an example of territoriality discussed earlier, and can also

be expressed nonverbally through visual themes.

2.3.4 Visual Themes

A personal place often contains visual displays that indicate a person’s interest, values,

and preferred activities (Steele, 1981). These visual themes can dominate the environment or be

more subtle in presentation. The owner of these items is sharing personal information about

himself with the onlooker and regards this collection as part of their identity (Pretty, Chippuer &

Bramston, 2003). Humans often mark their territories through personalization (Kopec, 2012).

Personalization can positively affect the environmental satisfaction and well-being of individuals

at work and at home, because it demonstrates control over the environment (Wells, 2007).

Women typically personalize more often than men and use artifacts that express relationships,

such as photographs of family members, friends, and pets. Men are more likely to personalize

their space with artifacts associated with status such as diplomas, trophies, and awards (Wells,

2007). Visual themes can also include artifacts that are identified with cultural, religious,

political, or familial relationships, for example, or express a personal passion for a specific

endeavor within the arts or the sporting realm (Tuan, 1977).

2.3.5 Traces of Friends

Closely related to visual themes is the act of displaying traces of friends and family. A

person’s identity is shaped and influenced over time by the relationships formed within a family

unit, in addition to friendships that are chosen and maintained by the individual (Tuan, 1977). A

personal environment will often display photographs of family members and friends, living and

deceased, showing the hierarchy and relationships between the people in the photographs, as

well as representing how the resident of the space fits into that hierarchy (Steele, 1981).

Memorabilia from special events, family vacations, and educational institutions are examples of

artifacts that can also be displayed and fulfill the same purpose (Wells, 2007). These tangible elements are expressions of the human need to attach memories to artifacts and display them for onlookers to experience. To a great extent, these visual representations express a person’s sense of identity (Steele, 1981).

2.3.6 Boundaries

The most potent personal places have distinct boundaries, so that there is a clear line between a personal environment and all other spaces. Boundaries can be manifested by visual barriers such as walls and doors, or by less physical expressions such as a person’s need for quiet time at home that is respected by other members of the family (Tuan, 1977). Ownership is not a pre-requisite for establishing boundaries (Jackson, 1994). The caretakers of a grand mansion may experience a high level of place attachment and possess the characteristics of an owner by limiting access while protecting and maintaining the property. Conversely, absentee landlords do not necessarily feel place attachment to their property or the need to establish boundaries, even though they are the legitimate owners of the property. Ownership by one person does not make a setting a personal place (Steele, 1981).

According to Steele (1981), the six qualities detailed above that create a spirit of space or sense of personal place are territory, tinkering and products, special furniture, visual themes, traces of friends, and boundaries. These qualities help to fulfill and support the four basic human needs of security, sense of identity, social contact, and personal growth. It is important to understand these four needs because they are universally common to human beings in most social, economic, and cultural environments. These elements are discussed in greater detail below and the relationships that exist between them are explored.

2.3.7 Shelter and Security

Shelter provides a home base for self-protection and is the foundation for establishing

feelings of security and personal safety (Maslow, 1954). Human beings need to feel secure

about their physical body and well-being, as well as other aspects of their lives including their

resources, employment, morality, family, health, and personal property (Maslow, 1954). Shelter

is a refuge from the stresses of daily life and provides a safe haven for rejuvenation. People will

establish their territory in a place where they feel safe and will surround themselves with

personal possessions to demonstrate a sense of belonging through personalization (visual themes

and traces of friends), and lay claim to pieces of special furniture or a room to establish

ownership and set boundaries (Steele, 1981).

2.3.8 Sense of Identity

The concept of home is an experience between an individual and an environment forming

a psychological construct and is central to developing a sense of identity (Korpela, 1992). Bonds

and memories are formed and deep meaning is assigned; however, home is a state of mind rather

than a physical place (Korpela, Hartig, Kaiser & Fuhrer, 2001). An emotional attachment to

place reinforces a sense of identity through relationships and shared experiences with family,

friends, and the community at large. Identifying with a place contributes to a sense of

distinctiveness and high self-esteem (Steele, 1981).

One way human beings expresses their sense of identity is through personalization, which demonstrates the physical aspects of identity (Wells, 2007). Research indicates that people are more comfortable in interior spaces that are decorated with their personal belongings than those that are not (Wells, 2007). Creating visual displays of memorabilia such as souvenirs from traveling experiences, evidence of personal relationships presented in framed photographs, and themes relating to religious icons and symbols, for example, are the delivery method most commonly used to communicate information about the individual’s identity to themselves and to other people (Steele, 1981). Personalization is the first function used to define personal places.

2.3.9 Social Contact

A personal place allows the occupant to control social contact with other people. Having

a sense of control is crucial to the well-being of humans (Peterson, Maier & Seligman, 1993).

Personal control within an environment relates to the freedom of actions, as well as the type and

level of stimulation to which a person is subjected. Members of western cultures equate their

personal space with personal freedom, which allows them the ability to express themselves as

individuals in a safe environment (Hockey & James, 2003). The need for privacy and the ability

to control access to personal spaces is essential, and a sense of helplessness can develop over

time if this fundamental need is not met (Peterson, Maier & Seligman, 1993). When a person

experiences feelings of prolonged helplessness, it can lead to the creation of physical or

psychological barriers, depression, and social withdrawal.

Appropriate social contact is critical to establish and maintain a support system of family,

friends, and professional relationships, while developing a sense of identity, and learning cultural

customs. A home is rarely experienced without the companionship of others (Gibb, Coles,

Heimberg, 2005); however, the key is the ability to control access by establishing a territory with

boundaries (Steele, 1981).

2.3.10 Personal Growth

According to Maslow’s (1954) theory of hierarchical needs, it is necessary for human

beings to feel safe and secure in their environments before they are able to eventually evolve to

the level where self-actualization and personal growth can be realized. In order to create a safe

place of refuge where they can dwell, humans will stake out territories and establish boundaries.

Further, they exercise control over their environments by restricting social contact within their space to those with whom they feel safe. When these basic needs have been met, personal places are used as a stimulus for individual growth and to develop a sense of personal identity. To stimulate personal growth, a place must be dynamic and ever-changing, rather than static and unyielding. Human beings cannot evolve and mature if the status quo is maintained (Steele,

1981).

Skills and talents are routinely developed within personal spaces and can contribute to personal growth (Steele, 1981). Disseminating information and acquiring new skills are personal growth experiences for the teacher and the student. Simultaneously, family bonds and friendships can be strengthened during the process. Opportunities to share accomplishments acquired through ‘tinkering and products’ allows the stakeholder to express pride in their surroundings, as well as possibly influence the personal growth of others. Living in a communal setting, whether it is a nuclear family or a community, offers the opportunity for each individual to bring their particular skill set into the environment and utilize them for the betterment of the group.

The quantity of existing research on the subjects of place attachment and sense of place is

vast. The consensus of the authors whose research is presented in this review of literature is that

people feel more secure and develop a sense of identity through experience and knowledge of a particular place. Place attachment emerges through knowledge of the people, history, and geography of a place after living there for an extended time. Memories of personal and cultural experiences create a sense of belonging or rootedness and help form bonds between people and

places.

It is possible to create a sense of place in a new and different location if some of the

elements and qualities, such as privacy and personalization, of the primary home environment

are present (Steele, 1981; Oldenburg, 1999; Kopec, 2009). This information can be especially

significant when designing interiors for people who are displaced either by choice or by

circumstance. A student living in a dormitory away from home while attending school or a

traveling salesperson staying in various hotels would be examples of persons who are displaced

voluntarily. People who must leave their primary residences due to circumstances beyond their

control seek care and refuge in places such as homeless shelters, foster homes, hospitals, and

hospital-associated hospitality houses.

2.4 Hospital-Associated Hospitality Houses

The concept of hospital-associated hospitality houses is relatively new. The first facility

in the United States of America began in 1974 when Fred Hill, the quarterback at the time for the

Philadelphia Eagles football franchise, had a child diagnosed with leukemia. During his

daughter’s treatment, he and his wife noticed other parents sleeping in the waiting rooms and

eating out of the vending machines. Those parents lived too far away from home to commute

back and forth to the hospital on a daily basis. With the support of his teammates and a

partnership formed with the local McDonald’s restaurant, the first Ronald McDonald House

opened on October 15, 1974 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and is known internationally as the

“House that Love Built” (McLeod, 2003).

Although each hospital-associated hospitality house has been created independently and

has its own story to tell, including those that are recognized as part of a single entity such as

Ronald McDonald House Global Charities (McLeod, 2003), one of the primary shared goals is to

reduce the stress and tension attributed to the medical crisis surrounding a family by providing

them with lodging and non-medical services in a comfortable and restful atmosphere. Their mission is to promote the healing process in caring, emotionally supportive, home-like environments with dignity and integrity, and without regard to financial resources (Jackson,

2012). The houses are designed to provide a temporary place to live while a loved one is

undergoing medical treatment or rehabilitation in a location far from the caregiver’s primary

residence. Hospital-associated hospitality houses also provide residents with opportunities to

meet other individuals coping with similar circumstances in a positive environment where

information and support can be shared. Caring bonds are often established as a result of

cohabitating in a friendly “home-away-from-home” atmosphere (McLeod, 2003).

Hospitality houses also strive to incorporate the commonly accepted components of a

healing space that can be achieved through architecture. Those elements include providing

access to nature, light, good air quality, and privacy; pleasant or positive distractions; and the

reduction of environmental stressors such as unnecessary noise, and toxic or harmful substances

(Ananth, 2008). Aroma, music, color, artwork, and a home-like environment have also been

proven through research to support an optimal healing space (Ananth, 2008).

Communal homes are shared by extended family groups living together, as well as

unrelated groups of people sharing a common need or goal. Communal living arrangements

include family compounds, college dormitories, military barracks, and religious groups such as

monasteries. In contrast, non-communal residences are limited in membership to the nuclear

family (Altman and Chemers, 1980). Hospital sponsored hospitality homes are typically

communal in nature and routinely bring unrelated people together to share a space, but the

degree to which spaces are shared varies a great deal from house to house. This can be attributed

to the fact that a wide variety of building types are currently being used for hospitality houses,

which can vary by size, location, architectural style, and age of the property (McLeod, 2003).

Due to the fact that hospital-associated hospitality house must be conveniently located

near the hospital they serve, many such communal residences are created from existing

architecture and have been adaptively repurposed to make them safe and habitable for residents.

Hospitals located near urban centers are especially prone to be pro-preservation minded due to

the expense of new construction compared to the cost of adaptive reuse, the shortage of available building sites in established downtown areas, plus the benefit of being able to create a home-like environment in a building with a human connection or history.

As part of this review of literature, the author visited the Ronald McDonald House located in Richmond, Virginia, to observe and discuss the facility with the administration and the staff. This location has been transformed from a nine bedroom, single-family residence built in

1911 into a multi-family hospitality house associated with The Children’s Hospital of Virginia

Commonwealth University. The house has also served as a dormitory for nursing students and as a nursing home prior to becoming a Ronald McDonald House in 1980. Located on historic

Monument Avenue in Richmond and designated as part of a local historic district, the house

must conform to strict architectural guidelines and maintain its original Federal-inspired façade

as shown in Figure 2.9.

Figure 2.9. Façade of the Ronald McDonald House in Richmond, Virginia. The historical façade cannot be altered; however the city has allowed a new kitchen addition onto the back of the house and a fire escape. (Source: www.TonyGiammarino.com retrieved 12/7/12).

The board of directors of the Richmond charity mandates that it is equally important to

maintain the original interior architectural features of the communal residence as well as the

exterior. Included in these unique features are patterned hardwood floors, wainscoting,

chandeliers, and multiple working fireplaces as shown in Figures 2.10 and 2.11. In this author’s

opinion based on personal observation and supported by conversations with the staff, these

residential characteristics coupled with soft furniture and warm rugs (see Figures 2.10 and 2.11),

contribute to a sense of place or “home-away-from-home” environment for the temporary residents. By creating gathering places and areas of social contact, the architecture provides a

34 sense of stability, security, and shelter from the outside world. Collectively, the physical environment they have created is considered homey and a peaceful place of refuge during stressful times.

Figure 2.10. The original parlor is now the reception room and features a small desk for check-in. There is also a large sofa facing the fireplace for the incoming family to sit and rest while the paperwork is completed. (Source:www.TonyGiammarino.com retrieved 12/7/12).

Figure 2.11. The living room is furnished with modern furniture designed for comfort and a large television. The original piece of art hanging over the mantel features the iconic large red clown shoe worn by Ronald McDonald. (Source: Author, taken October 11, 2012).

The Richmond hospital-associated hospitality house may appear to be rooted solely in the

past; however, it has recently been gifted with a new multi-workstation kitchen pictured in

Figure 2.12, which features two ranges, refrigerators, dining tables, sinks, and dishwashers. The

space plan allows for multiple people to use the area simultaneously for food preparation and

clean up, while also fostering a sense of community and normalcy in the lives of the residents,

according to the kitchen renovation designer and project manager, Tom Holton (personal

communication, October 11, 2012).

Figure 2.12. The traditional residential design of new the kitchen is in keeping with the turn of the century architecture of the house. (Source:www.TonyGiammarino.com retrieved 12/7/12).

The new kitchen also incorporates a simple deterrent to petty theft that can be a problem in a communal living environment, according to staff members of the house. Individual pantries with locks are now provided to discourage food pilfering and are shown in Figure 2.13. Cork and chalk boards are also visible in Figure 2.13, and are a frequently used method of communication between the residents and the staff.

Figure 2.13. The nine pantries with locks represent one for each of the nine bedrooms (family units) occupying the Richmond hospitality house. (Source: www.TonyGiammarino.com retrieved 12/7/12).

According to the house operations manager at the Richmond Ronald McDonald House, all of the problems that exist in everyday society can also be found to some degree within their resident population (personal communication, October 11, 2012). One of the challenges, apart from theft, currently facing the staff members is the frequent personality clashes between different family units. In the recent past, the house was used primarily by lower income families from the United States, but now middle class and international families are seeking shelter there as well. Differences in socio-economic backgrounds and cultural norms can be sources of conflict, so the manager stresses the importance of having a common area large enough to entertain group social activities that seek to establish common bonds, promote understanding, and encourage friendships. In Richmond, they often have large family-style meals provided by volunteers and sponsor family friendly events such as movie and game nights.

Another ongoing problem within their hospitality house culture is that the longer a resident stays in the property, the more territorial they become. Objects such as computers and dishes, as well as entire rooms, can be viewed as personal possessions and personal spaces.

Since bedrooms are not of equal size, residents may be asked to give up their room and move

into another when a larger family comes to stay, and most are unwilling to do so amicably. It is

the opinion of the daily operations manager that it would be better if all of the bedrooms were of

equal size so that parity could be achieved (personal communication, October 11, 2012).

Privacy is also an issue when people live in a communal environment. The Richmond

Ronald McDonald House lacks a place to meditate, pray, exercise, meet with a counselor, or

entertain a personal guest that is not located within a bedroom. Furthermore, due to the fact that

the house has nine bedrooms, but only 5 full bathrooms, residents are forced to share a bathroom

with another family when the house is at full occupancy. Scheduling conflicts, modesty issues,

grooming habits, and cleaning the facilities (or lack of cleaning) can contribute to disagreements

and negative feelings among the residents. The Richmond staff suggests that the problem of

insufficient private bathroom facilities could be easily resolved if space allowed; however, their historic architecture prevents the addition of the square footage necessary to solve the problem sufficiently.

While the challenges of creating a harmonious communal living environment among residents are numerous, there is still another important issue that represents tension at the Ronald

McDonald House in Richmond, Virginia. Noticeably missing from the household effects, décor, and displays is any historical information concerning the specific history of the house and its previous owners, its nationally recognizable address on Monument Avenue, or the landmark status of the neighborhood historic district. To further illustrate the significance of this unique geographical location, it is important to know that Monument Avenue is a premier American

example of the Grand Avenue city planning style first made popular in France during Napoleon’s

reign (Dabney, 1976). Between 1890 and 1925, Monument Avenue exploded with

architecturally significant houses, churches, and apartment buildings. A tree-lined grassy mall

divides the east and west-bound sides of the street and is dotted by statues memorializing famous

Virginian participants in the Civil War including Robert E. Lee, J.E.B. Stuart who is shown in

Figure 2.14, Jefferson Davis, and Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson (Dabney, 1976). Monument

Avenue is also listed on the National Register of Historic Places as a National Historic Landmark

District. In 2007, the American Planning Association, a professional organization representing the field of city and regional planning, named Monument Avenue one of the 10 Great Streets in

The United States. The avenue was selected for its historic architecture, urban form, quality of residential and religious architecture, diversity of land uses, public art and integration of multiple modes of transportation (Dabney, 1976).

Figure 2.14. The Richmond Ronald McDonald House is located directly on the historically significant and nationally recognized Monument Avenue. (Source: richmondvamls.net).

When questioned about the historical aspects of the property, the manager from the

Ronald McDonald House in Richmond said that she and the staff, with the support of the board

of directors, have decided that it would be best to totally disregard and ignore the history of the

area (personal communication, October 11, 2012). The racially inflammatory issues that were a

part of the social culture in Virginia during the Civil War era, such as slave ownership and white

supremacy, could potentially be offensive to their residents. It was their contention that if someone wants to seek out that type of historical information, then it is their individual right to do so away from the property, but they will not promote or support the subject within the house.

Others would disagree with this policy and advocate that knowledge is powerful and that human beings cannot know where they are going unless they understand where they have been

(Santayana, 1905). Ignoring or hiding historical facts does not protect people, but rather promotes ignorance and is a missed opportunity to learn from the past (Santayana, 1905). In the

opinion of this author, both positive and negative aspects of history contribute to collective

cultural heritage, and therefore, freely belong to everyone. Embracing the past would enhance

the uniqueness and identity of the house, and promote cultural awareness and sensitivity among

the staff and residents.

2.5 Summary

This review of literature has yielded through research an academic foundation that

advocates the adaptive reuse of a landmark church building for the purpose of creating a

hospital-associated hospitality house, while maintaining the perceived integrity and value of its

original purpose and history. Since many hospital-associated hospitality houses are created from

existing architecture due to their need to be located near the medical facilities they serve,

adaptive reuse is an important preservation partner and may serve the needs of the hospital well.

Historic preservation protocol set forth by the National Trust for Historic Places suggests that

adaptive reuse is a sustainable and viable alternative to the more traditional methods of

conservation and restoration, and can be effectively prescribed as a means of preserving shared

local history, fostering neighborhood place attachment, and creating a sense of place. Historic architecture can conjure a sense of nostalgia and is considered to be warmer, friendlier, and

posses more home-like qualities than new construction (Brand, 1995; Powell, 1999). These qualities contribute to an ideal environment for a hospitality house, the goals of which include creating a place to rejuvenate and rest in a family-friendly and welcoming space. If the idea of home is embodied in the architecture (Steele, 1981), it follows that the concept of home is also closely linked with a sense of place.

Human beings seek to establish a sense of place in their primary residences, as well as places where they must dwell while living away from those primary residences. Hospitality houses encourage informality, bonding, personalization, and tranquility among families and caretakers of patients in an effort to create a “home-away-from-home” atmosphere.

These areas of study are considered in turn within this chapter to suggest that there is an interconnection between buildings with an established human history and sense of place issues, and also to exemplify the importance of repurposing historical architecture thoughtfully and respectfully according to its past.

CHAPTER THREE

METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

Building projects face a variety of issues and goals for their designs that often seem to compete with one another. For example, communities lose a part of their visual identity and a piece of their collective cultural history when a landmark building has been demolished and replaced with a modern structure. As discussed in Chapter Two, historic preservation and adaptive reuse strategies seek to avoid this loss. Historic preservation projects could rejuvenate pride of ownership within a community, spark additional neighborhood improvements, and encourage people to gather socially (Diamonstein, 1978; Schmertz, 1982; Gause, 1996; Powell,

1999). If the structure cannot be revitalized for the original constructed purpose, then the integrity of the building could still be preserved and respected by repurposing it for another use.

By honoring the past, these authentic examples of regional architecture could become economic and social assets to the community once again.

Chapter Two also identified that landmark architecture could provide a psychological sense of place. There has been a modern trend in industrialized countries towards characterless settings that have no special personality or distinguishing spirit. The rich variety that antiquity offered in the form of Main Street has been replaced with homogenized settings that are generally devoid of personality, surprise, or traces of their own history and development. In the

United States, residential neighborhoods, fast food restaurants, and retail shopping chains have wiped out the regional differences in architecture and building materials (Steele, 1981). To summarize Fritz Steele, author of A Sense of Place, place attachment and the sense of belonging

42 to a neighborhood gives way to indifference when unique and recognizable architecture has been replaced with homogenous structures or nothing at all (1981).

It is not a forgone conclusion that all historically preserved buildings may offer a sense of place to their users in the contemporary sense, especially if they have been repurposed. This concept has raised questions as illustrated in Figure 3.1. For example, can adaptive reuse and sense of place coexist within a project, serving both issues well?

Why does this matter and how could this information add to the body of knowledge?

Human history is lost when historic architecture is demolished and bonds to place are diminished

Urban centers have an abundance of Adaptive Re-use is sustainable and unoccupied and outdated buildings that preserves the embodied sense of place need to be repurposed, rather than building in the architecture while repurposing new new structures outside of city centers the structure for a modern use

Hospitals seek a home-away-from-home environment close in proximity for caregivers who must temporarily live away from their primary residence.

The research will seek to identify The research will seek to identify the if the original purpose and history elements and qualities that contribute of a place should be a consideration to creating a sense of place in a hospital- when repurposing landmark buildings. . associated hospitality house

Figure 3.1. This study has sought to establish a relationship between the cultural, societal, and individual benefits reaped as a result of preserving historic architecture.

3.2 Research Questions

The research questions were focused on the three main topics of inquiry of adaptive reuse, sense of place, and the intersection of these two criteria. The first topic examined the perceived value of adaptively repurposing the study’s existing church building through the lens of its historical significance within the community. The second topic explored the state of living

43 in a hospital-associated hospitality house, and sought to identify elements and qualities of the built and non-built environment that contributed to the establishment of a sense of place, which may be important to families living with stressful circumstances away from their primary residences. Lastly, the results from the first two topics of inquiry will likely yield information regarding the relationships, intersections, and contrasts that exist between adaptive reuse and sense of place when applied to the study’s historical location, the 32nd Street Baptist Church in

Birmingham, Alabama, and its intended new use as a hospital-associated hospitality house.

This study’s exploration of the intersections that exist between historic preservation through adaptive reuse, sense of place and the case study’s intended use, hospitality houses, has been illustrated in Figure 3.2.

Human history is preserved in old architecture and can be reborn through adaptive reuse

Urban hospitals are located The embodied human spirit of In established areas often near Preservation Vacant and abandoned buildings historic buildings can create a sense of place through familiarity and nostalgia ? Hospitality Sense of Houses Place Hospitality houses seek to create a sense of place A sense of place while remaining in close connects human beings proximity to the hospitals to their environment that they serve

A home-away-from-home environment is the goal of hospitality houses to promote health and well-being for their residents

Figure 3.2. This diagram illustrates the relationship between the three realms of inquiry explored in this study and their intersections.

3.2.1 Primary Research Question

How can a historically significant building be adaptively reused with integrity and value of original purpose while fostering community and creating a sense of place in a temporary communal residence?

3.2.2 Questions of Adaptive Reuse

1. What historic elements of the project’s case study building must be acknowledged and respected according to the current community stakeholders?

1a. What is the historical background and perspective of this space?

1b. What are the unique visual identifiers of this architecture?

1c. What architectural features should be saved or re-created?

1d. How can the history of a place be incorporated into a new design in a

meaningful way?

3.2.3 Questions of Sense of Place

2. What elements of the built environment contribute to a sense of place for hospital-associated hospitality houses according to staff and residents of such environments?

2a. What is the perceived value of these elements within a temporary shelter?

2b. How can these elements be incorporated into a design solution which seeks to

create a new residential communal living space?

3. What intangible qualities contribute to a sense of place for hospital-associated hospitality houses according to staff and residents of such environments?

3a. What is the perceived value of these qualities within a temporary shelter?

3b. How can these elements be formulated into design criteria that seek to

create a new hospital-associated hospitality house?

3.2.4 Questions of Intersections of Adaptive Reuse and Sense of Place

4. What intersections and contrasts exist between the historical aspects of the architecture,

adaptive reuse goals, and creating a sense of place as perceived by the study’s stakeholders?

4a.What criteria are used by community stakeholders when evaluating an historical

building for adaptive reuse purposes? What criteria, if any, are discounted or ignored?

4b. In what ways do stakeholders seek to resolve the conflicts often presented

between respect for the history of a building and its contextual meaning within

a community, and the current needs of the modern day population?

3.3 Site Selection

The 32nd Street Baptist Church in Birmingham, Alabama has served as the venue to explore the intersections of historic preservation and adaptive reuse as they relate to sense of place issues. The church’s history has suggested that its preservation is important. For example, the architect of the original 1924 structure was Wallace Rayfield (Durough, 2010). He has been nationally recognized as the architect of the 16th Street Baptist Church, also located in

Birmingham, which was added to the National Register of Historic Places in 2006. He was the first African-American professionally trained architect in Alabama and the second in The United

States (Durough, 2010). Further, the church was known to have played a role in the history of racial relations and segregation during the African-American Civil Rights Movement of the mid- twentieth century. Influential members of the Southern Leadership Conference including Dr.

Martin Luther King, Reverend John Duffy, Reverend Fred Shuttlesworth, Reverend Ralph

Abernathy and Reverend C.L. Franklin, father of pop culture icon Aretha Franklin, spoke inspirational messages of social change through non-violent means from its pulpit. The building also served as an organizational meeting place for the Alabama Christian Movement for Human

Rights where bus boycotts, lunch counter sit-ins, and group marches were planned. Although the historical significance of the 32nd Street Baptist Church has been overshadowed by the tragic bombing of its sister congregation, the 16th Street Baptist Church, the 32nd Street Church has remained an official stop on Birmingham’s Freedom Trail. The Freedom Trail was created to lead visitors on a path throughout the city, stopping at significant places associated with the Civil

Rights Movement. The 32nd Street Baptist Church has also been under consideration for National

Historic Landmark status. The photograph of the church shown in Figure 3.3 is on display at the

Civil Rights Institute located in downtown Birmingham, Alabama.

Figure 3.3. The 32nd Street Baptist Church photographed in 1945. The Church suffered financially during the Great Depression and World War II (Source: Birmingham Public Library).

Specifically, this research thesis has explored the feasibility of adaptively repurposing this historic building for a new communal shelter for families in temporary medical crisis.

This new function has been selected because the church is close in proximity to St. Vincent’s

Hospital, and therefore, this structure could logically be repurposed to fill this existing need. St.

Vincent’s is a private non-profit Catholic hospital founded by the Daughters of Charity in 1898 and is named for the 17th century Parisian St. Vincent de Paul, who started the Daughters of

Charity in 1633. St. Vincent’s is Birmingham’s oldest hospital and the home of the first nursing school in the state of Alabama. The goals of these two entities as they were originally defined are in agreement since they both sought to offer comfort, sanctuary, and healing to the occupants. See

Figure 3.4 for a map of both locations.

32nd Street Baptist Church

St. Vincent’s Hospital

Figure 3.4. Map illustrating the church’s geographical relationship to St. Vincent’s Hospital (Source: Google Maps).

The historic nature of these two entities has been linked together for the purpose of this

study to address the need of creating a sense of place within a temporary shelter for families of

patients seeking medical treatment in the community.

3.4 Study Procedure and Data Collection

The procedure for this research-based study has been completed in the following order:

(1) review of supporting literature and related studies, (2) development of methodology and

research instruments, (3) site selection, (4) approval of the study’s interview and survey

instruments by the Institutional Review Board, (5) data collection, (6) documentation of the

results in both graphic representations and explanatory text, and (7) review and analysis of the

findings.

Two methods of data collection were used to obtain the necessary information to respond to the study’s research questions. First, personal interviews were conducted orally to explore responses to research questions 1a through 1d and 4a through 4b concerning the existing structure with regard to its history with those the author has designated as primary community stakeholders, which included the current property owner, a local real estate developer, and both the current and a former pastor of the congregation. The nature of the questions were open response in an effort to gain as much knowledge as possible from their perspectives regarding the historic significance of the 32nd Street Baptist Church, the perceived value that repurposing the structure for a new use could have on the community, and those criteria or guidelines they would embrace when repurposing an historic structure. The interview questions formulated for the owner and the developer have been provided in Appendix H. The interview questions formulated for the pastors have been provided in Appendix I.

The interview responses have been qualitatively analyzed by the author in an attempt to identify areas of agreement between the community stakeholders, as well as areas of discord and tension with regard to architectural and cultural historic preservation, the context of the site

49 location within the Lakeview District (Birmingham, Alabama), and the stakeholders’ personal vision for repurposing the 32nd Street Baptist Church.

Second, two distinctive written questionnaires were used to address the sense of place research questions 2a through 3b. The first questionnaire was distributed to current residents

(Appendix J) and the second questionnaire to staff members (Appendix K) of six hospital- associated hospitality residences located in the Southeastern United States. The author has toured several hospitality houses and used those established contacts to promote and encourage participation. The questionnaires were distributed in person by the author to locations within

Alabama and Florida.

The author has analyzed the descriptive statistical data generated from the questionnaires

in an attempt to establish hierarchies of importance among both tangible and intangible elements

associated with creating a sense of place. The statistics have been reported in the text and are

visually presented with multiple tables. The qualitative data generated from the questionnaires

has been evaluated by the author in an attempt to identify common themes and concerns shared

by the respondents.

The analysis and discussion has addressed both adaptive reuse and sense of place

information as outlined in research questions 4a and 4b. This analysis has provided insights

regarding the social significance of saving historic architecture by respectfully repurposing old

buildings. This portion of the research was the result of a combination of the in-person

interviews conducted with the community stakeholders, and also from responses to the two

written questionnaires obtained from hospital-associated hospitality house residents and staff.

This information has contributed to a list of recommendations regarding the selection of historic

buildings for adaptive reuse projects in terms of cultural appropriateness, which for the purposes

50 of this study means that the building’s contextual history within the community is respectfully considered as an integral part of the repurposing proposal and implementation.

In summation, the author has attempted to create a written model for an abandoned church located in Birmingham, Alabama, while remaining respectful to the human history embodied in the architecture. Old buildings in established neighborhoods exhibit unique characteristics, often described as personality, and are seen as friendly and familiar places by the public. Their age and history can evoke feelings of personal safety and security, as well as promote a comfortable and home-like environment. This quality makes some abandoned buildings ideal candidates for adaptive reuse projects where people need a place to live, work, and play. The proximity of a local hospital justified using a hospitality house as a model occupant for the former church building to explore the intersections of adaptive reuse and sense of place.

3.5 Sample

The sample consisted of two separate and different populations, keyed to the two different data gathering methods. The first of these addressed the historic aspects of the architecture and its place within the community noted in the first section “A” of the research questions. This sample consisted of four adult stakeholders with connections to the Lakeview

District of Birmingham, in order to gather the history of the church and its context within the community. The term ‘stakeholder’ has been used here as these individuals would have a vested interest in the nature of the repurposing of this structure. Individual interviews were conducted with the following individuals, and all granted the author permission to use their real names in these reported findings.

• Elane Lee-Isa is the current property owner of the former church building. This

interview permitted the author to discuss the economic concerns of a re-development

project in the Lakeview District, as well as the governmental restrictions inherent when

working on historic architecture. The author has also discussed the future plans Mrs.

Lee-Isa has for the former church, and her perspective regarding the appropriateness of

adaptive reuse projects in relation to the social, cultural, or architectural history of the

structure.

• Catherine Sloss Jones is a local real estate developer. Mrs. Jones has recently facilitated

successful adaptive reuse projects in the neighborhood. This interview has provided

insight regarding the features and qualities that must be present in a site location when

selecting a building for adaptive reuse. The author also discussed her real estate

company’s perspective on respectfully repurposing architecture within the context of its

original purpose.

• The Reverend Victor Sinclair Lewis was the last congregational pastor of the 32nd Street

Baptist Church before the building was sold and the congregation relocated in 2005.

This interview has provided important historical information about the church, and his

perspective on why it failed to thrive in its original location. The author also discussed

the pastor’s vision of the future for the abandoned building, and his opinion of the

proposed new use as a hospital-associated hospitality house.

• Pastor Marlon Elkington is the current spiritual leader of the congregation of the New

Vision Baptist Church, formally known as the 32nd Street Baptist Church. Pastor

Elkington grew up as a member of the congregation when it was located in the original

building, and has provided insightful information through personal stories and

remembrances regarding the church’s significant place in the community and history.

The study’s second sample population has facilitated the examination of a sense of place

in a temporary communal environment, addressed by the section “B” research questions. These

participants have completed a questionnaire designed to gather a broad perspective on sense of

place issues and participants’ present living and working conditions in a hospital-associated

hospitality house. Participants were chosen at random from the current residents and staff of six

hospitality house residences located in Florida and Alabama.

3.6 Instruments

There are four total instruments in this research study, detailed below.

Interview questions concerning adaptive reuse:

The interview questions were developed to investigate the historic nature of the intended adaptive reuse project. These interview questions have been provided in Appendices H and I.

Also, archival data specific to this structure was obtained from sources such as local newspapers, city planning documents, maps, and historical society collections in Birmingham, Alabama. This helped to confirm data from the interviews and further illuminated historical events and influences that informed this study.

Questionnaire concerning sense of place:

The author has generated quantitative and qualitative data related to sense of place through two questionnaires provided in Appendices J and K. The questions were generated from the author’s research questions, which in turn emerged from a review of literature. The primary framework for establishing the sense of place questionnaires emerged from Fritz Steele’s A Sense of Place (1981), which identifies six qualities that create a spirit of personal place: territory,

53 tinkering and products, special furniture, visible themes, traces of friends, and boundaries. In addition, Steele proposed that there are four elements that help to fulfill basic human needs: shelter and security, sense of identity, social contact, and personal growth.

The survey has been administered through two different written questionnaires, one for the staff and one for the residents of hospital-associated hospitality houses, and all of the responses have been manually recorded for data processing and analysis at the conclusion of the research process. All questionnaires were cross-checked to include at least one survey question for each research question. The questionnaires were pilot tested with two persons similar to the target participants to asses its readability and clarity, and revisions were undertaken as a result of this preliminary check. Question types included Likert scale, multiple choice, short answer, and open response in an effort to provide respondents the opportunity to expand their answers with qualitative information.

All instruments were submitted to The Florida State University and achieved Institutional

Review Board for approval prior to their administration.

3.7 Data Analysis Methods

The transcript from the interview sessions with the stakeholders has been analyzed by the author to identify intersections of common ground, as well as areas of contrast and tension. The reporting of this qualitative data was subjective to the author’s interpretation, which is a reality of qualitative research. However, data has been confirmed through historical documentation where possible to serve as a cross-check mechanism.

The data collected from the questionnaires that were distributed to the staff and residents of the hospital hospitality houses has been quantitatively analyzed and the results reported as text and tables. Descriptive statistics have been reported where appropriate in an effort to determine the

54 nature, frequency, and strength of subjective responses. Narrative responses have been provided throughout the various sub-topics for clarification, which has permitted the inclusion of respondents’ write-in comments.

3.8 Limitations, Delimitations, and Transferability

Limitations: The interviewee(s) may not have been completely forthcoming with information, may have attempted to only present their position in the best possible light, and may intentionally or unintentionally have distorted events and outcomes. On occasion, the interviews were interrupted or the interviewees became distracted during the course of the conversation, which disrupted the stream of consciousness and the logical progression of storytelling.

Environmental conditions such as temperature, lighting conditions, external noise, and time of day had some influence on the length and quality of the responses. Thus, these conditions could not be duplicated for further research.

The author sought to gain knowledge regarding a certain culture that existed in

Birmingham, Alabama from the late 1950’s through early 1960’s. Thus, many of the people who were adults during that time are no longer living, meaning much of the oral history was told from a second-hand perspective. This could have made the accounting of certain events less accurate and more distorted than they would be told from a first-hand perspective.

The questionnaire that was distributed to the hospitality houses was written in the English language, and it is possible that this instrument was given to participants who could not read or write in English with fluency. As a result, the outcome of the data could be compromised by their limited ability to comprehend the questions, respond fully, or refuse to participate.

The questionnaire has only being distributed to residents of hospital-associated hospitality houses in Florida and Alabama, so the results could be construed to only have meaning within the region.

Delimitations: This study has not attempted to inquire about other aspects of the respondents’ personal or professional lives, nor has it attempted to explore other possible repurposed uses for the former 32nd Street Baptist Church building.

Transferability: The perceptions reported here may differ from other communal living environments such as homeless shelters, shelters for women and children, shelters for at-risk youths, prisons, or university and college dormitories. This descriptive study has sought to capture the perceptions of residents and staff in hospital-associated hospitality houses in the spring of

2013, and cannot be generalized to other points in time or to other populations. Further, in the tradition of case study research, the full implications of this study only extend to the repurposing of the 32nd Street Baptist Church due to the specific and contextual nature of the study’s questions and outcomes. However, it is the author’s intent that the study’s resulting analysis may yield information regarding the adaptive reuse of ecclesiastical architecture that may have applicability to similar projects that attempt to respectfully assign a modern purpose to historic buildings, and therefore, accomplish more than superficial renovations.

3.9 Summary

Two forms of methodology have been used to explore the relationships, intersections, and

contrasts that exist between historic preservation, adaptive reuse, and creating a sense of place.

The first method was a series of individual interviews conducted by the author with primary

stakeholders in the Lakeview District, located in Birmingham, Alabama, designed to obtain

information regarding the historical significance of the neighborhood, ways they have sought to

preserve and promote the community, and to identify methods that they have employed in their

decision making process regarding historic architecture. This group of individuals was selected

for their presumed knowledge of the site location for this focused research, the 32nd Street

Baptist Church.

The second form of methodology used was the distribution of two questionnaires to the

population of selected hospital affiliated hospitality houses, which sought to gain knowledge

regarding the elements and qualities necessary to establish a sense of place in a temporary

environment. The individuals participating in the survey consisted of two groups. The first

group was comprised of employees, staff, and/or volunteers who work at the hospitality shelters.

The second group of participants was the caregivers and patients who must live away from their

primary residences while receiving medical treatment.

The objective of this methodology was to identify intersections imbued with meaning within the areas of adaptive reuse and sense of place. A building rich in local history was selected to serve as the venue, and the research provided a model for a useful solution within a specific community to suit its historical architecture.

CHAPTER FOUR

RESULTS

4.1 Introduction

This chapter reports and describes the results obtained from questionnaires completed by residents and staff of hospital-associated hospitality houses, and interviews that were conducted with four stakeholders concerning the selection and development of the site location. These interviews were conducted to address the study’s research questions:

2. What elements of the built environment contribute to a sense of place for hospital-associated hospitality houses according to staff and residents of such environments?

2a. What is the perceived value of these elements within a temporary shelter?

2b. How can these elements be incorporated into a design solution which seeks to

create a new residential communal living space?

3. What intangible qualities contribute to a sense of place for hospital-associated hospitality houses according to staff and residents of such environments?

3a. What is the perceived value of these qualities within a temporary shelter?

3b. How can these elements be incorporated into a design solution that seeks to

create a new hospital-associated hospitality house?

Preliminary findings were reported in the text and emergent themes were presented. Chapter five will further discuss conclusions gathered from the results discussed here as well as potential avenues for further research.

4.2 Survey Methodology and Demographics

To review, participants for the survey portion of the research process were current residents and staff of six hospital-associated hospitality houses located in Birmingham and

Huntsville, Alabama, and Gainesville and Jacksonville, Florida. Prior visits by the author to two hospitality houses located in Richmond, Virginia were used for observational and general information gathering only, and the information was presented in Chapter Two.

Resident participants from the six participant hospitality houses were randomly selected and approached by the author from those who had gathered in the shared kitchen, dining room,

TV/game room, library, and living room common areas of the house during the author’s visits.

The questionnaires were typically given to the caretakers, rather than to the patients themselves.

Residents were not solicited for participation in their private bedrooms or living spaces out of respect for their illnesses and desire for privacy. The staff members of each hospitality house received self-addressed stamped envelopes so that they could complete their questionnaires and return them to the author at their convenience.

The questionnaire instruments for the residents and the staff are located in Appendices J and K respectively. A total of 66 questionnaires for hospital-associated hospitality house residents were distributed and 40 were completed, yielding a return rate of 60.6%. A total of 20 questionnaires for hospital-associated hospitality house staff were distributed and 13 were completed, yielding a return rate of 65%. The vast majority of the completed questionnaires were returned to the author during in-person hospitality house visits. The 23 questionnaires that were left to be completed after the author left the premises were returned via a self-addressed stamped envelope. Some questionnaires from each category were not fully completed, but the data from those incomplete instruments has still been reported in these findings.

In order to fulfill the Institution Review Board confidentiality requirements, the names of the facilities have been omitted. The hospital-associated hospitality houses locations that were

selected to participate in the survey portion of this research and their primary patient populations

are as follows:

1. Birmingham, Alabama Population: Adult Cancer Patients and Caregivers

2. Birmingham, Alabama Population: Parents and Siblings of Hospitalized Children

3. Huntsville, Alabama Population: Adult and Children Patients and Caregivers

4. Jacksonville, Florida Population: Adult and Children Cancer Patients and Caregivers

5. Jacksonville, Florida Population: Parents and Siblings of Hospitalized Children

6. Gainesville, Florida Population: Adult Cancer Patients and Caregivers

The hospitality houses were all located in Alabama and Florida, but the population demographics report a slightly more regional distribution as shown in Table 4.1.

Table 4.1. Primary residence locations for survey participants.

HOME STATES AND COUNTRIES OF RESIDENT PARTICIPANTS Number from Each Location Alabama 21

Arkansas 1

Georgia 1

Florida 15

Mississippi 1

England 1 Total 40

The questionnaire first asked the respondents to identify how many adults and how many children were residing with them in the hospitality house in an effort to understand the age of the population, their specific needs, and their perspective or point of view. Twenty-nine out of 40 respondents indicated that there were two adults sharing their private living space, while seven stated that they were the only adult in their party. The balance of the study population reported three adults in one family unit, and two groups had four adults occupying the same space. One respondent did not answer the question.

Table 4.2 summarizes the quantity and age group of children living in the house during the study’s inquiry period under adult supervision. Many of the respondents that answered

“none” also wrote in that they were residents of the hospitality house because they had children that were patients at neighboring hospitals.

Table 4.2. Age distribution of children residing in hospitality house with parent(s) who participated in the study.

Number of Children Residing with Parents in Hospitality House

None 28

Under the age of 5 years 4

Between the ages of 5-10 years 5

Between the ages of 11-18 years 5

The participants were asked if they had been a resident of the current hospital-associated hospitality house in the past or any other hospitality house while seeking medical treatment.

Twenty-seven of the total respondents indicated that this was their first experience staying in a

61 hospitality house, and thirteen participants said that they had previously been a hospitality house resident. This question sought to understand the familiarity and expertise of the residents while considering their responses to other questions.

In that same vein of questioning, the residents were asked to identify the number of hours each day (including sleep time) that they spent at the hospitality house and how long they had been a resident during their current stay. Tables 4.3 and 4.4 illustrate those findings and show that residents spend many waking hours, as well as sleeping hours, at their hospitality houses.

Some hospitality houses may hold a resident’s room allowing them to go home for a short visit.

Those days away from the hospitality house were not deducted from the length of the current stay that the residents reported in Table 4.4.

Table 4.3. Hours per day residents spend at their hospitality houses.

The Number of Hours Spent at the Hospitality House Each Day

1 to 8 Hours 9 to 12 Hours 13 to 18 Hours 19 to 24 Hours

Number of 6 8 15 11 respondents

Table 4.4. Residents estimate their current length of stay to date in a hospitality house.

The Number of Days Spent at the Hospitality House to Date

1 to 6 Days 1 to 2 Weeks 3 to 4 Weeks 1 to 3 Months 3 Months +

Number of 7 8 9 14 2 respondents

The demographics of the staff population varied in their positions and responsibilities, as well as their length of employment at the hospitality house as shown in Table 4.5. The information and observations reported by these individuals was fairly consistent considering their different responsibilities, titles, and length of employment.

Table 4.5. The demographics of the hospitality house staff participants.

Type of Staff Position Number of Average Length Respondents of Service Director or Assistant 5 10 years and 7 months Director Volunteer 3 7 years

Administrative Worker 1 4 years

Resident Services and 3 9 years and 4 months Volunteer Coordinator Social Worker 1 3 months

The staff members were asked to rate the frequency of their interaction with the residents.

Of those respondents, ten staff persons out of 13 reported that their interactions with residents qualified as ‘Frequent,’ and three rated the quantity of their interaction time as ‘Moderate’. These statistics verified that all of the staff participants have had contact and communication with the residents, which lent credence to their observations and opinions reported later in this chapter.

4.3 Survey Results

4.3.1 Hospitality House Residents

Residents of hospitality houses are often required to live away from their primary residences for long periods of time due to a medical crisis or the unavailability of medical

treatment near their home. In an effort to understand the importance of feeling at home in a

temporary residence during this time of duress, residents were asked to rate their overall

satisfaction with certain physical aspects common to all of the hospital-associated hospitality houses that participated in the survey such as the kitchen space, bathroom facilities, and the common living and dining areas. The second type of question asked of participants concerned issues relating to sense of place, which included the tangible and intangible qualities of security, safety, privacy, personal sanctuary, and personalization. The questionnaire also offered residents an opportunity to list and describe the features that they associated with a “home-away-from home” environment. The final topic presented in the questionnaire asked the residents to evaluate their perspective of historical architecture as it relates to their belief system, as well as their feelings about staying in a building with history versus a newer structure.

4.3.1.1 Physical attributes: the kitchen space. Five out of the six hospitality houses visited by the author had recently renovated or installed brand new group kitchens, as did one of the facilities visited for observational purposes only. The high quality of these food preparation spaces greatly influenced the survey participants’ responses shown in Table 4.6. Comments from the residents described their kitchen space as “roomy” and “very clean”. Twenty one out of

38 respondents that answered this question expressed the simple joy that they experienced by being able to cook with or for their families.

Table 4.6. The kitchen space evaluated by residents for overall satisfaction.

The Degree of Satisfaction Regarding the Kitchen Space

Very Satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied No Response

Number of 30 8 0 0 2 respondents

These responses speak to the importance of sharing a meal with family and friends as a bonding experience, and also to the normalcy of being able to cook in a facility while living away from home. The author learned from site visits that the governing boards and staff of these hospitality houses have recognized the kitchen space as a priority by designating funds to their design and modernity.

4.3.1.2 Physical attributes: the bathroom facilities. The author observed that the age and condition of the bathroom facilities varied greatly from location to location, and five out of the six hospitality houses visited during the research phase had private bathrooms adjoining the bedrooms. The majority of respondents reported that they were either ‘Very Satisfied’ or

‘Satisfied’ with their washroom facilities as stated in Table 4.7; however, the author interpreted approximately 30% of the comments in the optional write-in section on this topic as negative in nature. The overall size of the washroom space was a frequently noted problem as too small for a family unit, and the lack of natural light and/or overall quality of lighting was problematic for residents as well. Surprisingly, only one hospitality house had 100% ADA (Americans with

Disabilities Act) compliant features and equipment. Several other participating houses had a few handicapped accessible washrooms, but there were not enough to accommodate all of the requests.

Table 4.7. Hospitality house residents rate their overall satisfaction with the bathroom.

The Degree of Satisfaction Regarding the Bathroom Facilities

Very Satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied No Response

Number of 22 14 1 0 3 respondents

One parent noted that the bathroom was her private retreat and considered it an “evening get away” space while her child fell asleep. Another resident stated that “it is mine for now, and

I can keep it my way.” One hundred percent of the negative comments came from the solitary

hospitality house that required residents to share a bathroom with other residents. Those that

commented cited the lack of privacy and unpleasant odors as their primary objections. The manager of this hospitality house informed the author that cancer patients are often sick after

chemotherapy treatments and can stay in the bathroom for long periods of time.

4.3.1.3 Physical attributes: the common spaces. The author observed that the shared common spaces were located within different areas of each house and varied greatly in size and purpose. The kitchen is a popular shared common area, but because it was evaluated separately on the questionnaire, it was not included in the rooms that were considered for this question.

Residents were questioned separately during the survey regarding places of sanctuary as well, which could be a shared chapel or garden; therefore, this aspect was also not included in this section. For the purpose of this study, the rooms considered to be the common areas were the dining room, living room(s), the library, any shared computer space, TV room, and/or game room. Table 4.8 gives an account of the overall satisfaction of residents regarding their shared living spaces.

Table 4.8. Survey participants’ evaluations of the communal living spaces.

The Degree of Satisfaction Regarding the Shared Common Areas

Very Satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied No Response

Number of 19 18 2 0 1 respondents

Two residents remarked that their living room space reminded them of home, which is often a primary goal of those who design the interiors of hospitality houses. Twenty percent of those that wrote in comments remarked that they enjoyed getting to meet and socialize with a diverse group of people, and that it was nice to have a space to entertain friends and family that come to visit. One resident stated that it was a “blessing to have a safe place to talk about cancer”.

4.3.1.4 Sense of place: safety and security. The term sense of place refers to the way

a person has related to their environment and has engaged with their surroundings (Steele, 1981).

The review of literature showed that it is possible to feel at home in a temporary environment if

there are objects present or other sensory stimuli that are reminiscent of the visitor’s primary

residence and that evoke a memory (Steele, 1981; Oldenburg, 1999; Kopec, 2009). For the purposes of this study, certain sense of place aspects found in hospitality houses have been quantitatively shown in the following tables, and the written data has been reported in the text.

It is important to note that the major population surveyed for this research thesis are

residents of hospitality houses because they are experiencing, a medical crisis. They are required

to live away from their primary residences, often for long periods of time, while treatment is

administered. The crux of this research is to determine those features, qualities, and elements, if

any, that contribute to their sense of place and how important is it to a resident that they feel at-

home in an environment that is only meant to provide them with temporary shelter. Table 4.9

adds weight to the theory that after people have their most basic needs met of food and shelter,

safety is their next highest priority (Maslow, 1954). It is only after acquiring a feeling of safety

and security that the residents are able to focus on their health.

Table 4.9. Hospitality house residents’ perceptions of safety and security as a major consideration when choosing a place to live.

The Degree of Importance Attributed to Safety and Security

Very Important Moderately Not Important No Response Important Important Number of respondents 34 3 1 0 2

Residents were encouraged to write in aspects or features of their hospitality house that

contributed to their sense of safety and security. Twenty three respondents (60%) mentioned that

the front door stayed locked 24/7 and that only the residents were granted unrestricted access.

Visitors had to be admitted by a staff member and were required to sign in at the front desk.

Seven participants remarked that the presence of locks on their private living spaces, in addition

to the exterior locks, promoted a sense of personal safety and security for their possessions. The

second most frequent response came from ten residents who said that having a member of the

hospitality house staff on duty 24/7 also contributed to their feelings of safety and security within

their residences. Other physical features built into the environment mentioned by residents

included security cameras (four responses), an alarm system (three responses), fences (two responses), and gated parking (two responses). Two residents noted that their sense of safety and security was enhanced by living with a large group of people, and one person remarked that they felt safe “living with such good people, because here we are all one big family”. The author did not ask any socio-economic background questions of the residents, so it was not possible to gain perspective or understand their point of view regarding their personal history with high crime environments.

4.3.1.5 Sense of place: privacy. The concept and importance of privacy was rated as

‘Very Important or ‘Important’ by 97% of the participants as described in Table 4.10, but the write-in comments demonstrate that the qualities and aspects of privacy were interpreted

differently by members of the resident population.

Table 4.10. The issue of privacy is rated highly by hospitality house residents.

The Degree of Importance Attributed to a Sense of Privacy

Very Important Moderately Not Important No Response Important Important Number of respondents 27 9 1 0 3

The survey revealed that fifteen participants cited private bedrooms and bathrooms as the

single most important aspect of their house that fulfilled their need for privacy, and the ability to

lock a door to their private spaces was also noted by nine residents. These physical features of

the house provided privacy among the residents. Some other features of the houses commented on by two respondents in each category that aid in privacy from the outside world included window treatments, a private playground, and a tall, solid wall so that people passing by the residence cannot see the grounds.

Some of the non-physical aspects of privacy that were mentioned concerned the in-house policies instituted by the facilities to protect the privacy of their residents. Two respondents wrote in that their names are not given out at the front desk; two people commented on the fact that the staff does not enter their room except in the case of an emergency; three more wrote that the staff does not interfere in their lives; three others stated that they liked cleaning their own room, because they could maintain their privacy from the staff; and one surveyed resident was 69

pleased and surprised that her mail and packages were delivered to her unopened. Hospitality

house resident populations are frequently comprised of people from lower socio-economic

groups due to their inability to pay for an alternate place to stay, so perhaps some of them do not

feel entitled to privacy or feel like they deserve privacy because of their in gratis status.

4.3.1.6 Sense of place: home-away-from-home environment. Those surveyed were asked on the questionnaire to rate the importance of living in a “home-away-from-home”

environment, and they were also given the opportunity to identify up to three aspects or features

that their hospitality house provided to evoke this feeling. The results are shown below in Table

4.11.

Table 4.11. Degree of importance participants placed on feeling “at home” in their hospitality houses.

The Degree of Importance Attributed to Feeling “At-Home”

Very Important Moderately Not Important No Response Important Important Number of respondents 22 13 1 1 3

Overall, participants placed a high importance on feeling “at-home” in their temporary residences, ranking it either as ‘Very Important’ or ‘Important’.

Approximately 50% of the residents listed tangible or physical elements of their residences that contributed to their sense of comfort or feeling “at-home” in that environment.

Fifteen out of the 37 people (41%) that responded to this question identified having access to a kitchen as the best or most important physical feature of their residence that contributed to their sense of feeling “at-home”. Two residents commented on the fellowship opportunities or social

aspects of preparing food together, and the phrase “family atmosphere” appeared six times in the

commentary. One participant stated, “It’s like you are at home when you are cooking. Hotel

rooms do not have full kitchens in them.” During the visits to these facilities, the author

observed that many meals were prepared by outside charitable organizations and brought into the hospitality houses for the residents. The staff suggested that this act of kindness allowed the residents the easy option of eating food that was already prepared, or preparing their own meals, which dietary restrictions often required.

Other physical aspects noted by the residents that contributed to a home-like atmosphere included the laundry facilities (mentioned by eight people), access to a television and computer

(three people), comfortable beds (three people), the décor (two people), and the ability to control the temperature in their room (two people). This last criterion can be especially critical to cancer patients according to one hospitality house manager, because they are often cold after receiving chemotherapy.

The feeling of being “at-home” in a place that is not a private residence can also be achieved through interpersonal relationships and connections. The staff members of the six hospitality houses that were visited by the author were often praised in the commentary by the residents for their friendliness and compassion. Nine participants cited personal acts of kindness by specific staff members, and one resident said, “It is amazing that they know all of our names and what circumstances bring us here.”

Some houses foster a feeling of bonding and empathy among the residents. One hospitality house for cancer patients in Alabama, for example, had ten participants that commented on the support, love and unity shared among the residents as critical to their recovery. The phrases “we are all in this together,” or “we are all in the same boat” appeared

repeatedly. Participants from all of the hospitality houses listed some form of human contact and

fellowship as one of the three aspects that contributed to their sense of place. Six residents wrote

in that other people in the house were very “friendly,” three people referred to the other residents as “family,” and one resident was referring to his hospitality house when he said, “When I told the doctor I wanted to go home, I meant this place.”

4.3.1.7 Sense of place: places of sanctuary. The fourth question regarding a sense of place dealt with the issue of sanctuary. For the purpose of this study, sanctuary refers to a physical place that offers solace and peace of a spiritual nature. This question was especially significant to the research, because the selected site for the theoretical location of the hospitality house being developed for St. Vincent’s Hospital in Birmingham, Alabama is the former 32nd

Street Baptist Church. Not all of the hospitality houses that participated in this survey had a chapel devoted to contemplation, meditation or prayer, but they all offered some space that could be used for such purposes, such as an outdoor garden or quiet room.

The respondents were asked to rate the importance of having a place of sanctuary on a

Likert Scale ranging from ‘Very Important’ to ‘Not Important’ as illustrated in Table 4.12. This question had the most evenly distributed responses among the selections on the scale, and also elicited the most diverse and passionate responses from the residents surveyed on sense of place issues. This could be due to the fact that it conjured up feelings about religion and personal belief systems, even though the question did not directly ask about these topics. The data gathered is regionally specific to the southeastern portion of the United States, which may have had a cultural influence on the responses. In addition, these respondents are often under emotional duress due to a medical crisis that could produce an atypical response to any question, especially one that evokes issues of life and death and their relationship to a higher power.

Table 4.12. Participants rate the importance of having a place of sanctuary.

The Degree of Importance Attributed to Having a Place of Sanctuary

Very Important Moderately Not Important No Response Important Important

Number of 14 7 8 10 1 respondents

The nine respondents that replied that a place of sanctuary was either ‘Not Important’ or

‘Moderately Important,’ did so because they “carried their faith with them everywhere,” as summarized by one participant. This distinction is pertinent since it suggests that the concept of sanctuary could still be important to those people, but that the physical space was not necessary for them to experience spirituality. The remaining nine participants that also answered either

‘Not Important’ or ‘Moderately Important,’ described themselves as atheists, non-religious or simply indifferent to the idea of sanctuary. One mother stated that she has never had any use for religion, not even now that her five year old son had cancer. However, this same participant also wrote in that she was not offended by the fact that other residents required or desired a place of sanctuary, as long as it was “not in her face”. This resident did not opt to consider that a place of sanctuary could also be used for meditation or quiet contemplation. This could possibly have been avoided if the author had provided a definition of sanctuary on the questionnaire.

Several of the positive responses to the importance of having a place of sanctuary included the words “quiet,” “stress-free zone,” “solitude” or “alone with my thoughts,” and

“rejuvenation” in their text. One of the self-described “non-religious” respondents remarked that she appreciated having a quiet and stress-free environment where she could “hide and take a break”. Five respondents that had access to an outdoor garden on the hospitality house grounds

remarked on how peaceful and serene they felt in that space, and how much “closer to God” they

felt in the garden. One resident that frequently used the meditation room that her hospitality

house provided said, “You can pray anywhere, but to have a chapel is meaningful. A person

needs a quiet place to talk to God... and to listen.”

4.3.1.8 Sense of place: personalization. The final question regarding sense of place issues asked the residents if they brought any possessions with them to personalize their rooms.

Twenty three respondents, or 65.7%, replied positively that they did bring personal articles with

them, and 12 people chose not to bring any objects with them. Of those participants that brought

personal possessions with them to personalize their space and who opted to list those objects,

pillows and electronic devices were the most often mentioned items with nine responses each.

Other popular articles that were important enough to make the journey included Bibles and

books (five responses), photographs (four responses), blankets (four responses), music and movies (four responses), toys (three responses), and special hats (two responses). The common threads woven through this list of individual possessions might include that they offer some type of personal comfort, provide a positive reminder of home, and/or have entertainment value.

4.3.1.9 Historical perspective. The final topic that was addressed on the questionnaire concerned the historical and cultural perspectives of hospitality house residents. The first question on this subject asked the participants if the information regarding the history of the host city, community, and/or house was not in agreement with their own value and/or belief system, would they still choose to stay in that place, and if so, why? A majority of participants (28 people or 70%) responded positively that they would still choose to reside in their hospitality house, citing emotional support (ten responses), economics (seven responses), and location (three responses) as the prevailing justifications for making that decision. Nine residents responded

positively to the question, but they did not write in any additional information. Six participants

(15%) elected not to answer this question.

The second question was intended to gauge the value of historical architecture among hospitality house residents and asked them if they would prefer to stay in a building with history

that had been repurposed, or a newer building that had been constructed in the last twenty years.

Of the 33 residents that responded to this question, 14 preferred a building with history, five

preferred a newer building, and 14 stated that they were indifferent with some conditions. Seven

participants (18%) elected not to answer this question.

The participants that preferred to reside in an historical building wrote with passion and

mentioned the “character” and “personality” of place, as well as the added benefit of “learning

from history,” and they identified history as “part of who we are as humans”. One cancer patient

caregiver wrote, “I would prefer a building with history! It most often adds good vibes to the

atmosphere and the spirit of a place.” Such comments bring to mind the comments of Fritz

Steele in his book, A Sense of Place (1981). Steele referred to the spirit of a building as

embodied architecture, which encompasses and preserves the history of the human beings that

have occupied the space throughout the life of the structure.

Of the five residents that preferred newer architecture, four wrote in that they perceived

newer construction as “cleaner” and “healthier”. The fifth respondent stated that he preferred a

building constructed in the last 20 years “because it would probably be more [structurally] sound

and in better shape”. Interestingly, two participants that preferred historical architecture also

remarked that their preference was based on the premise that an older building would have been

built better and more carefully, and therefore, would also be more structurally sound.

The unexpected outcome for this question resulted from the 14 indifferent or

conditionally indifferent responses, which is equal to the number of people that stated that they

preferred a building with history. Five participants stated unequivocally that it made no

difference to them whether they stayed in a newer building or one with history. Nine of the

respondents also expressed their indifference as long as certain conditions or standards were met

in both types of architecture regarding cleanliness, proximity to their hospitalized loved ones,

and economic concerns.

4.3.1.10 Summary. The hospitality house residents that participated in this study generally lived together in harmony and were very grateful to have the opportunity to stay in such a “wonderful/ terrific/ fabulous” place at no-cost or low-cost. The author visited 8 houses

total and observed that the facilities were not equal in size, quality, or amenities, but the residents

in each house felt they were very fortunate. They brought personal items from home to personalize their rooms, evoking memories of home or happier times, and making their stay more comfortable.

Residents enjoyed normal activities such as cooking, playing games, watching TV, and relaxing in the garden. They appeared to be a very social group which they expressed by conversing on a first name basis, laughing together, and making physical contact, such as hugging. At one house in particular, the author observed the residents eating a meal together and found it difficult to tell the patients from the caregivers because everyone appeared to be equally at home and in good humor.

The residents of the hospitality houses that participated in the study were multi-cultural

and multi-racial, but they often referred to themselves as “one big family”. Similar to biological

family units, there were occasional areas of tension reported on the questionnaire, especially

when residents had to share a common bathroom space. However, the medical circumstances

that brought them to stay at the hospitality house also appeared to be the source for their mutual

support of one another and their close bond.

4.3.2 Hospitality House Staff

Staff members of hospital-associated hospitality houses are in a unique position to observe the interactions among the residents and how they interact with their environment. In a

series of questions, staff members were asked to evaluate their perceptions on the physical

attributes of their respective houses, such as kitchens and bathroom facilities, and how those

spaces are used by residents. Also, in an effort to understand the importance of feeling at home

in a temporary residence during a stressful time, observations regarding both tangible and

intangible qualities relating to a sense of place such as security, safety, privacy, personal

sanctuary and personalization were also addressed on the questionnaire. The instrument also

offered staff an opportunity to list and describe the features that they associated with a “home-

away-from home” environment. Similar to the resident questionnaire, the final topic presented

in the staff questionnaire asked the staff members to evaluate their perspectives of historical

architecture as it relates to their belief systems, as well as their feelings about working in a

building with history versus a newer structure.

4.3.2.1 Physical attributes: the kitchen space. Staff members ranked the degree of

satisfaction that they perceived that residents experienced in the kitchen space as either ‘Very

Satisfied’ or ‘Satisfied’ as illustrated in Table 4.13. The results are consistent with the rankings

on this same question asked of residents. The staff members surveyed were also asked to

describe the interaction among the residents who were using the kitchen space at the same time

and the results are shown in Table 4.14.

Table 4.13. The kitchen facility was evaluated by staff members for the overall satisfaction they perceived to be occurring amongst the residents.

The Degree of Perceived Satisfaction Regarding the Kitchen Facility

Very Satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied No Response

Number of 7 6 0 0 0 respondents

Table 4.14. The interaction among residents using the kitchen space simultaneously was evaluated by staff members.

The Quality of Interaction Among Residents while Using the Kitchen Space

Very Positive Moderately Moderately Very No Response Positive Negative Negative Number of 10 3 0 0 0 respondents

The staff members were not given the opportunity to write in comments on the questionnaire regarding the kitchen space. However, the state of agreement between the resident and staff questionnaires has reinforced the perceived importance of this space that offers residents the opportunity to prepare food according to their desires and requirements, as well as a place to socialize and bond with fellow residents and family members.

4.3.2.2 Physical attributes: the bathroom facilities. As was the case reported in the resident data, staff perceived that people were most happy and comfortable when they were assigned a private bathroom as illustrated in Table 4.15.

Table 4.15. Staff members’ perception of resident satisfaction with hospitality house bathrooms.

The Degree of Perceived Satisfaction Regarding the Bathroom Facilities

Very Satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied No Response

Number of 6 5 1 0 1 respondents

The single staff respondent that reported that she perceived that the residents were not pleased with the bathroom facilities in their hospitality house is the manager of the institution that currently cannot provide residents with private washroom accommodations.

4.3.2.3 Physical attributes: the common spaces. Although people temporarily living in hospitality houses were often under duress, the staff perceived them to be satisfied with the shared common areas available to them as shown in Table 4.16.

Table 4.16. Staff members’ perception of resident satisfaction with hospitality house common areas.

The Degree of Perceived Satisfaction Regarding the Shared Common Areas

Very Satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied No Response

Number of 6 7 0 0 0 respondents

The staff also perceived the interaction among residents to be very positive and supportive as demonstrated by results shown in Table 4.17. Perhaps the staff witnessed the effects of bonding that can occur among strangers when placed in similar complex and stressful circumstances.

Table 4.17. Staff members’ perception of quality of resident interaction in shared common areas.

The Quality of Interaction Among Residents while Using the Shared Common Areas

Very Moderately Moderately Very No Response Positive Positive Negative Negative Number of respondents 10 3 0 0 0

4.3.2.4 Sense of place: safety and security. One hundred percent of the staff members

surveyed responded that safety and security were extremely important to them personally, and also as a staff member responsible for the well being of others as shown in Table 4.18.

Table 4.18. Hospitality house staff rated safety and security as a major factor when choosing a place to work and providing house residents with a secure environment.

The Degree of Importance Attributed to Safety and Security

Very Important Moderately Not Important No Response Important Important Number of respondents 13 0 0 0 0

Some of the staff commented on the 24 hour security that they provided as a team, and

that the doors remained constantly locked with admittance only by a keypad entry or an escort by

a member of the security staff. Five staffers also mentioned their close relationship with the

police, paramedics and/or the security guards on duty at the neighboring hospitals.

4.3.2.5 Sense of place: privacy. Privacy was highly rated by staff members of hospitality houses as described in Table 4.19, but not as highly as other sense of place issues such as safety and security.

Table 4.19. Hospitality house staff members’ perceptions of the importance of privacy for residents.

The Degree of Importance Attributed to a Sense of Privacy

Very Important Moderately Not Important No Response Important Important Number of respondents 9 3 1 0 0

When asked to describe some of the features found within their hospitality houses that

contributed to a sense of privacy, private bedrooms and bathrooms were mentioned by 60% of

the respondents. However, some of the more unique single responses included direct telephone

lines in each room, locked storage bins for food, and back door entrances for residents who do

not wish to be seen by other residents or staff, perhaps because they are not feeling well.

4.3.2.6 Sense of place: home-away-from-home environment. The significance of establishing a home-like environment has been a central issue throughout this research project.

Table 4.20 has illustrated that the staff perceives it as ‘Very Important’ indeed, with 100% of the respondents ranking it as such.

Table 4.20. Degree of importance perceived by staff members for residents feeling “at home” in their hospitality houses.

The Degree of Importance Attributed to Feeling “At-Home”

Very Important Moderately Not Important No Response Important Important Number of respondents 13 0 0 0 0

The ability to cook and share a meal with friends and family was the response given by

69%, or nine people. Thirty-one percent of staff participants believed that staff interaction with the residents contributed to a family atmosphere, and two staffers remarked that the floor plan of the house was very residential or “homey” by design, in spite of its large size.

4.3.2.7 Sense of place: places of sanctuary. Although staff participants rated the importance of having a place of sanctuary very highly as established in Table 4.21, their perceptions regarding the meaning of this space varied greatly. As was stated during the analysis portion of the resident responses, the author might have clarified this issue for the respondents by including a definition of sanctuary on the questionnaire.

Table 4.21. Participants rate the importance of having a place of sanctuary.

The Degree of Importance Attributed to Having a Place of Sanctuary

Very Important Moderately Not Important No Response Important Important Number of respondents 7 5 0 1 0

One participant wrote in that “we cannot encourage any beliefs as it may be offensive to

others.” Thirty eight percent alluded to the importance of nature when residents needed a place

of sanctuary, and they observed that they would often seek solace in a garden or on the front

porch, for example. One staff member stated that their facility offered Tai Chi and meditation

classes in an effort to help their residents achieve some level of spirituality. Fifteen percent

remarked that they either had a chapel or were in the process of remodeling a space to become a

chapel, and another 15% commented that they needed or desired a chapel within their facility.

4.3.2.8 Sense of place: personalization. Staff members of hospitality houses were asked about items of personalization from home that they saw being brought into the residences most often by residents. Bed linens were the most common articles mentioned with 77% writing in ‘blankets’ and 62% writing in ‘pillows’. Photographs, pictures and greeting cards was the second most popular category of objects preferred by residents as noted by 54% of the respondents. Perhaps these elements represent some level of physical comfort by providing a familiar place to rest and recover, as well as emotional support from non-present family members and friends.

4.3.2.9 Historical perspective. The final topic that was surveyed on the questionnaire concerned the historical and cultural perspectives of hospitality house staff members. The first question on this subject asked the participants if the information regarding the history of the city,

community, and/or house was not in agreement with their own value and/or belief system, would

they still choose to work in that place, and if so, why? Three people, or 23%, responded

negatively to this question. The principle behind this decision was summarized by one

participant who wrote, “No, I would not. All people should be where their ethics and culture are

in sync. It yields greater personal satisfaction and lowers the possibility of rejection by other

staffers.” Only one respondent was indecisive citing that “it would depend how different” the

value or belief system was from his own before he could comment further.

The majority of the staff members, or 69%, stated they would indeed work in an

institution where the prevailing belief system was different from their own. Nine participants, or

100% of those that responded, mentioned their personal need to serve others in some capacity as

the reason for their decision. Some of the remarks included on the write-in portion of the

questionnaire were as follows: “when a family is in need, someone needs to be there to open the

door”; “the mission of helping cancer patients and their caregivers is more important than

theologies and philosophies”; and “I am here to serve others, not myself, and that is in agreement

with my belief system.” The multiple hospitality house staff members that the author interacted

with on each visit revealed that they receive personal gratification from their employment, and

that they considered being a part of their hospitality house community very rewarding.

The second question asked hospitality house staff members if they would prefer to work in a building with history that had been repurposed, or a newer building that had been constructed in the last twenty years. One person diplomatically responded that “buildings with history and newer buildings both have their benefits,” but the remaining participants responded

almost equally in favor of one building type or another. Thirty-eight percent cited that newer

construction was better designed with patients in mind and more likely to comply with the

Americans with Disabilities Act, which requires certain physical alterations to the environment.

One hospitality house manager stated, “I’d rather live in a home with history, but I would rather

work in a newer building for ease of maintenance. We built our current Ronald [McDonald]

House to escape the mounting repair expenses of our old building.” Her thoughts were echoed

by another staff member who said that she “loved old buildings, but having worked in old and

new, new is so much easier to keep clean.”

More than half of the respondents, 54%, pronounced their support for any building with

history as opposed to newer construction. One staff member stated that she preferred “a building

with history, because they have character and do not look or feel like an institution or a hospital.”

Another of the cancer center managers wrote, “Ours is the first hospitality house that was

constructed to be a residence strictly intended for cancer patients. The feedback from the

residents always describes this 30 year old building as ‘comfortable’ and ‘homey’.”

4.3.2.10 Summary. The term hospitality house “staff” was used in this study to refer to anyone that served or interacted with the residents in any capacity and included members of management, office workers, volunteers and interns. During site visits, these people communicated a desire to serve others and found working at a hospitality house very rewarding.

They were very observant and in-tune with the needs, activities, and physical condition of each resident, and they expressed great admiration for their courage, endurance, and determination to

get better.

Most of the residents that participated in the study did not comment on the questionnaire

when they were asked to list the things that were undesirable about their residences. However,

when the author asked the same question of staff members, they had numerous suggestions such

as the need for a place for older children to interact, a day care or babysitting service on site, a

recycling station on the grounds, and a medical person on staff. These recommendations

illustrate an understanding and connection to the residents’ needs.

The issue of cleanliness frequently appeared on the staff questionnaires on multiple topics

such as the common kitchen area and bedrooms, where the residents are expected to clean up

after themselves; also, under the heading of ‘privacy,’ the subject of residents sharing bathrooms

was described as unsanitary and undesirable; and again, regarding the issue of ‘historic buildings

versus newer construction,’ many staff members described the importance of providing and

maintaining a healthy and clean environment for the residents in both building-type scenarios.

Again, they were primarily concerned about the well-being of the residents and the restoration of

their health.

4.4 Interviews

A series of three interviews transpired with four current stakeholders associated with the

32nd Street Baptist Church located in Birmingham, Alabama. These interviews were conducted to address the study’s following research questions:

1. What historic elements of the project’s case study building must be acknowledged and respected according to the current community stakeholders?

1a. What is the historical background and perspective of this space?

1b. What are the unique visual identifiers of this architecture?

1c. What architectural features should be saved or re-created?

1d. How can the history of a place be incorporated into a new design in a

meaningful way?

The interviewees included Elane Lee-Isa, the current owner of the building; Catherine

Sloss Jones, a local developer who has experience with historic preservation projects in the area;

Pastor Sinclair Lewis, the last minister to lead services in the historic church building; and Pastor

Marlon Elkington, a life long member of the congregation and the current minister of the church.

The extended interview summaries with each participant can be found in Appendices L, N, and

P. These individuals represent different view points of how the church building could be

integrated into the neighborhood as repurposed architecture, and what aspects of its cultural and

architectural history should be acknowledged in the final outcome. Their unique perspectives

have contributed information regarding financial concerns, social and cultural considerations,

and an understanding of the religious foundations of the congregation.

4.4.1 Elane Lee-Isa Interview Summary

Elane Lee-Isa currently lives in New Jersey with her husband of twenty-two years, and she is a family counselor specializing in purposeful parenting and management consulting for family businesses. The interview (Appendix L) took place by telephone on April 19, 2013.

Lee-Isa described her first glimpse of the former 32nd Street Baptist Church as “love at first sight”. While driving around the downtown area, she and her husband were struck by the beauty and magnificence of the structure, even though only the shell remained intact. At that moment, the poem “The Builders,” by Longfellow came to her mind and she knew that they should buy the building. Lee-Isa admitted that purchasing this property was an emotional decision for her and her husband. They do not have any connection to the space other than the desire to preserve history and restore the architecture to a “noble purpose,” while profiting from their investment. Lee-Isa did not perform any significant research on the building until she and her husband were actually the owners.

From a social perspective, Lee-Isa said that the approval of the surrounding community was not essential to her development plans. She suggested that she and her husband would never do anything to the building that could be perceived as inappropriate, in their opinion, but they felt compelled to follow their own instincts regarding development. She joked that they were capitalists, and regarded this as a project of the heart, but they also purchased this building as an investment. Lee-Isa pointed out that the city of Birmingham was responsible for looking out for the rights of the people, so if they received approval for their plans from elected officials, then that was tantamount to social approval from their perspective.

Historically, the Lee-Isa family has enthusiastically and wholeheartedly embraced all of the historical aspects of the 32nd Street Baptist Church, including the church’s involvement in the

Civil Rights Movement. The interviewee stated that she believes that it is important not to forget

everything that history has taught mankind, and that it would be a mistake to selectively choose

which parts of history to remember. Lee-Isa said, “You cannot separate one part of yourself

from another part of yourself. We are all good and bad. It is the same with history.” She also

mentioned that she plans to re-apply for recognition from the National Trust for Historic Places

when the development project is completed, and that should protect the property from future

demolition, as well as increase its importance in the community and its financial value.

To provide some cultural continuity to the community, she suggested that at the very

least a commemorative plaque should be installed on the exterior of the building to

commemorate the congregation’s participation in the Civil Rights Movement; but ideally,

something more significant would be permanently installed or displayed in the interior of the

building, perhaps a small museum or a library with showcases for artifacts. “I believe that a

historical building gives us a sense of wonder, and makes us want to know about the people that

inhabited that space before we got there,” stated Lee-Isa. This building could be “the beginning of a new beginning for the neighborhood, and who knows what might happen after the church is restored [repurposed]?” She also stated that “the members of the former congregation probably

do not live around there anymore, but the new residents could learn and appreciate their history.”

As preservationists, the Lee-Isa’s believe that a responsible developer should not try to

turn a preservation project into something that it cannot feasibly become, and that it is also

important to be a good steward with the resources at hand. “Everything that can be saved for the

sake of preserving history should be saved, but not at all costs,” said Lee-Isa. She noted that all

that remained of the former church building was the exterior shell, so that it was especially

important to preserve what was left of the architecture. “I believe that the two bell towers are a

88 common architectural feature used by Wallace Rayfield in his designs, so those should remain for sure. I would love to install chimes in them so that they could be heard throughout the community,” she added. She also pointed out that the double-sided front staircase leading up to the front entrance was very unique, and that the 1924 building still has its foundational cornerstone in place.

On a visit to the Civil Rights Institute in Birmingham, she noticed that the solitary remaining stained glass window from the 32nd Street Baptist Church was on display there. She remarked to the author that it would “be lovely to put it back into the building; but if that is not possible, perhaps we could re-create it as a focal point. It would put the smile back on the face of the church where it belongs.”

When asked about her future plans for repurposing the space, she reminded the author that the first developers to own the building after it was sold by the 32nd Street Baptist Church congregation had planned to repurpose the space for luxury condominiums (Appendix M) named

“Rayfield Place,” in honor of the architect. The Lee-Isa’s were not totally opposed to the idea of building a residential community, but they preferred to build something that had more of a neighborhood outreach mission. She and her husband have considered repurposing the building into a private school, perhaps for children that need extra counseling for social problems, or for a wellness center that would take a holistic approach to well-being encompassing the mind, body, and spirit. Elane Lee-Isa was very supportive of the idea of repurposing the church building into a hospital-associated hospitality house, and she also recognized that the mission of the former church was in agreement with the services provided by most hospitality houses. However, from a realistic point of view, she also pointed out that a hospitality house would not be profitable as an investment for her family.

4.4.2 The Reverends Lewis and Elkington Interview Summary

Pastor Lewis was the youngest and the last minister of the 32nd Street Baptist Church congregation to lead services in the historic building, and Pastor Elkington grew up as a member of the congregation and has been the minister since 2008. The congregation voted to change their name when they moved away from the original 32nd Street location to New Vision

Community Baptist Church. The interview (Appendix N) took place in person at the new church location in Birmingham on April 12, 2013.

Pastor Lewis described the experience of serving such a historical congregation as a delicate balancing act, because it was important to simultaneously reference the historical context of the congregation in the community and be progressive. He was always aware that the church had “been in the good fight,” and considered it a “blessed privilege to be a part of its history.”

When asked why the congregation decided to sell the old church building, Pastor Lewis said that it simply had not been maintained properly throughout the years and the space was deemed too costly to renovate. Pastor Elkington also described how much the neighborhood had changed since the congregation was founded. The Lakeview District was once a residential community, but had gradually grown into a commercial center beginning in the 1970’s. Prior to that time, the church had been the center of all activity in the neighborhood in every aspect of their lives: socially, culturally, and spiritually.

Pastor Lewis commented that many outstanding people and ministers had spoken from the pulpit as guest speakers including Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.; but the most historically noteworthy pastor that was a full time minister was the Reverend C. L. Lewis. His tenure as pastor at the church was brief, but he was known for his fiery sermons and his beautiful singing

voice. However, he may best be remembered for being the father of soul and gospel singer

Aretha Franklin.

Architecturally, Pastors Lewis and Elkington were in agreement that the exterior shell

should be preserved at all cost. They both commented on how beautiful the façade of the

building was and on how unique the architecture appeared within the context of the

neighborhood. Pastor Lewis said, “Can you imagine how proud of that building those people

must have been in 1924? That was a major accomplishment for black folk(s) back then… for

now, really.” Some of the visual identifiers they mentioned included the front double-sided

staircase and all of the stained glass windows (Appendix O) that were installed on both side

walls of the church. The coloration, opacity, and the sheer quantity of windows made the

interior quite ethereal, in their opinion. Pastor Elkington commented, “[Wallace] Rayfield was a formally trained black architect at a time in history when those words were not normally associated with southern black men. He also designed mostly churches, places of worship. I am very proud of that fact.”

While discussing how people might feel about living in a former African-American church, Pastor Lewis turned the question around and asked Pastor Elkington how he would feel about living in “the former headquarters of the Ku Klux Klan?” Elkington quickly responded that he would “consider it a victory. Good trumps evil, and in the end we were the victors. I would live there and thank God everyday for the privilege and honor of living there.”

Pastor Lewis stated that to save this architectural landmark would also help ensure that the history of the people and their fight for social justice would be preserved “in the bricks” as well. Both pastors agreed that the cultural and religious history should be acknowledged and

preserved together in the re-design of the space because it is important to learn from history.

Pastor Lewis said, “People who do not learn from past mistakes are destined to repeat them.”

The Pastors agreed that in order for the church to be saved, it would probably have to be

repurposed for another use. However, if the church could be adapted for use by another

congregation, that would be their preference. When asked how they envisioned the repurposed

building functioning, Pastor Lewis was generally agreeable to any purpose that would benefit the

community. Pastor Elkington had a more specific vision, “I would like to see an educational

institution there of some kind. I grew up listening to Brother Parker [a former pastor with 35 years of service] preach about the benefits of education, and I am living proof that education does make a difference in a person’s life. I know that he would endorse any purpose that enriched the quality of life for the people in the community, but I would like to see a school there in his honor and named in his memory.”

“I do not think a night club or a dinner theatre-type place would be appropriate,” said

Pastor Lewis while Pastor Elkington nodded his head in agreement. Pastor Elkington added, “I do not think that any business that served alcohol, or was in the business of ‘partying’ would do.” They mutually expanded on that thought by remarking that the church had a “higher purpose,” a calling to serve the residents of the neighborhood and “all of God’s children”.

Pastor Lewis suggested that the re-design of the building should include an honorarium of some type to acknowledge the history of the space, particularly the 100+ years of service to

God and the community (the congregation began in 1910, although the church was not constructed until 1924), as well as its connection to the Civil Rights Movement. He mentioned the possibility of a museum space that would be free to the public. Pastor Elkington proposed

the idea of a chapel, and they were in agreement that there should be a Christian cross hung in

the repurposed building in a prominent location.

The author told the pastors that the church was hypothetically being repurposed for this

study as a hospital-associated hospitality house. When the pastors heard this they started clapping. They understood that this transformation was only supposed to happen in theory, but they were certain that God had planted this seed and that someday it would come to pass. The interview closed with Pastor Elkington leading the group in prayer.

4.4.3 Catherine Sloss Jones Interview Summary

Catherine Jones grew up in Birmingham, Alabama, where her great-grandfather founded

Sloss Furnace in 1882. The Sloss family went on to start other businesses, including Sloss Real

Estate where Jones has been the President and CEO of the company for more than 25 years. She was selected by the author to participate in this study due to her expertise in adaptive reuse as a method of historic preservation in the Lakeview District where the 32nd Street Baptist Church

building is also located. The interview (Appendix P) took place in person at her office on March

29, 2013.

Jones became interested in revitalizing the Lakeview District in 1986, and her company

has been at the forefront of the preservation movement in that neighborhood. They have worked

closely with the Auburn Studio, a co-op that is comprised of advanced students and professors of

architecture from Auburn University, to develop a master plan for the community. In 2011, the

32nd Street Baptist Church was listed on the real estate market by the original developers that were unsuccessful in their attempt to build condominiums, and Sloss Real Estate represented their interest. She provided the author with photos of the interior (Appendices Q and R) that were taken during the time the property was for sale.

Her company has catalogued the types of businesses that have opened and closed in the

Lakeview District during the past 27 years. She noted that in reality, homes should be built in the neighborhood first so that there would be people in the community to support the businesses.

The developers have planned a mixed-use, multicultural, pedestrian-friendly neighborhood.

Jones stated that it was their desire to build housing for different income levels and to bring people together in the spirit of creating a diverse and dynamic community. This concept has been identified as one of the principles of New Urbanism, an architectural theory that Jones studied during graduate school at Harvard University.

She has been involved with approximately 15 adaptive reuse projects in Birmingham.

Her first project has become a local hotspot known as Pepper Place, because it was originally a syrup manufacturing plant for the soft drink, Dr. Pepper. Retail spaces, restaurants, and offices occupy most of the warehouse space, but the landmark is best known locally as a farmer’s market. Jones told the author that she decided to allow local farmers to sell their produce in the parking lot on Saturday mornings in an attempt to make people aware of the area and also to support surrounding small farms.

Catherine Jones said “Preserving history has been fundamentally at the core of every society since the beginning of time. It is human nature to want future generations to know that we were here in this place, and that our contributions mattered.” She went on to say that adaptive reuse was the vehicle by which historic architectural preservation could be accomplished successfully. She remarked that the “city’s [Birmingham’s] future will become richer if we can save her landmark architecture,” and that “tearing down a beautiful old building is just not an option for me; but every old building cannot become a monument or a museum, so it is important to assign them a modern use.”

The social aspects of a building are imperative and must be considered before her

company becomes involved in a project. She described repurposing a building as “financial

suicide” if its new purpose or business is not in agreement with the community, because it will

not be supported by the locals. She stated, “The neighborhood looks so sad now, and saving this

building would show the area residents that they are important, and then more people would

follow and do the same thing. It’s always hard to be the first one, but so worthwhile.”

In her opinion, developers have a responsibility to be respectful to all of the people that have previously occupied a space and their belief systems, when planning an adaptive reuse project. In an effort to gain a perspective on the historical value of the 32nd Street Baptist

Church, the author asked Jones if she thought it was important (or not) to incorporate the history

of the congregation into the new space. She replied, “How could you not incorporate the Civil

Rights history of this building into the re-design? That is the uniqueness, that is the draw, and

frankly, that is the money maker!” She also pointed out that the Civil Rights Movement was a

national event, not just a local incident; therefore, the church should be preserved as a national

landmark and be recognized for its role during an important era of United States history.

“Can you imagine the surprise and horror that the local [white] population must have felt

when the 16th Street and the 32nd Street Baptist Churches were constructed in the 1920’s? Most

black people in Alabama were uneducated sharecroppers, miners, or worked at menial jobs back

then, and this was very grand architecture for Birmingham.” Jones went on to say that it was

significant that the members of the congregation chose to fund such a project with their limited

resources; it gave the church added social value due to the sacrifices that must have been made

by the community.

From an architectural perspective, Catherine Jones thought that the double bell tower was

a unique feature designed by the architect, Wallace Rayfield. She has been aware of his work in

Birmingham for many years, but she did not realize that he designed the 32nd Street Baptist

Church. Preservation is warranted based on this fact alone, in her opinion. She commented on how similar the façade is compared to classically designed European Catholic churches, such as

Notre Dame. She also stated that the new use for the building might inform the design team as to what historical, architectural, or decorative elements should be re-created and/or included. As an example, she suggested that pews might be installed instead of theatre seating if the building were to be repurposed as a theatrical or musical venue.

However, Jones would prefer to see the building designated for a new use that would serve the surrounding community in much the same way that the church did when the congregation was active. She discussed how other buildings on the block could be repurposed into residential and retail spaces in an effort to support a nonprofit community outreach program such as a senior center, day care facility, or neighborhood arts center. She agreed that a hospital-

associated hospitality house could fulfill that role, and that the proximity of the building to St.

Vincent’s Hospital made it a logical and reality-based proposal.

In summary, the merit and value of the 32nd Street Baptist Church building is found in three realms, and each sphere was discussed by the interviewees in varying degrees of depth and expertise. Firstly, it is a unique architectural gem designed by noted architect, Wallace Rayfield; secondly, the congregation participated in the socially charged Civil Rights Movement of the

1950’s and 1960’s. And finally, the Christian outreach mission of the church served the

community, and was the heart and soul of the Lakeview District.

4.5 Emergent Themes

Chapter Four has reported both the quantitative and qualitative data garnered from questionnaires distributed to the residents and staff of six hospitality houses located in Alabama and Florida, observations made by the author during site visits to eight hospitality houses, and interviews with four major community stakeholders. The following themes that have emerged from the data represent possible intersections of sense of place issues, the mission of hospital- associated hospitality houses, and historic preservation through adaptive reuse:

1. Most hospitality house residents enjoyed the social aspects of sharing a meal with family and friends. The kitchen space was highly valued in these residences because it offered control over one small aspect of a resident’s life, especially when their well-being was beyond their control. Fellowship and bonding occurred among residents during food preparation and dining experiences.

2. The need for people to feel safe and secure in their home environment is universal, even if that environment is located in a temporary shelter. Hospitality houses shoulder a distinct responsibility for the safety and well-being of their residents by providing both tangible and intangible elements of security. Perhaps when this most basic need has been met, the patients are free to focus on improving their health.

3. People appreciate privacy and sanctuary. These sense of place qualities were found in all of the hospitality houses in different aspects of the built environment, such as private bedrooms, private bathrooms, dedicated phone lines, chapels, meditation rooms, and outdoor gardens. The staff members also protected the residents’ private medical records and personal information.

4. The desire to create a “home-away-from-home” environment was a priority for both staff members and residents of hospitality houses. Non-institutional furnishings and materials were used in addition to warm colors and natural light sources. Residents brought possessions from home to personalize their spaces, such as bed linens, photographs, and toys.

5. Old historical buildings were cherished and prized by hospitality house respondents

for their character, personality, and uniqueness. The at-home family atmosphere desired for

hospitality houses may be best served by historic architecture due to the human connection felt

by residents, as long as issues regarding cleanliness and sanitation can be addressed.

6. Most survey participants were not deterred from working or staying in a building

associated with a different social, religious, or cultural value system from their own, therefore

making most antiquated buildings potential candidates for hospitality houses.

7. The divine calling or purpose of the 32nd Street Baptist Church was to serve and

minister to the residents of the Lakeview District. As a sanctified edifice, the new use for the

structure should reflect its original community outreach mission, as well as honor the history of

the congregation that worshiped there.

8. This example of religious architecture has been a landmark building in the community

since 1924. The interviewees were in agreement that the shell and façade should be saved in

order to honor the work of architect Wallace Rayfield, to provide visual continuity and identity

to the neighborhood, and also to preserve the history of the congregation embodied in the

structure.

These and other emergent themes will be discussed in Chapter Five and used to arrive at

informed conclusions that describe the essence of what it means to create a sense of place within

historic architecture. The author will also suggest potential avenues for further research that

have been identified over the course of this study.

4.6 Summary

In summary, this chapter has detailed the information gathered through site visits, interviews, and questionnaires regarding the repurposing of historic architecture into a hospital- associated hospitality house, while exploring the intersections of sense of place in a temporary shelter. The research instruments were formulated to answer the primary and secondary research questions presented in Chapter Three, and emerging themes were discussed.

The following Chapter Five has summarized this research study and further analyzed the most significant findings, encapsulated what can be learned from those discoveries, and reinterpreted the information from a holistic perspective. In conclusion to this study, suggestions for future research have been proposed in the next chapter.

CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY

5.1 Introduction

From the beginning, the goal of this study has been to bring awareness to a historic

landmark building formerly known as the 32nd Street Baptist Church located in Birmingham,

Alabama, by adapting it to a new use. In theory, the transformation would repurpose the structure into a hospital-associated hospitality house that would provide food and shelter to people experiencing a medical crisis. By applying the research explored in the review of literature, data collection, and the history of the site, the author will here discuss emergent themes that illustrate the symbiotic relationship that may exist between historic preservation,

sense of place, and temporary shelters for at-risk populations. The areas of tension and

agreement between the hospitality house population, the current owner of the church building, a

local developer of historic architecture, and two church leaders, past and present, will also be

examined.

At the conclusion of this chapter, the author also proposes suggestions for further

research and offers some final reflections.

5.2 Emergent Themes

The following section will offer conclusions drawn from the emerging themes presented

in Chapter Four. The significance and implications of these conclusions will be explored,

possible design solutions will be presented, and potential changes to hospitality house protocol

will be suggested.

The primary research question is, “How can historically significant buildings be

adaptively reused with integrity and value of original purpose while fostering community and

100

creating a sense of place in a temporary communal residence?” Each of the following emergent

themes describes the author’s interpretation of the data’s responses to this question:

5.2.1 Breaking Bread Fosters Bonding

The framework for establishing a sense of place identified by Fritz Steele (1981)

recognizes that personal and cultural experiences can create a sense of belonging or rootedness,

and helps to form bonds between people and places. Such an understanding and spiritual

connection to a place can foster bonding within the community among all parties who have an

emotional stake in a place. Shared physical perceptions and experiences help people from different cultural backgrounds fashion a local culture that expresses their unity in a place. The group solidifies its bonds through celebrations and rituals (Loukaitou-Sideris, 1995), such as sharing a meal or celebrating a homecoming or birthday. Most hospitality house residents enjoy the social aspects of preparing and sharing a meal with family and friends. Staff members have observed that fellowship and bonding occurs among residents during food preparation and dining experiences, and this study’s research identified the kitchen as the most highly valued and

appreciated physical space in the hospitality house.

One possible design solution for a hospitality house kitchen would be to incorporate

multiple work stations with unobstructed views to fellow residents who were also preparing

food, or eating, or were just there to socialize. This would promote interaction and facilitate

conversation among the residents.

The interview with Pastors Lewis and Elkington has revealed an historic reference with a

similar finding. When it was active, the 32nd Street Baptist Church was the center of community

life for the congregation, serving as the venue for all types of social events, not just religious

activities, such as birthday parties, anniversary celebrations, and baby showers. The original

101

architecture included a large kitchen where the ladies of the church and neighborhood once

gathered to prepare food and socialize. Catherine Sloss Jones, a local real estate developer, and the current owner of the building, Elane Lee-Isa, both envision a large food preparation space in their respective versions of proposed future development: Jones would like to see the space used as a community center for the Lakeview District, and Lee-Isa envisions the building as a school or wellness center.

The hospitality house residents, staff, and the four community stakeholders are in significant agreement that preparing and sharing a meal with other people is about more than just the physical act of eating food. This social function promotes health, well-being, and human bonding.

5.2.2 Shelter, Security and Safety are Significant

Shelter provides a home base for self-protection and is the foundation for establishing feelings of security and personal safety (Maslow, 1954). Human beings need to feel secure about their physical body before they can concentrate on their health and well-being. A shelter is a refuge from the stresses of daily life and provides a safe haven for rejuvenation and creates a sense of place (Steele, 1981). The need for people to feel safe and secure in their home environment is universal, even if their home is located in a temporary shelter. Hospitality houses provide no-cost or low-cost shelter to people experiencing a medical crisis in their lives. They also assume responsibility for the safety of their residents within the house by providing both tangible and intangible elements of security. With this most basic and vital need provided for them, patients and caregivers are free to focus on medical treatments and improving their health.

Through site visits and observation, the author has noticed that there are many devices and protocols in place to protect the residents from the outside world, such as security cameras,

102

gates, keypad entries, and staff members checking identification cards at the front desk.

However, the residents begin their relationships as strangers and have little protection from each

other. Hospitality houses take in residents that are referred to them from a doctor’s office or

hospital, but none of the institutions participating in this study requires a security screening to be performed on the potential resident before they are admitted into the house. Therefore, in the

interest of everyone’s safety and security, the author recommends that hospitality houses should

screen applicants to determine if there is a record of criminal behavior. People with such a record should not be permitted to reside in a place where adults and children are ill, vulnerable, and/or at-risk. Knowing that everyone in the residence has been through such a screening process could possibly enhance the feeling of safety within the house.

During the interview with Catherine Jones, she discussed her concerns for the Lakeview

District in terms of safety and security for retail businesses and future residents. Some parts of the area have been revitalized, thanks in part to her efforts, but she still would not consider the area to be safe after dark. Elane Lee-Isa refers to this part of Birmingham as “blighted and desolate,” and she also has concerns regarding security due to the number of vacant buildings in the area, the proximity of the church to a major highway, and the near-by location of a homeless shelter. Pastor Elkington made comments regarding the evolution of the community from a residential neighborhood to a commercial zone that took place during his childhood, and Pastor

Lewis says that the church had been vandalized and burglarized during his tenure as the last congregational pastor.

These parties were in agreement that the neighborhood is currently not a safe place to live or work in at night, but that it could be revitalized if large numbers of residences could be built in the area and small businesses opened simultaneously. Perhaps a security guard service or

103

a police presence would create a safer environment for the first residents who move into the area.

However, tension exists between the current state of the neighborhood and the reality that

hospitality house residents need to feel safe and secure while they are receiving medical treatment.

5.2.3 Privacy, Peacefulness, and Prayer are a Priority

A group home, such as a hospitality house, is rarely experienced by people without the companionship of others; however, the key is the ability to control access by establishing a territory with boundaries (Steele, 1981). The most potent personal places have distinct boundaries and offer privacy and sanctuary to the residents, so that there is a clear line between the personal environment and all other spaces. For example, all of the hospitality houses participating in this study provide each resident or family unit with a private bedroom. A personal and private place in a communal home allows the residents to control social contact with other people, and having a sense of control is crucial to the well-being of humans (Peterson,

Maier & Seligman, 1993; Wells, 2007). Boundaries can be manifested by visual barriers, such as bedroom walls, or by less physical expressions, such as a person’s need for quiet time and contemplation that is respected by others (Tuan, 1977).

Hospitality house residents are typically in medical crisis and receiving treatment far away from the comfort and support of their home environment. The research suggests that these people often seek a place of solitude for quiet meditation and/or prayer. This information is significant because the site location for this study is historic ecclesiastical architecture.

However, only one out of six hospitality houses that took part in this study provides a dedicated space for such activities, possibly illustrating the lack of understanding or undervaluing the connection between spiritual well-being and the physical health of their residents.

104

A simple design solution for the built environment would be to create a dedicated

meditation room or chapel within the hospitality house. If the square footage is not available

within the residence to accommodate a place of sanctuary, perhaps a series of intimate outdoor

spaces and gardens could be designed on the hospitality house grounds, which could be utilized

by all of the residents desiring introspection. A final suggestion would be to offer a holistic

exercise program to the residents, such as yoga or Tai Chi, that emphasizes spiritual harmony as well as physical health.

Pastors Lewis and Elkington are in agreement with each other that the best use for the building would be to become the church home for another congregation. However, they acknowledge that this scenario is unlikely due to the financial constraints of most churches, as well as the lack of potential members in the area. The consolation for them would be to incorporate a chapel into the repurposed space with a Christian symbol, such as a cross or crucifix, as the focal point. They believe that this is necessary to honor and memorialize the history of the 32nd Street Baptist Church. Although Catherine Jones and Elane Lee-Isa would not be in agreement with the pastors about re-establishing a congregation or re-creating a Christian chapel, they do want to acknowledge the history of the church and the participation of the congregation in the Civil Rights Movement with a plaque, small museum, or vitrines filled with photographs and memorabilia. Therefore, there is tension between the owner and developer versus the pastors as to how and to what degree the religious aspects of the building should be commemorated, but they are all in agreement that the history of the church and the activities of the parishioners during the struggle for civil rights should be recognized in the repurposed space.

105

5.2.4 Hospitality Houses Serve as a “Home-Away-From-Home”

It is possible to create a sense of place in a new and different location if some of the elements and qualities of the primary home environment are present, according to some researchers (Steele, 1981; Oldenburg, 1999; Kopec, 2009). Further research indicates that people are more comfortable in interior spaces that are decorated with their personal belongings than those that are not (Wells, 2007). The desire to create a home-like environment is a priority for both staff members and residents of hospitality houses. The mission statement, website, and/or literature from the six hospitality houses participating in this study repeatedly use the phrase “home-away-from-home” to describe the prevailing atmosphere or environment found in their facilities. Creating a sense of place with the addition of personal possessions is the most commonly used form of personalization (Steele, 1981). Residents and caregivers frequently bring possessions from home to personalize their space, such as bed linens, photographs, artwork, toys, and electronics. Personalization can positively affect the environmental satisfaction and well-being of individuals at work and at home because it demonstrates control over the environment (Wells, 2007). Therefore, allowing residents to personalize their rooms and private spaces may contribute to their overall health and happiness.

In an effort to create a sense of place and encourage residents to genuinely feel at home, hospitality house designers could leave some table tops bare and provide empty, open shelving so that residents are able to fill them with personal belongings, such as memorabilia, books, and photographs. Another design solution would be to install a cork board so that residents can display and easily access personal articles, such as greeting cards, artwork, and inspirational messages.

106

Included in the original mission statement of the 32nd Street Baptist Church is the divine calling to “shelter God’s children from the storms of life… feed the soul… embrace the lost… and support the community of brothers and sisters….” This is also in accord with the purpose and objectives of a hospital-associated hospitality house, and the pastors concur that this would be an acceptable alternative to re-establishing the building as a church. Catherine Jones also supports this concept if St. Vincent’s Hospital, the hypothetical client in this study, or another hospital purchased and renovated the building. She believes that other small businesses could open nearby in response to having a built-in customer base via hospitality house staff, residents, and their visitors, and this is in agreement with her long-term plan to redevelop the Lakeview

District. Although Elane Lee-Isa offered the author positive feedback on the idea of a hospitality house, as the owner of the building she believes that the repurposed space will have to be more profitable than charitable. It would appear that there is tension here between Lee-Isa’s need to establish a profitable business, versus a non-profit type of business supported by the pastors and

Jones, but Lee-Isa’s proposed ideas regarding the founding of a private school or wellness center could serve the community, as well as provide a return on her investment, and thus could resolve this point of contention between the community stakeholders.

5.2.5 The Embodied Humanity of Historic Architecture may Facilitate Well-Being

Historic preservation stems from a deep psychological need for security and roots

(Powell, 1999). Adaptive reuse is a type of preservation where old buildings are repurposed to facilitate new functions and activities for which they were not originally intended. The most successful transformations through adaptive reuse are respectful of the building’s history and mindful of the surrounding community (Diamonstein, 1978). Old buildings appeal to people on a deeper and more nostalgic level than new construction, and they are often beloved for their

107

history, familiarity, and humanness (Brand, 1995; Powell, 1999). This study’s research suggests

that buildings with history are cherished and valued by hospitality house respondents for their

character, personality, and uniqueness. The concept of repurposing older architecture may be

particularly refreshing to hospitality house residents because traditional institutional-type medical facilities, such as hospitals, can cause anxiety and stress in patients, and therefore, undermine the healing process (Ananth, 2010). The at-home family atmosphere desired for hospitality houses may be best served in historic architecture due to the human connection and familiarity felt by residents that can contribute to their well-being. In addition, most hospitality house residents and staff members are not deterred from working or staying in a building that is associated with a different social, religious, or cultural value/belief system from their own, therefore making almost all buildings with significant age viable candidates for hospitality houses.

Major hospitals are often located in urban areas that are surrounded by older vacant buildings that can be imbued with charm and history. The noise and activity associated with these areas can deter some types of renovation and long-term residences, but the proximity to the

hospital creates a symbiotic relationship between hospitality houses and the patients and

caregivers they shelter. However, this study reveals one reoccurring negative aspect that is

linked with older structures, versus newer construction, that involves issues of cleanliness,

sanitation, healthy building materials, and fresh air. The design solution that is proposed by the

author for older buildings, if appropriate, would be to remove all of the potentially harmful

interior finishes down to the framing or infrastructure, preserve the shell intact, and reuse as

many of the architectural and decorative features as possible in the repurposed architecture. This

action would be followed by reconstruction using the healthiest building materials available

108

while bringing the structure up to the standards set forth by the International Building Code.

Kent Burress, CFO of Ronald McDonald House Charities in Austin, Texas, a LEED (Leadership

in Energy and Environmental Design) Platinum certified building, stated, “Our first mission is to

provide a healthy house environment for our children and their families,” (Ronald McDonald

House Charities of Austin & Central Texas, 2013) emphasizing the need for hospitality houses to

assist residents on their journey to better health.

The site location for this study is the former 32nd Street Baptist Church in Birmingham,

Alabama, which could serve as an example for bringing old elements and new features together to create a meaningful historical tribute with a modern purpose. The original church interior is non-existent, but the historic exterior is intact and structurally sound, according to the owner.

The building’s façade is a familiar landmark in the neighborhood and in its renovated condition could conceivably serve as a model for other hospitality houses to follow. The new space would demonstrate the connectedness that exists between historic preservation and the positive effects that embodied architecture can have on the human spirit by providing a sense of place and belonging.

A major point of agreement between the four community stakeholders, Jones, Lee-Isa,

Lewis and Elkington, is the absolute necessity of saving the exterior shell of the 32nd Street

Baptist Church building, designed by prominent architect, Wallace Rayfield. It is their consensus of opinion that the architecture is unique, iconic, monumental, and worthy of preservation at all costs, regardless of the intended future use of the building. The double-sided front staircase and the bell towers are both architectural visual identifiers of the structure mentioned by all four stakeholders, with Elane Lee-Isa also remarking that she would also like to install chimes in the bell towers as an audio reminder to the neighborhood that they are part of a

109

very special community. The pastors and Lee-Isa are also in agreement regarding the solitary

stained-glass window that is on display at the Civil Rights Institute in downtown Birmingham.

During interviews with these individuals, they have expressed hope that the window would be

returned to the church building when it is renovated. Acknowledging that this is an unlikely

scenario, they are in agreement that perhaps the window could be re-created and prominently

featured as part of the historic architecture. A photograph of the window taken by the author is

shown in Appendix O.

5.3 Research Questions

This section will address the study’s following research questions:

4. What intersections and contrasts exist between the historical aspects of the architecture,

adaptive reuse goals, and creating a sense of place as perceived by the study’s stakeholders?

4a. What criteria are used by the community stakeholders when evaluating an historical

building for adaptive reuse purposes? What criteria, if any, are discounted or ignored?

4b. In what ways do community stakeholders seek to resolve the conflicts often presented

between respect for the history of a building and its contextual meaning within

a community, and the current needs of the modern day population?

The community stakeholders that contributed to this study are Elane Lee-Isa, the current owner of the former church building, Catherine Sloss Jones, a local developer of historic architecture, Reverend Victor Lewis, the last pastor of the 32nd Street Baptist Church

congregation, and Reverend Marlon Elkington, who is the current pastor of the congregation

now known as The New Vision Baptist Church. They participated in separate interview sessions

with the author, with the exception of the pastors, who were interviewed together. This

procedure precluded the participants from influencing one another’s responses to questions, and

110

prevented one or more stakeholders from becoming overbearing or dominating the conversation,

or from withholding information or their opinions during the interview so as not to offend the

other participants.

The prevailing response to the preservation of the 32nd Street Baptist Church in

Birmingham is unanimously supported by all of the community stakeholders. On some level,

they have expressed their respect for the architecture and the architect, as well as their admiration for the historic contributions made by the congregation during the Civil Rights Movement.

However, tension exists when the stakeholders reveal their visions for repurposing the architecture and how much space should be designated to commemorate the historical aspects.

The pastors believe that the best use for the church building would be to remodel the structure for a new congregation, but they are willing to concede that a non-profit or business with a community outreach focus would be agreeable. This concept would be more in agreement with the owner’s and the developer’s vision of a school or community center. Lee-Isa and Jones would install a plaque or vignette to remind visitors of the historic nature of the building, but the pastors would prefer to have a designated room within the repurposed space for worship and prayer. Given the nature of their professions as religious leaders, they would also prefer for the space to have Christian imagery and symbolism incorporated into the design to pay homage to the church’s Baptist roots. It is the author’s perception that the historical aspects of the building are prioritized differently by the stakeholders. The pastors perceive the space as a church first, a

House of God and a sanctified place of worship, then secondly as a place significant to the Civil

Rights Movement, and lastly, as an important architectural landmark. Conversely, the owner and the developer recognize the significance of the architecture and its place in the community first,

111 followed by the Civil Rights Movement connection, and then finally, as a church or religious organization.

It is the author’s perception that Catherine Jones is the only participant that seems to view the property as part of a collective whole. She has repurposed many historic buildings in the area and is the current president of the Lakeview Development District, and she sees the former 32nd

Street Baptist Church as an identifiable visual landmark for the community. In her opinion, it could be a tourist attraction due to its participation in the Civil Rights Movement, and a calling card to attract more businesses and residential development. She is most in-tune to the needs and desires of the potential inhabitants of the community, and she would like to develop a district based on the principles of New Urbanism, where the residents are culturally and socio- economically diverse, and the streets are pedestrian-friendly. After conducting her own research, it is her professional opinion that this Birmingham neighborhood is a prime candidate for this type of development. Tension exists here because Lee-Isa frequently expresses her rights of solitary ownership and the privilege of deciding what becomes of the building. The purchase of the property was an emotional decision for Lee-Isa, and she is very protective about its future.

She reserves the right to profit from her investment, but financial considerations will not be the most important factor when she decides how the building will be repurposed.

All of the stakeholders that participated in this study agree that the historic church merits respectful adaptation to a new use. That respect should encompass the past historical aspects of the architecture and the congregation, and also include the current and future residents of the surrounding community. The author is hopeful that Elane Lee-Isa and Catherine Jones can find common ground and work together to restore the historic church in reality.

112

5.4 Suggestions for Further Research

The following section will discuss potential avenues for further research, which are informed by the study’s conclusions.

5.4.1 Symbiotic Relationship between Adaptive Reuse and Sustainability through the Lens of Historic Preservation

The sustainable preservation movement is growing from the synergies that exist between historic preservation and sustainability, which is defined as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”

(McDonough, 2002). Both building practices support the preservation of buildings and encourage the reuse and recycling of materials, as well as the removal of hazardous materials

(Bender & Green, 2009). The regeneration of buildings conserves resources and benefits the environment by reducing waste and saving embodied energy, as discussed in Chapter Two, in addition to preserving the history and integrity of the architecture. “The Sustainable Preservation movement seeks to leverage the inherently energy efficient elements of historic buildings, as well as sensitively incorporate new elements, materials, systems and equipment in a way that retains historic materials and character defining features” (Bender & Green, 2009, p. 3).

The focus of this study is to examine the intersections of adaptive reuse and sense of place issues; however, adaptive reuse and sustainability are also preservation partners that can provide long term benefits to the health and well-being of mankind. Integrating these

approaches to form a more holistic perspective is important to understanding the comprehensive

value of historic preservation.

113

5.4.2 Creating a Sense of Place in Historic Architecture Using Other Types of Communal

Living Environments as the Model

Hospital-associated hospitality houses are just one type of communal living environment.

Other types of temporary communal living residences that might have a similar at-risk population would include homeless shelters, women and children’s shelters, and hospice care centers. Therefore, the author would anticipate similar research findings originating from those environments concerning sense of place issues; however, there are other types of temporary communal living shelters that might offer some different findings or variables. For example, college dormitories are communal and temporary by nature, but the population is not usually experiencing a medical crisis and can vary by age, gender, and academic interests. Penitentiaries would be another example of a temporary living environment that could provide an interesting population to study. Prisons are typically gender specific and the residents can vary by socio- economic background, education level, and the nature of the crime that led to their conviction and incarceration. Family units are generally not present in college dormitories or penitentiaries, which might alter the dynamics of personal relationships and interactions with other residents.

As an example, college students are known for personalizing their living space by bringing possessions from home. These tangible elements are expressions of the human need to attach memories to artifacts and display them for onlookers to experience. To a great extent, these visual representations express a person’s sense of identity (Steele, 1981), and give them control over their environment. What if prisoners are allowed to personalize their cells, to exercise the smallest amount of control over their environment, could it positively affect their behavior during incarceration and possibly beyond?

114

5.4.3 Diversifying the Geographic Limitations

The findings presented in this study are limited to a regional demographic, namely the

southeastern portion of the United States. The author visited two hospitality houses in Virginia

prior to beginning this study for observational purposes, and the questionnaires have been collected from three hospitality houses that are located in Alabama, and three houses that are located in Florida, thus creating a geographically limited pool of participants. Although respondents from other states did participate in the study, their primary residences are located in the Southeast as well.

The author acknowledges that one or more findings may have been skewed by the narrow geographic scope of this study. For example, the residents of the six hospitality houses that are participating in this study often express an overwhelming feeling of gratitude, both verbally to the author and in writing, regarding the generosity and kindness that they are experiencing as resident guests. This ‘attitude of gratitude’ is not the problem in and of itself; however, the residents are so grateful for any help or assistance that it is difficult to determine what elements of the environment or other qualities pertaining to their hospitality house stay are not positive.

To illustrate, the author has observed on site visits that the laundry facilities varied greatly from house to house by size, quantity, quality, and modernity. However, similar positive responses have been received from all of the hospitality houses regarding their physical amenities, including the laundry area. Further research might identify if this behavior is common to all populations who are at-risk or are in crisis, and/or if this behavior is primarily prevalent in the south where an emphasis is placed on good manners and social etiquette.

115

5.5 Final Reflections

The residents of the hospitality houses are courageous under pressure, and the staff embraces them with love and support. However, it is the interview portion of this study that has profoundly affected and forever changed the author’s perspective regarding historic preservation.

Interviewing four passionate people with very different points of view has been the highlight of this journey. Each interviewee brings a particular energy and a vision for the former 32nd Street

Baptist Church building to the table, which is both inspiring and overwhelming. The following is a brief summary of conversations that transpired outside of the actual interview parameters:

Catherine Sloss Jones has requested the contact information for Elane Lee-Isa, the current owner of the church building. She is interested in pursuing a joint development project with the

Lee-Isa family in accordance with the Lakeview District revitalization project she has created.

The author has communicated this information to the owners, and they are currently in contact with each other and have scheduled a face-to-face meeting for the fall of 2013. The possibility that this hypothetical project may lead to the restoration of the historic church building in reality is very promising.

Pastors Victor Lewis and Marlon Elkington are spiritual leaders and men of faith. They believe that God has divinely inspired the author and planted this seed so that this remarkable example of historic and religious architecture will be saved. Their strong beliefs and words of encouragement have created some anxiety for the author; but perhaps they are right and the 32nd

Street Baptist Church will be saved by the people brought together as a result of this study. The author will follow-up with the owner of the building and the potential developer in the near future, and will keep the pastors informed of their plans.

116

5.6 Conclusion

Based on the quantitative and qualitative data garnered from hospitality house residents and staff, and from four community stakeholders, this study demonstrates that the spirit and the original Christian outreach mission of the 32nd Street Baptist Church could still be served through adaptive reuse by repurposing the structure into a hospital-associated hospitality house.

The iconic exterior and the historical background of the church will enhance a sense of place, or

“home-away-from-home” environment for the residents; but the embodied spirit of the architecture alone will not create a sense of place. Some of the qualities and elements necessary to create a sense of place in a hospital-associated hospitality house identified by this study are privacy, security, the need for sanctuary, personalization, and a sense of belonging. These aspects have been translated into recommendations that include a change in protocol related to security, additions to the programs offered by the hospitality houses that promote spiritual well- being, and design solutions that will enhance the at-home environment. The preservation of a historic building together with sense of place characteristics could provide continuity in the neighborhood, promote a healing atmosphere, and contribute to a sense of community for the hospitality house residents and staff. This study suggests that historically significant buildings can be adaptively reused with integrity and value of original purpose while fostering community and creating a sense of place in a temporary communal residence, and serve both purposes well.

117

APPENDIX A

HUMAN SUBJECTS APPROVAL

Office of the Vice President for Research Human Subjects Committee Tallahassee, Florida 32306-2742 (850) 644-8673 · FAX (850) 644-4392 APPROVAL MEMORANDUM Date: 3/08/13 To: Linda Lyons Address: Dept.: Interior Design From: Thomas L. Jacobson, Chair Re: Use of Human Subjects in Research THE HISTORIC 32ND STREET BAPTIST CHURCH REBORN: EXPLORING INTERSECTIONS OF ADAPTIVE REUSE AND SENSE OF PLACE

The application that you submitted to this office in regard to the use of human subjects in the proposal referenced above have been reviewed by the Secretary, the Chair, and two members of the Human Subjects Committee. Your project is determined to be Expedited per 45 CFR § 46.110(7) and has been approved by an expedited review process.

The Human Subjects Committee has not evaluated your proposal for scientific merit, except to weigh the risk to the human participants and the aspects of the proposal related to potential risk and benefit. This approval does not replace any departmental or other approvals, which may be required.

If you submitted a proposed consent form with your application, the approved stamped consent form is attached to this approval notice. Only the stamped version of the consent form may be used in recruiting research subjects.

If the project has not been completed by 03/07/2014 you must request a renewal of approval for continuation of the project. As a courtesy, a renewal notice will be sent to you prior to your expiration date; however, it is your responsibility as the Principal Investigator to timely request renewal of your approval from the Committee.

You are advised that any change in protocol for this project must be reviewed and approved by the Committee prior to implementation of the proposed change in the protocol. A protocol change/amendment form is required to be submitted for approval by the Committee. In addition, federal regulations require that the Principal Investigator promptly report, in writing any unanticipated problems or adverse events involving risks to research subjects or others.

118

By copy of this memorandum, the chairman of your department and/or your major professor is reminded that he/she is responsible for being informed concerning research projects involving human subjects in the department, and should review protocols as often as needed to insure that the project is being conducted in compliance with our institution and with DHHS regulations.

This institution has an Assurance on file with the Office for Human Research Protection. The Assurance Number is IRB00000446.

Cc: Jill Pable, Advisor HSC No. 2013.9944

119

APPENDIX B

FSU BEHAVIORAL CONSENT FORM

120

APPENDIX C

COVER LETTER TO HOSPITALITY HOUSE RESIDENTS

Dear Resident Guest:

Thank you for participating in this brief research survey related to your hospitality house stay. Your participation will be very beneficial to my graduate research at The Florida State University, and the information that you provide could affect the design plan and amenities for future hospitality houses and the comfort of their guests. In addition to questions concerning your specific house accommodations, the study will also ask questions regarding your perceptions of privacy, security, and your connectedness to this hospitality house.

There are minimal risks associated with this research beyond the risks associated with daily life and all of the information collected will remain confidential. You do not need to provide your name on the questionnaire, and all of the information gathered will remain under lock and key with the researcher. All of the data collected will be destroyed one year after the collection of this information. You will not receive compensation for completing this survey. Your participation is valued and completely voluntary, and you may stop your participation at any time.

Enclosed is a copy of the survey that should not take more than 15 minutes of your time to complete and a consent form. Please read the consent form carefully and contact the primary investigator if you have any questions. In an effort to protect your privacy and identity, your name or signature is not required on the consent form or questionnaire in order for the data to be used. The act of filling out the questionnaire will serve as your consent. Please keep the copy of the consent form for your records. When you have read the consent form and completed the questionnaire, please insert it into the attached envelope and seal it, then return to the front desk. The staff at this hospitality house will not have access to your answers. . Thank you again for your participation, Linda Lyons MFA graduate student The Florida State University

121

APPENDIX D

COVER LETTER TO HOSPITALITY HOUSE STAFF

Dear Staff Member:

Thank you for participating in this brief research survey related to your hospitality house staff position. Your participation will be very beneficial to my graduate research at The Florida State University, and the information that you provide could affect the design plan and amenities for future hospitality houses and the comfort of their guests. In addition to questions concerning the accommodations at your specific house, the study will also ask questions regarding your observations and perceptions of the interactions among residents, and privacy and security issues in your hospitality house.

There are minimal risks or benefits associated with this research beyond the risks associated with daily life, and all of the information collected will remain confidential. You do not need to provide your name on the questionnaire, and all of the information gathered will remain under lock and key with the researcher. All of the data collected will be destroyed one year after the collection of this information. You will not receive compensation for completing this survey, or be adversely affected beyond the risks associated with daily life. Your participation is valued and completely voluntary, and you may stop your participation at any time.

Enclosed is a copy of the survey that should not take more than 15 minutes of your time to complete and two consent forms. Your signature is required on one consent form and must be returned along with the questionnaire in order for me to use the data. Please keep one copy of the consent form for your records. When you have completed the questionnaire and signed the consent form, please insert both into the attached envelope and seal it, then return to the front desk.

Thank you again for your participation, Linda Lyons

122

APPENDIX E

EMAIL SCRIPT TO INTERVIEWEES

Dear (Rev. Lewis, Rev. Elkington, Mrs. Jones, or Mrs. Lee-Isa):

Thank you again for your willingness to participate in the research that I am conducting for my thesis as a graduate student at The Florida State University. As you probably remember, we will be discussing historic preservation through adaptive reuse and the former 32nd Street Baptist Church located in Birmingham, Alabama, in an informal oral interview session.

Participation in this research is totally voluntary, and you may quit at any time during the interview for any reason. Attached is a copy of the interview questions that I will pose to you during the interview, as well as a copy of the consent form for you to read in advance. You can contact me by e-mail or by the cell phone number listed below should you have any questions or concerns prior to our interview.

The interview should take approximately 30-45 minutes of your time, and it will be necessary for me to audio record our conversation for accuracy and reference purposes only. The recording will be password protected on my personal computer and deleted after one year from the date of the interview. The information that you can provide is unique and very valuable to my research, but there are no benefits associated with this research beyond educational purposes. Also, there are no risks associated with this research beyond those associated with daily life.

I am sincerely looking forward to meeting with you. Please let me know when would be a convenient time for the interview.

Thank you again for your support,

Linda Lyons

123

APPENDIX F

EMAIL SCRIPT TO HOSPITALITY HOUSES

Dear Hospitality House Manager:

Creating a “home-away-from-home” environment is the focus of my graduate research at Florida State University. I am a second year Master of Fine Arts candidate in interior design, and I would sincerely appreciate your help conducting a brief survey in your hospitality house among residents and staff. Copies of the questionnaire and consent forms are attached for your review. In general, the survey seeks to understand the importance of certain spaces within the hospitality house and the qualities necessary to help people feel “at home” when they must temporarily live away from their primary residence.

Participation in the 10-15 minute survey is totally voluntary, participants may quit at any time, and there are no risks associated with this research beyond the scope of daily life. Participants will be asked to read a consent form and will be have an opportunity to ask questions before they are given a copy of the questionnaire. The act of filling out the questionnaire will mean that they give their consent. If they choose to complete the questionnaire, they will be asked to return it to the front desk in a sealed envelope that will be provided for their use. In an effort to protect the identity and privacy of the participants, names are not requested on the questionnaire or envelope. As the researcher, I will be responsible for dropping off and collecting the survey instruments.

There are no benefits associated with this survey at this time beyond the educational benefits that I will receive during my thesis research. Please contact me if you have any questions or would like to discuss this opportunity further. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,

Linda Lyons

124

APPENDIX G

TRANSCRIPT OF EARLY TELEPHONE CONTACT WITH INTERVIEWEES

Transcript of telephone inquiry to three potential interviewees; Elane Lee-Isa, Catherine Sloss Jones, Rev. Marlon Elkington and Rev. Sinclair Lewis:

PI: Hello, my name is Linda Lyons and I am a graduate student at FSU. If this is a good time for you to talk, I would like to tell you about my thesis research project.

General Response: Yes, this is a good time.

PI: I am from Birmingham, and I am very interested in the history of the 32nd Street Baptist Church and the adaptive reuse of the building. I understand that you have a special connection to the (architecture, neighborhood, or former congregation).

General Response: Yes, I do.

PI: If I continue down this research path, would you be willing to be interviewed so that you can tell me what you know about the former church?

General Response: Yes, tell me what would be involved.

PI: Ideally, it would be an oral interview that would take place in your office or a location of your choosing and it would be recorded for accuracy. I think it would take at least 30 minutes and less than one hour. Participation is totally voluntary, and you can choose not to answer any question or stop the interview at any time. There are minimal risks associated with this interview, and the benefits are educational in nature. I would need you to sign a consent form, which I would send to you in advance of the interview for you to read and contact me with questions.

125

General Response: When would this take place?

PI: It would be during the spring semester. Hopefully, during spring break, which is early March, when I will be at home in Birmingham. Would that be a convenient time for you?

General Response: Probably. Please call or e-mail me in advance to schedule an appointment. Good luck, Linda.

PI: Thank you. I look forward to meeting with you in the spring.

126

APPENDIX H

INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR THE OWNER AND DEVELOPER

1. What is your personal connection to Birmingham, the Lakeview District, and/or the former 32nd Street Baptist Church?

2. How many adaptive reuse projects have you been involved with in this area, and can you describe them for me?

3. Do you think it is important to society at large to preserve architectural and cultural history together through adaptive reuse? If so, why?

4. What type of research and data gathering do you perform prior to purchasing and renovating a building, if any?

5. In what ways do you consider the social aspects of a building when planning an adaptive reuse project? [The researcher will provide 2-3 examples of social aspects as prompt if necessary.]

6. In what ways do you consider the cultural aspects of a building when planning an adaptive reuse project? [The researcher will provide 2-3 examples of cultural aspects as prompt if necessary.]

7. In what ways do you consider the historical aspects of a building when planning an adaptive reuse project? [The researcher will provide 2-3 examples of historical aspects as prompt if necessary.]

8. How do the current needs of the community factor into your decision making process concerning adaptive reuse?

127

9. Have you found it necessary to reconcile the current needs of the community with the history of the space? If so, how did you deal with this?

10. What other factors, if any, should contribute to the final decision regarding what building type will be constructed within a preserved structure in your opinion?

11. Can you tell me a bit of what you know about the former 32nd Street Baptist Church?

12. From a historical perspective, what aspects of this space do you perceive as worthy of preservation if any?

13. What are the unique visual identifiers of this architecture if any? [The researcher will provide definition of visual identifiers if necessary.]

14. In your opinion, is there anything about these architectural features or the history of the architecture itself that qualifies these elements as unique or special?

15. To your knowledge, are any of these architectural elements exclusive to the former 32nd Street Baptist Church building?

16. What architectural features should be saved or re-created at this site if any, and why?

17. In what ways if any would the neighborhood be enriched by saving this architectural landmark building?

18. If this structure were to be preserved, should the cultural or religious history of the space also be acknowledged and incorporated into the re-design of the building? Why or why not?

19. How do you visualize the history of this place being incorporated into a new design in a meaningful way, if at all?

128

20. How would the church’s participation and involvement in the Civil Rights Movement influence your decisions, if at all, regarding the re-purposing of this space and why?

21. My preliminary investigation has indicated that the creation of a hospital-associated hospitality house would serve the community in this area, and also be in agreement with the history of service that is embedded in the architecture of the church. How do feel about the former 32nd Street Baptist church being re-purposed for a hospitality house?

129

APPENDIX I

INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR THE PASTORS

1. What is your personal connection to Birmingham, the Lakeview District, and/or the former 32nd Street Baptist Church?

2. How long were you the pastor at the 32nd Street Baptist Church and what were some of the highlights during your tenure there?

3. Describe what it was like being the spiritual leader of such a historically significant congregation.

4. In your opinion, what were some of the contributing factors that led to the closing of the church?

5. Who are some the outstanding people from the church’s history and what was their contribution?

6. Is there any additional information about the history of the former 32nd Street Baptist Church that you would care to share with me?

7. How would you feel about the former church building being re-purposed for another use?

8. What are some potential uses for the renovated building that you perceive as appropriate or in agreement with the past life of the structure?

9. What are some building functions for the renovated space that you perceive as inappropriate or not in agreement with the past life of the structure?

10. Do you think it is important to society at large to preserve architectural and cultural history together through adaptive reuse? Why or why not?

130

11. From a historical perspective, what aspects of this space, if any, do you perceive as worthy of preservation?

12. What were the unique visual identifiers of this architecture? [The researcher may provide examples of visual identifiers to help define this term.]

13. Do any architectural features or the history of the architecture itself qualifies the 32nd Street Baptist Church as unique or special in your opinion? Why or why not?

14. To your knowledge, are any of these architectural elements exclusive or unique to the former 32nd Street Baptist Church building?

15. What architectural features, if any, should be saved or re-created and why?

16. Do you have any photographs or documents that I might see that you think could be beneficial to my research?

17. In your opinion, would the neighborhood be enriched by saving this architectural landmark building? How so?

18. In preserving and reusing this structure, do you believe the cultural or religious history of the space should also be acknowledged and incorporated into the re-design of the building? Why or why not?

19. How do you visualize the history of this place being incorporated into a new design in a meaningful way, if at all?

20. How would the church’s participation and involvement in the Civil Rights Movement influence your decisions, if at all, regarding the re-purposing of this space and why?

131

132

APPENDIX J

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR HOSPITALITY HOUSE RESIDENTS

*Thank you again for your participation in this survey. Please enclose your questionnaire within the envelope provided and return it sealed to the front desk when you are finished.

1. In what city, state, and country is your primary residence located? ______

2. How many adults including yourself reside with your group in this hospitality house? _____

3. How many children are also residing with your family group in this hospitality house? Write in your numeric answer next to the correct age groups.

Under the age of 5 years _____ Between the ages of 5 – 10 years _____ Between the ages of 11 – 18 years _____

4. During a typical day, approximately how many hours do you spend in this hospitality house including sleeping? Circle your answer.

1 hour - 8 hours 9 hours - 12 hours 13 hours - 18 hours 19 hours - 24 hours

5. How long have you been residing at this hospitality house during this stay? Circle your answer.

1 – 6 days 1 – 2 weeks 3-4 weeks 1-3 months More than 3 months

6. Have you been a resident of this or any other hospitality house before? Yes No

7. If the information regarding the history of the city, community, and/or house where you are temporarily residing was made available to you, how interested would you be to learn about that place? Circle your answer.

Very Interested Moderately Interested Not Interested

133

8. If the information regarding the history of the city, community, and/or house where you are temporarily residing was not in agreement with your own social, cultural, or religious philosophies, would you still choose to stay in that place and why?

______

9. If all interior features were equal, would you prefer to stay in a building with history that had been repurposed or a building constructed in the last 20 years? Why? ______

______

10. How important is it for you to feel safe and secure while you are a resident in this hospitality house residence? Circle your answer.

Very Important Important Moderately Important Not Important

11. Identify up to three aspects or features of your hospitality house that contribute to your sense of security and safety. If none, leave this question blank.

1.______

2.______

3.______

12. How important is it for you to feel “at home” in this hospitality house residence? Circle answer.

Very Important Important Moderately Important Not Important

13. Identify up to three aspects or features of your hospitality house that contribute to your sense of belonging or “home away from home”. If none, leave this question blank.

134

1.______

2.______

3.______

14. How important is it for you to feel a sense of privacy within this hospitality house? Circle

answer.

Very Important Important Moderately Important Not Important

15. Name up to three aspects or features of your hospitality house that contribute to your sense of privacy. If none, leave this question blank.

1.______

2.______

3.______

16. Did you bring any possessions with you to personalize your room? Yes No

List items you brought here: ______

17. How important is it for you to have a place to experience spirituality or inner peace (other than your room) within this hospitality house? Circle your answer.

Very Important Important Moderately Important Not Important

Why do you feel this way regarding places of sanctuary?

______

135

18. In your opinion, what is the single best aspect of this hospitality house environment?

______

19. In your opinion, what is the single worst aspect of this hospitality house environment?

______

20. State your degree of satisfaction with the overall characteristics of the kitchen space in your hospitality house residence. Circle your answer.

Very Satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied

Why do you feel this way about your kitchen space? ______

______

21. State your degree of satisfaction with the overall characteristics of the bathroom space in your hospitality house residence. Circle your answer.

Very Satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied

Why do you feel this way about your bathroom space? ______

______

22. State your degree of satisfaction with the overall characteristics of the shared common living areas (living room, dining room, TV room, etc.) within your hospitality house residence. Circle your answer.

Very Satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied

Why do you feel this way about your common living space? ______

136

APPENDIX K

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR HOSPITALITY HOUSE STAFF

*Thank you again for your participation in this survey. Please enclose your questionnaire within the envelope provided and return it sealed to the front desk when you are finished.

1. What is your staff position at this hospitality house? ______

2. How long have you worked at this hospitality house? ______

3. How much interaction do you have with the residents? Circle your answer.

Frequent Interaction Moderate Interaction No Interaction

4. In your observations, do residents bring possessions with them to personalize their rooms or spaces allocated to them? If so, what type of personal possessions have you observed?

______

5. If all interior amenities were equal, would you prefer to work in a building with history or in a building constructed in the last 20 years and why? ______

______6. If the information regarding the history of the city, community, and/or house where you are working was made available to you, how interested would you be to learn about that place? Circle your answer.

Very Interested Moderately Interested Not Interested

137

7. If the information regarding the history of the city, community, and/or house where you are

working was not in agreement with your own social, cultural, or religious philosophies, would

you still work in that place? Why or why not? ______

______

8. State the degree of satisfaction you perceive among residents regarding the overall accommodations of the kitchen space in your hospitality house residence. Circle your answer

Very Satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied

9. How would you describe the interaction among residents who are using this space at the same time? Circle your answer.

Very Positive Moderately Positive Moderately Negative Very Negative

10. State the degree of satisfaction you perceive among residents regarding the overall bathroom accommodations in your hospitality house residence. Circle your answer.

Very Satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied

11. State the degree of satisfaction you perceive among residents regarding the overall accommodations of the shared common living areas (living room, dining room, TV room, etc.) within your hospitality house residence. Circle your answer.

Very Satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied

12. How would you describe the interaction among residents who are using this space at the same time? Circle your answer.

Very Positive Moderately Positive Moderately Negative Very Negative

138

13. How important is it for you and residents to feel safe and secure while you are in this hospitality house? Circle your answer.

Very Important Important Moderately Important Not Important

14. Identify up to three aspects or features of your hospitality house that contribute to your sense of security and safety as well as the security and safety of residents.

1.______

2.______

3.______

15. How important is it to you that residents feel “at home” in this hospitality house? Circle answer

Very Important Important Moderately Important Not Important

16. Identify up to three aspects or features of your hospitality house that you feel may contribute to the sense of belonging or “home away from home” for residents.

1.______

2.______

3.______

17. How important do you think it is for residents to feel a sense of privacy within this hospitality house? Circle your answer.

Very Important Important Moderately Important Not Important

139

18. Identify up to three aspects or features of your hospitality house that contribute to a sense of privacy for residents.

1.______

2.______

3.______

19. How important is it for residents to experience spirituality or inner peace within this hospitality house (other than their room)? Circle your answer.

Very Important Important Moderately Important Not Important

Additional comments regarding places of sanctuary: ______

______

20. In your opinion, what is the single best service or feature that the hospitality house provides for the residents? ______

______

21. In your opinion, what is the single service or feature that is not provided by the hospitality house that you would like to see added to better serve the residents? ______

______

140

APPENDIX L

EXPANDED SUMMARY OF INTERVIEW: ELANE LEE-ISA

Elane Lee-Isa was born and raised in Forrest County, Mississippi, received her bachelor’s degree from the University of Alabama and her master’s degree from Columbia University in

New York City, New York. She currently lives in New Jersey with her husband of twenty-two years, and has a private practice specializing in purposeful parenting, family counseling, and management consulting for family businesses. The interview took place by telephone on April

19, 2013, and the questions approved by the Internal Review Board at The Florida State

University provided the format for discussion between the researcher and the interviewee.

1. What is your personal connection to Birmingham, the Lakeview District, and/or the former 32nd Street Baptist Church?

Mrs. Lee-Isa described her first sighting of the former 32nd Street Baptist Church as “love at first sight”. She had purchased an historic home in Birmingham, Alabama to restore for her mother to live in, and was in town to visit the project site and spend time with her family. While driving around the downtown area, she and her husband were struck by the beauty and magnificence of the structure, even though only the shell remained intact after a recent fire.

They made an offer to purchase the building shortly thereafter, but it was declined. More than one year later, they learned that the property had gone into foreclosure. They were able to purchase the church, two adjoining buildings and land that faced 32nd Street for $385,000, a fraction of the original $800,000 asking price.

141

Mrs. Lee-Isa admitted that purchasing this property was an emotional decision for her and her husband. She told the author that the building “looked lonely and needed help”. They do not have any connection to the space other than the desire to preserve history and restore the

architecture to a noble purpose, while profiting from their investment. Mr. and Mrs. Lee-Isa have postponed development plans until they retire to Birmingham in October, 2013.

2. How many adaptive reuse projects have you been involved with in this area, and can you describe them for me?

One of Birmingham’s founding fathers is Robert Jemison, Jr. He is remembered for voting against succession at the beginning of the Civil War, but he was also a land developer and a businessman. He built two large homes in what is now known as Mountain Brook, a suburb of

Birmingham, Alabama, one for himself and one for his son. Mr. and Mrs. Lee-Isa were able to purchase the home that Jemison built for his son with her mother in mind as the resident.

Unfortunately, her mother passed away in 2012, but the restoration project continues to this date.

The Isa-Lee’s have worked diligently to restore this home due to its historical significance in the area by preserving many of the original architectural and decorative details. Upon their retirement, they plan to move into the completed residence in the fall of 2013.

3. Do you think it is important to society at large to preserve architectural and cultural history together through adaptive reuse? If so, why?

Elane Isa-Lee responded to this question by reading the following poem, “The Builders” by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, to the author:

142

All are architects of Fate,

Working in these walls of Time,

Some with massive deeds and great,

Some with ornaments of rhyme.

Nothing useless is, or low;

Each thing in its place is best;

And what seems but idle show

Strengthens and supports the rest.

For the structure that we raise,

Time is with materials filled;

Our todays and yesterdays

Are the blocks with which we build.

Truly shape and fashion these;

Leave no yawning gaps between;

Think not, because no man sees,

Such things will remain unseen.

In the elder days of Art,

Builders wrought with greatest care

Each minute and unseen part;

For the Gods see everywhere.

Let us do our work as well,

Both the unseen and the seen;

Make the house, where Gods may dwell,

143

Beautiful, entire, and clean.

Else our lives are incomplete,

Standing in these walls of Time,

Broken stairways, where the feet

Stumble as they seek to climb.

Build today, then, strong and sure,

With a firm and ample base;

And ascending and secure

Shall tomorrow find its place

Thus, alone can we attain

To those towers where the eye

Sees the world as one vast plain,

And one boundless reach of sky.

Mrs. Lee-Isa suggested that this Longfellow poem summarized her thoughts better than anything that she could have said herself. The author has visited Mrs. Lee-Isa’s website, she is self-employed as a family counselor, on numerous occasions and found the presentation to be spiritual, ideological and filled with references to poetry and inspirational quotations. She communicated to the author that this poem came to mind when she first saw the abandoned 32nd

Street Baptist Church.

4. What type of research and data gathering do you perform prior to purchasing and renovating a building, if any?

144

Lee-Isa did not perform any significant research on the building until she and her

husband were actually the owners. Using internet search engines, she was able to uncover the

rich history associated with the 32 Street Baptist Church, including the name of the architect, the

role it played during the Civil Rights Movement, and some of the celebrated speakers that

addressed the congregation.

5. In what ways do you consider the social aspects of a building when planning an adaptive

reuse project? [The researcher will provide 2-3 examples of social aspects as prompt if

necessary.]

Elane Lee-Isa’s first remarked that “people are important,” but then went on to say that

the approval of the surrounding community was not essential to her development plans. She

suggested that she and her husband would never do anything to the building that could be

perceived as inappropriate, in their opinion, but they felt compelled to follow their own instincts

regarding development. She joked that she and her husband were capitalists, and regarded this

as a project of the heart, but they also purchased this building as an investment. Mrs. Lee-Isa pointed out that the city of Birmingham was responsible for looking out for the rights of the people, so if they received approval from elected officials of their plans from the city, then that was tantamount to social approval from their perspective.

6. In what ways do you consider the cultural aspects of a building when planning an adaptive reuse project? [The researcher will provide 2-3 examples of cultural aspects as

prompt if necessary.]

145

The interviewee reiterated her point of view expressed in question number five, but she also commented that the social and cultural aspects of this project could not be separated, in her opinion.

7. In what ways do you consider the historical aspects of a building when planning an adaptive reuse project? [The researcher will provide 2-3 examples of historical aspects as prompt if necessary.]

Elane Lee-Isa said, “This building should be a lighthouse in the community. It should act as a beacon of light calling everyone to remember its past – our history as a city and as its citizens.” She went on to say that this building has been overshadowed by its sister church, the

16th Street Baptist Church, tragically known for the 1963 bombing that killed four little girls.

However, once it is restored, she has hope that it will take its proper place among Birmingham’s other historic landmark buildings. Mrs. Lee-Isa also mentioned that she plans to re-apply for recognition from the National Trust for Historic Places when the development project is completed, which should protect the property from future demolition as well as increase its importance in the community and financial value.

8. How do the current needs of the community factor into your decision making process concerning adaptive reuse?

Mrs. Lee-Isa began her commentary by pointing out that the south side of downtown

Birmingham, known locally as the Lakeview District, has deteriorated dramatically in the past fifty years. In her opinion, the urban sprawl that took people away from the city could also be the force at work that will encourage them to relocate back to an urban environment. She

146

reminded the author that the first developers to own the building after it was sold by the 32nd

Street Baptist Church congregation had planned to repurpose the space for luxury condominiums

(Appendix M). The Lee-Isa’s were not totally opposed to the idea of building a residential

community, but they preferred to build something that had more of a community outreach

mission. In conclusion, their undefined project will benefit the community by breathing new life

into the area.

9. Have you found it necessary to reconcile the current needs of the community with the

history of the space? If so, how did you deal with this?

From Elane Lee-Isa’s point of view, the area is currently so desolate and bleak that

anything would be an improvement. She and her husband have considered repurposing the

building into a private school, perhaps for children that need extra counseling for social

problems; or perhaps a wellness center that would take a holistic approach to well-being encompassing the mind, body and spirit.

10. What other factors, if any, should contribute to the final decision regarding what building type will be constructed within a preserved structure in your opinion?

The Lee-Isa family has supported efforts to reuse, reduce and recycle in their current

community. From her perspective, a responsible developer should not try to turn a preservation

project into something that it cannot feasibly become, and that it is also important to be a good

steward with the resources at hand. “Everything that can be saved for the sake of preserving

history should be saved, but not at all costs,” said Mrs. Lee-Isa. She suggested that the

147 architecture itself will inform the developer(s) regarding what the building should, or should not, become before the transformation process begins.

11. Can you tell me a bit of what you know about the former 32nd Street Baptist Church?

The Lee-Isa’s did not know much at all about the church when they purchased the building, but they have since learned some basic facts regarding the architect, Wallace Rayfield, and the involvement of the congregation during the 1960’s Civil Rights Movement, which included visits from Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and others.

12. From a historical perspective, what aspects of this space do you perceive as worthy of preservation if any?

Mrs. Lee-Isa noted that all that remained of the former church building was the exterior shell, so that it was especially important to preserve what was left of the architecture. She also mentioned that although the existing stucco façade was not original to the structure, she believed that it should be embraced as part of the history of the building; because the stucco finish is perceived as unique in the area, and perhaps the material is covering up some unidentified cosmetic problems.

13. What are the unique visual identifiers of this architecture if any? [The researcher will provide definition of visual identifiers if necessary.]

“I believe that the two bell towers are a common architectural feature used by Wallace

Rayfield in his designs, so those should remain for sure. I would love to install chimes in them

148

so that they could be heard throughout the community,” said Elane Lee-Isa. She also pointed out

that the double-sided front staircase leading up to the front entrance was very unique.

14. In your opinion, is there anything about these architectural features or the history of

the architecture itself that qualifies these elements as unique or special?

The simple fact that the architecture has stood the test of time was impressive to Mrs.

Lee-Isa. The building was built in 1924, and it still has its foundational cornerstone in place.

The interviewee remarked that Birmingham does not have too many landmark buildings to be

proud of that were also designed by a historically significant architect. This could have been due

in part to the fact that the city was founded as a mining town and steel manufacturing hub.

Eventually business headquarters and government buildings were built to serve the population;

but in the beginning, it was just the people who worked in the mining industry that desired a

noteworthy place of worship.

15. To your knowledge, are any of these architectural elements exclusive to the former 32nd

Street Baptist Church building?

The interviewee observed that the 32nd Street Baptist Church architecture was very similar to the 16th Street Baptist Church exterior, but that she was not familiar enough with

Birmingham’s architecture to comment further.

16. What architectural features should be saved or re-created at this site if any, and why?

Mrs. Lee-Isa and her family had visited the Civil Rights Institute in Birmingham and noticed that the solitary remaining stained glass window from the 32nd Street Baptist Church was

149 on display there. She remarked to the author that it would “be lovely to put it back into the building; but if that is not possible, perhaps we could re-create one as a focal point. It would put the smile back on the face of the church where it belongs.”

17. In what ways if any would the neighborhood be enriched by saving this architectural landmark building?

“It could be the beginning of a new beginning for the neighborhood,” said Elane Lee-Isa,

“who knows what might happen after the church is restored (repurposed)?” She also stated that

“the members of the former congregation probably do not live around there anymore, but the new residents could learn and appreciate their history.” The subject of installing chimes in the church towers for the community to enjoy was brought up again. They would serve as an audio reminder to the neighborhood that they were part of a very special place, even if individuals were not in sight of the building.

18. If this structure were to be preserved, should the cultural or religious history of the space also be acknowledged and incorporated into the re-design of the building? Why or why not?

“Yes, definitely! I believe that an historical building gives us a sense of wonder, and makes us want to know about the people that inhabited that space before we got there,” responded Mrs. Lee-Isa to the question when posed by the interviewer.

19. How do you visualize the history of this place being incorporated into a new design in a meaningful way, if at all?

150

She suggested that at the very least, a commemorative plaque should be installed on the

exterior of the building; but ideally, something more significant would be permanently installed

or displayed in the interior of the building, perhaps a small museum or a library with show cases

for artifacts. Mrs. Lee-Isa also proposed the idea of creating a memorial to the architect, Wallace

Rayfield, adding that he did not receive the respect or attention for his work during his lifetime

that he earned and deserved.

20. How would the church’s participation and involvement in the Civil Rights Movement

influence your decisions, if at all, regarding the re-purposing of this space and why?

The Lee-Isa family has enthusiastically and wholeheartedly embraced all of the historical aspect of the 32nd Street Baptist Church, including the church’s involvement in the Civil Rights

Movement. The interviewee stated that she and her husband believe that it is important not to forget everything that history has taught mankind, and that it would be a mistake to selectively choose which parts of history to remember. Elane Lee-Isa said, “You cannot separate one part of yourself from another part of yourself. We are all good and bad. It is the same with history.”

Elane Lee-Isa was very supportive of the idea of repurposing the church building into a hospital-associated hospitality house. She also recognized that the mission of the former church was in agreement with the services provided by most hospitality house. However, being a

151 businesswoman, she also pointed out the reality that a hospitality house would not be profitable as an investment for her family.

152

APPENDIX M

RENDERING OF RAYFIELD PLACE CONDOMINIUMS

Figure M.1. The SAS architectural firm produced this rendering for a proposed condominium project, “Rayfield Place,” that failed to develop. (Source: Artist Unknown. Courtesy of Elane Lee-Isa).

153

APPENDIX N

EXPANDED SUMMARY OF INTERVIEW: THE REVERENDS LEWIS AND ELKINGTON

1. What is your personal connection to Birmingham, the Lakeview District, and/or the former 32nd Street Baptist Church?

Pastors Lewis and Elkington were both born and raised in Birmingham, Alabama. The former 32nd Street Baptist Church was located in the Lakeview District. Pastor Lewis led the congregation while it was in its original location, and Pastor Elkington has been a member of the congregation his entire life.

2. How long were you the pastor at the 32nd Street Baptist Church and what were some of the highlights during your tenure there?

Pastor Lewis served as the minister for seven years before he was called to another congregation. He was the youngest minister to ever serve the historic congregation, and he was able to facilitate the sale of the building and left the church in good financial standing.

3. Describe what it was like being the spiritual leader of such a historically significant congregation.

Pastor Lewis described the experience as a delicate balancing act, because it was important to maintain the historical context of the congregation in the community and be progressive simultaneously. He was always aware that the church had “been in the good fight,” and considered it a “blessed privilege to be a part of its history.”

154

4. In your opinion, what were some of the contributing factors that led to the closing of the

church?

The old building simply had not been maintained properly throughout the years,

especially during the Depression and World War II, and it was deemed to costly to renovate the

space, according to Pastor Lewis. Pastor Elkington recounted several events that were affected

by leaking plumbing and defective roofing.

Pastor Elkington also described how much the neighborhood had changed since the

founding of the congregation. The Lakeview District was once a residential community, but had

grown gradually into a commercial center since the 1970’s. Pastor Lewis specifically mentioned

that UAB (The University of Alabama at Birmingham) had come into the area and taken over.

Once all of the residences in proximity of the church building were gone, members of the

congregation began traveling long distances to attend services and that reduced their overall

attendance numbers, especially during services and programs held on a weekday.

The congregation voted to sell the building and relocate 20 minutes away to a residential

neighborhood on Dowell Avenue in Powderly, Alabama. The purchasers told the church

members that their intention for the building was to turn it into residential condominiums, and

they were going to name the development “Rayfield Place,” in honor of the architect. The pastors were pleased with this historic tribute to the architect, but felt that it did not recognize the congregational participation in the Civil Rights Movement; however, there were no legal obligations set forth in the contract that required any acknowledgement of their activities. See

Appendix M for an artistic rendering of the proposed condominium adaptive reuse project that

was planned by the original developers.

155

5. Who are some the outstanding people from the church’s history and what was their

contribution?

Pastor Lewis commented that many outstanding people and ministers had spoken from

the pulpit as guest speakers at the 32nd Street Baptist Church including Dr. Martin Luther King,

Jr., and the Reverends Abernathy and Shuttlesworth; but the most historically noteworthy pastor that was the full time minister in residence was the Reverend C. L. Lewis. His tenure as pastor at

the church was brief, but he was known for his fiery sermons and his beautiful singing voice.

C.L. Franklin went on to host a radio talk show that reached 65% of the African-American

population in the United States at that time, and his friendship with Dr. King was highly

publicized. However, he may best be remembered for being the father of soul and gospel singer

Aretha Franklin.

In the opinion of both Pastor Lewis and Elkington, the Reverend C. H. Parker was the

most outstanding person in the church’s history. He served the congregation for 35 years and

stressed the importance of education to the members. He was the Dean of the Congress on

Christian Education and truly was the “face of the church in modern history”.

6. Is there any additional information about the history of the former 32nd Street Baptist

Church that you would care to share with me?

According to Pastor Elkington, the church was the center of all activity in the

neighborhood in every aspect of their lives: socially, culturally and spiritually. He mentioned the

following as examples of the types of activities that took place there: birthday celebrations, baby

showers, anniversary parties, tutoring sessions, community and political meetings, as well as

baptisms and BTU (Baptist Training Union).

156

7. How would you feel about the former church building being re-purposed for another use?

Pastors Lewis and Elkington agreed that in order for the church to saved, it would probably have to be re-purposed for another use. However, if the church could be adapted for use by another congregation that would please them the most. Pastor Lewis added that there has been a national trend where people move back into urban areas, so perhaps one day, there might be enough people living in the area again to support a church.

8. What are some potential uses for the renovated building that you perceive as appropriate or in agreement with the past life of the structure?

Pastor Lewis: “Anything that would benefit the community.”

Pastor Elkington: “I would like to see an educational institution there of some kind. I grew up listening to Brother Parker preach about the benefits of education, and I am living proof that education does make a difference in a person’s life. I know that he would endorse any purpose that enriched the quality of life for the people in the community, but I would like to see a school there in his honor and named in his memory.”

9. What are some building functions for the renovated space that you perceive as inappropriate or not in agreement with the past life of the structure?

“I do not think a night club or a dinner theatre-type place would be appropriate,” said

Pastor Lewis while Pastor Elkington nodded his head in agreement. Then Pastor Elkington added, “I do not think that any business that served alcohol, or was in the business of ‘partying’

157

would do.” They mutually expanded on that thought by remarking that the church had a “higher

purpose,” a calling to serve the residents of the neighborhood and “all of God’s children”.

10. Do you think it is important to society at large to preserve architectural and cultural

history together through adaptive reuse? Why or why not?

Pastor Elkington commented that he hated to see waste of any kind, and that Birmingham

had too many abandoned buildings that should be used before new buildings were built. Pastor

Lewis said that “old buildings are like old friends. It just does a soul good to see them again doing

so well.”

11. From a historical perspective, what aspects of this space, if any, do you perceive as

worthy of preservation?

Pastor Lewis and Elkington were in agreement that the exterior shell must be preserved at

all cost. They both commented on how architecturally beautiful and grand the façade of the

building was, and also on the uniqueness of the architecture within the context of the

neighborhood. Pastor Lewis said, “Can you imagine how proud of that building those people

must have been in 1924? That was a major accomplishment for black folk(s) back then… for

now, really.”

12. What were the unique visual identifiers of this architecture? [The researcher may

provide examples of visual identifiers to help define this term.]

Some of the identifiers they mentioned included the double-sided staircase that leads to the front entrance, the baptismal pool that was the focal point on the back wall beyond the pulpit,

158

and all of the stained glass windows that lined up both side walls of the church. Pastor Elkington

remembered daydreaming during services while staring at the windows, noting that they were

primarily yellow and green in color and that he could not see through them, but the light still

shown through. Appendix O shows a photograph of the last remaining original stained glass

window from the 32nd Street Baptist Church.

13. Do any architectural features or the history of the architecture itself qualifies the 32nd

Street Baptist Church as unique or special in your opinion? Why or why not?

“It is the members of the congregation that make each church that I minister unique for

me,” said Pastor Lewis, “the architecture is always pretty traditional in a southern Baptist

church.” Pastor Elkington remarked on the “specialness” associated with having the space

black architect at a time in history when those words were not normally associated with southern

black men. He also designed mostly churches, places of worship. I am very proud of that fact,”

Pastor Elkington commented.

14. To your knowledge, are any of these architectural elements exclusive or unique to the

former 32nd Street Baptist Church building?

Both pastors recounted the extraordinarily huge balcony that hung almost half-way over

those seated on the main floor of the sanctuary. Neither of the gentlemen had ever seen such a

large balcony in a church, and they remembered it as primarily full of young people. They also

mentioned the unique front staircase again, which allowed the church to be built much closer to

the street that most churches, as well as the stained glass windows. Apparently, the coloration

159 and quantity of the windows was unique compared to other churches they had both visited.

Pastor Elkington described some decorative bricks on the sides of the building, but the author could not locate any evidence of these in modern day or historic photographs.

15. What architectural features, if any, should be saved or re-created and why?

Although not an architectural feature, the pastors were in agreement that there should be a Christian cross or crucifix hung in the building in a prominent location.

16. Do you have any photographs or documents that I might see that you think could be beneficial to my research?

Pastor Elkington retrieved a small box from storage containing framed photographs of the congregation while they were located in the downtown Birmingham area. Unfortunately, the photographs were not in very good shape, showed mostly groups of unidentified people without any architecture visible, and in the estimation of the author, were taken in the 1970’s. However, there was one photograph of the deacons and deaconesses that was from an earlier period, perhaps the 1950’s that showed a small portion of the interior of the church including a door which Pastor Elkington explained was the office of Pastor C.H. Parker. The author observed that the walls were covered in wood paneling, the floors were linoleum or a similar product, and the church pews were constructed of stained oak. Pastor Elkington said that was how the interior of the church looked while he was a member there as well. He laughed when he noticed the hand held fans carried by the deaconesses, because the church did not have air conditioning installed.

17. In your opinion, would the neighborhood be enriched by saving this architectural landmark building? How so?

160

Pastor Lewis began by stating that to save this architectural landmark would also ensure

that the history of the people associated with the building was preserved as well. In an excited

voice, Pastor Lewis said, “If you think that the Civil Rights Movement is over, then you are

wrong. The generation before us started the good fight, but as a people, we fight this fight every

single day.” He changed his tone and commented further that just as the church had been the

center of community life during its height, it could become that again with “a little love”.

18. In preserving and reusing this structure, do you believe the cultural or religious history of the space should also be acknowledged and incorporated into the re-design of the

building? Why or why not?

Both pastors agreed that the cultural and religious history should be acknowledged and

preserved into the re-design of the space, because it is important to learn from history. Pastor

Lewis said, “People who do not learn from past mistakes are destined to repeat them.”

19. How do you visualize the history of this place being incorporated into a new design in a

meaningful way, if at all?

Pastor Lewis suggested that the re-design of the building should include an “honorarium”

of some type to acknowledge the history of the space, particularly its connection to the Civil

Rights Movement, and also the 85 years of service to God and the community by members of the

congregation. He mentioned the possibility of a museum space that would be free to the public.

Pastor Elkington proposed the idea of a chapel. Ideally, it would be located on the ground floor

and open to people of all faiths on a daily basis.

161

20. How would the church’s participation and involvement in the Civil Rights Movement

influence your decisions, if at all, regarding the re-purposing of this space and why?

Pastor Elkington commented that the older members of his congregation are very proud

of the fact that their church was a part of the social movement that pushed for non-violent change

in the late 1950’s and 1960’s, and that the whole history should be embraced. Pastor Lewis

twisted the question around and asked Pastor Elkington how he would feel about living in “the

former headquarters of the Ku Klux Klan?” Elkington responded that he would “consider it a

victory. Good trumps evil, and in the end we were the victors. I would live there and thank God

everyday for the privilege and honor of living there.”

21. My preliminary investigation has indicated that the creation of a hospital-associated

hospitality house would serve the community in this area, and also be in agreement with

the history of service that is embedded in the architecture of the church. How do feel about

the former 32nd Street Baptist church being re-purposed for a hospitality house?

When the pastors heard this idea they started clapping. Pastors Lewis and Elkington were both very pleased with this concept and thought it was an ideal modern purpose for the historic church building. They understood that this transformation was only supposed to happen in theory, but they were certain that God had planted this seed and that someday it would come to pass. We closed our interview with Pastor Elkington leading us in prayer

162

APPENDIX O

PHOTOGRAPH: ORIGINAL STAINED GLASS WINDOW

Figure O.1. Photograph of the only surviving original stained glass window from the church, now displayed at the Civil Rights Institute in Birmingham, Alabama. (Source: Author, taken December 14, 2012).

163

APPENDIX P

EXPANDED SUMMARY OF INTERVIEW: CATHERINE SLOSS JONES

1. What is your personal connection to Birmingham, the Lakeview District, and/or the former 32nd Street Baptist Church?

Catherine Jones has credited growing up in Birmingham within a strong Christian family as the source of her success. She became interested in revitalizing the Lakeview District in 1986, and her company has been at forefront of the preservation movement to bring this neighborhood back to life. Sloss Real Estate has worked closely in recent years with the Auburn Studio, which is comprised of advanced students and professors of architecture from Auburn University to develop a master plan for the Lakeview District. In 2011, the 32nd Street Baptist Church was listed on the real estate market by the original developers that were unsuccessful in their attempt to build condominiums, and Sloss Real Estate represented their interests. However, Mrs. Jones was not involved specifically with the marketing or sale of the building.

2. How many adaptive reuse projects have you been involved with in this area, and can you describe them for me?

Mrs. Jones has been involved with approximately 15 adaptive reuse projects in the

Lakeview District. Her first project has become a Birmingham hotspot and is known as Pepper

Place, because it was originally a syrup manufacturing plant for the soft drink Dr. Pepper. Retail spaces and business offices occupy most of the warehouse space, but the landmark is best known locally as a farmer’s market. Jones told the author that she decided to allow local small farmers to sell their produce in the parking lot on Saturday mornings in an attempt to make people aware

164

of the area and also to support surrounding small farms. It has grown to include several blocks

of farm stands, live music, chef demonstrations and the selling of prepared foods as well.

3. Do you think it is important to society at large to preserve architectural and cultural

history together through adaptive reuse? If so, why?

Catherine Jones’s response to this question was, “Absolutely! Preserving history has

been fundamentally at the core of every society since the beginning of time. It is human nature to want future generations to know that we were here in this place, and that our contributions mattered.” She went on to say that adaptive reuse was the “vehicle” by which historic

architectural preservation could be accomplished successfully.

4. What type of research and data gathering do you perform prior to purchasing and

renovating a building, if any?

Located in the historic Young and Vann building in downtown Birmingham, the

Birmingham History Center has been a vital resource for Sloss Real Estate projects. Mrs. Jones

has worked closely with a staff historian named Linda Nelson. She also mentioned frequent

contact with the Jefferson County Historical Society during the research process. Mrs. Jones

advocated that it is vital to gather as much information as possible about the space before

acquiring the property, especially regarding the structural soundness of the building. The type of

data that she has collected in the past has included information about the architect or builder, real

estate comparables, current local zoning requirements and the building materials.

165

5. In what ways do you consider the social aspects of a building when planning an adaptive

reuse project? [The researcher will provide 2-3 examples of social aspects as prompt if necessary.

In her opinion, the social aspects of a building are imperative and must be considered before her company becomes involved in a project. She described repurposing a building as

“financial suicide” if its new purpose is not in agreement with the history of the community.

Experience has taught her that locals will not support a business that they deem inappropriate or offensive to the neighborhood.

6. In what ways do you consider the cultural aspects of a building when planning an adaptive reuse project? [The researcher will provide 2-3 examples of cultural aspects as prompt if necessary.]

The developers have planned a mixed-use multicultural neighborhood for the Lakeview

District. Mrs. Jones stated that it was their desire to build housing for different income levels and to bring people together in the spirit of creating a community. This concept has been identified as one of the principles of New Urbanism, an architectural theory that Mrs. Jones studied during graduate school at Harvard University.

7. In what ways do you consider the historical aspects of a building when planning an adaptive reuse project? [The researcher will provide 2-3 examples of historical aspects as prompt if necessary.

166

Architectural historic preservation has been at the core of most of the projects that Mrs.

Jones has become personally involved in within her business. She remarked that the “city’s

future will become richer if we can save her landmark architecture,” and that “tearing down a

beautiful old building is just not an option for me, unless is it truly unsafe for the workers.”

8. How do the current needs of the community factor into your decision making process

concerning adaptive reuse?

Acknowledging that the original purpose of a building might need to change has been an

important first step in her experience. She went on to say that “not every old building can

become a monument or a museum, so it is important to assign them a modern use.” During the past 20 years, Mrs. Jones has kept close tabs on the types of businesses that have opened and closed in the Lakeview District. She noted that in reality, homes should be built there first so that there would be people in the community to support the businesses.

9. Have you found it necessary to reconcile the current needs of the community with the history of the space? If so, how did you deal with this?

Mrs. Jones stated that she is very sensitive to the original purpose of the building when determining its new purpose. In addition, Sloss Real Estate has been protective of its reputation as a company and does not desire to infringe on anyone’s personal rights or belief systems. With that business philosophy in mind, Sloss Real Estate has stayed away from developing any projects for companies that could be considered controversial.

167

10. What other factors, if any, should contribute to the final decision regarding what building type will be constructed within a preserved structure in your opinion?

“Profitability with integrity” has always been a business philosophy for Catherine Sloss

Jones. She also spoke passionately about sustainability issues, and her commitment to being a responsible steward with her resources.

11. Can you tell me a bit of what you know about the former 32nd Street Baptist Church?

Mrs. Jones graciously acknowledged that the author had brought the significance of the

32nd Street Baptist Church to her attention. Therefore, all of her specific information was derived from viewing a power point presentation prepared by the author and submitted electronically to her prior to the interview.

12. From a historical perspective, what aspects of this space do you perceive as worthy of preservation if any?

The architect of the 32nd Street Baptist Church is Wallace Rayfield, and Mrs. Jones has always been aware of his significant work in and around Birmingham for many years.

Preservation is warranted based on this factor alone, in her opinion. She also pointed out that the

Civil Rights Movement was a national event, not just a local incident; therefore, the church should be preserved as a national landmark and also be recognized for its role during an important era of United States history.

13. What are the unique visual identifiers of this architecture if any? [The researcher will provide definition of visual identifiers if necessary.]

168

Catherine Sloss Jones thought the double bell tower was a unique feature incorporated by architect, Rayfield. She commented on how similar the façade is compared to classically designed European Catholic churches, such as Notre Dame.

14. In your opinion, is there anything about these architectural features or the history of

the architecture itself that qualifies these elements as unique or special?

“Can you imagine the surprise and horror that the local (white) population must have felt

when the 16th Street and the 32nd Street Baptist Churches were constructed in 1924? Most black

people in Alabama were uneducated sharecroppers or worked at menial jobs back then, and this

was very grand architecture for Birmingham.” Mrs. Jones went on to say that it was significant

that the members of the congregation chose to fund such a project with their (supposedly) limited

resources; it gave the church added social value due to the sacrifices that must have been made

by the community.

15. To your knowledge, are any of these architectural elements exclusive to the former 32nd

Street Baptist Church building?

The interviewee did not feel like she could comment as to the exclusivity of the architectural elements.

16. What architectural features should be saved or re-created at this site if any, and why?

Mrs. Jones stated that only the shell of the building remains due to a recent fire

(Appendix Q), and therefore, it should be preserved at all costs. She also believed that the new

169

intended use for the building might inform the design team as to what historical elements could

be re-created. As an example, she suggested that pews might be installed instead of theatre seating if the building were to be re-purposed as a theatrical or musical venue.

17. In what ways if any would the neighborhood be enriched by saving this architectural landmark building?

“The neighborhood looks so sad now,” said Catherine Jones, “saving this building would show the area residents that they are important, and then more people would come and do the same thing. It’s always hard to be the first one, but so worthwhile.” She compared re-vitalizing a neighborhood to a face-lift on a human and explained further to the author that at first people come look because they are curious, then they find it attractive and want to know more, and finally, they “sign the check and purchase one for themselves”.

18. If this structure were to be preserved, should the cultural or religious history of the space also be acknowledged and incorporated into the re-design of the building? Why or why not?

Mrs. Jones replied to this question, “How could you NOT incorporate the history of this building into the re-design? That is the uniqueness, that is the draw, and frankly, that is the money maker!”

19. How do you visualize the history of this place being incorporated into a new design in a meaningful way, if at all?

170

Birmingham has been home to the Civil Rights Institute, a Smithsonian partner, since

November 16, 1992, so the interviewee felt that it was unnecessary to create another full-blown

museum in the space. Also, the 32nd Street Baptist Church has continuously served as a place of

worship since its construction, as well as a memorial to the loss of life during the activities

associated with the Civil Rights Movement. Therefore, Mrs. Jones recommended that the space

be used to serve the surrounding community in much the same way that the church did while the

congregation was active. She discussed how other buildings on the block could be re-purposed

into residential and retail spaces in an effort to support a non-profit community outreach program

in the former church such as a senior center, day care facility or neighborhood arts center.

20. How would the church’s participation and involvement in the Civil Rights Movement influence your decisions, if at all, regarding the re-purposing of this space and why?

“History is just history…it does not hold any power over us, it just informs us,” said

Catherine Jones. In context, she meant that lessons can be learned from history, but that negative

historical precedents do not have to remain the status quo; positive changes are possible.

Specifically, she mentioned the fact that Birmingham, Alabama has only had African-American

mayors since the 1979 election of Richard Arrington, Jr. It was her opinion that developers have

a responsibility to be respectful to all of the people and their belief systems that have occupied a

space when planning an adaptive reuse project, even if they are historically unpopular or not in

agreement with their own morals and values, as well as those people currently living in the

community.

The author asked a secondary question, “How can a developer make all of the people

happy all of the time?” Mrs. Jones replied that it was impossible, of course, but “the bottom line

171

is that saving an architectural landmark is good for the neighborhood’s self-esteem, good for historical preservation, and good for business.”

Catherine Sloss Jones referred back to her response in question number 19, re-stating that the church should be re-purposed to serve as the home for a charitable organization that has been established to serve the community. She agreed that a hospitality house could fulfill that role, and that the proximity of the building to St. Vincent’s Hospital in downtown Birmingham makes it a logical and reality-based proposal.

172

APPENDIX Q

PHOTOGRAPH: INTERIOR OF THE 32ND STREET BAPTIST CHURCH

Figure Q.1. Detail of interior brick arch located on the ground floor. (Source: Photographer unknown. Courtesy of Sloss Real Estate Company).

173

REFERENCES

Alabama Trust for Historic Preservation. (2012). Legislative Budget Summary. Retrieved April 9, 2012 from http://www.alabamatrust.info/.

Altman, I. & Chemers, M. (1980) Culture and environment. Pacific Grove: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.

Ananth, S., (2010). Sita Ananth on Kaiser’s healing environments. H&HN Hospitals & Health Networks. 84(7), 2.

Austin, R.L., Woodcock, D.G., Steward, W.C. & Forrester, R.A. (1988). Adaptive reuse: Issues and case studies in building preservation. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company.

Beebe, S., Beebe, S. & Redmond, M. (2008). Interpersonal communication: Relating to others. (6th Edition) New Jersey: Pearson.

Bender & Associates Architects & Green Building Services. (2009). Sustainable stewardship: the environmental benefits of historic preservation in Florida.

Brand, S. (1995). How buildings learn: What happens after they’re built. London: Penguin Books.

Brandenburg, A., Carroll, M. (1995), Your Place or Mine?: The effect of place creation on environmental values and landscape meanings. Society and Natural Resources.8. 381- 398.

Brown, B., Perkins, D. & Brown, G. (2003). Place attachment in a revitalizing neighborhood: Individual and block levels of analysis. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 23. 259- 271.

Carter, J. 220.18.2 Records of the National Commission on Neighborhoods, Title II of the Supplemental Housing Authorization Act of 1977. (91 Stat.56). April 30, 1977).

Carollo, S. (2011). Understanding oil prices: A guide to what drives the price of oil in today’s markets. The Wiley Finance Series, 12.

Dabney, V. (1990). Richmond: The story of a city. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia.

Dalzell, R. F., & Dalzell, L. B. (1998). George Washington's Mount Vernon: At Home in Revolutionary America. New York: Oxford University Press.

Diamonstein, B. (1978). Buildings reborn: New uses, old places. New York: Harper & Row.

174

Durough, A. (2010). The Architectural Legacy of Wallace A. Rayfield: Pioneer Black Architect of Birmingham, Alabama. Tuscaloosa: The University of Alabama Press.

Eshelman, P. & Evans, G.W. (2002). Home again: Environmental predictors of place attachment and self-esteem for new retirement community residents. Journal of Interior Design. 28(1), 1-9.

Gause, J.A., Hoch, B.M., Macomber, J.D., Rose, J.F.P., & Urban Land Institute. (1996). New uses for obsolete buildings. Washington, D.C.: Urban Land Institute.

Gibb, B.E., Coles, M.E., & Heimberg, R.G. (2005). Differentiating symptoms of social anxiety and depression in adults with social anxiety disorder. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 36, 99-109.

Google Earth. (2012). Google Earth Image: Birmingham, Alabama.

Gruenewald, D. (2003). Foundations of place: A multidisciplinary framework for place- conscious education, American Educational Research Journal. 40. 619- 654.

Herbers, J. (1990). Great adaptations: New residential uses for older buildings. New York: Watson-Guptill Publications.

Hockey, J. & James, A. (2003). Social identities across the life course. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.

Hugh, H. (1991). The preservationist’s progress: architectural adventures in conserving Yesterday’s Houses. Canada: HarperCollins Canada Ltd.

Hyllegard, K., Ogle, J., Dunbar, B. (2003). Sustainability and historic preservation in retail Design. Journal of Interior Design. 29(1&2). 32-49.

Jackson, J. (1994). A sense of place a sense of time. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Jandl, H. (1982). Preservation Brief #11: Rehabilitating historic storefronts. Technical Preservation Services National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. Washington, D.C. Retrieved October 7, 2011 from http;//www.nps.gov/history/hps/tps/briefs/brief11.htm.

Jiven, G. & Larkham, P. (2003). Sense of place, authenticity and character: A commentary. Journal of Urban Design, 8(1). 67-81.

Jung, C. G. (1963). Memories, dreams, reflections. New York: Pantheon Books.

Kellogg, W. (2002) Nature’s neighborhood, urban environmental history and neighborhood planning. Journal of the American Planning Association. 68. 356- 370.

175

Kopec, D. A. (2009). Health, sustainability, and the built environment. New York: Fairchild Books & Visuals.

Korpela, K. (1992). Adolescent’s favorite places and environmental self- regulation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 12, 249-258

Korpela, K., Hartig, T., Kaiser, F., & Fuhrer, U. (2001). Restorative experience and self- regulation in favorite places. Environment & Behavior, 33, 572-589

Loukaitou-Sideris, A. (1995). Urban form and social context: cultural differentiation in the use of urban parks. Journal of Planning Education and Research. 14. 89-107.

Lowenthal, D. (1979). Environmental perception: preserving the past. Human Geography. 3(4). 549-559.

Lukas, J. (1985). Common ground. New York: Knopf.

Malmberg, T. (1980). Human territoriality: Survey of behavioral territories in man with preliminary analysis and discussion of meaning. The Hague: Mouton.

Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper.

McLeod, B. (2003). Entering these doors of compassion: Ronald mcdonald house. Wilmington: Orange Frazer Press.

McDonough, W. & Braungart, M. (2002). Cradle to cradle: Remaking the way we make things. New York: North Point Press.

McMillan, D.W. & Chavis, D.M. (1986). Sense of community: A definition and theory. Journal of Community Psychology, 14(1), 6-23.

National Park Service. (2010). National Register of Historic Places Program: About us. Retrieved October 7, 2011 from http://www.nps.gov/nr/about.htm.

National Park Service. (2013). Archeology and Historic Preservation: Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines. Retrieved June 27, 2013 from http://www.nps.gov/history/local- law/arch_stnds_10.htm.

Oldenburg, R. (1999). The great good place: Cafe’s, coffee shops, bookstores, bars, hair salons, and other hangouts at the heart of a community. New York: Marlowe.

Perkins, D. & Long, A. (2002). Neighborhood sense of community and social capital: A multi- level analysis. in Psychological sense of community: Research, applications, and implications. A. Fisher, C. Sonn, & B. Bishop, eds. New York; Plenum.

Peterson, C., Maier, S., & Seligman, M.E.P. (1993). Learned helplessness: A Theory for the age of personal control. New York: Oxford.

176

Powell, K. (1999). Architecture reborn: Converting old buildings for new uses. New York: Rizzoli.

Pretty, G., Chippuer, H., Bramston, P. (2003). Sense of place amongst adolescents and adults in two rural Australian towns: The discriminating features of place attachment, sense of community and place dependence in relation to place identity. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 23. 273-287. Ramati, R. (1981). How to save your own street. Beijing: Dolphin Books.

Riger, S. & Lavrakas, P. (1981). Community ties patterns of attachment and social interaction in urban neighborhoods. American Journal of Community Psychology, 9, 55-66.

Rivlin, L. (1982) Group membership and place meaning in an urban neighborhood. Journal of Social Issues. 38(3). 75-93.

Rogers, R. (1990). Architecture: A modern view. London: Thames & Hudson.

Ronald McDonald House Charities of Austin & Central Texas (2013). Retrieved April 5, 2013 from http://www.rmhc-austin.org/leed-platinum. Santayana, G. (1905). The life of reason: Or, The phases of human progress. New York: C. Scribner's Sons.

Schmertz, M.F. (1982). New life for old buildings. New York; McGraw-Hill.

Shamai, S. (1991). Understanding spatial relationships to place. Geoforum. 2. 347 – 358.

Steele, F. (1981). The sense of place. Boston; CBI Publishing Company, Inc.

Tuan, Y. (1975). Place: An experiential perspective Geographical Review. 2. 65.

Tuan, Y. (1977). Space and place: the perspective experience. Geographical Review. 8.2.

Venturi, R. & Rauch, J. (1975). Venturi and Rauch: Architects and planners. Urbana, Ill; University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Wells, M. (2007). Workspace personalization and organizational culture: does your workspace reflect you or your company? Environment and Behavior. 6.

177

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Linda Lyons received her Bachelor of Arts degree in Interior Design from The University of Alabama. Her professional experience has focused on residential and commercial new construction projects. She received her NCIDQ (National Certification of Interior Design Qualifications) certification in 2007. This thesis concludes her work towards obtaining her Master of Fine Arts degree in Interior Design from The Florida State University. After earning her MFA degree, Linda plans on teaching at the university or college level, and continuing her interior design practice.

178