architectual thesis book

Continuing Architectural HeritageContemporary Addition and Reuse of Historic Buildings

Zak Robinson | Graduate Thesis | Professor Ronaszegi | May 2012

Continuing Architectural Heritage: Contemporary Addition and Reuse of Historic Buildings

Zak Robinson

Accepted in Partial Fulfillment of the RequirementsFor the Degree of Master of Architecture at:

The Savannah College of Art and Design

© May 2012 Zak Robinson

The author herby grants SCAD permission to reproduce and distribute publicly paper and electronic thesis copies of document in whole or in part in any medium now known

or hereafter created.

Signature of Author and Date_________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________/__/__ Arpad Ronaszegi, Professor of Architecture, Committee Chair Date

_______________________________________________________________________________/__/__ Catalina Strother, Professor of Architecture, Faculty Advisor Date

_______________________________________________________________________________/__/__ Justin Gunther, Professor of Historic Preservation, Topic Consultant Date


A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the Architecture Departmentin Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Architecture

Savannah College of Art and Design

ByZak Robinson

Graduate Thesis (Arch 799)Savannah, GA

May 2012

Table of Contents List of Figures

Thesis Abstract

Thesis Proposal

Historic Preservation

History of Preservation

Methods of Intervention

Design Aproach

Contemporary Architecture

Contextualism

Debate and Guidelines on Contemporary Design

Differing Opinions

Continuing Heritage

Contemporary Design within Savannah

Conceptual Analysis

The Problem

The Concept

Design Strategies

Site Analysis

Program

2

4

6

10

12

14

22

24

26

27

30

31

32

38

40

42

43

49

71

Schematic Design

Sketches and Diagrams

Plans

Perspectives

Design Develpment

Building Codes

Plans

Details

Perspectives

Conclusion

Final Documentation

Presentation Board

Bibliography

80

82

88

93

97

99

100

106

107

114

115

137

140

Fig. 1.1 - http://www.georgiatrust.org/images/hayhouse/hay_house.gif

Fig. 1.2 - http://www.georgia.org/SiteCollectionImages/Industries/Entertainment/Camera%20Ready/ Counties/Bibb/Hay%20House%20Interior.jpg

Fig. 1.3 - http://www.history.org/almanack/places/hb/hbpalpc2.cfm

Fig. 1.4 - http://www.nps.gov/hps/tps/standguide/reconstruct/reconstruct_approach.htm

Fig. 1.5 - http://www.tate.org.uk/modern/images/tatemodern_exterior.jpg

Fig. 1.6 - http://www.tate.org.uk/modern/images/tatemodern_turbinehall.jpg

Fig. 1.7 - Tyler, Norman. Historic Preservation. 2nd ed. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2009. P 107.



Fig. 1.10 - http://www.themorgan.org/about/images/renzo-madison-entrance.jpg

Fig. 1.11 - http://www.themorgan.org/about/images/renzo-model_1.jpg

Fig. 2.1 - Tyler, Norman. Historic Preservation. 2nd ed. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2009. 104.

Fig. 2.2 - http://www.msa.mmu.ac.uk/atelieritalia/venez/atitwork.htm

Fig. 2.3 - http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/GQcunVQabDYv6YyZZbUCOw

Fig. 2.4 - http://www.flickr.com/photos/derboti/3799981534/

Fig. 2.5 - http://www.wallpaper.com/art/scad-museum-of-art-in-savannah-georgia/5501

Fig. 2.6 - http://www.wallpaper.com/gallery/art/scad-museum-of-art-in-savannah-georgia/ 17052726/53312

Fig. 2.7 - http://savannah.for91days.com/2011/01/13/ellis-square/

Fig. 2.8 - http://dmscs.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/EllisSquareG.jpg

Fig. 3.1-3.3 - Photos by Author

Images Cited

1|2

Fig. 3.4 - http://www.themorgan.org/about/images/renzo-madison-entrance.jpg

Fig. 3.5 - http://www.themorgan.org/about/historyImage.asp?id=68

Fig. 3.6 - http://www.wallpaper.com/art/scad-museum-of-art-in-savannah-georgia/5501

Fig. 3.7 - http://www.wallpaper.com/gallery/art/scad-museum-of-art-in-savannah-georgia/ 17052726/53312

Fig. 3.8 - 3.23 - Diagrams by Author

Fig. 3.24 - http://www.archiexpo.es/prod/cultured-stone/aplacados-de-piedra-reconstituida-interior- 5646-15692.html

Fig. 3.25 - http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/N0j3QcS1K3OGOyCj_kbCyw

Fig. 3.26 - http://www.nicsolutions.biz/project_gallery

Fig. 3.27 - http://www.interpane.com/m/de/medien/resize/bildmaterial_industrie_indus_300dpi_ 11-02_punkthalter_g_436_330.jpg


Fig. 3.32 - 3.38 - Photos by Author


Fig. 3.64 - 3.69 - http://www.a-x-d.com/

Fig. 3.70 - 3.75 - http://www.fosterandpartners.com

Fig. 3.76 - 3.81 - http://www.lamott.de/display.php?project_id=69


Fig. 4.1 - 4.55 - Images by Author

Fig. 5.1 - 5.13 - Images by Author

Fig. 5.14 - 5.23 - Images by Author with Photoshop assistance by Emily Hum

Fig. 5.24 - Image by Author


Zak Robinson

May 2012

This thesis focuses on the continuation of our architectural style within historic districts through the use of

contrasting architectural elements. The goal of contrasting design is to respect the existing structures by

putting an emphasis on the differences rather than similarities. The concept is that new and old design

should be easily distinguishable from one another as it is a product of its own era. Therefore, we are able

to continue the architectural heritage from every generation whether it’s past, present or future.

3|4

Thesis Statement

The design intent of this thesis is to restore,

reuse and add to the existing structure on

the intersection of Montgomery Street and

Congress Street in the historic district of

Savannah, Georgia to create a Historic

Preservation Museum. Today our culture is

either stuck in the past or striving towards

new innovative designs. Architecture is

one of the most important parts of being

able to tell the history of the people that

lived before us. Destroying that history can

lead to a loss in knowledge of our heritage

for future generations. Most contemporary

architects tend to ignore our history and

culture and look mainly towards the

future. If an important existing building sits

on the site in a prime location for a new

business, an architect will typically demol-

ish the existing building and neglect to see

its importance within our heritage. If a

building is deemed historic on a site, an

architect, by code, has no choice but to

build around it or renovate it for reuse. The

significance of this thesis is to show that

contemporary architecture can be used

as a tool to celebrate our history without

severing it ties to its heritage.

Significance of Study

In a historic city, more often than not there

will be a large amount of unused or

vacant buildings. Why is this? Most archi-

tects feel restricted in what they are able

to build and will shy away from the adap-

tive rehabilitation of a historic building. In

today’s society, we have the mentality

that what we buy must be new. People

would much prefer a brand new car over

a used car that smells like smoke, has

stains on the seats or a broken radio.

Thesis Proposal5|6

This gives a negative connotation that

when something is used it is dirty or dull.

When someone buys new, they have a

much deeper connection to it. The intro-

duction of contemporary into a historic

city can help to make the city feel new

and less dull or dirty. This study will help to

show how contemporary design can

coalesce with an existing design to create

a new history and interest in unused

spaces.

In designing new architecture within the

context of old, how do we relate the new

addition and rehabilitation contextually to

the surrounding built environment? This

thesis will show the physical and theoreti-

cal connection between old and new. It

will provide the challenge of how the new

design will interact with the existing build-

ing in order to put emphasis on its history

and the heritage of the city. There are

multiple ways to approach the addition’s

design. It can mimic the surrounding

historic elements, contrast with the existing

building or blend the two together. The

code requirements as set down by the

Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for

Treatment of Historic Buildings will provide

strict limitations on what can be achieved

with the project.

The ultimate goal is to prove the need for

more contemporary architecture within

historic cities. The use of a new design, if

done correctly, can make the surrounding

urban context stand out more; otherwise,

it becomes monotonous and just blends in

with the rest of the city. In designing a

museum for historic preservation, there

needs to be an element that provides the

building with the opportunity to stand out

and become a node or destination within

the city. If the museum is just another

restored historic building, people might

not be interested in visiting it, as they do

not realize it is a museum because it looks

just like most other buildings in the city. The

significance of this study is to coalesce

new and old architecture to form a new

history rather than always live in the past. If

we always live in the past, we are losing

our current culture. The layer of architec-

tural elements in the city provides richer

knowledge of our culture than freezing a

city in a specific era. A building designed

today can be seen as a historic landmark

in a few hundred years from. So why stop

architectural growth? History needs to

continue; our contemporary culture

should not be neglected.

Methods of Inquiry

There are many key issues that need to be

explored throughout this design process.

Preservation and the different types of

ways it can be accomplished. The theory

and background of architectural addi-

tions to historic buildings needs to be

explored, along with the concept of

adaptive rehabilitation. How do these

relate to one another? The research and

study of the theory behind contemporary

design within a historic context will be

analyzed. Case studies on these topics

become a key factor in providing

evidence that contemporary design is

practical in helping celebrate the history

of the city rather than deterring from it. An

in-depth analysis of the city of Savannah’s

urban growth can illustrate that architec-

ture is always changing and that we

should not be limited to living in the past.

Codes and regulations provided by the

city’s Historic Review Board will be studied

and implement as much as possible into

the final design.

In the end, the final vision of this thesis is to

have an addition and rehabilitation of the

existing building that will allow for the

celebration of the historical building, of

the city and of the culture. The design

should fit within the surrounding context

and not deter from other buildings. The

idea for the museum will be to provide the

people with a deeper understanding of

the importance of our history and culture

and how we pass it on to the next genera-

tion.

7|8

Chapter OneHistoric Preservation

This chapter will investigate the origins of Historic

Preservation. It aims to show where preservation

came from and where it will be going in the

future. There are multiple different ways in which

historic buildings can be preserved, but there is

never a correct solution for any one project. Thus,

having a thorough understanding of these

different methods of preservation helps the

architect to choose which approach is the best

choice for each situation.

9|10

History of Preservation Architecture is the framework of our

heritage. Each and every building tells a story

about the people that lived before and their

cultural heritage. Throughout the past forty years,

practically every community in American society

has acknowledged the importance of historic

heritage within the built environment. During the

course of these past few decades, many steps

have been implemented in hindsight after the

deterioration of these historic landmarks, so

much so that the government has taken a

significant role in designating and regulating

these places. Historic preservation ultimately has

become the key to saving the history of our

heritage for future generations to come.

History of Preservation in the United States

Historic preservation has two distinctive

paths from which it formed, private and public.

During most of early preservation, the government

was not a large influence. In the private sector of

preservation, activities “tended to [focus on]…

important historical figures and associated

landmark structures” (Tyler 2nd, 27). The

government’s involvement was restricted to

establishing national parks and preserving natural

features. Throughout the years the public and

private paths of preservation blended together to

create the preservation movement we have today

(Tyler 2nd, 27).

The first act of preservation within the

United States was to save Independence Hall in

1816 from demolition. After much opposition, the

city of Philadelphia purchased the building for

preservation (Tyler 2nd, 27). Soon after, many

historical societies and associations were founded

hoping to protect sites with relevance to the late

eighteenth and early nineteenth century architec-

ture. The first association was named the Mount

Vernon Ladies’ Association in 1853. The

association’s goal was to save the deteriorating

11|12

Mount Vernon, George and Martha Washington’s

home. They requested assistance from the govern-

ment, but the government declined (Tyler 2nd, 29).

This new, private organization was developed and

directed by Ann Pamela Cunningham. After much

campaigning, their efforts proved successful.

Mount Vernon was to be restored. The association

became a role model for preservation organiza-

tions that would soon follow. These new organiza-

tions focused on the preservation of buildings

relating to important events and people (Tyler 2nd,

30).

The government, on the other hand, took

little or no part in the preservation of potentially

historic buildings. Their primary focus was the

westward expansion of the nation. They finally

announced Yellowstone National Park as a

protected area in 1872, which made it the world’s

first national park (Tyler 2nd, 30). In 1889, the Casa

Grande ruin in Arizona was designated as the

nation’s first National Monument. Thus began the

United State’s first national funding for preserva-

tion. With the passing of the Antiquities Act of 1906

the President had the ability to deem landmarks

and structures as historic. This act established

penalties for destroying federally-owned sites and

became the nation’s first preservation legislation

(Tyler 2nd, 31). Eventually it led to the creation of

the National Park Service in 1916, with their

primary focus of managing areas too large to be

preserved and protected privately (Tyler 2nd, 32).

In 1933, the National Park Service, the

American Institute of Architects (AIA) and the

Library of Congress established the first federally

funded program to survey historic structures

named the Historic American Buildings Survey

(HABS). Thus began the government’s first signifi-

cant presence within historic preservation (Tyler

2nd, 40). Ultimately in 1949, the public and private

paths of preservation unified through the National

Trust for Historic Preservation. The National Trust

aimed to coordinate the National Park Service and

the private preservation sectors. This allowed for all

aspects of historic preservation to be brought to a

new level of awareness (Tyler 2nd, 42). Seventeen

years later, the National Trust published a book

titled With Heritage So Rich. The book documented

our heritage through photos of lost historic

structures and became indispensable to preserva-

tionists. Recommendations made in the book led

to the establishment of the National Historic

Preservation Act of 1966. This act was the most

important act passed by Congress for historic

preservation. Prior to the act the primary focus was

on specific historic landmarks, but after it was

passed it allowed for locally run historic districts

and funding for many preservation activities. The

act was a model for most present-day guidelines

(Tyler 2nd, 46-47).

Methods of Intervention for Historic Structures

Preservation

Preservation is the ceasing of processes

that contribute to the deterioration of a building or

site by making essential repairs to maintain its

existing state. It is hidden work aimed in keeping a

property as it was found (Fram, 42). There are

various theories and philosophies that are associ-

ated with historic preservation. Most people see

preservation as saving old buildings. Arguably

some see preservation “as preserving cultural

heritage, some as fostering urban revitalization,

and some as contributing to sustainability and an

alternative approach to current development

practices” (Tyler 2nd, 18). With these different

philosophies, preservationists often have differing

views on how a building should be preserved.

Some feel that it is necessary to keep the historic

structure as is, yet others wish to restore it to its

original designed condition. Preservation should

be based upon each specific objective. A method

that works in one instance may not work in another

(Tyler 2nd, 18).

13|14

Restoration

Restoration is the act of bringing a historic building

back to a specific time period. Most often it is

brought back to its original condition. At times,

restoration is required when the historic integrity is

lost or when a specific time period is more signifi-

cant (Tyler 1st, 24). The Hay House in Macon,

Georgia is an example of restoration that is being

done today. Three different families owned the

home: The Johnston’s, The Felton’s, and The Hay’s.

The challenge was deciding what time period to

restore the building to. The Georgia Trust for

Historic Preservation (founded in 1973) decided

that they should represent each era. They restored

the rooms based on which was the most promi-

nent. In order to preserve the history of all three,

they would leave patches of the original paint in

case they wished to someday restore it back to its

original design.

Figure 1.1 Figure 1.2

Reconstruction

Reconstruction is the replication of a

historic structure’s design or materials. This method

of construction is used primarily when the original

structure no longer exists, and there is a strong

need for it to be replaced for continuity. Williams-

burg, Virginia was one of the first colonial cities

within the United States. In the 1920s, John D

Rockefeller realized the importance of the city and

began restoration of the entire town. The main

problem was nothing remained of the structure of

the Governor’s Palace that was the hub of the

original town. The decision was to reconstruct the

palace from what plans, paintings and documents

they had available. It was completed in 1934 (Tyler

1st, 27-28).

Figure 1.3

Figure 1.4

15|16

Adaptive Rehabilitation/Reuse

A historic building’s original function and

use is often not practical within today’s society. The

approach of rehabilitation, also referred to as reuse,

is used to adapt a structure to a new function or

use. Norman Tyler, explains, “Rehabilitation

describes a suitable approach when existing

historic features are damaged or deteriorated but

modifications can be made to update portions of

the structure, even adapting the building for a new

purpose” (Tyler 1st, 28). The majority of changes

happen primarily on the interior of the building.

The changes on the exterior are limited in order to

maintain the historic integrity of the building (Tyler

1st, 28).

Contemporary architecture has infiltrated

into historic preservation with the advent of new

technology and design. Often new construction in

adaptive rehabilitation aims to be compatible or

contrast with the original historic elements. When

new construction attempts to be compatible with

existing, it must take into consideration and relate

to elements such as material, scale, massing, color

and proportions. The new design will not fully

match the original but it will make a few connec-

tions to it. The majority of designers today tend to

design so that the new construction does not

compete with the existing. Contrasting the original

elements is where contemporary design becomes

controversial. The goal of contrasting design is to

respect the existing structures by putting an

emphasis on the differences rather than similarities.

The contrast of an element such as a glass curtain

wall system next to an older brick wall can put an

emphasis on both of the elements rather than one

becoming superior to the other (Tyler 1st, 28).

Case Study: Tate Modern in London,

England

The Bankside Power Station in London is

an inspirational example of adaptive rehabilitation.

The building was built in two different phases

between 1947 and 1963. The rising prices of oil

made the power station inefficient, so it was closed

in 1982. The factory remained empty until 2000

when the Tate Collection decided to convert the

building to a new use. The Tate Collection was

originally located in Millbank, London. They

realized they had outgrown the original building

and need to move to a different location. The

question they were faced with was: does modern

art need to be in a modern building or a conversion

of an old building? Ultimately, they settled on the

reuse of the Bankside Power Station for its size and

location. The turbine hall is used as the main

entrance and provides space for large pieces of art.

The boiler room is divided into individual galleries.

A glass roof on the top allows light into the main

hall and provides space for a café (Tate Moderns).

17|18

Figure 1.5

Figure 1.6

Additions

More often than not additions and

adaptive rehabilitation go hand in hand. An

addition is the expansion of an existing building.

When additions are made the existing building

will be rehabilitated to function better. The major

issue associated with additions is contextualism

as it primarily focuses on the exterior of the

building. Questions often arise as to how well the

old and the new designs will blend together.

Similar to adaptive rehabilitation, additions have

three different design approaches that can be

utilized: matching, compatible and contrasting

(Tyler 2nd, 106).

Matching

The primary goal of matching is to just imitate

the existing features. Additions will be designed

in the same style and use similar materials and

detailing. Norman Tyler states that, “Some critics

question this approach, saying the new is not

clearly differentiated from the old, and may fool

an observer into thinking a recent construction is

older, part of the original historic structure.” This

idea of matching an existing structure limits

design and is often looked down upon (Tyler 2nd,

106-107).

Compatible

Compatible design is the most common

technique used for additions. The new design

makes suggestions to the original size, scale,

material, color and proportions. This is often

achieved through simplification of these

elements. For example if the façade of a building

consisted of a series of four evenly spaced ornate

Romanesque windows, the addition can take the

size and spacing of those windows and simplify

Figure 1.7

them on the addition, which makes it compatible

with the existing building (Tyler 2nd, 107).

Contrasting

As stated before, “The goal of contrasting

design is to respect the existing structures by

putting an emphasis on the differences rather

than similarities.” The concept is that new and old

design should be easily distinguishable from one

another as it is a product of its own era. There are

different ways to approach contrasting additions.

The new structures, with little identity, can recede

into the background of the old building, which

makes the old building stand out. The new

building could aggressively clash with the historic

structure and context. This often makes the

architects seem as if they put no consideration

into the historic context with the thinking that

architecture is a product of its own time (Tyler

2nd, 108).

19|20

Figure 1.8

Figure 1.9

Case Study: Morgan Library by Renzo

Piano

For the Morgan Library in New York, Renzo

Piano was challenged with designing an addition

with a setting that consists of multiple contextual

styles. The new addition needed to make a connec-

tion between three different buildings on the site:

the original Morgan Library designed by McKim,

Mead and White; the Annex designed by Benjamin

Wistar Morris; and the Morgan House. Renzo Piano

blended the compatible and contrast

ing approach to the addition. The center part that

extrudes out has a three-part structure, which

relates to the existing building to the left of the

addition. It also relates to the simplicity and color of

the existing building to the right of it. The physical

connections of additions are made of glass, which

contrasts and gives more emphasis to the older

structures. The new addition is recessed back from

the street, so it won’t clash with the existing

buildings (The Morgan Library & Musuem).

Figure 1.10

Figure 1.11

The role of preservation is important in

the conservation of our culture and heritage. Many

of today’s architects tend to overlook the impor-

tance of historic buildings. Frequently new

constructions are attached to or placed next to

historic structures with little or no consideration to

the impact on the surroundings. An architect

needs to respect our heritage as it will be the key to

the knowledge of our past and a foundation our

future. History cannot be repeated, and if it is lost, it

will be forgotten. If a building is replaced, it is not

continuing history but rather making a new history.

When designing within a historic environment,

there are many different issues that need to be

addressed and many solutions. One must study all

possible solutions such as whether it should be

preserved, restored, reconstructed, rehabilitated or

enlarged.

The focus of this thesis will be about

adaptive rehabilitaion and additions to existing

historic structures. The theory of contrasting

designs of old and new proves to be a difficult

undertaking. It needs to take into consideration

the theory of contextualism and the significance of

comptempory design within preservation. This will

be discussed in more depth in the next chapter.

With historic structures, there are regulations and

codes that need to considered. Navigating and

weighing them against the need for contemporary

design in a historic district will be the challenge.

What defines something as historic? How can

contemporary design create a new usefulness to

our historic structures and preserve the richness of

our past?

Design Approach21|22

Chapter TwoContemporary Architecture

This chapter will investigates the idea of incorpo-

rating contemporary architecture into a historic

built environment. It shows that the topic is

nothing new and has been a subject of debate for

many years. Knowing differing views on the topic

can prove useful in providing evidence towards

why it should be considered as a design idea. This

chapter will prove the importance of continuing

our architectural heritage thourgh the use of

contemporary architecture.

23|24

The goal of a historic preservationist is to

preserve heritage for future generations. Then why is

it that we have to deny the architectural heritage of

the present? The implementation of contemporary

architecture as an addition to a historic building is

often looked down upon and never thought of in the

initial design phases. With this thought, do we feel

that our current heritage will be lost for the future

generations? The United States, more often than

most countries, is content on designing monoto-

nous, undistinguished and loosely referenced new

historical additions. De Teel Patterson Tiller states in

the Forum Journal, a journal of the National Trust for

Historic Preservation, “Best intentions of the most

committed architectural review board aside, in doing

so, we rob future generations of the record of our

time, of what was important to us, of how we best

built here and now, particularly in rich setting of our

nation’s historic districts and neighborhoods” (De Teel

Patterson Tiller, 6).

Contemporary Architecture within a Historic Context

Contextualism

The term contextualism usually goes

hand-and-hand with contemporary design.

Contextualism design approach “yields contem-

porary architecture that is sensitive to, and

compatible with, its surroundings” (Tyler 2nd,

103). There are two main elements to this design

method: context of time and context of place. The

context of time is essential to understanding the

history of a building. Peter Eisenman provides an

example of an arrow. In the picture, we do not

know whether the arrow is moving or is static.

Without knowing where it came from or where it

is headed, we are unable to understand the

arrow. The image shows only a fraction of the

story of that arrow. The meaning is lost without

knowing the larger context. A building cannot

stand alone. It essentially is a part of a continuing

story becoming the link between the past and

the future. The design should not neglect what

25|26

was there before and what is there currently.

Architects tend to ignore this and only think of

the future. Similarly historic districts should not

neglect the idea of what it is today, what it was

and what will become. The context of place puts

emphasis on the building’s physical surroundings.

It will have neighbors, making it a part of a

collection of structures. The building needs to be

compatible with its neighbors but different at the

same time (Tyler 2nd, 103-104).

First Debate on the Topic

The concept of contemporary architec-

ture within a historic context is not a new

argument. In 1951, Frank Lloyd Wright was asked

to design a building in Venice, Italy. The project

was called Masieri Memorial. It was located in a

prominent part of the city. The site could be seen

from the Ponte del’ Academia and located on the

one of the busiest intersections of the Grand

Canal. On either side of the site, there is Gothic

and Renaissance palazzi. When Wright revealed

his design to the public, it triggered an immense

debate about its merits from 1953 to 1955. Many

well-known architects of the time were in

agreement with Wright’s design ideas, but others

thought differently. They felt the design was ‘a

piece of inexcusable vandalism.’ Thus the design

was rejected by Venice’s municipal council. They

claimed that it would lose the vernacular of the

historic building it sought to replace, and that the

modern architecture was unsuitable in the

historic city. This argument became one of “the

first public debates on the matter of how (or

whether) contemporary designed buildings can

(or should) be integrated within historic

precincts” (De Teel Patterson Tiller, 7).

Figure 12

Figure 2.1

Figure 2.2

Guidelines for New and Old

Around ten to twenties years later, many

countries throughout Europe and the United States

began to understand the importance of regulating

the introduction of contemporary architecture into

historic contexts. A common agreement was made

by preservationist groups through charters such as

Venice Charter of 1964, the third ICOMOS

(International Council on Monuments and Sites)

General Assembly in Budapest in 1972, and the

National Trust for Historic Preservation’s sympo-

sium in 1977. They came up with four conclusions

similar to the ones stated in the ICOMOS General

Assembly, which states:

1) “The introduction of contemporary architecture

into ancient groups of buildings is feasible in so far

as the town-planning scheme of which it is a part

involves acceptance of the existing fabric as the

framework for its own future development”

(ICOMOS, 1).

2) “Such contemporary architecture, making

deliberate use of present day techniques and

materials, will fit itself into an ancient setting

without affecting the structural and aesthetic

qualities of the later only in so far as due allow-

ance is made for the appropriate use of mass,

scale, rhythm and appearance” (ICOMOS, 1).

3) “The authenticity of historical monuments or

groups of building must be taken as a basic

criterion and there must be avoidance of any

imitations, which would affect their artistic

and historical value” (ICOMOS, 2).

4) “The revitalization of monuments and groups

of buildings by the finding of new uses for them

is legitimate and recommendable provided

such uses affect, whether externally or internally,

neither their structure nor their character as

complete entities.” (ICOMOS, 2).

The National Trust for Historic Preservation

concluded with similar guidelines of relating old

and new buildings. They released a book called

Old and New Architecture: Design Relationship

written in 1980. The book provides an assortment

of desirable design ideas for architectural

additions that differ from the original historical

structure (sometimes called “theory of disjunc-

tion”). It shows how a new building can work with

the context of size, footprint, massing and detail

of the original building but still be different.

These design ideas paved the way for the consen-

sus that additions mimicking the historical

context are not aesthetically pleasing and that

contemporary design “should obey the impera-

tives of its own historical moment” (De Teel

Patterson Tiller, 9).

27|28

Standard 9

The design ideas in the book Old and

New Architecture: Design Relationship were

coalesced and incorporated into the Secretary of

the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation. It

consists of ten standards of advice on how to

balance preservation with rehabilitation.

Standard 9 speaks directly of new additions and

how they should behave. Standard 9 originally

read:

1978) “Contemporary design for alterations

and additions to existing properties shall not be

discouraged when such alterations and additions

do not destroy significant historic, architectural,

or cultural material, and such design is compat-

ible with the size, scale, color, material, and

character of the property, neighborhood, and

environment” (De Teel Patterson Tiller, 9).

In 1995, a revision was made to the Secretary of

the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, which

changed Standard 9 to read:

1995) “New additions, exterior alterations, or

related new construction will not destroy historic

materials, features, and spatial relationships that

characterize the property. The new work shall

be differentiated from the old and will be

compatible with the historic materials, features,

size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect

the integrity of the property and its environment”

(De Teel Patterson Tiller, 9).

The new revision to the standards makes

the statement that different but compatible is the

preferred method of design, leaving the idea of

contemporary design open as a possibility. It has

been argued that nothing in the rewrite restricts

contemporary design just so long as it is respect-

ful to its context. These standards are used as

guidelines for architectural review boards, zoning

boards and planning commissions. As a guide-

line, they are open to interpretation by local

officials so what one review board may pass

another may reject. This revision, however, has

created a ripple effect within addition design that

may allow for contemporary ideas to coalesce

with the original design (De Teel Patterson Tiller,

10).

Differing Opinions

The concept of contemporary design set

within a historic district is an unfamiliar theory to

most people. Generally speaking, preservationists

have the mindset that we need to do anything to

preserve the past with little knowledge of the

current architectural style. Similarly, an architect’s

focus is so much on the future of architectural

design styles that they neglect the important

surrounding historical context. These conflicting

ideas surfaced as a result of the Second World

War. The majority of preservationist realized that

the destruction of war caused heavy losses of our

architectural heritage. It resulted in a hefty

increase in the preservation of older buildings

vital to continuing their heritage. Also around the

Second World War, architectural modernism and

urban planning proved to be destructive towards

thousands of historical buildings and the loss of

heritage. The modernist movement focused on

the concept of a machine and the push towards a

new age, which generally ignored the surround-

ing context and demonstrated a lack of respect

towards its history. “The architecture profession

bears significant responsibility for so many

inferior designs foisted into historic districts

nationwide. Unlike in Europe, historic design

contextualism remains largely ignored in most

U.S. architectural school curricula today” (De Teel

Patterson Tiller, 11). The United States is only a

few hundred years old whereas Europe has been

around for thousands of years. With that much

history, there is no way to completely ignore the

surrounding context. The idea of context is new

in the United States as architects are just now

beginning to understand the importance of

architectural heritage. The preservationist field is

a recent process towards saving our history,

which might be flawed. Many review board

members in federal, state and local government

preservation departments “are rarely adequately

schooled or prepared for these complex visual

decisions” (De Teel Patterson Tiller, 11). These

review boards will often lack the advice from an

architect, which leads towards biased decision

that may ultimately end with a boring design just

to blend in with the surrounding context. A larger

amount of citizens have been involved at review

board meetings and serving on committees but

more for social and political reasons. The average

response to something that is different is more

often than not negative. Thus, contemporary

designs are often looked down upon, so people

resort to vaguely historicized addition, as they are

safer.

29|30

Continuing Our Heritage

The creation of new historicized build-

ings curtails our architectural heritage. “We

experience a complexity of generations of

occupancy expressed through architecture and

material culture, layer on layer, generation by

generation, tangible and intangible. Historic

places have the power to speak to us as vital and

living links between us and those that have gone

before and those yet to come. Historic neighbor-

hoods speak to the continuum of life and

endeavor” (De Teel Patterson Tiller, 12). The

visually interesting part of being in a historic city

is being able to look around at all the different

styles of architecture layered on top of one

another and know that it has a rich heritage. A

building with multiple additions from different

time periods has more to tell and is thus more

exciting than a new building that is built in the

same style as the building right next to it.

Imagine a hundred years from now when we look

at a historic city and wonder what happened in

the last hundred years of architecture. Whether

we like or hate a building’s design, it is crucial

towards the continuum of our architectural

heritage. “Good contemporary design is funda-

mental to that interaction with the future and the

past” (De Teel Patterson Tiller, 12).

Think of what power contemporary

architecture could have within a historic context

and how interesting an intergenerational design

conversation could become, rather than being

“trapped in history with little sense of future

befitting its powerful and magnificent past” (De

Teel Patterson Tiller, 13). It allows the viewer to

understand and interpret the history of that

building through the layering of design. Contem-

porary design is not always the best design

decision for an addition, but it should be an

integral part of the initial design phases. It should

not be explored as an afterthought. Contempo-

rary design in a historic context is the most

difficult challenge to successfully achieve when

designing an addition. When done effectively,

however, it can become the most rewarding. It is

able to celebrate our past and current heritage

for the future generations to come.

Savannah is one of the most well-known

historic cities within the United States. Its core

value is to preserve as much of the city as

possible to provide an example of historic cities

and to preserve its heritage. The city follows the

Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabili-

tation and also has a strict set of guidelines on

what is allowed to be built within the city’s

historic district. With these strict regulations, it is

often difficult to incorporate contemporary style

into a design, but there are a few examples in the

city of contemporary architecture that works with

the surrounding context.

Savannah and Con-temporary Architecture

31|32

Case Study: Jepson Center

The Jepson Center for the Arts, designed

by Moshe Safdie and Hansen Architects, is a

contemporary architectural design located in the

heart of Savannah’s Landmark Historic District.

The challenge was to be unique but work with

Savannah’s urban fabric. Safdie states the

building’s design “respects the traditional grid of

the historic district. The glazed façade on York

Street engages tree-lined Telfair Squarer and is

formed by two white architectural concrete

‘screens’ framing glass walls, which break up

the…(120-foot) frontage into bays of less

than…(60 feet), as required by the Historic

Savannah guidelines” (Safdie Architects).

The Jepson Center is typically viewed as the

primary example of contemporary architecture in

Savannah. It is a design that pushes the boundar-

ies of being compatible to almost becoming

contrasting. The building is successful in drawing

from the rhythm and pattern of its neighboring

buildings and the rest of the surrounding context.

It uses a staggered white stone that is compatible

with the staggering of brick and the white stone

and stucco used in many of the other surround-

ing buildings. The introduction of a predomi-

nately glass façade facing the square pushes the

boundary of the typical vision of new design

within the context of old, which has proved

successful.

Figure 2.3

Figure 2.4

The eight-six foot tower fits into the skyline as

one of the highest points within Savannah’s

downtown district. Their contrasting design

approach makes the original structure stand out

more than that of the new addition. Thus,

providing a prime example of how contrasting

contemporary architecture can be successful in

celebration of a passed heritage (Sottile & Sottile).

33|34


Case Study: SCAD Museum

The SCAD Museum of Art sits on the site of the

original headquarters of the Central of Georgia

Railway. The majority of the original building had

fallen to ruins. Only parts of the exterior façade

on the west side of Turner Boulevard and a few

rooms on the side closest to Martin Luther King

Junior Boulevard remained intact. The site is

located in the Landmark Historic District of

Savannah, which requires the new structure to

abide to the design guidelines set by the city of

Savannah. The firm Sottile & Sottile was given the

task of designing a contemporary art museum

while preserving the walls that still remained. The

new design was placed between the original

walls, which helps demonstrate to the viewer the

importance of the original building’s heritage.

contemporary visitor center and restrooms. The

visitors’ center is primarily glass walls with a

butterfly roof. The design is minimal and has little

relationship to its surrounding context. It is not

overpowering the other buildings because of its

diminutive size. Even though it might not be the

most successful design that it could have been, it

is a step towards the notion of incorporating

contemporary architecture within the city of

Savannah (City of Savannah).

Case Study: Ellis Square

The site of Ellis Square originally was a

part of Savannah’s City Market. A portion of City

Market was torn down in 1954 to make way for a

new parking garage. The garage was an attempt

to provide additional parking downtown to

encourage shopping. The city realized the

importance of the site, and the parking garage

needed to be removed. In 2005, the garage was

torn down and placed underground. This

provided the opportunity to create an urban

plaza at street level. The square also consists of a


Concluding Thoughts

The concept of designing contemporary

architecture within a historic context is challeng-

ing and highly controversial. The debate on

whether we should accept this design idea has

been continuing for over fifty years. There is no

correct solution to the issue, but steps have been

made that allow for more variety in architectural

design within our ever-growing historic districts.

New design relies heavily on its surrounding

context. If this context is ignored, the building

design will prove unsuccessful. When done

correctly, however, it provides us with the

opportunity to create a link “between us and

those that have gone before and those yet to

come,” and allows for the continuum of architec-

tural heritage.

35|36

Chapter ThreeConceptual Analysis

This thesis focuses on the continuing of

our architectural style within historic

districts. It is the reuse and addition to

the vacant building located on the

corner of Montgomery and Congress

Street in Savannah, Georgia. The build-

ing will be reused as a museum to

celebrate Historic Preservation to give

the viewer an understanding of what

goes into preserving buildings, furniture

and other elements.

37|38

Left: Hilton Garden Inn detail; copying architectural style.

Bottom: Hilton Garden Inn from Franklin Square.

Top Right: The Cay Building, to be completed on Elis Square in 2012.

Figure 3.1

Figure 3.2

Figure 3.3

Historic cities are a vital link to the history

of previous generations. When we look

at older cities, we see a layering of

architectural styles and heritage.

Whether the design was successful or

not, it is a part of our history, even

buildings that are being built today.

Preservation is the key to saving history

for future generations and the

continuum of architectural heritage.

When we preserve historic districts

however, we become “trapped in

history with little sense of future befitting

its powerful and magnificent past.”

Imagine a hundred years from now

when we look at a historic city and

wonder what happened in the last

hundred years of architecture.

The Problem39|40

Top Left: Morgan Library in New York City designed by Renzo Piano.

Top Right: The Morgan Library addition provides a perfect example of how to incorporate today’s traditions within a historical context.

Bottom Left: SCAD Museum designed by Sottile and Sottile.

Bottom Right: Certain contrasting architectural elements create an emphasis on the existing brick to celebrate the history of the building.



41|42

Contrasting architectural elements

provide the opportunity to incorporate

today’s style of architecture into a

historical context. The goal of contrast-

ing design is to respect the existing

structures by putting an emphasis on the

differences rather than similarities. The

concept is that new and old design

should be easily distinguishable from one

The Concept

Con

text

ualis

mContrasting

Exist

ng

New & Old

Mat

eria

lity

Heritage

ContinuingHi

stor

icPr

eser

vatio

n

Contemporary

Celebrate

Architecture

another as it is a product of its own era.

Therefore, we are able to continue the

architectural heritage from every genera-

tion whether its past, present or future.

Figure 3.8

Design Strategies

?North Elevation abstracted from site on West Congress and Montgomery

Lack of Respect for Surrounding Context

The design strategies are a personal set

of guidelines that will be used to help

create the new plan for the addition.

Without personal or city guidelines any

building can be built on the site, possibly

lacking the respect towards the already

existing buildings.Figure 3.9

Figure 3.10

43|44

Matching copies the surround contextual elements within the new building.

Compatible takes some architectural elements from the surrounding context without directly copying them, which is the most common method of designing in historic districts.

Contrasting, contemporary design, if done effectively, allows for the continuum of our architectural heritage with the respect of the existing context.

Figure 3.11

Figure 3.12

Figure 3.13

Short

Tall

Average

Pros-Does not overpower surrounding context

Cons-Can become lost-Does not provide enough space as an addition

Pros-Can stand as a landmark-Provides extra space for a small addition-Contrasts context

Cons-Can be over baring-Amount of material on facade could clash to much with the neighboring buildings

Pros-Works proportionally with surrounding buildings-Does not exceed height restriction for the area

Cons-May blend to much with other building heights-Does not make a statement if needed

Height

Figure 3.14

Figure 3.15

Figure 3.16

Small

Large

Pros-Can allow for path between buildings-Gives visual dominance to existing build-ing

Cons-Does not cover enough street frontage-May not provide enough space for the program-May not be enough to prove concept

Pros-Provides extra space-Can expand over existing

Cons-Cannot go over neighboring building-Could become visually overbearing

Pros-Hints to the idea of expanding over the existing building-Does not overpower its context

Cons-Blends too much with context-Not enough of a statement

Average

Scale45|46

Figure 3.17

Figure 3.18

Figure 3.19

Fenestration

Visual Grid

The building form of the city block is tall and narrow on the center lots and short and long on the end buildings. The center lots have a three or four part type within the windows.

With this grid created by the fenestration, how should the grid be incorporated into the design of the new addition?

The grid does not have to be literally represented in the design. It can be abstracted but still refer back to the context, which may better distinguish old from new.

Abstract Grid

Figure 3.20

Figure 3.21

Figure 3.22

47|48

Stone material is similar to the surrounding context, which may not work for contrasting design.

Wood is visually contrasting the existing materials, but it does not have the sense of permanence that the existing has.

Steel or metal can contrast the existing materials and it also provides a sense of permanence that wood is lacking.

Glass is visually transparent, and brick is solid, which creates visual contrast. It also has a sense of permanence like metal or stone.

Existing MaterialityFigure 3.23

Figure 3.24 Figure 3.25 Figure 3.26 Figure 3.27

Savannah River

Site Location

Figure 3.28

49|50

Existing historic building

Empty lot for addition

Mon

tgom

ery

St

Jeffe

rson

St

Barn

ard

St

Mar

tin L

uthe

r Kin

g Jr

Blv

d

W Julian St

W Bryan St

W Congress St

Broughton St

Bay St

Figure 3.30Figure 3.31

Figure 3.29

Figure 3.32 - West Facade Figure 3.35 - Brick and Stucco

Figure 3.33 - Garibaldi’s with Original Signage Figure 3.36 - East Facade

Figure 3.34 - West Congress Street Figure 3.37 - Franklin Square and City Market

Site Context

51|52

Site of Addition

Rough Building Height of 30’

Garibaldi’sRestuarant

Likely orginal brick covered with stucco

Rough Building Height of 36’

West Congress Street

Building to be Rehabilitated

Figure 3.38 - North Facade

Forest City M

illsHaynes & Elton

Storage

Shed

Steam Fire Eng. N

o 2

Plumber’s Supplies

Iron Pipe

Wholesale M

dse.

1884 Sanborn Map

1898 Sanborn Map

John Shick originally owned the land and sold it to George W. Hardcastle in 1854. In that year, Hardcastle had the building on 30-38 Montgomery St built. It was originally called Forest City Mills. Notes on the Sanborn map of 1884 state “Forest City Mills-Haynes & Elton- run of stone, smut mach. 3rd, brand 3R, very little wheat grinding done principally corn, lights, gas, fuel, and wood.”

The property changed hands a few times between 1854 and 1898. In 1857, tax records show that Francis J. Champion owned the property, yet it kept the name Forest City Mills. In 1866, George Washing-ton Garmany purchased the property. On the tax records, it states that in 1873 Garmany, Trustee, owned the property.

W. Congress St.

Mon

tgom

ery

St.

W. Congress St.

Mon

tgom

ery

St.

Plumber’s Supplies

’

Site History

Figure 3.39

Figure 3.40

53|54

Wholesale

Dry Goods

Stge. Wholesale M

dse.

WholesaleRadio

Stge.

Garage

Wholesale

Dry Goods

Wholesale M

dse.

WholesaleRadio

1916 Sanborn Map

1954 Sanborn Map

W. Congress St.

Mon

tgom

ery

St.

W. Congress St.

Mon

tgom

ery

St.

The tax records show that the lot immedi-ately to the East was combined with the building in 1866. For the most part, the building was utilized as a retail store as it was situated right next to City Market. The lot to the East of the building was primarily used as storage spaces.

Sometime between 1916 and 1954, the storage structures were removed, and the lot remains empty to this day. The main building however, continued to be used as a wholesale store. In 1993, it housed the 606 East Cafe for nine years until they closed in 2002. The building has been vacant ever since.

Wholesale

sDry G

oodso

WholesaleRadio

Wholesale

sDry G

oodso

WholesaleRadio

Figure 3.41

Figure 3.42

Site Analysis

Historic District

Savannah River

55|56

zrobin20

Typewritten Text

zrobin20

Typewritten Text

Figure 3.43

Savannah River

Historic BuildingsThere are appoximately 1700 historic buildings in

downtown Savannah, Georgia. Making it the largest National Historic Landmark District in the

United States.

zrobin20

Typewritten Text

Figure 3.44

Savannah River

57|58

There are few museums Located in of the largest historic districts in

the United States. Of which, there are no Historic Preservation

Museums for being one of the leading cities in preservation.

Roundhouse Railroad Museum

Ships of the Sea Maritime Museum

SCAD Museum

Jepson Center

Telfair Museum

Owens Thomas House MuseumDavenport House Museum

Museums

zrobin20

Typewritten Text

Figure 3.45

Savannah River

107'-414"

1-2 Storys3 Storys4 Storys5 Storys6 Storys

8-14 Storys

The building height restriction for the site is four stories.

Building Heights

zrobin20

Typewritten Text

Figure 3.46

Savannah River

59|60

1-2 Storys3 Storys4 Storys5 Storys6 Storys

8-14 Storys

Location of site, which could provide opportunity for a new landmark.Emporis- First Union BankSCAD Museum Tower

Cathedral of St. John the Baptisit

Building Landmarks

zrobin20

Typewritten Text

Figure 3.47

Savannah River

Franklin Square is the last remaining intact square on Montgomery Street.

Liberty Square was cut down in size by Montgomery Street, a parking garage and the city courthouse.

Albert Square was cut by Montgomery Street and the Civic Center.

Last Square

zrobin20

Typewritten Text

Figure 3.48

Savannah River

61|62

The primary entry to the city of Savannah terminates at Franklin Square. If or when

the I-16 fly-over is removed, Montgomery Street still is interupted by the square,

which makes it a point of interest within the city.

City Entry

zrobin20

Typewritten Text

Figure 3.49

City Market

zrobin20

Typewritten Text

Figure 3.50

?Ellis Square

No Place of DestinationAfter its completion, Ellis Square has become a

popular tourist destination to accompany City Market, but there is no counter balance on the other side of

the market.

67|68

zrobin20

Typewritten Text

Figure 3.51

Elis Square

The proposed site the opportunity to serve as a counter balance to the contemporary design of Elis

Square.

Place of Destination

zrobin20

Typewritten Text

Figure 3.52

65|66

Ellis Square

Public ParkingThere are two parking garages near the

site. These are popular for tourist to park in because they are located close to city

market and Broughton Street. When tourist park there, they will often walk past the site, which makes it a good location to

attract tourists.

zrobin20

Typewritten Text

Figure 3.53

Vehicular Traffic

Very little trafficLittle traffic

Average trafficMore than average traffic

A lot of traffic

zrobin20

Typewritten Text

Figure 3.54

67|68

Pedestrian Traffic

Little trafficAverage traffic

More than average trafficA lot of traffic

zrobin20

Typewritten Text

Figure 3.55

Proposed Building Marc by Marc Jacobsto the South

Proposed Building Marc by Marc Jacobsto the South

Close building proximity limits the use of natural light during the winter. The addition could provide the ability to bring more light into the building.

Proposed Addition

Proposed Building

Winter sun angle is 38 degrees.

Summer sun angle is 81degrees.

Solar Analysis

Figure 3.56

Figure 3.57

Figure 3.58

69|70

Mon

tgom

ery

St.

Congress St.

Mon

tgom

ery

St.

Congress St.

Mon

tgom

ery

St.

Congress St.

Mon

tgom

ery

St.

Congress St.

Summer Fall

Spring Winter

Wind Analysis



60’ 32’

90’

Existing Building Empty Lot

90’ x 60’ =5400 SqFt per Floor

5400 x 3 (Floors) =16,200 Total SqFt

90’ x 32’ =2800 SqFt per Floor

2800 x 4-8 (Floors) =11,200 - 22400

Total SqFt

27,400 - 38,600Total SqFt

Gallery 9,200 - 12,900

Working Gallery 6,100 - 8,600

Studios 5,000 - 7,500

Classrooms 1,500 - 2,300

Shop 2,500 - 3,300

Cafe and Kitchen 3,000 - 4,000

Approximate Square Footages

Program

Figure 3.63

71|72

Always by Design AxDStudio/Gallery

AxD is an architectural firm that specializes in creating spaces for living, working and learning. This building was originally a warehouse that is now converted into a working studio and open gallery. They paid specific attention to emphasize the existing brick and historical features to create a dynamic interior space.

Figure 3.64 Figure 3.65 Figure 3.66

Figure 3.67

Figure 3.69

Foster + Partners ReichstagNorman Foster states that rehabilitation and addition of Reichstag is “rooted in four issues: the significance of the Bundestag as a democratic forum; a commitment to public accessibility; a sensitivity to history; and a rigorous environmental agenda.” The building took a beating during the world war. After removing some of the layers added in the 90s they revealed “the striking imprints of the past, including graffiti left by Soviet soldiers.

Figure 3.70


Figure 3.73

Figure 3.74

Figure 3.75

73|74

Lamott ArchitektenPublic Library

The existing building was built in 1895 to house the Landau slaughter-house. It is now reused as a public library to accommodate 75,000 books, CDs and periodicals. The new addition provided the room to hold the large amount of books. The concept was to make a clear transition between old and new architecture. The addition contains the entry, foyer, exhibition area, cafe, children’s library, and main reading room with open stacks. The bridges on the interior make the transition between the old and new architecture, which emphasize the differ-ences in materiality.



Galle

ryGa

llery

Mon

tgom

ery

St.

Congress St.

Main Gallery

Cafe

KitchenShop

Working Gallery

Galle

ryStudios

Classrooms

Circ

ulat

ion

Figure 3.82

75|76

CafeClassrooms

Main Gallery

Studios

Kitc

hen

Shop

Cir

cu

lati

on

Galle

ryWorking Gallery

Outdoor Gallery

Figure 3.83

Mon

tgom

ery

St.

Congress St.

Utili

ze M

axim

um A

mou

nt o

f Spa

ce

Large amount of pedestrian traffic provides attention towards the building

Glass and Metal Construction or material that is contrasting and gives a sense of permanence.Brick and Stucco facade

Cafe

Encourages people to come in.

Show what Preservation is about

Transparent

Tran

spar

ent

Vehicular traffic is forced to turn next to site which forces driver to look towards the new addition.

Glass facade on upper levels will help bring natural light into the building.

Figure 3.84

77|78

Land

mar

k

Cross Ventilation from Westerly Wind

Stack Ventilation

Views toRemember

Architectural

Heritage

Public Interaction and Outdoor Space

Figure 3.85

Chapter FourDesign

This thesis focuses on the continuing of

our architectural style within historic

districts. It is the reuse and addition to

the vaccant building located on the

corner of Montgomery and Congress

Street in Savannah, Georgia. The build-

ing will be reused as a museum to

celebrate Historic Preservation to give

the viewer an understanding of what

goes into preserving buildings, furniture

and other elements.

79|80

Designing a building in a historic city is a

challenging task to accomplish. The

building has to be designed to fit within

the surrounding context while also

attempting to fit within personal and city

guidelines. The goal was to create a

design that will become unified with the

original structure but also can be visually

read as a separate building through

contrasting elements.

Schematic Design

81|82

Preliminary Sketches


Figure 4.3

Figure 4.5

Figure 4.4

Figure 4.6

Figure 4.7

Figure 4.8

Figure 4.9

83|84

Figure 4.11

Figure 4.10

Figure 4.12

Figure 4.13 Figure 4.14 Figure 4.15 Figure 4.16

New Old

IntersectionConcept Diagrams

Figure 4.17

85|86

Top of Building to Left

Top of Building to Right

Grid from Interior Continued to Exterior

Open to Welcome Public

Glass

Drop Ceiling

Heavy Timber Beam

Able to See Existing Structure and Allow for Natural Light

I-Beam

Glass Existing Floor

Heavy Timber Beam

Show Connection Between Old and New

I-Beam

Glass

Brick with Original Signage

Existing Openings on East FacadeReversal of Solid and Void



The new entry of building will be located

in the addition portion of the design. The

main lobby contains the core circulation

and the beginning of procession

through the main gallery.

87|88

UPUP

West Congress Street

Mon

tgom

ery

Stre

et

Gallery - Local Completed Projects

Gallery - Current Local Projects

Impo

rtanc

e of

Hi

stor

ic P

rese

rvat

ion

Lobby/Entry

Men

Women

Service Elevator

First Floor Plan

2’

4’

8’

16’

32’

0

N

Figure 4.24

The second floor consists mainly of more

gallery space for the museum. The

opening to below part provides the view

towards the signage wall and opens up

the main lobby space to allow for more

natural light.

Open to Below

Gallery Old/New

Service Elevator

Second Floor Plan

Figure 4.25

89|90

The third floor is similar to the second

except that it has office spaces on the

south side of the original building. The

new addition is set back from the origi-

nal to allow guests to see the physical

connection between old and new.

Rest.

Office Office OfficeConference

Service Elevator

GalleryFinished Works

Open to Below

Third Floor Plan

Figure 4.26

The fourth floor gives the guests the

opportunity to learn how architectural

elements are preserved or restored. In

the working gallery, a preservationist

would be working and explaining to

people the process to which they have

to go through to bring these elements

back to life.

Service Elevator

Working Gallery

Process of Preservation

Open to Below

Outdoor Space/Larger Works

Fourth Floor Plan

Figure 4.27

91|92

The top floor is the indoor and outdoor

cafe space. The surrounding buildings

are no higher than four stories. This

provides guests the ability to relax and

reflect on the unique heritage that the

city of Savannah has to offer.

Rest.Kitchen

Cafe

Outdoor Seating

Fifth Floor Plan

Figure 4.28

Outdoor Cafe

Working Gallery

Outdoor Space

Cafe

Elevator

Wall with Existing Signage

Galleries Entry/Lobby

Cantilevered Structure Over Existing

Figure 4.29

93|94

The design keeps the street frontage

that is required in the city’s guidelines.

The new addition above is recessed to

make sure it does not visually over

power the existing building.

North Perspective

Figure 4.30

The East wall of the original building is

partially removed to expose the con-

nection between the new and old. This

was done by inverting the solids and

voids that use to service the older

additions.

Interior Lobby

Figure 4.31

95|96

The wall on Garibaldis on the East side of

the new addition contains original

signage. This signage will be preserved

behind a glass wall to help enhance the

visual of the old ways of advertising.

Third Floor/Signage Wall

Figure 4.32

Design Development This portion of the design was focused

mainly on the details of how the design

can be feasible. A new addition to an

existing historic structure provides many

unique challenges. The main one being

the physical connection that is made

between old and new. The other issue

that was addressed was fixing the

interior design to: create more visual

interest in the main lobby, rework the

layouts of the gallery spaces and add

more service spaces with the addition of

a basement.

97|98

Figure 4.33

Figure 4.36


Figure 4.34

Figure 4.35

Figure 4.38

Figure 4.39

Building Code Occupancy Type: A-3 - “This group

includes recreational amusement, and

worship uses not specifically falling under

other Assembly groups, including, for

example galleries, auditoriums,

churches, community halls, courtrooms,

dance halls, gymnasiums, lecture halls,

libraries, museums, passenger station

waiting areas, and the like.”

Contruction Type: I-B - Requires 2

hour fire rating

Occupancy Load: 5 sq.ft. net per

occupant

Max Travel Distance:

Unsprinkled - 200’

Sprinkled - 250’

Max Common Path - 75’

Dead End Corridor - 20’

Door Width - Min. - 32” net clear

Max - 48” nominal

99|100

Basement Floor Plan After more investigation of the original

building, it was determined that it con-

tained a basement that could be

utilized for addition space. In the new

addition, restrooms and service spaces

were added to utilize the existing base-

ment for storage. The East side of the

addition is open to allow natural light to

filter into the basement and give space

to display works.

UPUP

UPUP

UPUP

Figure 4.41

First Floor Plan After research of building codes, it was

necessary to incorporate a secondary

form of emergency egress. The place-

ment of restrooms in the basement

provided extra room on the main floor to

be used as gallery space. The vertical

circulation was moved to run along the

signage wall rather than having a

central core.

UP

UPUPDNDN

UPUP

DN

Figure 4.42

101|102

Second Floor Plan The second floor addition was reduced

in size to provide more visual space for

the main lobby below. The east side of

the floor was relocated farther away

from the signage wall to be able to

better see it and provide space for the

vertical circulation. Light wells were put

in the existing part of the building that

runs from the roof down to the base-

ment. This allows for more natural light.

DNDN

UPUP

UPUP

UPUP

Figure 4.43

Third Floor Plan The third floor is similar to the second

other than the landing for the main

staircase is in a different location. The

floor on the existing building is cut away

along the main gallery to help open up

the buildings and allow the viewer to see

the physical connection between the

new and old.

DNDN

UPUP

UPUP

UPUP

Figure 4.44

103|104

Fourth Floor Plan The fourth floor is the working gallery,

which is cantilevered over the original. It

contains a partial glass floor allowing

guests to see the structure below. The

I-beams holding the new structure were

extended to allow for the light wells in

the existing building. This floor also

provides the access to the roof of the

existing structure serving the outdoor

gallery and roof garden space.

DNDN

UPUP

UPUP

UPUP

Figure 4.45

Fifth Floor Plan The fifth floor contains the indoor and

outdoor cafe and kitchen space along

with restrooms. The outdoor space now

has a glass roof that cantilevers from the

indoor portion of the structure.

DNDN

DNDN

DNDN

Figure 4.46

105|106

Structural Details The details help to show the interaction

of old and new design. A connection

between a heavy timber beam and

steel I-beam is not common. Thus a

unique bracket had to be designed to

join the two elements. The bracket

design, however, needed to be larger to

be able to support the timber, as the

end of the beam is the most common

place for shear failure.

Hardwood Floor

Railing

Metal T-Shaped Bracket to Support Timber Beam

Original Heavy Timber Beam

Original Wood Joists

Original Wood Decking

Steel I-Beam Column

Gypsum Board Wrapped Around I-Beam

Metal Stud

Metal Decking

Concrete

Gypsum

Wood Furring

Steel I-Beam

Drop Ceiling

Open Web Joist

Hardwood Flooring

Glass Roof

Steel I-beam Joist

Steel I-beam Column

Railing for Outdoor Cafe

Concrete on Metal Deck Roof Roof

Concrete Decking

Existing Basement

Original Brick Wall

Concrete on Metal Decking

Original Heavy Timber Beams 7”x 7”

Glass Curtain Wall

Gypsum Board

1”x 3” Original Decking

3/4” Hardwood Flooring

W16x45 Steel I-beam column

W16x45 Steel I-beam Joist

Original 2”x 8” Joists

New Concrete Wall

Wall SectionBasement

First Floor

Second Floor

Third Floor

Fourth Floor

Fifth Floor

Figure 4.47


North Perspective The perspective helps to give an idea as

to how the new design will look within

the existing context of the city.

Figure 4.50

107|108

Overview from North The overview shows how the new addi-

tion rests above the existing and allows

for vertical light wells in the center of the

original building.

Figure 4.51

Congress Street View Context is vital to the success of a

design within a historic city. The view

provides the rough idea of how the

design has been successful in contextu-

ally contrasting with the surrounding

buildings.

Figure 4.52

109|110

Main Lobby The floors are set back to allow for a

larger main lobby, and the large white

wall provides the space for a main

display for the guests when they first

enter the museum.

Figure 4.53

View of Main Lobby Opening up a part of the original wall

near the main lobby allows for the

interaction between old and new.

Guests will be able to see details of the

connections while being able to see the

signage wall.

Figure 4.54

111|112

Working Gallery The working gallery helps to demon-

strate to the viewer the importance of

historic preservation.

Figure 4.55

Chapter FiveFinal Design

Architecture is a way to write history.

Every part of every building has a unique

story to tell us. Preserving historic

buildings provides the opportunity to

share history with the future generations.

City officials have attempted this by

setting guidelines for new construction in

historic districts. However, these rules

constrain today’s architectural style. The

strict rules have resulted in new

construction that mirrors the style of

architecture from a hundred years ago.

Thus, the architectural heritage of today

is being lost within our historic cities.

When we experience a historic city, the

most unique aspect is the layering of

generations, which gives us the ability to

see history through architecture. Through

the use of contrasting architectural

elements with respect of the surrounding

context, this inevitable gap in our

architectural heritage can be fixed.

113|114

Figure 5.1

Basement Floor Plan

UP

UP

UP

2’

4’

8’

16’

32’

0

Prep/Office SpaceResource Library

Storage

Mech.

115|116

Figure 5.2

First Floor Plan

UP

UPDN

UP

DN

DN

61' - 0" 30' - 0"

90' -

3"

4' -

0"6'

- 10

"19

' - 7

"12

' - 8

"8'

- 0"

20' -

0"

6' -

4"1'

- 7"

11' -

3"

19' -

11"

8' -

11"

10' -

6"

9' -

6"10

' - 4

"9'

- 2"

20' -

0"

6' -

5"

10' - 3"

4' -

0"6'

- 10

"19

' - 7

"12

' - 8

"8'

- 0"

20' -

0"

6' -

4"1'

- 77"7

11' -

3"

2’

4’

8’

16’

32’

0

Main Gallery

Figure 5.3

Second Floor Plan

DN

DN

UP

UP

DN

UP

2’

4’

8’

16’

32’

0

Gallery

117|118

Figure 5.4

Third Floor Plan

DN

UP

DN

UP

DN

UP

2’

4’

8’

16’

32’

0

Gallery

Figure 5.5

Fourth Floor Plan

DN

UP

DN

UP

UP

2’

4’

8’

16’

32’

0

Working Gallery

Rooftop Gallery

119|120

Figure 5.6

Fifth Floor Plan

DN

DN

DN

2’

4’

8’

16’

32’

0

Cafe

Office

OutdoorSeating

Figure 5.7

121|122

Wor

king

Gal

lery

Gal

lery

Gal

lery

Mai

n G

alle

ryS

tora

geC

afe

13' -

11"

12' -

0"

10' -

0"

11' -

3"

10' -

0"

13' -

11"

Figure 5.8

Figure 5.9

123|124Glass Roof

Steel I-beam Joist

Steel I-beam Joist

Hardwood Flooring

1’x 3” Original Decking


Original Heavy Timber Beam 7”x7”

Bolted Metal Bracket to Connect Timber to Steel

Hardwood Flooring

1’x 3” Original Decking


Original Heavy Timber Beam 7”x7”

Original Heavy Timber Column

Hardwood Flooring

Concrete with Metal Decking

Open Web Steel Joists

Steel I-Beam Joist

Drop Ceiling Wrapped with Gypsum

Steel I-beam Column

Steel I-beam Column

Railing for Outdoor Cafe

Concrete on Metal Deck Roof Roof

Concrete Decking

Existing Basement

Original Brick Wall

Concrete on Metal Decking

Original Heavy Timber Beams 7”x 7”

Glass Curtain Wall

Gypsum Board

1”x 3” Original Decking

3/4” Hardwood Flooring

W16x45 Steel I-beam column

W16x45 Steel I-beam Joist


New Concrete Wall

Wall Section

New and Old Connection

Original Structure

New Construction

Figure 5.10

Figure 5.11


125|126

Figure 5.14

North Overview

Figure 5.15

127|128

South Overview

Figure 5.16

Main Lobby

Figure 5.17

129|130

Signage Wall

Figure 5.18

View from Original into New

Figure 5.19

131|132

Working Gallery

Figure 5.20

Roof of Original

Figure 5.21

133|134

Indoor and Outdoor Cafe

Figure 5.22

Figure 5.23

135|136

Figure 5.24

139|140

Fram, Mark. Well-Preserved. 3rd ed. Ontario: Boston Mills Press, 2003.

City of Savannah. “Ellis Square.” Web. 8 November 2011 < http://savannahga.gov/cityweb/p&tweb.nsf/ 02e67f6f5dc1d3e585256c2f0071940a/5ec6a1cca9ba14e68 52571f7002c8d62? OpenDocument>.

De Teel Patterson Tiller. “Obey the Imperatives of Our Own Moment: A Call for Quality Contemporary Design in Historic Districts.” Forum Journal. Volume: 21. Summer 2007: 1-13. Print.

ICOMOS. “Resolutions of the Symposium on the Introduction of Contemporary Architecture into Ancient Groups of Buildings.” Web. 5 November 2011<http://www.international.icomos.org/ publications/93towns7e.pdf>.

Safdie Architects. “Telfair Museum of Art, Jepson Center for the Arts.” Web. 8 November 2011 <http://www.msafdie.com/#/projects/Telfairmuseumofartjepsoncenterforthearts>.

Sottile & Sottile. “Savannah College of Art and Design Museum of Art.” Web. 8 November 2011 <http://www.sottile.cc/SCAD-Museum-of-Art-Sottile-Folio-Excerpts.pdf>.

Tate Moderns. “The Building.” Web. 9 October 2011 <http://www.tate.org.uk/modern/building>.

The Morgan Library & Musuem. “The Renzo Piano Expansion and Renovation.” Web. 9 October 2011. <http://www.themorgan.org/about/historyMore.asp?id=27>.

Tyler, Norman. Historic Preservation. 1st ed. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2000.

Tyler, Norman. Historic Preservation. 2nd ed. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2009.

Works Cited

architectual thesis book

Documents

professor of architecture

new york

norton company

degree of master

faculty advisor date

committee chair date

arpad ronaszegi

signature of author