An Architectural Inventory for CharlestonAuthor(s): Helen G. McCormackSource: The Journal of the American Society of Architectural Historians, Vol. 1, No. 3/4,Preservation of Historic Monuments (Jul. - Oct., 1941), pp. 21-23Published by: University of California Press on behalf of the Society of Architectural HistoriansStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/901105 .

Accessed: 14/06/2014 14:14

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

University of California Press and Society of Architectural Historians are collaborating with JSTOR todigitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of the American Society of Architectural Historians.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.245 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 14:14:04 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

AN ARCT{ITECTTURAL IMVENTORY FOR CHARLESTON

by Helen G. McCormack

There is a coherence of design and devblopment in the architecture of Charleston that is recognized by the thoughtful Charlestonian and is even apparent to the casual visitor, although he nay not analyze the appearance that gives him pleasure. While this historical

axnd archi-

teotural unity is recognized and valued, there is always danger of its being destroyed by the same inevitable forces vwhich have changed the aspect of other cities that attain-ed municipal majority in the eight- eenth century. These destructive forces, so often the unfortunate but necessary accoipaniment of needed progress, have been less drastic in Charleston, w-ith the result that the city still possesses many of its eighteenth century aspects. Though it is not advisable, or even possible, to freeze the city in its eighteenth century mold, eve~ry thoughtful per- son vwill wrish to find a rmethod whereby the older values which are worth preserving may be happily combined with modern necessity.

Since 1931 Charleston has possessed a Zoning Ordinance which es- tablished an area designated as "Old and Historic," and in which no architectural ohanges can be made without the approval of a Board of Architectural iReview.0 This Board, through w-ise and considerate exer- cise of its pow'ers has encouraged a higher standard of restoration and has prevented many an architectural abortion. The Board's powers, how- ever, are at best largely advisory; it may provent things from going from bad to worse in a restricted section, but it cannot, order correc- tions whero none are contemplatod. It

canneot provent demolition. It cannot influence a large area of the city niot

included in the "Old and Historic Aroa," through which good architectural material is scattered.

In the spring of 1940 a group of people, concerned with these con- ditions and desiring to find a plan for preservation, organized them- selves ihto a commn ittee of the Carolina Art Association. The group consisted of the director of the Art Association, three architects, the director of the Charleston Museum, an historian, a lawyer who is also a member of City Council, and tw;o business men. The committee has been somewhat enlarged since its organization.

At the com~nittee's invitation, Mr. Frederick La-w Olmstead visited Charleston to consult Twith it and to make suggestions for procedure. The resulting analysis emphasized the fact that Charleston's "distinc- tive and charming amenity" iwas endangered by loss through deliberate destruction in the name of progress, or through inadvertent neglect due to the financial difficulty of maintaining what was' created under a different economy and for a different-way of life.

Helen G. McConnack, after graduation from the College of Charleston, served as curator of the South Carolina collections

of the Charleston Museum., From 1930 to 1940 she was director of the Valentine Museum, Richmond, Va., and now is secretary of the Charleston Regional Plaining Comnittee of 'the Carolina Art Association.

Page 21

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.245 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 14:14:04 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The only apparent check to disintegration vas the grovwing appre- ciation of the amenity. But even this' was accompanied by its own dan- gers and limitations, for a misunderstanding of the elements constitut- ing true architectural value may result in the exploitation of super- ficial features, and, though the unorganized desire may be strong and healthy, it touches only individual buildings and leaves the problem as a whole unsolved.

Tvo needs were obvious: (1) an inventory of the whole city to determine the buildings worthy of preservation; and (2) a central body which vould act as a clearing house for information, would set standards of architectural excellence, and would direct activities and make plans for preservation. As a first step toward the achievement of these ends, the committee asked for and obtained a grant from the Carnegie Corpora- tion to make the inventory and to take measures to establish itself as the central agency.

The inventory was commenced in January, 1941, and is recorded upon cards, an example of wrhich is reproduced here. Rch card carries on its face at least one photograph of a building, a sumnary of its use, condition, period,, source of interest and value; and, on the reverse, its history and bibliography, wherever possible. Over a thousand cards have been made. The cards are reviewed by the three architects and his- torian of the committee before ratings are finally determined. When the ratings are completed, the buildings are located upon a map by their vari-colored value symbols, and the map thus becomes a key to the areas iwhere control and preservation are most needed and desirable. The rat- ing has not yet been completed, but apparently the proportionate values will be as folloiws: one nationally important building to four valuable- to-the-city, to six valuable, to nine notable, to twelve worth only mention. "Mention" houses are those included for some single feature worthy of notice, or because, through their characteristic form, their number constitutes important background for their more imposing proto- types.

A number of interesting facts have become apparent in the course of the inventory. In making up the cards a geographic grouping was adopted which followed the historic additions to the city. The bound- ary lines of these additions (formerly called, for the most parts boroughs) have actually long since disappeared, but to those working on the inventory they began to reappear in types of houses. Rhetts- bury, for instance, is characterized by houses built of warm brovwn brick,set rather close to one another, gable ends to the street, and having Greek Revival doorways. Large wooden houses that are set Side- ways or endways to the street, with twuo or three piazzas, lateral ped- iments supported on consoles, and surrounded by big gardens are charac- teristic of Harleston which was built up in the 1810's to 1830's. Very modern concepts wJere often applied in these foreru•mners of modern real estate subdivisiois. The Wraggs, in dividing up Wraggboro into lots, set aside two small areas as public parks, and Henry Laurens established one in Hampstead. Fortunately they ronain intact to this day. Hamp- stead, on the other hand, offers a warning for the modern plannuer; its one-time charm and comfort were totally disrupted by the intrus-ion of a cotton mill in pre-zoning days, causing it to degenerate into little better than a slum.

When the inventory is completed, the qomnittee is planning to an- nounce its findings in the form of an ex;hibition. The exhibition is scheduled to open at the Art Association's Gibbes Gallery late in De-

Page 22

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.245 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 14:14:04 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Serial !To. A or B Residence : -hvorable : 35 mm. Borough Commercial Medioere Photos Street Light Inldustrial Adverse Naie Heavy Industrial Inharmonius Intrusions SUBJECT DTelling Garden Scenic: CLASSIFICATION Church Cemetery Isolated

Public Bldg. Square Extensive Accessory Bldg. Parsk

OCCPLTZItCY Single Dwvelling Social Philanthropic Multiple " Abandoned Education Religious Commnercial Industrial

SOL 'C CE Historical Interiors Walls Spacious Garden OF Lrch'itectural Characteristic Fen ces :eall Garden Ii1RES2T Picturesque Type Piazza Survivilng Type

Garden Co:struction Iro -work Gates Trees or Plants Ma terials Doorway Roof of special interest

PERIOOD Pre-Revol. STATE ;xcellit QUJiLITY Mention Post-.evol. OF Good RATING Notabl3 aite-Bel1ltin REPAIR Fair Valuable

Miodern Poor Valuable to city Bad Nationally irnmportant

cenber, 1941, and to continue into the first two months of 1942. The exhibition Ywill show, by means of facts and photographs, the number and importance of the buildings -rorthy of protection, those threatened with loss by dilapidation and demolition, and the need of a program for pres- ervation. Moreover, it will recognize the contributions already made to the cause of preservation by individuals who have carefully restored their homes and shops and by the Federal Government's participation in saving two rice mills as Coast Guard and Naval Patrol Stations . as well as its cooperation with the local housing authority in making possible the inclusion, in a recent lowr-rent housing project, of the Marine Hospital by Robert ~IMills and several other dignified old buildings.

The inventory has convinced those who have been working on it that the architectural inheritance of Charleston is an obligation upon the community, and, though it is primarily the City's omi re- sponsibility to preserve and maintain it, the interest and cooperation of the country as a

•iwhole is needed and welcomed because. Charlestonts

inheritance is a part of the nation's aesthetic treasure.

Page 23

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.245 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 14:14:04 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions