Present: Jim Alexander, Mary Beth Clancy, Michael DeLacey, Marc Demaree, Taya Dixon, Lee Eiseman, Jack Glassman, Patrick Guthrie, David Hart, Susan Hollister, Susan Hurst, Wendall Kalsow, David Kelman, Drew Letts, Jack Little, Michael Lynch, Jackie McBride, Henry Moss, Ivan Myjer, Bettina Norton, , William Remsen, Albert Rex, Brian Roche, Peter Roudebush, Susan Schur, Malcolm Smiley, Kim Sykes, Sara Wermiel 1. Danvers State Hospital: Mary Beth Clancy and Drew Letts from the Division of Capital Asset Management (DCAM), and Jim Alexander, whose firm, Finegold Alexander + Assoc. is involved in evaluating the condition of the Kirkbride buildings (the most historic part of the Danvers hospital complex), visited the committee to provide an overview of this project and current disposition policy for other historic state hospitals and asylums located around the Commonwealth. The BSA has been aware of the problems posed by these hospitals for about a decade - since Candace Jenkins made a presentation about her thematic listing of twenty-three properties at various levels of architectural significance and physical vulnerability. Jim explained that the policy of DCAM's immediate predecessor (DCPO) had been to get rid of the hospital properties for the land value, ignoring the vast, lugubrious, dilapidated but historically significant buildings. This policy has changed and now DCAM tries to incorporate preservation. However, protecting the buildings until they can be transferred - securing, maintaining, heating and planning for their best use - remains a challenge. The centerpiece of the 500-acre Danvers complex is the 1870s hospital buildings, Nathaniel Bradlee's enormous brick and slate realization of the Kirkbride diagram, called the Kirkbride complex. This 300,000 s.f. building, originally intended for a site in Winthrop, sits on a hilltop and is contained (along with some unappealing 1970's buildings) in a grand oval enclosed by mature trees. The hospital has been partially shut-down for about twenty years, and completely closed since the '90's. The site's parcelization and disposal process have been underway for more than a decade. DCAM is charged with coordinating the often conflicting interests of project stakeholders. These include the host community, DEP (asbestos and other hazardous materials responsibilities), the departing user agencies (Mass Mental Health at Danvers), the Mass Historical Commission, a Citizens' Advisory Committee, and the local historic and conservation commissions. DCAM produced the first reuse plan for Danvers in 1983. Ten years later, a second reuse plan was done. Six years after that (1999) the site was rezoned. In August 2000, DCAM put out a RFP for development of seventy-five acres, which includes the Kirkbride buildings. Density is often an issue, and at Danvers, locals anticipate new development will have a major impact on the area. Effects on schools, traffic and other planning dimensions have been explored and debated in detail over the years prior to the formulation of a RFP by DCAM. The legislature required that 10% of the new housing units will be for the mentally ill and 10% will be moderate-income housing. The Citizen's Advisory Committee designated Archstone as the developer. Archstone proposed to retain the central building and two major Kirkbride wings, about 100,000 sf. While preservation and reuse is a goal, the developer could propose how much of the Kirkbride buildings it wishes to retain and reuse. A year and a half passed between the start of the selection process and the appointment of Archstone. It was clear to both DCAM and Archstone that the buildings would need a more extensive condition assessment. After being cold mothballed for so many years, they have deteriorated badly. Finegold Alexander found sodden brick exterior walls behind which timber floors had "pancaked" through progressive collapse. The interior would have to be gutted and rebuilt. The structure's dimensions also present difficulties. Its wings are narrow (40'), with small rooms and corridors defined by bearing walls. Adaptive reuse would entail construction costs estimated at $250-$270 per square foot. Mary Beth, Drew and Jim noted that people had grown to expect that complete preservation of Bradlee's building would be the outcome. As time went on, the Advisory Committee began to understand that this would not be feasible. Archstone has Master Plan Approval for a development scheme that includes reduced building; but the Danvers Preservation Commission still strongly resists this conclusion. DCAM is now trying to improve the entire management and disposal process for other sites with significant historic structures. DCAM would like to have a faster process (less time for major physical deterioration) and adequate funding to ensure that buildings are properly "mothballed." DCAM hopes Medfield State Hospital will be a model for an appropriately responsible process. Finegold Alexander is leading this effort with the buildings there, where a campus concept underlay the plan, unlike the Kirkbride hospitals at Danvers, Northampton, and Worcester. Jim stated that "due diligence" (condition assessment, envelope repairs, stabilization and interim management plans) should be done prior to DCAM's receiving properties like these. For more information on this building type, see the Historic Asylums of America website http://darkspire.org/asylums/index.html 2. Gaiety Theater (Publix Cinema), 663 Washington Street: Stephen Jerome arranged for Lee Eiseman, Bettina Norton, Peter Roudebush, and Jack Little to present the case for upgrading the Boston Landmarks Commission's (BLC) classification of this 1908 burlesque theater designed by Clarence Blackall. The building consists of a "tapestry" brick office structure on Washington Street, with two retail units, and what was once the lobby leading from Washington Street into the large brick theater enclosure that extends westward along LaGrange Street, with a service and egress alleyway adjacent to the China Trade Building. Kensington Investment Co. has proposed demolishing the entire Blackall complex to make way for a 30-story apartment building, street-level stores, and an underground garage. Bettina Norton brought copies of Blackall's drawings from the BPL archive. She described Blackall's career as a theater designer. Jack Little noted the inexorable attrition among Boston's historic theaters during the past two decades, and described the unusual sense of spaciousness combined intimacy that Blackall achieved at the Gaiety. Jack argued that the theater itself was sufficiently intact and valuable as a performance space to deserve a higher BLC ranking and protection as a Boston Landmark, and that its interior ornamentation had been "chaste" from the beginning. Lee Eiseman questioned the public benefit of Kensington Investment's proposed development by noting that only 50 units of affordable housing were included in the scheme, there is extensive on-site parking, and the development's height is unrelated to its neighbors. Moreover, there is a discrepancy in the calculated land area that is required to establish a PDA. He also stated a concern with removing an 1830's town house on LaGrange Street. Among the committee members, Jackie McBride spoke for a group that has been critical of theater loss in the Midtown Cultural District. Michael DeLacey noted that the location of the Gaiety is important as it could reduce the widening disconnection between the theaters on Tremont Street and those on Washington Street. For more information on the Gaiety Theatre development plans and preservation effort, see these recent articles. [On the following Monday, Henry Moss, representing this BSA committee, and David Fixler, representing the Society of Architectural Historians, were invited to tour the Gaiety by Kensington Investment. See the attached letter to the BLC in which Henry set out reasons not to support the petition for designation as a Boston Landmark (mostly lack of remaining integrity). The following night, the BLC voted 5 to 3 in favor of the petition to pursue a study report, initiating the process that could lead to landmark designation. The vote was unusual in that it ran counter to the recommendations of BLC staff and the Boston Preservation Alliance, not to mention the BSA and SAH. Stay tuned…] 3. Mortars for Historic Buildings, Engineers' Perspectives: Ivan Myjer invited members to the structural engineers' session on historic mortars, scheduled for Wednesday, Dec. 4, 2002 at 6:00 p.m. This event will be held in the conference room of Shepley Bulfinch Richardson & Abbot on 40 Broad Street, near the Architects' Building. Ivan, Matthew Bronski, and Bill Barry organized this presentation and interactive panel discussion as part of a series of investigations to determine appropriate mortar formulations for different applications to old structures. Panelists include John Wathne of Structures North, Brent Gabby of Simpson, Gumpertz & Heger, John Ochsendorf, Asst. Prof. at M.I.T., and Michael Lynch of S.P.N.E.A. There promises to be plenty of knowledge in the audience as well. Wendall Kalsow is helping Ivan and Matthew organize the next session, which will explore the subject from the points-of-view of masonry contractors. Focus topic: Historic Masonry; structural analysis and preservation of masonry arches, vaults, and buttresses. Presentation by John Ochsendorf, Asst. Prof., MIT 8: 00 a.m., Thursday, December 12, 2002 The Architects' Building, 52 Broad Street, 5th floor, Boston |