LEXINGTON-FAYETTE URBAN COUNTY GOVERNMENT 1899 FAYETTE COUNTY COURTHOUSE RFP # 30-2014 215 West Main Street Lexington, KY 40507
19 March 2015
CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT & REHABILITATION PLAN FOR THE RESTORATION & REUSE OF THE 1899 FAYETTE COUNTY COURTHOUSE LEXINGTON, KY ASSESSMENT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
IN ASSOCIATION WITH
Preservation Design Partnership, llc
19 March 2015 IN ASSOCIATION WITH
Mayor Jim Gray and Mr. Jeff Fugate Room 338, Government Center 200 East Main Street
Preservation Design Partnership, llc
Lexington, KY 40507 Re: 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Architectural, Historic & Structural Services RFP #30-2014 Dear Mayor Gray and Mr. Fugate: We are pleased to submit our Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse, a historic landmark of unique architectural, historic, and cultural significance and an icon in the heart of Lexington for over 115 years. Over the course of its history, a series of unfortunate interventions and changes compromised and removed several of the building’s defining features, including its heroic Rotunda with its monumental stair, as well as its exterior arched windows, among several other modifications. In addition, decades of deferred maintenance have compromised critical structural components, including the structural deck above the basement space located outside the footprint of the building, as well as the historic balconies, all of which required emergency shoring and stabilization. While these events had serious impacts on the building, existing documentation and surviving physical evidence can provide sufficient information to recapture several of the lost architectural and character defining features of this rare example of Richardsonian Romanesque architecture. The location of the building, its iconic presence and symbolism, and the current redevelopment plans and projects all advocate for a thoughtful, carefully crafted restoration, repurposing, and reuse - one that would make the building again the centerpiece of the City of Lexington, an amenity that can be shared by all residents and visitors alike. This Preservation Plan presents our findings and recommendations, a vision for the future, projected project costs, options for implementation, and a construction sequence / schedule. Over the last six months, the building and the site have given us two important messages: ▪▪ Any interventions should be carefully considered to make sure that the long term preservation and protection of the building will be based on sound reasoning, historic analysis, and long-term performance considerations. ▪▪ Time is of the essence - the building has acute needs, and its present state may lead to additional losses of historic building fabric and additional risk as the building continues to deteriorate. The EOP / PDP team is available to answer any questions the City may have and we are available to assist you with your efforts in creating a sustainable future for this important resource for the City of Lexington. Respectfully yours,
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Richard Polk AIA, LEED AP
George C. Skarmeas, PhD, AIA, NCARB, AICP
Project Principal
Partner, Planning & Design Director
EOP Architects
Preservation Design Partnership, LLC
i
ii
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Acknowledgements Planning for the restoration, reuse. and repurposing of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse is a challenging undertaking. The contributions of several individuals and entities were critical to creating a sensible plan and a sustainable vision for the future. The EOP / PDP team would like to acknowledge and thank the following individuals for their contributions, research, guidance, valuable documentation, and thoughtful comments:
Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government (LFUCG)
Jim Gray
Mayor
Derek Paulsen
Planning Commissioner
Eric Eason
Traffic Engineering
Stephen Harrod
Building Inspection
Sally Hamilton
Chief Administrative Officer
Scott Kelsey
Trades Supervisor
Bettie Kerr
Director of Historic Preservation
Randy Shipp
Historic Preservation
Todd Slatin
Director of Purchasing
Jessica Walker
Facilities Project Management
Tom Webb
Environmental Policy
Jenifer Wuorenmaa
Administrative Officer
VisitLex
Mary Quinn Ramer
Director
D.W. Wilburn, Inc.
William Stakelin Josh Sword
City Properties
Haverstick / Borthwick
Bill Weyland
President
Barry Alberts
Managing Partner
Bill Cobb
President
National Environmental Contracting Inc Bryan Daub
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Project Manager
iii
iv
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Team Structure
In this 6 month effort, the following individuals played a key role in preparing this document. The EOP / PDP team wishes to acknowledge their contributions, efforts, findings and recommendations for creating a sensible and sustainable plan for the restoration, repurposing, and reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse: LFUCG
DDA
EOP Architects
Jamshid Baradaran
Director, Division of Facilities & Fleet Management
Mark Arnold
Facilities Manager / Project Management
Jeff Fugate
President
Brandi Berryman, LEED AP
Project Manager
Richard Polk, AIA, LEED AP
Principal in Charge
Andrew Moore, LEED AP
Project Manager
Daniel Polk Preservation Design Partnership, LLC
BFMJ Engineers
George C. Skarmeas, PhD, AIA, NCARB, AICP
Partner, Planning & Design Director
Dominique M. Hawkins, AIA, LEED AP, NCARB
Partner, Managing Principal
John M. Evans, AIA, LEED AP
Associate, Project Architect
Lisa Soderberg
Associate, Senior Project Coordinator
Kenneth Jacobs, PhD
Architectural Historian
Lindsay Bates, LEED AP
Project Coordinator
Ethan Buell, PE, SECB
Principal
Anthony Harvey, EIT CMTA Engineers
Sam Claxton, PE
Project Manager
Greg Brumagen, PE, RCDD, CxA Element Design
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Ramona Fry, RLA, ASLA, LEED AP
Principal, Project Manager
Mark Arnold, RLA, ASLA
Principal
Air Source Technology
Bruce Fergusson, CIH, CIEC, PE (ret)
President
Welsh Color & Conservation, Inc.
Frank S. Welsh
International Consultants, Inc.
Michael Funk
President
v
vi
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Table of Contents 1
Introduction
2
Architectural and Historic Overview
3
Site Analysis
4
Architectural Analysis
5
Architectural Assessment
6
Structural Assessment
7
Building Infrastructure & Systems
8 Compliance Issues for the Restoration and Reuse of the Building 9
Restoration and Reuse Vision
10
Project Cost Estimates
11
Predevelopment and Financing
12
Implementation Sequence and Schedule
13
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Appendices
vii
viii
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
1. Introduction
100’-0”
The 1899 Fayette County Courthouse is a fine example of Richardsonian Romanesque architecture and is the largest building of its type in the Commonwealth of Kentucky. Designed by Cleveland architects Israel J. Lehman and Theodore Schmitt and completed in 1900, the building occupies one of the most prominent locations in Lexington [Figure 1.1].
Figure 1.1: Aerial view of the Courthouse and the Downtown Commercial District, ca. 1925. [Design Guidelines for the Courthouse Area, 2000]
40’-0”
Figure 1.2: North-South building section showing the Entrance Staircase and Rotunda, construction drawing, 1898.
The structure has always dominated its immediate vicinity, becoming a visual, architectural, and cultural landmark in the heart of the city. In addition to its imposing exterior presence, the interior of the building contained a heroic Rotunda, 40 feet wide and over 100 feet high, with an ornamental staircase and a spectacular interior decorative dome suspended below an exterior structural dome [Figure 1.2 and Figure 1.3]. As the needs of the County increased, so did the pressure to add additional space to handle the judicial needs of the jurisdiction. In 1930, a design was proposed to add an additional floor to the building but it was never implemented. In 1960, the firm of Proctor-Ingels & Associates was retained to develop a scheme for maximizing utilization of the structure. The solution was swift and brutal: new floor slabs were inserted in the elegant courtrooms with their rich decorations [Figure 1.4], and the Rotunda was infilled with additional slabs, elevators, and restrooms to enhance circulation and increase the net usable area of each floor. Through this intervention, one of the most spectacular interior spaces in the Commonwealth was seriously compromised and rare historic building fabric was destroyed. In 2000, the court functions were relocated to a new complex, and in 2012 the building was closed due to environmental hazards. In 2014, the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government selected EOP Architects in association with Preservation Design Partnership [PDP] to provide architectural, historic, and structural services [RFP #30-2014] and prepare a study for the reuse of this rare and very significant architectural and historic resource. Over the course of 6 months, the EOP / PDP team: • performed a photo-documentation (digital architectural orthophotography) of the building’s exterior to create a baseline document of “as-found” conditions [a complete set of the deliverable is included in Appendix 13.2], • performed a visual assessment of the existing conditions, • recommended a series of probes [destructive examination] to evaluate areas of concealed deterioration and potential risks, • undertook a series of planning and design charrettes / workshops to develop reuse options, • delineated a restoration / renovation Scope of Work, • prepared a cost estimate, and • recommended implementation strategies for the proposed planning and design concepts.
Figure 1.3: Rotunda staircase, First Floor landing. [Herald Leader, unpublished, 1960]
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Figure 1.4: Suspended ceiling below new floor slab inserted ca. 1960-61 in former double-height Circuit courtroom.
This document presents the findings and recommendations of the EOP / PDP team and a vision to restore the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse, making it a community resource that would be a welcoming center for residents of Lexington and visitors to the Blue Grass Region.
1.1
2. Architectural and Historic Overview
2. Architectural and Historic Overview 2.1 ORIGINAL CONSTRUCTION The 1899 Fayette County Courthouse is the third facility of its type to occupy the site, serving as the community’s judicial center for over a century [Figure 2.1]. The existing three story building was constructed 1898-1900 at a cost of $255,169 and was intended to be a state-of-theart fireproof facility. Its predecessor burned on May 14, 1897, [Figure 2.2 and Figure 2.3] and, after dismissing several schemes to rebuild the heavily damaged structure, the Fayette County Fiscal Court decided to erect a new facility “…thoroughly protected against the attack of fire, equipped with all necessary and modern appliances for safety and comfort, and one which in its architectural appointments would be a fitting temple of Justice.”
Figure 2.1: Courthouse Square, ca. 1940. [Lexington History Museum website]
Figure 2.2: The Fourth Courthouse, Special Collections]
1890. [Bullock-Transylvania University
The Court reviewed four design submissions, two prepared by local architect Herman L. Rowe, and two submitted by Cleveland architects Israel J. Lehman and Theodore Schmitt who had recently completed an addition to the Cuyahoga County Courthouse in Cleveland, Ohio [1894] and a new county courthouse in Towanda, Pennsylvania [1896-98]. On February 28, 1898, the Court approved Lehman and Schmitt’s design for a cruciform-shaped masonry building with dome, estimated by the architects to cost $150,000. Construction was to begin on March 13, with completion expected by January 1, 1899. Although reminiscent of its predecessor in many ways, the new building was a highly individual example of the Richardsonian Romanesque style introduced in the United States in the 1870s by Boston architect Henry Hobson Richardson (1838-86), an approach that reused 11th and 12th century Romanesque forms such as round-headed arches, recessed entrances, rustication, and cylindrical towers with conical caps. While the Lexington Post Office [1886-89, Supervising Architect of the Treasury, demolished] displayed a more refined version of the style, the Courthouse is the largest example in Kentucky, and the influence of Richardson’s recently completed and widely published Allegheny County Courthouse and Jail [Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 1885-88] is evident.
the Lexington’s few historic open spaces, it is one of the city’s only historic buildings intended to be viewed and accessed from all sides. Accordingly, its continuing role as the architectural and urbanistic focus of the downtown area was acknowledged in the adoption of the Design Guidelines for the Courthouse Area by the city in 2000, the creation of a Courthouse Area Design Review Board in 2001, and the creation of a Courthouse Area Design Overlay Zone in 2009 [Please refer to Section 8.1.].
Summary • The Fayette County Courthouse is the prime embodiment of local government and is the architectural and urbanistic focus of the downtown area. • It is one of the few, and by far the largest and most impressive, of the courthouses in Kentucky whose design was inspired by the Richardsonian Romanesque style. • While there have been several unsympathetic interventions over the years, the historic resource retains many of its character defining features (both exterior and interior), and a high level of architectural integrity.
The structure was built by J. Albert Howard and George Clarke whose firm was one of Lexington’s leading contractors. They agreed to complete the project by January 1, 1899 for $134,100, exclusive of an electric lighting system and elevator to be installed after the building was finished. The Tandy & Byrd Construction Company, a local firm owned by African Americans Henry Tandy and Albert Byrd, installed the brickwork located behind the building’s stone facing and interior walls.
Figure 2.3: Fourth Courthouse after the May 14, 1897 fire. Transylvania University Special Collections]
[Bullock-
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
The Courthouse received its occupants on February 1, 1900 and was listed in the National Register of Historic Places in 1983 as a contributing structure within the Lexington Downtown Commercial District. Situated on the courthouse square, one of
2.1
3. Site Analysis
3.1 Site Overview & Context
LOCATION OF COURTHOUSE
The city of Lexington, founded in 1775, is located in the heart of the Blue Grass Region, an area that has been the economic, cultural and social driver of Central Kentucky for almost two centuries. With a population of over 300,000 [2013 data], it is Kentucky’s second largest city. In 1974, the city and the Fayette County Government were consolidated into a single government entity [Lexington – Fayette Urban County Government]. Lexington is located within an 80 mile radius of Louisville, Frankfort, and Cincinnati, three urban centers that offer cultural, political, and economic synergies [Figure 3.1], and are connected through a simple and straightforward Interstate Highway System and state routes [Figure 3.2]. The city has a modern airport [Blue Grass Airport] that provides primary and secondary connections to national and international destinations for commercial and private aviation. The city form and urban grid that exist today were first established in 1780, when Kentucky was still a part of Virginia. Relatively small building lots were located near a market and business center, and larger lots extended northward over the gently rising area, now known as the Northside Residential District. During the nineteenth century, the urban core and street grid expanded east and west of the original settlement, with more diffuse residential extensions to the north and south [Figure 3.3].
Figure 3.1: 2015 Map of Kentucky [80 mile radius of Lexington shown in blue].
Construction of the New Circle Road / Kentucky Route 4 (195067) and Man - O - War Boulevard / I-75 (1973-88), inner and outer ring roads that surround the city, and a series of 8 diagonal “spokes”, opened up surrounding rural areas and horse farms to easy urban access for the first time, as well as sparking an exodus of residents and businesses from the central core [Figure 3.2]. Lexington’s historic central core survives as the Downtown Commercial District. It provides strong architectural evidence of the city’s first wave of prosperity, the revived economy of the 1830s, and the positive impact of the railroads before and after the Civil War. The Downtown Commercial District also harkens back to the turn-of-the-century economic boost created by the influx of trade with Eastern Kentucky as the timber, gas, and coal resources of that region were developed. Lexington’s continued agricultural dominance as a distributor of crops, and its role in the horse and livestock industries is still clearly reflected in the District’s architectural vocabulary.
Figure 3.2: Map of Lexington and vicinity.
Figure 3.3: Sanborn Fire Insurance Map of Lexington, 1896.
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
3.1
The site of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse was carefully selected relatively early in the history of the city [1781] to be the symbolic and political center of the growing urban settlement [Figure 3.4]. The site continued to be the preferred location for a judicial facility through three iterations, maintaining its significance as an architectural, planning, political, and social anchor typical of small to medium size cities throughout the United States [Figure 3.5 and Figure 3.6]. Today, the historic courthouse, the fifth in the history of Lexington, and its surrounding square continue to be the geopolitical center of the Downtown Commercial District. Although hundreds of historic structures were demolished over the past decades to make way for new construction, the Downtown Commercial District, listed in the National Register of Historic Places in 1983, still retains much of its pre-World War II commercial, financial, institutional, and governmental fabric, with the historic courthouse being its defining architectural and planning feature [Figure 3.7]. Fourteen blocks are fully or partially included within the District’s National Register boundaries. They contain seventy buildings and seventeen intrusions, the latter consisting of parking lots, vacant lots, and structures that have lost their architectural integrity due to inappropriate alterations [Figure 3.8]. Now primarily a commercial area, the District includes several governmental and institutional facilities, as well as a few residential structures. Although separated from surrounding historic residential areas by parking, vacant lots, and large scale new construction, some visual continuity remains in each direction through links with the Gratz Park neighborhood and the South Hill and Western Suburb Historic Residential Districts. Also, despite intrusions and gaps on nearly every street, the continuity of the block streetscapes contributes to a relatively high level of architectural and urban integrity.
Figure 3.5: Third Courthouse, ca. 1806. (Bullock, Transylvania Special Collections)
Figure 3.6: Fourth Courthouse, ca. 1886. (Bullock, Transylvania Special Collections)
Figure 3.4: Map showing location of the Second Courthouse, 1791.
Still present in a generally harmonious juxtaposition are structures that include fine examples of Federal and Greek Revival architecture; eclectic styles of the post-Civil War period, such as Italianate, Victorian Gothic, Queen Anne, Richardsonian Romanesque, early twentieth century Beaux-Arts, Baroque, and Neoclassical, and a few examples of twentieth century modernism [Figure 3.13 - Figure 3.15]. Although only a small number of buildings were designed by nationally recognized firms and architects or Lexington’s own Gideon Shryock or Matthew Kennedy, the quality of the built environment is high, with a strong level of architectural, continuity and integrity.
Figure 3.7: Sanborn Fire Insurance Map of the Downtown Commercial District, 1901.
3.2
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
KEY
4
1
ENTERTAINMENT:
1
CIVIC:
1
PARKS:
1
HOTELS:
P P 13
CO UR TH OU SE AR EA
3
DE SI GN OV ER LAY ZO
NE
22
5 P
P
1 16 2
14
6 9
15
P
20
26 1
1
5
12
25
23
10
3 7 3 2 6
1
P
9
8
4
2
P
P
P 11
2
1
12
19
13
8
2
8 1 12 10
P 5
7 4
14
5
4 17
24 2
6
11
10 4
13
DO WN TO WN CO MM ERC IAL DIS TRI CT 15 3 3 3 9 2 P
4
7
1
2
1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
1. 2. 3. 4.
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Lexington Opera House Lexington Children’s Theater Art’s Place Downtown Arts Center
Cheapside Park Triangle Park Phoenix Park Court House Plaza
Future 21C Hotel Future Marriott Hotel Future Courtyard Marriott Gratz Park Inn Hilton Hotel Hyatt Hotel
RETAIL:
P
PUBLIC PARKING
11
P
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13.
1
Public Library Court House Phoenix Building Police Department Lextran
1
4
P
1. 2. 3. 4.
The Square Future Centerpoint Irish Import Shop Mithrils Jewelry Joseph A Banks Merritt Furniture Shorty’s Urban Market Farmer’s Market The Clock Shop Fayette Cigar Store Savane Silver Joe Rosenberg Jewelers Heritage Antiques
1
RESTAURANTS: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26.
Dudley’s Courtyard Deli Cheapside Bar And Grill Lexington Diner Table 310 Village Idiot Alfalfa Side Bar Nat’s Bellinis Sam’s Hot Dog Stand A La Lucie’s Taste Of Thai Saul Goods Claw Daddy’s Shakespeare And Company Shorty’s Urban Market Sunrise Bakery Limestone Blue Goodfella’s Pizza El Habanero Loco Georges Deli Sawyer’s Main Street Deli L.A. Gourmet Pizza The Sweet Spot
BARS: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16.
Parlay Social Henry Clay’s Public House Bluegrass Tavern Mccarthy’s Irish Bar Bells’s Cocktail House Sky Bar Wildcat Saloon Molly Brooke’s Pub Rosebud Redmond’s Crossings Trust Lounge Shorty’s Tap Room Hugo’s Harvey’s Big Blue Martini
3 6 P
5
Figure 3.8: Aerial photograph of Downtown Lexington, showing boundaries of the Downtown Commercial District and Courhouse Design Overlay Zone [Courthouse outlined in red], 2015. 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
3.3
In addition to the Downtown Commercial District, a zoning overlay, the Courthouse Area Design Overlay Zone, was created. The two entities were designed to protect the character of the area, manage growth in a sensible way, and provide a continuity from the past to the present and the future [Figure 3.8]. Today, the heart of the Downtown Commercial District is Cheapside Park, located on the city block bounded by Main, Market, Short, and Cheapside Streets, next to the Old Fayette County Courthouse. The closing of Cheapside Street and the addition of the 5 / 3 Bank Pavilion in 2010 solidified the Park as the core of the District and it now hosts a variety of events. The Lexington Farmer’s Market, recently ranked as #1 in the Commonwealth of Kentucky, was originally established in 1975 and moved to its current location in Cheapside Park in 2009. The Market creates a festival-type atmosphere every Saturday morning and now operates year round [Figure 3.9]. The Downtown Lexington Corporation hosts Thursday Night Live, now celebrating its 20th year. The seasonal music venue has grown from humble beginnings into a community staple, regularly attracting several thousand people to the Park [Figure 3.10].
Summary ▪▪ The site for the construction of the Fayette County Courthouse was selected early in the history of the city of Lexington, namely in 1781. ▪▪ Three county courthouses occupied the site, the last being the existing 1899 Fayette County Courthouse, completed in 1900 following the 1897 fire that devastated the second courthouse. ▪▪ This historic location has been the geopolitical center of the city and has continued to be the character defining structure of Lexington’s urban core. ▪▪ Today, the site is experiencing a new revitalization with the creation of the Cheapside Park and several major urban development initiatives that are providing new opportunities for the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse to reclaim its rightful position as the nexus of the city.
Other notable projects located within the District and adjacent to the Courthouse include: • The 21c Museum Hotel: An important project that will combine a contemporary art museum, a restaurant, and boutique hotel, all within in the historic Fayette National Bank Building located adjacent to Cheapside Park. Now undergoing an extensive renovation, the building was designed by the famed New York architectural firm McKim, Mead & White and was Lexington’s first skyscraper. The hotel is expected to open in late 2015.
Figure 3.9: Lexington Farmer’s Market at Cheapside Park.
• CentrePointe: A large, high-rise project encompassing an entire city block, will be a mixed-use development with retail, office, hotel, condominiums, and apartments. Currently under construction, the project is located across from the Old Fayette County Court House, within the Court House Overlay District. The completion date has yet to be finalized. These projects, as well as other smaller new additions to the area, have resulted in a renaissance of the District and the Courthouse Square and have provided a new focus, vibrancy, and vitality to this core area of the city, further emphasizing the symbolic, architectural and cultural significance of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse and its site as the city’s premier landmark. In this context, the leadership of the city is wisely exploring options to repurpose this rare and significant resource by celebrating its past and creating a sustainable future as the centerpiece of the city’s urban core. Figure 3.11: Runners (Ken Silvestri)
3.4
Figure 3.10: Thursday Night Live at Cheapside Park. 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Figure 3.12: (2) View of Cheapside Park, looking northeast, after pavilion construction in 2010.
Figure 3.13: (3) View of Cheapside Park, looking northeast, prior to pavilion construction in 2010.
Figure 3.14: (4) View looking south on Short Street.
Figure 3.15: (5) View looking northeast towards Upper Street.
)
4
)
3
)
2
Figure 3.16: (1) View looking north towards Cheapside Street, prior to pavilion construction in 2010.
5
)
) 1
6
Figure 3.17: Aerial photograph of Courthouse Square - Image Key Plan, 2015.
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
) Figure 3.18: (6) View looking east towards Upper Street.
3.5
4. Architectural Analysis
4. Architectural Analysis
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
4.1
ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION
4.2
CHANGES / MODIFICATIONS
4.1
4.2
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
4.1 Architectural Description EXTERIOR The 1899 Fayette County Courthouse is a three-story, cruciform-shaped structure with partial Basement, hipped roof with dormers, and Dome with cupola. Described by its architects as an example of “modern Romanesque,” the building was located near the center of and aligned with the city block bounded by West Main, North Upper, West Short, and Cheapside Street [Figure 4.1]. The primary entrance was located on West Main Street, facing southwest [Figure 4.2]. Please note that the following conventions are used throughout this report: • The Main Street elevation will be considered the South elevation. • The Upper Street elevation will be considered the East elevation, • The Short Street elevation will be considered the North elevation. • The Cheapside Street elevation will be considered the West elevation.
Figure 4.1: Site plan, Sanborn Fire Insurance Map, 1907.
Figure 4.2: Courthouse Square view from Main and Upper Street, 1907.[Lexington History Museum website]
With the exception of the Short Street entrance where the ground floor was close to street level, the building sat on a broad concrete terrace that was edged with a low, broken range rock-faced ashlar limestone wall capped with round coping. On Main Street, the terrace engaged a smooth-faced limestone staircase that lead to the primary entrance located on the Second Floor. The three level staircase was ornamented with foliated limestone newels and urns designed by Frederick B. Miles and a pair of electrified bronze torchères, each containing five frosted globes [Figure 4.3]. The building’s interior arrangement and floor levels were expressed on its elevations through the placement of its windows and the detailing of its exterior walls which were made of limestone-faced brick. At the projecting facades, windows were paired and vertically aligned to either side of and above a central doorway; at the returns, single windows were centered and vertically aligned within blank walls. Floor levels were signified by continuous belt courses that also linked the projecting facades to the returns [Figure 4.4]. At the ground floor, exterior walls were clad with large rockfaced limestone ashlar stretchers laid in running bond above a smooth-faced two-part stepped and beveled limestone base. Window openings were framed by flat rock-faced lintels, and sills consisted of bevels cut into the base. A smooth-faced beveled limestone belt course ran above the lintels.
Figure 4.3: Main Street (South) entrance staircase and replacement torchères, 2014.
Figure 4.4: Cheapside Street (West) elevation, 2014.
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Wall surfaces above the ground floor belt course were clad with random coursed, rock-faced ashlar. At the first floor, windows were trimmed with rock-faced flat lintels, narrow Romanesque
4.3
jamb colonettes, and projecting sills, all of which were made of limestone. The First Floor was separated from the Second by a smooth-faced projecting limestone belt course with a double row of staggered dentils. The flat-headed second floor windows and semi-circular upper arched windows (now removed in most locations) were intended to be seen as vertically unified entities. The second floor windows rested on a smooth-faced limestone base between Romanesque jamb columns and were surmounted by the beveled limestone sills of the upper windows that also served as the lintels of the second floor windows. The beveled sills alternated with smooth-faced limestone stretchers surmounted by dentils to form a belt course that merged with the imposts of the similarly trimmed upper window voussoirs. A limestone cornice with a built-in cooper gutter supported on heavy stone corbels capped the exterior walls. It also provided a base for the building’s hipped slate roof and the gabled limestone central dormers that marked the building entrances below, and for the smaller flanking gabled dormers that appeared only on the Main Street facade [Figure 4.5]. The central dormers contained three semi-circular arched openings supported on engaged and free-standing Romanesque columns with denticulated arches and foliated carving. Openings at the smaller Main Street dormers contained similar columns below flat lintels. All of the dormers contained flat-headed windows, now largely replaced with louvers except on Main Street. The Short Street dormer was intersected on its west side by an octagonal stone chimney that extended above the roof [Figure 4.6].
Figure 4.5: Main Street (South) dormers, roof cornice and gutter, 2014.
Figure 4.6: Chimney at Short Street (North) Dormer, 2014.
Double overlay paneled wood doors provided access to ground floor entrances located to either sided of and below the upper landing of the Main Street staircase. At the top of the staircase, a shallow projecting bay contained a pair of paneled wood doors within an arched limestone surround enriched with clustered Romanesque columns and foliated carving below a semi-circular gridded and glazed transom supported on a paneled lintel[Figure 4.7]. A pair of paneled wood doors with integral arched glazed transoms were located within an arched limestone surround enriched with foliated carving at the other entrances. A shallow balcony located the Main Street entrance contained Romanesque balusters engaged with a smooth-faced projecting limestone belt course with a double row of staggered dentils below it. Similar balconies were located above the other Ground Floor entrance. [Figure 4.8]. Within each balcony, a pair windows, slightly taller than typical for the floor, was separated by clustered Romanesque columns. Twelve carved grotesque faces adorned the balcony corbels at the Main and Short Street entrances, while carving at the Cheapside and Upper Street balconies was foliated [Figure 4.9]. Windows slightly taller than
4.4
Figure 4.7: Exterior and interior face, Main Street (South) entrance door and transom. [Herald Leader, unpublished, 1957]
Figure 4.8: Upper Street (East) entrance and balcony, 2014.
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
typical for the floor, were separated by clustered Romanesque columns within the balconies. From the Basement through the second floor, typical windows consisted of 1 / 1 double hung wood sash, while the upper windows consisted of semi-circular leaded glass units [Figure 4.10]. Nearly all of the double hung windows were replaced ca. 1960 with aluminum sash of modern design and others were closed up with concrete block [Figure 4.11]. The wood entrance doors were also replaced in 1972 with glass and metal units of modern design. The building’s most prominent exterior feature was an octagonal exterior Dome capped with an arcaded and domed copper Cupola with weather vane [now removed] [Figure 4.12]. The Dome rested on a square drum faced with random coursed, rock-faced ashlar similar to the exterior walls below. Each side of the drum contained a row of seven tall windows located below smooth semicircular arches trimmed with dentils and above two-part beveled sills. The drum walls were ornamented with a low, smooth-faced belt course, two denticulated cornices, and engaged corner towers with conical caps, and they supported four clocks set within pedimented surrounds. The exterior face of the Dome was clad with slate shingles and copper ridge trim, and was supported on steel framing. Its diagonal sides were much narrower than their orthogonal counterparts, reflecting the arrangement of the underlying framing and giving it an unusual appearance that may have been considered appropriate to the building’s Romanesque forms.
Figure 4.9: Faces carved on balcony corbels, Main Street (South) entrance balcony, 2014.
STRUCTURAL SYSTEM According to its architects, the Courthouse was intended to provide “…a practical and permanent safe depository for the thousands of valuable records and documents naturally accumulating in this, the county’s safe deposit building, as well as its house of law and justice.” To that end, the building’s structural system employed fire-resistant materials such as stone, brick, terra cotta, iron, steel, and marble to the greatest extent possible, and the use of combustible materials was limited to decorative finishes and non-structural items. Although the Dome contained wood staircases and walkways, its slate roof shingles were installed without wood underlayment as part of this approach.
Figure 4.10: Original 1 / 1 windows. [Herald Leader, 1956]
Figure 4.11: Typical windows.
1960-61
aluminum
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
replacement
Figure 4.12: Dome, Clock, Cupola, and base of Weathervane, 2014.
Exterior walls were load-bearing and consisted of a Kentucky limestone facing over brick; foundations and footings were made of stone. With few exceptions, interior walls were load bearing and made of brick; non-load bearing partitions were made of terra cotta tile. Horizontal framing, roof truss members, and Dome framing were steel, and free-standing load-bearing columns were cast iron. Typical floor construction consisted of concrete-topped flat-arch terra cotta tile that
4.5
spanned between masonry load bearing walls and steel channels or beams. BUILDING SYSTEMS Illumination was provided by combination gas and electric fixtures. Water and sanitary drainage was provided in toilet rooms. Steam heat in occupied spaces was generated by a coal-fired boiler that was augmented by the lighting plant dynamos; radiators were regulated by local thermostats. Rainwater was conveyed by external downspouts to a subsurface sewer system. WALL AND CEILING PLASTER Consistent with the desire for fireproof construction, all plaster was installed on steel mesh or directly on masonry. TOWER CLOCK MECHANISM AND BELL The tower clock mechanism located within the dome and the bell located within the Cupola were supplied by the E. Howard Clock Co. of Boston; the bell weighed 2,000 pounds. The mechanism powered the four large clocks located on the dome and several small repeater clocks located throughout the building. VERTICAL CIRCULATION A centrally-located monumental staircase and electric elevator located adjacent to the Rotunda provided access between the Ground Floor and the Second Floor [Figure 4.13 and Figure 4.14]. Access between the Second Floor, the Rotunda balcony, and the Attic was provided by wood staircases. Access within the Attic and to the Cupola was provided by wood boardwalks and a wood staircase. ARRANGEMENT OF ROOMS Offices were situated within the building to provide direct access and ease of communication for employees and the public. Rooms were grouped around a central rotunda that extended vertically through the building, thereby reducing the number of corridors and passages and providing them with additional natural light. The ground floor contained Magistrate courtrooms, county and local offices were located on the first floor, and Circuit and Grand Jury courtrooms on the second floor. BASEMENT The windowless basement contained no publicly accessible or habitable spaces. Its 4’-high crawl spaces were bounded
4.6
by masonry bearing walls except along Short Street where a 9’-10”high tile-faced engine room contained two dynamos [50 kilowatt main and 20 kilowatt spare] that powered the lights and elevators, and a double-height, tile-faced boiler room. A 9’-high sub-surface vault accessible from a sidewalk hatch and the engine and boiler rooms extended beyond the building’s Short Street foundation wall. It contained ash, fuel, and supply rooms. GROUND FLOOR The ground floor was accessible from the four streets that surrounded the block on which the Courthouse was located. It contained Magistrate courtrooms and adjoining private offices, a public toilet room, storage and janitor rooms, and the upper portion of and entrance to the boiler room; typical ceiling height was 11’-2”. Corridors accessed from Cheapside and Upper Street passed by the Magistrate courtrooms and their adjoining private offices. They were paved in white marble tile with light green marble bases. Their plastered walls contained wood chair rails and cornices. Illumination was provided by single-globe electric chandeliers.
Figure 4.13: Rotunda staircase and Main Street (South) entrance. [Herald Leader, 1949] .
The Magistrates’ private offices were carpeted and illumination was provided by a brass gas / electric chandelier and gas / electric wall sconces. Within the Magistrate courtrooms, flooring was linoleum and each contained two chandeliers similar to those in the private offices. Oak furniture designed for the offices and courtrooms was used throughout the building and supplied by the Robert Mitchell Company of Cincinnati. All of the corridors opened onto a 40’-wide x 105’-high central rotunda that was paved in white marble and ornamented with shallow pilasters and saw tooth-shaped corner wall abutments. At the ground floor, a Y-shaped bronze-plated iron staircase with metal risers and white marble treads was situated within a circle of eight cast iron Romanesque columns. The staircase extended to the second floor, each of its runs consisting of an 8’-wide lower section and two 6’-wide upper sections supported on a triangular intermediate landing. The Rotunda was illuminated by 4 electric chandeliers, each containing 4 ground glass globes, and by 40 exposed electric light bulbs located around the circular opening through which the staircase rose. Lighting devices used throughout the building were supplied by the David J. Braun Manufacturing Company of Chicago. FIRST FLOOR With the exception of the Fiscal Court, the first floor contained no judicial offices. It was entered from a terraced stone staircase that faced Main Street and provided access to an Entrance Hall, the Rotunda, and the offices of the County Judge, Fiscal Court, County Clerk, County Surveyor, Turnpike Superintendent, and an employees’ toilet room; typical ceiling height was 13’-3. Access
Figure 4.14: Rotunda staircase, First Floor landing. [Herald Leader, unpublished1960]
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
to the offices of the School Superintendent, County Attorney, Tax Collector, Sheriff, and County Assessor was through a corridor located on the Cheapside side of the Rotunda. The elevator and a large pair of windows that opened onto the boiler room were located on the Short Street side of the Rotunda.
bands of light green marble rested on white marble tile. Within the Rotunda, plaster walls were ornamented with shallow Romanesque pilasters and arches; medallions with bas reliefs were located within the arches. Illumination was provided by 5-globe wall sconces.
The Entrance Hall and the Rotunda contained a white Vermont marble wainscot that rested on white marble tile flooring and was edged with upper and lower bands of light green marble. Marble commemorative plaques containing the names of the building’s first occupants and the contractors who built it were located adjacent to the Main Street entrance. Walls within the Rotunda featured Romanesque pilasters and corner wall abutments. Illumination in the Entrance Hall was provided by single-globe electric chandeliers and lighting in the Rotunda was provided by four chandeliers, each containing five globes, and single globe fixtures. The monumental staircase rose to the second floor through an octagonal opening.
The Circuit Courtroom, the largest and finest room in the building, was carpeted and held 180 chairs. Its beamed and paneled 22-9”-high metal ceiling [now removed] was divided into 15 sections, the central of which was configured as “a floral dome in the natural colors of vines and flowers” and it supported an electric chandelier with 51 frosted and cutglass globes. Similar chandeliers with 13 gas and 13 electric lights were located in each corner of the room, and additional illumination was provided by 10 clusters of 5 electric lights dispersed about the ceiling in frosted glass bowls. The ceiling was supported on large brackets located within a wide coved band. Woodwork and furniture was made of dark oak, and arched stained glass transoms were located above tall windows on the area’s three exterior walls [Figure 4.15 - Figure 4.18]. Of the building’s 1,150 electric lights, 174 were located in the Circuit Courtroom. Some have described the richly decorated space as being influenced by Tibetan precedents, but this seems unlikely as the first readily available photographs of Tibetan architecture were not published until 1905; contemporary newspaper accounts described the space as “Romanesque.”
The public office of the County Judge contained linoleum flooring, two chandeliers, and several wall sconces. His private office, said to be the most elegant in the building, was similarly decorated and illuminated. The Fiscal Courtroom contained a railing that separated the marblepaved public area from the remainder of the space. Illumination was provided by single-globe electric chandeliers
Figure 4.15: Circuit courtroom, ca. 1900. [Transylvania University Special Collections]
Figure 4.16: Installation of acoustical tile ceiling in Circuit courtroom. [Herald Leader, 1949]
Public and private areas within the County Clerk’s office were separated by a high railing made of burnished copper; the public area was paved in marble. The L-shaped office held a large fireproof file vault containing metal filing cabinets and metal furniture supplied by the Art Metal Construction Company of Jamestown, New York. Illumination was provided by single-globe electric chandeliers. The County Attorney’s private office was carpeted and his public office contained a linoleum floor. The Sheriff’s offices were arranged in a similar configuration to the County Attorney’s and contained a railing that separated the marble-paved public area from the private offices. Illumination in private offices was typically provided by chandeliers and wall fixtures. SECOND FLOOR
Figure 4.17: Circuit courtroom following installation of acoustical ceiling. [Herald Leader, unpublished, 1960]
Figure 4.18: Ca. 1900 Circuit courtroom Judge’s Bench as it appears today.
Important Note: Unfortunately the Circuit courtroom has been subdivided horizontally and the vast majority of its decoration and furnishings have been irretrievably lost. 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Spaces on this floor included the Circuit courtroom and its witness and prisoner rooms, Circuit Judge’s public and private offices, ladies’ witness room and toilet room, Grand Jury courtroom and its witness room, public toilet room, jury and adjoining toilet rooms, Circuit Clerk’s offices (extended-height spaces with metal filing cabinets, furniture, and balconies on two sides in the larger room), and Prosecuting Attorney’s offices and Law Library (both extended height spaces); typical ceiling height was 13’-3”. As on the first floor, a white Vermont marble wainscot edged with
4.7
Figure 4.19: Balcony and Dome repairs. [Herald Leader, unpublished, 1944]
Figure 4.20: Balcony and Dome repairs. [Herald Leader, unpublished, 1944]
4.8
Figure 4.21: View looking up to Rotunda Arcade, Balcony, and Dome. [Herald Leader, unpublished, 1960]
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
ROTUNDA
Figure 4.22: As-found conditions in the Rotunda, 2014.
Figure 4.23: As-found conditions in the Rotunda, 2014.
Although now drastically compromised, perhaps the building’s most notable interior feature was the Rotunda, a 40’-wide square shaft of space that rose over 100’ to a drum pierced by 28 tall arched windows [now replaced with louvers on Cheapside and Upper Street], an arcade and balcony, and a ribbed octagonal inner dome [Figure 4.18 - Figure 4.21]. Not readily accessible, the arcade was bounded by the square exterior walls of the drum and a series of semi-circular arches supported on narrow Ionic columns linked by low walls. It rested on a massive bracketed cornice located above a band of decorative blind arches. The cornice contained a double row of staggered dentils and floral frescoed fascia panels. The brackets also provided support for an octagonal array of eight tall Romanesque columns that engaged with and passed through the arcade to support the inner dome’s pendentives. A balcony with decorative burnished copper railing was located directly above the arcade. It was illuminated by the drum windows and could be accessed by a U-shaped wood staircase located opposite the second floor Circuit Courtroom. The inner Dome and its Oculus were frescoed with floral motifs [now over-painted] and illuminated by approximately 200 exposed electric light bulbs. It was hung from steel framing that also supported the clock mechanism and defined the configuration of the exterior Dome. ATTIC The Attic contained no publicly accessible spaces. With the exception of lower portion of the Rotunda that extended though it and the upper portion of the Circuit Clerk’s office, it was likely used for storage.
Figure 4.24: As-found conditions in the Rotunda, 2014.
Figure 4.25: As-found conditions in the Rotunda, 2014.
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
4.9
Figure 4.27: Attic windows before alterations. [Herald Leader, 1956]
Figure 4.28: Circuit courtroom window transom before removal. [Herald Leader, unpublished, 1960]
Figure 4.26: Main Street (South) elevation. [Herald Leader, unpublished, 1949] 4.10
Figure 4.29: Typical exterior window before replacement. [Herald Leader, 1956] 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
4/21/2014 9:18:12 AM
LFUCG OLD COURTHOUSE LEXINGTON, KY
Project Status DATE
PHASE
---
----
P:\14.004_Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\#Base\_Project-Specific-Blocks\#EOP-Logo.jpg
Figure 4.30: Attic windows after alterations, 2014.
P:\14.004_Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\#Base\_Project-Specific-Blocks\#PDP-Logo.png
PROJECT TEAM EOP Architects Prime Architect www.eopa.com Preservation Design Partnership, LLC Preservation Architects & Planners www.pdparchitects.com CMTA Engineers MEP Engineers www.eopa.com BFMJ Engineers Structural Engineers www.bfmj.com Element Design Landscape Architects www.element-site.com
P:\14.004_LFUCG Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\01_Master Plan Drawings\#A3-xA_ExteriorOrthophotography_22x34.dwg
Figure 4.31: Circuit courtroom window transom after removal, 2014.
Figure 4.32: Typical exterior window after replacement, 2014.
Job Number Drawn By Checked By Date
1421 JME JME JANUARY 2015
Figure 4.33: Main Street (South) elevation, 2014.
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899-Fayette County Courthouse 1 SOUTH ELEV HYBRID A3.2-A SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" 19 March 2015
SOUTH ELEV - HYBRID
A3.2-A
4.11
4.2 Changes / Modifications The following is a summary of the known planned and executed changes and modifications to the Courthouse: • 1903: “Redecoration” of the Rotunda and Interior Dome. • 1930: Unrealized proposal to add a Third Floor jail to the building [Figure 4.34]. • 1949: Offices, corridors, Magistrate and County courtrooms repainted; suspended ceiling installed in Circuit courtroom. • 1951: Unrealized proposal to demolish the building, sell the Jail and the portion of Courthouse Square that fronts on Main Street; widen Cheapside Street to allow for a new County Building at the corner of Cheapside and Short Street; construct a parking garage at Short and Upper Street. • 1956: Exterior of the building sandblasted [Figure 4.35]. • 1957: Dome clocks renovated, replacement of exterior doors. • 1960-61: Replacement of nearly all windows [Figure 4.36], partial replacement of slate roof; removal of Rotunda staircase and finishes; installation of elevators, bathrooms and ductwork within the Rotunda; interior view to the Dome closed off and space within it used for mechanical equipment; installation of new egress staircases; installation of new partitions and suspended ceilings; creation of Third Floor within the Attic. • 1972: Removal of 28 semi-circular masonry arches and leaded glass upper windows and replacement with clear, flat-headed windows above low opaque panels [Figure 4.37]. • 1980: Proposal made by the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government to move all of Lexington Fayette County operations to a new facility. • 1981: Removal of Cupola Weathervane due to storm damage [Figure 4.38]. • 2000: Courthouse Square Foundation created to restore the building, endow a history museum within it, fund its maintenance and operation. • 2000: Last trial held in the building; replacement opens a few blocks away on North Limestone Street. • 2003: The building becomes the home of the Lexington History Center, comprised of the Lexington History Museum, Lexington Public Safety Museum, Isaac Scott Hathaway Museum, and the Kentucky Renaissance Pharmacy Museum. • 2012: The building is closed to the public after discovery of hazardous materials.
4.12
Figure 4.34: Unrealized proposal to add a Third Floor jail, 1930. [Lexington History Museum website]
Figure 4.35: Exterior sandblasting. [Herald Leader, unpublished, 1956]
Figure 4.36: Main Street (South) elevation showing 1960-61 window and door replacement.
Figure 4.37: Alterations to Attic windows, 1972 [location of original arches highlighted in red]..
Figure 4.38: Removal of storm-damaged Cupola Weathervane, 1981. [Herald Leader]
Summary • Over the course of its 115 year history, the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse was subjected to several architectural interventions with the intent to increase its utilization. • All of these interventions, both proposed but not implemented and constructed, were conceived without any serious consideration of the impacts on the architectural and historic integrity of this rare architectural edifice [Figure 4.22 - Figure 4.25]. • Today, the exterior of the building maintains the vast majority of its character defining features and a thoughtful rehabilitation can be pursued that would meet The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. • The interior of the building, however, has less integrity, since a significant amount of rare and significant historic fabric and furnishings have been irretrievably lost. • Based on current archival and documentary knowledge, as well as physical evidence found during the probes undertaken by the EOP / PDP team, a restoration of the interior of the building that would meet The Secretary of the Interior Standards may not possible; however, a sensible interpretation would be.
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
5. Architectural Assessment
5. Architectural Assessment 5.1
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
EXTERIOR ASSESSMENT
5.1.1
Introduction
5.1.2
General Building Conditions
5.1.3
Roofing
5.1.4
Masonry
5.2
WINDOWS AND DOORS
5.3
INTERIOR ASSESSMENT
5.1
5.2
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
5.1 Exterior Assessment 5.1.1 INTRODUCTION As part of the overall assessment of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse effort, the EOP / PDP Design Team performed the following tasks: 1. Preparation of an ortho-photographic, perspective-corrected documentation of the exterior building envelope. This highresolution, perspective-corrected, scaled documentation creates a baseline of the current conditions of the building and also provides the building owner with tool to monitor the structure’s long-term rate of deterioration [Figure 5.1]. See Appendix 13.3 for complete set of ortho-photography documentation. 4/21/2014 9:18:12 AM
LFUCG OLD COURTHOUSE LEXINGTON, KY
Project Status DATE
PHASE
---
----
2. The ortho-photographic documentation was converted into LFUCG OLD COURTHOUSE line drawings [elevations] to be used for the needs of this report, as well as any design efforts for the future treatment LEXINGTON, KY of the building [Figure 5.2]. See Appendix 13.4 for complete set of elevations. Project Status 3. A visual assessment of the exterior building envelope. The assessment was performed using: DATE
PHASE
---
----
a. binoculars and telephoto lenses for the upper areas of the building, P:\14.004_Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\#Base\_Project-Specific-Blocks\#EOP-Logo.jpg
P:\14.004_Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\#Base\_Project-Specific-Blocks\#PDP-Logo.png
b. a 120 foot high-reach to access areas below the main building cornice, P:\14.004_Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\#Base\_Project-Specific-Blocks\#EOP-Logo.jpg
P:\14.004_Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\#Base\_Project-Specific-Blocks\#PDP-Logo.png
PROJECT TEAM EOP Architects Prime Architect www.eopa.com
c. scaffold located on the southeast corner of the building to PROJECT TEAM provide access to the main building cornice and edge of the main roof, and EOP Architects Prime Architect www.eopa.com
Preservation Design Partnership, LLC Preservation Architects & Planners www.pdparchitects.com CMTA Engineers MEP Engineers www.eopa.com BFMJ Engineers Structural Engineers www.bfmj.com Element Design Landscape Architects www.element-site.com
Preservation Design Partnership, LLC Preservation Architects & Planners www.pdparchitects.com
d. carefully selected probe areas [destructive examination] to review suspect areas of concealed deterioration and possible failure, both inside the building as well as targeted exterior areas. CMTA Engineers MEP Engineers www.eopa.com
BFMJ Engineers Structural Engineers www.bfmj.com
Through this rigorous approach, the Design Team was able to assess the various areas of the building and focus on the most acute conditions to make informed recommendations regarding the required Scope of Work, areas of possible concealed deterioration, and the overall general treatment of the building; thereby developing a reliable construction cost estimate. Element Design Landscape Architects www.element-site.com
1 A3.2-A
Figure 5.1: Ortho-photographic SOUTH ELEV - HYBRID SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
P:\14.004_LFUCG Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\01_Master Plan Drawings\#A3-x_BuildingElevations_22x34.dwg
N
Job Number Drawn By Checked By Date
Job Number Drawn By Checked By Date
1421 JME JME JANUARY 2015
• the exterior balconies, and • the basement area located below the Short Street sidewalk north of the exterior perimeter of the building.
SOUTH ELEV - HYBRID
documentation of Main Street (South) Elevation.
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
1421 JME JME JANUARY 2015
During this assessment of the building, two major areas of risk were identified, both of which required immediate action, namely:
Figure 5.2: Line drawing of Main Street (South) Elevation.
1 A3.2
SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
A3.2-A
The complete reports of these important findings and recommendations for immediate action are included in ELEVATION Appendices,SOUTH Section 13.6: BMFJ Emergency Interventions Reports and Drawings.
A3.2
5.3
Organization
Dome Roof
Summaries of as-found conditions, discussions of the causes of deterioration and the relationships among them, and recommendations for repair are organized by system as follows:
The Dome roof is covered with black slate shingles. Its octagonal form consists of four large and four small curved, triangular sections [Figure 5.4].
• Roofing, Gutters, and Rainwater Conductors • Masonry • Doors and Windows 5.1.2 GENERAL BUILDING CONDITION The 1899 Fayette County Courthouse is 115 years old. Over the course of its history, the building was: 1. subjected to a series of inappropriate interventions which compromised its historic integrity and long term performance, including: a. removal of the arched Attic windows on the main facades and insertion of new steel lintels and new aluminum windows, b. sandblasting of the exterior masonry, a technique used in the 1960s and early 1970s but since abandoned, that has potentially damaging long term impacts, and c. several modifications that resulted in improper redistribution of structural loads and resultant structural distress. 2. subjected to a serious lack of maintenance over the last thirty years that has created significant risk areas, including the exterior balconies and the structural deck system that supports the public sidewalk on Short Street. The remainder of the building is in fair to good condition, and there is enough physical and documentary evidence available to undertake a responsible rehabilitation of this important structure. 5.1.3 ROOFING, FLASHING, GUTTERS, AND RAINWATER CONDUCTORS Cupola A copper-clad, metal-framed circular Cupola rests on the building’s Dome and appears to be original [Figure 5.3]. The Cupola supports a large bell with a clapper mechanism. The deck under the bell is covered with a flat-seam copper roof. Water stains and deteriorated wood framing are evident below the Cupola. Historic photographs indicate the presence of a weathervane above the Cupola; it was removed ca. 1980 after it was damaged in a storm.
The Dome roof shingles are tied with wire to the original metal framing below. There is no evidence of wood sheathing below the shingles. The absence of wood sheathing is a detail of the building’s original construction that was intended to enhance its fire resistance. The hips of the Dome roof are covered with richly ornamented copper caps [Figure 5.5]. The copper is torn and dented and has been patched at many locations with roofing cement. The joint between the copper and the slate is also covered with roofing cement. The Dome roof was not replaced during the major building alterations undertaken during the 1960s. The slate is 115 years old and appears to be at the end of its useful life. Main Roof The cruciform-shaped main roof is covered with black slate, portions of which were installed 1960-61 over wood plywood sheathing and sleepers above the original metal roof framing. It is likely that copper ridge caps and cresting similar to that at the Dome roof were removed at that time. The Main Roof is at the end of its useful life. There is evidence of cracked, broken, and missing slates throughout the main roof and at the dormers [Figure 5.6]. At some locations, roofing cement has been installed over the top of the slates.
Figure 5.3: Detail of clock and copper-clad Cupola at Dome.
Proposed Treatments / Repairs: Cupola, Dome Roof and Main Roof Cupola: Remove, disassemble, reconstruct, restore, and reassemble the Cupola on the ground. The restoration will entail replacement of the copper cladding, although it may be possible to reuse some of the ornamental copper cornice. Remove, restore, and reinstall the bell and clapper mechanism. Dome Roof: Replace the Dome roof with slate to match the existing; install over wood sheathing. Dismantle, repair, and replace the hip covers in-kind, matching existing materials, details, and profiles; assume 100% replacement. Main Roof: Replace the main roof with slate to match the existing; install over wood sheathing. All slate to be selected and installed in one building campaign to achieve uniform appearance and consistent performance of the slate. Replace hip covers and cresting to match the Dome. Figure 5.5: View of copper caps at Dome.
5.4
Figure 5.4: View of slate roofing, West Dormer, and Dome.
Figure 5.6: Loose, slipped and missing slates at dormer, South Elevation. 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Weathervane
Cupola
Exterior Dome Oculus
Interior Dome Balcony Arcade
Dome Drum
172’-10 1/2” ± Balcony 164’-0” ± Arcade
149’-2 3/4” Fourth Floor 139’-4 1/2” Third Floor
126’-6” Second Floor
Monumental Staircase
112’-4” First Floor
100’-0” Ground Floor
88’-3” Basement Floor
As Modified in
Original Design Intent
1960-1961
1898 Construction Drawings
Figure 5.7: Diagrammatic overview of the building and comparison between original design intent [right] and 1960-61 modifications [left], as well as terminology.
Flashing Perimeter roof, valley, step, and counter flashings are copper and appear to be original. Roofing cement has been installed at side wall dormer flashings and covers many of the joints. Proposed Treatments / Repairs: Roof Flashings Replace all existing flashings with new copper flashings matching the original design intent.
Gutter Liners and Rainwater Conductor System The gutter system of the Main Roof is a significant component of the exterior building envelope. It is the critical detail that creates the transition from the Main Roof to the building’s loadbearing masonry walls and provides protection from moisture infiltration [Figure 5.8]. The gutters were constructed with copper supported on wood [Figure 5.9] and are supported on stone blocks that cantilever outside the building, providing the structural base for the gutters and architectural ornamentation [Figure 5.10]. Figure 5.8: View of copper gutter liner at Main Roof.
Figure 5.11 and Figure 5.12 delineate the original design intent and the actual “as-built” condition.
Figure 5.10: View of copper gutter fascia above stone cornice.
11 3/8"
8 1/4"
3/4"
7 1/2"
ATTIC FLOOR PLAN 49' - 5"
7"
6 1/2"
1/2"
6 1/4"
8"
2' - 7"
1/2"
1' - 11 1/2"
1' - 5"
9"
11"
1"
Figure 5.9: Probe assessment revealing wood blocking behind the copper gutter liner.
Figure 5.11: Construction drawing showing section through gutter and stone cornice, 1898.
1 3/4"
1' - 1 3/4"
1' - 9"
Figure 5.12: Probe drawing showing as-found section through gutter and stone cornice, 2014. 1
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
8 1/2"
D3.1
CORNICE DETAIL SECTION SCALE: 1 1/2" = 1'-0"
5.7
The visual assessments and the probe made in the southeast corner of the building [Figure 5.13] revealed the following: 1. The copper liners appear to be original and have far exceeded their life expectancies, causing gaps and other material failures. Several repairs have been made including EPDM patches, roofing cement, etc. [Figure 5.14] 2. There are significant guano deposits in the gaps between the masonry cornice and the gutter, indicating that this is an area where birds roost [Figure 5.15]. 3. The gutters drain into external downspouts through decorative collector boxes. Several areas have failed seams and there several areas where water escapes from the rain water collection system. The collector boxes and the rain water conductors appear to be original and have far exceeded their life expectancies.
Figure 5.14: EPDM repairs and roofing cement applied to open seams at copper gutter liner.
4. There is extensive biological growth behind and adjacent to the rain water collection system on the walls, indicating that significant quantities of water are escaping from the rain water conduction system and infiltrating the historic masonry [Figure 5.16]. 5. The 1972 intervention that altered the Attic masonry arches included installation of steel lintels to create the new openings for the new Fourth Floor windows, which have extensive surface rusting [Figure 5.17 and Figure 5.18].
14’-5”
Proposed Treatments / Repairs: Gutters and Rainwater Conductors Repair / Replace Outriggers and Support Structure: Remove all copper gutter liners. Assume 50% repair of outriggers and gutter liner support structure and 50% replacement.
Figure 5.15: Guano-filled gap between copper gutter liner and stone cornice.
Repair Stone Cornice Units: Repair all stone cornice units before new gutter liners are installed. Replace Gutter Liners: Replace all copper decorative fascia and gutter liners in-kind, matching existing materials, details, and profiles. Downspouts: Replace all copper downspouts in-kind, matching existing materials, details, and profiles.
6’-0” 14’-0”
Figure 5.13: Location of probe on southeast corner of the Upper Street (East) Elevation.
5.8
Figure 5.16: View of biological growth behind disconnected downspout. 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
5.1.4 MASONRY Typical Conditions: Moisture Intrusion
Typical Conditions: Mortar Loss, Open and Deteriorated Joints
The majority of the evident masonry deterioration appears to result from the effects of water infiltration, age, deferred maintenance, and inappropriate treatments or interventions. Most of the severe damage occurred at locations, such as cornices and balconies, where there has been continuing water infiltration into the wall assembly. It is important to explain at this juncture, the destructive impact of freeze-thaw action in building assemblies:
A proper initial survey of masonry conditions starts with the documentation of the extent and pattern of mortar loss and deterioration. This is because mortar loss and deterioration are generally the first events to occur at aging masonry wall systems, and areas where mortar is missing become pathways for additional moisture penetration into a wall assembly [Figure 5.18].
• Water/moisture expands when it changes from a liquid to solid state when the ambient temperature drops below freezing. • The expansion is significant, exerting stresses that cause cracks and, quite often, displacement of the materials in the assembly. • Repeated freeze-thaw action can exacerbate the site of the cracks as well as the displacement. • If moisture is trapped within a building assembly or material, such as stone, the destructive impact of freeze-thaw action is such that it can cause material failure, separation, and pieces/components to break off. In simple terms, preventing moisture penetration, retention, and saturation is a critical priority of responsible stewardship to prevent future failures, loss of significant fabric, and protect the building’s life. Regarding the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse, water has entered the wall assemblies from exterior sources such as: • open and deteriorated mortar joints, • cracks in the masonry, and • defects or failure of the roofing, flashing, and gutter liners. The effects of prolonged water infiltration can be seen in the extensive patterns of mortar loss, spalling, delamination, efflorescence, corrosion, biological growth, and staining evident on the building [Figure 5.17]. More severely affected areas and areas that have been subjected to long-term water saturation over the course of many freeze-thaw cycles exhibit displacement.
Significant mortar loss was noted at all projecting elements, including cornices, balconies, and dormers [Figure 5.19]. Upward-facing mortar joints at these features are typically uncovered and subject to water intrusion. Mortar loss and deterioration appeared to increase at higher areas of the building as a result of increased exposure to weather, with significant mortar loss observed at the Dome drum and at the dormers. The rear face of the dormer walls is constructed of exposed brick. Significant mortar loss and displaced brick were noted at the rear face of the large dormer on the Main Street Elevation [Figure 5.20]. The brick rises more than three feet above the roof at this location and is particularly exposed to the weather. At the smaller dormers, the brick is covered and protected with copper flashing.
Figure 5.17: View of stone cornice with corroded lintel above Fourth Floor window.
Figure 5.18: View of corroded steel lintel showing deteriorated mortar.
Figure 5.19: View of stone cornice showing open and deteriorated joints.
Figure 5.20: View of the rear of large South dormer showing open and deteriorated joints in the brick. Copper flashing covers the brick at the other dormers.
Proposed Treatments / Repairs: Mortar Loss Match Original Mortar: Repoint 100% of the joints. Analyze samples of the original mortar so that the new mortar matches the color and texture of the original. The compressive strength of the repointing mortar should be less than that of the adjacent masonry. Lead Joint Covers: Install lead joint covers at all upwardfacing joints at cornices, balconies, and dormers.
Interventions Required: Disassemble affected areas, determine the cause of moisture intrusion, install flashings or caps as required, replaced damaged masonry units in-kind, repoint. Assume 15% replacement, 100% repointing at affected areas.
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
5.9
Typical Conditions: Staining Biological Growth Biological growth and associated staining occurs where there is sufficient moisture in masonry to sustain plant growth. Such growth keeps masonry moist by trapping water against it, thereby further this condition. In addition, some by-products of biological growth are acidic and can damage stone or brick. Mapping growth and staining provides an indication of where moisture is present and where it concentrates within the masonry (saturation). Significant biological growth and staining was observed in the shaded corners of the building, adjacent to the downspouts and was especially prominent at the north corners of the East and West Elevations [Figure 5.21]. If allowed to grow, biological growth in masonry joints can also displace masonry and cause increased water entry and localized failures [Figure 5.22 - Figure 5.24]. Other Staining
Figure 5.22: Biological growth at a balcony.
Figure 5.23: Biological growth at balcony.
Dark atmospheric-borne soiling is present at most of the projecting stone elements including dormers, cornices, belt courses, and balcony balustrades [Figure 5.25]. Dark soiling and crusts are also present under window sills and other areas that are not frequently washed by rainwater. Rusting was also noted at balconies where metal bird mesh was installed. Proposed Treatment / Repairs: Staining The building should be cleaned with a gentle method that is not abrasive, given the nature of the Kentucky limestone. It is important to note that a specific sequence needs to be implemented, as follows: • masonry repairs, • joint repointing, • cleaning, • installation of replacement windows, and • localized micro-cleaning around windows. Specific Conditions 1. Main Roof and Dome Drum Cornices: Open joints are widespread at the Main Roof masonry cornice [Figure 5.26 and Figure 5.27]. The open joints were likely caused by water infiltration through the failed copper gutter liner and flashing above.
Figure 5.21: Biological growth on the East corner of the Short Street (North) Elevation.
5.10
Water infiltration into the cornice assembly has caused several of its masonry units to crack. The cracked masonry could also be caused by the expansive forces of corroding structural steel at those locations. Figure 5.24: Biological growth at a balcony., contributing to cracked masonry.
Figure 5.25: Atmospheric staining at the stone cornice. 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Open joints in the masonry also occur directly above the steel lintels installed in 1972 when the stone arched openings below these locations were removed. The lintels were installed directly below joints that are vulnerable and particularly prone to deterioration, and no flashing was installed above the lintels to protect them. All of the steel lintels have corroded and their mortar has cracked and fallen off at the exposed faces [Figure 5.28]. Previous studies indicate that the masonry in the southeast corner of the Dome Drum is cracked and displaced at the Dome truss supports. As the configuration and detailing of the Dome Drum Cornice is similar to that of the Main Roof Cornice, there could be similar patterns of masonry distress at both locations.
Proposed Treatments / Repairs: Main Roof and Dome Drum Cornices Replace cracked masonry with new to match existing. Assume 15% at the Main Roof Cornice and 20% at the Dome Drum Cornice. Remove all corrosion to bare metal at the trusses that support both cornice assemblies.
Figure 5.26: Crack in the stone cornice directly below the gutter.
Figure 5.28: Open deteriorated joints in stone cornice above corroded steel lintel.
Figure 5.27: Open deteriorated joints typical at the stone cornice.
Figure 5.29: View of stone cornice below gutter. Note variation in stone color where the original arched openings were removed and rectangular openings were installed.
Refer to Former Arched Attic Window Openings, below, for treatment of the lintels.
2. Former Arched Attic Window Openings Evidence of the removal of the stone arches at the former Attic windows is apparent at the stonework adjacent to the ca. 1972 Fourth Floor windows [Figure 5.29]. The replacement mortar does not match the color of the original, and several of the new limestone units are yellower in color than the original units. Also, steel lintels installed in these locations above the windows were not flashed and are now corroded [Figure 5.17 and Figure 5.18].
Proposed Treatments / Repairs: Former Arched Attic Window Openings Expose all steel lintels, remove all corrosion and treat all sides with a high-performance, rust-inhibitive paint. Install lead-coated copper or terne-coated stainless through-wall flashing with drip edge.
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Figure 5.30: Open horizontal joint below sill and vertical crack that extends through joints to cornice and wall below as indicated by red arrows, North Elevation.
5.11
3. Crack Patterns at Masonry Lintels and Window Sills
5. Balconies and South Entrance Staircase
Below the windows, there is an unusual detail [Figure 5.30]. A horizontal slot spans almost the entire width of the window, stopping short of the mason’s opening at either, approximately 68 inches, but almost in alignment with the base of the decorative column. This is an original design detail, the function of which is not known. There is no evidence in the historic design intent drawings that provide any indication as to what the intended function of this detail was. At this juncture, it is not possible to speculate as to what the function of this detail was, without further investigation[s].
Spalls are large pieces of stone that separate from a unit [Figure 5.33]. Their presence indicates breakdown of the stone itself, and a separation generally occurs where some form of stress has caused a crack to propagate through the stone unit.
There is however an important issue that needs to be addressed regarding the sills. Virtually in all of these sills, there are cracks that tend to appear around their mid-points. The cracks appear to continue below as indicated in [Figure 5.31]. Proposed Treatments / Repairs: Crack Patterns at Masonry Lintels and Window Sills As part of the design effort, we would recommend that one window assembly be taken apart, the sills exposed, and two to three courses of masonry be carefully disassembled to determine the cause of this condition. At this juncture, it appears that it may not be necessary to replace the entire sill or lintel with a new block of stone. Localized repairs may be sufficient. 4. Systemic Crack Patterns at the North and East Elevations Widespread vertical cracking and step cracks were observed on the North Elevation and at the north side of the East Elevation [Figure 5.32]. Cracks through stone cornices, lintels, sills, and belt courses extended the entire height of the building at several locations, particularly above and adjacent to the North Entrance. Possible causes could include one or more of the following:
Spalls were highly localized and found where there were open joints that allowed rusting at the metal anchors and cramps that secured the affected stone units to the building. The anchors and cramps that were used to attach the building’s limestone veneer to its underlying brick walls were made of iron, a material that expands exponentially when it rusts. Such expansion can exert enough stress on masonry to cause it to crack or become displaced. Three early-stage spalls were noted at a masonry lintel on the north elevation and the distress appeared to be related to rusting anchors [Figure 5.33]. Delamination is the sloughing off of relatively thin layers of stone from the face of a stone unit. It is most common in sedimentary stones, such as limestone, and generally occurs along weak or weakened planes in the stone. Delamination was evident at the horizontal face of the South and West Balconies. It was also evident at the base of the South Entrance Staircase cheek walls. Stone deterioration at the latter location was exacerbated by the use of de-icing salts. Balconies Wide, open joints, and cracked and displaced stone units are evident at the balconies on the South, East and West Elevations. There are also large cracks at the balcony cornices at the South and East Elevations. Distress is most severe at the West Elevation, where there are cracks on the north and south sides of the balcony; in addition, the carved portions of the outermost brackets appear to be rotating downward [Figure 5.34] and the stone has spalled adjacent to one of the brackets, exposing a corroded iron anchor [Figure 5.33].
Figure 5.31: Wide, deteriorated joint and crack at stone lintel, North Elevation.
Figure 5.32: Crack extends from cornice to mortar joint at lintel and into stone units and colonettes at the window jamb, North Elevation.
• differential foundation settlement, and • incompatibility between the original structure and structural modifications made when the Fourth Floor was installed in 1960-61. Proposed Treatments / Repairs: Systematic Crack Patterns at the North and Elevations After final determination of the causes of distress, repairs to the masonry will include: • repointing, • masonry unit replacement, • stone dutchman repairs, and • pinned crack repairs.
Proposed Treatments / Repairs: Balconies West Balcony: Disassemble, clean, replace cracked carved portions of the outermost brackets, reassemble and reinstall, repoint, install lead joint covers.
Figure 5.33: Detail showing spalled stone at balcony bracket, exposing corroded iron anchor.
North and East Balconies: Repoint, 20% surface retooling to match adjacent, install lead joint covers, install 2 small dutchman repairs per balcony. South Balcony: Repoint, 20% surface retooling to match adjacent, install lead joint covers, install 6’ long full-face dutchman repair at south face of balcony. All Balconies: Install lead-coated copper or terne-coated stainless steel flashing on balcony floors.
Assume 100% repointing, 20% masonry unit replacement, 25 stone dutchman repairs, and 5 pinned crack repairs. Figure 5.34: View of underside of Balcony at West Elevation.
5.12
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
South Entrance Staircase Significant masonry distress is present at the South Entrance Staircase [Figure 5.35]. Many joints are open, with failed and deteriorated mortar. In addition, many treads are cracked and displaced [Figure 5.36]. Spalled and delaminated stone was also evident at the treads and at the cheek walls. Proposed Treatment / Repairs: South Entrance Staircase Disassemble, clean, reconstruct, and reassemble the South Entrance Staircase. During this process, the support structure below should be evaluated and repaired. Replace all cracked, spalled, and delaminated cheekwall units and treads; assume 25% at cheekwalls and 40% at treads.
Inappropriate Treatments / Interventions Bird Control Visually obtrusive and ineffective devices have been installed throughout the building to control bird roosting. Nixalite, or wire spikes, have been installed at the top of all of the balcony railings as well as metal screens and wire mesh which have caused staining [Figure 5.37 - Figure 5.38].
Figure 5.35: Stairs at South Entrance.
Proposed Treatments / Repairs: Bird Control Remove all existing bird control devices and replace them with new devices made of fabric netting that requires limited penetrations in masonry. Install bird control devices at masonry cornices and balconies.
Figure 5.36: Cracks through treads at South Entrance Stairs.
Figure 5.37: Nixalite (wire spikes) and mesh used as a bird control devices at balcony railings.
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Figure 5.38: Staining of masonry due to wire mesh installed at balconies.
5.13
5.2 Windows and Doors Windows Most of the original wood, 1/1, double-hung window sash were removed and replaced with single-glazed aluminum units during the 1960-61 renovations; however, some of the original wood frames remain [Figure 5.39 - Figure 5.40]. In 1972, the original arched Attic windows were removed and replace with metal rectangular windows. Original wood casement windows and wood half-round windows remain at several locations at the dormers. All of the South Ground Floor windows and one of the West Ground Floor windows were removed and the openings infilled with masonry and ornamental wrought iron grilles [Figure 5.41]. All of the replacement aluminum windows are now over 40 years old, have exceeded their life expectancies, and need to be replaced with new units. The design approach for the replacement windows is subject to compliance with The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. The approach is very straightforward and clear: the design, appearance, and details of the new units should match the original design and be based on evidence and accurate documentation. Thankfully, there are several original windows that have survived that provide sufficient information on the frame and the sash configuration, details, and finishes. In addition, there are several historic photographs of the building that can provide supplemental information for the rest of the openings. In conclusion, documentary and physical evidence exists that would inform the design of the replacement windows and produce historically accurate configurations. The next issue that needs to be settled is the material to be used for the new windows. Ideally, one would choose wood. Experience indicates that wood windows can last for decades and even centuries provided that: • the appropriate wood species is selected [such as mahogany, etc.] and • there is proper cyclical maintenance and regular repairs. Experience from previous projects indicates that the cost of a wood window replacement program vs. aluminum is approximately the same, since both choices share the same fixed costs, such as:
On the other hand, there are a couple of additional issues that should be considered before making a decision as to whether wood or metal would be the preferred choice:
Proposed Treatments / Repairs: Windows and Exterior Doors
• The weight of a double glazed system may exceed the structural capacity of a wood sash, if the historic profiles are to be maintained.
Windows: Remove all windows and install doubleglazed metal windows to match the design, profiles, configuration, and detailing of the historic wood windows.
• Cleaning of the exterior surfaces may require that the sash should have a “tilt-in” design that would allow the sash to be cleaned from inside the building as opposed to exterior cleaning that would require a professional window cleaner to be contracted on a regular basis and at a significant cost, in addition to installing hooks and attachments for repelling down on a bosun’s chair or an equivalent access method.
Exterior Doors: Remove all exterior doors and transoms and install wood doors and transoms to match the design, profiles, configuration, and detailing of the historic doors and transoms.
Both options, if properly executed, can meet The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards.
Figure 5.39: Original Attic window at South Elevation.
Note: In several projects involving historic buildings, a third option may be pursued, that of installing a single glazed replacement window with an interior storm. While this option may have its own advantages, it also has four significant drawbacks: • The interior window surrounds may have to be modified to accommodate the interior storm unit, both dimensionally and structurally. • There is no flexibility in allowing occupants to open the windows, especially in shoulder seasons. • They have to be removed and reinstalled twice a year. • There are two sets of windows that need to be cleaned as opposed to one. For budget purposes, the cost estimate carries a replacement window program of high institutional construction quality that includes double glazing and a “tilt-in” feature. Exterior Doors All of the original wood exterior doors were removed and replaced with glazed aluminum frame storefront units. The half-round transom window above the South Entrance doors was also removed.
a. removal of existing units, b. repair to masonry surrounds [exterior], c. repairs to interior surrounds, d. new double glazed system, e. installation of new units, and f. custom profiles and finishes to match historic colors.
5.14
Figure 5.40: Original wood window sash and frame at South Elevation.
Figure 5.41: Infilled Ground Floor window openings at South Elevation.
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
The following diagrams represent the approximate locations of the various conditions discussed in this section. Mapping these conditions is essential to determine patterns and overall assessment of the building envelope.
KEY HATCH
ABBREVIATION
REPAIR
CRACKS CC
CRACKS
JO
OPEN JOINT
SP
SPALL
EX
EXFOLIATION
ST
ATMOSPHERIC OR BIOLOGICAL STAINING
JOINTS
SPALLS
DELAMINATION
SOILING
ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES LOCATION OF ARCHED WINDOWS REMOVED IN 1972
Figure 5.42: Masonry Conditions at South Elevation. 3'-0"
1
SOUTH ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0"
4'-0"
2'-0"
0
0
4'-0"
8'-0"
4'-0"
12'-0"
8'-0"
16'-0"
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
5.15
LEXINGTON, K
Project Stat DATE
PHASE
---
----
P:\14.004_Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\#Base\_Project-Specific-Blocks\#EOP-Logo.jpg
PROJECT TEA EOP Architects Prime Architect www.eopa.com
Preservation Design Pa Preservation Architects www.pdparchitects.com CMTA Engineers MEP Engineers www.eopa.com BFMJ Engineers Structural Engineers www.bfmj.com
Element Design Landscape Architects www.element-site.com
P:\14.004_LFUCG Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\#Base\Elevations-Exterior\2015-1-14_LFUCG Exterior Repairs ELEVATIONS.dwg
KEY
5.16
HATCH
ABBREVIATION
REPAIR
CRACKS CC
CRACKS
JO
OPEN JOINT
SP
SPALL
JOINTS
SPALLS
DELAMINATION EX
EXFOLIATION
ST
ATMOSPHERIC OR BIOLOGICAL STAINING
Job Number Drawn By Checked By Date
SOILING
ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES LOCATION OF ARCHED WINDOWS REMOVED IN 1972
Figure 5.43: Masonry Conditions at East Elevation.
3
EAST ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0"
3'-0" 4'-0"
2'-0"
0
0
4'-0"
8'-0"
4'-0"
12'-0"
8'-0"
16'-0"
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
1421 JME JME JANUA
LEXINGTON, K
Project Stat DATE
PHASE
---
----
P:\14.004_Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\#Base\_Project-Specific-Blocks\#EOP-Logo.jpg
PROJECT TEA EOP Architects Prime Architect www.eopa.com
Preservation Design Pa Preservation Architects www.pdparchitects.com CMTA Engineers MEP Engineers www.eopa.com BFMJ Engineers Structural Engineers www.bfmj.com Element Design Landscape Architects www.element-site.com
P:\14.004_LFUCG Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\#Base\Elevations-Exterior\2015-1-14_LFUCG Exterior Repairs ELEVATIONS.dwg
KEY HATCH
ABBREVIATION
REPAIR
CRACKS CC
CRACKS
JO
OPEN JOINT
SP
SPALL
JOINTS
SPALLS
DELAMINATION EX
EXFOLIATION
ST
ATMOSPHERIC OR BIOLOGICAL STAINING
Job Number Drawn By Checked By Date
SOILING
ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES LOCATION OF ARCHED WINDOWS REMOVED IN 1972
Figure 5.44: Masonry Conditions at West Elevation.
2
WEST ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0"
3'-0" 4'-0"
2'-0"
0
0
4'-0"
8'-0"
4'-0"
12'-0"
8'-0"
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
16'-0"
5.17
1421 JME JME JANUA
KEY HATCH
ABBREVIATION
REPAIR
CRACKS CC
CRACKS
JO
OPEN JOINT
SP
SPALL
EX
EXFOLIATION
ST
ATMOSPHERIC OR BIOLOGICAL STAINING
JOINTS
SPALLS
DELAMINATION
SOILING
ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES LOCATION OF ARCHED WINDOWS REMOVED IN 1972
3'-0"
NORTH ELEVATION Figure 5.45: Masonry Conditions at North Elevation. 4
5.18
3/16" = 1'-0"
4'-0"
2'-0"
0
0
4'-0"
8'-0"
4'-0"
12'-0"
8'-0"
16'-0"
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
5.3 Interior Assessment The 1960-61 interventions had a series of unfortunate and adverse impacts on the historic and architectural character of the building. More specifically: ▪▪ Approximately a third of the historic volume of the heroic Rotunda was completely obliterated, and the monumental staircase was removed without any sections or components of the decorative architecture surviving today [Figure 5.46]. ▪▪ Historic finishes and valuable historic building fabric were mostly removed and obliterated throughout the building, including decorative ceilings, marble flooring and wainscoting, wood and plaster cornices, ornate decorative door frames and lunettes, etc. [Figure 5.47]. ▪▪ The one- and two-story courtrooms were stripped of most of their historic finishes, including decorative ceilings, plaster, stenciling, millwork, etc., with only a few sections of an original Judge’s Bench surviving [Figure 5.48]. In addition, floor slabs were inserted within the two story spaces to create additional usable area and increase the utilization of the building [Figure 5.49].
Figure 5.46: Ductwork and electrical cables in the Rotunda, installed 1960-61.
Figure 5.47: Evidence of remaining historic fabric in upper portion of the Rotunda.
▪▪ As indicated in the exterior assessment, the original arched windows were modified, and new flat lintels were inserted to allow windows to be installed to provide natural light in newly created areas on the Fourth Floor. This change resulted in additional loss of historic fabric associated with the original windows and interior trim, as well as the exterior of the building. Through visual assessment, research, and interior probes, it was determined that: ▪▪ There is sufficient physical and documentary evidence to undertake a thoughtful and responsible reconstruction of the Rotunda and its monumental stair and an educated reconstruction of finishes. ▪▪ The volumetric qualities of the perimeter spaces can be recaptured after all existing partitions, flooring, and nonhistoric construction are carefully removed; however, it appears that there is not sufficient evidence to reconstruct historic stencils, patterns, and decorative painting in most areas of the building, with the exception of the Rotunda. ▪▪ There is sufficient physical and documentary evidence to recreate the primary qualities of the historic lighting in the Rotunda and the exterior of the building. ▪▪ Finally, support areas, such as Basement, egress stairs, restrooms, etc., will need to be reconfigured to address code-driven requirements for the reuse of the building as well as the spatial needs of the necessary support infrastructure and building systems.
Figure 5.48: ca. 1900 Judge’s Bench and light fixtures, Second Floor Circuit courtroom. 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Figure 5.49: Demolition of the Second Floor landing in the Rotunda. [Herald Leader, 1961]
5.19
The Circuit Courtroom and Creating Memorable Spaces One of the most spectacular spaces in the 1899 Fayette Courthouse was the Second Floor Circuit Courtroom. The original Courtroom, a richly decorated two-story space with a 22’-9” high ceiling and a small interior dome, contained high-style furnishings and fixtures, all carefully designed and selected to reflect the quality and significance of the building and its symbolic meaning for the City of Lexington and Fayette County [Figure 5.50]. The history of the building indicates very clearly that, from 1949 through 1961, there was a series of planned interventions that: a. First, obscured historic finishes through the installation of lay-in ceilings and other modifications [Figure 5.51], b. Then, inserted a new floor slab, subdividing the volume of the historic courtroom into two stacked rooms, and c. Finally, demolished most of the historic finishes, furnishings, and fixtures, rendering them irretrievably lost [Figure 5.52]. Today, only the Judge’s Bench remains in a state that requires careful restoration based on additional research, analysis of finishes, and expert knowledge and skill. During the course of preparing this Preservation Plan, a series of questions were asked regarding this important space, all being important and critical to the development of a long term vision for the restoration, reuse and repurposing of the building:
already has an unusually low net usable-to-gross area. • An important feature of the courtroom was the configuration of the windows with arched transoms that were part of the building’s original exterior and interior composition. Restoring the arched windows along with their transoms may be technically feasible; however, it will add approximately $500,000 to the project cost and will require complicated shoring for supporting the roof and the cornice, while the modification is executed [Please refer to Section 9: Restoration and Reuse Vision.]. While this added cost may appear as “nice to have” vs. “necessary to have”, creating two monumental spaces at the top of the stair in the Rotunda would create a venue that would be unique in the City of Lexington for events that can use either of the two spaces or both simultaneously, generating a respectable income stream from use of these two spaces. This aspect of the project requires a cost – benefit analysis, something that would be undertaken by the development advisor for the City of Lexington and the selected partner for a Public / Private Partnership.
Figure 5.50: Circuit Courtroom, 1900. Collections]
[Transylvania University Special
Figure 5.51: Installation of suspended ceiling in Circuit Courtroom, 1949. [Herald Leader, unpublished, 1949]
1. Can the courtroom be restored? Undertaking a scientific, literal, correct, and responsible restoration without conjecture is not possible since a great deal of original historic building fabric has been removed and obliterated, thereby eliminating important and critical physical evidence that is needed to perform such a task. An attempt to reconstruct and restore the historic courtroom without sufficient and reliable archival and physical evidence is a treatment that The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards strongly discourages. Such an approach may have adverse effects in receiving approvals from the Historic Preservation authorities having jurisdiction over the project, in addition to possibly jeopardizing the eligibility of receiving Rehabilitation Investment Tax Credits, should a Public / Private Partnership be pursued. 2. Can the courtroom be [re]interpreted as a two story space? If the courtroom cannot be restored, could it be interpreted as a two story space? While The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards may find such an approach acceptable, there are still significant issues that need to be addressed. More specifically: • The removal of the Third Floor slab will result in loss of approximately 7,142 square feet of space in a building that
5.20
Figure 5.52: Ca. 1900 Circuit Courtroom Judge’s Bench relocated to south side of the Second Floor courtroom, 2014.
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
6. Structural Assessment
6. Structural Assessment
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
6.1
INTRODUCTION
6.2
DESCRIPTION OF STRUCTURAL SYSTEM
6.3
METHODOLOGY
6.4
URGENT INTERVENTIONS
6.5
GENERAL FINDINGS
6.6
PROPOSED SCOPE OF WORK
6.1
6.2
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
6.1 Introduction The EOP / PDP Design Team included bfmj as the structural engineers for the preparation of this report. Based on requirements of the RFP, the work was organized along the following parallel tracks: a. Archival Research This was a shared activity involving EOP, PDP, and bfmj. All available documents were collected and reviewed by the team before proceeding with the next tasks.
Figure 6.3: Interior of box gutter as revealed by the cornice probe.
Figure 6.4: Wall compromised by installation of MEP equipment
Note: One of the reasons why bfmj was retained for this project was that the predecessor firm White Walker and McReynolds, Inc. was responsible for the structural modifications of the building involving the removal of the monumental stair in the Rotunda and the insertion of the new structure and slabs. Unfortunately, bfmj was not able to produce any of the documents of this important modification to the building; however, the key structural concerns of this intervention were addressed through the probe / destructive examination program [see below]. b. Visual Assessment of the Structure The EOP / PDP / bfmj team performed a visual assessment utilizing a high-reach, binoculars, and access through a scaffold on the S-E corner of the building.
The findings indicate the following: • There are specific areas that have advanced deterioration that required immediate intervention to manage and mitigate significant risk, including the basement areas below the Short Street Sidewalk and • The balconies on Upper Street, Short Street and Cheapside Street sides of the Courthouse have advanced areas of deterioration and presented risk to life safety. Shoring and limiting access to those areas was recommended and implemented immediately. • There are several localized areas of structural distress that need to be addressed in the near future to avoid further deterioration and protection of valuable historic building fabric, including structural areas of the Rotunda, the upper cornice, etc. With the exception of the areas identified specifically in this report, the overall structural condition of the building is good given its age [over 115 years] and the significant deferred maintenance that has occurred over the last thirty to fifty years of its life.
c. Probes / Destructive Examination Based on the archival research, the visual assessment and specific distress signs, the EOP / PDP / bfmj team requested a series of probes / destructive examination areas to better understand: • how the building was originally constructed in specific locations, • how the 1960-61 modifications were implemented and are impacting the structure, • whether reversing these structural modifications would be feasible without creating risk to the building and its integrity, • why specific patterns of distress are exhibited in specific areas of the building and, finally, • what the risk is in areas where advanced deterioration was observed, in areas including the basement and the balconies. The structural findings are presented in detail in this section. The documentation produced for the emergency interventions are included in Appendix 13.6.
Figure 6.1: View of balcony condition
Figure 6.2: Crack at window on North Elevation
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
6.3
6.4
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
6.2 Description of Structural System As stated in previous sections of this report, the building was originally constructed to store documents and records and to serve as a judicial facility. In order to support these heavy loads and keep flammable items safe, the building’s structure was built with fire-resistant structural materials. The roof structure consists of slate shingles on underlayment supported by steel angles. These steel angles are supported by steel beams and steel trusses. Elevated floors are constructed of structural clay tile and a steel beam system topped with concrete fill. The steel floor framing members are in turn supported on a combination of cast iron columns and load-bearing multi-wythe brick walls. The Basement floor is a soil-supported concrete slab and the building foundations are constructed of built-up layers of thick stone footings bearing on in-situ soils. The exterior walls of brick were covered with a Kentucky limestone façade. The Basement structure that is located outside of the foot print of the main building is constructed of a concrete roof / sidewalk supported on either concrete - encased steel beams with cast iron columns or multi-wythe brick and concrete walls. The 1960-61 renovation included removal of the original stairs and floors located in the Rotunda area from the Ground Floor up to the current Third Floor. After these slabs were removed, a pair of new elevators were placed in the center portion of the Rotunda and a new floor was added within the Rotunda. The elevators and new floor system are constructed from the Ground Floor up to include the new Fourth Floor and a new Attic / mechanical room floor. The floor systems added during this renovation are constructed of a formed structural concrete floor supported on steel beams with four interior steel columns around the elevators. The steel floor beams are supported by the existing Rotunda brick walls. The elevator shafts were constructed of non-loadbearing concrete masonry walls with the elevator’s masonry walls and the steel columns supported on a concrete foundation system below the Ground Floor level. A new Fourth Floor infill consisting of concrete on metal deck supported on steel bar joists was also added around the Rotunda. The steel bar joists are supported by the building’s existing brick masonry walls. Additional construction in the 1960-61 renovation included removal of original elevators and portions of floors to add new stairs; addition of a completely new mechanical system, and infilling of existing floor openings located outside of the Rotunda area.
Figure 6.5: Original east/west building section
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
6.5
6.6
Figure 6.6: Exterior test pit
Figure 6.7: Exterior retaining wall test pit
Figure 6.8: Interior cornice probe
Figure 6.9: Interior crawl test pit 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
6.3 Methodology VISUAL ASSESSMENT
PROBES
A visual assessment was performed to determine: the existing LFUCG OLD To further our understanding of as-built construction and GENERAL NOTES COURTHOUSE building’s current structural condition, verify original building current state of conditions a series of interior and exterior construction methods and determine how the unfilled floor probes were conducted by qualified contractors: areas had been constructed. LEXINGTON, KY • Four test pits were dug in order to determine the original 1.
CONTACTOR IS TO VERIFY ALL FIELD CONDITIONS PRIOR TO DEMOLITION
2.
PERFORM DISASSEMBLY AND REMOVALS IN A CONTROLLED MANNER: WITHOUT UNNECESSARY CUTS; WITHOUT DAMAGE TO THE EXISTING SITE, STRUCTURE OR FEATURES; AND WITHOUT DAMAGE TO MATERIALS OR CONSTRUCTION TO REMAIN.
3.
PROMPLY REPAIR, REPLACE OR REINSTALL ANY ITEMS DAMAGED DURING THE WORK WHICH ARE NOT SCHEDULED TO BE DEMOLISHED, AT NO ADDITIONAL COST. SECURE ARCHITECT'S APPROVAL FOR PROPOSED REMEDIAL WORK BEFORE PROCESSING.
4. 5. 6.
8. 9. 10. 12.
13.
14.
• From our assessment, it was determined that the foundation materials, size, and depth below the Ground PROBES building’s existing structural elements (except the exterior Floor. At these test pits it was determined that the bottom PACKAGE basement roof/sidewalk structure) appear to be in good of the existing footings appear to be located at approximate PHASE structural condition. Due to past construction---DATE building 4’0”below exterior grade, which had been built up with ---modifications and damage from water infiltration there are retaining walls at certain locations. The footings are areas of the building’s structure that are in need of repair constructed out of large cut limestone and appear to be the and or reinforcing. These items would include: size indicated in the original drawings. ▪▪ Repair to damaged areas of the existing clay tile • Probe holes were made in areas of the 1§60 renovation (flat- arched) floor structure. to determine what remained of the original floor framing ▪▪ Areas of load bearing brick walls that were damaged and how the new floor structure was constructed and when openings were added, including missing or connected to the existing brick walls. damaged lintels at the head of these openings. • Additional probe holes were made on the interior face of ▪▪ Repair and replacement of existing structural steel SHEET NOTES PROJECT TEAM exterior walls to observe the walls at the head of the new and load- carrying brick walls at the mechanical / Attic EOP Architects windows modified in the 1§60 renovation and to observe Prime Architect www.eopa.com floor caused by water damage. the construction and condition of the cornice assembly. ▪▪ Addition of concrete cheek walls to reinforce the Design soil Partnership, Preservation LLC • A section of wood flooring was removed from the upper Preservation Architects around stone foundations in the crawl space below www.pdparchitects.com rotunda balcony to expose the steel cantilevered imbedded the Rotunda area and elsewhere (the original stone CMTA Engineers wall support and evaluate its condition. MEP Engineers foundations are located above the crawl space www.eopa.com which has led to soil loss beside and under these BFMJ Engineers Structural Engineers footings). www.bfmj.com Element Design ▪▪ Repair of cracks in stone and mortar joints on the Landscape Architects www.element-site.com exterior walls. ▪▪ Repairing of exterior terrace walls. PERFORM WORK IN A MANNER WHICH WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY, OPERATIONAL ELEMENTS, SAFETY ELEMENTS & VISUALPROPERTIES.
REMOVE AND LEGALLY DISPOSE OF DEBRIS, RUBBISH AND OTHER DEMOLITION WASTE FROM THE SITE.
IN THE EVENT THE CONTRACTOR UNEXPECTEDLY ENCOUNTERS ON THE SITE UNKNOWN MATERIALS REASONABLY BELIEVED TO BE ASBESTOS, POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYL (PCB) OR OTHER CLASSIFIED HAZARDOUS MATERIAL, NOTIFY ARCHITECT AND OWNER OF THE DISCOVERY OF ANY HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND IMMEDIATELY STOP WORK AND REPORT FINDINGS TO OWNER AND ARCHITECT IN WRITING AND DO NOT RESUME WORK UNTIL APPROACH IS IDENTIFIED. REFER TO PROVIDED PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT FOR KNOWN LOCATIONS AND TYPES OF HAZMAT MATERIALS. PROPER SAFETY PRECAUTIONS SHOULD BE TAKEN WHEN WORKING IN NOTED LOCATIONS. PROVIDE ANY TEMPORARY SHORING REQUIRED TO STABALIZE EXISTING BUILDING AND SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING ANY TEMPORARY PROTECTION NECESSARY AT EXTERIOR TEST PITS.
TEST PIT AREAS AFTER ARCHITECTS DOCUMENTATION TO BE BACKFILLED WITH DENSE GRADE FILL MATERIAL, AND HAND TAMPED IN THREE FOOT LIFTS.
THE VERIFICATION OF THE LOCATION OF ALL UTILITIES AND STRUCTURES EITHER SHOWN OR NOT SHOWN ON THESE PLANS SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR. IF ANY DISCREPANCIES EXIST, THE CONTRACTOR IS TO NOTIFY THE OWNER AND ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY.
CONTRACTOR SHALL RESTORE ALL DAMAGED PAVEMENT OUTSIDE OF THE TEST PIT AREAS TO ORIGINAL CONDITION AND TO THE OWNER'S SATISFACTION. IN ADDITION AREAS OUTSIDE OF PAVEMENT SHALL BE RESTORED TO TURF OR EXISTING CONDITIONS AND SHALL MEET OWNERS APPROVAL. ANY RESTORATION WORK SHALL CONSIDERED SUBSIDIARY AND SHALL NOT RECEIVE SEPARATE PAYMENT. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR KEEPING ALL ROADWAYS AND SIDEWALKS CLEAN AROUND THE SITE AREA.
1
PROVIDE EXTERIOR TEST PIT TO ALLOW VISUAL EXAMINATION OF EXTERIOR & INTERIOR FOUNDATION WALL AND FOOTING AS FOLLOWS:
a. MECHANICAL DIGGING MAY BE USED WITHIN 12” OF BUILDING WALLS. REMAINING 12” TO BE HAND-DUG. DIMENSIONS SHOWN ON DRAWING INDICATE MINIMUM AREA OF FOUNDATION WALL TO BE EXPOSED. LIMIT EXCAVATION TO THE DEPTH OF THE EXISTING FOOTINGS. b.TEST PITS OCCUR AT LOCATIONS KNOWN TO HAVE BELOW-GRADE DOWNSPOUTS AND UTILITIES. ALL WORK IS TO BE COMPLETED WITHOUT DAMAGING EXISTING CONSTRUCTION. REFER TO GENERAL NOTES FOR MORE INFORMATION.
c.CLEAN DIRT AND DEBRIS FROM BELOW-GRADE FOUNDATION WALLS FOLLOWING EXCAVATION, TO ALLOW EXAMINATION BY ARCHITECT.
d.CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING ANY REQUIRED TEMPORARY SHORING DURING AND AFTER EXCAVATION. SHORING SHOULD ALLOW ARCHITECT TO GAIN PROPER ACCESS FOR DOCUMENTATION OF THE WORK. e.ARCHITECT WILL REVIEW AND DOCUMENT ALL TEST PITS IN A SINGLE VISIT. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE TEMPORARY PROTECTION REQUIRED FOR BOTH OCCUPANT SAFETY AND PROTECTION OF THE BUILDING FROM MOISTURE INFILTRATION.
f.AFTER COMPLETION OF DOCUMENTATION BY THE ARCHITECT, TEST PITS ARE TO BE BACKFILLED WITH DENSE GRADE FILL MATERIAL AT EXTERIOR AND CLEAN FILL ON INTERIOR. HAND-TAMP IN THREE-FOOT LIFTS. FINAL GRADE TO HAVE POSITIVE DRAINAGE FROM BUILDING.
3
1 10' - 0"
10' - 5"
2
LIMIT OF TEST PIT TO INCLUDE FOUNDATION OF RETAINING WALL
3
BASEMENT AREA IS KNOWN TO CONTAIN ASBESTOS. PROPER PROTECTION SHOULD BE TAKEN WHEN WORKING IN THIS AREA. REFER TO PAHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT FOR MORE INFORMATION
N
7' - 2"
1
All designs, arrangements and plans indicated or represented by this drawing are the property of EOP Architects and were created and developed for use on and in connection with the specified project.
3 2
None of this information shall be used by or disclosed to any person or entity for any reason whatsoever without the permission of EOP Architects. Written dimensions shall have precedence over scale dimensions. Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions and conditions on the job. Notify EOP Architects immediately of any variation from the dimensions and conditions shown by these drawings.
1
Job Number Drawn By Checked By Date
1
1421 STAFF STAFF 22 OCTOBER 2014
1
1 D1.0
FOUNDATION PLAN
TEST PIT PLAN
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
0'
Figure 6.10: Plan of test pit probe locations 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
4'
8'
16'
32'
D1.0 6.7
Figure 6.11: Basement deteriorated steel beam
Figure 6.12: View of Main Street balcony condition
Figure 6.13: Basement exposed rebar and spalling concrete beam
6.8
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
6.4 Emergency Shoring / Life Safety Concerns
Figure 6.14: New temporary basement shoring
During the initial visual inspection of the building, several areas were identified as distinct life safety hazards. It was BFMJ’s recommendation that immediate steps be taken to insure the safety of the public: [refer to appendix 13.6 BFMJ Emergency Interventions Reports and Drawings for further information]
The shoring and roof structure / slab will need to be removed and a new roof/sidewalk slab with a waterproofing system will need to constructed during the future renovation project(s).
Basement [Outside Main footprint of the Building]
Balconies:
The existing basement extends out from under the building under the North entry sidewalk to within 2 feet of the curb along Short Street. The area of the sidewalk over the basement is the roof of the basement & is constructed of a reinforced concrete slab supported by either concrete or steel beams that are encased in concrete. The majority of the supporting beams are steel beams. In viewing this sidewalk/roof slab from the basement it was observed that both the steel reinforcing bars in the slab and concrete beams as well as the steel beams have experienced significant rusting and deterioration that has caused large areas of the concrete slab to spall off. The rebar and steel beams are in varying degrees of deterioration and in some cases the rebar and steel beams have lost more than 50% of their cross-sectional area. Extensive water infiltration through joints and decking without moisture protection. In addition, it is suspected that the use of salt during the winter has accelerated the deterioration of the structural components of the deck and the supporting structure Both the sidewalk slab and its supporting structure have lost significant strength and load carrying capacity throughout this basement area and is considered structurally unsound & is an unsafe condition.
The Four Balconies at the Cheapside, Main, Upper, and Short Street entrances were determined to have numerous cracked stones and deterioration with some cracking being considered significant. This condition is caused by water infiltration that leads to rust of the supporting steal structure and spalling of the stone. and should be shored or fenced off to ensure that the public is not exposed to issues associated with the potential spalling of the stone.
Note shoring should be re-inspected by a licensed proffesional on an annual basis.
Implemented Treatments / Repairs: Basement The entire area immediately adjacent to the Courthouse was fenced off to prevent public access. Currently Temporary shoring is being installed, consisting of heavy timbers and adjustable steel jacks at each of the four balcony locations. Note shoring should be re-inspected by a licensed professional on an annual basis.
Implemented Treatments / Repairs: Basement It was recommended that immediate steps be taken to fence off the sidewalk to prevent public access over the existing exterior basement area. A Post and beam shoring system was installed to keep the sidewalk portion of the Basement roof structure supported and allow pedestrian traffic access to the sidewalk running along Short Street. One significantly deteriorated area of the sidewalk adjacent to the existing building directly below the North Entrance to the courthouse was also be shored up. The remaining area of the exterior basement roof/sidewalk will be fenced off to prevent public access to this area. The shoring supporting portions of the Basement roof structure will inhibit new construction activities and limit close access to the north façade of the building directly over the Basement. Figure 6.15: New temporary balcony shoring and safety barrier 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
6.9
6.10
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
6.5 Review of Findings Cupola: The cupola is made up of cooper sheet roofing supported by a steel angle frame work that is supported on 8 steel (wide flange) columns. These 8 columns are supported by a steel beam compression ring in the top of the domes roof structure. A large bell is suspended from a steel angle frame inside the roof of the Cupola. There were signs of water leaks and some minor surface rusting of some of the structural elements was observed. Proposed Treatments / Repairs: Cupola The base of the cupola should be further investigated during the reroofing project to determine if any significant rusting elements should be reinforced. Any surface rust should be removed and the steel repainted. Dome / Attic:
Figure 6.16: View of the top of Main Roof Cornice from the interior
Figure 6.17: Full wall depth stone lintel cornice cap
The sides of the roof of the dome are constructed of 8 bowstring trusses made of steel angles and plates riveted together. These trusses are attached to the compression ring at the top of the dome and slope down at an 80 degree angle and tie into a steel plate (tension ring) at the bottom of the domes roof. The bottom of the Domes trusses bear on to a stone cornice that is supported by 4 walls made of multi-wythe brick. Located at approximately 4’-6” foot above the lowest balcony in the rotunda is the top of the Main Roof structure. There are slate shingles on the main roof which are supported on angles, wood sheathing was added as part of the 1960’s renovation between the angles and the slate shingles. The support structure of the Main Roof is 20 feet deep and is constructed of a combination of approximately 6’-0” deep steel trusses and steel (wide-flange) rafter beams. The steel trusses are made of steel angles and plates riveted together. The steel trusses and rafter beams support the steel angles that support the slate shingles. The ends of the trusses are pocketed into the interior rotunda multi-wythe brick walls and on top of the stone cornice at the exterior walls of the main building. At the exterior walls the trusses bear upon a continuous steel plate that is anchored to the top of the stone with bolts through the end of the truss or beam rafters. This continuous steel plate serves to help tie the top of the stone cornice together.
Figure 6.18: Steel lintel installed during 1960-61 renovation 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Figure 6.19: Imbedded cantilevered steel truss, supporting lower balcony of Rotunda
The original attic floor as shown on the original drawings was to have been constructed of clay tile, flat-arches spanning between small steel (double-channel) support beams. The attic floor support beams are shown to be at an elevation of ~10’-0” below the trusses and were apparently suspended with steel angles from the bottom chord of the main roof trusses. This
6.11
section of attic floor and the suspended angles appear to have been removed during the 1960’s renovation.
long term settlement and our movement within the building structure.
Proposed Treatments / Repairs: Dome / Attic
Exterior wall cracks on the North wall that faces Short Street. These cracks extend from the bottom of the wall and extend up to and through the cornice stones.
There was minor surface rusting observed on some of the structural angles, beams. Trusses and plates. These should be cleaned of any rust and repainted during the re-roofing process. It was noted that the end of the steel trusses that are pocketed into the rotunda walls there are several bricks and mortar joints that have cracked and/or have loose that will need to be repaired when the roof replacement is performed. Additionally a thorough inspection of the top of the steel roof elements, their anchors and the stone cornices should be performed during the roofing work. Removal of the slate roofing will allow for better observation of these and other elements that could not be observed during our investigation. Removal of Arches / Metal Lintels: The existing drawings and existing stone work indicate that the stone arches of the upper 3rd floor windows, as shown on the original drawings, were removed and replaced with a taller rectangular windows during one of the previous renovations. The original steel angle lintels at the head of the existing window openings appear to be located a few bricks above the head of the current windows. One of these original lintels was exposed, at the East side of the building and appeared to be in good structural condition. The existing window head is made up of a steel plate and angle, despite the surface the extensive rusting of the exposed plates it appears to be surface rust and does not appear to have diminished the strength of these elements. Proposed Treatments / Repairs: Removal of Arches / Metal Lintels Steel plates should be properly cleaned and re-painted with appropriate rust inhibitive paint. Cracks: The existing interior load bearing multi-wythe brick walls have had openings added and large sections of walls removed and replaced with steel beams and columns to support the existing floors and walls above. If these openings are eliminated in the next phase of work it would be recommended that additional investigation and analysis be performed to determine what type of infill materials would be most appropriate. During our investigation there were cracks in noted in the existing walls that are caused due to past renovations and most likely due to
6.12
The exterior stone façade has experienced significant cracking that should be repaired. Proposed Treatment / Repair: Cracks Several monitoring points should be placed across these cracks to determine if ongoing settlement is continuing to occur. If settlement is ongoing then underpinning of these wall foundations may be required. Rotunda: The ceiling of the rotunda is constructed of radius shaped angles suspended from the trusses of the Dome with 3/4 inch diameter rods. The steel framing of the rotundas ceiling is used to support the stairs and clock support structure which is made out of wood framing. The 4 multi-wythe brick walls supporting the dome become the walls of the rotunda that extend down to the buildings foundation. Below the ceiling of the dome are two interior balconies. These interior balconies serve as access platforms to service the clock and bell as well to the rotunda ceiling. The balconies are framed of wood supported on steel channels which in turn are supported by 4 steel I-posts. These I-posts are supported from steel brackets that project out from the inside face of the rotundas multi-wythe brick walls. These steel brackets are made up of steel angles and plates similar to the original corbels supporting the second floor of the rotunda. It was noted that there has been significant rusting and deterioration of some of the steel columns, steel balcony beams and balcony wood flooring due to water damage. The majority of the water damage is caused from condensate on the existing mechanical equipment (cooling tower) that was installed during the 1960’s renovation. The rotunda original floors were located at the ground floor, 1st and 2nd floors were all removed during the 1960’s renovation. Based upon the original design documents the 2nd floor of the rotunda was a 7’ thick floor slab with an octagonal shaped hole in the center of the floor. Along the edge of the interior floor opening were 10’ deep steel wide flange beams. The floor system appears to have been constructed of structural clay tile, (flat-arch) floor slab supported with concrete fill on 8” and 10” deep steel wide flange beams. The steel floor beams were supported on corbels made of triangular shaped steel beams built out of steel plates and angles. The tall end of the triangle
was embedded into the brick rotunda walls allowing them to cantilever from the walls to support the floor beams. During our investigation we found photographs showing demolition of the existing 2nd floor system along with the steel corbels described in the drawings were observed in these photos. Additionally from the probe holes portions of the steel corbels were found embedded in the existing brick rotunda walls. The first floor of the rotunda had a large circular opening in the center of the floor. The 1st floor system appears to have been constructed of 9” structural clay tile (flat-arched) floor slab supported by 10” deep wide flange beams with a concrete fill. The 1st floor beams were supported by the rotunda walls and a ring of 8 cast iron columns around the perimeter of the floor opening. The cast iron columns were supported on limestone footings just below the ground floor which appears to have originally been a concrete floor slab supported on the ground. Photos of the original 1st floor appear to show that the construction of the first floor was as shown on the drawings. Because of the 1960 renovation the existing ground floor and 1st floor were demolished and removed. Proposed Treatments / Repairs: Rotunda Deteriorated Upper balcony steel columns, beams and imbeds need to be repaired or replaced as needed. Damaged balcony wood floor system, repair and replace as needed. Floors:
Proposed Treatment / Repairs: Original Floor System These areas will be required to be repaired or reinforced to bring the floor structure back to its original structural strength. As other areas of the floors are exposed additional investigation will be required to determine if additional floor areas will ne to be repaired. 1960’s Infill Slab System: Rotunda infill areas - ground floor, through the first, second, third, fourth and mechanical floors. These floors were placed around the two elevators at the middle of the rotunda. All floors but the ground floor were constructed of formed concrete floor slabs supported on steel beams. The steel beams are supported on 4 steel wide flange columns that are located in the 4 corners of the elevator shaft. The steel beams pocket into the rotundas multi-wythe load bearing brick walls. The concrete floor slab has a bond break material placed at the face of the existing brick walls that the slabs are placed against. The steel columns extend down to the top of the elevator pits located just below the ground floor. The ground floor slab and elevator pit walls are constructed of concrete. Third floor infill around the perimeter of the rotunda was constructed of a concrete floor slab on metal centering supported by steel bar joists that span from the rotunda walls to the exterior walls of the building. The bar joists are embedded into the rotunda walls and at the exterior walls the bar joists are bearing on a bearing angle that is placed flush against the exterior wall but has support steel pocketed into the brick wall.
Original Floor System: Entry level, first and second floors are constructed out of 12 inch thick structural clay tile (flat arch) floor slabs spanning 5 to 7 feet between 12 inch deep steel wide flange beams. The clay tile and floor beam system is supported by a combination of additional steel wide flange girder beams, steel columns and interior and exterior load bearing multi-wythe brick walls. There are areas of the building that had original plaster ceilings and newer suspended acoustical tile and or metal deck ceilings. These newer ceilings had been added during past renovations. All of the acoustical tile ceilings were removed to allow for inspection of the underside of the existing first and second floor structure. The bottom of the floor structure was still covered with original or renovated areas of plaster ceilings. There were several areas of the exposed structural floor that has been damaged during past renovations. This damage included cut or broken structural clay tile (flat arch) floors. Overall the existing floor structures appeared to be structurally sound.
Proposed Treatment / Repairs: Rotunda Infill Slab System Removal of rotunda infill slab should begin with removal of the upper concrete floor followed by the removal of the steel frame at that level. Repair of the damage walls should be done as the work progresses downward one floor at a time. Please note that the floors could be used as work platforms to perform structural repairs to the existing walls, new MEP and architectural construction above the floor to be removed. Once all the floors are removed the existing elevator pits and foundations could be left in place if found not to interfere with the new foundations and renovations. Removal of all of the added third floor structures should not negatively affect the original strength of the building structure as long as proper sequence of demolition is performed and areas of floor diaphragms are installed at the approximate location of the original attic floor structure. These will be needed to brace the existing brick walls. Once a replacement floor or diaphragm system is designed it should be at the
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
appropriate phase of demolition and construction. Once this work has been determined removal of all or portions of the third floor surrounding the rotunda can begin. This would include first removing the concrete slab followed by the removal of the floor decking then the bar joists. Following the removal of the bar joists repairing of the pockets in the brick walls will be required by infilling them with appropriate structural materials. The removal of the joist support angles on the exterior walls can be done by cutting them loose from the embedded steel brackets. The steel brackets can be left in place or if removed these pockets will also need t be repaired. Footings: Rotunda Limestone footings supporting the cast iron columns holding up the rotunda first floor slab appear to have been located directly under the ground floor slab while the multi-wythe brick rotunda walls are constructed of large limestone footings located approximately 4’-0” below the ground floor. During our investigation probe holes were dug within the existing crawl space to confirm the depth of the existing footings and height of the existing crawl spaces. Under the ground floor of the rotunda there is a crawl space area around the new elevator pit walls. The new crawl space extends over to an access opening that was added through the basement wall. Adjacent to this access opening and around the sides of the foundations the crawl space has over excavated the areas adjacent to the original stone foundations. The sides of the existing footings will need to be reinforced with concrete to prevent loss of soils from the area under the existing footings. Interior load bearing walls The multi-wythe brick walls extend down approximately 4’0” to the exposed earth floor of the crawl space and are supported at that level on large limestone foundations. The large flat pieces of limestone appear to be ~18 inches thick and are stacked in a varying number of layers to help build out the width of these wall footings based upon the amount of load each individual wall footing supported.
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
6.13
6.6 Proposed Scope of Work • Careful removal of added concrete infill slabs within the Rotunda. When the floor support beams were added, they were pocketed into the existing walls at brick pilasters. These brick pilasters have significant damage and will need to be repaired. • Disassemble & reconstruct (4) exterior balconies • Basement – reconstruct concrete decking and expand basement limits along Short Street. • Pin North foundation wall if determined settlement is occurring • Repair MEP penetrations without lintels through masonry walls. • Repair damaged or compromised sections of clay tile (flatarched) floor system. • Repair and replace as needed upper rotunda wood balcony floor system, due to water damage. • Upper Rotunda balcony supporting steel structure, repair or replace deteriorated members as needed. • Deconstruct and reconstruct exterior perimeter stone faced retaining walls. • Reconstruct Lower Rotunda balconies and “Y” stair, will require new embedded steel brackets and supporting steel columns • The original column foundations of both the First Floor platform and ‘Y’ stair support columns have either been removed or adjusted from original position. The columns and new foundations will need to be reinstalled. •
Add new elevator shaft and associated floor openings.
• Infill slab areas from stair removal • Removal of Third Floor added slabs
6.14
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
7. Building Infrastructure and Systems
7.1 Systems OVERVIEW A comprehensive renovation, restoration, and repurposing of the building will require the installation of a completely new infrastructure and building systems to serve the needs of the facility for the next thirty years. After careful review of the existing conditions, it was determined that all existing building systems and infrastructure will have to be removed and replace.
• sanitary sewer, and
New systems and infrastructure will include:
Primary Mechanical Equipment and Distribution
• heating,
Conventional approaches to heating, ventilation and air conditioning [HVAC] include boilers, chillers and cooling towers. Chillers and cooling towers are used for heat rejection; however, they do present significant challenges in historic buildings on several levels, including significant space needs and adverse visual impacts on the exterior of the building.
• ventilation, Figure 7.1: Mechanical equipment in the Dome Arcade.
• air conditioning, • smoke detection, • fire suppression, • electrical system, • lighting, • conduits for a range of building systems, such as teledata, security, etc., • plumbing, • natural gas, and • drainage [roof and perimeter foundation protection]. Removals All existing infrastructure, utilities distribution and building systems will be removed and any associated hazardous substances will be abated as necessary. The removals need to be performed by skilled contractors to avoid further loss of historic building fabric in the Rotunda and other areas of the building where there is evidence of such fabric [Figure 7.1]. Important Note: Our assessment indicates that there is nothing of value in terms of infrastructure, systems, fixtures or equipment that could be retained, refurbished and reused. This includes existing conduits. Their value is limited to being existing “pathways” that can be followed to avoid further disturbing building fabric of value. Utilities The renovated building will require: • power to support the needs of the building, special functions, as well as the public functions to be staged at the site, • domestic water [including water for fire suppression],
Figure 7.2: Proposed locations of 48 geothermal wells, each 500 feet deep on 20’-0” centers. 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment and Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
• storm sewer,
• natural gas [to support the needs of a future restaurant / food service ]. For budget purposes, the assumption is that the existing services are adequate for the needs of the project and a modest allowance of $200,000 is included for incidental work.
There is, however, an option that can work very well for this project; namely, a geothermal system. A geothermal system requires a series of wells to be drilled that would provide a sufficient quantity of water at a specific stable temperature to be used as a heating and cooling medium through heat exchangers. A geothermal system: • can be unobtrusive, which is a significant factor for a historic building, • requires significantly less space, an important consideration for this project given its already low net usable space, and • has significant performance and energy efficiency benefits. Preliminary calculations indicate that there is sufficient area to create a geothermal field to drill the required wells. Figure 7.2 delineates the basic concept of the field specifically for this site. The figure indicates that the well field will fit within the landscape of the site. For this project, the preliminary calculations indicate that a 120 ton load will need to be accommodated, requiring 48 wells at 20 feet on center at 500 feet deep each, based on data from similar installations in the vicinity. The wells will be connected with a series of underground lateral pipes at 42” below grade in a reverse return configuration. The piping will tie into an underground geothermal vault that will house isolation valves for each circuit. A set of pumps would be located at the Basement Level to pump water through the well field and through the building. All geothermal piping, both exterior and interior, will be poly-propylene and will utilize an alcohol-based anti-freeze. The hot and chilled water produced through the geothermal system will be used to heat and cool air to be ducted through the building via air-handling units located in the Attic and the
7.1
Basement to minimize duct sizes and runs. Perimeter radiation will be used to temper the air along the cold [exterior] surfaces of the building. The outside and exhaust air needs of the building will be accommodated through discreetly and unobtrusively placed intakes and grills at the dormers, Cupola and Dome areas, as well as the base of the building through the terraces. Commercial Kitchen Exhaust For budget purposes, it is assumed that the building will house a food service establishment / restaurant which will require a kitchen exhaust system. The pathway for the exhaust is included in the budget; however, the cost of the equipment is not, since this item will be driven by the tenant / user. Lighting The following types of lighting are being proposed and have been budgeted for this project: • Period Lighting [Exterior and in the restored Rotunda] [Figure 7.3 and Figure 7.4], • General Lighting for all occupied areas of the building, • Architectural Lighting [highlighting the exterior of the building] [Figure 7.5], • Service Lighting [for the Attic and Basement areas], and • Support for Exhibit and Special Lighting to be installed by the individual users / tenants. As part of the design, we would recommend that a lighting designer with significant experience in historic lighting is engaged to ensure that the lighting recommendations will be appropriate for the architecture, period, and style of the building, as well as the overall aesthetic of the restored building.
Figure 7.3: Original Circuit Courtroom chandeliers. [Herald Leader, 1960]
Summary: • The existing building utilities, infrastructure and building systems are either under capacity or have far exceeded their life expectancies. • A completely new infrastructure, properly sized utilities, and new building systems will be required for the building, regardless of what its final use will be.
Figure 7.4: Original Rotunda wall sconce. [Herald Leader, 1960]
7.2
Figure 7.5: Main Street (South) Entrance Staircase with replacement torchères and added wall-mounted entrance downlights, 2014.
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
8. Compliance Issues for the Restoration and Reuse of the Building
8. Compliance Issues for the Restoration and Reuse of the Building
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
8.1
INTRODUCTION
8.2
COURTHOUSE AREA DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
8.3
ZONING
8.4
CODE ANALYSIS AND OPTIONS
8.1
8.2
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
8.1 Introduction The restoration, reuse, and repurposing of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse would trigger the following compliance reviews: A. Zoning The 1899 Fayette County Courthouse lies within the Lexington Downtown Center Business [B-2B] Zone [Figure 8.1]. The allowable uses provide a wide range of options that are compatible with the architecture of the building, its character, and significance, and would result in a dignified and sustainable solution. Section 8.3 provides additional information regarding zoning and design considerations as delineated in articles 3, 17 and 27 of the LFUCG Zoning Ordinance, updated January 2015. B. Building Code Overview and Compliance
10.21.2013
B-2a
: DRAFT
B-2b
B-2
The restoration, reuse, and repurposing of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse will require a comprehensive approach to ensure that the entire building is brought into compliance with applicable codes. However, code compliance can have a particularly significant impact on the reuse of an existing and/or historic building. This is because the net usable area following a renovation is generally less than what existed before any improvements are undertaken. For example, in nearly all existing buildings, code compliant restrooms require more space than allocated prior to renovation, and their placement needs to be considered carefully to minimize impacts on space use and historic building fabric. Similar concerns must be addressed for the introduction and placement of codemandated egress staircases. The restoration, reuse, and repurposing of this historic building will comply with the following applicable Codes and Standards: ▪▪ 2013 KBC - Kentucky Building Code (Update 2) ▪▪ 2013 KPC- Kentucky Plumbing Code ▪▪ 2011 NEC - National Electric Code (NFPA 70) ▪▪ 2012 IMC - International Mechanical Code
Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government
▪▪ 2009 Fuel Gas Code (NFPA 54) ▪▪ 2010 ICC/ANSI A117.1 Accesibility Code ▪▪ LFUGC Zoning Ordinance ▪▪ The Secretary Of The Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic Properties Please note that historically designated buildings such as this one are exempt from compliance with 2012 IECC - International Energy Conservation Code. Figure 8.1: Diagram of the Downtown Center Business Zones [Courthouse shown in red].
11
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
8.3
Building code compliance requirements can be organized in the following categories: a. building classification, b. egress requirements, c. ADA [Americans with Disabilities Act] compliance, d. heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning requirements, e. electrical requirements, and f. plumbing requirements There are three significant dimensions that should be taken into consideration regarding building codes at this juncture: • All building codes were designed primarily for new construction and not specifically historic buildings. • While there are provisions and exceptions for historic buildings, each project has its own special dimensions requiring a careful review, expertise, and experience on the part of the Design Team and the Code Officials having jurisdiction over the project. • A proactive and collaborative dialogue between the Design Team and the Code Official[s] can produce creative solutions to address code compliance and life safety in an historic building. The key issues for this project can be summarized as follows: 1. How egress will be handled and how the placement of stairs will impact the layout of the building. 2. How a reconstructed monumental stair will be part of the overall code compliance strategy. 3. What the size and location of the restrooms will be and how they will impact the layout of the building. Section 8.4 provides the specifics of the Code Analysis including egress paths and placement of stairs and restrooms. Finally, there is one issue that, while not requiring a variance, must be addressed; namely, energy conservation. While new windows would be installed in the building and should be double glazed, the nature of the various exterior envelope assemblies is such that they do not allow for an installation of continuous interior insulation and vapor barriers without placing the building at risk of condensation that would be dangerous and destructive as a long-term consideration. Experience indicates that in the vast majority of restorations such as this one, the best solution is to only install double glazed windows and avoid any attempts to retrofit the historic building envelope in ways that were never intended in the original design and which would have long-term adverse implications.
8.4
D. Historic Preservation Compliance The 1899 Fayette County Courthouse is a rare and unique resource in the heart of the City of Lexington. It was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1983 as a contributing structure within the Downtown Commercial District. This relatively early designation, made over thirty years ago, places a significant architectural, historic, and cultural value on the building and the immediate site. As a result, any project involving the renovation, restoration, reuse, and repurposing of this significant historic structure is subject to historic preservation reviews by all authorities having jurisdiction over the project at local and Commonwealth levels. In addition, the City of Lexington has expressed its interest in exploring private / public partnerships that may pursue a Certified Rehabilitation and would seek Rehabilitation Investment Tax Credits [RITCs]. If this option is pursued, the federal government will be involved through the National Park Service. While these multiple reviews may appear to be significant burdens and complex processes, the reality is that they are not. All levels of review [local, Commonwealth, and federal] use the same criteria and framework to evaluate a project, namely The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic Properties [Please refer to Appendix 13.10]. The Standards stipulate in simple terms that intervention and treatment must: • be based on thorough understanding of the historic significance of the building, • be developed through careful research, evidence and reasoning, • utilize reversible design solutions to minimize impacts on valuable historic building fabric, and • take into consideration the long-term preservation of the building. It is frequently said that in a good preservation project, less is more.
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
8.2 Courthouse Area Design Review Board The Courthouse Area Design Review Board consists of five voting members: ▪▪ two design or preservation professionals,
PERMIT SUBMITTAL PROCESS:
▪▪ one employee of LFUCG, ▪▪ one banking community representative, and ▪▪ one owner of a property or business located within the Courthouse Area Overlay Zoning District.
LFUCG HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE
LFUCG COURTHOUSE OVERLAY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
TUESDAY PLAN REVIEW:
HEALTH DEPARTMENT : (IF FACILITY CONTAINS KITCHEN)
• DIVISION OF BUILDING INSPECTION
STATE PLUMBING INSPECTION
• FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU • ADDRESSING OFFICE, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY • DIVISION OF ENGINEERING • DIVISION OF TRAFFIC ENGINEERING • WASTE MANAGEMENT
The Courthouse Area Design Review Board is authorized to issue permits for exterior changes to a property or structure within the zone protected by the Courthouse Area overlay. Authorization is not required for work that is considered to be ordinary maintenance and repair to an existing building or where the elements of a building are replaced with identical units and the work does not change the appearance of the building. Authorization is required for the following: Exterior Change: Rehabilitation or replacement which is not ordinary maintenance or repair. New construction of any building element, addition, building, or structure is an exterior change; demolition of any building element, addition, building, or structure is also an exterior change. • Major Rehabilitation, Rehabilitating Large Areas with Similar Materials: rehabilitating / replacing, changing materials, style, or configuration; installation of new elements, replacing missing building elements or materials. • Major Rehabilitation, Replacement and Installation of Site Elements: rehabilitating large areas with similar materials, rehabilitating / replacing, changing materials, style or configuration, installing new site elements, replacing missing site elements or materials, removing trees > 10” in diameter, disturbing archaeological features by demolition or new construction, rehabilitating or replacing existing signs, installing new signs.
Schedule • Pre-filing Conference – Applicant shall meet with Compliance Officer before any formal filing can occur. • Preliminary Board Review – This is not a hearing and does not require a formal notice. The Board will provide feedback prior to final Board review. • Final Board Review – Public hearing requiring formal notification. Additional Information • The Board meets once each quarter or on an asneeded basis. Application deadlines are one month prior to the Board meeting, with public notification one week later. • F iling materials may include architectural plans, site plan, landscaping plan, and other pertinent information. • The Board does not consider any interior changes. Exterior changes are reviewed based on application of the Court House Area Design Guidelines. The intent of the Board is to prevent development that is incongruous in scale, design, or materials to the District. • The Board is required to approve or disapprove applications in whole or in part within sixty days of a formal filing. • The Design Review Officer shall issue Authorization based upon the Board’s decision. • Upon issuance of Authorization, the Division of Building Inspection may issue a Building or Demolition Permit. Building Inspection shall enforce all provisions of the Authorization. Commencement of work shall start within one year of Authorization.
Demolition: Any act that destroys in whole or in part a building or structure. • Application for demolition of an addition, for a portion of a building, or for an accessory structure which is not significant to the principal structure, site, or district: Approval of the application may not adversely affect those parts of a building or district which are significant.
Figure 8.2: Diagram depicting the permit submittal process.
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
• The Board, after hearing evidence at a public hearing, may postpone action for up to one year from filing of the application to conduct studies, surveys, and / or gather information with regard to alternatives or question the economic hardship of the applicant.
8.5
8.3 Zoning Article 3 General Zone Regulations
Article 27 Court House Area Design Overlay Zone
The LFUCG 1899 Fayette County Courthouse lies within the Lexington Center Business (B-2B) Zone [Figure 8.1]. This Zone is concentrated in the core of the Downtown area and is intended to preserve existing compatible attractions and encourage new complimentary uses. Land uses should promote tourism, improve the local economy, and have an aesthetically pleasing character.
The LFUCG 1899 Courthouse is located within a special Design Area Overlay Zone intended to protect the building and its surrounding context. The Courthouse has been a center of cultural activity for well over 115 years, and the Overlay Zone is a tool to help manage change while respecting the traditional character of the area and accommodating compatible improvements [Figure 8.3].
Principal uses within this Zone are the most inclusive of any within the City. Allowable uses that may pertain to this project include: offices, museums, art galleries, studios for work or teaching of fine arts, travel agencies, restaurants, cocktail lounges that may offer live entertainment, retail, and indoor amusement enterprises. Other requirements include: • Accessory Uses: sidewalk café, micro-brewery • Conditional Uses: health clubs and spas • Lot, Yard and Height Requirements: No limitations • Off-Street Parking: No requirement other than Residential uses. • Special Provisions: Any redevelopment must comply with the Downtown Streetscape Master Plan. Article 17 Sign Regulations. Allowable Signage: • Business Signs: Signs may be non-illuminated, indirectly illuminated, internally illuminated, or directly illuminated. Painted signs are prohibited. • Free-standing sign for each street frontage: 40 SF max, 20’ height max. • One wall-mounted sign per building face: 3% max SF of wall area, 50’ min. mounting height, max. projection 12”. • One wall-mounted sign per building face: max letter or cabinet height 2 1 / 2’, max. mounting height 50’, max. projection 12”. • Separate Establishment direct entrance: one wall sign per building face, min. mounting height 10’ max 30’, max. 1 ½” SF per linear frontage not to exceed 80 SF, max. projection 12”. • One projecting sign not exceeding 50 SF per each establishment having direct entrance, min. mounting height 10’, max 30’, max. projection 8’. 0
35
70
140
210
280 Feet
• Window Sign: 25% of window total area. • Nameplates, directional signage, menu boards and informational signage per B-1 zone.
Figure 8.3: Courthouse Area Design Overlay Zone
8.6
• A-frame or sandwich board type sign: 8 SF max. per panel, 48” max. height, 24” max. width, one sign per street front, max. two signs. 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
8.4 Code Analysis and Options IV.
CODE SUMMARY
FIRE-RESISTIVE REQUIREMENTS 1.
404
I.
PROJECT INFORMATION Project Name: Location: Owner: Building Code: Mechanical Code: Plumbing Code: Electrical Code: Other: Energy Code Code Check by:
Use Sprinkler Protection
404.2
LFUCG 1899 Courthouse 215 West Main Street Lexington, KY 40507 LFUCG KBC IMC KPC NFPA 70 IECC N/A AM
Project #: 201421
404.3
Fire Alarm System Smoke Control Atrium enclosure
404.4 404.5
Year: Year: Year: Year: Year: Date:
2013 2012 2013 2011 2012 02/24/15
Special Requirments A. Atriums:
404.6
Standy by Power Travel Distance
404.7 404.9
2.
II.
Table 601
OCCUPANCY
Table 601 Table 3-A
1.
2.
Occupancy Classification Non- Separated Mixed Use A. Primary Occupancy: M (Mercantile) B. Other Occupancies: A-2 (Restaurant) B. Other Occupancies: A-3 (Museum/Art Gallery) B. Other Occupancies: B (Offices) Occupancy Separation(s) required (Sprinkled):
3.
Special Provisions
309 303 303 304 508.3.3
III.
ALLOWABLE AREA & HEIGHT
Section 506
1.
Section 506 Section 506 Section 506 Section 506 Section 506 2. Chapter 6
3.
Area Modifications per level and construction type of proposed building (GSF) Const type:Allowable: Level: Floor: Elev: Use Group: Level 0.0 Basement A Assembly IIIB 35,625 Level 1.0 Grade A Assembly IIIB 35,625 Level 2.0 A Assembly IIIB 35,625 Level 3.0 A Assembly IIIB 35,625 Level 4.0 Mezzanine B Buisness IIIB Number of Stories: 3 B. Allowable Stories: 3 (A/M Occupancies) 4 (B Occupancy) Existing Construction Type: IIIB A. Total Height in Feet: 40' B. Allowable Height in Feet: 75'
Table 601 Table 601 Table 602 603
Actual: 4,449 11,756 11,756 11,756 3,050
707
Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A
707.5 707.5.1 707.6 710
G. Fire Barriers: Vertical Continuity: Supporting Construction Openings H. Smoke barriers:
Shall extend from the top of the floor/assembly to the underside of the floor shall have same rating as supported barrier, exception 3: 1HR barrier no req. Exception 1: opening shall not be limited to 156 SF if sprinkled (25% MAX) Exception 3: no limit if opening meets ASTME 119 or UL 263 and is 1 HR
711 707.5 712 712.1.12 713 713.12 713.14.1 3006.4 714 714.3.1 714.3.2 714.4..1
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
A. Structural Frame B. Bearing Walls C. Roof Construction D. Floor Construction E. Nonbearing Walls F. Allowable Combustible Construction
Opening connecting more than 2 stories, Does not apply to spaces that comply w/ section 712 Exception 1: atrium floor permitted to be used for an approved use if sprinkled Exception 2: Ceiling of Main Atrium above 55' from Finished Floor, sprinklers not required at ceiling Fire Alarm System to be provided per 907.2.14 Smoke Control per section 909, per 909.1 can be passive 1 hr fire barrier exception 3: a fire barrier is not required if the adjoining space of any three floors is is accounted for in the smoke control design Smoke Control to be on Standby power Exit access travel distance within the atrium is limited to 200', does not include 1st Exit Travel Distance from most remote point on third floor to 2nd floor exit discharge 157' Not required to be rated Not required to be rated Not required to be rated Not required to be rated Not required to be rated 1. Fire Retardent wood in non bearing walls partitions and exterior walls, roof 2. Insulation other than plastic foam with smoke index < 25 3. Foam plastics per chpt. 26 4. Interior Floor finishes per 804 5. Blocking 6. Millwork * Note upper rotunda balconies contain wood construction
I. Horizontal Assemblies: Fire Resistance Rating J. Vertical Openings: Unenclosed Stair or ramp K. Shaft Enclosures: Top Enclosure L. Elevator Lobby: M. Elevator Machine Room: N. Penetrations: Through Penetration Rated Walls O. Membrane: Rated Assemblies
Shall be no less than the required occupancy separation per table 508.4 including supporting construction vertical openings created by unenclosed stair per 1009.2 & 1009.3 allowed 2hr except 1 HR when connecting less than 4 stories same rating as shaft unless extends to bottom of floor or roof must be constructed using a horizontal assembly per 711 Exception 4. not required when sprinkled and serving floors < 75' Exception 1 no less than 1 HR. Exception 2 no rating required if does not directly abut elevator shaft and building < or = 4 stories see exception 2 for ferrous penetrations, annular space shall be protected against passage of smoke and hot gas in accordance with ASTM E 119 see exception 1 & 2 for electrical boxes, and exception 5 for sprinkler heads see exception 1 & 2 for pipes and conduits, and exception 3 for electrical boxes
8.7
Through Penetration Horizontal Assemblysee exception 1 & 2 for ferrous penetrations,3 for electrical boxes Through Penetration Rated Walls see exception 2 for ferrous penetrations, annular space shall be protected against passage of smoke and hot gas in accordance with ASTM E 119 or UL 263 Duct and Air Transfer Openings see exception 3 for ducts penetrating a 1 hr rated wall Shaft Enclosure pentrations see for exceptions P. Flame Spread Exit Enclosures: (B) Corridors: (B) Rooms ( C) Q. Furred Construction If interior finish material is applied to of rated or non-combustible const. then void between furring to filled with inorganic or noncombustible material, 1 3/4" max furr. R. Interior Floor Finish Corridors and exit passageways Class II S. Roof Classification Type C
714.4.1.1 714.3.1 717.1 717.5.3 table 803.9 803.11.1.1 804.4.2 Table 1505.1
1005.3 1003.5 1008.1
FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS 1.
903.4 903.4.1 903.4.2
903.4.3 905 905.4 906 table 906.3 906.5 909 909.4.6 909.5 909.7 909.8 909.16 912
2. 907.2
907.2.7.1 907.5.2.2 907.5.2.2.5 907.2.14
3. 3003.1 3003.1.2 3003.1.4 3004.1
Fire extinguishing systems A. Sprinklers required: Fully Sprinkled B. Sprinkler System Supervision and alarms see 903.4 for exceptions C. Moitoring Alarm, supervisory and trouble signals shall be different and automaticaly transmit to supervising station. See exceptions D. Alarms Audible alarms shall be connected to every automatic sprinkler system shall activate upon water flow, alarm to located on exterior of building shall activate fire alarm system E. Floor Control Valves Floor Control Valves @ point of connection on each floor F. Standpipes: Exception 1: Class 1 allowed if sprinkled location at each stairwell intermediate landing, all portions of building to be within 200' G. Portable fire Extinguishers All parts of building to be within 75' of extinguisher, Size and distribution of fire extinguisher based on hazard locations conspicuous locations readily accessible, along normal paths of travel H. Smoke Control * Note does not apply if Atrium is not considered an Atrium Duration of Operation 20 min or 1.5 times the calculated egress time whichever is less Smoke barriers per section 710 Airflow Method smoke migration through fixed openings Exhaust Method Smoke Control Panel H. Fire Department Connections Fire Alarm A. Manual Fire Alarm
B. occupant Notification C. Emergency voice/alarm Emergency Power C. Atriums Elevator A. Standby Power B. Manual Tansfer Switch C. Venting D. Hoistway venting
mechanical smoke control for large enclosed area per NFPA 92B Fire Fighters smoke control panel shall be placed in an approved location. Per NFPA
3.
1008.1.1 1008.1.2
1008.1.6 1008.1.10 1009
V.
2.
1005.3.1
4.
1009.3
1009.4 1009.5 1009.7.2 1009.7.2 1009.8 1012 1007.3 1007.3 1009.9.3 1014
5.
1014.2 Table 1014.3 Table 1015.1 1015.2.1 table 1021.1 table 1016.2
Required in A occupancy > 300, Exception 1 not required if fully sprinkled and occupancy notification system, B > 100 & M > 100 has same exception a minimum of one manual shall be provided in an approved location In M occupancy - instructions over a voice/alarm communication system Paging zones shall be provided at a min. locations: Elevator, Stairways, each floor Voice/alarm notification system shall be provided w/ emergency power per chpt. 27 smoke detection in atrium, voice communication for A & M occupancies
VII.
EXIT REQUIREMENTS 1.
1003.3 1003.5
Headroom Horizontal Projections Elevation Change
1018
6.
Table 1018.2 1005.7.1 table 1018.1 1022
7.
1027.1 1028
8.
1028.9
Coridors A. Width: B. Doors: C. Construction D. Dead Ends: Exit Enclosure A. Exit Discharge: Assembly A. Exit B. Seating @ Tables
1028.10.1
min. headroom of 80" for any walking surface no more than 4" over any walking surface between 27" an 80" in height 6 > shall be equipped with handrails or contrasting floor finish
1028.8 1007.2.1 1007.4 1007.4 713.14.1
8.8
B. Width: C. Headroom: D. Riser: E. Tread: F. Landings: G. Handrails: Clear Width H. Area of refuge I. Enclosure under Stair Exit Access A. Intervening Rooms: B. Common Path: C. # of Exits: D. Exit separation: E. Min # of Exits F. Travel Disatance
404.9
1028.10.1.1 1003.2
C. Landings: D. Panic Hardware Stairways A. Exit Access Stairway
table 1016.2
1018.4
An Accessible elevator shall be on Stanby power Elevator shall automatically switch to standy power within 60 sec. Machine room ventilation or air-conditioning shall be attached to stanby power Not required if building is sprinkled
Egress Capacity Stairs other Doors A. Minimum Size: B. Swing:
9.
C. Common Path Elevator A. Emergency Power B. Area of Refuge C. Elevator Lobbies:
.2" per occupant .15" per occupant min. clear width 32", In direction of exit travel when serving area with occ. load of 50 Shall not reduce required width by more than 7" when fully open Shall not reduce width in any position to less than 1/2 if serves occ. load > 50 44" minimum Required in Group A with occupant load > 50 Not required to be enclosed per exception 5: Exit access stairways per section 404 Exception 4: Exit Access Stairway not required to be enclosed if : (not an Atrium) 1. Fully Sprinkled 2. Floor does not connect more than 4 stories 3. Area of Floor opening between stories does not exceed twice the horizontal projected area of the exit access stairway 4. Protected by a draft curtain and closed space sprinkler 44" minimum Exception 3: min. 80" 4" minimum, 7" maximum 11" minimum Landing shall be no less than the width of stair Required on each side, One rail to extend 12" beyond top & bottom riser Exception 1: 48" not required clear between handrails in a sprinkled building Exception 2: not req'd in sprinkled buildings Enclosed occupiable spaces below stairs, walls and ceiling to be 1 HR Except were such adjoining rooms are accessory and not high hazard B & S occupancy 100', all other occupancies 75' A, B and M occupancies occupant load no greater than 49 only 1 exit required,
Exception 2 no less than 1/3 diagonal (46 FEET) Occupant load per story 1-500 (2), 501-1,000 (3), > 1,000 (4 per story)
A and M occupancies 250', B Occupancy 300' Exit Access travel distance shall not exceed table 1016.2 Exit Access Stairways within an Atrium travel distance limited to 200' 44" minimum (hallways serving occupant load less than 50 may be 36"), 24" access MCH Shall not reduce required width by more than 7" when fully open Shall not reduce width in any position to less than 1/2 if serves occ. load > 50 No required Rating max 20', Exception 2: B & M occupancies 50'
A occupancies > 300 main exit shall accommodate half of the occupants aisle accesway 12" min + 1/2" per foot for each foot beyond 12' clear width of 19" shall be taken perpendicular to table surface Common Path of Egress Travel 30' max, Exception 1: < 50 occupants travel max 75' Accessible elev. shall be provided if accessible floor is 4 stories or more above level of discharge Accessible elevator shalll have emergency operations and standby power per chapter 27 &30 Exception 2: not required at accesible elevator if sprinkled Exception 4: Not required if sprinkled and serves floors < 75' 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
EXISTING VS. USABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE CALCULATIONS VIII.
ACCESSIBILITY
1104.1
1. 2.
Route: Entries:
at least one accesible route shall connect building and accessible site elements at least one accesible entry
4. 5. 6.
Loading Zones Dinnning and drinking Toilet Assisted Use
Loading zones shall be accesible interior and exterior areas shall be accessible Shall be accessible were an aggregate of six or more male and female water closets is required, In mixed occupancy only those shall be used to determine requirement. (*not included in fixture count per KPC) At least one elevator shall be an accesible
3411.4.2 1106.7 1108.2.9 1109.1 1109.2.1
Existing Building
2,796
Ground Floor
11,983
10,637
5,596
First Floor
11,756
10,637
7,095
Second Floor
11,756
10,637
7,357
Third Floor
11,756
10,637
7,361
61,487
45,344
27,409
X.
MISCELLANEOUS REQUIREMENTS
Total
106.1
1.
Live Loads Posted
Propsed
1208.1
2406.4
2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Min. Room Dimension Min ceiling Height Room Area Mechanical apliances Safety Glazing
2702
7.
Emergency Power
1208.3 1209.3
3409
8.
Historic Buildings
C101.4.2
LEVEL GROUND*
OCCUPANCY OCCUPANCY 1. Historic Buildings
WATER CLOSETS
TYPE Mercantile
LOAD 252 ACTUAL
# men 252
1ST FLOOR *
MERCANTILE
252 ACTUAL
0
126
2ND FLOOR
Assembly
600 ACTUAL
300
300
3RD FLOOR
NON-OCCUPIED
0
MECH Basement
NON-OCCUPIED
0
REQUIRED BUILDING TOTALS ACTUAL BUILDING TOTALS
#REF!
URINALS
Historic Buildings are exempt from this code # women 126
RATIO 3/450
3/400
MEN'S 3 3 0 0 3 3 0
0
RATIO 2/400
2/300
2 2 0 0 2 3 1
WATER CLOSETS RATIO 2/200
WOMEN'S 2 4 2 2/200 2 6 4 4/200 +1 5 6 1
LAVATORIES RATIO 2/400
MEN'S 2 2 0
RATIO 2/400 2/400
3/400
0 3 3 0
3/400
WOMEN'S 2 2 0 2 4 2 3 4 1
0
RATIO 1/500 1/500 1/500
DRINKING FOUNTAIN 1 1 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 0
MOP SINK 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6 6
4 5
9 16
5 5
7 10
3 5
0 3 3
GROSS SF
NET SF
2,151 MCH
NET USABLE SF
Basement
15,558
4,449
Ground Floor
11,983
10,637
6,308
First Floor
11,756
10,243
6,804
Second Floor
11,756
10,170
7,121
Third Floor
11,756
3,050
2,322
Total
62,809
38,549
22,555
Building Volumes:
COURTHOUSE PLUMBING FIXTURE COUNT (BASED ON 2013 KPC) XI. 2012 ENERGY CODE
NET USABLE SF
14,236
8.
In commercial or industrial buildings were live load meets or exceeds 50 PSF, a sign shall be conspicously posted on each part of story that it applies too. Other than kitchens 7' Occupiable spaces 7'-6", Bathrooms, kitchens, storage rooms, laundry rooms 7' min all other rooms 70 sf2 min, does not apply to kitchens Access shall be per IMC In hazardous areas as defined by 2406, doors, adjacent to doors, within 18" of floor or walking surface within 36" horizontally of window plane Exception 2: protected by a rail between 34" - 38" withstanding a horizontal load of 50 lbs/LF Emergency power shall be provided for: Voice/alarm notification system, Smoke Control Systems, Means of egress illumination, & Accessible elevators Provisions of this code are not mandatory if so judged by the code official to not constitute a a distinct life safety hazard
NET SF
Basement
1007.2.1
1208.2
Elevator
GROSS SF
3,634 MCH
Occupied Lower Volume (CF)
556,534
Unoccupied Upper Volume (CF)
214,241
Required # of fixtures Provided # of fixtures Difference between provided and required *Note: For Levels 2 Men's Restroom alternate floors
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
8.9
MATERIAL LIFT
RECIEVING/STORAGE 1747 SF MECHANICAL 1497 SF
ELEVATOR LOBBY
2
1
STAIR B
DN
STORAGE
DN UP
ELEV.
1
CRAWL
9324 SF
PROPOSED BASEMENT PLAN
8.10
0'
4'
8'
16'
32'
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
MATERIAL LIFT
EXIT ACCESS TRAVEL DISTANCE 71'
RECIEVING/STORAGE 1/300 6 1747 SF MECHANICAL 1/300 4 1497 SF EXIT ACCESS TRAVEL DISTANCE 42'
STAIR B
DN
ELEVATOR LOBBY
STORAGE 1/300 1
1
242 SF 2
DN UP
ELEV.
1
CRAWL
9324 SF
0'
4'
8'
16'
32'
PROPOSED BASEMENT EGRESS PLAN
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
8.11
DN
STAIR B ELEV. LOBBY
RESTROOM 220 SF
ELEV. UP
ROTUNDA
TENNANT AREA A
TENNANT AREA B
3131 SF
3177 SF
UP
STAIR A UP DN
RESTROOM
VESTIBULE
UP
UP
UP
0'
4'
8'
16'
32'
PROPOSED GROUND FLOOR PLAN
8.12
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
DN
11
STAIR B
191
2
RESTROOM
UP
2
1
75
TENNANT AREA A 1/30 105
30
TENNANT AREA B 1/30 106
31
3131 SF
75
3177 SF
TRAVEL DISTANCE 85'
UP
STAIR A 2
315 UP DN
RESTROOM
2 315
2
UP
UP
UP
0'
4'
8'
16'
32'
PROPOSED GROUND FLOOR EGRESS PLAN
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
8.13
SUPPORT 187 SF
TENNANT AREA D
ELEV. TENNANT AREA E 824 SF
DN
ROTUNDA
DN
TENNANT AREA C 2651 SF
UP
TENNANT AREA F 1922 SF
STAIR A UP
DN
VESTIBULE
UP
RESTROOM SUPPORT SPACE
SUPPORT SPACE
370 SF
341 SF
UP
UP
0'
4'
8'
16'
32'
UP
PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR PLAN
8.14
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
2
661 SF
2
TRAVEL DISTANCE 140'
TENNANT AREA D 1/30 22
TENNANT AREA E 1/30 28
96
824 SF
96 DN
DN
TENNANT AREA C 1/15 178 2651 SF TENNANT AREA F 1/15 128
UP 191
319
1922 SF
STAIR A
DN
2
UP
RESTROOM
SUPPORT SPACE 1/30 12
SUPPORT SPACE 1/30 13
UP
341 SF
370 SF
UP
UP
0'
4'
8'
16'
32'
UP
PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR EGRESS PLAN
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
8.15
SUPPORT AREA A1
SUPPORT
353 SF
181 SF
RESTROOM EVENT ROOM D
UP
SUPPORT AREA B1 396 SF
397 SF ELEV.
ROTUNDA DN
EVENT ROOM A
DN
EVENT ROOM B
DN
2373 SF
2473 SF
STAIR A DN
UP
EVENT ROOM C SUPPORT AREA A2 353 SF
407 SF
RESTROOM SUPPORT AREA B2 364 SF
0'
4'
8'
16'
32'
PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR PLAN
8.16
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
SUPPORT AREA A1 1/15 24 353 SF
13
SUPPORT AREA B1 1/15 27
EVENT ROOM D 1/15 20
1
UP
RESTROOM
396 SF
397 SF
2
160
160 DN
DN
' 137
" 3/8
EVENT ROOM B 1/10 248
1/2 "
EVENT ROOM A 1/10 238
-9
TRAVEL DISTANCE 125'
ELEV.
2473 SF
37 '
-6
2373 SF
314
STAIR A
DN
SUPPORT AREA A2 1/15 24 353 SF
2
UP
EVENT ROOM C 1/30 14 407 SF
RESTROOM
SUPPORT AREA B2 1/15 25 364 SF
0'
4'
8'
16'
32'
PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR EGRESS PLAN
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
8.17
STAIR C DN
SUPPORT
OPEN TO BELOW
OPEN TO BELOW
OPEN TO BELOW
DN UP
SUPPORT
0'
4'
8'
16'
32'
PROPOSED THIRD FLOOR PLAN
8.18
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
13 COMMON PATH 71'
DN
SUPPORT 1/100 13
STAIR C
1251 SF
2
2
OPEN TO BELOW
OPEN TO BELOW
OPEN TO BELOW
12
DN
2 UP
SUPPORT 1/100 12 1120 SF
0'
4'
8'
16'
32'
PROPOSED THIRD FLOOR EGRESS PLAN
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
8.19
ATTIC / MCH OPEN TO BELOW
7645 SF
UP
STAIR A DN
MECHANICAL CATWALK
0'
4'
8'
16'
32'
PROPOSED ATTIC PLAN
8.20
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
OPEN TO BELOW
0'
4'
8'
16'
32'
PROPOSED CUPOLA PLAN
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
8.21
PROPOSED EAST-WEST SECTION
8.22
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
PROPOSED NORTH-SOUTH SECTION 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
8.23
9. Reuse / Vision
9. Reuse / Vision The 1899 Fayette County Courthouse is a unique resource with significant planning, architectural, historic and cultural dimensions worthy of a high level and quality of preservation, restoration, and reuse. Prior to undertaking such a project, there are some important questions that need to be answered before an investment is made. More specifically: 1. What are the lessons learned from its history and the present research undertaken by the EOP / PDP team? • The building has an unusually low utilization ratio [gross to net usable for both floor areas and building volume]. In that context, the cost per square foot for a thoughtful and responsible renovation would be unusually high since it will be skewed by areas such as the Rotunda, which has a floor to ceiling dimension of over 100 feet. • Past efforts to increase its utilization had disastrous results, seriously compromising one of the most significant spaces in Lexington and damaging its architectural, historic and cultural integrity. • The building is a true planning, architecture, and cultural icon in the heart of the City and has been an integral part of the City’s history for over 115 years. • While the degree and level of destructive viciousness that was demonstrated in the 1960-61 interventions with the goal of increasing the utilization of the building was truly astonishing, the results did not create the return on investment that the projects had envisioned. Fortunately, there is enough physical and documentary evidence that will allow for a thoughtful recapture of the original design intent. • Regardless of what the intended / proposed use of the building will be, there are certain fixed costs that need be budgeted to address the building’s own needs, such as: i. New roofing systems ii. Restoration and repairs of masonry envelope iii. New windows and doors iv. A completely new building infrastructure and building systems v. Repairs to usable areas and recapture of the volumetric dimensions of the building’s layout vi. These items represent close to 90% of the total budget, with 10% representing the cost of finishes and restoration / reconstruction of the Rotunda and the monumental stair. vii. The cost per square foot of renovation [with or without the restoration of the Rotunda] is very high, beyond the reach of any commercial venture. 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
In simple terms, the return on investment is simply not there for a private development. In addition, the layout and interior architecture of the building is not adaptable to other uses, such as residential, hotel, etc. 2. What are the options for the future of this magnificent edifice and icon of Lexington? Experience indicates that the site and the building will always give us the right answers if we ask the right questions: • Courthouses have historically been placed in the heart of American cities, surrounded by a public square, and becoming the planning, political, cultural and government center of a city. The Old Fayette County Courthouse is a perfect example of this uniquely American planning tradition. • While there have been many adverse changes over the course of its 115 year history through waves of urban renewal and lack of strategic and planning vision, today, through an alignment of new development forces, the site is reclaiming its rightful place as the center of Lexington, where residents and visitors go to experience the unique dimensions of the city. • The building was designed to accommodate the residents of Lexington in generous and heroic public spaces, large public rooms, open spaces, and architecture of high quality. These qualities can still be recaptured today to create a unique public place that is the center of Lexington. • The original architecture of the building is perfect for public meetings, exhibit galleries, multi – purpose spaces, small lecture rooms, and dining facilities, all focused around the most heroic space in Lexington, the historic Courthouse Rotunda. Through a careful and thoughtful restoration and repurposing, the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse can become a destination and a departure point for not only the City of Lexington but for the entire Blue Grass Region:
robust growth of the bourbon industry, and a unique history and nature, all important dimensions of the tourist industry. The restored and reimagined building can house: • A food/drink establishment • A museum of the equestrian tradition of Kentucky • A sampling of the bourbon industry • A visitor center • Multi-purpose spaces for lectures, gatherings and catered events
community
• A high quality store that will show case Kentucky’s finest products and memorabilia The site can be a destination and departure point where visitors can get information on special tours of the Blue Grass Region’s world famous horse farms, innovative distilleries and historic sites, begin a bus tour and return for refreshments, dining and drinks. In simple terms, the building can become the “living room” of Lexington and the Blue Grass Region and would bring together the creative forces of the state, time-honored traditions, and a vision for the future: a true public / private partnership. Should a “scaled back” project be considered? Experience and careful analysis indicate that the answer is no. A “scaled back” project without the heroic Rotunda will still be an expensive undertaking and without any dimensions that would capture the attention, support, and imagination of the residents of Lexington and the Blue Grass Region, the major stakeholders and industry leaders throughout the State, and the thousands of visitors who come to this part of the country to experience the unique dimensions of Kentucky. An unimaginative reuse will not be sustainable. In Daniel Burnham’s words, “Make no little plans.” Recapturing the essence of the building’s urban design and architectural qualities would make an enormous contribution to progress that is currently under way in revitalizing this historic American city.
• The site and the Courthouse terraces can become an extension of the building and become part of the new vibrancy that has been created by the 5 / 3 Pavilion, the addition of a world class boutique hotel, and a major mixed-use development that would bring thousands of people to the site on a permanent basis. • As in many cities, a visitor and a resident center that would house a “sampling” of the unique historic and cultural dimensions of Lexington, the Blue Grass Region, and the State of Kentucky, such as the world class equestrian industry and its major events, the
9.1
9.2
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
10. Project Cost Estimates
10.1 Project Cost Estimate Construction Budget
Interior Architecture:
In preparing the construction cost estimate the following assumptions were made regarding the proposed Scope of Work:
The proposed work includes:
General Assumptions: • The proposed restoration, renovation, and improvements are to have a life expectancy of at least 30 years. The quality and level of the proposed work is not of commercial, but institutional quality. • The exception may be specific components of the HVAC system - such as pumps, etc. – which will comply with ASHRAE standards, i.e. a minimum of 20 years. • The work will meet Historic Preservation Compliance requirements and will qualify for Rehabilitation Investment Tax Credits should the City choose to pursue a public / private partnership. • The renovated building will meet current code requirements in the context of a historic structure. • The estimate is conservative, i.e., it includes a modest contingency. Please review the end of this section for additional information. Site: Site improvements and repairs are proposed to allow the building and its site to become the center of Lexington and a destination / departure point for both residents and visitors. These include walks, monumental stairs, steps, terraces, etc., as well as exterior lighting, including historic lighting based on research, evidence and surviving components, and architectural lighting to highlight the building.
1. Recapturing the historic Rotunda space, which includes: a. careful removal of all slabs that were inserted in 1960-61, b. reconstruction of the balconies and the monumental staircase, c. reconstruction of historic elements and finishes, d. reconstruction of historic doors, lunettes, and millwork, e. restoration of historic decorative paint and finishes based on research and physical evidence, and f. installation of lighting based on historic research and evidence. 2. All interior spaces along the perimeter of the building will be refurbished volumetrically, i.e., a. all non-historic partitions will be removed and the historic masonry walls will be revealed, b. careful removal of third floor added slabs c. cornices, chair rails, base boards, plaster ceilings and walls will be repaired, refurbished, and reconstructed as necessary, d. an interior “floating” ceiling will be installed allowing the historic volume of each space to remain intact; this “floating” ceiling will house building systems and lighting, thereby allowing the historic integrity of the spaces to be protected and the intervention to be fully reversible, and e. colors will be selected based on historic research and physical evidence.
Exterior Building Envelope:
3. It is assumed that the below-grade space outside the footprint of the building will be rebuilt and expanded.
The following improvements are envisioned:
4. An allowance for hazmat remediation is included.
• restoration of the Cupola, • new roofing systems, • new rainwater conduction system [gutters, downspouts, drainage, etc.],
Installation of new building infrastructure and building systems: The proposed work includes: • a geothermal system is envisioned that would eliminate the need to install visually intrusive and space-demanding chillers, cooling towers, and boilers, • completely new distribution of ducted air for heating, cooling, and air conditioning, supplemented with perimeter radiation, • new electrical systems, including full coverage by smoke detection and fire alarm system[s], • new lighting and provisions for supplemental lighting for exhibits and special uses, • full coverage by an automatic sprinkler system,
Many aspects go into seeing a development project to fruition. Well before construction starts, and then during, there are design services, development specialists, legal counsel, accountants, and financial entities involved. Collectively, these expenses are known as “soft costs.” The following budget fully anticipates the soft costs for the project based on the assumption that the project will seek to utilize multiple sources of financing, including state and federal historic tax credits. These are estimated costs and fees. All professional contracts would be procured and negotiated.
• a security system,
Total Development Estimate
• conduits for teledata and exhibits,
The total development estimate also anticipates a capitalized reserve for the project, which is often a condition of outside investors, as well as protects the investment in the building long-term.
• a new ADA compliant passenger elevator with a “gurney size” platform to be used for transporting exhibits, and • a lift – in lieu of a loading dock – to support the needs of the users. The construction budget was prepared by Michael Funk of International Consultants, Inc., a cost estimating consultancy with over 30 years of specialized experience in the restoration, renovation and adaptive reuse of historic landmarks.
The estimate also anticipates a contingency for unforeseen conditions. The contingency is calculated at 15% at this juncture, since the design effort has not commenced.
In addition, the Design Team engaged a highly qualified and experienced construction manager with extensive experience in historic building restoration to review the detailed cost estimates and provide an independent Peer Review. The Design Team recommended Haverstick / Borthwick, led by William Cobb, Jr., an individual with over 40 years of experience in this area of specialized construction, located in the MidAtlantic region [Philadelphia].
• restoration and repairs of masonry walls, • repairs to balconies,
Their Peer Review Letter is included in Appendix –
• new double – glazed windows based on the historic design and appearance, and
The estimate anticipates a 4% escalation of construction costs per year. This escalation is based on the Central Kentucky market for construction services.
10.B
Soft Costs
• new plumbing and ADA compliant restrooms,
Haverstick / Borthwick does not pursue projects outside the Delaware Valley and would not be a candidate for this project, an important requirement for an independent Peer Review.
• reconstruction of all exterior historic doors.
This construction budget number is an informed estimate. The final price of construction would be determined by a bidding process, negotiated fee with the design team, and a final negotiated contingency amount.
If the project is delayed beyond the proposed time frame, the condition of the building would have to be evaluated again and adjustments to the estimate would have to be made, in addition to escalation costs.
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Estimated Project Costs
The total cost of the project is presented in the following summary matrix:
Base Construction Estimate
$ 26,767,098
Escalation [July 2016]
$ 1,070,684
Subtotal Construction
$ 27,837,782
Design Fees
$ 2,783,778
Other Professional Fees & Costs
$ 1,670,267
Subtotal Soft Costs
$ 4,454,045
Capitalized Reserve & Financing Costs
$ 1,071,755
Contingency
$ 4,906,409 $ 5,978,164
Total Development Cost
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
$ 38,269,991
10.C
11. Predevelopment and Financing
11. Predevelopment and Financing The Development Team Assembling the team is an important first step for any development project, particularly one that utilizes complex financing, as described in below. The necessary expertise include the following entities: 1.
Development Agent: Serves as LFUCG’s representative in directing the various tasks through the pre-development process, including the tax credit negotiations. The LFUCG has issued an RFP for these services. [Please refer to Appendix 13.10]
2.
Legal Counsel Law firm / entity with expertise in Certified Rehabilitations, syndications and public / private partnerships [PPP] and related matters
3.
Accounting Firm An accounting firm with experience in Rehabilitation Investment Tax Credits and related matters
4.
Architectural / Engineering Team A multi-discipline Architectural / Engineering Team specializing in the restoration, renovation and adaptive reuse of historic buildings, for all prime disciplines, with the lead architect having experience in Certified Rehabilitations and the Secretary of the Interior Standards.
5.
Construction Management Firm A Construction Management Firm specializing in Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings and, preferably, with experience in Certified Rehabilitations.
6.
Designated Project Manager (internal point person to LFUCG)
The Predevelopment Process Any development project has a series of actions and decisions necessary to move forward towards construction. These steps can be grouped into the following categories: • Determine a viable set of end uses and users for the rehabilitated facility the meet mission, financial, and regulatory obligations (“The Program”); • Determine a project capital budget and an operational pro forma (“The Project Budget”) • Evaluate the various capital financing options that might be utilized (“The Financing”) and determine the appropriate development structure, including ownership, leasing, and management responsibilities (“The 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Development Structure”); • Identify potential financial partners, including tax credit investors if historic tax credits are to be utilized (“The Development Partners”)
• July 1, 2015: It is the date by which an application for intent to seek Kentucky Historic Preservation Tax Credits needs to be in place, i.e. the “clock starts” and
• Undertake the architectural and engineering plans for the redevelopment project, including the necessary submissions to the State and Federal Historic Preservation offices (“The Design”)
• June 30, 2017:
It is important to point out that these steps (and the various tasks required under each of them) are parallel rather than sequential. Information assembled within each step inform and impact the others. It is also important that the impact of each of these elements on the ongoing operation, management, maintenance, and cash flow of the project once put into services are considered to be as important as the capital cost of construction.
The next section will discuss the sequence and timing implications.
When the “clock stops” and all of the qualified expenditures are in place to calculate the final value of the state tax credits.
Financing the Capital Cost of the Project The restoration, reuse and repurposing of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse, can be financially realized in one of two ways: • As a project undertaken by the City of Lexington as the sole source of financing, or • As a Public/Private Partnership [PPP] utilizing multiple sources of financing, specifically state and federal historic tax credits. The first option is relatively straight-forward. The second option is complex, but potentially leverages approximately 30% of the total project costs from outside sources of funds. Under the PPP option, a new corporate “entity” would have to be created following IRS rules for a public / private partnership that would pursue a Qualified Rehabilitation. This entity would seek and secure both Federal Rehabilitation Investment Tax Credits [RITCs] and Kentucky Historic Preservation Tax Credits. The LFUCG would retain oversight of the entity. The value of the two tax credits can range from 25% to 30% of the qualified rehabilitation expenditures [QREs], which in the case of this project represent a value of at least $13.o million. The tax credits can generate an equity of approximately $11.o million, allowing an equity partner to contribute this amount in the overall structure of the project. There are several projects throughout the US that have followed a similar PPP structure, including the Restoration and Rehabilitation of the Cincinnati Union Terminal, as well as the Richardson Olmsted Complex in Buffalo. [Appendices?] At this juncture, if a PPP is pursued, there are two deadlines that should be taken into consideration to maximize the equity generated by the Kentucky Historic Preservation Tax Credits:
11.1
12. Implementation Sequence and Schedule
12. 1 Implementation Sequence and Schedule Deadline Considerations for External Funding
Recommended Sequence and Schedule
An important deadline that is critical for such a PPP structure is July 1, 2015. An application for intent to apply for the Kentucky Historic Preservation Tax Credits needs to be filed on or before that deadline to be eligible for the consideration for the state historic preservation tax credits, which represent half of the value of the total tax credits that could be available for this project.
In this context, the following sequence and steps represent a reasonable scenario in which the project can be implemented to maximize the value of the state credits, minimize escalation of costs, protect this rare historic resource and create an amenity that would create memorable experiences for both the residents of Lexington and all of the visitors of the Blue Grass.
Per KRS (Kentucky Revised Statues), only the qualified expenditures that have been encumbered between July 1,2015 and June 30th 2017, will be used for the calculation of the value of the state historic preservation tax credit. A preliminary review of the project’s eligibility for the state historic preservation tax credits indicates that the project would qualify for the credits; however, the actual value cannot be determined at this juncture, since it would depend on how quickly construction can get under way and the work in place has advanced to as to close to completion as possible. On the other hand, the federal RITCs (Rehabilitation Investment Tax Credits) do not have any specific deadlines and can be pursued following the existing IRS rules. Escalation of Costs The assessment of the existing conditions revealed that there were two areas of acute deterioration that presented risk to life safety, namely the deck of the basement outside the footprint of the building and the balconies. These two items were addressed with temporary measures; however the deterioration has not been arrested and will continue to impact the long term preservation of the building until a comprehensive restoration, rehabilitation, reuse and repurposing of the building is undertaken. In addition, costs will continue to increase. The rate of escalation cannot be predicted; however, at the present time it is projected to be approximately 4% annually based on the performance of the Central Kentucky construction market over the past few years. This rate adds to the cost of the project approximately $1 million for each year that the project is deferred. Additional deterioration of the building is unpredictable, but will accelerate in the coming years. Significant ongoing water intrusion will continue to undermine the structural integrity of the building.
11.B
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Proposed Schedule
2015
2016
2017
Selection of Development Agent Selection of Architecture & Engineering Team Selection of Construction Manager Assemble Financing Leasing and Operating Agreements Preparation of Exterior Bid Package State & Historic Tax Credit Process Exterior Renovation Preparation of Interior Bid Package Interior Renovation Close Out
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
11.1
13. Appendices
13. Appendices 13.1 SOURCES CONSULTED 13.2 HISTORIC DRAWINGS 13.3 EOP / PDP ORTHO-PHOTOGRAPHY (ELEVATIONS) 13.4 EOP / PDP DRAWINGS (ELEVATIONS) 13.5 EOP / PDP PROBE PACKAGE 13.6 BFMJ EMERGENCY INTERVENTIONS REPORTS
AND DRAWINGS
13.7 LFUCG SUMMARY OF WORK TO DATE 13.8 HAVERSTICK / BORTHWICK COST ESTIMATE PEER
REVIEW LETTER
THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S STANDARDS
FOR PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS
THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S STANDARDS
FOR REHABILITATION OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS
THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S STANDARDS
FOR REHABILITATION OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS
(“CERTIFIED REHABILITATIONS”)
THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S STANDARDS
FOR RESTORATION OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS
THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S STANDARDS
FOR RECONSTRUCTION OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS
13.9 CITY VISIONS PRIVATE / PUBLIC PARTNERSHIP CASE
STUDIES
B
13.10 LFUCG RFP #9-2015 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 13.11 ARTICLE 27 COURTHOUSE DESIGN AREA OVERLAY 13.12 BY-LAWS – COURTHOUSE AREA DESIGN REVIEW
BOARD (REVISED JANUARY 16, 2008)
13.13 ORDINANCE NO. 155-2009 AN ORDINANCE
AMENDING ARTICLES 27-6(D) AND 22-7 OF THE
ZONING ORDINANCE TO DELAY THE ISSUANCE
OF DEMOLITION PERMITS IN THE COURTHOUSE
DESIGN AREA OVERLAY ZONE, AND TO STAY ALL
WORK ONCE AN APPEAL TO THE PLANNING
COMMISSION HAS BEEN FILED UNTIL AFTER THE
HEARING BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION
13.14 DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR THE COURTHOUSE
SQUARE AREA MAY 17, 2000
13.15 PREAMBLE TO THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
STANDARDS FOR THE TREATMENT OF HISTORIC
PROPERTIES
13.1
13.1 Sources Consulted
13.1 Sources Consulted The following resources were utilized in conducting this assessment of the Old Fayette County Courthouse: AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. DRAFT Analysis of Brownfield Cleanup Alternatives, Lexington History Museum, 2014. _____. DRAFT Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, Historic Fayette County Courthouse, 2013. Ayers / Saint / Gross Architects-Planners. Downtown Lexington Masterplan, 2005. E. Verner Johnson and Associates. Old Courthouse Museum Project Comprehensive Master Plan, 2001. Case Western Reserve University and Western Reserve Historical Society. Encyclopedia of Cleveland History [on-line edition]. Fitzsimons Office of Architecture, Inc. Feasibility Study, Restoration of the Old Fayette County Court House, 1999. Grever, Joan. “Lexington History Museum in the Historic Fayette County Courthouse” (typescript), 2003. Kannensohn, Margaret A.H. DRAFT “Art and the Fayette Circuit Court” (typescript), 2005. Langsam, Walter E., Howard S. DeCamp. National Register of Historic Places Inventory-Nomination Form, [Lexington, Kentucky] Downtown Commercial District, 1983. Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government. DRAFT Design Excellence Standards and Guidelines, Downtown Lexington, KY, 2013. Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government Division of Historic Preservation. Downtown Lexington Building Inventory, 2009. Lexington Herald archive Lexington Herald-Leader on-line archive Lexington History Museum archive and on-line resources Lexington Leader archive Lexington Public Library, Kentucky Room Lexington Public Library Local History Index Ranck, George W. History of Lexington, Kentucky: its Early Annals and Recent Progress, 1872. Transylvania University, Special Collections University of Kentucky, Young Library
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
13.5
13.2 Historic Drawings
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
13.9
13.10
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
13.11
13.12
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
13.13
13.14
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
13.15
13.16
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
13.17
13.18
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
13.19
13.3 EOP / PDP Elevation Orthophotography
4/21/2014 9:18:12 AM
LFUCG OLD COURTHOUSE LEXINGTON, KY
Project Status DATE
PHASE
---
----
P:\14.004_Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\#Base\_Project-Specific-Blocks\#EOP-Logo.jpg
P:\14.004_Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\#Base\_Project-Specific-Blocks\#PDP-Logo.png
PROJECT TEAM EOP Architects Prime Architect www.eopa.com Preservation Design Partnership, LLC Preservation Architects & Planners www.pdparchitects.com CMTA Engineers MEP Engineers www.eopa.com BFMJ Engineers Structural Engineers www.bfmj.com
P:\14.004_LFUCG Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\01_Master Plan Drawings\#A3-xA_ExteriorOrthophotography_22x34.dwg
Element Design Landscape Architects www.element-site.com
13.22
Job Number Drawn By Checked By Date
1421 JME JME JANUARY 2015
WEST ELEV - HYBRID 1 A3.1-A
WEST ELEV - HYBRID SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
A3.1-A 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
4/21/2014 9:18:12 AM
LFUCG OLD COURTHOUSE LEXINGTON, KY
Project Status DATE
PHASE
---
----
P:\14.004_Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\#Base\_Project-Specific-Blocks\#EOP-Logo.jpg
P:\14.004_Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\#Base\_Project-Specific-Blocks\#PDP-Logo.png
PROJECT TEAM EOP Architects Prime Architect www.eopa.com Preservation Design Partnership, LLC Preservation Architects & Planners www.pdparchitects.com CMTA Engineers MEP Engineers www.eopa.com BFMJ Engineers Structural Engineers www.bfmj.com
P:\14.004_LFUCG Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\01_Master Plan Drawings\#A3-xA_ExteriorOrthophotography_22x34.dwg
Element Design Landscape Architects www.element-site.com
Job Number Drawn By Checked By Date
1421 JME JME JANUARY 2015
SOUTH ELEV - HYBRID 1 A3.2-A
SOUTH ELEV - HYBRID SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
A3.2-A 13.23
4/21/2014 9:18:12 AM
LFUCG OLD COURTHOUSE LEXINGTON, KY
Project Status DATE
PHASE
---
----
P:\14.004_Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\#Base\_Project-Specific-Blocks\#EOP-Logo.jpg
P:\14.004_Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\#Base\_Project-Specific-Blocks\#PDP-Logo.png
PROJECT TEAM EOP Architects Prime Architect www.eopa.com Preservation Design Partnership, LLC Preservation Architects & Planners www.pdparchitects.com CMTA Engineers MEP Engineers www.eopa.com BFMJ Engineers Structural Engineers www.bfmj.com Element Design Landscape Architects www.element-site.com
P:\14.004_LFUCG Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\01_Master Plan Drawings\#A3-xA_ExteriorOrthophotography_22x34.dwg
N
13.24
Job Number Drawn By Checked By Date
1421 JME JME JANUARY 2015
EAST ELEV - HYBRID 1 A3.3-A
EAST ELEV - HYBRID SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
A3.3-A 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
4/21/2014 9:18:12 AM
LFUCG OLD COURTHOUSE LEXINGTON, KY
Project Status DATE
PHASE
---
----
P:\14.004_Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\#Base\_Project-Specific-Blocks\#EOP-Logo.jpg
P:\14.004_Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\#Base\_Project-Specific-Blocks\#PDP-Logo.png
PROJECT TEAM EOP Architects Prime Architect www.eopa.com Preservation Design Partnership, LLC Preservation Architects & Planners www.pdparchitects.com CMTA Engineers MEP Engineers www.eopa.com BFMJ Engineers Structural Engineers www.bfmj.com
P:\14.004_LFUCG Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\01_Master Plan Drawings\#A3-xA_ExteriorOrthophotography_22x34.dwg
Element Design Landscape Architects www.element-site.com
Job Number Drawn By Checked By Date
1421 JME JME JANUARY 2015
NORTH ELEV - HYBRID 1 A3.4-A
NORTH ELEV - HYBRID SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
A3.4-A 13.25
13.4 EOP / PDP Elevation Drawings
4/21/2014 9:18:12 AM
LFUCG OLD COURTHOUSE LEXINGTON, KY
Project Status DATE
PHASE
---
----
P:\14.004_Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\#Base\_Project-Specific-Blocks\#EOP-Logo.jpg
P:\14.004_Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\#Base\_Project-Specific-Blocks\#PDP-Logo.png
PROJECT TEAM EOP Architects Prime Architect www.eopa.com Preservation Design Partnership, LLC Preservation Architects & Planners www.pdparchitects.com CMTA Engineers MEP Engineers www.eopa.com BFMJ Engineers Structural Engineers www.bfmj.com Element Design Landscape Architects www.element-site.com
P:\14.004_LFUCG Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\01_Master Plan Drawings\#A3-x_BuildingElevations_22x34.dwg
N
13.28
Job Number Drawn By Checked By Date
1421 JME JME JANUARY 2015
WEST ELEVATION 1 A3.1
WEST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
A3.1 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
4/21/2014 9:18:12 AM
LFUCG OLD COURTHOUSE LEXINGTON, KY
Project Status DATE
PHASE
---
----
P:\14.004_Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\#Base\_Project-Specific-Blocks\#EOP-Logo.jpg
P:\14.004_Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\#Base\_Project-Specific-Blocks\#PDP-Logo.png
PROJECT TEAM EOP Architects Prime Architect www.eopa.com Preservation Design Partnership, LLC Preservation Architects & Planners www.pdparchitects.com CMTA Engineers MEP Engineers www.eopa.com BFMJ Engineers Structural Engineers www.bfmj.com
P:\14.004_LFUCG Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\01_Master Plan Drawings\#A3-x_BuildingElevations_22x34.dwg
Element Design Landscape Architects www.element-site.com
Job Number Drawn By Checked By Date
1421 JME JME JANUARY 2015
SOUTH ELEVATION 1 A3.2
SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
A3.2 13.29
4/21/2014 9:18:12 AM
LFUCG OLD COURTHOUSE LEXINGTON, KY
Project Status DATE
PHASE
---
----
P:\14.004_Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\#Base\_Project-Specific-Blocks\#EOP-Logo.jpg
P:\14.004_Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\#Base\_Project-Specific-Blocks\#PDP-Logo.png
PROJECT TEAM EOP Architects Prime Architect www.eopa.com Preservation Design Partnership, LLC Preservation Architects & Planners www.pdparchitects.com CMTA Engineers MEP Engineers www.eopa.com BFMJ Engineers Structural Engineers www.bfmj.com
P:\14.004_LFUCG Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\01_Master Plan Drawings\#A3-x_BuildingElevations_22x34.dwg
Element Design Landscape Architects www.element-site.com
13.30
Job Number Drawn By Checked By Date
1421 JME JME JANUARY 2015
EAST ELEVATION 1 A3.3
EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
A3.3 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
4/21/2014 9:18:12 AM
LFUCG OLD COURTHOUSE LEXINGTON, KY
Project Status DATE
PHASE
---
----
P:\14.004_Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\#Base\_Project-Specific-Blocks\#EOP-Logo.jpg
P:\14.004_Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\#Base\_Project-Specific-Blocks\#PDP-Logo.png
PROJECT TEAM EOP Architects Prime Architect www.eopa.com Preservation Design Partnership, LLC Preservation Architects & Planners www.pdparchitects.com CMTA Engineers MEP Engineers www.eopa.com BFMJ Engineers Structural Engineers www.bfmj.com
P:\14.004_LFUCG Old Fayette Courthouse\07_Drawings\07_01_CADD Drawings\01_Master Plan Drawings\#A3-x_BuildingElevations_22x34.dwg
Element Design Landscape Architects www.element-site.com
Job Number Drawn By Checked By Date
1421 JME JME JANUARY 2015
NORTH ELEVATION 1 A3.4
NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
A3.4 13.31
13.5 EOP / PDP Probe Package
GENERAL NOTES 1.
CONTACTOR IS TO VERIFY ALL FIELD CONDITIONS PRIOR TO DEMOLITION
2.
PERFORM DISASSEMBLY AND REMOVALS IN A CONTROLLED MANNER: WITHOUT UNNECESSARY CUTS; WITHOUT DAMAGE TO THE EXISTING SITE, STRUCTURE OR FEATURES; AND WITHOUT DAMAGE TO MATERIALS OR CONSTRUCTION TO REMAIN.
3.
PROMPLY REPAIR, REPLACE OR REINSTALL ANY ITEMS DAMAGED DURING THE WORK WHICH ARE NOT SCHEDULED TO BE DEMOLISHED, AT NO ADDITIONAL COST. SECURE ARCHITECT'S APPROVAL FOR PROPOSED REMEDIAL WORK BEFORE PROCESSING.
4.
PERFORM WORK IN A MANNER WHICH WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY, OPERATIONAL ELEMENTS, SAFETY ELEMENTS & VISUALPROPERTIES.
5.
REMOVE AND LEGALLY DISPOSE OF DEBRIS, RUBBISH AND OTHER DEMOLITION WASTE FROM THE SITE.
6.
IN THE EVENT THE CONTRACTOR UNEXPECTEDLY ENCOUNTERS ON THE SITE UNKNOWN MATERIALS REASONABLY BELIEVED TO BE ASBESTOS, POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYL (PCB) OR OTHER CLASSIFIED HAZARDOUS MATERIAL, NOTIFY ARCHITECT AND OWNER OF THE DISCOVERY OF ANY HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND IMMEDIATELY STOP WORK AND REPORT FINDINGS TO OWNER AND ARCHITECT IN WRITING AND DO NOT RESUME WORK UNTIL APPROACH IS IDENTIFIED. REFER TO PROVIDED PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT FOR KNOWN LOCATIONS AND TYPES OF HAZMAT MATERIALS. PROPER SAFETY PRECAUTIONS SHOULD BE TAKEN WHEN WORKING IN NOTED LOCATIONS.
8. 9.
CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING ANY TEMPORARY PROTECTION NECESSARY AT EXTERIOR TEST PITS.
10.
TEST PIT AREAS AFTER ARCHITECTS DOCUMENTATION TO BE BACKFILLED WITH DENSE GRADE FILL MATERIAL, AND HAND TAMPED IN THREE FOOT LIFTS.
12.
THE VERIFICATION OF THE LOCATION OF ALL UTILITIES AND STRUCTURES EITHER SHOWN OR NOT SHOWN ON THESE PLANS SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR. IF ANY DISCREPANCIES EXIST, THE CONTRACTOR IS TO NOTIFY THE OWNER AND ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY.
13.
CONTRACTOR SHALL RESTORE ALL DAMAGED PAVEMENT OUTSIDE OF THE TEST PIT AREAS TO ORIGINAL CONDITION AND TO THE OWNER'S SATISFACTION. IN ADDITION AREAS OUTSIDE OF PAVEMENT SHALL BE RESTORED TO TURF OR EXISTING CONDITIONS AND SHALL MEET OWNERS APPROVAL. ANY RESTORATION WORK SHALL CONSIDERED SUBSIDIARY AND SHALL NOT RECEIVE SEPARATE PAYMENT.
14.
CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR KEEPING ALL ROADWAYS AND SIDEWALKS CLEAN AROUND THE SITE AREA.
1
PROVIDE EXTERIOR TEST PIT TO ALLOW VISUAL EXAMINATION OF EXTERIOR & INTERIOR FOUNDATION WALL AND FOOTING AS FOLLOWS: a. MECHANICAL DIGGING MAY BE USED WITHIN 12” OF BUILDING WALLS. REMAINING 12” TO BE HAND-DUG. DIMENSIONS SHOWN ON DRAWING INDICATE MINIMUM AREA OF FOUNDATION WALL TO BE EXPOSED. LIMIT EXCAVATION TO THE DEPTH OF THE EXISTING FOOTINGS. b.TEST PITS OCCUR AT LOCATIONS KNOWN TO HAVE BELOW-GRADE DOWNSPOUTS AND UTILITIES. ALL WORK IS TO BE COMPLETED WITHOUT DAMAGING EXISTING CONSTRUCTION. REFER TO GENERAL NOTES FOR MORE INFORMATION. c.CLEAN DIRT AND DEBRIS FROM BELOW-GRADE FOUNDATION WALLS FOLLOWING EXCAVATION, TO ALLOW EXAMINATION BY ARCHITECT. d.CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING ANY REQUIRED TEMPORARY SHORING DURING AND AFTER EXCAVATION. SHORING SHOULD ALLOW ARCHITECT TO GAIN PROPER ACCESS FOR DOCUMENTATION OF THE WORK. e.ARCHITECT WILL REVIEW AND DOCUMENT ALL TEST PITS IN A SINGLE VISIT. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE TEMPORARY PROTECTION REQUIRED FOR BOTH OCCUPANT SAFETY AND PROTECTION OF THE BUILDING FROM MOISTURE INFILTRATION. f.AFTER COMPLETION OF DOCUMENTATION BY THE ARCHITECT, TEST PITS ARE TO BE BACKFILLED WITH DENSE GRADE FILL MATERIAL AT EXTERIOR AND CLEAN FILL ON INTERIOR. HAND-TAMP IN THREE-FOOT LIFTS. FINAL GRADE TO HAVE POSITIVE DRAINAGE FROM BUILDING.
2
LIMIT OF TEST PIT TO INCLUDE FOUNDATION OF RETAINING WALL
3
BASEMENT AREA IS KNOWN TO CONTAIN ASBESTOS. PROPER PROTECTION SHOULD BE TAKEN WHEN WORKING IN THIS AREA. REFER TO PAHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT FOR MORE INFORMATION
3 10' - 0"
10' - 5"
LEXINGTON, KY
PROBES PACKAGE DATE
PHASE
---
----
PROVIDE ANY TEMPORARY SHORING REQUIRED TO STABALIZE EXISTING BUILDING AND SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION.
SHEET NOTES
1
LFUCG OLD COURTHOUSE
PROJECT TEAM EOP Architects Prime Architect www.eopa.com Preservation Design Partnership, LLC Preservation Architects www.pdparchitects.com CMTA Engineers MEP Engineers www.eopa.com BFMJ Engineers Structural Engineers www.bfmj.com Element Design Landscape Architects www.element-site.com
N
7' - 2"
1
All designs, arrangements and plans indicated or represented by this drawing are the property of EOP Architects and were created and developed for use on and in connection with the specified project.
3 2
None of this information shall be used by or disclosed to any person or entity for any reason whatsoever without the permission of EOP Architects. Written dimensions shall have precedence over scale dimensions. Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions and conditions on the job. Notify EOP Architects immediately of any variation from the dimensions and conditions shown by these drawings.
1
Job Number Drawn By Checked By Date
1
1421 STAFF STAFF 22 OCTOBER 2014
1
1 D1.0
FOUNDATION PLAN
TEST PIT PLAN
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
0'
13.34
4'
8'
16'
32'
D1.0 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
LFUCG OLD COURTHOUSE LEXINGTON, KY
PROBES PACKAGE DATE
PHASE
---
----
PROJECT TEAM EOP Architects Prime Architect www.eopa.com Preservation Design Partnership, LLC Preservation Architects www.pdparchitects.com CMTA Engineers MEP Engineers www.eopa.com BFMJ Engineers Structural Engineers www.bfmj.com Element Design Landscape Architects www.element-site.com
N
All designs, arrangements and plans indicated or represented by this drawing are the property of EOP Architects and were created and developed for use on and in connection with the specified project. None of this information shall be used by or disclosed to any person or entity for any reason whatsoever without the permission of EOP Architects. Written dimensions shall have precedence over scale dimensions. Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions and conditions on the job. Notify EOP Architects immediately of any variation from the dimensions and conditions shown by these drawings.
Job Number Drawn By Checked By Date
0'
1 D2.0
4'
8'
ORIGINAL NORTH/SOUTH SECTION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
16'
1421 STAFF STAFF 22 OCTOBER 2014
32'
REFERENCE SECTION
D2.0 13.35
LFUCG OLD COURTHOUSE LEXINGTON, KY
PROBES PACKAGE DATE
PHASE
---
----
PROJECT TEAM EOP Architects Prime Architect www.eopa.com Preservation Design Partnership, LLC Preservation Architects www.pdparchitects.com CMTA Engineers MEP Engineers www.eopa.com BFMJ Engineers Structural Engineers www.bfmj.com Element Design Landscape Architects www.element-site.com
N
All designs, arrangements and plans indicated or represented by this drawing are the property of EOP Architects and were created and developed for use on and in connection with the specified project. None of this information shall be used by or disclosed to any person or entity for any reason whatsoever without the permission of EOP Architects. Written dimensions shall have precedence over scale dimensions. Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions and conditions on the job. Notify EOP Architects immediately of any variation from the dimensions and conditions shown by these drawings.
Job Number Drawn By Checked By Date
0'
1 D3.0
13.36
4'
8'
16'
ORIGINAL EAST / WEST SECTION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
32'
1421 STAFF STAFF 22 OCTOBER 2014
REFERENCE SECTION
D3.0 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
GENERAL NOTES 1.
CONTACTOR IS TO VERIFY ALL FIELD CONDITIONS PRIOR TO DEMOLITION
2.
PERFORM DISASSEMBLY AND REMOVALS IN A CONTROLLED MANNER: WITHOUT UNNECESSARY CUTS; WITHOUT DAMAGE TO THE EXISTING SITE, STRUCTURE OR FEATURES; AND WITHOUT DAMAGE TO MATERIALS OR CONSTRUCTION TO REMAIN.
3.
PROMPLY REPAIR, REPLACE OR REINSTALL ANY ITEMS DAMAGED DURING THE WORK WHICH ARE NOT SCHEDULED TO BE DEMOLISHED, AT NO ADDITIONAL COST. SECURE ARCHITECT'S APPROVAL FOR PROPOSED REMEDIAL WORK BEFORE PROCESSING.
4.
PERFORM WORK IN A MANNER WHICH WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY, OPERATIONAL ELEMENTS, SAFETY ELEMENTS & VISUALPROPERTIES.
5.
REMOVE AND LEGALLY DISPOSE OF DEBRIS, RUBBISH AND OTHER DEMOLITION WASTE FROM THE SITE.
6.
IN THE EVENT THE CONTRACTOR UNEXPECTEDLY ENCOUNTERS ON THE SITE UNKNOWN MATERIALS REASONABLY BELIEVED TO BE ASBESTOS, POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYL (PCB) OR OTHER CLASSIFIED HAZARDOUS MATERIAL, NOTIFY ARCHITECT AND OWNER OF THE DISCOVERY OF ANY HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND IMMEDIATELY STOP WORK AND REPORT FINDINGS TO OWNER AND ARCHITECT IN WRITING AND DO NOT RESUME WORK UNTIL APPROACH IS IDENTIFIED. REFER TO PROVIDED PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT FOR KNOWN LOCATIONS AND TYPES OF HAZMAT MATERIALS. PROPER SAFETY PRECAUTIONS SHOULD BE TAKEN WHEN WORKING IN NOTED LOCATIONS.
8.
LFUCG OLD COURTHOUSE LEXINGTON, KY
PROBES PACKAGE DATE
PHASE
---
----
PROVIDE ANY TEMPORARY SHORING REQUIRED TO STABALIZE EXISTING BUILDING AND SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION.
9.
CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING ANY TEMPORARY PROTECTION NECESSARY AT EXTERIOR TEST PITS.
10.
TEST PIT AREAS AFTER ARCHITECTS DOCUMENTATION TO BE BACKFILLED WITH DENSE GRADE FILL MATERIAL, AND HAND TAMPED IN THREE FOOT LIFTS.
12.
THE VERIFICATION OF THE LOCATION OF ALL UTILITIES AND STRUCTURES EITHER SHOWN OR NOT SHOWN ON THESE PLANS SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR. IF ANY DISCREPANCIES EXIST, THE CONTRACTOR IS TO NOTIFY THE OWNER AND ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY.
13.
CONTRACTOR SHALL RESTORE ALL DAMAGED PAVEMENT OUTSIDE OF THE TEST PIT AREAS TO ORIGINAL CONDITION AND TO THE OWNER'S SATISFACTION. IN ADDITION AREAS OUTSIDE OF PAVEMENT SHALL BE RESTORED TO TURF OR EXISTING CONDITIONS AND SHALL MEET OWNERS APPROVAL. ANY RESTORATION WORK SHALL CONSIDERED SUBSIDIARY AND SHALL NOT RECEIVE SEPARATE PAYMENT.
14.
CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR KEEPING ALL ROADWAYS AND SIDEWALKS CLEAN AROUND THE SITE AREA.
SHEET NOTES
PROJECT TEAM EOP Architects Prime Architect www.eopa.com
CORNICE PROBE
1
1
14' - 5"
A.
LIMIT OF PROBE TO INCLUDE STEEL LINTEL ABOVE ADDED WINDOW OPENING AND WRAP THE CORNER OF THE BUILDING
B.
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW WITH THE PROFFESIONAL THEIR METHODS OF CORNICE DISASSEMBLY AT EACH PROBE LOCATION BEFORE THEY BEGIN THE INVESTIGATIVE WORK.
C.
THE CONTRACOR SHALL PHOTOGRAPH THE AREA TO BE DISASSEMBLED BEFORE THE START OF THE WORK. ALL COMPONENTS TO BE REMOVED SHALL BE LABELED AND IDENTIFIED WITH THE LABEL NUMBER VISIBLE IN THE PHOTOGRAPH. ANY REMOVED COMPONENTS SHALL BE CAREFULLY PROTECTED AND STORED ON-SITE.
D.
WHEN THE PROFFESIONAL NOTIFIES THE CONTRACTOR THAT THE PROBE DOCUMENTATION IS COMPLETED, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAKE THE PROBE OPENING WEATHERTIGHT.
E.
TEMPORARY ROOFING MATERIAL SHOULD BE INSTALLED AT AREAS WHERE SECTIONS OF THE CORNICE HAVE BEEN REMOVED AND STORED ON-SITE AS PART OF THE PROBE INVESTIGATION. THE ENCLOSURE SHALL BE DESIGNED TO BE WEATHERTIGHT FOR A MINIMUM OF THREE (3) YEARS.
Preservation Design Partnership, LLC Preservation Architects www.pdparchitects.com CMTA Engineers MEP Engineers www.eopa.com BFMJ Engineers Structural Engineers www.bfmj.com Element Design Landscape Architects www.element-site.com
N
All designs, arrangements and plans indicated or represented by this drawing are the property of EOP Architects and were created and developed for use on and in connection with the specified project. None of this information shall be used by or disclosed to any person or entity for any reason whatsoever without the permission of EOP Architects. Written dimensions shall have precedence over scale dimensions. Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions and conditions on the job. Notify EOP Architects immediately of any variation from the dimensions and conditions shown by these drawings.
Job Number Drawn By Checked By Date
1421 STAFF STAFF 22 OCTOBER 2014
1
UPPER STREET SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
6' - 0"
2 D4.0
UPPER STREET 0' 14' - 5"
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
4'
8'
16'
32'
D4.0 13.37
13.6 BMFJ Emergency Interventions Reports and Drawings
14037.90
August 14. 2014
If you should have any questions please contact me.
Andrew Moore EOP Architects ??? Short St. Lexington, KY 40502
Best regards, Buell Fryer McReynolds Jahed, Inc.
RE:
Structural Investigation Fayette County Courthouse 215 W Main St., Lexington, KY 40507 BFMJ Project No. 14037.90
Ethan A. Buell PE, SECB Principal
Andrew, The following is a summary of our initial site visits for the structural investigation of the existing Fayette Co. Courthouse. As discussed at our meeting today we have observed several structural issues that we feel are unsafe conditions that will require immediate steps to insure the safety of the public that could be on the courthouse property adjacent to the existing courthouse building structure. The existing basement extends out from under the building under the North entry sidewalk to within 2 feet of the curb along Short Street. The area of the sidewalk over the basement is the roof of the basement & is constructed of a reinforced concrete slab supported by either concrete or steel beams that are encased in concrete. The majority of the supporting beams are steel beams. In viewing this sidewalk/roof slab from the basement it was observed that both the steel reinforcing bars in the slab and concrete beams as well as the steel beams have experienced significant rusting and deterioration that has caused large areas of the concrete slab to spall off. The rebar and steel beams are in varying degrees of deterioration and in some cases the rebars and steel beams have lost more than 50% of their cross-sectional area. Both the sidewalk slab and its supporting structure have lost significant strength and load carrying capacity throughout this basement area and is considered structurally unsound & is an unsafe condition. It is recommended that immediate steps be taken to fence off the sidewalk to prevent public access over the existing exterior basement area. It would be possible to shore up a portion of the sidewalk directly adjacent to Short street, approximately back to the metal bollards, if so desired. Design of this shoring is beyond the scope of our investigation. Another area of structural concern is the second floor balconies located over each of the buildings entries. Each of these balconies have cracked pieces or broken stones that have the possibility of either dropping small pieces of stone or in the case of the West, Cheapside, balcony, the possibility of larger sections of the balcony and/or it’s railing. Due to the conditions of the stone it is recommended that immediate action be taken to fence off each of the remaining balconies by placing a fence at least 5 feet from the balcony edges. The North balcony would be satisfactorily fenced off once the fencing is installed around the exterior sidewalk above the exterior basement. Page | 2 Structural Engineers www.bfmj.com
13.40
Phone Fax
859/278.5050 859/278.6060
620 East Euclid Avenue, Suite 300 Lexington, Kentucky 40502
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Structural Investigation: Old Fayette County Courthouse- BFMJ Project #14037.90o
August 18. 2014 RE:
Structural Investigation Fayette County Courthouse 215 W Main St., Lexington, KY 40507 BFMJ Project No. 14037.90
To Whom It May Concern:
This condition is caused by water infiltration that leads to rust of the supporting steal structure and spalling of the stone. At this juncture, we would recommend that the following steps are taken immediately: a.
Shoring the balconies properly
b.
Additionally, installing a net in each balcony to ensure that pieces will not fall off and the historic building fabric will remain in place until permanent repairs are made.
The following is a summary of our preliminary assessments from our site visits August 14th, 2014 of the historic Fayette County Old Courthouse. Our assessments, while preliminary, indicate that there are two areas that require immediate attention and intervention to insure the safety of the Public. More specifically:
We trust that the above is self-explanatory. We would be happy to meet with you and the city representatives on site; however, time is of the essence. Design of the shoring can be provided as an additional service.
1.
Basement Area:
Sincerely,
The Basement of the building extends north of the exterior north wall under the sidewalk of Short Street. Based on field measurements, the basement actually extends to approximately 2 feet from the south curb of the street.
If you should have any questions please contact me. Best regards, Buell Fryer McReynolds Jahed, Inc.
The deck – essentially the “roof” of the Basement – is constructed as follows:
The deck is reinforced concrete
It is supported by either reinforced concrete beams or steel beams encased in concrete
The deck and beams are supported by cast iron columns and the perimeter reinforced concrete wall receiving the loads of the deck and the supporting structure
Ethan A. Buell PE, SECB Principal
The structure is exposed to view from the Basement and our team was able to make the following observations: (See attached Photos)
Extensive water infiltration through joints and decking without moisture protection. In addition, it is suspected that the use of salt during the winter has accelerated the deterioration of the structural components of the deck and the supporting structure
Significant and extensive spalling and deterioration of the concrete, exposing the reinforcing that has extensive rust
Significant deterioration and rusting of steel beams, with substantial [over 50%] loss of the cross section, reducing structural capacity below acceptable limits
At this juncture, we would recommend the following:
2.
a.
“Fencing off” the area
b.
Providing shoring below Public Domain to ensure that the existing structure will continue to be in place until more comprehensive and permanent repairs are made
In addition to the Basement issues, we also found that all four balconies [see photo] display several areas of deterioration that need attention and should be shored or fenced off to ensure that the public is not exposed to issues associated with the potential spalling of the stone. (see attached photos)
Structural Engineers www.bfmj.com
Phone
859/278.5050
620 East Euclid Avenue, Suite 300
Fax
859/278.6060
Lexington, Kentucky 40502
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Page | 2
13.41
7' - 10"
3 1/2"
TO TERRACE WALL (F.V.) 2 - 2x10 PT MEMBERS (HORZ) OVER TOP OF 6x6 POSTS. TOP MEMBER ATTACHED TO BOTTOM MEMBER w/ SIMPSON STRONG-TIE HTP37Z. ENSURE STRIP DOES NOT CONTACT STONE TO REDUCE RISK OF STONE STAINING.
8"
CORBEL BEYOND (DASHED LINE)
SIMPSON STRONG TIE BC6 POST CAP FOR CONNECTION OF 6x6 BEAMS. 6x6 x CONT. PRESSURE TREATED BEAM (HORZ) RUNNING PERPENDICULAR TO BUILDING ACROSS ALL 6x6 PT BEAMS .
2x6 PRESSURE TREATED HORZ 'x' BRACING. EA BAY.
SIMPSON STRONG TIE BC6 POST CAP FOR CONNECTION OF 6x6 BEAMS.
1'-8" MAX COURTHOUSE EXTERIOR WALL
7' - 4"
BALCONY ABOVE EXTENTS. FV. EQ
EQ
DOORWAY ARCH BELOW.
UNO. SEE 4/S-1 TYP.
7' - 0" ADJUSTABLE STEEL JACK POST w/ ZINC RICH PRIMER. APPLY PRIMER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 6,000lbs CAP MIN.
1/2"Ø ALL THREADED ROD 'X' BRACING w/ EYE BOLT CONNECTION ON EA END. EA. BAY.
NOTES: GALVANIZED SCREWS WILL BE USED FOR ALL CONNECTIONS. UNO. EQ
FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND ELEVATIONS. TYP.
FV
4' - 5"
4 S-1
SECTION @ TOP OF SUPPORT FRAME 1 1/2" = 1'-0"
CL CORNICE
6x6 HORIZ MEMBER ONLY.
1/2"Ø ALL THREADED ROD w/ TURNBUCKLE & EYE BOLT EA END. EA BAY. TYP.
6' - 0" CL JACK POSTS
CHEAPSIDE ST BALCONY PLAN 1/2" = 1'-0"
1/3 HEIGHT OF
3
SIM.
S-1
INNER DOORWAY ARCH
BALCONY ABOVE EXTENTS. FV. 1' - 8"
1' - 0"
ADJUSTABLE STEEL JACK POST w/ ZINC RICH PRIMER. APPLY PRIMER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 6,000lbs CAP MIN.
SIMPSON STRONG-TIE BC6 POST CAP. TYP.
5' - 10"
EQ
STEEL JACK POST
EXTERIOR FACADE ARCH
2' - 6"
BUILDING FACE
6' - 0"
COURTHOUSE EXTERIOR WALL
ABBREVIATIONS: BTWN BETWEEN CAP CAPACITY CONT CONTINUOUS CL CENTERLINE FV FIELD VERIFY HORIZ HORIZONTAL OPP OPPOSITE VERT VERTICAL UNO UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE
6x6 x 7'-0" PRESSURE TREATED BEAM (HORZ) RUNNING PERPENDICULAR TO BUILDING ACROSS TWO STEEL JACK POSTS.
STONE CORNICE BALCONY SUPPORT. TYP.
S-1
14050.40
1/2"Ø ALL THREADED ROD THRU BOLT w/ GALVANIZED NUTS AND WASHERS FOR CONNECTION OF ALL THREADED ROD 'X' BRACE TO 6x6. TYP.
SUPPORT FRAME LOCATIONS.
STEEL JACK POST. 6,000lb CAP MIN.
1
SIMPSON STRONG TIE BC6 POST CAP FOR CONNECTION OF 6x6 BEAMS.
EQ
6" MAX
10"
3
5 1/2"
4' - 5" EQ
FEILD VERIFY (FV)
10" 10" 1' - 3"
S-1
6x6 PRESSURE TREATED (PT) POST (VERT) @ EACH LOCATION BTWN CORBEL LOCATIONS. TYP.
1/2" HOLD OUTSIDE FACE OF POST BACK FROM NOSE OF CORBEL
2x6 x 12" PRESSURE TREATED BLOCKING ON TOP OF 6X6 FOR 'X' BRACING CONNECTION.
6x6 x CONT PRESSURE TREATED BEAM (HORZ) RUNNING PERPENDICULAR TO BUILDING ACROSS ALL 6x6 PT BEAMS .
EQ
1/2"Ø ALL THREADED ROD 'X' BRACING . TYPICAL EXTERIOR BAYS. EA SIDE.
2x6 PT BEAM BTWN 6x6 POSTS. EA SIDE.
TOP OF 2x10 FLUSH w/ UNDERSIDE OF OF BALCONY
1' - 3"
6x6 HORIZ MEMBER ONLY.
8"
1' - 0"
EQ
1' - 8"
2' - 6"
1/2"Ø ALL THREADED ROD THRU BOLT w/ GALVANIZED NUTS AND WASHERS FOR CONNECTION OF ALL THREADED ROD 'X' BRACE TO 6x6. TYP.
7' - 0" 3/4"Ø x 9" HILTI KWIK HUS SCREW ANCHOR @ 36" O.C. INTO SLAB
EQ
BALCONY EXTENT
SIMPSON STRONG TIE BC6 POST CAP FOR CONNECTION OF 6x6 BEAMS. TYP.
O
WIDTH OF ENTRY LANDING (F.V.)
2 S-1
LI
SS
18' - 8"
EO
MAIN STREET BALCONY PLAN 1/2" = 1'-0"
No.
SHORT STREET
2x6 PRESSURE TREATED HORZ 'x' BRACING. EA BAY.
F K EN T
ETHAN ALLEN BUELL
11,644 C E N S ED
NI
E PR F
S-1
1/2"Ø ALL THREADED ROD 'X' BRACING . TYPICAL EXTERIOR BAYS. EA SIDE.
SECTION @ BASE OF SUPPORT FRAME 1 1/2" = 1'-0"
EER
5
STA T
EQ
NG
6' - 0"
CL JACK POSTS
6x6 HORIZ MEMBER ONLY.
6x6 HORIZ MEMBER ONLY.
EQ
2 - 6x6 x CONT PRESSURE TREATED
KY UC
EQ
UNO. SEE 4/S-1 TYP.
10"
6x6 HORIZ MEMBER ONLY.
1' - 8"
6x6 HORIZ MEMBER ONLY.
ENTRY WALL
10"
NO I
1' - 8"
SUPPORT FRAME LOCATION
EXISTING CONC SLAB. CL CORBEL
AL E
Description
Date
1 S-2
1 S-3 2' - 6" CORBEL BEYOND
3 1/2"
6x6 x CONT PRESSURE TREATED MEMBER HORZ. EXTENT 6" BEYOND CENTERLINE OF LAST SUPPORTING MEMBER. TYP.
7' - 0"
SIMPSON STRONG-TIE BC6 POST CAP.
VARIES. FIELD VERIFY.
4 S-1
6' - 0" BUILDING FACE
ADJUSTABLE STEEL JACK POST w/ ZINC RICH PRIMER. APPLY PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. TYP ALL POSTS
3/4"Ø x 9" HILTI KWIK HUS SCREW ANCHOR @ 36" O.C. INTO SLAB
2 - 1/2"Ø ALL TREAD ROD w/ TURNBUCKLE. EA BAY.
6x6 PRESSURE TREATED
EXISTING CONC SLAB.
10/13/2014 10:46:23 PM
2 - 6x6 x CONT PRESSURE TREATED
GENERAL NOTES: A. FRAMING LUMBER 1. ALL LUMBER SHALL BE GRADED IN ACCORDANCE WITH NFPA STANDARDS. a. TREATED TIMBER SHALL COMPLY WITH THE AMERICAN WOOD PRESERVER’S ASSOCIATION (AWPA) GUIDELINES FOR TREATED LUMBER OR PLYWOOD FOR USES (ABOVE GROUND, GROUND CONTACT AND FRESH WATER USE, PERMANENT WOOD FOUNDATION OR SALT WATER). 2. WOOD CONNECTORS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS SHALL BE SIMPSON STRONG-TIE CONNECTORS AS MANUFACTURED BY THE SIMPSON CO. OR APPROVED EQUAL AND SHALL BE ZMAX RATED OR ACQ COMPATABLE CONNECTORS: a. ALL 6x6 BEAM TO BEAM CONNECTIONS SHALL BE MADE WITH TYPE BC6 POST CAPS (BY SIMPSON CO.) b. ALL 6x6 TO SLAB CONNECTIONS SHALL BE MADE WITH HILTI ¾” KWIK HUS x 9” SCREW ANCHORS. (BY HILTI.) 3. PROVIDE GALVANIZED SCREWS AND STAINLESS STEEL BOLTS/ALL THREADED RODS AS INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS. 4. PROVIDE X-BRACING WITH ALL THREADED RODS AT END BAYS PARALLEL TO THE BALCONY AND ALL BAYS PERPENDICULAR TO THE BALCONY. 5. SPLICE ALL CONTINOUS HORIZONTAL MEMBERS OVER SUPPORTS. IF TWO CONTINUOUS MEMBERS ARE SIDE BY SIDE DO NOT SPLICE AT THE SAME LOCATION. B.
SHORING NOTES 1. DRAWINGS REPRESENT THE DESIRED RESULT OF CONSTRUCTION. THE METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION AND THE RISKS INVOLVED DURING CONSTRUCTION ARE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN THE BUILDING’S STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY AT ALL STAGES OF CONSTRUCTION. 2. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND ELEVATIONS DURING CONSTRUCTION AND REPORT TO THE ENGINEER DURING CONSTRUCTION ANY DISCREPANCIES. 3. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE STEEL “PATENT ® CONST. SYSTEMS” SHORES (OR ENGINEER APPROVED EQUAL). 4. INDIVIDUAL STEEL BUCKLING SINGLE LEG LOAD = 6,000lbs CAPACITY. PLACE ADJUSTMENT SCREW ON BOTTOM END OF JACK POST FOR FUTURE ADJUSTMENTS AS REQUIRED. TYP. 5. USE 1/4"Ø x 4 1/2" SDS SCREWS (OR LAG SCREWS OF EQUAL STRENGTH) w/ WASHERS TO FASTEN STEEL JACK POSTS TO WOOD MEMBERS ABOVER & BELOW. 6. ALL LUMBER SHALL BE GRADED IN ACCORDANCE WITH NFPA STANDARDS. a. 6 x 6 BEAMS SHALL BE TREATED SOUTHERN YELLOW PINE, GRADE NO. 2 AT 19% MOISTURE CONTENT WITH ALLOWABLE SINGLE MEMBER BENDING STRESS, Fb, OF 1200 PSI AND A MODULUS OF ELASTICITY, E OF 1,600,000 PSI. b. TREATED TIMBER SHALL COMPLY WITH THE AMERICAN WOOD PRESERVER’S ASSOCIATION (AWPA) GUIDELINES FOR TREATED LUMBER ABOVE GROUND. 7. FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND ELEVATIONS. TYP.
BASEMENT
U P P E R
C H E A P S I D E 1 S-1
1 S-1
SIM
S T R E E T
LFUCG 215 MAIN STREET LEXINGTON, KY 40507 HISTORICAL FAYETTE COUNTY COURTHOUSE BALCONY SHORING PLANS & DETAILS
5 S-1
Project Number 2 S-1
6' - 0"
Drawn By Checked By
3 S-1
BALCONY SUPPORT FRAME SECTION 1/2" = 1'-0"
S-1
MAIN STREET
Scale
13.42
14050.40 OCT 2014 ARH EAB
Date
As indicated
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
MAX
EQ
EQ
EQ
EQ
EQ
EQ
EQ
EQ
EQ
EQ
EQ
EQ 2' - 6"
S-2
FIRST FLOOR 0"
14050.40
1' - 6"
SIM 3/S-2 TYP.
BASEMENT SUPPORT FRAME LOCATION
BASEMENT SUPPORT FRAME LOCATION
4
DIRECTLY UNDER CONCRETE BEAM. UNO. SEE 3/S-2 TYP.
BASEMENT SUPPORT FRAME LOCATION
1' - 6"
SIM 3/S-2 TYP.
BASEMENT SUPPORT FRAME LOCATION
BASEMENT SUPPORT FRAME LOCATION
DIRECTLY UNDER CONCRETE BEAM. UNO. SEE 3/S-2 TYP.
SIM 3/S-2 TYP.
BASEMENT SUPPORT FRAME LOCATION
6' - 0" F.V.
14' - 8 3/4"
EQ
1' - 6"
SIM 3/S-2 TYP.
3' - 0"
EQ 1' - 6"
ABBREVIATIONS: BTWN BETWEEN CAP CAPACITY CONT CONTINUOUS CL CENTERLINE FV FIELD VERIFY HORIZ HORIZONTAL OPP OPPOSITE VERT VERTICAL UNO UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE
CONCRETE BEAM OVERHEAD. SEE PLAN.
6x6 x CONT PRESSURE TREATED BEAM (HORZ) RUNNING PERPENDICULAR TO CONCRETE BEAMS CONTINUOUS BTWN EXISTING WALLS.
NOTES: GALVANIZED SCREWS WILL BE USED FOR ALL CONNECTIONS. UNO.
4 SIM.
TYP
S-2
FOUNDATION WALL BEYOND
CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE REMOVAL OF ANY UTILITIES w/ OWNER/ARCH OR OVERHEAD OBSTRUCTION THAT IS REQUIRED TO INSTALL SHORING IN LOCATIONS SHOWN.
F.V.
BASEMENT FOUNDATION WALL. F.V. LOCATION AND HEIGHT. TYP. ADJUSTABLE STEEL JACK POST w/ ZINC RICH PRIMER. APPLY PRIMER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 6,000lbs CAP MIN.
19' - 11" 20' - 0 1/8"
F.V. CL FOUNDATION WALL 3 S-2
1
3
S-3
S-2
REMOVE WOOD FLOOR AS REQUIRED TO INSTALL SHORING AS INDICATED. TYP MECHANICAL AREA.
MECHANICAL AREA
EDGE OF WOOD PLATFORM. F.V. BOUNDARY.
SIM
2
POUR 3" THICK CONCRETE LEVELING PAD IF NO CONCRETE FLOOR EXISTS IN SHORING LOCATION TO SUPPORT ALL 6x6 x CONT. BASE MEMBERS.
EXISTING CONCRETE FOUNDATION WALL
BASEMENT -11' - 8 3/4"
MECH EQUIPMENT PIT BELOW
F.V.
SHIM w/ SOLID PRESSURE TREATED WOOD BTWN CONTINUOUS 6x6 MEMBERS AND CONCRETE BEAMS AS REQUIRED TO ENSURE ADEQUATE BEARING. FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND ELEVATIONS. TYP. SHORING SIZED TO SUPPORT PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC ONLY
STORAGE AREA 2 S-2
S-2
MECHANICAL PIT
CLEAN CONCRETE FLOOR SURFACES WHERE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE LEVEL BEARING SURFACE FOR WOOD MEMBERS.
ANCHOR STEEL JACK POST INTO TOP OF CONCRETE WALL w/ SIMPSON STRONG-TIE 1/4"Øx4" Titen STAINLESS STEEL HEX HEAD CONCRETE SCREWS w/ WASHERS.
F.V.
SECTION @ FOUNDATION WALL 1/2" = 1'-0"
PROVIDE 'X' BRACING w/ 1/2"Ø ALL THREADED ROD. SEE SECTIONS 3 THRU 6/S-2 FOR DETAILS.
1 S-2
BASEMENT SHORING PLAN 1/2" = 1'-0"
4 S-2
EXISTING ELEVATED CONCRETE SLAB & BEAM CONSTRUCTION
EXTERIOR OF BUILDING
3 S-2
CL FOUNDATION WALL BEYOND
4 S-2
FIRST FLOOR 0"
EQ
EQ
6x6 PRESSURE TREATED BEAM (HORZ) SUPPORTING SLAB BTWN CONCRETE BEAMS. TYP.
6' - 0"
6 S-2
No.
ADJUSTABLE STEEL JACK POST w/ ZINC RICH PRIMER. APPLY PRIMER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 6,000lbs CAP MIN.
3/4"Ø x 9" HILTI KWIK HUS SCREW ANCHOR @ 36" O.C. INTO SLAB. ALTERNATE 6x6.
11,644 C E N S ED
EER
LI
AL E
Description
Date
6x6 x 7'-0" PRESSURE TREATED BEAM (HORZ) RUNNING PERPENDICULAR TO BUILDING ACROSS TWO STEEL JACK POSTS.
1/2"Ø ALL THREADED ROD THRU BOLT w/ GALVANIZED NUTS AND WASHERS FOR CONNECTION OF ALL THREADED ROD 'X' BRACE TO 6x6. TYP.
'X' BRACING. SEE PLAN FOR LOCATIONS.
F K EN T
NG
STA T
O
11"
3' - 0" MAX
3/4"Ø x 9" HILTI KWIK HUS SCREW ANCHOR @ 36" O.C. INTO SLAB. ALTERNATE 6x6.
BOTTOM OF EXISTING CONCRETE BEAM. F.V.
F.V.
F.V.
2 - 6x6 x CONT PRESSURE TREATED BEAM (HORZ) RUNNING PERPENDICULAR TO CONCRETE BEAMS AND ALL 6x6 PT BEAM.
EO
ETHAN ALLEN BUELL
NI
5 S-2
6x6 PRESSURE TREATED (PT) POST (VERT) @ EACH LOCATION BTWN CONCRETE BEAMS. TYP.
SIMPSON STRONG TIE BC6 POST CAP FOR CONNECTION OF ALL 6x6 BEAMS. TYP ALL CONNECTIONS.
SS
6x6 MEMBER CANTILEVER OVER STEEL POST.
6x6 PRESSURE TREATED BEAM (HORZ) SUPPORTING SLAB BTWN CONCRETE BEAMS. TYP.
E PR F
OFF WALL
9' - 6" BOTTOM OF CONCRETE
1' - 0" 14'-0" MECHANICAL ROOM 10'-0" STORAGE ROOM.
2 - 6x6 x CONT PRESSURE TREATED BEAM (HORZ) RUNNING PERPENDICULAR TO CONCRETE BEAMS AND ALL 6x6 PT BEAM.
6x6 PRESSURE TREATED (PT) POST (VERT) @ EACH LOCATION BTWN CONCRETE BEAMS. TYP.
KY UC
BOTTOM OF CONCRETE BEAM.
NO I
BOTTOM OF CONCRETE SLAB BTWN BEAMS.
1/2"Ø ALL THREADED ROD 'X' BRACING w/ EYE BOLT CONNECTION ON EA END. EA. BAY.
EXISTING CONC. SLAB
BASEMENT -11' - 8 3/4"
BASEMENT -11' - 8 3/4"
F.V.
F.V. 5 S-2
SECTION @ TOP OF BASEMENT SUPPORT FRAME 1 1/2" = 1'-0"
4 S-2
TYP BASEMENT SUPPORT FRAME 1/2" = 1'-0"
4 S-2
1/2"Ø ALL THREADED ROD w/ TURNBUCKLE & EYE BOLT EA END. EA BAY. TYP.
SECTION @ SLAB SUPPORT 1/2" = 1'-0"
LFUCG
6' - 0"
1/3 HEIGHT OF
ADJUSTABLE STEEL JACK POST w/ ZINC RICH PRIMER. APPLY PRIMER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 6,000lbs CAP MIN.
1/2"Ø ALL THREADED ROD THRU BOLT w/ GALVANIZED NUTS AND WASHERS FOR CONNECTION OF ALL THREADED ROD 'X' BRACE TO 6x6. TYP.
215 MAIN STREET LEXINGTON, KY 40507
STEEL JACK POST
3 S-2
HISTORICAL FAYETTE COUNTY COURTHOUSE BALCONY SHORING
10/13/2014 11:36:54 PM
2 - 6x6 x CONT PRESSURE TREATED. EA SIDE. TYP. 3/4"Ø x 9" HILTI KWIK HUS SCREW ANCHOR @ 36" O.C. INTO SLAB. ALTERNATE 6x6.
PLANS & DETAILS
EXISTING CONC BASEMENT FLOOR SLAB.
2 - 6x6 x CONT PRESSURE TREATED BASE MEMBERS. TYP.
Project Number BASEMENT -11' - 8 3/4"
F.V.
Drawn By Checked By
6 S-2
S-2
SECTION @ BASE OF BASEMENT SUPPORT FRAME 1 1/2" = 1'-0" Scale
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
14050.40 OCT 2014 ARH EAB
Date
As indicated
13.43
1 EXISTING CONCRETE.
S-2 EXTERIOR OF BUILDING
2 - 3/4" MARINE PLYWOOD. FIX BETWEEN WALL AND CONCRETE BEAM.
4 - 6x6 x CONT PRESSURE TREATED BEAM (HORZ) RUNNING PERPENDICULAR TO SHORE SUPPORT FRAMES.
14050.40
4 - 6x6 PRESSURE TREATED (PT) POST (VERT) @ EACH LOCATION BENEATH 6x6 HORIZ MEMBERS. TYP. SIMPSON STRONG TIE BC6 POST CAP FOR CONNECTION OF ALL 6x6 BEAMS. TYP ALL CONNECTIONS.
MECHANICAL AREA
ABBREVIATIONS: BTWN BETWEEN CAP CAPACITY CONT CONTINUOUS CL CENTERLINE FV FIELD VERIFY HORIZ HORIZONTAL OPP OPPOSITE VERT VERTICAL UNO UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE
2 S-2
MECHANICAL PIT
1/2"
6x6 x 7'-0" PRESSURE TREATED CAP BEAM (HORZ) RUNNING PERPENDICULAR TO BUILDING ACROSS TWO STEEL JACK POSTS.
NOTES: GALVANIZED SCREWS WILL BE USED FOR ALL CONNECTIONS. UNO. CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE REMOVAL OF ANY UTILITIES w/ OWNER/ARCH OR OVERHEAD OBSTRUCTION THAT IS REQUIRED TO INSTALL SHORING IN LOCATIONS SHOWN.
ADJUSTABLE STEEL JACK POST w/ ZINC RICH PRIMER. APPLY PRIMER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 6,000lbs CAP MIN.
CLEAN CONCRETE FLOOR SURFACES WHERE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE LEVEL BEARING SURFACE FOR WOOD MEMBERS. POUR 3" THICK CONCRETE LEVELING PAD IF NO CONCRETE FLOOR EXISTS IN SHORING LOCATION TO SUPPORT ALL 6x6 x CONT. BASE MEMBERS. SHIM w/ SOLID PRESSURE TREATED WOOD BTWN CONTINUOUS 6x6 MEMBERS AND CONCRETE BEAMS AS REQUIRED TO ENSURE ADEQUATE BEARING.
F.V.
21' - 3"
WARNING: DANGER OF OVERHEAD FALLING DEBRIS. CORDON OFF AREA.
FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND ELEVATIONS. SHORING SIZED TO SUPPORT PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC ONLY
EXISTING ROUND STEEL COLUMN. 2
2 EXISTING CONCRETE STAIRS TO MECHANICAL PIT.
S-3
S-3
SIM 5' - 0"
5' - 0" 10" 2 - 6x6 x 3'-0" PRESSURE TREATED BASE MEMBERS. SPLIT TO MISS EXISTING ROUND STEEL COLUMN BASE.
3/4"Ø x 9" HILTI KWIK HUS SCREW ANCHOR @ 36" O.C. INTO SLAB. ALTERNATE 6x6.
EXISTING CONC BASEMENT FLOOR SLAB.
2' - 2"
BASEMENT -11' - 8 3/4"
F.V.
6"
5' - 0"
2 - 6x6 x 3'-0" PRESSURE TREATED BASE MEMBERS. TYP MECHANICAL AREA ENTRY SUPPORT FRAME.
UNO. SEE 2/S-3 TYP.
BOUNDARY OF PLYWOOD ABOVE.
SUPPORT FRAME LOCATION
5' - 0"
6' - 6"
SS
1 S-3
BASEMENT MECHANICAL PIT PLAN 1/2" = 1'-0"
No.
EER
11,644 C E N S ED
NG
O
LI
NO I
SECTION @ MECHANICAL AREA ENTRY SUPPORT FRAME 1" = 1'-0"
F K EN T
ETHAN ALLEN BUELL
NI
E PR F
2 S-3
EO
KY UC
STA T
EXISTING CONC STAIR BEYOND.
AL E
Description
Date
LFUCG 215 MAIN STREET LEXINGTON, KY 40507
10/14/2014 12:07:29 AM
HISTORICAL FAYETTE COUNTY COURTHOUSE BALCONY SHORING PLANS & DETAILS Project Number
14050.40 OCT 2014 Author Checker
Date Drawn By Checked By
S-3 Scale
13.44
As indicated
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
13.7 LFUCG Summary of Work to Date
Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government Department of General Services Division of Facilities & Fleet Management
Jim Gray Mayor
Geoff Reed Commissioner
The following work has been conducted by LFUCG General Services since August 2014 in preparation for or in response to the conditions assessment.
Facility Clean Out All historically significant items owned by the Lexington History Museum or the LFUCG was sorted, catalogued, and moved to a secure storage facility on Manchester Street by the Lexington History Museum. Following this work, LFUCG removed all remaining items and waste materials to prepare the building for partial demo and full evaluation for the conditions assessment.
Partial Interior Demolition Per consultant request, a selective interiors demolition package was conducted. Removal of all drop ceilings and selective removal of partitions and flooring was completed in order to evaluate the structure.
Structural Emergency Repairs In response to the findings by structural engineers BFMJ during their initial assessment, as noted in the August 18, 2014 letter from BFMJ principal Ethan Buell, the following work required immediate attention and intervention to ensure public safety. Temporary caution fencing was placed around balconies and around the Short Street entrance and sidewalk that is placed over the basement as these areas were structurally compromised. Structural Shoring Designed by BFMJ Engineers to address emergency repairs for the basement and balconies as outlined by the structural investigation. Shoring was constructed to build supports for the balconies and the basement that is located directly below the public sidewalk. Following shoring construction the public sidewalk was reopened and accessible to the public. Chain-link construction fencing was erected to ensure all pedestrians remained off the structurally compromised basement and away from all shored balconies.
200 East Main Street
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
•
Lexington, KY 40507 • (859) 258-3905 HORSE CAPITAL OF THE WORLD Fax: (859) 367-4940
• www.lexingtonky.gov
13.49
13.8 Haverstick/Borthwick Cost Estimate Peer Review
13.52
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
13.53
13.9 City Visions Private/Public Partnership Case Studies
The complex is internationally regarded as one of architecture’s great treasures. In 1973 the Richardson Olmsted Complex was added to the State and National Registers of Historic Places, and in 1986 it attained status as a National Historic Landmark – one of only eight such sites in Western New York. The complex, to say the least, is a remarkable property, and truly one of the historic gems of Buffalo’s rich trove of American architectural treasures.
RICHARDSON OLMSTED COMPLEX CORE PROJECT Buffalo, New York
After years of vacancy and neglect, in 2006 New York State authorized funds to be dedicated towards the rehabilitation of the Richardson Olmsted Complex, including its building and grounds. A non‐profit civic board ‐ the Richardson Center Corporation (RCC) – was established to serve as the steward of the property; responsible for charting the future course of the rehabilitation. The RCC has completed essential reports and additional stabilization to the Complex structures, including: an Urban Land Institute Advisory Panel Report, Historic Structures Report, Cultural Landscape Report Architecture and Visitor Center Visualized Concept Study, an Architecture Center Feasibility Study, and the overall Master Plan. $10 million of stabilization has taken place since 2006 to prevent the further deterioration of the Complex and prepare it for reuse.
The Richardson Olmsted Complex, the former Buffalo State Asylum for the Insane, was a partnership between the noted American architect Henry Hobson Richardson and the renowned American landscape architect Frederick Law Olmsted. The complex of buildings and grounds, with its signature Gothic towers, is a National Historic Landmark. Construction on this impressive project was started in 1871 and was completed almost 25 years later. It was a state‐ of‐the‐art facility when it was built, incorporating the most contemporary ideas in psychiatric treatment. The designs of the buildings, as well as the therapeutic grounds, were intended to complement the innovations in psychiatric care practiced at the facility.
13.56
Richardson Olmsted Complex
Page 1 of 7
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Richardson Olmsted Complex Page 2 of 7 19 March 2015
The Core Project The Core Project consists of the total rehabilitation and reuse of Buildings 45, 44, and 10 – approximately 188,000 square feet of space – representing the towers building, and one adjacent building on each side. The mix of uses to be integrated into this space include: an 88 room hotel, event and conference center, a dynamic restaurant and food service “marketplace,” and space for the Buffalo Architecture Center.
© Deborah Berke Partners
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Olmsted Complex 19 MarchRichardson 2015
Page 3 of 7
Richardson Olmsted Complex
© Deborah Berke Partners
Page 4 of 7
13.57
Project Team The overall property on which the Core Project is located is owned and controlled by the Richardson Center Corporation, a non‐profit entity created in 2006 with the primary mission to serve as the steward of this magnificent property and act as the catalyst for its restoration and reuse. The Core Project will be controlled under a long term lease by an entity controlled by the Richardson Center Development Corporation (RCDC), a wholly owned for‐profit subsidiary of the Richardson Center Corporation (RCC). The hotel and events and conference center will be operated under a lease agreement by InnVest Lodging of Buffalo, owner and operator of The Mansion on Delaware as well as two dozen additional properties across the country. The result of the collaboration among all of these partners, as well as the leadership of the Richardson Center Corporation, is an economically viable, market driven development that will become one of the most unique and impressive historic preservation projects in the nation.
Project Financing The RCC is providing the majority of the necessary equity into the project, utilizing funds that have been authorized and committed to the project through the state appropriation administered by New York State’s Empire State Development. Additional investor equity f rom M &T Ban k as t h e p r o je ct ’s h ist or ic t ax cr e d it in ve st o r wi l l p ro vide ap p r o xim at e ly $1 5 m illio n in pr o ject f in an cin g. Th e o ve ra l l pro j e ct ’s co n st r u ct io n co st is $ 6 6 m illio n .
Photo Credits: Upper image, Paul Pasquarello; Lower images, Joe Cascio
13.58
Richardson Olmsted Complex
Page 5 of 7
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Richardson Olmsted Complex Page 6 of 7 19 March 2015
FORT PIQUA PLAZA PIQUA, OHIO
The City of Piqua, through a creative and innovative public/private partnership, successfully rehabilitated and restored for a variety of new use, the grand dame of its downtown, the old Fort Piqua Hotel, built in 1891.
In addition to its architectural grandeur the hotel has a rich history of providing shelter to presidents and other persons of national prominence including Theodore Roosevelt, William Howard Taft, Warren G. Harding, John Phillips Sousa and Harry Houdini. Locally it was a meeting place for the Women's Christian Temperance Union (WCTU) and the Anti-Saloon League, during prohibition. Later it became the site of a 1947 NAACP staged sit-in at the lunch counter that resulted in the end of restaurant segregation in the entire city The 85,000 square foot facility includes 1) the restoration of the former grand ballroom into a community banquet facility; 2) the relocation of the community’s public library; and 3) ground floor commercial use, including Winan’s coffee and chocolate shop. The project has attracted local, regional, and national attention both for the quality of the space and its multi-layered financing program. The $21 million project included the use of Federal and State Tax Credits of approximately $7 million, funds from the City of Piqua of approximately $8.5 million, and approximately 2.5 million in grant and loan funds from the State of Ohio. A series of entities created specifically for this project enabled the community to serve as its developer and to meet the requirements for the sale of the Historic and New Market Tax Credits.
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
13.59
13.10 LFUCG RFP #9-2015 Development Agent Services
Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government
Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government
RFP 9-2015 - Development Agent Services
Request For Proposal Summary
The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government hereby requests proposals for #9-2015 Development Agent Services to be provided in accordance with terms, conditions and specifications established herein. Sealed proposals will be received in the Division of Central Purchasing, Room 338, Government Center, 200 East Main Street, Lexington, KY, 40507, until 2:00 PM, prevailing local time, on March 25, 2015. Proposals received after the date and time set for opening proposals will not be considered for award of a contract and will be returned unopened to the Proposer. It is the sole responsibility of the Proposer to assure that his/her proposal is received by the Division of Central Purchasing before the date and time set for opening proposals. Proposals must be sealed in an envelope and the envelope prominently marked: RFP #9-2015 Development Agent Services If mailed, the envelope must be addressed to: Purchasing Director Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government Room 338, Government Center 200 East Main Street Lexington, KY 40507 Additional copies of this Request For Proposals are available from the Division of Central Purchasing, Room 338 Government Center, 200 East Main Street, Lexington, KY 40507, (859)-258-3320, at no charge. Proposals, once submitted, may not be withdrawn for a period of sixty (60) calendar days.
13.62
The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government (LFUCG) is soliciting proposals from qualified firms to provide Development Agent Services for the Old Fayette County Courthouse project. Background The Old Fayette County Courthouse is a facility owned by the LFUCG. The building was constructed in 1898-1900 and is an example of Romanesque-style architecture. It is located in the center of Lexington’s downtown commercial district, an area currently experiencing a large amount of private investment creating a synergy that is enhancing the vitality of the district. The LFUCG closed the Old Fayette County Courthouse in 2012 due to environmental and structural hazards and it has remained vacant. In 2014, the LFUCG allocated $250,000 to conduct a conditions assessment and an additional $300,000 for structural repairs and environmental remediation. The structural repairs have temporarily stabilized the building. Project Purpose and Description The LFUCG is now positioned to commence an adaptive reuse project to repurpose the Old Fayette County Courthouse for new and enhanced uses and as such, is seeking a qualified firm to assist with project and program management of the adaptive reuse of the building. The LFUCG anticipates that the project will be a public/private partnership (PPP) and will utilize both state and federal tax credits. Due to the complexities of the utilization of tax credits, the use of a Development Agent Service is paramount for the success of the project. The project will include site improvements, improvements to the exterior building envelope, and improvements to the interior architecture, including recapturing the building’s momentous Rotunda space, the focal point of this historic structure. Proposal Guidelines A. Proposals must be received by the LFUCG’s Division of Central Purchasing by March 25th, 2015 at 2:00pm. B. All costs must be itemized to include explanations of all fees. C. Development Agent must provide a breakdown of services for each project phase. 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
1
•
Payment for Development Agent Services is based on the funding of each phase outlined in the RFP. • Should a phase not be funded, the services of the Development Agent will cease and the contract will terminate. D. Contract terms will be negotiated upon selection of the winning proposal.
• • • •
Project Scope
•
PHASE I The development agent service shall provide the following services to begin with the predevelopment stage and continue through the closing:
D. Oversee Design and Setting of Construction Budget •
A. Assemble and Manage Project Personnel • •
• • • • •
Provide over-all project and program management. Assist the LFUCG in scoping and procuring key development team personnel including: architectural services, third-party engineering and testing services, a construction manager, specialized accounting, owner’s representative, and historic preservation consultants as necessary. Coordinate preparation of plans and specifications; manage cost-control and project schedule. Provide oversight through direction of third-party engineering and testing services. Manage and oversee Construction Management pre-development work; act as the LFUCG’s agent in negotiation of construction management contract and agreement. Provide coordination between outside legal counsel and accounting services with the LFUCG Department of Law and Finance Commissioner. Provide regular updates and direction as necessary to the LFUCG, elected officials, and the public.
B. Establish Operating Program and Lease Arrangements for Project • • •
Evaluate uses and lease/operating arrangements in regards to tax credit obligations while meeting desired policy outcomes set by the LFUCG. Negotiate lease or operating agreement on behalf of the LFUCG. Identify and negotiate solutions to operational issues such as parking, vehicular loading/unloading, and interface with Cheapside Pavilion.
•
•
Provide direction and guidance to architectural team; maintain cost-control and project schedule; ensure compliance with the Secretary of Interior’s Standards. Coordinate third-party engineering and testing services. Identify and anticipate utility locations and hookups, service delivery, and emergency access conflicts or issues. Review construction bids and estimates; negotiate final construction budget and draw schedule.
PHASE II The development agent service shall provide the following services through the construction phase of the project: A. Quality Control and Construction Management • • • •
Provide over-all project and program management. Oversee work of the Construction Manager and Project Architect. Monitor work and approve pavement of construction draws. Monitor workmanship and departures from the Plans and Specifications; negotiate change orders; and recommend courses of action due to changes to on-site, conditions, or schedule/scope issues. Monitor and recommend utilization of owner’s contingency. Maintain cash flow reports, project budget, and forecasts. Coordinate fit-up with operator/leases. Provide regular updates and direction as necessary to the LFUCG, elected officials, and the public.
B. Tax Credit Compliance
Prepare or assist in preparing financial models, development pro forma, cash flows, and other analysis required for testing the viability of the project. Oversee submission of Part I and Part II applications for both federal and state tax credit programs.
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
• •
• • • •
C. Assemble and Close Financing for the Project •
Represent the LFUCG in negotiations with both federal and state regulators regarding participation in tax credit programs. Obtain all required approvals for tax credit preparation. Provide coordination between outside legal counsel and the LFUCG Department of Law. Prepare and distribute all information required for investors, tax credit entities, financial institutions, and other public or private entities. Solicit and secure investors for the project, represent the LFUCG in negotiations of terms or financial agreements.
• •
2
Ensure compliance with historic approvals during construction. Coordinate Part III (final submission) for tax credit programs.
3
13.63
PHASE III The development agent service shall provide the following services through the operational phase of the project: A. Tax Credit Compliance • •
Monitor operations of project to ensure compliance with KRS and IRS regulations as applicable to tax credit projects. Oversee final accounting and distribution of tax credits.
Firm Qualifications All proposals shall include, at a minimum, the following: A. Provide a description of experience of your firm. Please list and provide a synopsis of three projects in which your firm or a current employee of your firm provided primary Development Agent Services or acted as the developer. Each project shall list a reference and appropriate contact information. B. List and provide a synopsis of three projects that utilized state and/or federal tax credits in which your firm or a current employee of your firm provided primary Development Agent Services or acted as the developer. Each project shall list a reference and appropriate contact information. C. List resources you are willing and able to assign to this project. Proposal Evaluation Criteria A. B. C. D. E.
13.64
Estimated Cost of Services 15 pts Specialized Experience 25 pts Capacity of the Person or Firm 25 pts Past Record and Performance 25 pts Familiarity with Details of the Project 10 pts
4
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
13.65
13.11 Article 27 - Courthouse Design Area Overlay
ARTICLE 27 site elements when changes are made in materials, style or configuration;
COURTHOUSE AREA DESIGN OVERLAY ZONE 27-1 INTENT - The intent of the Courthouse Area Design Zone is to encourage growth and redevelopment in the downtown area, while preserving and protecting the unique features and characteristics of the area in conformity with the Comprehensive Plan and the design guidelines for the Court House area adopted by the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Council. 27-2 APPLICATION OF REGULATIONS - The classifications and regulations hereunder shall be established in addition to the zone classifications and regulations as shown on the zoning map atlas for the subject areas. Except as provided hereinbelow, the use, dimensions and other requirements for said zones, as provided in the Zoning Ordinance, shall apply. Where there are conflicts between the procedures and regulations within the Zoning Ordinance, the more restrictive shall apply.
EXTERIOR CHANGE - Rehabilitation or replacement which is not ordinary maintenance and repair. New construction of any building element, addition, building or structure is an exterior change. Demolition of any building element, addition, building or structure is an exterior change.
(5) Painting a site element not previously painted;
(1) Rehabilitating large amounts of existing building elements when repairs are made with materials of the same size, shape, style, configuration, texture and material color;
27-3 DEFINITIONS - As used in this Article, the following terms shall mean: AUTHORIZATION PERMIT - A document which certifies the findings of the Board or the Design Review Officer that the work proposed by the applicant is appropriate. The Authorization shall also delineate any conditions imposed by the Board or Officer in approving the request. In order to grant an Authorization, the Board or Officer shall consider all circumstances related to the proposal, and may grant the Authorization if it finds that the proposed changes are consistent with the adopted Courthouse Area Design Guidelines.
(2) Rehabilitating/replacing existing building elements when changes are made in materials, style or configuration;
Repairing site elements when repairs are made with materials of the same size, shape, style, configuration, texture and material color;
(2)
Pruning trees and shrubbery and removal of trees less than 10" in diameter;
(3)
Planting vegetable and flower gardens, except as part of a major landscaping plan;
(4)
Planting shrubs and trees, except as part of a major landscaping plan;
(5)
Installing temporary signs (real estate, political, etc.);
(6)
Installing building numbers and mailboxes.
(7) Removing trees with trunks more than 10" in diameter; (8) Major landscaping projects, including installation, relocation or redesign of new or existing site elements; (9) Disturbing fields, archaeological and other land features by demolition or new construction on sites; (10) Rehabilitating or replacing existing signs when changes are made in materials, style and configuration;
27-4 COURT HOUSE AREA DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
(11) Installing new signs.
(4) Replacing missing building elements and/or materials; (5) Painting a structure or material not previously painted;
27-3(f)(1) ORDINARY MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR includes the following activities:
BOARD - The Courthouse Area Design Review Board of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government.
(6) Removing paint from a material previously painted.
(a) ROUTINE MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR OF BUILDING ELEMENTS
DEMOLITION - Any act that destroys in whole or in part a building or structure, or which results in the moving of any building or structure.
(b) MAJOR REHABILITATION, REPLACEMENT AND INSTALLATION OF SITE ELEMENTS
DESIGN REVIEW OFFICER - The employee of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government assigned by the Chief Administrative Officer to carry out the duties and functions of the officer as defined herein. This individual shall demonstrate expertise and/or have a professional degree in architecture, design, or a similar field so as to be qualified to carry
(1) Rehabilitating large amounts of existing site elements when repairs are made with materials of the same size, shape, style, configuration, texture and material color;
(1) Repairing small amounts of existing building materials and elements when repairs are made with materials of the same size, shape, style, configuration, texture and material color;
27-4(a) ESTABLISHMENT - The Court House Area Design Review Commission is established to review and decide applications in compliance with the provisions of this Article. 27-4(b) MEMBERSHIP - The Court House Area Design Review Board shall consist of five (5) voting members, including the chairman. All members must be residents of Fayette County. At least two (2) of the five (5) members shall be design or preservationrelated professionals. These include the professions of architecture, history, archaeology, architectural history, historic preservation, urban design or related disciplines such as urban planning or landscape architecture. One (1) member shall be an employee of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government who is not the Design Review Officer; one (1) member shall be a representative of the banking or financial community; and one (1) member shall be a property or business owner within the Court House Area Overlay Zoning District. When the Court House Area Design Review Board reviews an issue, and that field is not represented on the Court House Area Design Review Board, the Court House Area Design Review Board shall seek expert advice before rendering its decision.
(2) Painting a structure or material that is already painted; (3)
(2) Rehabilitating or replacing existing
(1)
(6) Removing paint from a site element which has been painted;
27-3(f) ORDINARY MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR - The correction of minor deterioration to site and building elements and structures when changes are made with the same materials with the same size, shape, configuration, style, texture and material color.
(3) Installing new building elements;
27 - 1 13.68
(4) Replacing missing site elements or materials;
(a) MAJOR REHABILITATION, REPLACEMENT AND INSTALLATION OF BUILDING ELEMENTS.
ROUTINE MAINTENANCE, REPAIR AND INSTALLATION OF SITE ELEMENTS
(3) Installing new site elements;
out such duties. The term “officer” when used in this Article refers to the Design Review Officer.
(1) EXTERIOR CHANGE includes, but is not limited to:
(b)
Caulking and weather stripping windows and doors.
27 - 2 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
27-4(c) ETHICS - The Court House Area Design Review Board shall prepare and keep on file, available for public inspection, the members' qualifications. Article 16, the Code of Ethics of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government Charter, shall apply to members of the Court House Area Design Review Board. 27-4(d) OFFICERS - The Court House Area Design Review Board shall annually elect one (1) of its members to be Chairman and one (1) of its members to be Vice-Chairman. The Secretary of the Court House Area Design Review Board shall be the Design Review Officer, who shall also serve as a non-voting member of the Court House Area Design Review Board. 27-4(e) LENGTH OF TERM - The terms of Court House Area Design Review Board members shall be as follows: (1)
Members shall serve a term of four (4) years, except that the membership of those representing particular organizations or offices shall be deemed to have terminated upon their leaving their respective memberships or positions.
(2)
Terms shall be staggered in such manner to allow the appointment or re-appointment of at least one half of the membership every two (2) years.
(3)
Term of membership shall extend from July 1 of one (1) year through and until June 30 of the designated year.
(4)
Vacancies, when they occur during a term of office, shall be filled for the unexpired term in the manner prescribed for original appointment.
(5)
(6)
for expenses necessarily incurred in the performance of their duties, subject to sufficient funds being appropriated by the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Council for this purpose.
Lexington-Fayette Urban County Council and other government agencies, departments, commissions and offices with regard to such matters as may be appropriate with respect to the Court House Area.
27-4(g) BYLAWS - The Court House Area Design Review Board shall adopt bylaws for the transaction of its business and the transactions of the business of all of its sub-committees. Regular meetings shall be held and special meetings may be held as specified in the bylaws. Minutes of all meetings and records of all proceedings, including the number of votes for and against each question and the record of the vote of each member, shall be kept and made available for public inspection. The Court House Area Design Review Board shall prepare a written annual report, which shall be kept and made available for public inspection. A simple majority of the total membership of the Court House Area Design Review Board shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. The Chairman votes only in the case of a tie. Each member shall be required to attend meetings regularly as defined in the bylaws. Failure to do so may result in removal from the Court House Area Design Review Board. The Court House Area Design Review Board shall have the power to establish subcommittees as it deems necessary, from both within and without its membership, and to receive assistance in its work from outside individuals, groups and organizations. The Court House Area Design Review Board may give special recognition to outside individuals, groups and organizations.
27-4(i)(3) - Form sub-committees as necessary.
27-4(h) JURISDICTION - The jurisdiction of the Court House Area Design Review Board shall include all necessary and implied powers as shall be described herein with respect to the regulation of the Court House Area Overlay Zone. 27-4(i) POWERS AND DUTIES - In addition to such other powers, duties and authorities as are set forth in this Article, the Court House Area Design Review Board shall in order to accomplish the purpose of this Article perform duties that include, but are not limited to, the following:
Members may serve consecutive terms but must go through the reappointment process to do so. The maximum length of membership shall be two terms or eight years, whichever is longer.
27-4(i)(1) - Present to the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Council and the Planning Commission annually a report containing (i) a statement of goals and objectives for the county for the next ensuing five-year period; (ii) any financial records pertaining to the Court House Area Design Review Board's operation.
Any member may be removed from office by a majority of the Council of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government.
27-4(f) COMPENSATION - The members shall serve without compensation but shall be reimbursed
27-4(i)(2) - Cooperate with and advise the
27 - 3 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
AUTHORIZATION PERMIT FOR EXTERIOR CHANGES AND NEW CONSTRUCTION Authorization Permits specified herein below. 27-6(b)(1) AUTHORIZATION PERMITS ISSUED BY THE BOARD - All applications for Authorization Permits shall be reviewed by the Board at a public hearing, except those applications for work which have been specifically delegated to the Design Review Officer under 27-6(b)(2).
27-4(i)(4) - Establish criteria for which applications may be acted upon by the Design Review Officer, and which cases require both a preliminary and final review by the Board.
In addition, the Board shall review all applications for Authorizations referred by the Design Review Officer or those requested for public hearing by the applicant.
27-4(i)(5) - Review and decide applications for Authorization Permits as provided herein below. 27-4(i)(6) - Periodically review the adopted design guidelines and make recommendations to the Urban County Council for changes to design guidelines.
27-6(b)(1)(a) PRE-FILING CONFERENCE Prior to formal filing, the applicant shall meet with the Design Review Officer to discuss preliminary design concepts, applicable procedures and similar matters. The Officer shall determine whether the matter can be approved by the Officer as specified under 276(b)(2). If the Officer determines that full Board approval is necessary, the Officer shall further determine if preliminary Board review is required, or if the applicant may proceed directly to final action by the Board.
27-5 DESIGNATION OF THE COURT HOUSE AREA DESIGN ZONE (CA) - To further the goals and purposes of this Article and the preservation, protection, perpetuation and use of the Court House Area, the Urban County Council shall have the authority to designate properties protected by a zoning overlay district to be known as the CA zone. The procedures to establish such zoning shall comply with all applicable state statutes and requirements contained in this Zoning Ordinance for the creation of a zoning district as a zoning map amendment.
27-6(b)(1)(b) PRELIMINARY BOARD REVIEW - Where determined to be necessary by the Officer, the Board shall first consider the application at a preliminary review meeting. This meeting shall not be considered a hearing, and notice shall not be required. The extent of the review shall be concept plans on building mass and scale. The Board will provide comments to the applicant for the applicant to consider for final Board review.
27-6 AUTHORIZATION PERMITS - An Authorization Permit shall be required before a person may undertake any exterior changes on a property or structure within a zone protected by a CA overlay. Ordinary maintenance and repair as defined under Article 27-3(f) may be undertaken without an Authorization Permit, provided that the work involves repairs to existing features of a building or the replacement of elements of a building with identical pieces, and provided that the work does not change the exterior appearance of the building.
27-6(b)(1)(c) FINAL BOARD REVIEW Final Board review shall be considered a public hearing as specified under Article 27-6(b)(1)(f) and will be subject to the notice requirements of Article 27-6 (b)(1)(e). Authorization permits may only be issued by the Board after action at a hearing.
27-6(a) WHERE REQUIRED - An Authorization Permit shall be required prior to the initiation of any new construction on; any exterior change to; or the demolition of all, or any part of, any building, structure or sign on any premises in a zone protected by a CA overlay.
27-6(b)(1)(d) FILING MATERIALS - The Board, where it deems necessary in order to review a particular application, may require the submission of any or all of the following items: architectural plans, plot plans, landscaping plans, plans for off-street parking, plans for
In no case shall an Authorization Permit be required to change the paint color of a previously painted surface. 27-6(b) PROCEDURES FOR ISSUANCE OF AN
27 - 4
13.69
proposed signs, elevations of all portions of proposed additions to structures, photographs, elevations, or perspective drawings showing the proposed structure and existing structures that are within one hundred (100) feet or are substantially related to it visually or by reason of function, traffic generation or other characteristics.
the design of the building, and other pertinent factors affecting the appearance and efficient functioning of the structure. The Board shall not consider any interior arrangement. The Board shall make no requirements except for the purpose of preventing development incongruous in scale, design or materials to the district.
Should the Board find that the material submitted is not adequate for the proper review of the proposal, the Board shall promptly notify the applicant and state the specific information that will be required. In such cases, the applicant shall not be deemed to have made a bona fide application to the Board until the specific information is submitted.
In reviewing proposals, the Board shall utilize the design guidelines and criteria adopted by the Court House Area Design Review Board. These guidelines shall form the basis of any action by the Board.
(2)
The Board shall vote to approve all or part of the application or disapprove all or part of the application within sixty (60) days after the completed application is filed. The Board shall be required to make findings to support any action of approval/disapproval, indicating the specific provisions of the adopted guidelines that support the action.
27-6(b)(1)(e) NOTICE - Notice of the time, place and reason for holding a public hearing shall be given by first class letter at least fourteen (14) days in advance of the public hearing to owners of all properties located within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property. It shall be the obligation of the Design Review Officer to prepare, certify and mail all notice as required herein.
27-6(b)(1)(g) AUTHORIZATION PERMIT ISSUANCE - The Design Review Officer shall promptly issue the Authorization Permit in accordance with the action of the Board. Copies of the Authorization and the application materials shall be forwarded to the Division of Building Inspection and/or the Division of Housing Maintenance, as appropriate.
Further, the Board shall give notice of the time, place and reason for holding a public hearing by publication in the newspaper of highest circulation in Fayette County, Kentucky, not earlier than twenty-one (21) days or later than seven (7) days before the public hearing.
27-6(b)(2) AUTHORIZATIONS ISSUED BY THE DESIGN REVIEW OFFICER - An Authorization issued by the Design Review Officer is intended to expedite approval of routine applications for exterior changes without full hearing and action by the Board.
27-6(b)(1)(f) BOARD PUBLIC HEARING After notice, the Board shall consider the request for an Authorization Permit at a public hearing. At the hearing, the Board shall receive the report of the Officer, orally and/or in writing, and shall allow the applicant, protestors and other interested citizens to testify and rebut evidence presented by others, provided the Chairman shall have the power to limit repetitive testimony and exclude irrelevant testimony and evidence.
The Board may review and delegate items to the responsibility of the Design Review Officer for review and issuance of Authorization Permits. The delegation of these items shall be reviewed by the Board at a public hearing and recorded in the minutes of the Board. 27-6(b)(2)(a) PROCEDURES FOR ISSUANCE OF AN AUTHORIZATION BY THE DESIGN REVIEW OFFICER
In its review of material submitted, the Board shall examine the architectural design and the exterior surface treatment of the proposed construction on the site in question and its relationship to other structures within the area, the relationship of the proposed construction to
(1)
27 - 5
13.70
of the work to be done. The Officer shall review the information and promptly notify the applicant if the material is not adequate for review and advise the applicant what specific information will be required.
FILING - The applicant shall file sufficient information as to accurately depict the location, design and scope
building or for an accessory structure which is not significant to the principal structure, site, or district; and the approval of the application would not adversely affect those parts of a building or district which are significant. 27-6(c)(1)(b) - The application is for the demolition or moving of a building, or portion of a building, which does not contribute to the character of, and will not adversely affect the character of the property in a zone protected by a CA overlay.
REVIEW - The Officer shall review the application for compliance with the adopted guidelines and consult with other Divisions, as appropriate, to ensure proper review. Upon determination that all requirements of the guidelines have been met and that the application complies with the requirements of the Board, the Design Review Officer shall approve the application and issue the Auth- orization Permit. If any question arises as to compliance, or if the Design Review Officer or applicant feels that the application raises issues deserving review by the full Board, the request shall be referred to the Board for action.
27-6(c)(1)(c) - No reasonable economic return can be realized from the property, and the denial of the application would result in the taking of the property without just compensation. If the owner wishes to make a claim that the denial of the permit would amount to a taking of the property without just compensation, the owner shall submit to the Board, not less than twenty (20) days prior to the public hearing, the following information: 27-6(c)(1)(c)(1) - For all property:
(3)
AUTHORIZATION PERMIT ISSUANCE - Upon approval by the Design Review Officer, the Officer shall issue the Authorization Permit and notify the applicant. In addition, the Officer shall forward a copy of the Authorization and application materials to the Division of Building Inspection.
(a) The amount paid for the property, the date of purchase and the party from whom purchased, including a description of the relationship, if any, between the owner and the person from whom the property was purchased; (b) The assessed value of the land and improvements thereon, according to the two (2) most recent assessments recorded in the office of the Property Valuation Administrator;
27-6(c) AUTHORIZATION PERMITS FOR DEMOLITION - The Division of Building Inspection shall issue no permit which would result in the demolition of all or any part of a structure within a zone protected by a CA overlay unless and until an Authorization Permit has been approved by the Board.
(c) The two most recent real estate tax bills;
27-6(c)(1) PROCEDURES - The procedure for review of an Authorization Permit for demolition shall be as set forth in Article 27-6(b)(1) above. The Board shall hear evidence concerning the application at its public hearing and may approve an Authorization only if one of the following conditions is determined to exist:
(d) Annual debt service for the previous two (2) years recorded by the lending agency; (e) All appraisals obtained within the previous two (2) years by the owner in connection with his purchases, financing or ownership of the property;
27-6(c)(1)(a) - The application is for demolition of an addition, for a portion of a
27 - 6 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
(a) Alternatives which may be or may become available, including restoration, rehabilitation, adaptive re-use, or other alternatives to demolition; and (b) Study the question of economic hardship for the applicant, including whether the structure can be put to reasonable beneficial use without the approval of the demolition; and whether the applicant can obtain a reasonable return from his/her existing building. If economic hardship or the lack of a reasonable return is not proved, the Board shall deny the demolition application, giving the facts and reasons for its decision.
(f) Listings of the property for sale or rent, price asked and offers received, if any; (g) Any consideration by the owner as to profitable adaptive uses for the property. 27-6(c)(1)(c)(2) - For income-producing property: (a) Annual gross income from the property for the previous two (2) years; (b) Itemized operating and maintenance expenses for the previous two (2) years;
27-6(d) EFFECT OF AUTHORIZATION PERMIT - Upon receipt of the Authorization Permit from the Design Review Officer, the Division of Building Inspection shall issue a building or wrecking permit, as appropriate in accord with the Authorization Permit, provided the application meets all other requirements of law.
(c) Annual cash flow for the previous two (2) years. 27-6(c)(1)(c)(3) - The Board may require that the property owner furnish such additional information as the Board believes is relevant to its determination of taking without just compensation and may provide, in appropriate instances, that such additional information be furnished under seal. In the event that any of the required information is not reasonably available to the applicant and cannot be obtained by the applicant, the applicant shall file with his affidavit a statement of the information that cannot be obtained, and shall describe the reasons why such information cannot be obtained.
The Division of Building Inspection shall enforce all provisions of the Authorization, including any conditions thereof, and shall inspect the property at regular intervals to insure strict compliance. The Building Inspector who inspects the site shall be governed by the design guidelines adopted by the Court House Area Design Review Board and shall receive technical assistance from the Officer in this inspection. The property owner shall obtain permits, when required, and commence work on all work authorized by the Authorization Permit within one (1) year from the issuance of the Authorization.
Should the Board find that the material submitted is not adequate for the proper review of the proposal, the Board shall promptly notify the applicant and state specifically the information that the Board requires.
27-6(e) FAILURE OF BOARD TO ACT - Upon failure of the Board to take final action upon any application within sixty (60) days after the completed application has been filed, and unless a mutual written agreement between the Board and the applicant has been made for an extension of time, the application shall be deemed to be approved and an Authorization Permit shall be issued to the applicant, and a copy of said Authorization transmitted to the Division of Building Inspection.
27-6(c)(2) - Notwithstanding any other provision of this Article, the Board, after hearing evidence at its public hearing, may vote to postpone action to approve or deny an appeal for a reasonable period of time not to exceed one (1) year from the filing date of application in order to conduct studies, surveys and/or gather information concerning the following:
27-7 APPEALS - Any person or entity claiming to be injured or aggrieved by any decision of the Board to approve or deny any request for an Authorization Permit may appeal such decision to the Planning Commission
27 - 7 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
within thirty (30) days of the Board's action. Such appeal shall be in writing and shall fully state the grounds upon which the appeal is sought. Upon receipt of the appeal, the Secretary to the Planning Commission shall notify the Design Review Officer, who shall promptly transmit the entire record of the Board, including tapes and transcripts, if any. In addition, within five (5) days of the filing of the appeal, the Secretary to the Planning Commission shall, by certified mail, notify the applicant of the appeal, if the applicant is not the appellant. The Commission shall then hold a de novo hearing on the appeal and render a decision within ninety (90) days of the date of filing the appeal.
All orders of the Planning Commission which have not been appealed within thirty (30) days shall become final; however, there shall be no stay of any action on the subject property until such time as an appeal has been filed with the Fayette Circuit Court. 27-7(c) CONSIDERATION BY THE BOARD OF PREVIOUSLY DENIED APPEALS - In the event the appeal of an applicant is denied by the Planning Commission, the building, or any portion thereof, which was the subject of the applicant's application, shall not be included in a subsequent application to the Board for an Authorization Permit and/or final decision until the expiration of one (1) year from the date of the order of the Planning Commission.
27-7(a) PROCEDURE FOR THE DE NOVO PUBLIC HEARING
However, before the expiration of one (1) year, the Board may allow the filing of an application for an Authorization Permit and/or final decision if the Board finds that there are new facts or conditions not considered previously, or that there has been a change in the adopted guidelines which has substantially altered the character of the request. In such cases, after the evidence is presented by the applicant, the Board shall vote to approve or deny such a request for a new hearing. The Board's reconsideration of the application shall take into consideration the new evidence presented. The Board's decision need not be restricted to the new evidence. If the new evidence is withdrawn at any time during the reconsideration by the applicant, the Board shall have no authority to reconsider the application.
27-7(a)(1) NOTICE - All parties to the appeal, including the Board, shall be notified of the time, place and reason for the public hearing by first class letter at least fourteen (14) days in advance. In addition, notice of the appeal shall be given by one publication in the newspaper of highest circulation in Fayette County, Kentucky, not earlier than twenty-one (21) days nor later than seven (7) days before the public hearing. 27-7(a)(2) ACTION BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION - After notice, as required above, the Commission shall conduct a public hearing and vote to approve or deny the appeal. At the hearing, the Planning Commission shall allow its staff, Design Review Officer, the Board members, the appellant, protestors, and other interested citizens to testify and rebut the evidence presented, provided that the Chairman shall have the power to limit repetitive testimony and exclude irrelevant testimony and evidence. In its deliberations, the Planning Commission shall give due consideration to the decision of the Board and the finding and conclusions reflected in the Board's record and shall apply the adopted design guidelines.
27-8 COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER CODES, STATUTES AND REGULATIONS - In order to prevent purposeful neglect of structures within zones protected by CA overlays, all properties shall comply with the BOCA, adopted Basic Property Maintenance Code, as well as all other applicable codes, statutes, and regulations. To accomplish this, the Design Review Officer shall quarterly consult with appropriate enforcement officials and compile and forward to the Board and the Court House Area Design Review Board a list of those properties in zones with CA overlays which have been found to be in violation of the BOCA Basic Property Maintenance Code.
27-7(b) APPEAL TO THE FAYETTE CIRCUIT COURT - Any person or entity claiming to be injured or aggrieved by any order of the Planning Commission to affirm, modify or set aside the Authorization Permit and/or final decision of the Board may appeal from the Planning Commission's action to the Fayette Circuit Court within thirty (30) days of that order in the manner as established in KRS 100.347.
27 - 8
13.71
13.12 By-Laws - Courthouse Area Design Review Board
BY-LAWS – COURTHOUSE AREA DESIGN REVIEW BOARD REVISED JANUARY 16, 2008
preservation, urban design or related disciplines such as urban planning or landscape architecture. At least one (1) member shall be a property or business owner within the Courthouse Area Overlay Zoning District. At least one (1) member shall be an employee of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government who is not the Design Review Officer. At least one (1) member shall be a representative of the banking or financial community. All members must adhere to Article 16 "Code of Ethics" of the Urban County Charter.
WITNESSETH: The Courthouse Area Design Review Board, in order to carry out the general powers conferred upon it by Ordinance No. 326-2000 creating Article 27 of the Zoning Ordinance of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government, does hereby adopt the following by-laws to govern its proceedings. ARTICLE I - NAME OF BOARD C. The name of the Board for all of Lexington-Fayette Urban County is "The Courthouse Area Design Review Board of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government." ARTICLE II - PURPOSE The Courthouse Area Design Review Board shall be the reviewing body for changes to sites and structures in the Courthouse Area Design Overlay Zone including proposed exterior alterations, demolitions, relocations and new construction. The Board shall: � promote those qualities in the environment which bring value to the community; � foster the attractiveness and functional utility of the community as a place to live and work; � preserve the character and quality of Lexington’s heritage by maintaining those areas which have special historic significance; � protect investment in those areas; � raise the level of community expectations for the quality of its environment.
ARTICLE V - OFFICERS The Design Review Board shall have officers who may succeed themselves. A.
Number and Election. The Officers of the Courthouse Area Design Review Board shall consist of a Chairman and a Vice-Chairman. At its first meeting and every January after that, the Board shall elect a Chairman and a Vice-Chairman. Nominations shall be made from the floor and the candidate receiving the majority vote of the membership in attendance shall be declared elected for a period of one year. This member shall be eligible for re-election and shall serve until their successor takes office. Vacancies in office shall be filled immediately by this election process. There will be a Secretary of the Board, this position shall be held by the Design Review Officer, who shall also serve as a nonvoting member of the Courthouse Area Design Review Board.
B.
Chairman. The Chairman shall preside at all meetings and public hearings of the Courthouse Area Design Review Board. The Chairman shall call special meetings of the Board when required, and shall act as spokesman for the Board. The Chairman shall vote only in the case of a tie on items brought before the Board.
C.
Vice-Chairman. The Vice-Chairman shall serve as Chairman during the temporary absence or disability of the Chairman and shall assume the duties of Chairman during the Chairman's absence or if the office of the Chairman is vacated. In case of absence of the both Chairman and Vice Chairman at any meeting, the Board shall designate a temporary Chairman for such meetings.
ARTICLE III - AUTHORIZATION The authorization for the establishment of this Board is set forth under Article 27-4 of the Zoning Ordinance of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government. ARTICLE IV - MEMBERSHIP A.
B.
Appointment. The Board shall consist of five (5) members appointed by the Mayor subject to confirmation by a majority of the members of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Council. The term of office of each member shall be four (4) years. Terms shall be staggered in such a manner to allow the appointment or reappointment of at least one half of the membership every two (2) years and shall extend from July 1 of one year through June 30 of the designated year. Vacancies will be filled as outlined in Article 27 of the Zoning Ordinance. Members may serve consecutive terms but must go through the reappointment process to do so. Resignations should be in writing to the Chairman of the Board.
Removal. Any member may be removed from the Board by a majority vote of the Council of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government for inefficiency or neglect of duty. If a member misses, without reasonable cause, three consecutive meetings or does not attend at least 75 percent of the meetings during the year, his record of attendance may be submitted by the Chairman to the Mayor for his consideration, after majority vote of the Board.
Qualifications. Members must be residents of and have knowledge of Fayette County and have demonstrated an interest in design, planning, or historic preservation. Two (2) of the members shall be design, planning, or preservation-related professionals. These include the professions of: architecture, history, archaeology, architectural history, historic 2
13.74
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Applicants should announce their request. The chair will then ask if anyone objects. Objection may come from the general public or a member of the Board. The Board shall vote on each individual request.
ARTICLE VI - STAFF The Mayor’s Office of Economic Development shall provide staff support to the Design Review Board. 2. ARTICLE VII - MEETINGS The Courthouse Area Design Review Board shall hold a public hearing within sixty (60) days after an application for a Authorization Permit has been filed in order to vote on its approval or disapproval. This requirement does not apply in those areas, which have been designated to the Design Review Officer. The Board shall meet quarterly, and thereafter in special meetings as needed to review any applications that cannot be approved by the staff. The Board, on a yearly basis, shall determine its meeting schedule for the coming year. This meeting schedule shall be available in the Mayor’s Office of Economic Development. Pursuant to KRS 61.805 et. seq., meetings shall be in a public place and be open to the public. A.
Public Hearing - As specified in Article 27 of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Zoning Ordinance, the Courthouse Area Design Review Board must hold a public hearing to approve or disapprove an Authorization Permit except as noted above. Notice of the public hearing shall be made as specified in Article 27 of the Lexington-Fayette County Zoning Ordinance. It shall be the obligation of the economic development staff to prepare, verify and mail all notices required.
B.
Quorum - A simple majority of the total membership of the Board shall constitute a quorum for transaction of business. In case of an abstention by a member when only three (3) members are present at a meeting, the official action may be taken by the other two members.
C.
Disqualification - Any member of the Courthouse Area Design Review Board who has any direct or indirect financial interest in the application for a Authorization Permit before the Board, shall disclose the nature of the interest to the Chairman and shall disqualify himself from voting on the application. At any time a member, to suit his own conscience, may abstain from voting without having to reveal the reason for his abstention.
No Discussion Items -- The Chairman will ask if there are any other agenda items where no discussion is needed…that is: a. All recommendations are in agreement including any conditions noted. b. The applicant agrees with the recommendations. c. No one present objects to the Board acting on the matter at this time without further discussion. d. Board will take action on each case where there is agreement.
3.
Should there be any objection by a Board member, Staff or anyone attending the meeting the item shall be heard.
B.
Guidelines In reviewing proposals, the Courthouse Area Design Review Board shall apply to the Design Guidelines for the Courthouse Area adopted by the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Council.
C.
Authorization Permit for Exterior Changes/New Construction The Courthouse Area Design Review Board, when it deems necessary to review a particular application, may require the submission of any or all of the following items: architectural plans, plot plans, landscaping plans, plans for off-street parking, plans for proposed signs, elevations of all portions of proposed additions to structures, photographs, elevations or perspective drawings showing the proposed structure and existing structures that are within 100 feet or are substantially related to it visually or by reason of function, traffic generation or other characteristics. If the Courthouse Area Design Review Board finds that the material submitted is not adequate for proper review of the proposal, the Courthouse Area Design Review Board shall promptly notify the applicant and state the specific information that will be required. In such cases, the applicant shall not be deemed to have made a bona fide application to the Courthouse Area Design Review Board until the specific information is submitted.
ARTICLE VIII - MEETING PROCEDURES A.
SOUNDING THE AGENDA In order to expedite completion of agenda items, the Chair will sound the agenda in regard to any postponements, withdrawals and items requiring no discussion.
1.
The Courthouse Area Design Review Board shall examine the architectural design and the exterior surface treatment of the proposed construction on the site in question and its relationship to other structures within the area and the relationship of the proposed construction to the
Postponements or Withdrawals -- The Chairman will ask for any items where postponement or withdrawal is being requested. 3
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
4
13.75
design of the building. The Board shall examine any other pertinent factors affecting the appearance and efficient functioning of the Courthouse Area Design Overlay District. The Board shall not consider any interior arrangement except as these changes relate to the exterior.
If the owner wishes to make a claim that the denial of the permit would amount to a taking of the property without just compensation, the owner shall submit to the Courthouse Area Design Review Board, not less than twenty (20) days prior to the public hearing, the following information. 1.
For all property: a. The amount paid for the property, the date of purchase and the party from whom purchased including a description of the relationship, if any, between the owner and the person from whom the property was purchased. b. The assessed value of the land and improvements thereon according to the two (2) most recent assessments recorded in the Office of the Property Valuation Administrator. c. The two most recent real estate tax bills. d. Annual debt service, if any, for the previous two (2) years. e. All appraisals obtained within the previous two (2) years by the owner in connection with his purchases, financing or ownership or the property. f. Listings of the property for sale or rent, price asked and offers received, if any. g. Any consideration by the owner as to profitable adaptive uses for the property.
2.
For income-producing property: a. Annual gross income from the property for the previous two (2) years. b. Itemized operating and maintenance expenses for the previous two (2) years. c. Annual cash flow, if any, for the previous two (2) years.
The Board shall make no requirements except for the purpose of preventing development incongruous in scale, design or materials to the district. The Courthouse Area Design Review Board shall vote to approve all or part of the application or disapprove all or part of the application within sixty (60) days after the completed application is filed. The Courthouse Area Design Review Board shall forward its decision and the reasons for its decision to the Division of Building Inspection. If the Board fails to take any action upon an application within sixty (60) days after the completed application has been filed, and unless a mutual written agreement between the Courthouse Area Design Review Board and the applicant has been made for an extension of time, the application shall be deemed to be approved and an Authorization Permit shall be issued. D.
Procedures – Authorization Permit Application for Demolition/ Moving/ Relocation The Courthouse Area Design Review Board shall issue no Authorization Permit for a demolition, moving or relocation except through procedures for application as expressly authorized in Article 27-6(c) of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Zoning Ordinance. The Design Review Board, at a public hearing, may vote to postpone action to approve or deny an application for a reasonable period not to exceed one (1) year from the filing date of application. This time period is intended to allow opportunity: � to consider alternatives to demolition, � study the question of economic hardship for the applicant � determine whether the property can be put to reasonable beneficial use without the approval of demolition, and � determine whether the applicant can obtain a reasonable return from his/her existing building. If economic hardship or the lack of a reasonable return is not proved, the
Courthouse Area Design Review Board shall deny the demolition application, giving the facts and reasons for its decision. 5
13.76
The Courthouse Area Design Review Board may require that the property owner furnish such additional information as the Courthouse Area Design Review Board believes is relevant to its determination of taking without just compensation and may provide in appropriate instances that such additional information be furnished under seal. In the event that any of the required information is not reasonably available to the applicant and cannot be obtained by the applicant, the applicant shall file with his affidavit a statement of the information, which cannot be obtained, and shall describe the reasons why such information cannot be obtained. Should the Design Review Board find that the material submitted is not adequate for the proper review of the proposal, the Courthouse Area Design Review Board shall promptly notify the applicant and state specific
information that will be required. In such cases, the application shall not be deemed to have made a bona fide application to the Design Review Board until the specified information is submitted.
6 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
ARTICLE IX - STAFF APPROVAL PROCEDURES A.
B.
C.
D.
General The Board may delegate specific Authorization Permit review actions to the Design Review Officer, who may review applications without public hearing and action of the Board. Review by the Design Review Officer does not require full public hearing and action by the Board. The delegation of specific items shall be approved by the Board at a public hearing and recorded in the minutes of the Board. A list of the specifically delegated actions shall be available in the Mayor’s Office of Economic Development for public information. The Board delegates to the staff the authorization to issue Authorization Permits for all covered activities with the exception of the following: demolition, new construction on vacant lots, additions to existing structures where the proposed activity exceeds 20 percent of the existing floor area, changes to doors and windows, signage and changes to facades. Filing The applicant shall file sufficient information as to accurately depict the location, design and scope of the work to be done. The staff shall review the information and promptly notify the applicant if the material is not adequate for review and advise the applicant what specific information will be required. Review The staff shall review the application for compliance with the adopted guidelines and consult with other Divisions as appropriate to ensure proper review. Upon determination that all requirements of the guidelines have been met and that the application complies with the requirements of the Board, the Design Review Officer shall approve the application and issue the Authorization Permit. If any questions arise as to compliance or if the Design Review Officer or applicant feels that the application raises issues deserving review by the full Board, the request shall be referred to the Board for action. Issuance Upon approval by the Design Review Officer, the staff shall issue the Authorization Permit and notify the applicant. In addition, the staff shall notify the Board at its next regularly scheduled meeting of any Authorization Permits, which have been issued. A copy of the Permit and application materials shall also be forwarded to the Division of Building Inspection and/or the Division of Code Enforcement as appropriate.
ARTICLE X - AMENDING AUTHORIZATION PERMITS The Board may hear proposed amendments to Authorization Permits without full re-hearing and notice when the following conditions exist:
7 1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
A. an Authorization Permit has been issued for the project B. an alternative proposal for amending the Authorization Permit has been filed with the Mayor’s Office of Economic Development staff for the Board's review C. no stop work order has been issued by the Division of Building Inspection staff D. the alteration does not encompass one of the following: � a change in dimension of a building or site element of six (6) inches or more in each dimension � a change in location of a building or site element by a distance of 1'-0" or more in any direction When all of these conditions exist, staff shall schedule the amendment item on the next Board meeting agenda. Should any one of the conditions not exist, the staff shall schedule the proposed amendment for full hearing as set forth in Article 27-6 (b)(1) of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Zoning Ordinance.
ARTICLE XI - CONSIDERATION OF PREVIOUSLY DISAPPROVED AUTHORIZATION PERMITS A.
While Appeal Filed and Pending The Board shall not re-hear any application, even when based on new evidence, while an appeal to the Planning Commission or Fayette County Circuit Court is pending, unless so directed to re-hear the case by the vote of the Planning Commission or by decision of the Circuit Court, except for the following exception: The Board may agree to determine whether it will re-hear the case based on new evidence. However, this full re-hearing of the case shall not be heard while an appeal is pending on the case.
B.
Where the Authorization Permit is Disapproved The Board shall not re-hear applications previously disapproved for a period of one (1) year from the time of the Board's disapproval, unless the Board determines that new evidence exists changing facts or circumstances of the original application. To determine the existence of new evidence, the Board shall consider: 1. the contents of the application at the time of the request for rehearing 2. the oral and written arguments presented in the public hearing from the applicant regarding his/her reasons for a new hearing request. 3. the contents of the application at the time of the original request (and eventual disapproval). 4. the discussion and action on the original application, including review 8 13.77
of staff reports, minutes and other documentation of the disposition of the original application. Suggestions by the Board can be considered, but shall not preclude a re-hearing if those suggestions were not acted upon in the original hearing. In reviewing these materials, the Board, without considering the appropriateness of the altered proposal, shall determine whether sufficient new evidence exists, meriting a re-hearing of the application. The Board's consideration of the application shall take into consideration the new evidence presented. The Board's decision to re-hear need not be restricted solely to new evidence. To determine that new evidence exists, a majority vote must be taken from the floor. If the new evidence is withdrawn at any time during re-hearing by the applicant, the Board shall have no authority to reconsider the application. Following determination and approval of a hearing based on new evidence, the Board shall consider the proposed application as described in Article 27-6(b)(1) of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Zoning Ordinance. The request shall be scheduled at the next earliest public hearing. ARTICLE XII - EXTENSION OF TIME FOR AUTHORIZATION PERMIT An extension of time for reasonable cause shown may be granted by the Board upon receipt of a written request for an extension from the holder of the Authorization Permit. Such request must be submitted to the Board prior to the expiration of the Authorization Permit. Time extension shall not exceed ninety (90) days in length and no more than two extensions of time will be permitted. ARTICLE XIII - RULES OF ORDER The rules contained in the current edition of Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised, shall govern the Board's proceedings in all cases to which they are applicable and to all cases where they are not inconsistent with these bylaws or any special order the Board may adopt. ARTICLE XIV - AMENDING BY-LAWS These by-laws may be amended by the majority vote of the full membership of the Courthouse Area Design Review Board.
APPROVED: November 20, 2001 REVISIONS APPROVED ON October 18, 2004 and October 4, 2006.
9 13.78
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
13.13 Ordinance No. 155-2009
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
13.83
13.14 Design Guidelines for the Courthouse Square Area
Design Guidelines for the
Design Guidelines for the
Courthouse Area Lexington, Kentucky
Courthouse Area
May 17, 2000
Lexington, Kentucky Prepared by: Winter & Company 775 Poplar Avenue Boulder, Colorado 80304 (303) 440-8445
May 17, 2000
13.86
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Credits
Table of Contents
City Council
The guidelines are organized in a series of six chapters, each of which addresses a specific category of improvements:
Pam Miller, Mayor Isabel Yates, Vice Mayor Scott A Crosbie, At-large David B. Stevens, M.D., At-large George A. Brown, Jr., 1st District Robert R. Jefferson, 2nd District Dick DeCamp, 3rd District Linda Gorton, 4th District Bill Farmer, Jr., 5th District Albert S. Mitchell, 6th District Willy Fogel, 7th District Fred V. Brown, 8th District Jennifer Mossotti, 9th District Sandy Shafer, 10th District Richard P. Maloney, 11th District Gloria Martin, 12th District
7
Chapter 2: General Design Guidelines
7 12 17
25
This includes a collection of miscellaneous design issues that may occur in a variety of projects. For example, treatment of utilities and mechanical equipment is addressed in this section. Site Plan Architectural Character Mass, Scale and Form Exterior Building Materials Upper Story Windows Entries Pedestrian Interest Awnings and Canopies Building Lighting Mechanical Equipment and Service Utilities
Chapter 3: Historic Properties
26 27 29 32 33 34 35 36 37 48
39
This chapter applies to buildings of historic significance. It provides principles for rehabilitation that are based on nationally accepted standards for preservation that are adapted to the courthouse area context.
Staff Dean Doerrfeld, Planning Department Bettie Kerr, Preservation Officer Harold Tate, Office of Administrative Services
Noré V. Winter Ray Kramer Julie Husband Brian W. Koenig Diana Brent Betsy Shears
Chapter 1: Design Character Historic Overview The Character of the Courthouse Area Today Building Types and Styles
Lyle Aten, Scruggs and Hammond Dick DeCamp, Urban County Council member Sidney Kinkead, Jr., Stites and Harbison Rose Lucas, Executive Director, Downtown Lexington Corporation David Mohney, College of Architecture, University of Kentucky Joe Rosenberg, Joe Rosenberg Jeweler Randall Vaughn, James, N. Gray Company
Winter & Company
1
This applies to design of new buildings as well as alterations to existing buildings that are not of historic significance.
Steering Committee
Consultants
Introduction
Historic photographs are courtesy of the Kentucky Historical Society. Appreciation is expressed to Bettie Kerr and John D. Wright, Jr. for the use of their book A Century in Photographs as a key photographic resource.
Character-Defining Features Design of Alterations Storefronts Windows and Doors Entries Kickplates Cornices Facade Materials Design of Additions
41 44 46 48 49 49 50 51 52
Copyright © 2000 by Noré V. Winter. This document contains materials copyrighted by Noré V. Winter which may not be reproduced without permission.
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
13.87
Introduction
Chapter 4: Parking Facilities
55
This chapter addresses specific design issues related to parking lots and structures. Location of Parking Facilities Visual Impacts of Surface Parking Visual Impacts of Parking Structures Security and Pedestrian Circulation
Chapter 5: Public Streetscape Improvements
55 56 58 60
61
This chapter presents guidelines for treatment of the streetscape and development of plazas and courtyards. Sidewalk Design Public Open Space Street Furniture Landscaping and Planting Street Lights
Chapter 6: Signs
62 65 66 68 69
71
This chapter addresses specific design issues related to signs. The Sign Context Appropriate Sign Types Sign Materials Sign Content Sign Lighting
Appendices Appendix A: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards Appendix B: Glossary of Terms Appendix C: Additional Information
72 73 73 74 74
75 75 77 82
Introduction This document presents design guidelines for the Courthouse Area in downtown Lexington, Kentucky. The area has been an important focus of civic activity for two centuries and during that time it has seen development stimulated by the construction of a series of court houses and other civic facilities. The buildings that stand reflect the efforts of citizens who worked and lived here and who used it as a center for cultural events. Now, entering the twenty-first century, the area once more anticipates substantial improvements in response to the construction of a new courts complex.
Policies Underlying the Guidelines These guidelines seek to help manage change such that the traditional character of the area is respected while accommodating compatible improvements. They reflect the City's goals to promote economic development, enhance the image of the area and reuse its historic resources, which are set forth in the community’s Comprehensive Plan: "Urban design issues have recently become much more consequential to Lexington...Improving the quality of the built environment is a major goal of [the Comprehensive Plan]...Such improvements should begin in the heart of the urban county—downtown Lexington...Within the existing development, proper infill and redevelopment should be encouraged for continued vitality. However, some controls to ensure compatibility of infill and redevelopment [such as design guidelines] are also appropriate. "The downtown core and surrounding downtown residential districts have developed in a compact manner with the majority of the buildings having been designed in classical older styles which exhibit extensive architectural detail. In some blocks overall urban design and building mass relationships must be considered so that new buildings can be compatible with nearby historically-significant commercial and residential structures. Several neighborhoods on the edges of downtown have Historic District overlays which provide for limited design review and control of redevelopment. However, the core downtown and residential areas to the northeast and southeast should have an appropriate design review and control mechanism. The variety of historically-significant residential and nonresidential structures deserve protection from incompatible infill and redevelopment, particularly those areas northeast and southeast of Main Street and in the vicinity of the courthouse." — (1996 Comprehensive Plan, pages 4-16)
Design Guidelines
13.88
1
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Introduction
Introduction
Comprehensive Plan Policy Base, continued...
The Comprehensive Plan also provides a clear policy base for design guidelines in the first three themes of the plan and several goals and objectives: Theme 1: "Enabling the creation, growth and retention of jobs that promote a strong, progressive economy." A key objective is to encourage the creation of jobs within the project area. Special opportunities exist, of course, with the construction of the courthouse for professional offices and related services as well as residential use. These design guidelines will help promote designs that support this theme while encouraging investment in the area.
Encourage protection of historic resources through compatible use and reuse of historic sites and structures.
Theme 2: "Promoting the downtown as a regional commercial, office, government, residential and cultural center focal point within the Bluegrass region." These design guidelines establish a vision for renovation and new construction that facilitates the mix of uses desired to make the Courthouse Area the focal point for the region. Theme 3: "Preserving, protecting and maintaining existing residential neighborhoods in a manner that ensures stability and the highest quality of life for all residents." Development within the Courthouse Area can impact the edges of abutting residential neighborhoods, including historic districts. The treatment of these transitional conditions is a special focus of these guidelines. Goal II: "Guide the physical development of the community." Regulatory tools such as zoning, land use regulations and design guidelines are effective ways to guide the physical changes seen on the Lexington landscape. Goal IV: "Ensure the vitality of the downtown." The objectives listed with Lexington's goal of ensuring vitality in the Downtown are very much the same as the reasons many communities choose to develop design guidelines—to protect investments and to ensure stability and livability.
2
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
• Objective A: Promote and expand the role of the Downtown area as the logical community location of major regional business, commerce, governmental administration, cultural and recreational activities and entertainment. • Objective D: Formulate a realistic plan for the future of the Downtown, and foster public-private efforts to maintain, rehabilitate and redevelop Downtown. • Objective E: Recognize and preserve significant architectural features and encourage new construction to be compatible with these significant features. • Objective F: Encourage increased Downtown residential uses through new construction, restoration, and redevelopment which is compatible with surrounding land uses and design. Goal X: "Protect and preserve Fayette County's significant historic and cultural heritage." • Objective A: Encourage protection of historic resources through compatible use and reuse of historic sites and structures. • Objective B: Encourage renovation, development and maintenance of historic residential and commercial structures. • Objective C: Encourage protection of significant historic resources through the documentation and designation of historic districts and historic landmarks. • Objective G: Encourage compatible design in public and private developments and structures which serve to reinforce the fabric of the community.
Comprehensive Plan Policy Base, continued...
Encourage renovation, development and maintenance of historic commercial structures.
The Comprehensive Plan also defines historic preservation as an objective, which is relevant to the Courthouse Area: "Historic and architecturally significant buildings are a vital part of Lexington-Fayette County's physical form, because they create a unique place to live and work. A well-planned community incorporates the new and the old, thus attracting businesses, residents, and tourists seeking a unique physical and cultural environment." These goals and policy statements from the Comprehensive Plan underscore the community’s commitment to the preservation of Lexington’s cultural and architectural resources and to urban design that will enhance the vitality of the city core. This document builds on these policy directives and provides a means for the community to encourage development that respects these resources.
Design Guidelines
3
13.89
Introduction
Introduction
Overview of the Design Guidelines The guidelines define those important features of the established context that should be respected when improvements occur. It is important to note that the guidelines neither dictate taste nor assure good design. Rather, they are intended to be a means for balancing the traditional qualities of the Courthouse Area with the demands of contemporary use. The design guidelines provide a basis for making decisions about the appropriate treatment of existing buildings, including historic resources, and the design of compatible new construction. They also serve as educational and planning tools for property owners and their design professionals who seek to make improvements that may affect the character of the Courthouse Area. Each design guideline contains the following components:
1. Design topic Within each chapter, the information is divided into pertinent design topics. For example, in Chapter 3: Guidelines for Historic Properties, the subtopic, “Design of Additions,” is among those discussed. This organization allows the user to quickly select the specific design topics within a chapter that are relevant.
2. Design guidelines The specific design guidelines are presented as bold face statements under each design topic. These are also numbered to indicate their relative position within the chapter and to aid in specific reference in the review process.
3. Supplementary information Also provided with the design guidelines are supplementary requirements, which clarify the primary design guideline statement and may suggest specific methods for complying with it. This may include additional design requirements or may provide an expanded explanation. These statements are listed as bullets (•).
4. Illustrations Photographs and sketches may also be provided to clarify the intent of a design guideline or its supplementary information.
A typical design guideline in this document contains four components: First, a design topic heading allows the user to quickly select relevant categories of design.
Design of Additions 3.31 An addition may be made to the roof of a building if it does the following: •
Second, the design guideline itself is presented as a numbered statement in bold type. This sets forth a basic principle for treatment of a selected design topic.
An addition should be set back from a primary, character-defining facade, to preserve the perception of the historic scale of the building. Roof addition set back from the front
Third, supplementary requirements are listed under the guideline. Preceded by bullets (•), these clarify the primary design guideline statement and may suggest specific methods for complying with it. Fourth, an illustration, in the form of a sketch or photograph, depicts a method of complying with the guideline.
A sample design guideline.
Basic Principles of Design in the Courthouse Area Principle 1. Maintain a clear definition of the street edge. Traditionally, the edge of the sidewalk was clearly defined as a “street wall,” which helped define the street as an urban space. This feature should be maintained.
Principle 2. Enhance the street level as an inviting place for pedestrians. Providing features that are visually interesting and that are in human scale is essential. These may include storefront windows, display cases, art and landscaping.
Principle 3. Relate to traditional buildings in the area. Traditional buildings combine to establish a sense of continuity in the area, while also accommodating variety in design and detail. As properties are improved, they should enhance the overall image of the area as a place to do business. Each building can help contribute to this visual continuity while also meeting an individual owner’s needs. 4
13.90
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
Design Guidelines
5
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
1. Design Character
Introduction
Principle 4. If the building is an historic structure, then respect its earlier character. Preservation of Lexington’s heritage is important to its sense of community and its economic development. Many of the structures in the Courthouse Area have historic value, even some that have experienced alterations. It is important to consider the significance of their character-defining features, including basic forms, materials and details when planning improvements.
Additional Principles for the Design of Commercial Buildings Generally, most buildings in the Courthouse Area should be retailoriented at the street level. For them, these basic principles also apply:
Keep it simple. An individual building should have a simple, unified design that serves as a frame for the windows that display goods or reveal services offered inside.
Use the entire building front to establish a design impact. Coordinate upper and lower floors into a single design concept, even if the upper floors are not a part of the ground floor business. This can serve the “attention-getting” function and can be much more effective than a large sign.
1. Design Character The Courthouse Area contains a mix of buildings that reflect the evolution of the community and convey the vitality of life in Lexington. The history of the city and county is closely tied to it and those features of the existing context that the community values are directly related to its early development. This chapter presents a brief summary of historical events that helped shape the courthouse area and it also highlights those key features of the built environment that contribute to its character today.
Historic Overview Lexington has grown from one small cabin located along the Middle Branch of Elkhorn Creek in 1775 to the urban center of Kentucky’s bluegrass region. Settlement of Lexington began in June of 1775, when a group of land speculators, hunters and surveyors from Pennsylvania were staking claims in the rich, lush meadows and woodlands of central Kentucky and were particularly attracted to an area that they later named Lexington—named in honor of the Massachusetts town where the Minute Men first confronted the British troops just two months before. By the end of the nineteenth century, Lexington had grown to be an important cultural, social and economic center and was often referred to as “Athens of the West.” An early street scene from the area is filled with Federal style buildings, while the structure in the lower right exhibits Greek Revival details. Italianate features are seen on the building on the lower left.
Develop a clear presentation to the street. A single, clear design concept that avoids clutter and directs the customer’s eye is important. The design scheme should easily lead the viewer’s attention to displays of goods, views of activities inside and ultimately to the business entrance. Use only a few colors throughout and keep signs to a minimum. Place them where they will lead a customer to products or activities. The design principles described above underlie the specific guidelines that appear in the chapters that follow.
6
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Design Guidelines
7
13.91
1. Design Character
1. Design Character
Early History Growth was slow in the early pioneer town. In 1781, city founders laid out 710 acres of land in a grid pattern to form what became the heart of the town of Lexington. The Virginia Legislature, which had jurisdiction over the area, approved the proposed town plat. Eleven years later, in 1792, Kentucky separated from the State of Virginia and became the Commonwealth of Kentucky, the fifteenth state in the Union. Lexington was not incorporated as a city until 1832. Farm produce, animal products, hemp and tobacco provided the foundation of Lexington’s growing trade business. As the Indian threat began to diminish, farms began to expand out into the county and hemp, tobacco, grain and livestock production began to flourish. These products were traded for household staples, equipment and the like and then shipped out of the area by the merchants. It was more profitable to convert some grains into whiskey before export—thus an industry, with which many people identify Kentucky, was born. By 1785 the frontier town of Lexington began to attract settlers seeking new land and merchants and artisans to serve the settlers. Governmental and institutional functions also were established in the area. The first Fayette County courthouse was built in 1782. At the same time, Rev. Rankin also built a two-story log house for his residence on High (formerly Hill) Street, just outside of the Courthouse Area. This house, later moved to 314 South Mill Street, is one of the oldest surviving structures in Lexington and graciously illustrates
the early, more rustic structures that were found in the early residential area downtown. Lexington was growing as a regional trade center, and served as the retail and wholesale hub for surrounding communities in central Kentucky. It was also the exporting center for Kentucky-produced goods, shipping hemp, tobacco and whiskey to Cincinnati, St. Louis and even as far away as New Orleans. Building construction during this period was dominated by the Federal style, with its graceful, symmetrical red brick houses. By the mid-1800s, growth and prosperity transformed Lexington from a frontier, trading town to an impressive urban community. Many frontier log cabins were torn down, other log houses were covered with clapboard, and stone and brick residential and commercial structures began to dominate the landscape. In 1831, entrepreneurs began building Lexington’s first railroad. When the Lexington & Ohio Rail Road had finished construction in 1852, Lexington was connected to the Ohio River—a major trade route of the era. An aerial view of the Courthouse Area, circa 1925, illustrates some basic features that most buildings had in common, even though they spanned more than 130 years of development. Structures align at the sidewalk edge and are constructed of masonry. Storefronts define a pedestrian zone at the street level and upper-story windows have similar dimensions.
A photograph taken after the construction of the First National Bank and Trust Building (1913-14) focuses on the current courthouse (1900). Cars fill the public space of Cheapside.
8
13.92
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
Design Guidelines
9
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
1. Design Character
1. Design Character
The Post Civil War Period When the Civil War began, Lexington’s economy slowed to a halt. Unlike many other Southern cities, Lexington was relatively unscathed physically and its housing and commercial buildings remained intact. A slow, post-war recovery was followed by growth in the 1880s, during which rail service expanded to five lines. These rail lines strengthened Lexington’s commercial connection with Cincinnati and Louisville and tied Lexington to the mineral and timberrich resources of southeastern Kentucky. The Louisville and Nashville Railroad (L&NRR) depot was conveniently located between Vine and Water Streets at South Mill Street, only two blocks away from the Courthouse, and contributed to business development along Main Street. Agricultural-based trade, particularly tobacco, continued to dominate economic activity in Lexington through the end of the nineteenth century. This photo was taken from the southeast corner of Main Street and the Union Station Viaduct circa 1915.
Public transportation helped support development in the emerging Courthouse Area. Travelers by train arrived in Lexington at the nearby L&NRR depot. The City licensed “omnibuses” (i.e., oversized horse-drawn stagecoaches) to serve limited routes throughout Lexington. Then, the Lexington Street Railway Company built a mule and horse-drawn streetcar system to serve downtown, with nine miles of track laid along Main, Broadway, Limestone, Third, Race and Vine. By 1882, the Belt Railway Company had began operating an electric trolley car system that, by the end of the decade, had replaced the animal-drawn streetcars. During this period, many of the downtown streets were paved with brick or creosoted wooden blocks. The courthouse square between Cheapside and North Upper Streets and between Main and Short Streets served as the focal point for civic activities. Market days and court days drew throngs to the streets around the Courthouse, particularly along Cheapside. The County’s third courthouse had been built on the courthouse square in 1806, but almost from its inception it was criticized by lawyers, judges and visitors for its rather unappealing interior. By 1882, activities of the courts and other county offices had grown enough to pressure County officials to authorize razing the Courthouse and building a new, larger one. This fourth courthouse was completed in 1885 and was a Renaissance-Eclectic structure, with a towering superstructure reaching 100 feet from the ground. In 1897, the Courthouse was totally destroyed by fire, requiring the County to build yet a fifth courthouse. This new structure was designed in the Richardsonian Romanesque style, which was quite popular at the time, and was completed in 1900.
10
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Extensive construction and expansion of the physical size of Lexington occurred around the turn of the century. This growth reflected development of the city’s traditional economic base of wholesale, retail and transportation industries. Trade and transportation of burley tobacco rapidly expanded in importance, replacing the dwindling activity in the hemp market. The horse industry also continued to grow, with many large horse farms springing up in the countryside around Lexington after the Civil War. The owners of these farms with their sprawling bluegrass pastures and palatial mansions generally were not the formerly landed-gentry of traditional, pre-war Lexington but were often new residents of Kentucky.
The Early to Mid-1900s When the Wall Street crash of 1929 and the ensuing Great Depression occurred, Lexington reacted quite mildly. While no one was predicting catastrophe, the city did not remain unscathed: in 1931, Fayette National Bank closed its doors; city workers lost their jobs; doctors, professors and city school teachers all took cuts in salary; and Lexington church women opened a soup kitchen. One-fourth of Fayette County’s families were receiving some form of financial relief by June of 1933. However, because the economies of Lexington and Fayette County were not based on the manufacturing industry, the Depression had a milder impact here than it did in much of the rest of the country. In 1938, Forbes Business Magazine called Lexington one of the most prosperous business centers, and a “bright spot” in the nation, even though roughly six percent of its total population (or approximately twenty percent of its work force) was still unemployed. By 1940, the effects of the Depression had all but disappeared from Lexington, and the city of almost 50,000 residents was enjoying a strong economy and growing population. The appearance of Art Moderne and Deco building styles reflected signs of a healthy economy during this time.
The south side of Main Street opposite Cheapside, circa 1925.
After World War II After the end of World War II, life in Lexington returned to its prewar status of a strong economy and growing population. But no one was ready for the changes that were going to occur over the next thirty-five years and that were going to make Lexington one of the fastest growing cities in the country. Lexington’s economic base received a major boost when industrial and manufacturing companies began building plants in the formerly trade-oriented county. General Electric, Dixie Cup (a Container Corporation of America subsidiary), IBM’s electric typewriter division, and R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company were some of the larger industrial companies to
Design Guidelines
11
13.93
1. Design Character
1. Design Character
locate manufacturing or warehousing facilities in Fayette County. Smaller companies also came to the area and added to the growth. Growth in manufacturing jobs brought in many new residents, caused major growth in schools, housing and community services, as well as had a positive effect on Lexington’s traditional trade center businesses.
Main Street looking east from Mill. Photograph taken in 1938.
This growth stimulated construction throughout the region in offices, commercial centers and new neighborhoods. Some retail businesses left the Courthouse Area to serve this growing population from new locations. While some retail activity shifted, new high rise office buildings appeared in the area. Streetscape enhancements in the 1970s brought a new image to the area and the urban county government signaled its continuing commitment to downtown by locating its offices in the old Lafayette Hotel at Harrison Avenue and Main Street. Then, in the late 1990s, the urban county government set upon a major improvement effort, with construction of a new courthouse complex as the centerpiece. The result is an area that strongly reflects its historic roots while also incorporating a variety of new buildings.
The Character of the Courthouse Area Today Early photographs provide insight into the design features of traditional building types and the manner in which these combined to create streetscapes in the Courthouse Area. They demonstrate that most buildings were built at the sidewalk edge, thereby defining a “street wall,” and that brick and stone were the dominant construction materials. Additional information about the character and development of the area is found in a series of maps produced by the Sanborn Fire Insurance Company. The company documented the location and footprint of each building in the area, periodically from the late 1800s through the 1950s. These maps, combined with historic photographs, convey the character-defining features that form the framework of the area’s context today. A rectilinear grid dominates.
Buildings Align in Plan Most buildings, particularly the predominant commercial structures, are sited at the sidewalk edge and therefore the building fronts align.
Buildings Fill the Widths of Their Lots Commercial buildings are constructed out to the side lot lines, creating a solid wall along the sidewalk edge.
Rear Setbacks of Buildings Vary Variations in building sizes are typically reflected on the backsides. While many structures occupy the entire depths of their properties, several do not. In general, the earlier, smaller buildings left room on the rear of their sites.
Storefront Heights Align Most first floors were constructed to relatively similar heights and, because the lower levels of the building fronts were primarily glass, the storefronts created a uniform line along the street edge. This was further emphasized with cornices and moldings that capped the storefronts.
A “Wall” of Buildings Two to Four Stories in Height is Defined The first two to four stories are typically defined with windows of similar heights and with moldings that align along the block to express the traditional scale of the street.
A Rectilinear Grid Dominates The squared intersections of streets established the basic framework for the organization of lots, which in turn set the character of building shape and placement in the area.
12
13.94
Buildings align in plan.
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
Storefront heights align.
Design Guidelines
13
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
1. Design Character
1. Design Character
Building Widths Appear To Be Within a Narrow Range
A block scale of two to four stories is typical. Even taller buildings have lower-story elements that reflect this tradition.
Many buildings convey the dimensions of a single building lot. Others that are larger often reflect the underlying set of lots with an “articulation” of facade details. Vertical elements, including columns and pilasters, often express the location of the individual lots. This helps to create a rhythm of building fronts along the street.
Masonry Building Materials Are Predominant Brick and stone are shaped in units that are similar in size and these are laid in a manner that establishes textures along the street that are visually interesting and help to establish a sense of human scale. Upper-story windows create a pattern across many building fronts. Most upper-story windows are of similar sizes and they use similar spacing patterns. They typically are vertically proportioned and their arches and sills tend to align as well. All of these features combine to create a pattern of evenly spaced openings and of horizontal features that align along the block. Masonry building materials are predominant.
These specific features of the built environment result in even more fundamental characteristics that are essential ingredients of the area: Most buildings in the Courthouse Area share a variety of design features, including the alignment of horizontal moldings and cornices. These help to unify individual blocks, even when building heights and styles vary.
Overall Building Heights Vary in the Area Most buildings stand from two to four stories in height, but several vary from this pattern. A few are one story and others are taller than the norm. However, most of the taller buildings appear to fit within the street character: they typically are of masonry construction that matches that of shorter structures nearby and the lower levels relate in scale and alignment of horizontal details. They also align in plan at the sidewalk edge.
14
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
A Sense of Visual Continuity Exists Because most buildings share a variety of the design features described above, the area conveys a sense of visual relatedness, of being a “place.” Within this sense of visual continuity, however, variety and accent occur. Building styles, for example, vary widely, reflecting their various periods of construction. In fact, each building varies from its neighbors in some manner, either a difference in scale, style or materials. But, for each design feature that varies from its neighbors, many others are shared. Thus, a sense of continuity is maintained, while accommodating individuality in design.
Streets Are Oriented to Pedestrians Key building elements, including windows, doors and details, are scaled to pedestrians. Masonry materials also contribute to this pedestrian-friendly scale. The storefronts provide views to activities inside, creating interest for passersby. Sidewalks also are of dimensions that are comfortable for pedestrians to pass. This invites walking.
Design Guidelines
Streets are oriented to pedestrians.
15
13.95
1. Design Character
1. Design Character
Civic Buildings and Spaces Provide Accents in the Streetscape While commercial buildings align along the street edge, civic buildings typically stand apart. The old Courthouse, for example, sits in the center of a block, surrounded by a lawn. These types of buildings also may vary more widely in their forms and details.
Building Types and Styles This section provides a brief overview of various architectural styles and building types found in the area. However, the list is not exhaustive. Certain architectural styles, or combinations thereof, may exist that are not included. Property owners should review these descriptions carefully. In many cases the design guidelines make reference to the characteristics of the styles that are presented here. There are clear examples in the area of Federal, Italianate, Art Deco and Classical Revival type structures. A common practice, however, was building in the “vernacular.” These simple structures closely reflect traditions of building in their respective periods of construction and are sometimes decorated with features that come from a variety of styles.
Civic buildings and spaces provide accents in the streetscape.
Commercial Building Types Most buildings in the Courthouse Area are variations on the traditional American commercial storefront. These buildings were designed for retail-related functions on the ground level, and therefore relatively large openings were used to maximize visibility and access to goods and services offered inside. Most are built to one, two or three stories, although some rise higher. The front wall is constructed at the sidewalk edge and is of masonry. Upper-story windows are smaller, with vertically oriented openings. The upper floor appears more solid than transparent. The following building types are seen in the Courthouse Area:
pediment cornice upper story windows midbelt cornice transom display window recessed entry
A detail of a Sanborn Map of 1934 illustrates a portion of the block bounded by North Upper Street, Short Street, North Limestone Street and Main. Building fronts align at the sidewalk edge and many structures occupy the full widths of their lots. A few alleys and pedestrian ways provide access to the interior of the block. The sixteen-story First National Bank and Trust Building, designed by the New York architectural firm of McKim, Mead and White and constructed in 1913-14, is located at the lower left corner. The edge of the courthouse building appears at the left edge of the image.
kickplate Typical storefront components.
16
13.96
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
Design Guidelines
17
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
1. Design Character
1. Design Character
Although window openings have been altered on both floors, this building exhibits the simple forms of Federal buildings. A gable roof, with the ridge line parallel to the street, is a typical feature.
Federal
Vernacular Commercial Storefront
• circa 1790-1820
• circa 1860-1920
The Federal style was the dominant design in Lexington from 1790 to 1820. Related to the popular Georgian style, buildings of the Federal period, as well as Federal-influenced vernacular structures, are commonly a simple box, two or more rooms deep. Doors and windows are arranged with a regular symmetry to allow adequate ventilation. Many of the buildings seen in the area were constructed according to this vernacular form.
The vernacular commercial storefront of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries appears in commercial districts throughout the country, including downtown Lexington. This building type is divided into two distinct bands. The first floor is more commonly transparent, so goods can be displayed, while the upper floors are usually reserved for offices, residential and warehousing functions. At the storefront, a kickplate is found below the display window while above, a smaller band of glass, a transom, is seen. Also, the main door is frequently recessed.
Characteristics • Side-gabled roof • Brick or stone construction • Joined chimney • Parapet walls • Wooden shutters • Wide doors with transom and sidelights • Galleries • Dormers Many of the Federal buildings were later transformed into more "stylish" structures by the application of other period detailing, then in vogue. In many cases a structure may not have been altered until many years after it was built. These changes were often based on architectural styles that were popular throughout the country at the time.
Greek Revival
Display windows Vernacular commercial storefront.
These buildings have brick facades, often with stone detailing. Ornamental detail exists, but is simple, and is limited to a shallow molding as a cornice. Some cornices were made of wood or masonry, while others were made of metal. Although construction of these buildings began as early as 1860 and continued until 1920, the majority were constructed at the turn of the century. Many carry Italianate detailing. Characteristics • Larger display windows • Transom lights • Kickplate • Recessed entry • Double doors • Tall second-story windows • Cornice
• circa 1820-1850
A vernacular commercial storefront.
The Greek Revival style became quite popular during the middle of the nineteenth century. By 1850, it was seen in almost all settled areas in the nation, gaining a presence in Kentucky at that time. Based on classical detailing that originated in ancient Greece, these buildings are known primarily for columns with Doric, Ionic or Corinthian capitals. Other Greek Revival detailing includes classical entablatures, simple window surrounds and door surrounds consisting of transom and sidelights. Greek Revival pilasters, or attached columns, adorn the upper level of this structure, which also exhibits the sloping roof form of a Federal period building.
18
Characteristics • Rounded columns • Pediment roof • Tall first-floor windows • Entablature • Doors with transom, side and corner lights • Gabled or hipped roof • Frieze band windows Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Design Guidelines
19
13.97
1. Design Character
1. Design Character
Detail of an Italianate building.
20
13.98
Italianate
Classical Revival
• circa 1850-1885
• circa 1890-1920
Originally inspired by Renaissance buildings of Italy, this blending of classical and romantic features became one of the most popular styles in the United States. Because of its ornate details, such as bracketed cornices, this style was easily adapted to storefronts. The details and features of this style were capable of being interpreted in wood, masonry or iron. With this adaptability and the sensibilities of the times, its popularity grew, particularly with those building townhouses and commercial buildings.
The Classical Revival style was originally based upon interpretations of classical Roman models, particularly in terms of order, symmetry and detail. Usually a composition of formal and symmetrical features enriched by elaborative details and often emphasized by a pedimented or projecting pavilion, this style was adaptable to wood, brick and stone construction. Partially due to this, the style was popular in many regions of the country, particularly for builders wishing to distinguish their structures from older ones in the community.
Characteristics • Double-hung, narrow windows, often with round arch heads • Window panes are either one-over-one or two-over-two • Protruding sills • Ornate treatment of the eaves, including the use of brackets, medallions and dentil courses • Quoins at building corners • Cresting along roof ridges • Transom, often curved, above the front door • Brackets, modillions and dentil courses • Flat roof • Overall, a vertical emphasis in building proportions
Characteristics • Flat roof with parapet and metal or cast stone cornice • Cast stone jack arches • Elaborate entrance • Keystone lintels • Sash windows with heavy dividers or muntins • Usually large, elaborate brick structure (often red) • Ornate moldings, such as dentils and modillions • Round columns with complex capitals • Dormers • Prominent center window on second story, often arched or curved
A deep cornice, supported on brackets, is a typical Italianate feature.
Contrasting trim elements and extensive detailing are features of Classical Revival buildings.
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
Design Guidelines
21
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
1. Design Character
1. Design Character
Masonry walls, usually with roughfaced, squared stonework and roundtopped arches over windows are typical features of the Richardsonian Romanesque style.
Richardsonian Romanesque
Art Moderne
• circa 1880-1910
• circa 1930-1940
Developed by the prominent Boston architect, Henry Richardson, the Romanesque, or Richardsonian Romanesque, style was commonly used for large public buildings beginning in the 1880s—following suit to Richardson’s Trinity Church in Boston. Romanesque structures are always of masonry construction.
Often closely related to the International style in appearance, the Art Moderne style was devised as a way of incorporating the machine aesthetic into architecture, in the sense that buildings could emulate motion and efficiency. It is also referred to as the Streamlined Moderne, and always carried the aura of the futuristic. Whatever the term, in this case architecture followed industrial design, as "the slick look" was used for everything from irons to baby carriages.
Characteristics • Masonry walls, usually with rough-faced, squared stonework • Most have towers with conical roofs • Round-topped arches over windows, porch supports or entrance • Deeply recessed openings • Decorative colonnettes around windows • Decorative floral patterns on column capitals, on wall surfaces and around openings.
The Fayette County Courthouse, constructed in 1900, exhibits Richardsonian arches and stone detailing.
22
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Characteristics • An asymmetrical facade, with a combination of rounded corners and angular shapes • Use of glass block • Use of metal sash windows with small panes, often placed at corners • Horizontal bands, referred to as "speed bands" • References to ocean liners, as in the use of "porthole" windows and metal railings
The Woolworth Building exhibits Art Moderne features. The streamlined sign band is the most distinctive feature.
Design Guidelines
23
13.99
2. General Design Guidelines
1. Design Character
Art Deco
2. General Design Guidelines
• circa 1930-1950 This style is related to Art Moderne in its decoration of surfaces, but in the case of Art Deco, the lines are angular rather than curvilinear. The style is most easily identified by its architectural ornament, which includes stylized floral patterns and repetitive geometric forms incorporating sharp angles and segments of circles. Zigzags, chevrons and diamond patterns are typical and often are applied as decorative moldings or are integral to masonry patterns themselves. Glass brick and rounded or angular corner windows were often used. Building entrances were embellished with decoration which extended to hardware and light fixtures. Glass brick panels were often lit from behind at night with colored lights.
The style is most easily identified by its architectural ornament, which includes stylized floral patterns and repetitive geometric forms incorporating sharp angles and segments of circles.
Characteristics • Variety of colors and textures • Stucco and tile combined • Projecting sunshades • Rounded corner windows • Colored brick or tile • Zigzag or chevron moldings • Molded metal panels or grills • Stylized floral patterns • Repetitive geometric forms
These design guidelines apply to all improvement projects in the Courthouse Area, including new buildings and alterations to existing structures of all types. (An additional chapter provides supplemental guidelines for historic buildings.) It is important to note that, while emphasis is placed on respecting historic resources, change is anticipated in the area; it is not to be “frozen in time.” However, alterations and new construction should occur in a manner that respects the traditional design context. These guidelines are based on that policy. The Courthouse Area conveys a sense of a time and place, which is expressed through its numerous historic and traditional buildings. This character should be maintained. When new building does occur, or an existing structure is altered, it should be in a manner that reinforces the basic character-defining features of the area. Such features include the way in which a building is located on its site, the manner in which it faces the street, its materials and the general alignment of architectural elements and details along a block. When these design variables are arranged in a new building to be similar to those seen traditionally in the area, visual compatibility results.
International • circa 1935 - 1970 Schools of architectural design in the modern age required new approaches to basic design. The elevator and the skyscraper went hand in hand. In the years after World War I, architects saw a chance to contribute to a new and better world. For architecture, this meant rejecting most conventional design standards. Structural systems were emphasized and curtain walls were designed to reflect modular compositions. Few buildings were constructed during this period in the Courthouse Area.
International style features include horizontal bands of glass.
24
13.100
Characteristics • Smooth wall surfaces • Flat roof line • Horizontal emphasis • Horizontal bands of glass • Minimal ornament and detail • Glass, steel and other manufactured materials
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
Building heights vary in the area, yet the scale and character of the first floors are quite similar.
The Courthouse Area conveys a sense of a time and place, which is expressed through its numerous historic and traditional buildings.
Design Guidelines
Storefronts dominate the street level throughout the area.
25
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
2. General Design Guidelines
2. General Design Guidelines
Locate the front building wall at the sidewalk line when feasible.
Site Plan
Architectural Character
Most structures in the Courthouse Area contribute to a strong “building wall” along the street because they align at the front lot line and are usually built out to the full width of the parcel, to the side lot lines. Although small gaps do occur between some structures, these are exceptions. These site plan characteristics should be preserved.
While it is important that new buildings and alterations be compatible with the historic context, it is not necessary that they imitate older building styles. In fact, stylistically distinguishing new buildings from their older neighbors in the Courthouse Area is preferred, when the overall design reinforces traditional development patterns.
2.1 Maintain the alignment of buildings at the sidewalk edge.
2.3 New interpretations of traditional building styles are encouraged.
•
•
•
Locate the front building wall at the sidewalk line when feasible. (See the map on page 16 for an example of traditional building siting patterns.) Where a building must be set back from the sidewalk, use landscape elements to define the sidewalk edge. (See also Chapter 5: Public Streetscape Improvements.)
• •
A new design that draws upon the fundamental similarities among older buildings in the area without copying them is preferred. This will allow it to be seen as a product of its own time and yet be compatible with its historic neighbors. The literal imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. In essence, infill should be a balance of new and old in design.
2.2 Orient the primary entrance of a building toward the street. • •
This contemporary interpretation of a storefront includes a recessed entry and transom element.
A building should have a clearly-defined primary entrance. For most commercial buildings, this should be a recessed entryway. A secondary public entrance to commercial spaces is also encouraged on a larger building.
Where a building must be set back from the sidewalk, use landscape elements to define the edge.
Discouraged
This contemporary cornice element includes the year of the building’s construction.
Preferred Align the building front at the sidewalk edge.
New interpretations of traditional building styles are encouraged. Photo left, before: The street wall is broken with a vacant lot. Photo right, after: A new building maintains alignment at the sidewalk edge.
26
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Design Guidelines
Simplified interpretations of vernacular commercial storefronts are also appropriate.
27
13.101
2. General Design Guidelines
2. General Design Guidelines
Architectural character, continued...
3
2
2.4 A new building should incorporate a base, a middle and a cap. •
Traditionally, buildings were composed of these three basic elements. Interpreting this tradition will help reinforce the visual continuity of the area.
3 3
2
2
Mass, Scale and Form Building heights vary substantially in the Courthouse Area and yet there is a strong sense of similarity in scale. This is in part because most buildings are within two to four stories in height. In addition, most buildings have features at the lower levels that are similar in scale. First floors, for example, are similar in height. Other lower floors are also defined by moldings that align along the block, which contribute to a perceived uniformity in height to pedestrians. A variety in building heights in new construction is, therefore, appropriate. However, the dominant scale of two to four stories should be maintained. This may be accomplished by literally constructing a building within this traditional height range; in other cases, design elements that reflect this traditional height may be incorporated into larger structures.
2.5 A new building should maintain the alignment of horizontal elements along the block. •
1
1 1
2.6 Floor-to-floor heights should appear to be similar to those seen historically. •
These three buildings in the Courthouse Area all incorporate the basic building blocks: (1) base, (2) middle and (3) cap.
Window sills, moldings and midbelt cornices are among those elements in this new building that align with existing buildings.
28
13.102
Window sills, moldings and midbelt cornices are among those elements that may align.
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
In particular, the windows in new construction should appear similar in height to those seen traditionally.
New construction should appear similar in mass and scale to structures found traditionally in the Courthouse Area.
A new building should maintain the alignment of horizontal elements along the block. Window sills, moldings and midbelt cornices are among those elements that may align.
Design Guidelines
29
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
2. General Design Guidelines
2. General Design Guidelines
Mass, scale and form, continued...
2.7 Consider dividing a larger building into “modules” that are similar in scale to buildings seen historically.
2.8 Maintain the established building scale of two to four stories in height.
•
•
If a larger building is divided into “modules,” they should be expressed three-dimensionally throughout the entire building.
•
• Consider dividing larger buildings into modules, such as this, to reflect the traditional building widths seen in the area.
•
Develop a primary facade that is in scale and alignment with surrounding historic buildings. If a building must be taller, consider stepping upper stories back from the main facade, or design the lower levels to express the alignment of elements seen traditionally in the block. (See photo, page 52.) Also consider stepping the mass of a tall building down to a lower height as it approaches surrounding historic buildings. When considering a tall structure, the alignment of building elements is particularly important. Although a new building may be taller than surrounding buildings, the first several stories should visually relate in scale to the surrounding historic context.
Mass, scale and form, continued...
new bui infill ldin g
exi s bui ting ldin g
If a structure should be markedly taller than adjacent buildings, consider stepping down the height near the older building to establish a transition in scale.
This single infill building is divided into smaller building modules that reflect traditional building widths. Upper floors step back from the front, thus maintaining the traditional two-story scale of the street.
Reinforce the established building scale of two to four stories in height.
A part of this contemporary infill building is a parking structure which is concealed with a “wrap” of office and retail uses. The openings in the parking section of the development also utilize window proportions similar to those seen historically.
In this context, a new building on the right includes a two-story element that aligns with older structures to the left. A central entry is clearly identified. The taller portion of the building is set behind the lower element. This maintains the traditional scale of the street.
30
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Design Guidelines
31
13.103
2. General Design Guidelines
2. General Design Guidelines
Exterior Building Materials
Upper-Story Windows
Traditionally, a limited palette of building materials was used in the Courthouse Area—primarily brick and stone. This same selection of materials should continue to be predominant. New materials also may be considered, however, when they relate to those used historically in scale, texture, matte finish and detailing.
A pattern exists along the streets in the Courthouse Area with the repetition of evenly-spaced, similarly-sized, upper-story windows. These also give a building a sense of human scale—even for high rise towers. Using window sizes and proportions that are familiar to the pedestrian helps them to relate to the overall size of a building. The alignment and similar scale of these upper-story windows are parts of a common way of building that should be continued.
2.9 Materials should appear similar to those used historically. • • • Materials should appear similar to those used historically, primarily stone or brick.
•
Masonry was the traditional material and is preferred for new construction. This includes stone and brick. Wood and metal were used for window, door and storefront surrounds and should be continued in new construction. New materials will be considered on a case-by-case basis. If used, they should appear similar in character to those used historically. For example, stucco, cast stone and concrete should be detailed to provide a human scale. New materials also should have a demonstrated durability in the Lexington climate.
2.11 Upper-story windows with vertical emphasis are encouraged. •
A typical, upper-story window is twice as tall as it is wide. These proportions are within a limited range; therefore, upper-story windows in new construction should relate to the window proportions seen historically.
2.12 Windows should align with others in a block. •
Windows, lintels and their trim elements should align with those on adjacent historic buildings.
2.10 A simple material finish is encouraged for a large expanse of wall plane. •
Upper-story windows with vertical emphasis are encouraged.
1x
A matte, or non-reflective, finish is preferred. Polished stone and mirrored glass, for example, should be avoided as primary materials.
2x
Stucco that is detailed to convey a sense of scale and provide visual interest is an appropriate material treatment.
Typically, upper-story windows are twice as tall as they are wide. This tradition should be continued. This may be expressed in a variety of ways. See the example to the left.
Brick
Stone
Detailed Stucco
These cast concrete elements convey the scale of traditional masonry facade components, which reinforces the traditional scale of buildings on this street.
Use building materials that are similar in their dimensions and that can be repeated as traditional modules. 32
13.104
Windows in new construction appear similar in height to those seen traditionally on other buildings nearby and yet are arranged to convey a contemporary character. This approach is encouraged..
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
Design Guidelines
33
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
2. General Design Guidelines
2. General Design Guidelines
Entries
Pedestrian Interest
The repetition of recessed building entries that occurs along the street in the Courthouse Area provides a rhythm of shadows along the street, which helps establish a sense of scale and invites pedestrians to enter buildings in the area. This trend should be continued in new construction.
The Courthouse Area should continue to develop as a pedestrianoriented environment. Streets, sidewalks and pathways should encourage walking, sitting and other outdoor activities; buildings also should be visually interesting to invite exploration by pedestrians. Existing pedestrian routes should be enhanced. A building should express human scale through materials and forms that were seen traditionally. This is important because buildings are experienced at close proximity by the pedestrian.
2.13 Building entrances should appear similar to those used historically. • Traditional storefront features—such as a kickplate, display window, transom and recessed entry—are reinterpreted in this new storefront design.
•
Clearly define the primary entrance with a canopy or other architectural or landscape feature. A contemporary interpretation of a traditional building entry, which is similar in scale and overall character to those seen historically, is encouraged.
2.15 Develop the ground floor level of a project to encourage pedestrian activity. •
2.14 Locate the primary building entrance to face the street. • •
The building entrance should be recessed. A primary building entrance also should be at or near street level. A sunken terrace entrance is not appropriate as the primary access from the street.
• •
Provide at least one of the following along primary pedestrian ways: - A storefront - Display cases - Public art - Landscaping - Decorative wall surfaces Include traditional elements such as display windows, kickplates and transoms on commercial storefronts. Avoid a blank wall or vacant lot appearance.
Avoid a blank wall that does not provide visual interest to pedestrians.
This contemporary storefront clearly identifies the primary entrance. Include traditional elements such as display windows, kickplates and transoms on commercial storefronts.
When providing a storefront at the street level is not feasible, consider using display cases that illustrate goods and services available inside or nearby.
Display windows at the library on Main Street provide interest to pedestrians and enliven the street.
Clearly define the primary entrance facing the street. 34
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Design Guidelines
35
13.105
2. General Design Guidelines
2. General Design Guidelines
Awnings and Canopies
Building Lighting
Historically, awnings and canopies were noteworthy features of buildings in the Courthouse Area and their continued use is encouraged.
This section addresses building lighting. (See page 69 for street light guidelines.) The character and level of lighting that is used on a building is a special concern. Traditionally, these exterior lights were simple in character and were used to highlight signs, entrances and first floor details. Most fixtures had incandescent lamps that cast a color similar to daylight, were relatively low in intensity and were shielded with simple shade devices. Although new lamp types may be considered, the overall effect of modest, focused building light should be continued.
2.16 A fabric awning is encouraged. • •
• • • •
Operable awnings are encouraged on historic buildings. Use colors that are compatible with the overall color scheme of the facade. Solid colors or simple, muted-stripe patterns are appropriate. The awning should fit the opening of the building. Simple shed shapes are appropriate for rectangular openings. Odd shapes, bullnose awnings and bubble awnings are inappropriate on most historic structures. Internal illumination of an awning is inappropriate.
2.17 A fixed metal canopy may be considered on a caseby-case basis. Mount an awning to accentuate character-defining features.
• •
Appropriate supporting mechanisms are wall-mounted brackets, chains and posts. A metal canopy is appropriate on a limited range of historic styles, in particular on Art Deco, Moderne and International styles. It also may be considered on a new infill structure.
2.18 On an historic building, mount an awning or canopy to accentuate character-defining features of window openings. •
It should be mounted to highlight moldings that may be found above the storefront and should match the shape of the opening.
2.19 Use lighting for the following: • • • •
2.20 Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting. • • • •
All exterior light sources should have a low level of luminescence. White lights, such as incandescent, that cast a color similar to daylight are preferred. Do not wash an entire building facade in light. Lighting fixtures should be appropriate to the building and its surroundings in terms of style, scale and intensity of illumination.
2.21 Prevent glare by using shielded and focused light sources. •
Simple shed shapes for awnings are appropriate for rectangular openings.
To accent architectural details. To accent building entrances. To accent signs. To illuminate sidewalks.
• •
Provide shielded and focused light sources that direct light downward. Unshielded, high intensity light sources and those that direct light upward should not be permitted. Shield lighting associated with service areas, parking lots and parking structures.
Canopies may be used to define entries.
36
13.106
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
Design Guidelines
37
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
3. Historic Properties
2. General Design Guidelines
Mechanical Equipment and Service Utilities Utility service boxes, telecommunication devices, cables and conduits are among the variety of equipment that may be attached to a building which can affect the character of the area. Trash and recycling storage areas also are concerns. To the greatest extent feasible, these devices should be screened from public view and negative effects on any historic resource should be avoided.
2.22 Minimize the visual impact of mechanical equipment on the public way. • • • • Minimize the visual impacts of trash storage and service areas. Dumpsters should be screened from view.
Screen equipment from view. Do not locate window air conditioning units on the building’s primary facade. Use low-profile mechanical units on rooftops that are not visible from public ways. Locate a satellite dish out of public view, to the extent feasible, and in compliance with other regulations.
2.23 Minimize the visual impacts of utility connections and service boxes. •
Locate them on secondary walls, when feasible.
2.24 Locate standpipes and other service equipment such that they will not damage historic facade materials. • •
Cutting channels into historic facade materials damages the historic building fabric and is inappropriate. Avoid locating such equipment on the front facade.
2.25 Minimize the visual impacts of trash storage and service areas. • •
Locate service areas away from major pedestrian routes; typically place them at the rear of a building. Dumpsters should be screened from view.
3. Guidelines for Historic Properties These design guidelines apply to all properties that are considered to be historic resources in the Courthouse Area. Some properties have been identified in historic surveys while many others that may not be officially designated may also have significance. In general, a building must be least fifty years old before it may be evaluated for potential historic significance. Those from the Federal period are widely recognized for their importance, but later styles also merit preservation. A basic tenet of preservation is to minimize intervention with the historic building fabric and, therefore, in the treatment of an historic building, it is best to preserve those features that remain in good condition. For those features that are deteriorated, repair is preferred, rather than replacement; but when replacement is necessary, it should be done in a manner similar to that seen historically.
Why Preserve Historic Resources? Historic resources make up a key part of the area’s character and represent tangible links to the past. They are assets that attract visitors, shoppers, businesses and residents. This can foster rehabilitation of buildings and support renewed economic activity. Reusing historic buildings offers these advantages: • Providing a link with the past • Establishing a distinct market image • Quickly making a building available for occupancy • Providing an attractive image for the area • Supporting heritage tourism strategies • Reinforcing the Courthouse Area’s ambiance Across the nation, thousands of communities promote historic preservation because doing so contributes to livability, enhances quality of life, minimizes negative impacts on the environment and yields economic rewards. Many property and business owners are also drawn to historic resources because the quality of construction is typically quite high and the buildings are readily adaptable to contemporary uses. Historic resources make up a key part of the area’s character and represent tangible links to the past.
38
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Design Guidelines
39
13.107
3. Historic Properties
3. Historic Properties
Construction Quality Many of the historic resources in the Courthouse Area are of high quality construction. Although some are deteriorated, most retain sound building systems and high quality materials. By comparison, in today’s construction, materials of such quality are rarely available and comparable detailing is very expensive. The high quality of construction in historic buildings is therefore a “value” for many people.
Character-defining features of historic properties collectively establish a sense of place, provide human scale and add rich detail to the street and should be preserved. Typical features include: original wall materials, decorative cornices, vertically-oriented upperstory windows, larger first-floor openings and trim around openings.
3.1 Preserve character-defining features that are intact.
Environmental Benefits
A preservation project typically has a higher percentage of its total costs devoted to labor and to the purchase of locally-available materials.
Character-Defining Features
Preserving an historic structure is also a sound environmental conservation policy because “recycling” the structure saves energy and reduces the need for producing new construction materials. Three types of energy savings occur: • First, energy is not consumed to demolish the existing building and dispose of the resulting debris. • Second, energy is not used to create new building materials, transport them and assemble them on site. • Finally, the “embodied” energy, that which was used to create the original building and its components, is preserved.
• •
Economic Benefits
3.3 Replace features that are missing or beyond repair.
Preservation projects also contribute more to the local economy than do new building programs because each dollar spent on a preservation project has a higher percentage devoted to labor and to the purchase of locally-available materials. By contrast, new construction typically has a higher percentage of each dollar spent devoted to materials that are produced outside of the local economy and to special construction skills that may be imported as well. Therefore, when money is spent on rehabilitating a building, it has a higher “multiplier effect,” keeping more money circulating in the local economy.
Don’t remove or damage character-defining features. Preserve intact features with appropriate maintenance techniques.
Preserve character-defining features that are intact.
3.2 Repair those features that are damaged. • •
• • •
Use methods that will not harm the historic materials. For example, repair work is preferred over replacement. When disassembly of an historic element is necessary for its repair, carefully identify how it will be stored during the rehabilitation project. Store it in a safe place until it is to be reinstalled.
Reconstruct only those portions that are beyond repair. Reconstruct the original element based on adequate evidence, if possible. This is the preferred option. If evidence is missing, a simplified interpretation of similar elements may be considered.
When disassembly of historic elements is necessary for its repair, carefully identify all pieces that will be stored during the rehabilitation project.
Repair those features that are damaged.
Replace features that are missing or beyond repair.
Reconstruct only those portions that are beyond repair.
40
13.108
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
Design Guidelines
41
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
3. Historic Properties
3. Historic Properties
Character-defining features, continued...
6
3.4 For a commercial storefront building, a rehabilitation project should preserve these character-defining elements:
3.5 For a Federal storefront building type, a rehabilitation project should preserve these character-defining elements:
•
•
• • •
5 •
•
3 4
2
Display windows: The main portion of glass on the storefront, where goods and services are displayed. Transom: The upper portion of the storefront, separated from the main display window by a frame. Kickplate: Found beneath the display window. Sometimes called a bulkhead panel. Entry: Usually set back from the sidewalk in a protected recess. Upper-story windows: Windows located above the street level. These usually have a vertical orientation, and appear to be less transparent than the large expanse of glass in the storefront below. Cornice molding: A decorative band at the top of the building. A midbelt cornice may sometimes be found separating some floors.
1
6
Upper-story windows
5
Midbelt cornice
3 1
2
Typical storefront components include: 1) kickplate, 2) display windows, 3) sign band, 4) recessed entry, 5) upper-story windows, and 6) cornice
42
• • •
Multi-paned windows: The storefront display windows as well as the upper-story windows were both typically small and vertically oriented. Entry: Sometimes set back from the sidewalk in a protected recess. The door was typically single wide and included a transom or sidelights. Cornice molding: A decorative band at the top of the building. Dormers: Used for expanded head room in the uppermost story of a building. Gabled roof: A sloping roof form with the ridge parallel to the street.
5 4 3
Flat roof
2 Cornice
4
•
Character-defining features, continued...
Recessed entries
1
Typical Federal storefront components include: 1) entry, 2) multi-paned display windows, 3) upper-story windows with operable shutters, 4) cornice, and 5) gabled roof.
The renovation of a commercial structure should maintain the characterdefining elements of the building type.
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Design Guidelines
43
13.109
3. Historic Properties
3. Historic Properties
Design of Alterations, continued...
Design of Alterations Buildings may undergo alterations over time. New alterations often occur when original material is missing and new interpretations of traditional elements become necessary. These new alterations should be planned to preserve the building’s integrity.
See Appendix C for additional technical information resources.
3.6 Design an alteration to be compatible with the historic character of the property. • •
Avoid alterations that would hinder the ability to interpret the historic significance of the original building. Alterations that seek to imply an earlier period than that of the building are inappropriate. For example, don’t apply “Colonial” details to an 1890s building.
3.7 Avoid alterations that damage historic features. •
For example, mounting a sign panel in a manner that causes decorative moldings to be damaged would be inappropriate.
The windows in this structure were boarded and architectural details needed repair. (Compare with the photo below.)
A modest building can also be renovated to be compatible with the context. In this photograph the original millinery shop front had simple moldings at the top. (Compare with the photos below.)
This row of buildings had lost some details over time and a monochromatic color scheme obscures the original design character. Overhead garage doors that had replaced original storefronts were later alterations without historic significance. (Compare with the “after” photograph below.)
Storefront windows were reopened and upper-story windows were repaired.
After rehabilitation, the row of buildings shown in the photograph above conveys a stronger sense of its historic character. Note that some old uses were retained, while other new uses were also introduced. Some noncontributing alterations were removed and storefronts were reconstructed. One was retained, but was painted to minimize impacts.
Years later, all original detail had been stripped from the building. (Compare with the photos above and below.)
The same building (above) after renovation exhibits the more classical features of commercial storefronts, including a painted cornice, kickplate and recessed entry. 44
13.110
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
Design Guidelines
45
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
3. Historic Properties
3. Historic Properties
Storefronts Many downtown storefronts have components seen traditionally on commercial buildings. The repetition of these standard elements creates a visual unity on the street that should be preserved. See page 42 for definitions.
If a storefront is altered, consider restoring it to the original design. (Compare with the two photos of the same building below.)
Although these elements are common among buildings, many of the elements relate to the period of construction and style of architecture of the building and are thus presented differently. If the storefront elements are defining of their architectural style or period of construction, they should be preserved.
However, on some buildings the specific design of individual storefront elements was not integral to the architectural style of the building. For example, in some styles, the position of the entryway is important to the design of the building, whereas in others it is not and its location moved around due to function. When this is the case and a feature (e.g., the location of the door) is not integral to the style of the building, it can be altered (e.g., the entryway can be moved or stairs to upstairs can be added.)
Storefronts continued...
The repetition of the standard storefront elements creates a visual unity on the street that should be preserved. When planning for the rehabilitation of a storefront, an evaluation of the building’s historic integrity should be made. Researching archival materials such as historic photos and building plans can be helpful in understanding the role of the storefront and its relationship to the building style and the street wall. An analysis of the existing building for any clues to the location of glass, window supports and transoms can also provide clues to a missing or altered storefront feature. Preserving significant historic storefronts or restoring an altered or missing storefront element are important preservation goals.
3.8 Preserve the historic character of a storefront when it is intact. • •
Using historic photographs can help in determining the original character. (Compare with below.)
Where original details are missing, an alternative design that is a contemporary interpretation of a traditional storefront, as this one is, may be considered. The storefront still should be designed to provide interest to pedestrians.
This rehabilitation preserves surviving details and reconstructs missing ones.
46
This will help maintain the interest of the street to pedestrians. If the storefront glass is intact, it should be preserved.
3.9 If a storefront is altered, consider restoring it to the original design. •
If evidence of the original design is missing, use a simplified interpretation of similar storefronts. The storefront still should be designed to provide interest to pedestrians.
Retain the original shape of the transom glass in an historic storefront. Removing or covering up the transom opening is inappropriate.
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Design Guidelines
47
13.111
3. Historic Properties
3. Historic Properties
3.10 An alternative design that is a contemporary interpretation of a traditional storefront is appropriate. •
•
• •
If an historically significant storefront opening has been altered, consider restoring it if the original condition can be determined. In this case, openings have been blocked down for smaller replacement windows. Returning to the original proportions is preferred.
Where the original is missing and no evidence of its character exists, a new design that uses the traditional elements may be considered. However, it must continue to convey the characteristics of typical storefronts, including the transparent character of the display windows, recessed entries and cornices, to name a few. Altering the size of an historic window opening or blocking it with opaque materials is inappropriate. Note that in some cases an original storefront may have been altered early in the history of the building and the alterations have taken on significance. Such changes should be preserved.
3.11 Maintain an historically significant storefront opening. The size and shape of the storefront are important characteristics that contribute to the integrity of an historic commercial building. Avoid altering the shapes of these features. If these elements have already been altered, consider restoring them if their original condition can be determined.
3.12 Retain the original shape of the transom glass in an historic storefront. • Preserve historic upper-story windows.
•
The upper glass band of a traditional storefront introduced light into the depths of a building. These bands are found on many historic storefronts, and they often align at the same height. The shape of the transom is important to the proportion of the storefront, and it should be preserved in its historic configuration, whenever possible. If the original glass is missing, install new glass. However, if the transom must be blocked, use it as a sign panel or a decorative band, but be certain to retain the original proportions.
3.13 Preserve historic upper-story windows. •
13.112
3.14 Maintain recessed entries where they are found. • •
• •
Historically, upper-story windows had a vertical emphasis. The proportions of these windows contribute to the character of each commercial storefront. Don’t block them down or alter their size. Consider reopening windows that are currently blocked. Maintain the historic sash as well. Repair sash, rather than replace it, when feasible.
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
Restore the historic recessed entry if it has been altered. Avoid positioning an entry flush with the sidewalk.
Original kickplate design
3.15 Where an entry is not recessed, maintain it in its original position, when feasible. •
Original windows and doors are important features that help convey the early character of a building. These elements should be preserved, when feasible.
•
48
The repetition of recessed entries provides a rhythm of shadows along the street that helps establish a sense of scale and identifies business entrances. This pattern should be maintained.
•
Windows and Doors
•
Where and entry is not recessed, maintain it in its original position, when feasible.
Entries
However, it may be necessary to comply with other code requirements, including door width, swing and construction. If so, an alteration may be considered. In some cases, entries must comply with accessibility requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Note, however, that some flexibility in application of these regulations is provided for historic properties.
Simplified replacement
Kickplates A kickplate, or bulkhead, was a popular feature of most commercial buildings. This feature should be preserved.
3.16 Retain an original kickplate as a decorative panel. •
The kickplate, located below the display window, adds interesting detail to the streetscape and should be preserved.
3.17 If the original kickplate is missing, develop a sympathetic replacement design. • •
Contemporary glass interpretation Retain the kickplate as a decorative panel. If the original is missing, develop a compatible replacement design.
Wood, metal and masonry are appropriate materials for replacements. Coordinate the color of the kickplate with other trim elements on the building.
Maintain recessed entries where they are found. The repetition of recessed entries provides a rhythm of shadows along the street that helps establish a sense of scale and identifies business entrances.
Design Guidelines
➛
Storefronts continued...
If the original kickplate is missing, develop a sympathetic replacement design. Here a transparent glass kickplate is used where a solid panel may have existed. However, the original proportions are still conveyed, which is appropriate.
49
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
3. Historic Properties
3. Historic Properties
Cornices
Facade Materials
Most historic commercial buildings have cornices to cap their facades. Their repetition and general alignment along a street contribute to the visual continuity on a block and should be preserved.
Original exterior building materials provide a sense of scale and texture and often convey the work of skilled craftsmen. These original building materials should not be covered, damaged or removed.
3.18 Preserve the character of the cornice line of an historic building.
3.21 Historic building materials and craftsmanship add textural qualities, as well as visual continuity and character to the streetscape, and should be preserved.
•
This may be a straight or stepped parapet.
• If the cornice is missing from a building, consider reconstructing it. (See below.)
3.19 Reconstruct a missing cornice, when historic evidence is available. • •
Use early photographs to determine design details of an original cornice. The substitution of another old cornice for the original may be considered, provided that the substitute is similar in appearance to the original.
Later covering obscures the original storefront
Brick and stone are the dominant building materials and their character and finish should be preserved.
3.22 Protect historic material surfaces. • •
Don’t use harsh cleaning methods, such as sandblasting, that could damage the finish of historic materials. If chemical cleaners are used, a test patch should be reviewed.
Don’t cover or obscure original facade materials.
3.23 Protect masonry from water deterioration. 3.20 A simplified interpretation also is appropriate if evidence of the original is missing.
•
•
•
Appropriate materials include stone, brick and stamped metal. Concrete and resin cast products may also be used.
•
Reconstruct a missing cornice when historic evidence is available.
•
Provide proper drainage so water does not stand on flat surfaces or accumulate in decorative features. Provide a means to drain water away from foundations to minimize rising damp. Do not permit downspouts to direct water to the foundation. DO NOT use a sealant, or clear coat, to protect masonry. A sealant will prevent proper breathing and cause moisture to be trapped inside the masonry. However, if masonry was painted historically, then it may be appropriate to repaint.
3.24 Don’t cover or obscure original facade materials. •
A simplified interpretation also is appropriate if evidence of the original is missing.
Reconstructing missing details, when sufficient information is available, is encouraged. In this case, the original cornice is missing in the photo at upper left. The central portion of the pediment is under construction, above. When completed, in the photo at lower left, the shadow lines from the cornice once again add interest to the building front.
•
Covering original facades not only conceals interesting detail, but also interrupts the visual continuity along the street. If the original material has been covered, expose it if feasible.
3.25 If material replacement is necessary, use materials similar to those employed historically. •
•
Brick and stone were the primary wall materials for most buildings. Wood and metal were used for window, door and storefront surrounds. Substitute materials may be used if they match the original in appearance.
Protect masonry from water deterioration.
Preserve the character of the cornice line with a replacement design. 50
If the original material has been covered, uncover it if feasible.
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Design Guidelines
51
13.113
3. Historic Properties
3. Historic Properties
Design of Additions Many buildings have experienced additions over time, as the need for more space occurred. An addition should be designed such that the historic character of the building can still be perceived. When planning a new addition to an historic structure, the negative effects that may occur should be minimized. While some destruction of original materials is almost always a part of constructing an addition, such loss should be minimized.
When a rooftop addition is set back from the front, the original scale of the building can be perceived.
Three distinct types of additions should be considered. First, a ground-level addition that involves expanding the footprint of a structure may be considered. Such an addition should be to the rear or side of a building. This will have the least impact on the historic character of a building, but there may only be limited opportunities to do this. Second, an addition to the roof may be designed that is simple in character and set back substantially from the front of a building. In addition, the materials, window sizes and alignment of trim elements on the addition should be compatible to those of the existing structure. A third option, which only will be considered on a case-by-case basis, is to design an addition within the wall plane of the existing building. This option is the most difficult and requires the most care to respect the historic relationship of the building to the street. Such an addition should provide a visual distinction between the existing structure and its addition. This may be accomplished through the use of a midbelt cornice element or a subtle change in building materials.
3.26 An addition should be compatible in scale, materials and character with the main building.
Design of additions, continued...
3.27 An addition should not damage or obscure historically or architecturally important features. •
For example, loss or alteration of a cornice line should be avoided.
3.28 Design an addition such that the historic character of the original building can still be interpreted. •
•
A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the building is inappropriate. For example, an addition that is more ornate than the original building would be out of character. An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the building also is inappropriate because it would confuse the history of the building.
An original three-story building, before an addition. (Compare with sketches below and on the following page.)
3.29 An addition should be subtly distinguishable from the historic building. •
An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, even in subtle ways, so that the character of the original can be interpreted.
3.30 An addition may be made to the rear or side of a building if it does the following: •
An addition should maintain the alignment of storefront elements, moldings, cornices and upper-story windows that exist on the main part of the building and its surrounding context.
New addition to the side New addition to the rear
An addition may be set back to preserve the perception of the historic scale of the building. In the image on the left, the original three floors of this building are visible. In the angle view at right, two newer floor are visible. Note how in this building the addition cannot be seen when looking at the building straight-on.
52
13.114
Appropriate alternative approaches to additions. Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
Design Guidelines
53
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
4. Parking Facilities
3. Historic Properties
Design of additions, continued...
Roof addition set back from the front
3.31 An addition may be made to the roof of a building if it does the following: •
• •
An addition should be set back from the primary, character-defining facade, to preserve the perception of the historic scale of the building. Its design should be modest in character, so it will not attract attention from the historic facade. The addition should be distinguishable as new, albeit in a subtle way.
3.32 In limited circumstances, an addition may be made to the roof of a building and not be set back from character-defining facades, if it does the following: •
•
Roof addition in the same plane as the original, but differentiated with details
•
An addition should be distinguished from the existing building. A change in material or a decorative band can be considered to accomplish this. An addition should maintain the alignment of storefront elements, moldings, cornices and upper-story windows that exist on the main part of the building. The addition should also be compatible in scale, texture and materials with the original.
4. Parking Facilities The Courthouse Area first developed without the automobile and its streets were designed for pedestrians and horse-drawn conveyances. Cars did appear early in the twentieth century, however, and they have continued to have a major presence. Even so, their visual impacts should be minimized. New parking facilities should be designed to be attractive, compatible additions to the historic area. Using high quality materials, including a sense of scale in architectural details, and providing active uses at the sidewalk edge are some methods that can mitigate potentially negative impacts of new parking facilities. In general, a new parking facility should remain subordinate to the street scene.
Location of Parking Facilities 4.1 Locate a parking facility, particularly a surface lot, in the interior of a block, whenever possible. •
This acknowledges the special function of corner properties as they are generally more visible than interior lots, serve as landmarks and provide a sense of enclosure to an intersection.
4.2 Site a parking lot so it will minimize gaps in the continuous building wall of a block. • • •
Where a parking lot shares a site with a building, place the parking to the rear or side of the building. In this way, the architectural continuity of the street can be preserved. Avoid multiple curb cuts. These complicate turning movements and disrupt the sidewalk.
For more detailed information regarding parking requirements, see the Zoning Ordinance for the LexingtonFayette Urban County, Kentucky, Article 16-1: General Regulations for Parking and Loading Areas.
Parking located to the side of the building Landscape buffer
parking
Entries Display windows
Entry plaza-no parking in front
Appropriate alternative approaches to additions.
Precedent for constructing an addition in line with the original building walls exists in the Courthouse Area: the McClelland Building, which stands on the northeast corner of Short and Upper streets, was built in 1900 as a five-story building, with the two additional stories being added circa 1904.
54
Display windows
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Where a parking lot shares a site with a building, place the parking at the rear of the site or beside the building and screen it.
street Locate a parking facility, particularly surface parking lots, at the interior of a block whenever possible. Design Guidelines
55
13.115
4. Parking Facilities
4. Parking Facilities
Visual Impacts of Surface Parking 4.3 Where a parking lot abuts a public sidewalk, provide a visual buffer. • 6’ MIN.
• •
•
This may be a landscaped strip or planter that is a minimum of six feet in depth. Consider the use of a wall as a screen for the edge of the lot. Materials should be compatible with those of nearby buildings. Note that for a parking area used by five or more vehicles, it must be landscaped and screened, according to Article 18: Landscape and Land Use Buffers, of the Zoning Ordinance for the Lexington-Fayette Urban County, Kentucky. Use a combination of trees and shrubs to create a landscape buffer.
4.4 To reduce the visual impacts of a large parking lot area, divide it into a number of smaller parking parcels and separate them with landscaping. • •
Visual impacts of surface parking, continued...
Plant shrubs and small trees, at least four feet in height, to define circulation routes for pedestrians and vehicles. Divide parking lots into smaller areas with planted buffers between them to minimize the perceived scale of the total field of stalls.
Intermediate tree plantings between islands Tree grate
Minimize the negative visual impact of cars parked on site. Divide parking lots into smaller areas with planted buffers between them.
Where a parking lot abuts a public sidewalk, provide a buffer. Plant shrubs and small trees, at least four feet in height, to define circulation routes for pedestrians and vehicles.
Consider the use of walls as screens for the edges of lots. Materials should be compatible with those of nearby historic buildings.
Consider the use of fences and walls as screens for the edges of lots. Where a parking lot abuts a public sidewalk, provide a landscape buffer. This one includes ground covers and a fence.
56
13.116
Use a combination of trees and shrubs to create a landscape buffer.
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
Design Guidelines
57
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
4. Parking Facilities
4. Parking Facilities
Visual Impacts of Parking Structures parking
retail
Parking structures should be designed to enhance the activity of the streetscape in the Courthouse Area. At a minimum a parking structure should help to animate the street and be compatible with the surrounding historic context. The visual impacts of the cars themselves should be minimized. (Note that these guidelines apply in addition to the General Design Guidelines for the design of an infill building.)
4.5 Design a parking structure so that it creates a visually attractive and active street edge.
Preferred!
• parking •
Not appropriate
4.6 A parking structure should be compatible with Visual impacts of parking facilities, continued... traditional buildings in the surrounding area. • • • • •
Respect the regular window pattern and other architectural elements of adjacent historic buildings. Maintain the alignments and rhythms of architectural elements, as seen along the street. Continue the use of similar building materials. Avoid multiple curb cuts. These complicate turning movements and disrupt the sidewalk. Express the traditional widths of buildings in the area.
When feasible, a parking structure in the area should be wrapped with retail or another active use along the street edge, to shield the facility from the street and add activity to the street. Other methods of accomplishing this include, but are not limited to: - Retail/commercial wrap - Murals or public art - Landscaping - Product display cases
The ground level of a parking structure should be wrapped by retail space, offices or some other active use along the street edge, when feasible.
A parking structure should be designed to be compatible with traditional buildings in the surrounding area. This garage fails to do so.
A part of this infill building is a parking structure that is set back from the front and sides of a retail wrap. The openings in the parking section reflect window proportions similar to those seen historically in the area.
Design a parking structure so that it creates a visually attractive and active pedestrian environment. This parking structure is screened with a two-story “wrap” of retail space.
This parking structure incorporates a wrap of retail stores along the street edge. The storefronts are contemporary interpretations of the historic downtown context.
58
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Design Guidelines
59
13.117
5. Public Streetscape Improvements
4. Parking Facilities
Security and Pedestrian Circulation in Parking Facilities
5. Public Streetscapes & Open Spaces
4.7 Design a parking facility so that pedestrian access is easy and clearly defined.
Lexington has the opportunity to reinforce downtown as a distinct pedestrian precinct, one in which people walking share downtown with buses, automobiles and bicycles. This mix of traffic can provide a sense of excitement and can actually enhance the pedestrian experience if these other elements are kept in balance. Paramount, however, should be providing a sense of comfort for pedestrians. This includes ensuring that the sidewalks are designed to facilitate walking and that public spaces are created which are lively and inviting. This section includes guidelines for sidewalk and open space design for the Courthouse Area that will help to achieve this objective.
• • •
Walkways should be clearly defined with graphics, lighting or landscaping. Providing a direct connection between a parking structure and its supporting businesses is desirable. Interior and exterior lighting should be planned to assure user safety.
Narrow curb cuts, such as this, can provide access to internal parking facilities while minimizing crossing conflicts with pedestrians.
Design Concept for the Public Streetscape The Lexington Downtown Streetscape Master Plan (1996) calls for installation of new street furniture, including benches, planters and waste receptacles, as well as new street lights along portions of Main Street. In conjunction with these improvements, reconstruction of some sidewalks is also anticipated. The scheme includes use of decorative paving for sidewalks and incorporates metal benches and waste receptacles. Cast planters are also employed. The streetscape plan also establishes some basic principles for street furnishings. The design guidelines presented in this section draw upon the basic design concepts established in this plan and further provide directions for how these furnishings may most effectively be placed in the streetscape. Precedent exists in the area for providing vehicular access that presents less of a conflict with pedestrian movements. The narrow passage in this Federal block of buildings is an example.
For additional details about the streetscape design, see: Lexington Downtown Streetscape Master Plan, June 1996.
Fundamentally, streetscape designs for downtown, and for the Courthouse Area specifically, should help to establish a sense of visual continuity while still expressing unique qualities of the region. This means that a consistent set of street furniture elements should be used whenever feasible and that open spaces should be designed to convey a sense of visual relatedness while also facilitating individual designs that will add accent to the urban setting. With respect to street furniture styles, the designs should not appear frozen in time, but instead should express an image of Lexington as it is today while also being respectful of its heritage. For example, street lights need not match those found historically in the area, but they should be compatible with and reinforce the context of the surviving historic buildings.
60
13.118
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
Design Guidelines
61
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
5. Public Streetscape Improvements
5. Public Streetscape Improvements
Decorative Paving
Sidewalk Design Sidewalks vary in construction and quality in the area. While many sidewalks in downtown are concrete, those along portions of Main Street are brick. This paving was installed in the early 1970s as part of an enhancement program for the area. Ramps have been installed at most corners to facilitate access. Portions of sidewalks have eroded over time and may require replacement. When reconstruction of sidewalks does occur, it should help to establish a sense of visual continuity for the area and to enhance the walking experience.
5.1 Use a consistent decorative paving design to convey a sense of visual continuity. •
Decorative paving should be used to denote distinct activity zones, such as intersections, pedestrian crossings and building entrances, and to define places for sitting and other outdoor activities.
5.2 Brick pavers should be incorporated in all sidewalks. •
Existing sidewalk
Sidewalks vary in construction and quality in the area.
Sidewalk design, continued...
Decorative street light
•
Cluster of street furniture
•
Expanded sidewalk, or plaza, at corner
•
The extent of brick to be used should comply with the hierarchy specified in the Lexington Downtown Streetscape Master Plan (1996). Some sidewalks have a simple accent edge while others have more extensive amounts of brick to define special activity areas. A basic sidewalk design may include a brick accent strip along the curb and the balance may be broom-finished concrete. Brick paving may also be used to identify building entrances and special activity areas. Sidewalks with a greater intensity of use should have a higher percentage of brick paving. This may be a scored and colored concrete or high density, modular pavers.
Brick pavers should be incorporated in all sidewalks.
Curb ramp The private courtyard is positioned to align with the mid-block crossing
Building wall
Provide expanded sidewalk areas, or “plazas,” where conditions permit doing so.
Expanded sidewalk at the mid-block crossing Coordinate private open space development with that of the streetscape design of public sidewalks, when conditions permit.
62
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Design Guidelines
63
13.119
5. Public Streetscape Improvements
5. Public Streetscape Improvements
Sidewalk design, continued...
Sidewalk Plazas
Public Open Space
5.3 Provide expanded sidewalk areas, or “plazas,” where conditions permit. •
• •
Where appropriate, work within existing extended rights-of-way or consider expansions to existing sidewalks at strategic locations. For example, locating an expanded plaza at the entry to a theater would accommodate gatherings of patrons. In addition, creating a “neck-down” at an intersection or midblock crossing is appropriate. These expanded areas also provide space for clustering street furniture.
5.4 Coordinate private open space development with that of the streetscape design of public sidewalks, when conditions permit. •
Opportunities exist to create outdoor places for people within properties, in addition to “plazas” that may be developed in expanded areas of the sidewalks. These spaces may include gardens and courtyards as part of building entries and they may also include more formal, public open spaces. In all cases, these should be designed to maximize the potential for their active use and to enhance the traditional character of the area.
5.5 Open spaces should read as “accents” in the street wall of building fronts. •
•
For example, combine a private courtyard with an expanded sidewalk plaza to maximize the visual impacts of these spaces. Building entries open onto courtyard to provide activity
Public sidewalk
In general, the majority of the edge of a block should consist of building walls. Gaps in the street wall that occur as open space should be planned to be subordinate to the definition of the street edge with buildings. In general, at least 50% of a building wall should be set at the sidewalk edge. Therefore, no more than 50% of the frontage of a property should be open space.
5.6 Define the edges of the open space along the sidewalk. •
Cheapside circa 1890.
Union Station circa 1930s.
Use changes in paving, hedges and walls to define the street edge.
5.7 Frame public open space activities that will be in use year round. • • Paving design changes at traditional storefront line to define the building wall
Locate open space such that pedestrian circulation routes to major buildings cross it in order to help to animate the space. Orient major entrances onto the open space and design circulation routes to facilitate movement through it.
5.8 Site open space to maximize opportunities for sun and shade. •
Provide shade for summer months and sun in the winter, when feasible.
Planters and benches also help define the building wall line Courtyard within property line Frame public open space activities that will be in use year round and define the edges of the open space along the sidewalk.
64
13.120
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
Design Guidelines
65
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
5. Public Streetscape Improvements
5. Public Streetscape Improvements
5.13 Position a bench to provide a sense of comfort.
Street Furniture Several areas of the downtown already have amenities in place that enhance the pedestrian experience. Additional furnishings should be considered to enhance the area, but should work with the existing features and the hierarchy of streetscape improvements proposed in the Lexington Downtown Streetscape Master Plan (1996). As feasible, street furnishings, such as benches, planters, lighting, newspaper racks and waste receptacles, should be located only in a “furnishings zone,” which maintains a clearly defined pedestrian travel lane.
• •
Buffer the bench from traffic; for example, position a planter between the bench and the curb. Avoid locating a bench close to the curb.
Waste receptacles 5.14 Cluster waste receptacles with other furnishings. •
The design of the receptacles should be compatible with other existing furnishings.
5.9 All street furniture in the public right-of-way should have similar materials and colors.
Planters
•
5.15 When feasible, cluster planters with other furnishings.
•
When feasible, street furniture should express local character in terms of materials and design. Individual furnishings should be of designs such that they may be combined with other street furniture in a coherent composition.
Street furniture, continued...
• •
Street Furniture Arrangement •
The design of the planters should be compatible with other furnishings. Install freestanding planters at seating areas, along edges with parking lots, in pedestrian plazas and in clustered furnishing areas. A grouping of three to five planters is recommended.
5.10 Street furniture should be located in areas of high pedestrian activity. •
Locate furniture at pedestrian route intersections and major building entrances and near outdoor gathering places.
5.11 Street furnishings should be clustered in “groupings,” when feasible. •
Use planters and waste receptacles to frame spaces for benches, for example.
Seating 5.12 Public seating should be provided to enhance the pedestrian experience. • •
66
Install benches in high pedestrian traffic areas and/or areas of interest. The design of the bench should be consistent with other furnishings.
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Design Guidelines
67
13.121
5. Public Streetscape Improvements
5. Public Streetscape Improvements
Landscaping and Planting
Street Lights
Located in the heart of the Bluegrass region, downtown Lexington has a rich array of landscape materials, most of it indigenous to the area. Consistent with the standards established in the Lexington Downtown Streetscape Master Plan (1996), a harmonious streetscape palette of plant material should be employed.
Street lighting should also reinforce the visual continuity of downtown. The light fixtures (luminaires) and poles (standards) should be unifying design elements that promote visual interest and variety.
5.16 Use indigenous plant materials when feasible.
5.21 Light pole designs should be decorative and complement other street furniture.
•
Locate street trees along edges of sidewalks, maintaining a clearly defined pedestrian travel zone. Locate street trees in larger planting areas, such as buffer strips adjacent to parking lots and/or pocket parks. Provide underground irrigation systems. Use flowers to provide seasonal colors. No planting, with the exception of ground cover, espalier plants and hedges, shall be placed closer than two feet to pavement or structures.
•
5.17 Trees installed in the sidewalks shall have tree wells that reflect the intensity of pedestrian traffic.
•
• • • •
• • • •
Lower-level use areas shall have ground cover or loosely laid bricks. Higher intensity use areas shall have cast metal tree grates. The grates shall be of a matching design, as specified in the Streetscape Master Plan, 12/99. A tree well should be a minimum of 40 square feet in area.
5.18 Install new street trees to enhance the pedestrian experience. • • •
Install new trees where walkway widths permit. Spacing of new street trees should average 35 feet. Replace trees that are diseased or have past their life cycle.
5.19 Street tree species should be consistent along designated streets. •
•
The color of the pole should match that of other key street furnishings, including benches and waste receptacles. A style that reflects the history of the street may be considered; however, a contemporary design that is compatible with the historic buildings in the context also is appropriate.
Higher light levels may be provided at street intersections, if necessary.
5.22 The light pole, or standard, should be designed to accommodate special decorative accessories. •
Mounts for hanging planter baskets and banners, for example, should be included. Mounts for seasonal lighting schemes also should be considered.
5.23 Streets lights in mid-block locations should convey a pedestrian-oriented scale. •
•
Lighting along the right-of-way should be a combination of pedestrian-scaled street lights and spillover from lights on adjacent buildings. Lighting in this location should be designed to be comfortable to pedestrians. A lamp that conveys the color spectrum similar to daylight is preferred. For example, metal halide and color-corrected sodium are appropriate.
The light pole, or standard, should be designed to accommodate special decorative accessories.
5.24 Higher light levels may be provided at street intersections, if necessary. •
Taller poles, with higher intensity lamps, may be used in these locations. Cobra style street lights are examples.
Tree species should comply with those specified in the Lexington Downtown Streetscape Master Plan (1996).
5.20 Provide electrical service for string lights in trees.
68
13.122
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
Design Guidelines
69
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
6. Signs
6. Signs
Even so, throughout the history of the area, signs have remained subordinate to the architecture. While some large signs have existed, these were relatively limited in number, such that one’s overall ability to perceive the character of sets of buildings was maintained. Therefore, the key unifying features of the area, including the alignment of first floor elements and the rhythm of building fronts and windows, have remained clearly visible.
6. Signs Traditionally, commercial signs have been a part of the character of downtown Lexington. Early photographs include a variety of signs, which occurred in five types: •
•
Medium-sized, square or rectangularly-shaped signs that projected from the building above the awnings or canopies; printed on both sides
Note that these guidelines for signs address the character, composition and placement of signs. Specific standards for the number and sizes of permitted signs are located in other regulations.
In addition, signs were mounted to fit within architectural features. In many cases, they were mounted flush above the storefront, just above moldings. Others were located between columns or centered in “panels” on a building face. This method also enabled one to perceive the design character of individual structures. Inappropriate: A sign should be subordinate to the overall building composition.
Small, horizontally-oriented rectangular signs that protruded from the building below the awnings or canopies but above pedestrians’ heads; printed on both sides
•
Medium- to large-sized, horizontally-oriented rectangular signs attached flat against the building, above and/or below the awnings; printed on one side only
•
Large “blade” signs (i.e., vertically-oriented, tall signs) that projected from the second or third/fourth floors of a building, above awnings or canopies; printed on both sides
•
Window signs, painted on glass; used at the street level and on upper floors
Historically, signs that were mounted on the exterior advertised the primary business of a building. Typically, this use occupied a street level space and sometimes upper floors as well. Window signs were the only ones used for businesses above. In the case of a large structure that included several businesses on upper floors, the name of the building itself was displayed on an exterior sign. Tenants relied on a directory at the street level.
Therefore, these traditions, of having a diversity of signs that remain subordinate to the overall context, and of signs complementing architectural compositions, should be maintained.
The Sign Context A sign typically serves two functions: first, to attract attention, and second to convey information, essentially identifying the business or services offered within. If it is well designed, the building front alone can serve the attention-getting function, allowing the sign to be focused on conveying information in a well-conceived manner. All new signs should be developed with the overall context of the building and of the area in mind.
6.1 Consider the building front as part of an overall sign program. • •
The overall facade composition, including ornamental details and signs, should be coordinated. Signs also should be in proportion to the building, such that they do not dominate its appearance.
Where several businesses share a building, coordinate the signs in a directory or use a master sign plan.
•
6.2 A sign should be subordinate to the overall building composition. • •
Sizes varied. Most signs were a few square feet in area, but some of the blade signs were quite large. In general, these larger signs were for a cultural or institutional facility, such as a theater, or for an office block. In a few instances, major retailers also used them.
• The earliest signs had no lights, but in time a variety of methods were used. Many signs in the early twentieth century had incandescent lamps focused on the sign panel. By the 1903s, some were outlined in lights and by the 1950s, neon appeared occasionally.
Design Guidelines
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Coordinate a sign within the overall facade composition. A sign should be in proportion to the building, such that it does not dominate the appearance. Develop a master sign plan for the entire building; this should be used to guide individual sign design decisions.
71
72
A sign should appear to be in scale with the facade. Locate a sign on a building such that it will emphasize design elements of the facade itself. On an historic building a sign should not obscure architectural details or features. Mount a sign to fit within existing architectural features. Use the shape of the sign to help reinforce the horizontal lines of moldings and transoms seen along the street.
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
13.123
6. Signs
6. Signs
Appropriate Sign Types
Sign Content
6.3 A flush-mounted wall sign may be considered.
6.8 Using a symbol for a sign is encouraged.
•
•
•
When feasible, place a wall sign such that it aligns with others on the block. When planning a wall sign, determine if decorative moldings exist that could define a “sign panel.” If so, locate a flush-mounted sign such that it fits within a panel formed by moldings or transom panels. When mounted on a building with historic significance a sign should not obscure significant facade features.
6.9 Use colors for the sign that are compatible with those of the building front. Symbol signs add interest to the street, are quickly read and are remembered better than written words.
6.4 A projecting (blade) sign may be considered. • • •
A small blade sign should be located near the business entrance, just above the door or to the side of it. A large blade sign should be mounted higher, and centered on the facade or positioned at the corner. Note that other approvals may be required to allow a sign to overhang the public right-of-way.
•
Sign Lighting Preserve an historic painted sign where it exists, when feasible. A flush-mounted sign, located directly above the entry way, is appropriate.
•
6.13 Indirect lighting is preferred for a sign. • •
Indirect lighting, that which is directed at a sign from an external, shielded lamp, is preferred. A warm light, similar to daylight, is preferred.
6.14 If internal illumination is used, it should be designed to be subordinate to the overall building composition.
6.7 Sign materials should be compatible with that of the building facade.
•
Avoid hard-to-read or overly intricate typeface styles.
6.12 Preserve an historic painted sign where it exists, when feasible.
Sign Materials
•
Typefaces that are in keeping with those seen in the area traditionally are encouraged. Also limit the number of colors used on a sign. In general, no more than three colors should be used.
6.11 Select letter styles and sizes that will be compatible with the building front.
A window sign may be painted on a window. A window sign should cover no more than approximately twentyfive percent (25%) of the total window area. It may be painted on the glass or hung just inside a window.
Group small, individual signs on a single panel as a directory to make them easier to locate.
•
•
6.6 A directory sign may be considered. •
6.10 A simple sign design is preferred. •
Any sign that visually overpowers the building or obscures significant architectural features, such as this one, is inappropriate.
6.5 A window sign may be considered. • •
A symbol sign adds interest to the street, can be read quickly and is remembered better than written words.
•
Painted wood and metal are appropriate materials for signs. Their use is encouraged. Unfinished materials, including unpainted wood, are discouraged because they are out of character with the context. Highly reflective materials that will be difficult to read are inappropriate. Painted signs on blank walls were common historically and may be considered.
•
Internal illumination of an entire sign panel is discouraged. If internal illumination is used, a system that backlights sign text only is preferred. Neon and other tubular illumination may be considered. However, use neon in limited amounts so it does not become visually obtrusive.
A window sign may be considered. It may be painted on the glass or hung just inside a window.
Design Guidelines
13.124
73
74
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Appendices
Appendices
9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.
Appendix A The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings are general rehabilitation guidelines established by the U.S. National Park Service. These standards are policies that serve as a basis for design principles presented in this document that address historic properties. The Secretary’s Standards state that:
Design for alternations and additions to existing properties should not be discouraged when such alterations and additions do not destroy significant historical, architectural or cultural material. Such design should be compatible with the size, scale, color, material and character of the property, neighborhood and environment.
1. A property shall be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships. 2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property shall be avoided. 3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, shall not be undertaken. 4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property shall be preserved. 6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. 8. Archeological resources shall be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken.
Design Guidelines
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
75
76
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
13.125
Appendices
Appendices
Appendix B
Feeling. As related to the determination of “integrity” of a property, feeling refers to how an historic property evokes the aesthetic or historic sense of past time and place.
Glossary of Terms
Fenestration. The arrangement of windows and other exterior openings on a building.
Alignment. The arrangement of objects along a straight line.
Form. The overall shape of a structure (i.e., most structures are rectangular in form).
Appurtenance. An additional object added to a building; typically includes vents, exhausts hoods, air conditioning units, etc.
Frame. A window component. See window parts.
Association. As related to the determination of “integrity” of a property, association refers to a link of an historic property with an historic event, activity or person. Also, the quality of integrity through which an historic property is linked to a particular past time and place.
Gable. The portion, above eave level, of an end wall of a building with a pitched or gambrel roof. In the case of a pitched roof this takes the form of a triangle. The term is also used sometimes to refer to the whole end wall. Glazing. Fitting glass into windows and doors.
Building. A resource created principally to shelter any form of human activity, such as a house.
Head. The top horizontal member over a door or window opening.
Contributing Resource. A building, site, structure or object adding to the historic significance of an historic district.
Historic Area. A significant concentration of sites, buildings, structures or objects united historically or aesthetically by plan or physical development.
Corbelling. A series of projections, each stepped out further than the one below it; most often found on brick walls and chimney stacks.
In-Kind Replacement. To replace a feature of a building with materials of the same characteristics, such as material, texture, color, etc.
Cornice. The continuous projection at the top of a wall. The top course or molding of a wall when it serves as a crowning member.
Kickplate. The horizontal element or assembly at the base of a storefront and which is parallel to a public walkway. The kickplate provides a transition between the ground and storefront glazing area.
Design. As related to the determination of “integrity” of a property, design refers to the elements that create the physical form, plan, space, structure and style of a property.
Location. As related to the determination of “integrity” of a property, location refers to an historic property existing in the same place as it did during the period of significance.
Dormer. A window set upright in a sloping roof. The term is also used to refer to the roofed projection in which this window is set.
Mass. The physical size and bulk of a structure. Elevation. A mechanically accurate, “head-on” drawing of the face of a building or object, without any allowance for the effect of the laws of perspective. Any measurement on an elevation will be in a fixed proportion, or scale, to the corresponding measurement on the real building.
Masonry. Construction materials such as stone, brick, concrete block or tile. Material. As related to the determination of “integrity” of a property, material refers to the physical elements that were combined or deposited in a particular pattern or configuration to form an historic property.
Facade. Front or principal face of a building; any side of a building that faces a street or other open space.
Design Guidelines
13.126
77
78
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
Appendices
Appendices
Module. The appearance of a single facade plane, despite being part of a larger building. One large building can incorporate several building modules.
Recessed Entry. A common component of an historic storefront. Display windows, which contained dry goods and other wares for sale, flanked the recessed entry historically.
Molding. A decorative band or strip of material with a constant profile or section designed to cast interesting shadows. It is generally used in cornices and as trim around window and door openings.
Rehabilitation. The act or process of returning a property to a state of utility through repair or alteration that makes possible an efficient contemporary use while preserving those portions or features of the property which are significant to its historical, architectural and cultural value.
Noncontributing Resource. A building, site, structure or object that does not add to the historic significance of a property.
Renovation. The act or process of returning a property to a state of utility through repair or alteration that makes possible a contemporary use.
Parapet. A low wall or railing often used around a balcony or along the edge of a roof. Period of Significance. Span of time in which a property attained the significance.
Restoration. The act or process of accurately recovering the form and details of a property and its setting as it appeared at a particular period of time by means of the removal of later work or by the replacement of missing earlier work.
Property. Area of land containing a single historic resource or a group of resources.
Roof. The top covering of a building. Following are some types: • Gable roof has a pitched roof with ridge and vertical ends. • Hip roof has sloped ends instead of vertical ends. • Shed roof (lean-to) has one slope only and is built against a higher wall.
Orientation. Generally, orientation refers to the manner in which a building relates to the street. The entrance to the building plays a large role in the orientation of a building; whereas, it should face the street. Pediment. A triangular section framed by a horizontal molding on its base and two sloping moldings on each of its sides. Usually used as a crowning member for doors, windows and mantles.
Sash. See window parts. Scale. The size of structure as it appears to the pedestrian.
Preservation. The act or process of applying measures to sustain the existing form, integrity and materials of a building or structure, and the existing form and vegetative cover of a site. It may include initial stabilization work, where necessary, as well as ongoing maintenance of the historic building materials.
Setting. As related to the determination of “integrity” of a property, setting refers to the physical environment of an historic property. Side Light. A usually long, fixed sash located beside a door or window; often found in pairs.
Protection. The act or process of applying measures designed to affect the physical condition of a property by defending or guarding it from deterioration, loss or attack or to cover or shield the property from danger of injury. In the case of buildings and structures, such treatment is generally of a temporary nature and anticipates future historic preservation treatment; in the case of archaeological sites, the protective measure may be temporary or permanent.
Sill. The lowest horizontal member in a frame or opening for a window or door. Also, the lowest horizontal member in a framed wall or partition. Size. The dimensions in height and width of a building's face. Stabilization. The fact or process of applying measures designed to reestablish a weather resistant enclosure and the structural stability of an unsafe or deteriorated property while maintaining the essential form as it exists at present.
Reconstruction. The act or process of reproducing by new construction the exact form and detail of a vanished building, structure or object, or part thereof, as it appeared at a specific period of time.
Design Guidelines
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
79
80
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
13.127
Appendices
Appendices
Storefront. The street level facade of a commercial building, usually having display windows.
Appendix C
Sreetscape. Generally, the streetscape refers to the character of the street, or how elements of the street form a cohesive environment.
Additional Information
Traditional. Based on or established by the history of the area.
Grimmer, Anne E. , Preservation Briefs 6: Dangers of Abrasive Cleaning to Historic Buildings. Washington, DC: Technical Preservation Services Division, National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. London, Mark, Respectful Rehabilitation - Masonry - How to Care for Old and Historic Brick and Stone. Washington, DC: The National Trust for Historic Preservation, 1988. National Trust for Historic Preservation. New Energy for Old Buildings. Washington, DC: The Preservation Press, National Trust for Historic Preservation, 1981. Nelson, Lee H., Preservation Briefs 17: Architectural Character: Identifying the Visual Aspects of Historic Buildings as an Aid to Preserving Their Character. Washington, DC: Technical Preservation Services New York Landmarks Conservancy. Repairing Old and Historic Windows: A Manual for Architects and Homeowners. Washington, DC: National Trust for Historic Preservation, 1992. Park, Sharon C., Preservation Briefs 16: The Use of Substitute Materials on Historic Building Exteriors. Washington, DC: Technical Preservation Services Division, National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. Park, Sharon C. Preservation Briefs 13: The Repair and Thermal Upgrading of Historic Steel Windows. Washington, DC: Technical Preservation Services, National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. Weeks, Kay D., Preservation Briefs 14: New Exterior Additions to Historic Buildings: Preservation Concerns. Washington, D.C.: Technical Preservation Services, National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, 1987.
Transom Window. A small window or series of panes above a door, or above a casement or double-hung window. Vernacular. This means that a building does not have details associated with a specific architectural style, but is a simple building with modest detailing and form. Historically, factors often influencing vernacular building were things such as local building materials, local climate and building forms used by successive generations. Visual Continuity. A sense of unity or belonging together that elements of the built environment exhibit because of similarities among them. Window Parts. The moving units of a window are known as sashes and move within the fixed frame. The sash may consist of one large pane of glass or may be subdivided into smaller panes by thin members called muntins or glazing bars . Sometimes in nineteenth-century houses windows are arranged side by side and divided by heavy vertical wood members called mullions. Workmanship. As related to the determination of “integrity” of a property, workmanship refers to the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture, people or artisan.
Design Guidelines
13.128
81
82
Courthouse Area • Lexington, Kentucky
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
13.15 The Secretary of Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties
Preamble to The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties
2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The replacement of intact or repairable historic materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.
Intent The intent of this part is to set forth standards for the treatment of historic properties containing standards for preservation, rehabilitation, restoration and reconstruction. These standards apply to all proposed grant‐in‐aid development projects assisted through the National Historic Preservation Fund. 36 CFR part 67 focuses on “certified historic structures” as defined by the IRS Code of 1986. Those regulations are used in the Preservation Tax Incentives Program. 36 CFR part 67 should continue to be used when property owners are seeking certification for Federal tax benefits.
3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Work needed to stabilize, consolidate, and conserve existing historic materials and features will be physically and visually compatible, identifiable upon close inspection, and properly documented for future research. 4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved.
Definitions
5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved.
The standards for the treatment of historic properties will be used by the National Park Service and State historic preservation officers and their staff members in planning, undertaking and supervising grant‐assisted projects for preservation, rehabilitation, restoration and reconstruction. For the purposes of this part: (a) Preservation means the act or process of applying measures necessary to sustain the existing form, integrity and materials of an historic property. Work, including preliminary measures to protect and stabilize the property, generally focuses upon the ongoing maintenance and repair of historic materials and features rather than extensive replacement and new construction. New exterior additions are not within the scope of this treatment; however, the limited and sensitive upgrading of mechanical, electrical and plumbing systems and other code‐required work to make properties functional is appropriate within a preservation project. (b) Rehabilitation means the act or process of making possible an efficient compatible use for a property through repair, alterations and additions while preserving those portions or features that convey its historical, cultural or architectural values. (c) Restoration means the act or process of accurately depicting the form, features and character of a property as it appeared at a particular period of time by means of the removal of features from other periods in its history and reconstruction of missing features from the restoration period. The limited and sensitive upgrading of mechanical, electrical and plumbing systems and other code‐required work to make properties functional is appropriate within a restoration project.
6. The existing condition of historic features will be evaluated to determine the appropriate level of intervention needed. Where the severity of deterioration requires repair or limited replacement of a distinctive feature, the new material will match the old in composition, design, color, and texture. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used. 8. Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken. Preservation as a treatment When the property's distinctive materials, features, and spaces are essentially intact and thus convey the historic significance without extensive repair or replacement; when depiction at a particular period of time is not appropriate; and when a continuing or new use does not require additions or extensive alterations, Preservation may be considered as a treatment.
(d) Reconstruction means the act or process of depicting, by means of new construction, the form, features and detailing of a non‐surviving site, landscape, building, structure or object for the purpose of replicating its appearance at a specific period of time and in its historic location. Standards One set of standards—preservation, rehabilitation, restoration or reconstruction—will apply to a property undergoing treatment, depending upon the property's significance, existing physical condition, the extent of documentation available and interpretive goals, when applicable. The standards will be applied taking into consideration the economic and technical feasibility of each project. The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Preservation of Historic Buildings 1. A property will be used as it was historically, or be given a new use that maximizes the retention of distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships. Where a treatment and use have not been identified, a property will be protected and, if necessary, stabilized until additional work may be undertaken.
13.132
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings 1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships. 2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. 3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken. 4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved. 6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used. 8. Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken. 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work will 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. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. Rehabilitation as a treatment When repair and replacement of deteriorated features are necessary; when alterations or additions to the property are planned for a new or continued use; and when its depiction at a particular period of time is not appropriate, Rehabilitation may be considered as a treatment.
The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings (“certified rehabilitations”) Rehabilitation projects must meet the following Standards, as interpreted by the National Park Service, to qualify as “certified rehabilitations” eligible for the 20% rehabilitation tax credit. The Standards are applied to projects in a reasonable manner, taking into consideration economic and technical feasibility. The Standards apply to historic buildings of all periods, styles, types, materials, and sizes. They apply to both the exterior and the interior of historic buildings. The Standards also encompass related landscape features and the building’s site and environment as well as attached, adjacent, or related new construction. 1. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment. 2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. 3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken. 4. Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a historic property shall be preserved. 6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. 8. Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings The Guidelines assist in applying the Standards to rehabilitation projects in general; consequently, they are not meant to give case‐specific advice or address exceptions or rare instances. For example, they cannot tell a building owner which features of an historic building are important in defining the historic character and must be preserved or which features could be altered, if necessary, for the new use. Careful case‐by‐case decision‐making is best accomplished by seeking assistance from qualified historic
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
13.133
preservation professionals in the planning stage of the project. Such professionals include architects, architectural historians, historians, archeologists, and others who are skilled in the preservation, rehabilitation, and restoration of the historic properties.
The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Restoration of Historic Buildings 1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use which reflects the property's restoration period.
2. Materials and features from the restoration period will be retained and preserved. The removal of materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize the period will not be undertaken. 3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Work needed to stabilize, consolidate and conserve materials and features from the restoration period will be physically and visually compatible, identifiable upon close inspection, and properly documented for future research. 4. Materials, features, spaces, and finishes that characterize other historical periods will be documented prior to their alteration or removal. 5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize the restoration period will be preserved. 6. Deteriorated features from the restoration period will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. 7. Replacement of missing features from the restoration period will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. A false sense of history will not be created by adding conjectural features, features from other properties, or by combining features that never existed together historically. 8. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used. 9. Archeological resources affected by a project will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken. 10. Designs that were never executed historically will not be constructed. Restoration as a treatment When the property's design, architectural, or historical significance during a particular period of time outweighs the potential loss of extant materials, features, spaces, and finishes that characterize other historical periods; when there is substantial physical and documentary evidence for the work; and when contemporary alterations and additions are not planned, Restoration may be considered as a treatment. Prior to undertaking work, a particular period of time, i.e., the restoration period, should be selected and justified, and a documentation plan for Restoration developed.
13.134
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Reconstruction of Historic Buildings 1. Reconstruction will be used to depict vanished or non‐surviving portions of a property when documentary and physical evidence is available to permit accurate reconstruction with minimal conjecture, and such reconstruction is essential to the public understanding of the property. 2. Reconstruction of a landscape, building, structure, or object in its historic location will be preceded by a thorough archeological investigation to identify and evaluate those features and artifacts which are essential to an accurate reconstruction. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken. 3. Reconstruction will include measures to preserve any remaining historic materials, features, and spatial relationships. 4. Reconstruction will be based on the accurate duplication of historic features and elements substantiated by documentary or physical evidence rather than on conjectural designs or the availability of different features from other historic properties. A reconstructed property will re‐ create the appearance of the non‐surviving historic property in materials, design, color, and texture. 5. A reconstruction will be clearly identified as a contemporary re‐creation. 6. Designs that were never executed historically will not be constructed. Reconstruction When a contemporary depiction is required to understand and interpret a property's historic value (including the re‐creation of missing components in a historic district or site); when no other property with the same associative value has survived; and when sufficient historical documentation exists to ensure an accurate reproduction, Reconstruction may be considered as a treatment.
1899 Fayette County Courthouse Conditions Assessment & Rehabilitation Plan for the Restoration and Reuse of the 1899 Fayette County Courthouse 19 March 2015
13.135
201 W Short Street | Suite 700 Lexington, KY 40507 [t] 859.231.7538 www.eopa.com
30 South 17th Street, Suite #1301 Philadelphia, PA 19103 [t] 215.842.3388 www.pdparchitects.com Preservation Design Partnership, llc
