SF Heritage Primer

FLASH!

John King (SF Chron, Tuesday Feb 22: King Facadism) has written an article about facadism. SFHP welcomes his examples of San Francisco putting its best preservation foot forward. Compare 88 Townsend Street to SFHP's example on Folsom Street.

However, King should have stopped when the going was good. His characterization of the 1924 structure on Howard Street as "The frills are surface decoration [in reference to the sheet metal finish], nothing more," and thereby dismissing its historic significance, belie his understanding of historic preservation. Applied decoration is the very reason many San Francisco buildings are historic landmarks. Also, this building's significance is not merely architectural or surficial, but rooted in its history with Guilfoy Cornice Works, a renown San Francisco company - see example (first and second to last paragraphs): Guilfoy Award). King would do well to read the criteria for landmark status used by the National Register of Historic Places, California Register of Historical Resources and The City's own landmarks ordinance - especially those criteria that are not design, style, or architectural. Maybe then he would not proclaim that this building should be demolished just because his (perceived) favorite architect is the designer of the new development.

ISSUE 1 – FEBRUARY 2005

San Francisco Heritage Primer Begins!

FACADES OR PRESERVATION?

Herein are four recent examples of the best of preserving historic buildings in San Francisco. Each had the benefit of one or all of the following: having preservation architects on the design teams, review by the Issues Committee of San Francisco Architectural Heritage, CEQA environmental review, Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board review, and legal action. The results speak for themselves. They are in alphabetical order, so as not to place more emphasis on one over the others.

(Click on photographs for larger image)

1. Emporium Department Store
The first, and most well known, is the former Emporium Department Store on Market Street. The proverbial shit hit the fan when the San Francisco Chron published a photograph of only the Market Street façade left (SF Chon photograph, left) after months of demolition. SFHP understands that the most the developers ever proposed to save was the first 65 feet of the office portion of the building (and the dome and reconstructed rotunda), but did not include any of the original retail spaces. Is this preservation?

SFHP has recently learned that the developers are facing another lawsuit about this issue, which may result in a ransom payment ala the Long Beach Heritage Fund. The plaintiffs are individual preservationists. Who the suit is aimed at and who are the attorneys involved are not privy to SFHP. The preservation architect is Carey & Co. Inc.  Westfield

2. Folsom/Dore Apartments (1346 Folsom Street)
Here is a fine example of facadism in the best sense of the word. This is just a tiny bit more egregious than the ZCMI building in downtown Salt Lake City. SFHP can’t seem to fathom:

1. Why was this façade alone worth saving?

2. If it was worth it, then why this particular front elevation design? It is nothing (perhaps SFHP should stop here) but totally disrespectful of the historic character of the only remaining feature of what once was a historic resource. Nothing about this elevation works.

The City (SFHP puts the blame there) could have saved everyone a lot of time and money by just allowing the development to proceed without having to deal with the dubious preservation of the façade. The resulting new façade is a mockery (“something ridiculously or impudently unsuitable,” “an insincere, contemptible, or impertinent imitation” – Merriam-Webster). This is not David Baker's finest moment. However, SFHP apologizes to architect Baker if this situation was foisted upon him by The City. It should know better. Architect: David Baker Architects.

Preservation Architect: None/Unknown.  Project

3. Jessie Street Substation

The Willis Polk designed substation’s south elevation will be the only feature left from this formerly intact industrial building. Its vast interior space with steel trusses and three other walls have been demolished to make way for a modernist design to house the Contemporary Jewish Museum. SFHP does not object to the design approach by Daniel Libeskind, only that it resulted in the demolition of a historic building. Reconstruction of demolished portions is not a viable approach to this important structure. The preservation architect is Architectural Resources Group.  Museum

4. San Francisco Conservatory of Music (50 Oak Street)

Isn’t this one interesting? The façade remains, following our theme, but are there really other historic features left? SFHP doesn’t know the details of whether these other portions of the building have any historic importance, but the damage has been done no matter how worthy the client. The preservation architect is Page & Turnbull.  SFCM

AND LAST - see what is going on at the SE corner of Powell and O'Farrell Streets. This corner has suffered the loss of decorative features from the glazed terra cotta building on the opposite NE corner (formerly Omar Khayam Restaurant) and the closing of Marquard's on the SW corner.

LATE BREAKING NEWS

Mayor Appoints New Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board Members

Alan Martinez, an architect actively involved in the preservation of The City’s historic resources, both as an individual and as a member and Vice President of Friends of 1800 Market.

Johanna Street, soon to be an architect. Ms. Street is a docent with San Francisco Architectural Heritage and works at Carey & Co. Congrats to both!

The LPAB now has at least three well-qualified members. The mayor previously appointed Bridget Maley. Ms. Maley is an architectural historian with Architectural Resources Group.

LINKS

Friends of 1800 Market  link

San Francisco Architectural Heritage  link

California Preservation Foundation  link

Western Regional Office, National Trust for Historic Preservation  link