Willamette Basin Project

All through the 19^th and early 20^th century the Willamette River flooded, causing damage to agriculture and settled areas that increased as Oregon’s population grew.  By the mid-1930s, as so often happened during that era of belief that government, people, could actually do great things when they worked together for a common good, state leaders were able to encourage the Federal government to consider solutions to the problem.  The Federal government, as it so often did, turned to the US Army Corps of Engineers and the result, authorized by the Flood Control Act of 1936, became known as the Willamette Basin Project.

The Willamette Basin Project was a series of multi-purpose dams, at one time as many as 19, that would control the river and its tributaries as far south as Cottage Grove, to provide for flood control, irrigation and recreational opportunities.  The Corps got started building several of the dams in the late 1930s and then, after the distraction of WWII, got back to work after the massive Vanport Flood of 1948 provided extra emphasis on how dangerous Oregon’s rivers could be.  The last of the 15 dams ultimately built in the Willamette Project, the Blue River Dam, was completed in 1969.

I’ve worked on several of these dams in the past, giving me an appreciation for the scope of Corps (and Oregon) vision during this New Deal-Great Society period of infrastructure construction (even Ike’s Administration, generally opposed to Federal funding, saw merit in the Willamette Basin Project).  At the moment I am working on the Fall Creek Dam and Reservoir, located near Lowell, Oregon.  Fall Creek is an earthen embankment dam, almost a mile long at its crest (5,100 feet) that rises 180’ and impounds Fall Creek, creating a reservoir just under 7 miles long.  Fall Creek was completed, at a cost of $22 million in 1969.

Now, as is happening on several of the Willamette Basin dams, a third party has filed an application to built a small hydropower project on the downstream face of the Fall Creek Dam, generating a small amount of electricity, about 10 megawatts, with the dam’s outflow.  These so-called micro-power projects can add significantly to Oregon’s generation capacity without much environmental impact (the dams are already there) but they trigger Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, sending me out into the field with a camera and into the archive on yet another dam. 

More on the Holly Theatre, Medford

On Monday the JPR Foundation held a public meeting at a generous Medford restaurant to present its vision for the renovation of the Holly Theatre as a performing arts center.  About 50 interested folks and most of the local media showed up, to hear about the building’s history and its future.  It was a productive meeting, and hopefully will push the City of Medford to provide some seed money to kick start the building.  Here’s a link to the local newspaper story:

http://www.mailtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110524/NEWS/105240320

One of the most exciting results of this meeting, at least for me, was that a local who in his own words “grew up at the Holly” (his father was the theatre manager) brought in some plans for its last major remodel, in 1976.  I have been searching for any plans of the building, as a way to help guide us as to what it originally looked like. 

Of course knowing the original design is a key tool in restoring it and while poking around the building will occur, it’s good to have some documentation to point that poking in the right direction.  At the Cascade Theatre, in Redding, California, we sometimes had very little to go on (those are remnants, threads, of the original carpet below...we found them under the plate of a non-original partition wall and extrapolated the carpet colors from them). 

Thankfully, at the Holly, we have an entire room that still has its  carpet but I sure would like to find more information on the original design- the seat fabric, the curtains, the lighting AND and the original plans, to go with the drawings from 1976.  We'll keep looking and, if things go as they often do, we'll find somebody that squirreled them away eventually.

Bungaloids

Architectural Historians, always a fun group of folk, came up with the term “Bungaloid” to refer to what I suppose everyone else would call “bungalow-like” structures, being those residential designs that share some of the common “bungalow” elements, but don’t otherwise quite fit the mold.  When I was at the UofO I played on an inter-mural volleyball team called the “Bungaloids,” but that’s a different story.

I am often asked to lecture on architectural styles (and did so this weekend, which is what has me thinking along these lines). Let's be honest.  Things termed “bungalow” are something of a polyglot, complicated by the fact (and there is just no other way to put it) that the word itself is just so melodic that it's almost fun to say it.  Bungalow-Bungalow-Bungalow.  It sounds like a chant. I mean really, stylistic attributes  and philosophical under-pinnings aside, wouldn’t you rather tell people at a party that you live in a “bungalow” than in a Colonial Revival or American Foursquare?  It just sounds prettier and more tasteful.

Which is, of course, what led to the problem of trying to explain just what IS a bungalow, and what is just Bungalow-wannabe?  When we get to the point that particular styles are advertised as “Italianate Bunaglows” or “Colonial Bungalows” I think we have wandered pretty far from the plains of India or whatever visions of small-scale, naturalistic, living Charles and Henry Greene, Gustav Stickley, or Edward Bok had in mind.  Not that what any of those guys had in mind was necessarily a “real” bungalow to begin with.

Still, everyone today (thanks a bunch This Old House) wants to believe that they live in a Bungalow (or even better, a CRAFTSMAN bungalow) and so the term gets further muddied.  But it is a great term.  What do you think are "must have" Bungalow elements?  Is the image above, from a catalog published in 1923 (okay, a little late for a TRUE believer bungalow), really a Bungalow at all?

Sometimes the process works!

In 2000 the voters of Jackson County, Oregon approved a $38.9 million dollar bond to fund the construction and renovation of its 14 branch libraries, a process that resulted in the construction of an entirely new library in Medford.  When the library moved out of its 1911 Carnegie Library, located in Library Park, the building reverted to the City who didn’t know what to do with it.  After a certain amount of hand-wringing that included serious consideration of selling the building for private development, a new Mayor, Gary Wheeler, took office and took the bull by the horns.  Mayor Wheeler established a library committee of concerned citizens and chaired it himself.  The NTHP, the Kinsman Foundation, and Medford’s Urban Renewal District all provided funding to help and a new plan was hatched: to transform the building into a multi-use community center while respecting and honoring its history.

About a year ago, after some work on the library had occurred when it was used as a temporary home for City offices during a city hall remodel, Medford received significant Federal stimulus funding to improve energy efficiency at the Carnegie, a process that resulted in all new HVAC and, as I have written before, all new windows.  While there were parts of that program that could have been handled differently, the funding source triggered Section 106 and required the City to not only replace the windows as consistently with their original character as possible but to mitigate the Adverse Effect caused by their removal. Working with Oregon SHPO to develop appropriate mitigation, the City elected to restore the front entry, replacing the bad aluminum doors with custom Fir doors modeled after the historic design, restoring the twin cast iron lampposts, and cleaning the brick, all to provide the public with a hint of what a restored Carnegie would look like.

And then, as so often happens once preservation effort starts, the City got inspired.  They found some funding to clean up the interior, including new commercial carpeting, new paint, repaired lighting, and other work that makes the Carnegie presentable and more importantly useable for meetings, weddings, community events and other functions.  Rental fees will help build toward a full restoration of the building as the Carnegie Library Committee planned but more importantly, even if not complete, the City’s vision returns the Carnegie to activity and utility in Medford after eight long vacant years.

Last night Mayor Wheeler and the members of the Carnegie Committee, along with the City’s Parks staff, Council, the local AIA (which donated time to help plan the project), former Mayors, and other dignitaries and supporters all joined together for a grand celebration to re-open the Carnegie.  A banner was hung, cookies and punch were served, photos and newspapers articles about the Carnegie’s history lined the newly painted walls, the author of the City's newly published Images of America history book signed copies and we all sat in the Carnegie Library and enjoyed the premiere of a video made to honor Medford’s 125^th Birthday as an incorporated city.  Well Done!

No More "Parking," Please!

Years ago, as a student at the UO, I wrote a paper on the growth of a local auto dealer and their process of demolishing dozens of buildings for new car lots in downtown Medford.  In my always tongue and cheek style, that paper was titled “There’s Plenty of Parking in Downtown.”  In the years since the Medford Urban Renewal Agency, at the behest of local merchants, have taken up that mantra and built two parking structures and several surface lots that collectively occupy four or five full city blocks.  That doing so reduces the tax base (which pays the increment in the renewal district) is fodder for some other post.

Yet still, there are those in downtown Medford who are convinced that it is lack of parking, and lack of parking alone, that causes stress for local merchants and business.  I think that is backward.  Having a parking “problem” is not demonstrated by a prospective customer having to drive a block or two out of their way to find an available space.  A parking problem is evidenced by having too much parking, and too little need.  Extrapolated out to the absurd, lots of available parking (be it asphalt or of the other variety) almost by definition means there is no commercial draw, no reason to go to the area and park your car, because there isn’t anything there you want to experience. THAT is parking problem.

Here are four views taken a 5:00 last evening, Saturday, on 6^th street, right in front of the proposed restoration of the Holly Theatre.  One of the TWO parked cars is mine.   I’m not seeing a big issue.(If you click on the photos to enlarge them I don't think you'll see any issue either)

On the other side of public investment, Medford has a plethora of parks, Alba Park, Vogel Park and just across Bear Creek, Hawthorne Park.  On Friday Lithia Motors broke ground on the Commons project, which will include two full blocks of public park (even more land taken off the tax rolls, but again that is another post).  I have long felt that while the Lithia HQ will be a fine addition to downtown, the inclusion of two more parks is a mistake.  At least, as I understand it, the City and Lithia have stepped back from building yet another parking structure as a part of the Commons.Thank goodness.

 

Downtown Medford is blessed with a surprising number of fine restaurants-Porters, Elements, Four Daughters, Habaneros and many more.  It has a viable performing arts center, the Craterian, and now there is the opportunity for the restored Holly and now a small community theatre to be located in a long-vacant warehouse.  The Carnegie Library is to be restored for public meetings and gatherings and, at the other end of Main Street, there's talk of relocating a historic home to Hawthorne Park for use as a another community center/museum/gallery  Those sorts of uses, offering a huge increase in night-time activity in downtown, not only support local restaurants and merchants, but may actually create enough demand that new visitors will take advantage of all of the parking the city already has. 

Sparta Building Update

The two Ionic columns found buried beneath stucco and brick at the Sparta Building, reported upon in an earlier post, turned out to have more damage to them than we'd hoped.  The capitals were largely chiseled away, to create a flat profile (we knew that), but there was considerable damage to the plinths (the bases) and the characteristic fluting as well, where earlier renovations had attempted to use the columns to support door frames and structure.

We'll repair, actually replace, the capitals with metal elements from W.F. Norman, the "restorer's friend" (I use W. F. Norman a lot!).  For the plinths and the fluting we are lucky to have found a skilled craftsman who is manually recreating the elements, using layers and layers of high-density cement before coating the entire surface with white cement, to create the proper finish.  One aspect, the forms that he's created to match the fluting perfectly, is a great example of in-the-field innovation.  Turns out that 2" PVC pipe, split in half, and banded together around the surviving flutes,  creates a perfect mold.  Way to go, Frank!

Good Intentions

Occasionally I am asked to review a planning application for this or that municipal client, typically when there is something non-standard about the proposal or they are not certain about how to react.  Sometimes I think I just am being asked to play the heavy, to provide language that is more polite than “What the %*^%$ are they thinking?” and perhaps provide some re-direction.  It is always an interesting experience.

I think that preservationists sometimes need to work a little harder to remember that no one sits down at the drawing board with the idea of “How do I really ruin this historic property” in the forefront of their mind.  Those property owners that are reaching for their wallet are, no matter how misguided, still following a laudable impulse - to invest in their building with the intent of improving it, making it more attractive, secure, functional, or whatever.  That’s a good thing and one that should be nurtured, not squashed.

Admittedly there are times when that impulse is so misdirected it is hard not to castigate anyone who proposes it.  Those are often the applications sent my way.  And often what the applicant is attempting (improved access, greater sense of entry) is a really good idea...it is just the proposed execution that fails.  Turning that around, educating them without making them feel stupid, isn’t always easy, but I try hard to see these situations as opportunities.  It isn’t really that difficult to do the right thing by a historic building, if you know what the right thing is and know that there are other sources of supply beside Home Depot and Lowes.