Saturday, October 26, 2013

National Register Stable Reduced to Rubble in Blagden Alley


The author has quietly been following this story since the plans for the property were first shared at a community meeting of the Blagden Alley-Naylor Court Association last spring. The stable (referred to as a garage) facade was to have been spared according to the decision by the HPRB. The building died last week. The story has recently been broken in the blogosphere by Badwolf (here) and the president of the BANCA (here).  The developers of the project articulated their position well as they responded to questions posed by the president  of the BANCA. You can read their responses through these links above.
Replication is not preservation. We have seen this in Naylor Court where a 1863 stable and 1868 home were destroyed several years ago. The developers promised to rebuild the stable however, their "replica" included windows that had never existed in the original (guided by the bastardization of the stable over decades) and the proportions of the replica widely miss the mark of a classic stable. They seem  to have completely misunderstood the basic bones of the anatomy of a stable.

The 9th Street side buildings in the Blagden Alley property were damaged beyond salvage by a large paulownia tree that had over time and through neglectful abandonment worked it way through loose mortar. Razing this building was understandable.

The path of the perfidious "Paulownious assault"

The stable/former auto repair shop however, faced the alley and was part of the history of the alley. Further, every building in Naylor Court and Blagden Alley has been on the National Register of Historic Places since 1990 and thereby nationally recognized as a significant collection of buildings that together define the historic nature of the two alleys. This fact is usually lost in discussion, even within the community. It's the impact of the collection rather than the individual buildings that is important. These two alleys have been losing bits and pieces of the collection piecemeal over the last four decades.


The original building that has just been razed, had been greatly modified from its days as a stable. The hayloft door had been bricked up and converted into a small window. The hayloft beam is long gone. The original entrance - the arch of which you can see on the right - had been enlarged with an "I" beam across 90% of the front of the building to accommodate cars. The building clearly had shared a party wall with another building, now long gone, as you can see by the joist remnants in the photo on the right. There was little left to suggest that this was a stable to the untrained eye. The structural and architectural integrity of this building was badly compromised.











Demolition began at the front of the property and proceeded westward. One day the building looked like this ...

and then like this.

It will be very interesting to follow how the developers recreate the stable in their own image from the rubble. It probably won't look much like a stable. Maybe they can come up with a name for the replica building that evokes at least a thought that this building was once a stable or auto repair shop.
The question about what to preserve and what to destroy lies at the hub of the historic preservation conversation. One can understand the developer's point of view when something is beyond salvage. Yet the community voices have been soft and proclaim that "progress is important" and "you should have seen the place 20 years ago." Many echoed concerns about their property values. Ironically, had the collection of stables and small shops been better protected over the years, the two alleys would have become destination places that had a clear identity that would stir the imagination with a true sense of place. This stable will at least be given a tombstone by the developers in the form of some kind of nod to its past presence through the final replicated structure which may look something like the image below where the stable is replaced by the brick structure on the left. The replicated structure will not look like a stable but a combination of stable and auto-repair shop. I guess this is one way to keep a sense of the memory alive but I highly doubt that very many people will understand the meaning of the structure in the future. It would be nice if the developers did come up with a clever moniker to honor the building as has been done elsewhere in the city (e.g. Rainbow Lofts named in memory of the auto-body paint shop)

The developers have assured the community "that the end product will not be any different from what we saw before."  "What we saw before" however, did not reflect the original building but rather, the results of years of modification. This is now going to be immortalized as it has been in Naylor Court in the previous developer demolition.
Perhaps the most prophetic statement in all of this comes from the little "haiku graffiti" on the wall opposite this job site written well before this most recent unstable life was extinguished.






5 comments:

Lisa said...

Again Dave you bring something to the conversation that I've not considered before. This time its:" "What we saw before" however, did not reflect the original building but rather, the results of years of modification."

The shadows, the story, of what a building used to be are housed within- outlines of long-gone stairwells, bricked in windows, holes in brick and walls where pipes or ducting or venting used to run, different types of bricks- the evolution of the structure is part of the structure, not just the current facade.

Douglas Dev. did not mention anything about HPRB or DCRA approving this raze, it sounds just like DD made an 'executive decision'. When the penalty will probably just be a few thousand dollars what's the business downside?

Anonymous said...

Again you bring something to the conversation that I've not considered before. This time its:" "What we saw before" however, did not reflect the original building but rather, the results of years of modification."

The shadows, the story, of what a building used to be are housed within- outlines of long-gone stairwells, bricked in windows, holes in brick and walls where pipes or ducting or venting used to run, different types of bricks- the evolution of the structure is part of the structure, not just the current facade.

Douglas Dev. did not mention anything about HPRB or DCRA approving this raze, it sounds just like DD made an 'executive decision'. When the penalty will probably just be a few thousand dollars what's the business downside?

Anonymous said...

I am interested. Great write-up. Sounds very sneaky to me (by Douglas). Greg Melcher hits it right on the head, here:

"My primary complaint here is this had to be discovered by walking through the alley, not by some notification from either the Developer or HPRB."

What sort of penalties are imposed for this sort of thing?

It's too bad this particular stable had been maintained and repaired so thoughtlessly over the years. I can see the arched doorrway that you pointed out. I assume that you are suggesting the 2nd story window was never there to begin with?

Unstable Lives said...

Stables never had windows on the second level because this is where the hay was stored. It was loaded through the hayloft doors with a beam and block and tackle above it. The doors opened outwards. The second floors had an opening in the middle of the floor to drop the hay down to the lower level for the horses throughout the year. There was also often a cupola on the roof to vent the hayloft and keep the temperatures down to minimize the risk of spontaneous combustion. Today the cupola opening is often used as a skylight and the floor opening is used as a staircase in adaptively reused buildings.

Anonymous said...

The house at the corner of 9th & R Sts NW was torn down against the HPRB. It was NOT rebuilt as it was, but as it originally was. In any event, I agree that rebuilding is not the same as preserving, no matter what. My wish is that the developer that tore down a protected building lose a lot of money on the project. Perhaps if enough developers lose lots of money on these types of projects, they won't tear down protected buildings.