Santa Fe
The City Different
A Brief Look at
Preservation
Sara Casten
Funded in part by the Historic Preservation Program at the University of Vermont
Table
of Contents
Acknowledgements.1
The
Santa Fe Style and Materials.......2
The
History of Preservation and the Work of John Gaw Meem5
The
Historic Design Review Board8
Current
Conservation Practices.14
Preservation
Organizations...19
The
Future of Santa Fe..25
Executive Summary
Santa Fe, the city different, in the land of enchantment draws thousands of tourists, artists, retirees, and asthmatics to name a few to take in the unique skyline, dry desert climate, rich red and blue colors. Founded in 1609 it is the countrys oldest capital city. It has been defined by its Santa Fe Style of architecture made popular by architects Isaac H. Rapp and John Gaw Meem in the early and mid twentieth century. The Santa Fe Style includes both the Territorial and Spanish Pueblo Revival.
This brief contains seven interviews with members of the citys preservation community. The interviews conducted, and the organizations visited give an overview of the practices in Santa Fe. Focusing mainly on the Downtown and Eastside Historic District, the first district formed in Santa Fe. While their backgrounds and opinions differ, there is no question that Santa Fe is a unique and beloved city.
Acknowledgements
Special thanks to Jake Barrow, Elaine Bergman, Ed Crocker, Jane Farrar, David Rasch, Francisco Uvia Contrers, Thomas Visser, Nancy Wirth, Cornerstones Community Projects, Historic Design Review Board, Historic Santa Fe Foundation, The City of Santa Fe, NM, and the University of Vermont Historic Preservation Program.
The Santa Fe Style and
Materials
The current principle styles of architecture
that make up the Santa Fe Style are the Spanish Pueblo, the Territorial, and
revivals of both styles. The
Spanish Pueblo Revival evolved out of the combination of the early Native
American adobe building and architecture brought over by Spanish settlers. The Territorial Style, which gets its
name when New Mexico was just a territory of the United States, grew out of the
westward expansion along the Santa Fe Trail in the mid nineteenth century.
One of the earliest examples of the fusion of the Spanish Mission Style and the Pueblo is the San Esteban Mission, Acoma Pueblo built between 1629 and 1644 (above Fig. 1). It is built by the Spanish to convert the native peoples to Christianity, as one of the main purposes of their settlements is to spread religion. The style is considered to be more inviting if it contained elements of the familiar.[1]
The Traditional Pueblos are small rectangular connected units that are designed for communal living. The walls are made out of adobe that is essentially a simple mud construction. The floors are earthen with a flat roof supported by vigas or pine logs (above Fig. 2). These dwellings typically did not have foundations. When the Spanish arrive they adopt much of this building type. They added the technology of shaping the adobe into bricks, which could then be dried in the sun. They also began building on foundations instead of directly on the ground. Other additions include portals to the exterior elevations and inner courtyards that are prevalent in European architecture. Neither of these elements is seen in traditional adobe structures.[2]
The mid 19th century brought trains and westward expansion, in New Mexico the Santa Fe Trail opened up as a merchant route. From this growth the Territorial Style develops. Materials are being shipped for construction use throughout the countrys new territories, which is how the style eventually gets its name. Some of these buildings are constructed with hard-burned brick. However, in the earlier stages of this style it is still too expensive and most builders just used this material to protect the adobe beneath. The brick is often laid in decorative patterns which became the first indication of the style, and handmade windows are replaced by new milled ones. The most affective change in construction is the beginning use of lime plaster, again to protect the adobe. Also the addition of the Territorial style porches, usually the full width and often full height of the building, are a character defining feature of the style.[3]
During the late 19th century Santa Fe began to grow as most of the country did. Red brick is becoming a more prevalent building material, and Mansard roofs are constructed indicative of the 2nd Empire Style. However, at the beginning of the 20th century a group of artists and architects, especially Sylvanus G. Morley, Jesse L. Nusbaum, and Isaac Hamilton Rapp, began to reverse this Americanization.[4] This is when the Santa Fe Style truly emerged. This informal committee convinced the community to return to their architectural roots. From numerous letters, designs and examples of existing buildingsmainly designed by Rapp a new style is created.
Today the Historic Ordinance, first written by John Gaw Meem and other prominent city members in 1957, prohibits the construction of buildings in styles other than the Spanish Pueblo Revival and the Territorial Revival Style in the Historic Districts.
The
History of Preservation and the Work of John Gaw Meem
The Santa Fe Style begins to take shape in
1912 with Sylanus G. Morley and Jesse L. Nusbaum. Morley is hired to redesign the portal for the Palace of
Governors located in the Plaza, the heart of Santa Fes Downtown. In 1912, the current portal reflected the
Territorial Style added to the building in the mid to late 19th
century. Morley sought to return
to the faade to what he thought it originally looked like, which is mainly
based on conjecture. At the same
time Nusbaum is designing an exhibition of architecture to spark interest in a
new Santa Fe Style and to help advertise the city as the new tourist center of
the southwest[5] Nusbaum has been desperately searching
for a style that he thought defined Santa Fe, he found it in Isaac Hamilton
Rapps work and thought his Colorado Supply Company Store in Morley, Colorado
to be the prefect example. Nusbaum
writes to Rapp praising his work and asks for his assistance in this endeavor,
and Rapp replies with a water color (above Fig. 3) of the building for the
November architecture exhibition.[6] Shortly after, Rapp designed the Museum
of New Mexico built in 1915, one of the earliest examples of the new Santa Fe
Style. It is easy to see Rapp is drawing
his inspiration for museum from San Esteban Mission, Acoma Pueblo. In 1920, Rapps Architectural firm
leaves Santa Fe paving the way for John Gaw Meem.
John Gaw Meem first arrives in Santa Fe in 1920 at the age of twenty-six. He came to the Sunmount Sanitorium, based on the suggestion of his doctor, because he had been suffering from Tuberculosis. While at Sunmount, Meem began his life long love for the southwestern sun and this truly unique city, aided by his doctor who took the patients on architectural and cultural tours of the area.[7]
His first major involvement with preservation is through the group, the Committee for the Preservation and Restoration of New Mexico Mission Churches. The group helped with repairs at Laguna, Zia, Acoma, and Santa Anna to name a few.[8] That is how he got excited about the missions and then used the vocabulary in his own designs. Meems decision to work with the CPRNMMC will be reflected in the rest of his architectural career. It gives him the understanding and feel of adobe, Chauvent considers this to be the wisest decision he has ever made.
His most beloved public work in Santa Fe,
according to his daughter, is the Cristo Rey Church (left Fig. 4). It is a modern adobe structure, built
in 1939 located in the Downtown and Eastside Historic District. Built in part by the Civil Conservation
Corps, a Works Projects Association group, and by the parishioners; its been a
model for Cornerstones Community Projects in many ways. This group works with
communities across the state to conserve public historic buildings.[9]
By 1947, he is a well established architect, and it is then that he begins thinking that zoning and planning for the future is an issue if Santa Fe is to be kept the way that he thought it shouldas a very unusual American city. Between 1947 and 1957 the city hires Harlem Bartholomew, a city planner from St. Louis.[10] The main danger to the downtown is the widening of the streets, because of this Meem forms a committee to write the citys first preservation ordinance with Oliver La Farge and Irene Von Horvath.[11] After a series of negotiations with all of the city officials, a balance was struck, if Cerillos Road and the west side can develop without restrictions will it be agreed that the central part of the town and the east side will have this ordinance placed on it. That was the beginning and this year, 2007, is the fiftieth anniversary of that Ordinance.[12]
Meems work in preservation did not end with the Ordinance. In 1960 he helped raise $20,000 to buy the Nusbaum house on Washington St, however the effort failed and the building was demolished. In 1962, with the funds raised the city is able to found the Historic Santa Fe Foundation a nonprofit organization established by Meem to be the stewards of historic properties in Santa Fe. El Zaguan is given to them and currently holds their main offices.[13] Meem and now his daughter continue to fund the efforts of the Historic Santa Fe Foundation and Cornerstones Community Projects, nonprofits dedicated to preservation.
The
Historic Design Review Board
The Current
Ordinance, Article 14-5.2 Historic Districts Overlay, is very similar to the
original written by John Gaw Meem et al, and serves as the citys historic administer
for the Santa Fe Style. The
stewards of the Ordinance are the Historic Design Review Board members. The seven members of the H. Board
include: Jake Barrow, Jane Farrar, Dan Featheringill,
Robert Frost, Charles Newman, Cecelia Rios,
and Deborah Shapiro. Historic
Preservation Long Range Planning Division, Section Head David Rasch, and City
Planner Marissa Barrett presided over design review meetings.
For the Downtown and Eastside Districts the Ordinance
recognizes two principle styles the Old Santa Fe Style, which is defined as
Spanish-Pueblo or Territorial, and New Santa Fe Style which is defined as
architecture that has an accord of materials, color, proportion, and overall
detail with the old style.[14] This is in direct contrast with the Secretary
of the Interiors Standards which state, The new work shall be differentiated
from the old.
The Following reflects the opinions of Historic Design
Review Board members Jake Barrow and Jane Farrar, as well as Section Head David
Rasch.
Santa Fe is a certified local government, one of six or seven in the state, so it receives grant money to do inventories of buildings so their status can be upgraded to contributing if appropriate. Because it is a certified local government, David Rasch is supposedly required to follow the Security of Interior Standards. Buildings that are constructed in 2001 need to look like they are constructed in 2001, and Ordinance and H. Board state that new construction should flow seamlessly with the Santa Fe Style, because this is such a unique American city. Currently Rasch is being threatened to employ the Standards, he states that since the Ordinance predates them, that they should not apply. He also states that is not a strong argument. In his opinion, there is a way to do contemporary work that looks Santa Fe style but still sets in this century. He cites this example, of a building, not in Santa Fe but near by, that used steel for the protruding vigas. It used the vocabulary of having an exposed roof but in contemporary materials, and thus there is no confusion between what is old and what is new.[15]
Jake Barrow states, the Ordinance doesnt reflect the Security of Interior Standards, particularly because it is based on the History of Santa Fe, and the style that John Gaw Meem and other community members were trying to preserve. It doesnt support additions to buildings or contemporary architecture. Barrow has a little bit of a problem with this, because he has to apply the standards for his job, but when he sits on the H. Board he is really focused the Ordinance.[16]
Additions do come in and the Board does talk about the distinction; however the Ordinance pushes for less of a distinction. The Security of Interior Standards are vague and are not written in stone, its not prescriptive, its meant to allow, where as the ordinance is prescriptive. Because of this, Barrow believes that the two can exist together.[17]
Aside from the issue regarding the Security of Interior Standards, there is the problem of the city not being preservation minded, its much more development friendly, according to Jane Farrar and Rasch. Many of the houses are 3rd and 4th homes for people that people are not living or voting here. Plus, many of the city officials campaigns are funded by developers that are not up to date with historic preservation. The dynamic is off and correcting it is just exhausting.[18]
Another struggle with preservation, states Farrar, is the cultural influences. This is a Spanish city and when Caucasians moved here in the mid 19th century and the country moved its manifest destiny in this direction it was not supportive of other cultures. Lurking in the background was idea that the indigenous people were not living as well as the rest of us. During her childhood, she witnessed children having their mouths washed out with soap at school, by teachers who had been brought there, because they spoke Spanish. It puts them down; it has created a sense that their culture and style of building was not great. Why would anyone want to live in a dirt house, it doesnt have modern amenities. This caused many locals to move away, which diminished any sense of pride among the Spanish people and their legacy. Thus no one was fighting to preserve the adobe structures.[19]
The Condo District, as Farrar calls the Downtown and Eastside Historic District is another problem.[20] Rasch states that this is due to the Business Capital District Ordinance, which was written to keep buildings low and to help provide affordable housing in downtown Santa Fe. This created a loophole and allows for condominiums to be built because they meet the height and affordable housing requirement. It is eroding the character, says Rasch, if a street has large lots and single family homes, now with this infill ordinance condominiums will be built in any open lots which will take up every last square inch of the land available.[21] The H. Board doesnt get a say in this because of the Business Capital District Ordinance, with all that money put into development, there is lot of settling and compromising, but when does the point come when everything is so compromised that nothing is left, asks Farrar?[22]
According to Farrar, it is the money that is causing the problems. The city has been so trendy, that developers see it as a money making opportunity. She had a friend equate it to mining, they come in to get the ore, take it out, and then they leave. Since the monitory value of the historic districts has grown so enormously, the city is in a lot of trouble. For example, on Alameda Street there is a modest John Gaw Meem house and seven condos have gone up around it destroying the character. The reason is an acre can sell for $500,000 to $700,000, and with the allowance of infill, developers are going to use up all the available space.
There is also the multi-billion dollar St
Francis Cathedral School (left Fig. 5) project. It is about 20 acres, and is going to be the largest
downtown development to happen at one time. It is going to break the precedent of just constructing one
house or one public building at a time.
There is not plan as of yet, there have been proposals that have been
rejected. Developers came forward
asking for height restrictions to be lifted to build tall buildings, but they
did not have the buildings designed, so that will not be allowed. When this does occur its going to be a
huge change for the city, the last large amount of open space will be filled in
(right Fig. 6).[23]
The current H. Board tends towards the conservative; some things that the board has allowed in the past would not have worked with the current board. Tension comes into play when the applicant has the option to bypass the H. Board and go to City Council, and if that happens too much, politically, that is going to be difficult for the Board, because it will lesson its authority. Some of us on the H. Board watch for that carefully, Say Barrow. If it is a marginal project they try to work with that applicant rather than just shut him or her down, especially if there is a large sum of money involved. For example, when there is a non-contributing single family house that is wanted to be torn down so four condos can be built, if the H. Board rejects it, than the applicant will go to the Council and have the decision over turned. Barrow states, he is very sympathetic to Janes argument.[24] However, the streetscape harmony is the strongest argument we have in this case, and making sure that is not disrupted is most important.[25]
Barrow ends, saying he makes a real effort to recognize the vernacular and the buildings that may be considered non-conforming to ensure their viability. For example, there are pitched roofs downtown and someone will propose to remove it and replace it with a flat roofto make it look like all the other roofs. He will argue that is the exact opposite of the way Santa Fe wants to go. It shows the variety, which is essential, even though the city has strict building codes it cannot all look the same.[26]
This is such a complicated issue, should the city continue to work with an Ordinance so inflexible to new design? Both David Rasch and Jane Farrar stated that thinking is perfectly acceptable in Europe; Rasch says he would like Santa Fe to look like Tuscany where most of the architecture is yellow earthen colored walls, and green tiled roofs. Rasch would like to see more contemporary materials used that relate to the old style, but can still be distinguishable. Jane states, that the Historic District only makes up 18% of the city and that modern buildings can be built in the west side and surrounding area. She is concerned with the development and the money being forced upon the downtown, when the Ordinance was written it focused on the vernacular and the earthen building materials, now that has been replaces by multiply-million dollar homes all designed but architectural firms. This is a far cry from the city she loves and the legacy that is slowly slipping away.
Current Conservation Practices
The following
is based on an interview with Ed Crocker of Crocker Ltd. which details his
experience and common architectural conservation practices in the Southwestern
United States.
Ed Crockers background is in anthropology and archeology, he is a graduate of Tulane University with a degree in Mesoamerican Archeology. Has completed field work Mesoamerica and the Southwest US. He has experience in water well drilling from working with a family business as well as general construction background. While he was not fond of construction, he found he had a real affinity for old buildings and from his educational background he started looking into doing specialty types of work in historic preservation. In picking and choosing the types of jobs he wanted to do, he seemed to be ending up with the types of jobs that no one wanted to do. Mainly in stabilization of adobe built directly on the ground with no foundation, and settlement issues and structural issues that people really did not want to deal with. Many contractors were afraid of them, too much liability.
In 1986 he got a fairly large contract to
underpin the bell tower of the Santuario de Guadalupe (left Fig. 7). In the process of doing that received a
bit of recognition, including the fledgling local non-profit organization
Cornerstones Community Partnerships.
They were in the beginning of formulating a field program, to restore
the historic churches throughout New Mexico, he started volunteering and within
two years had a full time job. He
got involved with field work in preservation and the theory
Adobe is one the worlds more interesting and versatile building materials. Its ubiquitous; you can find it everywhere. It represents the oldest buildings in the world, aside from caves. There earthen buildings in Jericho that go back 9,000 years, on the river Jordan on the West Bank.
Adobe is an easy material to conserve if simple principles are followed, like keeping it dry. The problem the Southwest has faced and this is true in other parts of the world that very soon after WWII adobe began to be looked upon as a material of the poor. People started to look for ways to move out of the adobe or to cover it up with modern materials. Adobe with parapet walls (not with a pitched roof and eves) exposed to the weather does require a fair amount of maintenance. By trying to escape that maintenance people chose to cover the walls with hard plasterscement plasters, Portland based. Obviously it was done with best of intentions, but it resulted in the retention of moisture and that lead to slow deterioration with increasing rapidness, by the mid 1980s buildings really began to start showing the signs of distress. This couldnt be seen, because of these hard plasters. Thus, a lot of buildings were lost.
The damage was mainly slumping walls. The moisture over time would migrate to the base from whatever point it came in, whether it was the roof or plaster cracks, and it would well up at the base. If adobe retains 14% moisture by weight it will fail, it loses its capacity to hold together, it reverts to mud, so the base of wall would slump outward; this creates an affect that looks like an inverted mushroom. Meaning that the walls are coming away from the roof and it becomes very unstable. Adobe could be pushed over by hand when this happens.
Cornerstones looked at how to preserve these historic buildings that were central to the vitality of these communities. One of the first things he did to institutionalize the conservation of adobe buildings was to run training workshops in the characteristics of adobe and how can you preserve it. Most of theses centered on stripping off the hard [cement] plasters, then developing both lime and mud mortars and plasters for the exterior walls. Then institutionalizing these practices as the norm, to accomplish this through workshops, start locally and then move to nationally, now its become worldwide.
Over time Cornerstones came up with a whole series of techniques most of which were not new. They just reintroduced them. They had been lost during the period when adobe had lost its appeal to people. Cornerstones published an adobe conservation handbook in 1996. Now it is in its second addition, and its a pictorial handbook. This came from vast experience in the organization, and with hundreds of communities, gathering the information from community elders. The idea is to be very graphic and very easy to understand. Text is kept to a minimum so it can be used in any context. It has been successful in its ability to be used. It has been a tool to a lot of people.
When Crocker left cornerstones he got very heavily into structural issues. Failed soils, failed wall bases, his company started developing methods for underpinning. They solved these problems by building structural elements that they slip under the wall and then support with piers. One way to stabilize a failing wall is to through bolt adobe cages that are made out of steelthey are screen like and they put them on either side of the walland then sandwich the wall together. They can by permanent or temporary. Everything Crocker Ltd does is in the context of sound preservation principle: the smallest intervention possible with reversibility. The adobe cages can be taken off as easily as they are put on if other mediation is needed or wanted. They have also done a lot of strapping together of buildings using very easy to handle and inexpensive polypropylene straps. They have learned how to predict how buildings are going to behave under certain stress situations like earthquakes, or settlement, and moisture damage.
I asked Ed Crocker to tell me about CEB, Compressed Earthen Block, a technology used in new adobe construction.
Invented in the mid to late 70s, it derived from a Columbian/Venezuelan technique which used a mold box and a long handle and one would fill the mold box and pull the handle down and compress the soil into a block. The idea derived from that simple tool has become highly mechanized equipment. Currently contractors can load the dirt into the machine and then it is hydraulically compressed with a ram, this produces about 10 to 12 blocks a minute. The bricks come out and can immediately be stacked into walls, no drying time needed. The dirt that goes in has about 8% moisture content. This technology saves huge amounts on the cost of labor.
With adobe there are several steps in forming the blocks and then moving them to the job site. With the CEB machine you eliminate all of that and the block can me made on site.
His company promotes it for use in infill projects for neighborhoods that have a tradition in building in adobe. They have never mixed these blocks with adobe in historic buildings.
Crocker is especially worried about the
future of adobe, especially within Santa Fe. It has become more of a style then a material. The new adobe is composite. The idea is to make it modern, because
contemporary design is not allowed in the historic districts. The new adobe is a soil block
impregnated with up to 12% asphalt emulsion, laid up in a Portland cement
mortar, with concrete bond beams, sprayed with polyurethane foam, then lathed
with 16 to 20 penny nails driven right into the adobe, then plastered to
reinforce the substrate and finished with an elastomer plaster over the
top. As Crocker states, this is
not adobe (above Fig. 8).
17
All the new construction in the Downtown and Eastside Historic District is being built with this new adobe. It is boring, states Crocker, to have a repeat of the same lumpy brown buildings. The Spanish Pueblo Revival and Territorial Styles does create this nice low landscape, but it lacks variety, it is tedious at the very least He would like to see contemporary buildings built in adobe in the historic district, because it advances the whole notion as a viable building material. That it is still has a place in modern architecture.[27]
Preservation Organizations
Cornerstones Community Projects is a 501(c)3 and have been since 1995. They started under another foundation, which is still exists, at the time they were called Churches Symbols of Community. The name was changed as to not be affiliated with religionwhich was never its purpose, preservation of the structures is.[28]
Established in 1986,
Cornerstones Community Partnerships assists communities in the preservation of
historic structures, promotes the use of centuries old building practices, and
supports the continuum of cultural values and heritage unique to this
region. The work is carried out in partnership with Hispanic and
Native American communities throughout New Mexico, neighboring southwestern
states, and northern Mexico. Cornerstones' community-based approach
fosters the involvement of youth, supports strong, unified communities, and
helps insure that cultural traditions and heritage are passed on to future
generations.[29]
The following is from an Interview with the Architectural Technical Manager, Francisco Uvia Contrers.
Cornerstones works mainly with public buildings, it does not go into private buildings. They do offer technical assistance to private home owners, says Francisco Uvia, Conerstones will work them for a little while and then direct them to Ed Crocker, Uvias Mentor.[30] However, if the house is going to be turned into a museum or the owner wants to donate it to a community then they would get involved with the process.
Most of the staffs knowledge is in adobe architecture. That is the main architecture of the region, and also the most threatened, says Uvia, that is what must be conserved.
Therefore Cornerstones dose not work much in town. There is so much money here [in Santa Fe] that people do not need a non-profit to help them out. Their concentration lies in many small rural communities, Indian Pueblos for example, where ever there is a need they will be there. Most of the projects in Santa Fe are educational trainings. Uvia trains people in adobe building techniques.
When asked about the future of Santa Fe, Francisco Uvia states simply, not good. It is becoming what he calls, Santa Fake, a mock-up or a movie set for tourists. It is hard to distinguish the historic adobe buildings from the ones that are not. People in preservation know from looking at the windows and the parapets, and from the size and the shape. However, people that come from the outside think that it is all adobe and its not.
Is there a better way for Santa Fe to be headed? According to Uvia it might be too far gone, if you walk around Santa Fe, you might find a hand full of buildings that retain their mud or lime plasters. Being more flexible when it comes to building with the traditional materials would help. The new way of building the adobe has affected the old way, for example, building adobe structures with cement stucco and asphalt emollition. None of is present in traditional building and now new construction has moved so far away from it. By bringing the traditional materials back, when someone walks by a building, he or she could say; now that is adobe.
As a contrast to the ideology, of Santa Fe, Uvia talks about one of the cities in New Mexico that he admires, Las Vegas. Situated an hour northwest of Santa Fe, about 25,000 people live there, and it has retained its flavor of architecture. It has everything, the architecture from mid 19th century, the turn of the century and even motels and the American roadside architecture from the 1950s and 60s. Its all there and you can see the progression. There are Territorial buildings, the old adobe structures, the overlapping of the vernacular, Romanesque and the Queen Anne Victorianits all there. In Santa Fe those buildings exist, but they have been covered up by stucco or painted brown. In Las Vegas all the styles shine.
The architectural progression that exists in Las Vegas has been cut off in Santa Fe, by the early proponents of the Santa Fe Style. In the early 20th Century Santa Fe sought to reverse the Americanization of Santa Fe, Uvia believes that is where the city went wrong. Not because it was unimportant to preserve this unique city, but because by building everything the same it is hard for people to know what is actually historic.[31]
The Historic Santa Fe Foundation (HSFF) is an organization that has thrived since it was founded in 1961. Our mission is to own, preserve and protect historic properties and resources of Santa Fe and its environs and to provide historic preservation education. We own eight properties in Santa Fe and holds historic Preservation easements on others.
The Historic Santa Fe Foundation is a valuable asset to our treasured community. We are here to protect what we all love about Santa Fe and to ensure that it is here for our grandchildren, and their grandchildren.[32]
The following is from an Interview with the Executive Director, Elaine Bergman.
The foundation formed when the Nusbaum House was in danger of being torn down to build a parking lot. With the help of John Gaw Meem, $20,000 was raised to try to purchase the building, but it was too late. At the same time in the background Meem was formulating the language for this organization. While the Nusbaum house was lost, the money raised was able to begin HSFF, which now ensures the preservation of many historic structures in Santa Fe.
El Zaguan (left
Fig. 9) is one of the first acquisitions, Margretta
Dietrich, a wealthy widow who had recently resettled in Santa Fe from Nebraska,
where she had been a leading organizer 
of women's suffrage
groups. She was the widow of the
former Nebraska governor. While on
a cruise in Europe when she heard the James L.
Johnson House & Garden [or El Zagun] was going
to be torn down, she immediately had her attorney send a western union note to
buy the house, as Elaine Bergman states, this is an early example of
preservation.
With the help of Dorothy
Stewart, Dietrichs sister and an artist, they converted the house into
apartments, and Stewart built what she called the galleria on the east
end. The apartments were soon
rented filled to artists. This
began in the 1920s, and HSFF still carries on the tradition of renting to
artists. Dietrich died in 1961 and a group of investor purchased it, including
Meem. Twenty years later they donated it to HSFF (right, artistic detailing Fig.
10).
Currently the
foundation owns eight buildings; they were selected based on their
vulnerability to being demolished. Some of their properties included: The
Felipe B. Delgado House, The Oliver P. Hovey House, and The Donaciano Vigil
House. The Delgado House is now a
bank, the Hovey House is an art gallery and the Vigil House remains a private
residence. By owning and renting
eight properties the foundation is able to help sustain itself.
The leases to these structures are extraordinary, renters cant make
changes. They see their tenants as stewards for the buildings. In terms of the three private
residences they have to not mind a little loss of privacy, if HSFF has special
guests or tours. The benefit is
renters pay about half market rate.
It is extremely competitive to rent one of these buildings, and
currently, Bergman states, they have wonderful tenants.
The foundation is always working on many different projects.
Currently education is at the forefront.
Helping people maintain their historic properties and therefore
acquiring new easements. They also
run earthen materials workshops, again to help people with their
buildings. One of the most popular
workshops focuses on how to mix mud plasters, how to apply them and what kind
of substrate is needed. Bergman
jests, that the popularity is because it lets people get their hands muddy.
One of the most important elements of their education program is
the preservation trades internship.
One of the biggest challenges in historic preservation is that designers
and trades people are losing the ability to work with earthen materials. This internship is designed to help
remedy that problem.
Presently the HSFF is not looking to acquire any more
structures, and is focusing more on easements to help preserve the cities
historic treasures. They have to be realistic about acquisition, they already
carry two mortgages, one is for the property next door and that was
purchased as a strategy to limit development. El Zagun and the Donaciano
Vigil house are gifts to the foundation; the other six properties were
bought. They acquired the Hovey
House downtown through mortgages, because it was extremely threatened, as were
the other five properties.
Bergman ends with what she loves most about Santa Fe what she
does. It is the little details,
the natural environment, the city in the valley between the two mountain
ranges,
The Future of Santa Fe
The general consensus is the future of Santa Fe does not look good,
whether one is for or against new construction in the Historic Districts. The Following are quotations from four
of the seven interviews:
Right now the future doesnt look good; we have a rather non supportive city council. Economic development is very big, green architecture is very big. A lot of people who do not understand historic preservation think that it is anti-green, which its not.
-David Rasch
It is scary, it is very scary. I think because tourism is our major industry it behooves the city to [preserve] it no matter how much it hurts [economically].
-Nancy Wirth
When you go downtown and walk up Canyon Roadits really trinkified. Even the art that is very pricey it is still kitsch. The community has moved away from the downtown.
-Jake Barrow
Im just really curious at this point. Its a racewe have global warming, corporate greed all these things and they all affect each otheryou just dont know. I do not know what the private community is anymore. For years it was not an expensive or accessible city. The charm drew artists that could work in a restaurant while they wrote their book or made their art. It has really lost that.
-Jane Farrar
The city is becoming more and more touristy, which in a way is good, as Nancy Wirth says, it is the citys main industry. However, one must be careful with a small town that the industry doesnt take it over before there is nothing left, as Jane Farrar worries about. There needs to be more of a bridge between developers and preservations. One that does not involve a compromise that is one sided. Developers must realize that in order for Santa Fe to be the valuable commodity that it is, it must retain some of its historic character. If it becomes too over developed the tourists industry will eventually die. It is also important for building practices to move forward, what may have been viable in the past may not be the best course for the future.
How could developers and preservationists work together? It is an odd concept, but not impossible. During the graduate course HP 304 entitled Contemporary Preservation Policy and Planning Seminar, professionals from the state of Vermont discuss current policies. Paul Bruhn, the executive director of Preservation Trust of Vermont, came to speak on February 27, 2007. One of the components of the Preservation Trust of Vermont is downtown revitalization. How does one make small businesses viable in the age of Wal-Mart? The answer is to work together. Bruhn shared a plan to incorporate a Wal-Mart into downtown St. Albans, VT. It would be smaller than most of their stores, non-obtrusive in design, and parking would be located underground. The idea is it would bring people downtown and if consumers could not find what they were looking for at Wal-Mart, then there would be numerous specialty stores to choose from. If this does not happen and Wal-Mart builds a store outside the downtown, it will draw all the business with it. In this case, Burhn and the Preservation Trust of Vermont are hoping to create a beneficial situation for both parties. This is a very site specific endeavourer, but it is this kind of creative thinking that promotes a healthy relationship between preservation and development.[34]
How could Santa Fe be more flexible without compromising its character? Currently the Ordinance only allows for new construction in the Spanish Pueblo Revival and the Territorial Revival Style. A step forward, and a suggestion of both Ed Crocker and Francisco Uvia, could be to allow contemporary design, but put the restraint that it must be built out of traditional earthen materials. With this restraint the color of the southwest and the height restrictions can be applied. However, it will allow for variety as well as reviving the use of the material which is so important to this region.
While the issue of preservation is unsolved, there are still many events and developments that are for preservation both structurally and culturally:
The city does make an effort, it has large music program downtown, there is Indian Market at the Palace of Governors, and the Spanish Market. The mayor has a new initiative to make Santa Fe a green city. There are still many artists and young artists too. The city tries to encourage that, making studio space cheap. Many aspects that made Santa Fe great still exist here.
-Jake Barrow
The Railyard Project is a positive direction for Santa Fe. Located in the Transition Historic District, it used to be a complex of warehouses. The project includes a larger area of open space that is now going to be a park. Its going to be great, states Nancy Wirth. There will be museums and new galleries, including Santa Fe Clay, as well as a Hispanic Cultural Center, and one of the major components is going to be a large year- round farmers market. It will be a major component to the downtown and will keep businesses from moving out towards the malls.[35]
It behooves the city to look at the Ordinance criticallywhere is it succeeding and what needs improvement. As Farrar says, when it was written it really focused on preserving the vernacular and the earthen traditions within the Santa Fe Style. However, in the last fifty years that has translated to multiple condominium developments and large 3,000 to 4,000 square foot mansions build out of modern adobe, as Crocker and Uvia explain. This is not the intent of the early preservationists, and it is certainly not where current preservationists want the city to go. In conclusion, Francisco Uvia states, People love Santa Fe and I love Santa Fe, but its a battle. There is not better way to describe it.
Appendix A
Photographs Noted in Text
Figure 1 Acoma Mission, photo about 1935 from The Myth of Santa Fe, Chris Wilson.
Figure 2 Taos Pueblo, North building, photo about 1880 from The Myth of Santa Fe, Chris Wilson.
Figure 3 Colorado Supply Company, water color Isaac Hamilton Rapp from The Creator of the Santa Fe Style, Carl D. Sheppard.
Figure 4 Cristo Rey Church, Sara Casten
Figure 5 Francis Cathedral School, Sara Casten
Figure 6 Francis Cathedral School parking lot, Sara Casten
Figure 7 Santuario de Guadalupe, Sara Casten
Figure 8 Modern Adobe Structures, Sara Casten
Figure 9 El Zaguan, Sara Casten
Figure 10 El Zaguan detail, Sara Casten