Jexter y Fixler - Modern Heritage, Progress, Priorities, And Prognosis

Association for Preservation Technology International (APT) is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to APT Bulletin.

http://www.jstor.org

Modern Heritage: Progress, Priorities, and Prognosis Author(s): THOMAS C. JESTER and DAVID N. FIXLER Source: APT Bulletin, Vol. 42, No. 2/3, Special Issue On Modern Heritage (2011), pp. 3-8Published by: Association for Preservation Technology International (APT)Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41228977Accessed: 01-03-2015 12:01 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of contentin a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Sun, 01 Mar 2015 12:01:44 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.orghttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aptechhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/41228977http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

Modern Heritage: Progress, Priorities, and Prognosis THOMAS C. JESTER AND DAVID N. FIXLER, GUEST EDITORS

Although the preservation field has

made tremendous strides in address-

ing Modern heritage, the challenges remain great, particularly in achiev-

ing general public acceptance of

Modernism as heritage and in the

technical realm.

Fig. 1. Boston City Hall (1961-1968), Boston, Massachusetts, designed by Kallmann, McKin- nell & Knowles, photograph 2002. Boston City Hall is emblematic of the broad spectrum of issues that continue to challenge the acceptance and rehabilitation of Modern heritage. Hailed as a masterpiece among architects and scholars and endowed with de facto landmark status by the Boston Landmarks Commission in 1991, it is nonetheless widely reviled by the public and its users and is bedeviled by a host of technical and maintenance problems that have largely arisen from the unique nature and a lack of understanding of the structure. Photograph by David N. Fixier.

In 2009 the APT Technical Committee on Modern Heritage helped organize a full track of papers on Modern heritage at the APT annual conference in Los Angeles. The introductory panel discus- sion, entitled "Modern Heritage: Prog- ress, Priorities, and Prognosis," explored the state of preservation with respect to efforts to conserve the legacy of Modernism. This special issue of the APT Bulletin is an outgrowth of the Los Angeles conference and includes a number of papers presented in Los Angeles, as well as additional papers written specifically for this issue.

APT has been one of the organiza- tions at the forefront of efforts to address Modern heritage. Three special issues of the Bulletin on this topic have been published previously: Preserving What's New (1991), Mending the Mod- ern (1997), and Curtain Walls (2001). In 1987 at the annual conference in Victo- ria and Vancouver, British Columbia, former APT president Michael Lynch presciently asked the question, "What are we going to do with the recent past in the not-too-distant future?" Almost 25 years later, APT's annual conference will return to Victoria later this year. It seems fitting to reflect on the progress that has been made in the past quarter century, discuss current priorities and issues, and consider the prognosis for Modern heritage.

The Philosophical Arc of Modern- Heritage Preservation

Modernism is both the genesis and the bte noir of historic preservation. Both movements have parallel histories, with preservation's first stirrings coming in the aftermath of the French Revolution, followed by slow but steady growth through the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, culminating in 1931

with the formulation of the first international conservation agreement, the Athens Charter for the Restoration of Historic Monuments. Two years later another Athens Charter, this one con- cerning the Functional City, codified the principles and mission of CIAM, the International Congress of Modern Architecture, as the official mouthpiece of what has come to be called the Mod- ern movement. These two documents together began to crystallize a contemporary design ethos that defined "traditional" architecture as heritage, positing it as the "Other" to which Modernism was a contemporary - and by exten- sion, future - foil. Thus were articu- lated two of the primary movements that would have significant and lasting impact on the global built environment of the twentieth century.

By the late 1980s there was a growing awareness and concern within the design community, especially in Europe, that the early works of Modernism - the seminal projects of the 1920s and '30s that established Modernism in all its guises as the preeminent design idiom of the twentieth century - were failing and neglected and that concerted efforts were necessary to ensure their survival. This concern, which was acknowledged and addressed from the beginning by APT, sparked challenging debates within the preservation community and fa- mously spawned D0C0M0M0, which by the turn of the millennium had galva- nized the voices of both Modern zealots and committed preservationists into a global voice in support of the legacy of Modernism.

Between 1945 and 1980 the volume of the global built environment more than doubled relative to all that had been constructed in the course of human history. The vast quantity and uneven quality of this heritage - much of

3


http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

4 APT BULLETIN: JOURNAL OF PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY / 42:2-3, 2011

Fig. 2. Exterior detail, Finlandia Hall (1968-1971), Helsinki, Finland, designed by Alvar Aalto, photograph 1998. The failure of the exterior clad-

ding at Finlandia Hall sparked a debate on intent and authenticity that eventually was heard by Finland's highest court, which ruled that the

replacement must conform to the architect's

original specification, as lobbied for by his wife and surviving partner. The replacement clad-

ding, a slighter thicker version of the original Carrara marble, is failing even faster than the

original installation. Photograph by David N. Fixier.

which falls into the category of ordinary everyday Modernism (OEM) - has tested the capacity and limits of traditional preservation practice, but it has definitely caught our attention. In the last 15 years APT, DOCOMOMO, ICOMOS, and (to our relief and sur- prise) an ever larger sector of the preservation community has, with increasing intensity, focused on addressing the social, technical, and aesthetic challenges associated with sustaining the legacy of postwar Modernism.

In this issue of the APT Bulletin, the editors have endeavored to examine the full breadth of issues that continue to challenge the design community with regard to Modern heritage. This under- taking has not been easy. While there are many iconic buildings that have undergone sensitive renewal, yielding many technical and aesthetic lessons, there is much that remains problematic and misunderstood in both the approach

and execution of many Modern preservation projects (Fig. 1). One of the issues that looms largest is how to address OEM. In Cronocaos, Office of Metro- politan Architecture's deliberately po- lemical diatribe about the problems and conundrum of preservation today, Rem Koolhaas brings a sobering if misleading clarity to this problem by declaring that there is a systematic, global initiative to eradicate ordinary everyday Modernism - particularly social housing and other government-related works - in the interest of emphasizing heritage as those works that pre-date Modernism, creating an appropriate complement to today's revivalist architecture (whether traditional or neo-Modern).

Michael McClelland's essay in this Bulletin speaks to the issue of addressing OEM via private and civic initiatives that can be undertaken to address Mod- ern heritage on a large scale using the example of postwar housing towers in Toronto. His paper outlines how a re- gion with literally thousands of concrete buildings housing a sizable percentage of its population is beginning to address the social, economic, and technical issues involved in sustaining and increasing the livability and performance of this architecture without denying its intrinsic value as cultural heritage. While policy and financing are major components of this initiative, there also must be a program of both outreach and education in order to bring the public around to em- bracing the value in these complexes and also a measure of accommodation in their rehabilitation that addresses their initial and present shortcomings. With- out this acknowledgment - the idea that there is perhaps reparation that goes along with repair (in Toronto's case, creating more comfortable, sustainable communities through robust renovation schemes) - it will be very difficult to achieve the level of desirabil- ity necessary to the continued economic viability of many of these towers. Like the more focused technical efforts at the Barbican and the Alexandra Road housing estates in the UK, crafting workable solutions that can address preservation concerns while being competitive in today's market will be increasingly pressing issues.

A fundamental question that has continually bedeviled the discourse on

Modern heritage is whether the principles and practices of preservation as they apply to the works of Modernism are or should be fundamentally different from those that apply to traditional buildings. This question is predicated on both the philosophy and intent of Mod- ernism as something that endorsed and fostered change and on the lack of physical durability of many Modern construction materials and systems, which often necessitate replacement in situations where traditional materials could be restored (Fig. 2). We are at a point in the trajectory of this effort, with two decades of experience under our belts, to be able to discern subtle but real philosophical differences - which will often show up in the language of a particular intervention.

David Strauss's presentation of the Magnolia Branch Library in Seattle postulates one such philosophical approach in his work on a renovation and addition solution that takes advantage of contemporary technology to create a marked separation from the original with the use of a similar cladding material but in an entirely different kind of system (horizontal boards as a rain screen vs. the original shingles). At the same time, a very matter-of-fact approach is taken to the execution of some of the systems (acoustic tile ceilings) and details (heavier glazing stops to accommodate insulated glass) that change key aspects of the original building, ac- knowledging, for reasons of economy, convenience, and performance, that this work is a renovation, with its attendant practical and economic considerations, not a restoration. We should stress, however, that the sparseness, even mini- malism, inherent in many Modern works lends particular importance to these kinds of decisions; despite the subtlety of the change, it can legiti- mately still be asked here to what degree the inevitable change in perception is also a change in value.

On the technical side, we have enough grounding and accumulated knowledge to more carefully address precisely the kinds of issues that Strauss brings to light. In this sense the evolution of preservation technology to accommodate Modern materials and systems has happened along much the same lines as those traditionally used to



PROGRESS, PRIORITIES, AND PROGNOSIS 5

Fig. 3. Intelstat Headquarters (1980-1985), Washington, D.C., designed by John Andrews, photograph 201 1 . The headquarters for the 1 10-nation satellite cooperative features reflective-glass sunscreens, a reminder that not all Modern buildings were designed without energy efficiency in mind. Envelopes are one of the biggest challenges for the preservation and design professionals charged with repairs, upgrades, and sensitive replacement. Photograph by Thomas C. Jester.

Fig. 4. AIA Headquarters (1972-1974), Washington, D.C., designed by The Architects Collaborative, photograph 1974. The monolithic structural glazing used for the double-height lobby at AIA Headquarters was manufac- tured by PPG and was an early installation of their "Total Vision" system. Important character-defining features and materials in Modern-era buildings should be preserved whenever possible. Courtesy of the AIA Slide Collection.

address any technical conservation issue. The difference, however, is an increasing acceptance of the necessity for replacing many components, especially where they were prototypical or otherwise relatively untested systems. Ironically, this kind of practice is not uncommon in other cultures (one imagines wood temples in Japan or sandstone structures in India, where all or part of the material fabric may be routinely replaced in kind every few generations), but it is anathema to the ethos of material conservation that is at the core of Western preservation philosophy. This issue is further compli- cated by the growing demand to opti- mize sustainable solutions that may on the one hand dictate replacement in the name of increasing building performance or eliminating a hazardous material but on the other result in the conse- quent loss of the material, its constituent embodied energy, and the associated impacts of sourcing, fabricating, trans- porting, and installing replacement elements.

This question has also been raised regarding interior fittings, building ser- vices, and decorative fixtures, as is examined with concise clarity in Rosa Lowinger's description of the restoration of Otto Piene's Sun and Moon light sculptures in the Hawaii State Capitol.

In a project that considers and measures the value of every element of every component affected in the course of this work against the highest conservation standards, we are reminded that any intervention provokes change; even at the level that some would regard as fine- art conservation, compromise will be inevitable, even in cases, such as Sun and Moon, where the compromises were largely invisible once the work was com- plete. What is particularly interesting is that the works are kinetic and that part of the compromise in updating the lighting programs was to be able to change the scene settings in ways that the cre- ator had not originally imagined. In evaluating this kind of change, we are venturing into the kind of interpretation that is traditionally reserved for performance art. However, this will clearly be an ever-growing issue as preservationists tackle projects that are increasingly laden with and even defined by technology.

Stepping several levels back and with a broader pen - but still ultimately with conservation in mind - Vanessa Fernandez argues for honoring the architect's intent in using the original layered facade and ventilation-systems design for Marcel Breuer's UNESCO headquarters in Paris (which was not originally designed to accommodate air-

conditioning) as touchstones for a more robust intervention that could enhance the performance of the building while increasing its sustainability quotient. Fernandez examines Breuer's project in the light of applying lessons learned from earlier, largely failed attempts by Le Corbusier to create mechanically ventilated, hermetically sealed buildings (the Salvation Army building in Paris and Centrosuyuz in Moscow) to create a more workable solution, which the new interventions will further enhance.

The realization that a return to the first principles that often informed the original design of many mid-century Modern buildings but were lost in earlier renovations is an important step toward the achievement of a comfortable, sustainable, aesthetically pleasing renovation - a point that is increasingly being borne out in renovations such as those carried out on Alvar Aalto's Baker House at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology or Ludwig Mies van der Rohe's Crown Hall at the Illinois Insti- tute of Technology (Figs. 3 and 4). Ben Shepherd's essay in this volume on the restoration of Paul Rudolph Hall, the Yale Art + Architecture Building designed by Paul Rudolph, falls very much into this category. In rescuing a building that had been mercilessly subdivided




Fig. 5. Prentice Women's Hospital (1974), Chi- cago, Illinois, designed by Bertrand Goldberg, photograph 1975. Less than 40 years old and threatened with demolition as a structure that no longer conforms to modern-hospital space standards, Prentice is a prime example of the rapid obsolescence that is threatening health- care facilities around the world. Photograph by William Brubaker, reproduced courtesy of the University of Illinois, Chicago, Visual Resources Collection.

and patched over the course of its almost 50-year history, Yale made the commitment to restore Rudolph's vision while making key changes to the systems and envelope that would radically enhance its sustainability. What is instruc- tive to note, however, is that this achievement was possible only through the creation of an addition that would accommodate not only inevitable program growth (though some of the original building program elements were located to new, off-site facilities) but, perhaps more importantly, the core service and access requirements that today demand far more square footage than was required when this building was originally constructed.

This last point touches on the issue of close program fit that is often cited as a hindrance to accommodating upgrades to meet contemporary space, access, and life-safety standards. Any structure renovated today - whether mid-century Modern or older - must address these

changes; the fact that many Modern structures were tightly tailored, in plan and section, to a specific program often necessitates radical alterations to the original building schematic. This situation raises the more general issue of dealing with those building typologies that are most subject to change and are therefore most endangered as they come up for renewal. Two of the most prominent of these building types are primary and secondary schools (particularly public schools) and health-care facilities (Fig. 5). Cameron Logan examines the general problem of addressing hospitals as heritage structures and essentially throws out a challenge to the preservation community to come up with creative schemes for repurposing these buildings as their only hope for survival. It is largely true that beyond the few iconic early modern European tuberculosis sanatoria (notably Bernard Bijvoet and Jan Duiker's Zonnestraal in the Nether- lands and Alvar Aalto's Paimio in Fin- land) whose cultural value as heritage have made it worthwhile to have them repurposed and restored, few hospitals survive beyond 30 to 40 years after construction without undergoing radical change. Many prominent early-postwar Modern hospitals have been either completely subsumed by subsequent construction (Erich Mendelsohn's Mai- monides Hospital in San Francisco) or subjected to outright demolition (the Michael Reese hospital complex in Chicago by Walter Gropius and The Architects Collaborative).

The Technical Arc of Modern-Heritage Preservation

Extensive literature has been published over the past 25 years about the conservation and repair challenges associated with the Modern materials and assemblies. This is confirmed in Susan Mac- Donald and Gail Ostergren's article describing the Getty Conservation In- stitute's "Twentieth-Century Built Her- itage" bibliography, a resource being made available as part of the Getty's new Conserving Modern Architecture Initiative. Since the mid-1990s the literature on preservation technology shifted from more theoretical discus- sions of issues to project-specific case studies as buildings from the Modern

era began to undergo interventions. Although a number of significant tomes have been published in the past five years, most notably Theodore Prudon's Preservation of Modern Architecture (2008), the technical literature on time- tested conservation and repair techniques for Modern materials and assemblies remains small relative to the need, suggesting that, following a period of early momentum, we are now in a period of technical stagnation, even as the advocacy and awareness-raising efforts have become more advanced. Concerned about this issue, the APT Technical Committee on Modern Her- itage will be working with partner or- ganizations, including DOCOMOMO International, ICOMOS, the Getty Conservation Institute, and others to reinvigorate the technical agenda so that gaps in the knowledge base can be addressed.

At issue are the many materials and assemblies whose life cycles are in many cases shorter than those found in traditional buildings. Some were experimen- tal, while others simply do not have the same durability of more traditional materials. It is important for preservation practitioners to understand the historical evolution of building technology - even subtle changes - in order to assess whether materials and assemblies can or should be repaired or con- served. It should also be noted that we have now reached the point in the technical arc where buildings from the 1960s are approaching 50 years in age and landmark eligibility. The materials and techniques used to construct buildings from the post-Modern era are much closer to building practices today, mean- ing that in some, but not all, cases preservation treatments will be more closely aligned with current building and detail- ing practices.

Designs and details that do not meet current performance requirements must also be addressed. Water management is a frequent problem. This is precisely the issue discussed by Harry Hunderman and Ken Itle in their article on repairing and upgrading the stone plazas at the Lyndon B. Johnson Presidential Library in Austin and 860-880 Lake Shore Drive in Chicago. Modern water-management and roofing systems must be carefully integrated with the stone paving in a



PROGRESS, PRIORITIES, AND PROGNOSIS 7

way that minimizes any visual deviation from the original plaza design.

Scores of buildings from the Modern era are now in need of renewal, having reached a point where significant capital reinvestment is required to replace systems and components near or beyond their service lives and to address defer- red maintenance that is all too common- place. This building stock represents a veritable maelstrom that will play out over the next few decades. Today it is recognized that renewal, rehabilitation, retrofit, repair, repurposing, and reuse of existing postwar buildings must be part of the equation in shaping a sustainable future.

This situation presents tremendous opportunities for the preservation field as the Modern-era building-renewal marketplace expands. As Mike Jackson noted in his 1991 article entitled "Pre- serving What's New," "Analyzing an existing structure, diagnosing its problems, and proposing solutions that respect the existing structure are the skills of preservationists." Architects, engineers, and conservators have more tools to use than 20 years ago, when the recent past was an emerging concern. Whereas in the past the case for conserving or replacing a building component was based largely on empirical knowledge, today the building industry is shifting toward performance-based design. Assemblies can now be evaluated and design options studied by using simulation tools that analyze and predict energy, lighting, ventilation, thermal, and moisture performance.

Regardless of the issues, the challenge for practitioners is to manage change and find a balance between performance and historic values for those buildings deemed worthy of conservation - whether significant heritage or a ubiquitous "ordinary" everyday Modern building. The starting point for design- ing an intervention should not be what must be replaced but rather what can be preserved. Extending the lifespan of material and assemblies may not always be possible due to reduced or unaccept- able performance or to limited remain- ing service life, but the starting point should not be wholesale replacement. Evidence suggests that the marketplace is shifting. An excellent example is the window rehabilitation at the Empire

State Building. California-based Serious Materials retrofitted the existing glazing for its 6,514 windows in a repair shop created on the job site (sound familiar?). IGUs were removed from the existing frames; glass layers were separated from the original spacers, cleaned, and fitted with a new suspended low-e film and spacers, and then gas filled and rein- serted into the existing frames. More of this type of creative problem solving in partnership with industry is needed.

The performance of envelopes and windows is and will continue to be an ongoing concern, as indicated by many of the articles in this issue. The paper by Angel Ayn and William Rose in particular highlights the technical challenges facing practitioners and the level of in- vestigation and analysis that is likely to become standard practice for large and high-profile projects. The design work at the Guggenheim Museum for the glazing envelope confirms that greater col- laboration among architects, mechanical engineers, specialty consultants, curtain- wall and glazing manufacturers, and installers is required to make informed treatment and design decisions with respect to complex envelopes. More case studies and technical literature are needed on envelope evaluation, retrofit potential, and sensitive replacement design.

Sustainability

Global warming and the need to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions has elevated sustainability to a prominent position and has become a significant driver in the building industry. Initially focused on new construction, a concerted effort by the preservation community, particularly APT and the National Trust for Historic Preservation, has brought attention to the importance of existing buildings in the sustainability equation. The specific linkages between Modern- era buildings and sustainability, specifically the opportunities and constraints they present, are important and should be explored more deeply. A key objec- tive should be finding the correct balance between energy performance and historic values, which also need to be more fully recognized as an important element of sustainability.

Michael McClelland's paper on the Toronto Towers project highlights the

linkages on an urban and regional scale. The planning efforts seek to make the ubiquitous towers more sustainable through improved transportation pat- terns and building upgrades to improve energy performance. While Toronto represents a suburban legacy of decentrali- zation that must be addressed, pressure to increase density in urban areas will also affect the Modern-era building stock. In some cases this trend may place pressure on existing buildings that may be candidates for replacement with taller structures. On the other hand, pressure to make urban areas denser will present opportunities to renew existing buildings and make them more sustainable.

At the building level, managing change will be critical as buildings are upgraded and renewed - whether the building is a landmarked icon or example of ordinary everyday Modernism. Creative design will be necessary to maintain the historic character of buildings deemed to have enough value to warrant sensitive interventions. Fortu- nately, many sustainability improve- ments can be made that are "invisible." New mechanical systems and roofing systems, in particular, can usually be integrated with little or no visual change to the structure. Other changes have the potential to radically change the original design of a building, and again the envelope is usually center stage. As design- ers and owners work toward the goal of carbon-neutral buildings, envelope upgrades and replacement are becoming an inevitability. Envelopes need not be an either-or proposition of retention or replacement. The renovation master plan for the AIA Headquarters in Washing- ton, D.C., is an interesting example of a hybrid approach that has merit. On the upper floors, the design team recom- mended that the ribbon windows be replaced with high-performance glazing. On the first floor, the monolithic, double-height structural glazing (an early example) in the lobby is slated to be retained: preservation of an important building element outweighed reduced performance (Fig. 4).

Prognosis and Next Steps

Modernism is now recognized for its cultural importance and its growing




role in shaping a more sustainable world for future generations. However, it continues to be widely misunderstood and is often reviled in the public eye. For this reason, continued education is needed, inside and outside the profession, as the building stock from the Modern era approaches and reaches the "danger zone" of 30 to 50 years in age, so that appropriate interventions can be implemented.

Although the preservation field has made tremendous strides in addressing Modern heritage, the challenges remain great, particularly in the technical realm. It is clear to the guest editors and others who have been working on this issue for some time that a concerted effort is needed to reinvigorate the technical agenda. It is an appropriate time to step back and evaluate which gaps in knowledge and research are most urgent to fill to ensure that sound conservation and repair tools, techniques, and materials are available when working on Modern building materials and assemblies. More up-to-date technical literature is needed on the conservation and repair of Mod- ern materials and building components; creating that material is inherently challenging given the vast universe of materials and systems. Conservation research is clearly needed in areas where preservation technology is less advanced. Too little is known about Modern architec- tural coatings and paints, glasses, metal alloys, plastics, and composites, including sandwich construction. Fortunately, progress is being made on some fronts - but more work is needed. As an example, the Getty Conservation Insti- tute recently published House Paints 1900-1960: History and Use, and APT's Technical Committee on Modern Her- itage is currently working on a Practice Points article on the identification and analysis of latex paints.

In looking across the full spectrum of resources that need to be addressed, and given the scale, variety, and often proto-

typical nature of that which we call Modernism, we must also acknowledge that along with the many successful, conservation-worthy examples to be found, there were also some spectacular failures. These failures must also be addressed by the design and preservation community. Here, we must recog- nize and own up to the Modernist dic- tum of change in the service of progress. We must acknowledge that politics, sustainability, economics, and pure public pressure may at times push our interventions to alter aspects of these works in ways with which we might not normally be comfortable as preservation professionals (especially in buildings or sites of secondary significance) in order to ensure their continued survival. This practice is already occurring, and it is therefore important that we be proactive in anticipating these changes so that some of these potentially radical and destructive shifts can be more readily managed to put forth optimal solutions that preserve the essential integrity of the resources in question. Knowledge of what is out there, educating others to its significance, and being able to articulate programs designed to address the full panoply of shortcomings will go a long way to the accomplishment of this goal.

Preservation education must also keep pace with the preservation challenges inherent in Modern heritage. The next generation of practitioners will need stronger skills in forensics and a deeper understanding of building science to go along with a strong foundation in preservation theory, history of technology, conservation science, and, ideally, an understanding of what made Mod- ernism tick and why it remains so much a part of our cultural heritage today. APT can play a crucial role in this arena as an organization that is committed to both the clear understanding and docu- mentation of history, while it continues to promote the use of craft and technology of the highest order through work-

shops, presentations, and writing, in the service of preservation.

Within the profession, more collabo- ration and strategic planning is needed among the many groups that are concerned with Modern heritage. Partner- ships and more frequent information exchange would go a long way to advance the cause. Within APT, the Tech- nical Committee on Modern Heritage is a small, dedicated group that is seeking both to reinforce the commitment of APT to Modern heritage and to increase outreach to the design and preservation community. As the founding co-chairs, we welcome the participation of all APT members who would like to join in this effort; the topic is vast, interesting, and challenging. More hands and new lead- ers are always needed to work on projects that would ultimately advance the course and value of the conversation.

THOMAS C. JESTER, AIA, LEED AP, is an associate at Quinn Evans Architects in Wash- ington, D.C. Editor of Twentieth -Century Building Materials: History and Conservation, he was one of the guest editors of the Mending the Modern issue of the APT Bulletin in 1997 and helped plan the "Preserving the Recent Past" and "Preserving the Recent Past 2" conferences. He can be reached at tjester quinnevans.com

DAVID N. FIXLER, FAIA, LEED AP is a principal at EYP Architecture and Engineering in Boston and president of DOCOMOMO- US/New England. An organizer of numerous conferences, author of many articles on Mod- ern heritage, and co-editor of a forthcoming book on Alvar Aalto and America, his practice is centered on the rehabilitation of the works of Modernism. He can be reached at dfixler eypae.com.

The APT Bulletin is published by the Association of Preservation Technol- ogy International, an interdisciplinary organization dedicated to the prac-

.NTERNATioNAL tcai application of the principles and

techniques necessary for the care and wise use of the built environment. A subscription to the Bulletin and free online access to past articles are member benefits. For more information, visit www.apti.org.



Article Contentsp. 3p. 4p. 5p. 6p. 7p. 8

Issue Table of ContentsAPT Bulletin, Vol. 42, No. 2/3 (2011) pp. 1-35, 1-6, 36-73Front MatterModern Heritage: Progress, Priorities, and Prognosis [pp. 3-8]Reassessing the Recent Past: Tower Neighborhood Renewal in Toronto [pp. 9-14]Modern Continuity: Seattle's Magnolia Branch Library Renovation and Addition [pp. 15-20]Preservation of Modern-Era Office Buildings and Their Environmental Controls [pp. 21-26]Sustainable Restoration of Yale University's Art + Architecture Building [pp. 29-35]Practice Points: NUMBER 12Conditions Glossaries as a Tool in the Survey Process: A Review of Several Glossaries [pp. 1-6]

Conserving Otto Piene's Kinetic-Light Sculptures in the Hawaii State Capitol [pp. 39-43]Preserving Health: Modern Hospitals as Historic Places [pp. 45-50]The Modern Plaza: Making More from Less [pp. 51-57]Reglazing Frank Lloyd Wright's Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum in New York City [pp. 59-66]CONSERVING TWENTIETH-CENTURY BUILT HERITAGE: A BIBLIOGRAPHY [pp. 67-68]BOOK REVIEWSReview: untitled [pp. 69-70]Review: untitled [pp. 70-70]Review: untitled [pp. 70-71]Review: untitled [pp. 71-71]

Back Matter

Documents

Jexter y Fixler - Modern Heritage, Progress, Priorities, And Prognosis