Video
Applying the Standards: Main Street Buildings – Webinar #5
Transcript
Hello, I’m Amy Elizabeth Uebel, Architectural Historian with Technical Preservation Services. This training is part of a series dealing with the interpretation and application of the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation. This webinar focuses on applying the Standards to Main Street Buildings. This is an advanced training intended for those already familiar with the Rehab Standards, and we assume everyone watching this webinar series already comes to it with that basic knowledge. However, additional information and training about the Standards are available on our website. The content of today’s training, like other guidelines, publications, and information available from the National Park Service, is intended to assist in the interpretation and application of the Standards but is not regulatory or binding for the purposes of the tax incentives program. The program regulations and the Standards themselves take precedence in any decision-making and should always be consulted first.
The project examples included in this webinar are not necessarily case studies. Some have had their facts and circumstances as described in the presentation simplified or adapted to more clearly express the concepts being discussed. Also, in using the information contained in this training, it should be considered in its entirety, and portions not taken out of context. Likewise, the TPS website should always be consulted to make sure you are using the most current version of any published guidance and information.
Main Street buildings are iconic parts of our towns and cities and their development and alterations contribute to our sense of place across the country. In the time I’m with you, we’ll be taking a broad look at how the Standards offer flexibility in the rehabilitation of Main Street Buildings and how alterations can meet programmatic needs while maintaining the building’s historic character.
We often think of Main Street buildings as ones that look much like the buildings shown on the current slide. Two to three stories, residential upper floors with commercial on the first floor. But wait a minute. Somethings a bit off.
All right, here we go! This is much better. As I was saying the stereotypical Main Street building has a fairly iconic look. They have large storefronts. These buildings can be built of various masonry types or be framed. On the second and higher floors, Main Street Buildings can have residential units, offices, or storage spaces.
Main Street buildings are also typified by a few broad character-defining elements. These include both large storefront systems and an open volume on the first floor.
After that, there are a myriad of character-defining features that can be found on Main Street Buildings of all styles. As seen in the photos, distinctive transoms, cast iron elements, or ornamental terra cotta crop up in various forms. Distinctive ceilings, unique windows or for that matter historic windows, and occasionally vehicular entries crop up as well. All of these elements helped to make the building unique and distinctive. Some of these elements, such as the retention of ornamental features, are typically more straight-forward in their rehabilitation, but the reconfiguring of openings and subdivision of open space can bring challenges to ensure the building’s rehabilitation meets the Standards.
Main Street buildings are also typified by the constant change that occurred while the buildings adapted to an ever-evolving downtown core. Some of these changes, such as what you see in the Efird Building on the left, include the infill of windows which occurred after the period of significance when the second floor was no longer inhabited.
Other alterations, such as this storefront in the image in the center, can include installation of storefronts that are outside the period of significance in the district. These storefronts may be functional and useable, though they don’t particularly reflect the district’s significance.
Lastly, some changes like the Napier Building in the right-hand photo, not only become significant to the development of the building, but to the district itself. Here, a 1920s building has its façade completely removed and replaced with a modern, international style storefront that exemplified the development of the main street district.
In this case, the building can be challenging to reuse, as it no longer has windows on the on the second floor and it is a delicate balance for the building to be reused while respecting the historic alterations to the structure.
Other modern needs add additional concerns in order to ensure that the rehabilitation of a main street building meets the Standards. Today, ramps are commonplace features that allow for buildings to overcome grade changes and give greater accessibility to all people. The inclusion of ramps on buildings that did not have them historically can be done in a way that is harmonious with the character of a historic building.
Additionally, modern codes or workplace safety will influence the rehabilitation of a main street building. In the image on the right, this commercial building had a historic wood floor at the start of the project, but the incoming coffee shop was required by code to have a more durable, water-resistant and cleanable floor behind the bar where the staff would be preparing their drinks and food.
Whether it’s ensuring access or ensuring workplace safety, the Standards regularly give flexibility and allow for creative adaptation and reuse of main street building. For the remainder of the time I’m with you, I’ll overview the larger issues that main street buildings face and how the standards can be successfully applied during their rehabilitation.
One of the most identifiable elements of a Main Street building is the storefront. Whether ornate, simple, modern or rustic, this feature is typically the most prominent feature of a commercial building. The original purpose of a storefront was to advertise the business and allow pedestrians to view the merchandise within the store. In the next few slides, we’ll be discussing treatment options for storefronts and looking at how the Standards can offer some flexibility when working with a historic storefront.
Looking at these photos, it’s easy to identify each of these buildings as having majorly distinct styles of storefronts. However, storefronts, despite their wide range of styles, have a similar architecture. It’s helpful to identify their major components when looking at potential work on an existing or new storefront. Although differing in design, these examples have storefront fenestration, an entrance, signage, and decorative elements.
Work on these components, including their alteration or removal, affects how a storefront will meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards.
For the rehabilitation of a storefront to meet the Standards, these three paths can be followed:
- If you have the historic feature, it is best to retain and repair it if possible. If deteriorated, it can be repaired in kind.
- If the historic storefront is missing, the Standards provide flexibility in its replacement. Importantly, the Standards do not require restoration of a historic design. If you have historic documentation, a new storefront can be installed based on that evidence.
- Alternatively, a new feature can be designed that is compatible with the historic character and period of the building.
Digging a little deeper, we all know that often the simplest option for the rehabilitation of a storefront is to repair and retain it. Here in this example, a mid-century storefront was repaired and the green glazed panels were replaced in kind while the display windows, awnings, and smaller transom windows were retained.
But what happens when a building has undergone changes during the course of its history?
We’ve all seen the buildings that have the funny little alterations that occur as the businesses adapt their structures to meet their programmatic needs. These changes can make it challenging to determine the best path forward.
In this example, the Empire Hotel in Salisbury, NC was subdivided for partial use as a Montgomery Ward Department store, which is still evident in the alterations to the fenestration and storefronts to the right. While not original to the building, the department store and its alterations are now firmly within the District’s period of significance and are emblematic of the urban revitalization of the town.
Standard 4 states “Most properties change over time and those changes that have acquired historic significance should be retained and preserved.” Often, acquired significance is mostly easily identified when a National Register District’s period of significance extends to those alterations and the alterations are distinctive.
However, just because something is within the period of significance doesn’t mean that it must be retained. Sometimes it is acceptable to return the building to an earlier appearance rather than retain an extant feature. It can be acceptable to remove some features when they do not contribute to the overall significance of the building or district and their removal will not adversely impact the historic character of the building. Our website provides further information on acquired significance.
Other times, it can be acceptable to replace a non-historic storefront with one based on a historically documented design. Here in this example from Covington, KY, the non-historic storefront on the left had blocked transom windows and modern brickwork. The non-historic storefront was removed and a new more traditional cast iron storefront was installed.
Lastly, it can be appropriate to design a compatible replacement storefront when the historic storefront no longer exists, there is little documentation of the historic storefront, or repair of the historic storefront is not economically or technically feasible. A new storefront should be compatible with the building type, period, and style and the surrounding historic district. For example, an early 20th century style storefront would not be appropriate on a building that was built in 1950.
As in this example of an early 20th century building, a compatible storefront can include doors, transoms, and display windows. Materials should be appropriate to the style and type of storefront that is proposed. Display glass is generally always clear. Transoms may be clear or frosted glass. It can be appropriate to use thinner connections to achieve the historic proportions for display windows.
In the first part of the 20th century, it wasn’t uncommon to see storefronts in a variety of materials. Wood, cast iron, and copper were commonly used across the country. As framing systems became more delicate, and larger amounts of glazing were desired, metal allowed for builders to incorporate bigger windows to tempt customers inside. At this time, a recessed entry with at least some storefront directly abutting the street was a typical design. If needed, structural columns as seen in the bottom right photo would support the building while the delicate storefront sported its fancy glazing. Wood, stone veneer, and metal panels were popular materials for bulkheads during the early 20th century.
In this example on the left, The building contained two unique storefronts of varying ages that both contributed to the significance of the building. The building retained its prism glass transom, but worked with the historic materials remaining to design a compatible storefront that you see here in this photo. The cast iron and wood in the leftmost storefront was painted unique colors, and while the door in the center is a little too residential in nature, the overall work met the Standards.
By the mid-20th century, storefront designs had evolved to sport more colorful and dramatic entries and openings. Pigmented structural glass, such as Carrara and Vitrolite, became popular. Metal framing, with the introduction of brushed aluminum, entered use as well as ever smaller metallic connections to create a frameless storefront like you see on the right.
Other aspects of a mid-twentieth century storefront include tinted glass, tile, highly polished stone, and designs that incorporate the entire façade of a building. Sometimes it was multiple stories. Note, that bulkheads, transoms, signs, and large display glass are still elements of a mid-20th century storefront, but it was not uncommon to see storefronts with no transom or bulkhead, like you see in the image on the left. Proportions were played with and the rhythm of transom, display glass, and bulkhead was no longer a necessary part of the architectural vocabulary of a mid-20th century storefront.
In this example, a mid-century building was being redeveloped into commercial spaces on the first floor and residential spaces on the second floor. The former furniture show room was a large open space and contained four large frameless display windows on the primary façade of the building. As this large commercial space was difficult to lease in the small town, the applicant proposed subdividing the space into three evenly sized retail areas.
An initial proposal was submitted that showed a sensitive subdivision of space, but the alterations needed for the code-required fire separation excessively intruded into the historic display windows.
It was the hope in this case to retain the jewel box like characteristics of these display windows with their high visibility that lead passersby into the store. Ultimately a design was done that allowed the subdivision to occur while meeting the necessary fire-separation requirements. This design used the structural column that was already in place to locate and build the subdivision of space. Fire rated gap fillers, caulking and blocking allowed for the wall and column to be connected while still meeting code.
Often main street buildings already have separate upper-level entries incorporated into their storefront system but this is not always the case. When a residential entry needs to be added, this often requires changing door swings, adding in security measures, creating a new demising wall, and adding in ramps to ensure its accessibility. These requirements do not always align with the historic display windows and design of the storefront.
The Bloch Block, located in Cleveland, Ohio, had stairs that were located deeper into the building and were not accessible from the street. One storefront was fully blocked in, while another was installed at an unknown date outside of the period of significance. Programmatic needs were able to be achieved through the creation of a residential entry in the bay where there was no extant storefront. A new system that is visible in the left side of the color photo, was designed to both blend with the extant storefront and be compatible with the historic character of the building.
When entries are recessed historically, it is a relatively simple process to alter door swing, but this is not always the case. It can be possible to create a recessed entry that remains compatible with the historic character of the building. In this example, an existing storefront, that you can see on the left, was modified, as you can see in the photo on the right, to accommodate a newly created retail space and residential entry. The remaining storefront along the street remained unchanged without recessing the entire storefront, thereby allowing for the programmatic needs to be met with very little alteration to the building. Lastly, rounded awnings would not be a recommended treatment on a late 19th century building such as this, but the applicant retained these awnings that were already in place.
But believe it or not, this talk is about more than just storefronts. Main Street buildings have a myriad of other issues that commonly impact rehabilitation projects. For the remainder of time that I’m with you, we’ll cover some of the more common treatments that can impact a rehabilitation project. Our primary focus will be on how subdividing spaces as well as adding mechanicals can be sensitively done while meeting the Standards.
Low profile ramps along the front and side of a storefront that traditionally had steps as seen in the photo on the left can be an effective method to ensure that the historic character remains while accommodating modern usage. If zoning ordinances or the site don’t allow for such alterations, ramps can be added to a secondary façade as we see in the images on the right.
It is not uncommon for party walls to become exposed over time, which gives applicants an opportunity to add daylight into spaces that did not have natural light historically. Generally, when adding openings in Main Street Buildings it is best to maintain the original massing and overall historic character of the building. Openings on the primary façade should be limited to those that existed during the period of significance.
On secondary facades, openings, like the one you see in the image on the slide, can be created when they are set back at least one bay from the primary façade and the windows are compatible but simplified.
Awnings, while less popular once centrally controlled heating and cooling became commonplace, were historically common features. Awnings were comprised of standard cloth, flat metal or wood that stretched over a historic storefront. While it isn’t uncommon to see them in a variety of paint schemes and pattens, convex, quarter-round, mansard, or other contemporary commercial designs are typically inappropriate for buildings unless they were installed during the district’s period of significance.
New awnings should not obscure character-defining features or destroy historic fabric for their installation. In both photos you can see these new awnings reflect the unique character of the buildings themselves. The photo on the left has an awning placed above and extending to just below the transom window. The photo of the right shows a much taller storefront and transom system. Here, it was appropriate to place the awning in-between the transom windows and the display windows.
While the design, materials, style, and shape of any proposed new awnings should still be influenced by the historic character of the building, awnings do not have to be cookie cutter examples of historic styles. Here, the ribs of the awning are a non-traditional shape while the overall shape and location still embodies the historic character of this commercial building. If you’re looking for more information, our website has additional documentation discussing ways to approach awnings in historic buildings.
While current trends today prefer a cleaner looking building, signage on many historic buildings has a historic precedent and can often be installed in way that meets the Standards. A commercial building will be able to take more signage along the primary facades of the building and on the fascia between the storefront and second floor, while more subtle signage would be appropriate for an institutional building, such as a post office, library, or bank.
A general rule is that any proposed signage should avoid damaging the building where it is installed and be attached though holes in the pointing or by clamping along extant metal grills.
In the photo on the left, the high style building had little signage historically and it was not appropriate to add a new sign that would overwhelm or obscure historic features. The applicant added a sign above the historic door that matched the scale of the building, was placed in a way to not obscure character-defining features, and was of a compatible design and material. In the photo the right, the applicant preserved the historic sign on the building, and chose to install a much more restrained sign along the historic storefront. Much like the lefthand example, this sign does not overwhelm, outcompete, or in any way obscure the historic building.
Ultimately, signage on a historic building should be compatible with the building type, era of construction, and its surrounding district. While it’s not necessary to prove historic precedent on the building itself, proposed signs should be representative of both the building and the surrounding district, if it is in a district.
Materials and illumination matter when designing an appropriate sign. Unless there was a historic precedent for them, neon and illuminated signs are generally not appropriate on buildings constructed before the mid-20th century. Historic signs that are in the district can and should be an inspiration for the placement, style, design of a new proposed sign. Further Information on Historic Signs in Main Street Buildings can be found in Preservation Brief 25.
While it’s not uncommon to see a historic commercial storefront take the form of a long, narrow commercial space, reuse and rehabilitation may require additional subdivision of spaces or an increase in volume to meet programmatic needs. It is generally not appropriate to remove all the demising walls in order to allow to greater circulation.
However, as you can see in the left-hand image, it is appropriate to add in a few cased openings while retaining the mass of the wall. This allows for greater circulation while retaining the historic volumes of the commercial space. The size of a cased opening varies and can be much larger than what is shown on the slide.
Alternatively, a space may be subdivided if the commercial space retains more of the historic open volume at the front of the building. The image to the right shows a general example of what would meet the Standards. While there isn’t a direct proportion of open space the applicant should retain, the width, height, and some depth should remain clearly visible after rehabilitation.
Additional subdivision at the front can be achieved using glazed walls, half-height walls, or mobile divisions. In the rear, the bathrooms, kitchens, and storage rooms can be added. In both these photos, subdivision was achieved through the creative use of an added mezzanine as seen in the right-hand photo and addition of an enclosed area which preserves the overall volume of the space as you can see in the long white wall in the image on the left.
In this example, a historic commercial area was converted to housing. The applicant retained the historic volume in a large portion of the historic commercial area, seen in blue on the plan. They also retained the storefront and entry, as well as the floors. They subdivided the area towards the rear of the building and grouped the subdivision together so as to minimize the impact to the historic volume.
The applicant was able to achieve privacy by the addition of blinds placed in the storefront windows. As blinds and curtains are not something we review, the added privacy they provide is successful and doesn’t require the installation of a permanent feature. In this case, the subdivision clearly meets Standard 2. The historic character of this building is retained and highlighted, despite the drastically different new use.
Just like the first floor, it is important to retain primary spaces on the upper floors, like historic circulations patterns. Although revisions to the historic plan can be made in a way that meets the Standards and programmatic needs. Whether the space was historically an office, lodge, residence, or warehouse, it is recommended to retain sequence of spaces, circulation patterns, and public areas, including the lobbies, stairwells, elevator lobbies, corridors and meeting spaces.
Furthermore, utilitarian and finished spaces varied between floors depending on the historic use of the building. For example, it was not uncommon for a utilitarian first floor to have finished office spaces on the second floor, as seen in the top right photo. Additionally, many fraternal organizations and lodges would have their meeting spaces located on the second or third floor of a main street building. These are all unique elements of a historic building and should be retained.
Alternatively, the Standards have enough flexibility that upper floor spaces can be reconfigured to incorporate modern amenities. In this example, a former office building is being converted into private residences. Notable features for this building include a grand stair, a large lightwell in the corridor, and distinctive transom windows leading from the corridor. In order to accommodate the change in use, the stairwells, corridor, and rhythm of doors were retained on the second and third floor. A former office space was reduced in size to incorporate a new elevator. Lastly, the small office spaces behind the corridor walls were reconfigured to accommodate a new plan for the residential units.
There is no one way a main street building was finished historically. It was quite common for many early 20th century and mid-20th century buildings to have fully finished spaces with plaster walls, wood, tile, or terrazzo floors, and pressed metal or plaster ceilings. However, main street buildings can also could have a less finished and industrial character if its historic use was related to warehousing or manufacturing. It is important to understand what the historic finishes were and then to use that information to guide the proposed finish plan. If there are historic finishes present, it is best not to remove them if they are sufficiently stable.
For example, if a main street building retains its historic pressed metal ceiling, then it should be retained and repaired. When replacing damaged tiles or adding fireproofing it is important that the overall character of the ceiling is maintained. Intumescent paint should not be excessively thick or textured. Historic tile patterns should remain visible. If exact matches are unable to be sourced, replacement tiles should be as close to the level of detail and pattern of the historic ceiling as available. Removing a ceiling and adding fireproofing underneath then replacing the historic ceiling meets the Standards.
The distinctiveness of the historic materials, their level of retention, and the severity of deterioration of these historic finishes are all considerations given when deciding if the finishes should be retained or replaced. For example, the Wells Grocery Company, as seen in the photo on the left, still had its historic pressed metal ceiling. As a result, it was appropriate to retain this feature.
Alternatively, sometimes the lack of a finish is the historic finishing character that should be retained. Lambert Pharmacal never had finished ceilings or walls in the first-floor spaces. During the rehabilitation, the applicant proposed to largely retain the exposed brick and ceiling and added drywall partition walls when constructing new enclosures. This treatment successful retains the distinctive features and finishes that characterize this property.
The ceiling is a character defining feature of a space and the visual integrity of the historic ceiling should be protected. We anticipate that a rehabilitation project will need to have new ducts and other plumbing lines added to spaces, but added mechanicals should not obscure character defining features nor should their installation drop the ceiling low enough to the point where the ceiling is lower than the historic transom windows.
Generally, mechanicals should be placed inside thoughtfully located soffits or installed above the finished ceiling. If a soffit is unable to be created due to an ornate ceiling or cornice, exposed, painted spiral ductwork can be appropriate.
In both these examples, the historic ceiling retained its visibility through the placement of a painted duct or a sensitively designed soffit. Plumbing waste lines were held towards the rear of the building and the original volume remained intact at the start and end of work. Messy, disorderly, and obstructive mechanical systems should be avoided in spaces that were finished historically. Here in these examples, we can see a few less than desirable outcomes.
On the left-hand photo, a distinctive ceiling and plaster cornice at the main entrance to the building was obscured through the installation of multiple plumbing drops that were not fully finished. This obscures and diminishes the appearance of this ornate feature. On the right-hand photo: an applicant initially added exposed plumbing drops in the historic commercial area that were quite prominent. The applicant proposed partitioning off this area for back-of-house space, where the plumbing could remain exposed or be concealed with a soffit or dropped ceiling.
But plumbing lines don’t always have to be towards the rear or buried in a soffit to maintain the building’s historic character. In this clever little example, the applicant needed to run the plumbing waste line the length of the building. In order to not impact and the ornate pressed metal cornice, the applicant proposed to remove the light fixture and run the waste line just above and behind the air duct. In this manner, the duct hides the view of the waste line but both are held away from the cornice.
On the upper floors, soffits can be effectively used to manage adding mechanicals without obscuring or overwhelming historic areas. As seen in the image on the right, and highlighted in blue on the plan, the installed soffits were placed back from the windows to minimize their visibility and grouped in areas such as kitchens, bathrooms, and closest with some running across corridors and exposed walls.
Alternatively, it can be acceptable to minimally lower a ceiling a few inches to allow for mechanicals to be run under an installed ceiling if not impacting historic features. In this example, as you can see in the left pre-rehab photo, the beadboard ceiling was quite tall and the prior owners had installed a variety of ducts and lighting to the space. In order to bury these system, the ceiling, as seen in the right-hand photo, was lowered a few inches and the beadboard reinstalled so that the ducts and electrical systems ran above the ceiling. The volume of the space remains largely the same, and the newly lowered ceiling does not impact the window or door surrounds. Ultimately, when adding mechanical systems that did not have them historically these general guidelines can be followed:
- Plumbing drops, and u bends should generally not be visible in the primary commercial space, though thoughtfully designed sprinkler systems and ducts can be visible and minimally impactful.
- Best practices for placing systems include installing them along walls, towards the rear of a building, or along columns that would be enclosed historically.
- When possible, group systems neatly together. The hope is to allow the systems to blend with the background.
- Painting ducts are a great way to mask their impact on a space.
- Don’t hesitate to use secondary spaces on upper floors to help hide systems.
Lastly, rooftop additions can be particularly tricky inclusions in main street buildings. As these buildings are typically less than three stories, any addition to the overall height may be quite visible and not meet the Standards. While it is generally not difficult to ensure that mechanical equipment and elevator overrides will be minimally visible, larger decks and inhabitable spaces are much harder to obscure on a smaller building. Generally, successful rooftop additions will blend with their surrounding environment and recede from view. This can be done by hiding the addition behind a parapet wall and setting it back from the street. In this example, the addition, as seen in the bottom right image is quite substantial, but the overall density and height of the district allows the addition to fade from view when viewed from the street level.
Just because a rooftop addition or deck is pushed back and set behind a parapet does not mean that it will not have a large impact on the historic character of the building. It’s important to help us understand the exact impact a proposed rooftop additional will have on the historic character of a building. Documentation showing the impact of an addition does not need to be highly rendered. In this example, the applicant proposed a substantial rooftop deck and stair and submitted detailed plans along with a few thoughtful photos of a mockup showing how little an impact the addition would have on the overall character. The mockup used 2x4s and caution tape to demonstrate the visibility of the rooftop deck and railing. If you are struggling to see where the mockup is, that was a good sign that the proposed rooftop deck would likely be largely obscured by other buildings and blend with the site and setting.
In closing, we’ve talked about the rehabilitation of Main Street Buildings in ways that both meet the Standards while still meeting the programmatic needs for a modern inhabitant. As we’ve seen, key project elements like storefront design, and the reworking of spaces without losing the overall layout, retention of finishes where possible, and the addition of modern systems should generally be approached with care and respect to the historic character of the building and surrounding district. However, the Standards are not rigid rules. The guidelines provided project the flexibility to still meet the unique needs for the rehabilitation while maintaining the historic character of the building itself. Thanks for sticking with me for this. If you would like more information regarding the rehabilitation of Main Street Buildings, we have a plethora of information on our website.
Description
This webinar focuses on “Main Street”-type, small-scale commercial and mixed-use buildings, including the identification of character-defining features, acquired significance, the treatment of storefronts, meeting code requirements, and other common issues associated with reusing or converting this building type to new uses.
Duration
35 minutes, 37 seconds
Date Created
04/28/2026
Copyright and Usage Info