|
|
|
|
|
I agree completely with Mr. Smith's remarks. My experience is that you either do, or do not, make your case for the treatment of the various elements of a building, in applying for tax incentives. In many old industrial buildings, the internal structural elements (such as timber roof trusses) are important character-defining elements, and the issue becomes one of making a good design case for how those structural elements still "read" through the alterations, so that the structural sense of the original is still evident.
Similarly, roof monitors, interior courtyards and the like may or may not be visible from the public right of way, or it may be in some cases that they are visible and do not meet The Secretary of the Interior's criteria for additions to historic buildings. Approval rests on the design case, once again.
This has been my experience in successfully gaining design approval for industrial building tax incentives with the Feds, so if this doesn't work in Virginia, perhaps the Virginia OHP is being too categorical themselves, and AIA should open some dialogue with them on the subject.
There are plenty of good design examples around that would inform architectural pop-ups, courtyards and riffling into structures. One of my favorites is an oldie, Modern Housing Prototypes by Roger Sherwood (Harvard University Press, 1978).
-------------------------------------------
Joseph Catalano AIA
Joseph Catalano AIA
Sierra Madre CA
-------------------------------------------
|
|
Be the first person to recommend this.
|