GEOGRAPHICAL DATA QUADRANGLE SCALE 1:24000 11 FORM PREPARED BY NAME / TITLE DATE LAL STREET & NUMBER CITY OR TOWN 12 STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER CERTIFICATION THE EVALUATED SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS PROPERTY WITHIN THE STATE IS: LOCAL X hereby nominate this property for inclusion in the National Register and certify that it has been evaluated according to the criteria and procedures set forth by the National Park Service. STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER SIGNATURE FOR NPS USE ONLY I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PROPERTY IS INCLUDED IN THE NATIONAL REGISTER GPO 921-803 291-2125 ORGANIZATION CODE COUNTY NATIONAL STATE NORTHING TELEPHONE 5/16/78 ATTEST: 237 East 18th Avenue the starting point. UTM REFERENCES George M. Kane ZONE EASTING of West 12th Avenue and a north-south line throughethencenter ofethe KEEPER OF THE NATIONAL REGISTER Columbus, Ohio 4.20.79 Herrick, John.
Mendenhall, Thomas C. The History of the ohio State University, Vol II. Columbus: The Ohio State University, As the designated State Historic Preservation Officer for the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (Public Law 89-665), I STRATION The ZONE main south doorway of the Old Ohio Union,then east 150 feet,then north 14412.91125 140 APR 2 0: 1979 Re-submit - OTHER KEEPER Inventory ARCHEOLOGIST Entered HAER Maps TECHNICAL Send-back Photos Review 4.10.79 National Register Write-up United States Department of the Interior-Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service BRANCH CHIEF Federal Register Entry OK 3.9.29 6-5-79 StateOH(Frankln 4:17.7 Old Ohio Union, Franklin Co.
between 1917-1940 MAR % APR 2 0 1979 Negatives: Ohio Historic Preservation Photographer: Gretchen Klimoski, 1979 Office brick additions built on the west side West end south facade looking NW showing MAR 7 APR 2 0 1979 end additions Photographer: Gretchen Klimoski, 1979 Negatives: Ohio Historic Preservation West end looking east showing west Office Old Ohio Union, Franklin Co. Old Ohio Union, Franklin Co. MAR 7 1979 APR 2 0 1979 Office Looking SE showing west end addition Negatives: Ohio Historic Preservation Photohrapher: Gretchen Klimoski and north addition (l921) Looking south at 1921 addition.
Lower APR 2 0 1979 Photographer: Gretchen Klimoski Office Negatives: Ohio Historic Preservation sotry existing since l917; remodeled and upper story added 1921 MAR 7 1979 Old Ohio Union, Franklin County MAR 7 1979 APR 2 0 1979 addition Photographer: Gretchen Klimoski Office Looking SW at original building and 1921 Negatives: Ohio Historic Preservation Old Ohio Union, Franklin County MAR 7 APR 2 0 1979 Photographer: Gretchen Klimoski bay showing original stairway Interior, east stairway in projecting Negatives: Ohio Historic Preservation Office #6 Old Ohio Union, Franklin County Old Ohio Union, Franklin County MAR 7 1979 APR 2 0 1979 Negatives: Ohio Historic Preservation Photographer: Gretchen Klimoski Office Same as #6, looking from laundry to second floor Negative: OHPO SEP 19 1978 APR 2 0 1979 Photographer: George Kane, May 13, 1978 Old Ohio Union, Franklin Co., Ohio East elevation #8079 Oh1or Pboto9by George Kane SEP 19 1978 tion office.
the Ohio Historic Preserva- South Facade, Old Ohio Union Columbus, Franklin County, Old Ohio Union 7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC) SOUTHWEST COLUMBUS QUADRANGLE UTm Reference: OHIO- FRANKLIN CO. HAMILTON SEP 19 1978 SOUTHWEST COLUMBUS,OHIO DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY JAN 0 3 1979 Columbus, Ohio 43210 Dear Dr. Vandament: TSgd.) William J. Murtagh FHR: LFranklin:mjd 343-6401 12/27/78 Sincerely, H32-NR Executive Assistant to the President for your information. participation in the registration process. especially those concerning the architectural integrity of the structure.
Dr.Thomas H.Smith Director's Reading File We have carefully read your letter and considered the questions raised information from the State historic preservation office, are enclosed The Ohio State University BASIC FILE RETAINED IN NR Keeper of the National Register Director, Budget and Resource Planning Since we believe they are valid, we are returning the nomination to the the reviewers comments, and the return sheet, requesting additional State for clarification.A xeroxed copy of the control sheets, showing Thank you for your letter of December l,1978,concerning the nomination 190 North Oval Mall Enclosures of the Old Ohio Union building of the Ohio State University. We appreciate your interest in the National Register program and your Dr.William E.Vandament THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY December 1, 1978 Dr. William J.
Murtagh, Keeper National Register of Historic Places Service, Department of the Interior 18th and C Streets, Northwest Re: Student Services Building Dear Dr. Murtagh: The Ohio State University was informed June 6, 1978 that the Ohio Historic at its meeting July 21, 1978.
Despite a strong letter stating University views completed a renovation and restoration of Hayes Hall at a cost of $1.8 million However, we believe that the Student Services Building lacks the unique It should be noted that 40 percent of the perimeter of the structure has been and door casings, second floor doors and casings, and pressed metal cellings in the basement; none of the first floor doors, floors and ceilings are origi- nal; most of the second floor ceilings, all the floors and walls, and some of Office of Budget and Resources Planning / 201 Administration Building /190 North Oval Mall / Columbus, Ohio 43210 /Phone (614) 422-9232 ficer. floor. million. statements made to justify its inclusion on the National Register.
Site Preservation Advisory Board would give final consideration to the nomina- on the issue, the nomination was recommended by the Board and subsequently ap- Heritage Conservation and Recreation The Board of Trustees has directed that the University's views on this nom- both are significant architecturally and historically.The University has just the doors are not original; similar non-original conditions exist on the third such recognition.As you know, both Hayes Hall and Orton Hall are University buildings on the National Register.We fully support their listing because Nomination to the National Register tion of the Student Services Building Ohio Union)to the National Register only the east stairwell poor condition),first floor main lounge wainscot and has a similar project for Orton Hall under design with a budget of $1.2 proved and forwarded to your office by the State Historical Preservation Of- ination should be presented.
Our position is that the building is not worthy of In the original nomination form the building is described as retaining affected by later(post-1911) additions and that, of the interior finishes, "its exterior form and character and much of its original interior finish." features of these two fine old buildings.We take exception to many of the Dr. William J. Murtagh December 1, 1978 it is a rectangular space with a projecting three-sided bay. The description of the north wing of the building in the nomination -- That wing is a 1937 addition which is more closely related to Saarinen's Cranbrook architecture than the Jacobean style that the building is purported to represent.
The additions on the west side are described as "two story brick"; they in fact are one-story with basement, and generally align with the basement and first floor of the original building with no defined spatial relationship to that building. wing and the window/solid surface relationship are greatly different from those in the original building. We note that Jacobean refers to a variant in architectural style which followed the Elizabethan and preceded the Georgian (of Christopher Wren, among others). This style was visible for some 20 or 30 years, although some critics extend it to the reign of James I, giving it a lifespan of about 60 years. Jacobean is a style profuse with characteristics, few of them distinct, style is characterized by its contortions, its highly decorated classical ele- ments and its exuberances in the use of detail.
It has been labeled "stormy alter simple elements of their buildings. Some general characteristics are the following: . Use of lead roofs, lead rain-water heads; The east stairway enclosure is described as a "hexagonal bay":in fact, tresses"and"pressed copper sheeting"do not exist elsewhere on the original spaces were like. in the original building are wood doublehung sash.Sill heights in the north The rear (north) section is described as "detailed in keeping with the style of the main building"; there is little relationship in reality. The "but- The description states that the first, second, and third floors "retain much of their oak woodwork." In fact, most of the heavy oak doors are gone as well as sidelights at the south entrance.
The profusion of sprinkler system piping and surface conduit for lighting, along with the alterations to virtu- The original nomination form points out that the building is one of the writer meant Jacobean. It should be noted that there are no Jacobean buildings and disordered" because of the willingness of Jacobean stylists to carve and - Use of brick and stone; - Ogee-capped turrets; projecting porches; gables and towers ally all floor and ceiling surfaces, remove any perception of what the original projecting upward uninterrupted from the building's facades; in Ohio;there may be structures designed and detailed in the Jacobean style. Dr.
William Murtagh December 1, 1978 - Center-symmetrical casement windows; windows on one facade identical to those on the opposite facade; Exuberantly carved marble mantels and highly ornamental in- terior decorations; - Richly carved entrances; superimposed classical orders; axis; wholly-visible main staircase important throughout the - Flemish-like wall panelling (the Flemish were the principal stonework artisans of the era; their product has been copied by the use of pressed metal or carved wood) ; "Broken" classical elements, effected by interrupting the line flow of the traditional classical detail with carving or unexpected ornament.
It is clear that some of these characteristics can be found in the "Old Ohio Union" but it is equally obvious that there is no consistent occurrence The roof is slate, not lead (or even a lead-appearing sub- - There are no turrets, a distinct Jacobean element. There are some areas containing wood wainscot and wood door - The building exterior, except for isolated elements, is ant detail. This building has little of the characteristic.
The front (south entrance) does have an Ionic-like order stacked above a base in the Doric style but the latter is not altered and the former has only minor deviations from Jacobean style); stitute); style; be unnoticeable.) An "H" building plan, occasionally a rectangular "U"(formed The "louvered vents with hipped roofs"are not found in the amples are: - Center hall at right angles to main front and entered on its by moving the center element in one direction or another); of Jacobean elements. Wood sash in a doublehung arrangement, for example, is the character of the style than are those of the original building.
Other ex- - The stone cornice interrupts the flow of the walls into the casings; none are "richly carved or highly decorated;" foreign to true Jacobean; the metal windows on the 1937 addition are closer to rather austere; the Jacobean style is marked by its exuber- the classical source (and those breaks are so regular as to dormers cornice is not"broken"by the dormers.); Dr. William Murtagh December 1, 1978 totally foreign to the style; it is enclosed and its appear- ance is inconsistent. No light fixtures remain. The Jacobean style contained or- nate candelabra (chandeliers); this building first contained piece relates not at all with the rich stone carving of Built-in window seats and main lobby benches are plain and gargoyle-like appearance of a Gothic feature.
Finally, metal storm doors and windows which enclose both en- the building, alter its appearance to the extent that entrance It should be emphasized that the characteristics of the original building argument could be made that it is Elizabethan, Late Victorian, Edwardian, Re- Jacobean and, whatever it is, too little of it remains to be significant or pure or notable. We note that the criteria for evaluation of nominations to the National that the nomination is based in part on the historical record of the building's ing that have made a"significant contribution to the broad patterns of our Student Services Building served as the student union for only 40 years in the until 1911 nor has it been since 1951 when a new student union was completed which continues to serve. construction history is contained in Attachment A).
These additions have al- sign" as the evaluation criteria stipulate (see photos, Attachment B). Moreover, the Student Services Building lacks the integrity of location of the building is no more. More recent construction of buildings to the south Jacobean mantels. impact is diluted. the fireplace is also very Art Deco in style.That chimney- - A "switchback" metal stair provides access to the various small ceiling fixtures, almost Art Deco in appearance, ac- Their only detail is a small carving which has the Register include "quality of significance to national history." We note also as Hayes Hall and Orton Hall. We do not find events associated with the build- The fact is that the 108 year history of this University. It did not serve as the student union ance by no less than seven additions (a complete documentation of the building's use as a student union.
However, we do not believe that such use is nearly so significant in American college history as buildings used for instruction such simple. Also we note the criteria include"quality of significance in architecture." with the lives of persons significant in our history." history."Nor do we find any record that this building has been "associated Dr. William Murtagh December 1, 1978 so that the building does not blend with its surroundings (Those who designed nearby buildings in the past 20 years did so with the understanding that the other older campus buildings, most of which are located facing or near the ing is somewhat a misfit with its surroundings. The area ambiance is not sup- portive of a National Register property.
Finally, we must point out the implications to the University if this date has been that the amounts are so small as to be of little value in a res- toration project of this magnitude. The University understands that listing on the National Register does not that public opinion would make it more difficult for the University to demolish the building even if that were clearly in the best interests of the institution. Therefore, we conclude that listing the Student Services Building on the Na- somehow provide funds to renovate and restore the building and to commit tenance -- all for a building that does not meet the stated criteria for the Sincerely yours, William E. Vandament Executive Assistant to the President Director, Budget and Resources Planning William J. Griffith, Director Office of Campus Planning & Space Utilization National Register.
Harold L.Enarson,President WEV/ks tion pertaining to the evaluation criteria are to be considered.Nevertheless, tional Register would in effect create strong pressure on this University to Student Services Building would eventually be removed). Nor does it relate to Oval -- a major campus open space (see map, attachment C). In short, the build- building is placed on the National Register. We are aware that only informa- we believe this additional information should be available to your office. vate and restore the building, which we estimate would cost $1.5M to $2.OM. And, of course,as a public institution the University does not qualify for any tax advantages resulting from restoring National Register properties. We of itself affect decisions on the building's use or prevent its demolition if that is the ultimate decision of the University Trustees.
Yet we also are sure $100,000 annually (in today's dollars) to pay for its plant operation and main- other old buildings are being renovated. There are no funds available to reno- INDIVIDUAL RESPONSE (ATTMCHED) INITIALS THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES TELEPHONE CALL (ATTACHIED) DATE CTICN TAKEN JAN 0 3 1979 Dr. Wil1ian B. Vandament Dear Dr. Vandament: TSgd.y Will1am J. Murtagh Wi11ian J. Murtagh ce: Dr. Thomas H. Smith FHR: LFranklin:mjd 343-6401 Sincerely, 12/27/78 Executive Assistant to the President The Ohio State University We have carefully read your letter and considered the questions raised especially those concerning the architectural integrity of the structure. Director, Budget and Resource Planning State for clarification.A xeroxed copy of the control sheets, showing for your inforaation.
Thank you for your letter of December l,1978,concerning the nomination participation fn the registration process. Director's Reading File Keeper of the National Register 190 North Oval Mall BASIC FILE RETAINED IN NR the reviewers comments, and the return sheet, requesting additional Enclosures Columbus, Ohio 43210 We appreelate your interest in the National Register program and your H32-NR Since we believe they are valid, we are returning the nomination to the of the Oid Ohio Union building of the Ohio State University. JAN 0 31979 Dr. Will1am B. Vandasent Columbus, Ohio 43210 Dear Dr. Vandanent: - particípation in the registration process. 343-6401 Enclosures Sincerely, for your information.
12/27/78 Director, Budget and Resource Planning Director's Reading File LFranklin:mjd Executive Assistant to the President BASIC FILE RETAINED IN NR the revievers comments, and the return sheet, requesting additional especially those concerning the architectural integrity of the structure. State for clarification.A xeroxed copy of the control sheets, showing Dr.Thomas H.Smith Keeper of the National Register We have carefully read your letter and considered the questions raised The Ohio State University information from the State historic preservation office, are enclosed 190 North Oval Mall of the Old Ohio Union building of the Ohio State University.
H132-NR We appreeiate your interest in the National Register program and your bcc: FHR: Thank you for your letter of December l,1978,concerning the nomination Since we believe they are valid, we are returaing the nomination to the THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY Dr. William J. Murtagh, Keeper National Register of Historic Places Service, Department of the Interior 18th and C Streets, Northwest Re: Student Services Building Nomination to the National Register Dear Dr. Murtagh: The Ohio State University was informed June 6, 1978 that the Ohio Historic at its meeting July 21, 1978.
Despite a strong letter stating University views and has a similar project for Orton Hall under design with a budget of $1.2 However, we believe that the Student Services Building lacks the unique affected by later (post-1911) additions and that, of the interior finishes, in the basement; none of the first floor doors, floors and ceilings are origi- ficer. floor. million.
the doors are not original; similar non-original conditions exist on the third proved and forwarded to your office by the State Historical Preservation Of- nal; most of the second floor ceilings, all the floors and walls, and some of both are significant architecturally and historically.The University has just only the east stairwell (in poor condition), first floor main lounge wainscot and door casings, second floor doors and casings, and pressed metal ceilings ination should be presented.Our position is that the building is not worthy of statements made to justify its inclusion on the National Register.
In the original nomination form the building is described as retaining Heritage Conservation and Recreation on the issue, the nomination was recommended by the Board and subsequently ap- Site Preservation Advisory Board would give final consideration to the nomina- features of these two fine old buildings.We take exception to many of the December 1, 1978 tion of the Student Services Building Ohio Union)to the National Register The Board of Trustees has directed that the University's views on this nom- It should be noted that 40 percent of the perimeter of the structure has been completed a renovation and restoration of Hayes Hall ata cost of $1.8 million such recognition. As you know, both Hayes Hall and Orton Hall are University "its exterior form and character and much of its original interior finish.
in a few rooms remain of the original interior finishes.No detailing remains buildings on the National Register.We fully support their listing because That wing is a 1937 addition which is more closely related to Saarinen's Cranbrook architecture than the Jacobean style that the building is purported to represent. fact are one-story with basement, and generally align with the basement and The description states that the first, second, and third floors "retain much of their oak woodwork." In fact, most of the heavy oak doors are gone as We note that Jacobean refers to a variant in architectural style which followed the Elizabethan and preceded the Georgian (of Christopher Wren, among others): This style was visible for some 20 or 30 years, although some critics extend it to the reign of James I, giving it a lifespan of about 60 years.
Jacobean is a style profuse with characteristics, few of them distinct, style is characterized by its contortions, its highly decorated classical ele- - Use of brick and stone; - Use of lead roofs, lead rain-water heads; - Ogee-capped turrets; projecting porches; gables and towers that building. projecting upward uninterrupted from the building's facades; Some general characteristics are the following: in the original building. alter simple elements of their buildings. Dr. William J. Murtagh The original nomination form points out that the building is one of the The east stairway enclosure is described as a "hexagonal bay":in fact, spaces were like.
in the original building are wood doublehung sash.Sill heights in the north first floor of the original building with no defined spatial relationship to wing and the window/solid surface relationship are greatly different from those December 1, 1978 ments and its exuberances in the use of detail.It has been labeled "stormy The section is described as "detailed in keeping with the in Ohio; there may be structures designed and detailed in the Jacobean style. The description of the north wing of the building in the nomination -- and disordered"because of the willingness of Jacobean stylists to carve and The additions on the west side are described as "two story brick"; they in itisa rectangular space with a projecting three-sided bay.
style of the main building";there is little relationship in reality.The"but- tresses"and "pressed copper sheeting" do not exist elsewhere on the original piping and surface conduit for lighting, along with the alterations to virtu- writer meant Jacobean.It should be noted that there are no Jacobean buildings best examplesof on the campus.We assume the Dr. William Murtagh December 1, 1978 - Center-symmetrical casement windows; windows on one facade identical to those on the opposite facade; - Exuberantly carved marble mantels and highly ornamental in- - Richly carved entrances; superimposed classical orders; - Center hall at right angles to main front and entered on its axis; wholly-visible main staircase (important throughout the stonework artisans of the era; their product has been copied by the use of pressed metal or carved wood); or unexpected ornament.
- The roof is slate, not lead (or even a lead-appearing sub- - There are no turrets, a distinct Jacobean element. - The building exterior, except for isolated elements, is stacked above a base in the Doric style but the latter is not altered and the former has only minor deviations from be unnoticeable.) stitute); style; "Broken" classical elements, effected by interrupting the An "H" building plan, occasionally a rectangular "U" (formed Jacobean style); terior decorations; The front (south entrance) does have an Ionic-like order The stone cornice interrupts the flow of the walls into the of Jacobean elements. Wood sash in a doublehung arrangement, for example, is Ohio Union" but it is equally obvious that there is no consistent occurrence There are some areas containing wood wainscot and wood door ant detail.This building has little of the characteristic.
the character of the style than are those of the original building.Other ex- amples are: by moving the center element in one direction or another); line flow of the traditional classical detail with carving rather austere; the Jacobean style is marked by its exuber- The "louvered vents with hipped roofs" are not found in the Flemish-like wall panelling Flemish were the principal foreign to true Jacobean; the metal windows on the 1937 addition are closer to the classical those breaks are so regular as to casings; none are "richly carved or highly decorated;" It is clear that some of these characteristics can be found in the "01d December 1, 1978 - A "switchback" metal stair provides access to the various ance is inconsistent. No light fixtures remain.
The Jacobean style contained or- nate candelabra (chandeliers); this building first contained small ceiling fixtures, almost Art Deco in appearance, ac- tually inconsistent with the architecture. A wood panel above piece relates not at all with the rich stone carving of Built-in window seats and main lobby benches are plain and gargoyle-like appearance of a Gothic feature. Finally, metal storm doors and windows which enclose both en- the building, alter its appearance to the extent that entrance argument could be made that it is Elizabethan, Late Victorian, Edwardian, Re- Jacobean and, whatever it is, too little of it remains to be significant or We note that the criteria for evaluation of nominations to the National that the nomination is based in part on the historical record of the building's which continues to serve.
sign" as the evaluation criteria stipulate (see photos, Attachment B). Moreover, the Student Services Building lacks the integrity of location Jacobean mantels. and setting that the evaluation criteria also require.The original setting construction history is contained in Attachment A).These additions have al- impact is diluted. It should be emphasized that the characteristics of the original building of the building is no more.More recent construction of buildings to the south the fireplace is also very Art Deco in style.That chimney- pure or notable. 108 year history of this University.It did not serve as the student union totally foreign to the style;it is enclosed and its appear- Dr. William Murtagh trances (south and east) and which were early additions to as Hayes Hall and Orton Hall. We do not find events associated with the build- use as a student union.
However, we do not believe that such use is nearly so until 1911 nor has it been since 1951 when a new student union was completed tered the building's original appearance so that two of the four facades are simple. significant in American college history as buildings used for instruction such with the 1ives of persons significant in our history."The fact is that the ing that have made a"significant contribution to the broad patterns of our very different.In short,we do not think the building has "integrity of de- gency ora combination of all those.The point is that it is not necessarily Register include "quality of significance to national history."We note also Their only detail is a small carving which has the Student Services Building served as the student union for only 40years in the Dr.
Withiam Murtagh December 1, 1978 nearby buildings in the past 20 years did so with the understanding that the other older campus buildings, most of which are located facing or near the portive of a National Register property. Finally, we must point out the implications to the University if this we believe this additional information should be available to your office. vate and restore the building, which we estimate would cost $1.5M to $2.OM. And, of course, as a public institution the University does not qualify for any tax advantages resulting from restoring National Register properties. date has been that the amounts are so small as to be of little value in a res- The University understands that listing on the National Register does not the building even if that were clearly in the best interests of the institution.
tenance -- all for a building that does not meet the stated criteria for the Sincerely yours William E. Vandament Executive Assistant to the President Director, Budget and Resources Planning Harold L. Enarson, President William J. Griffith, Director Office of Campus Planning & Space Utilization Oval -- a major campus open space (see map, attachment C). In short, the build- toration project of this magnitude. National Register.
other old buildings are being renovated.There are no funds available to reno- and east -- some of them high-rise -- has severely altered the original setting tion pertaining to the evaluation criteria are to be considered.Nevertheless, that public opinion would make it more difficult for the University to demolish WEV/ks somehow provide funds to renovate and restore the building and to commit so that the building does not blend with its surroundings who designed of itself affect decisions on the building's use or prevent its demolition if $100,000 annually today's dollars) to pay for its plant operation and main- will be used for a few more years as"swing space" to temporarily house while building is placed on the National Register.
We are aware that only informa- Therefore, we conclude that listing the Student Services Building on the Na- Ohio State University has no established long-term need for the Student Services tional Register would in effect create strong pressure on this University to Student Services Building would eventually be removed).Nor does it relate to WASHINGTON, D.C. 20240 JAN 0 31979 Dr. William E. Vandament Director, Budget and Resource Planning Columbus, Ohio 43210 Dear Dr. Vandament: cc: VDr. Thomas H. Smith Sincerely, for your information. H32-NR Enclosures Executive Assistant to the President participation in the registration process. We appreciate your interest in the National Register program and your especially those concerning the architectural integrity of the structure.
We have carefully read your letter and considered the questions raised information from the State historic preservation office, are enclosed the reviewers comments, and the return sheet, requesting additional (Sgd.) William J. Murtagh The Ohio State University United States Department of the Interior State for.clarification.A xeroxed copy of the control sheets, showing 190 North Oval Mall Since we believe they are valid, we are returning the nomination to the Keeper of the National Register Thank you for your letter of December l,1978,concerning the nomination HERITAGE CONSERVATION AND RECREATION SERVICE of the Old Ohio Union building of the Ohio State University. IN REPLY REFER TO: THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY December 1, 1978 Dr. William J.
Murtagh, Keeper Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service, Department of the Interior 18th and C Streets, Northwest Re: Student Services Building Dear Dr. Murtagh: The Ohio State University was informed June 6, 1978 that the Ohio Historic on the issue, the nomination was recommended by the Board and subsequently ap- However, we believe that the Student Services Building lacks the unique It should be noted that 40 percent of the perimeter of the structure has been affected by later (post-1911) additions and that, of the interior finishes, and door casings, second floor doors and casings, and pressed metal ceilings nal; most of the second floor ceilings, all the floors and walls, and some of ficer. "its exterior form and character and much of its original interior finish. million. floor. statements made to justify its inclusion on the National Register.
the doors are not original; similar non-original conditions exist on the third Site Preservation Advisory Board would give final consideration to the nomina- Nomination to the National Register buildings on the National Register.We fully support their listing because such recognition.As you know, both Hayes Hall and Orton Hall are University proved and forwarded to your office by the State Historical Preservation Of- In the original nomination form the building is described as retaining tion of the Student Services Building (old Ohio Union) to the National Register National Register of Historic Places and has a similar project for Orton Hall under design with a budget of $1.2 The Board of Trustees has directed that the University's views on this nom- at its meeting July 21,1978.Despite a strong letter stating University views completed a renovation and restoration of Hayes Hall at a cost of $1.8million in the basement; none of the first floor doors, floors and ceilings are origi- in a few rooms remain of the original interior finishes.
No detailing remains ination should be presented.Our position is that the building is not worthy of featuresof these two fine old buildings.We take exception to many of the only the east stairwell poor condition),first floor main lounge wainscot -Dr. William J. Murtagh The description of the north wing of the building in the nomination -- vant. That wing is a 1937 addition which is more closely related to Saarinen's Cranbrook architecture than the Jacobean style that the building is purported to represent. fact are one-story with basement, and generally align with the basement and first floor of the original building with no defined spatial relationship to that building. style of the main building"; there is little relationship in reality.
The "but- piping and surface conduit for lighting, along with the alterations to virtu- The original nomination form points out that the building is one of the We note that Jacobean refers to a variant in architectural style which tollowed the Elizabethan and preceded the Georgian (of Christopher Wren, among others): This style was visible for some 20 or 30 years, although some critics extend it Jacobean is a style profuse with characteristics, few of them distinct, style is characterized by its contortions, its highly decorated classical ele- - Use of brick and stone; - Use of lead roofs, lead rain-water heads; - Ogee-capped turrets; projecting porches; gables and towers The additions on the west side are described as "two story brick"; they in 'The east stairway enclosure is described as a "hexagonal bay": in fact, Some general characteristics are the following: to the reign of James I, giving it a lifespan of about 60 years.
in Ohio; there may be structures designed and detailed in the Jacobean style. projecting upward uninterrupted from the building's facades; writer meant Jacobean.It should be noted that there are no Jacobean buildings in the original building are wood doublehung sash.Sill heights in the north it is a rectangular space with a projecting three-sided bay. tresses" and "pressed copper sheeting"do not exist elsewhere on the original wing and the window/solid surface relationship are greatly different from those and disordered"because of the willingness of Jacobean stylists to carve and December 1, 1978 ments and its exuberances in the use of detail.It has been labeled "stormy alter simple elements of their buildings. spaces were like.
The description states that the first, second, and third floors "retain ally all floor and ceiling surfaces, remove any perception of what the original in the original building. best examples of Jacobethan architecture on the campus.We assume the The rear section is described as "detailed in keeping with the "bowed with buttresses","trimmed with pressed copper sheeting"--isirrele- Dr.
William Murtagh December 1, 1978 Center-symmetrical casement windows; windows on one facade identical to those on the opposite facade; - Exuberantly carved marble mantels and highly ornamental in- terior decorations; - Center hall at right angles to main front and entered on its axis; wholly-visible main staircase (important throughout the - An "H" building plan, occasionally a rectangular "U" (formed - Flemish-like wall panelling (the Flemish were the principal stonework artisans of the era; their product has been copied by the use of pressed metal or carved wood); "Broken" classical elements, effected by interrupting the line flow of the traditional classical detail with carving or unexpected ornament.
It is clear that some of these characteristics can be found in the "Old Ohio Union" but it is equally obvious that there is no consistent occurrence The roof is slate, not lead (or even a lead-appearing sub- - The stone cornice interrupts the flow of the walls into the dormers above. (The cornice is not "broken" by the dormers.); - There are no turrets, a distinct Jacobean element. - The "louvered vents with hipped roofs" are not found in the There are some areas containing wood wainscot and wood door casings; none are "richly carved or highly decorated;" The building exterior, except for isolated elements, is rather austere; the Jacobean style is marked by its exuber- ant detail. This building has little of the characteristic.
The front (south entrance) does have an Ionic-like order stacked above a base in the Doric style but the latter is not altered and the former has only minor deviations from the classical source (and those breaks are so regular as to stitute); style; be unnoticeable.) Jacobean style); amples are: by moving the center element in one direction or another); of Jacobean elements. Wood sash in a doublehung arrangement, for example, is the character of the style than are those of the original building. Other ex- - Richly carved entrances; superimposed classical orders; . Dr. William Murtagh December 1, 1978 ance is inconsistent. tually inconsistent with the architecture. A wood panel above piece relates not at all with the rich stone carving of Built-in window seats and main lobby benches are plain and gargoyle-like appearance of a Gothic feature.
Finally, metal storm doors and windows which enclose both en- argument could be made that it is Elizabethan, Late Victorian, Edwardian, Re- Jacobean and, whatever it is, too little of it remains to be significant or pure or notable. that the nomination is based in part on the historical record of the building's Student Services Building served as the student union for only 40 years in the 108 year history of this University. It did not serve as the student union until 1911 nor has it been since 1951 when a new student union was completed which continues to serve. ance by no less than seven additions (a complete documentation of the building's sign" as the evaluation criteria stipulate (see photos, Attachment B). Moreover, the Student Services Building lacks the integrity of location impact is diluted. Jacobean mantels.
with the lives of persons significant in our history."The fact is that the It should be emphasized that the characteristics of the original building of the building is no more.More recent construction of buildings to the south We must point out that the building has been altered from its original appear- and setting that the evaluation criteria also require.The original setting ing that have made a"significant contribution to the broad patterns of our tered the building's original appearance so that two of the four facades are as Hayes Hall and Orton Hall.We do not find events associated with the build- Also we note the criteria include"quality of significance in architecture." are so inconsistent that to label it a distinct style begs the question.An We note that the criteria for evaluation of nominations to the National nate candelabra this building first contained totally foreign to the style; it is enclosed and its appear- No light fixtures remain.
The Jacobean style contained or- small ceiling fixtures, almost Art Deco in appearance, ac- very different. In short, we do not think the building has "integrity of de- the building, alter its appearance to the extent that entrance use as a student union. However, we do not believe that such use is nearly so the fireplace is also very Art Deco in style. That chimney- simple. construction history is contained in Attachment A).These additions have al- significant in American college history as buildings used for instruction such Register include "quality of significance to national history."We note also A"switchback"metal stair provides access to the various Their only detail is a small carving which has the trances and east)and which were early additions to . Dr.
William Murtagh December 1, 1978 so that the building does not blend with its surroundings (Those who designed nearby buildings in the past 20 years did so with the understanding that the other older campus buildings, most of which are located facing or near the portive of a National Register property. Finally, we must point out the implications to the University if this vate and restore the building, which we estimate would cost $1.5M to $2.OM.
And, of course, as a public institution the University does not qualify for date has been that the amounts are so small as to be of little value in a res- The University understands that listing on the National Register does not that public opinion would make it more difficult for the University to demolish Therefore, we conclude that listing the Student Services Building on the Na- somehow provide funds to renovate and restore the building and to commit Sincerely yours William E. Vandament Director, Budget and Resources Planning Harold L. Enarson, President William J. Griffith, Director Office of Campus Planning & Space Utilization Oval -- a major campus open space (see map, attachment C). In short, the build- toration project of this magnitude.
of itself affect decisions on the building's use or prevent its demolition if any tax advantages resulting from restoring National Register properties.We tional Register would in effect create strong pressure on this University to we believe this additional information should be available to your office.The tion pertaining to the evaluation criteria are to be considered.Nevertheless, and-east--some of them high-rise --has severely altered the original setting are aware that grants for restoration work are possible but our experience to WEV/ks building is placed on the National Register.We are aware that only informa- $100,000 annually today's dollars) to pay for its plant operation and main- the building even if that were clearly in the best interests of the institution.
will be used for a few more years as "swing space"to temporarily house while Ohio State University has no established long-term need for the Student Services Executive Assistant to the President ing is somewhat a misfit with its surroundings. The area ambiance is not sup- National Register. Student Services Building would eventually be removed).Nor does it relate to other old buildings are being renovated.There are no funds available to reno- tenance--all fora building that does not meet the stated criteria for the DIVISION: NR PHONE: ADDRESS: OFFICE OF ARCHEOLOGY AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION TELEPHONE REPORT STAFF MEMBER: PHONE: DIVISION: REPORT: DATE: OFFICE OF ARCHEOLOGY AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION ADDRESS: TELEPHONE REPORT 4,00 Pr. Vandamant STAFF MEMBER: Luf DLETOWN, VA.
22645 4-038075E328 11/24/78 ICS IPMBNGZ CSP WSHB DR WILLIAM J MURTAGH, KEEPER SERVICE, DEPT OF THE INTERIOR COLUMBUS OH 43210 TO REPLY BY MAILGRAM, SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR WESTERN UNION'S TOLL - FREE PHONE NUMBERS THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY DECEIVE HERITAGE CONSERVATION AND RECREATION NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES NOMINATION TO THE NATIONAL REGISTER REGARDING STUDENT SERVICES BUILDING OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY CAMPUS 190 NORTH OVAL MALL MGMCOMP MGM SINCERELY, GRAM SERVICE CENTER THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. DEAR DOCTOR MURTAGH 18TH AND C STS NORTHWEST WILLIAM E VANDAMENT EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER OF OHIO.
THE UNIVERSITY HAS LEARNED RECENTLY THAT A DECISION MAY BE MADE PRIOR DECEMBER 41978.I WOULD APPRECIATE BEING ADVISED IF A DECISION ON THIS WASHINGTON DC 20240 (R1/78) 16:21 EST TO JANUARY 11979 CONCERNING PLACEMENT OF THE OSU STUDENT SERVICES GRAM THE UNIVERSITY DID NOT NOMINATE THE BUILDING FOR PLACEMENT ON THE 6144572590 MGMTDBN C0LUMBUS0H17211-240420PEST AND DIRECTOR OF BUDGET AND RESOURCES PLANNING western union FOR YOUR LOCAL NUMBER, SEE THE WHITE PAGES OF YOUR TELEPHONE DIRECTORY DIAL (TOLL FREE) 800-257-2241 (EXCEPT IN NEW JERSEY 800-632-2271) .. 6161 . 910 420 1212 FROM TELEX OR DIAL WESTERN UNION'S INFOMASTER SYSTEM DIRECTLY: FROM TWX TO REPLY BY MAILGRAM, PHONE WESTERN UNION ANY TIME, DAY OR NIGHT: APR 20 1079 Honorable John H. Glenn, JI. DE. Thomas H. Smith Honorable Samuel L.
Devine Colunbus, Ohio 43211 Byers/bjr Location Pickerington vicinity Name Greenville Director Franklin County 4/27/79 Fairfield County Stemen Road Covered Bridge State Historic Preservation Officer Honorable Thomas M. Kindness Honorable Clarence E. Miller ENTRIES IN THE NATIONAL REGISTER Darke County Honorable Howard M. Metzenbaum Columbus The Ohio Historical Society Date Entered Lansdowne House Also Notified Interstate Tl at 17th Avenue STATE OHIO For further information, please call the National Register at (202)343-640l. 01d Ohio Union
Block