Lazaretto Architectural Investigation

7/29/2019 Lazaretto Architectural Investigation

1/194

Spring of 2012


2/194

THE LAZARETTO QUARANTINE STATION

Contents:

Executive Summary 4

History of the Site 5

Historic American Building Survey Drawings 22

I. Introduction

II. Existing Conditions


3/194


I. Introduction

Executive SummaryHistory


4/194


Executive Summary

Over the course of the four-month semester, the participants of this Architectural Archaeology

course took a materials-based approach to documentation of the structure and the site. Projects ranged

from analyzing the main buildings framing system to a detailed paint analysis for several rooms on

extensively explored, assessed, and documented. Auxiliary structures to the main building, includingthe Carriage House (now referred to as the Barn) and the Bargemans Tower, were also subjects of

research.

Investigations conducted at the site were primarily concerned with uncovering the original


5/194


History of the SiteExerpted from the Historic American Buildings Survey, PA-6659


6/194

Quarantine Station was among the earliest

purpose-built, and is the oldest extant,

quarantine-related structure in teh United

States. The buildings high level of integrity

is of particular importance since it is physical

evidence of the forces impacting eighteenth-

century Amercan hospitals--both in terms of

by that policy. The City of Philadelphias Board

citizenry against infestious diseases long before

the federal government involved itself withsuch concerns. Nearly a century passed before

and immigrant station on Ellis Island in New

Station and other similar, early-nineteenth-

century centers are precursors to this later, far-

purpose relative to its time and place. Activities

the people or cargo carried on ships as sources

for epidemic disease. Each was inspected and

detained based on the presence of a perceived

health threat and only released when that threat

Only with the rise of immigrant processing and

regulation in the mid-nineteenth century did

quarantine become more exclusively associated

with people.

As with most early public health initiatives,


Exerpted from the Historic American Buildings Survey, PA-6659


7/194


directly to a local crisis: in 1793, a yellow fever

epidemic devastated Philadelphia, claiming

determined citizen-caretakers abandoned the

mortality rate. Despite Philadelphias position

as the most cosmopolitan city in America, it

still lacked the municipal organization and the

facilities needed to contend with a large-scale

epidemic. It was home to the Pennsylvania

Hospital, the only institution of its kind in

America at that time; however, because it was

conceived to cure, rather than merely contain,

the sick, the hospital literally shut its doors

during the 1793 epidemic, as did the nearbyAlms House, the conventional repository for

the sickly poor. The abject failure of the city to

deal with this catastrophe hastened the creation

of the Philadelphia Board of Health in 1794, the

people with infectious diseases approaching

the city by ship at a location remote from the

metropolis. It can be suggested that the Board

of Health realized the new quarantine stations

centerpiece building on formal plans by English

architect-emigre Joseph Bowes, but eighteenth-

century vernacular traditions most impacted

its massing and spatial organization. The main

buildings visually dominant center pavilion

generic English formula that colonists imported

and adapted to meet local requirements and

conditions. This process previously gave shape

to Philadelphias Pennsylvania Hospital, which

eighteenth-century American structures related

to social welfare.

The Pennsylvania Hospital single-handedly

l h d d i l f h



8/194



As featured in HABS Report PA-6659


9/194


and Buildings thereon erected, known by the

indicating that the construction campaign for

its replacement had proceeded far enough to

use the new facility during the 1801 quarantine

season.3 On November 23, 1801, the Board of

Health stated in a meeting: The buildings

4 While

clearly functional, the degree to which they

a high state of improvement.5

and construction methods are easily and

appropriately situated within the local

behind in Americas largest city.6 An October

1794 newspaper advertisement announced

Bowess arrival, his objective to practice the

business of Architecture in all its departments,

and stated solid credentials as a Draftsman

for several years past, to the celebrated

Robert Adam, Esq. Architect in London.7

His supposed employment with Adam is not

familiar with many of the Adam brothers

late works in Edinburgh and Glasgow. Robert

Adams and James Adams deaths in 1792 and

Bowess appearance in Philadelphia since their

passing may well have precipitated a need to

Regardless of his background, Bowes was



10/194


seems not to have enjoyed much successin Philadelphia. The 1796 Philadelphia city

directory lists him as an architect on Vine

Street, while the following year he had moved

to Cressons Alley and designated his

profession as architect & engraver.10 After

1798, his continued residence in the city is

doubtful.11

Whether he died or moved awayis not known; perhaps he was a victim of that

years yellow fever epidemic. In the end, a lack

of known commissions, either documented or

extant, points to unlikely accomplishment in


Guard House on the bank of the Delaware River, 1936As featured in HABS Report PA-6659


11/194


ill.14

made clear during the yellow fever epidemic

of 1793 during which the privately funded

Pennsylvania Hospital closed its gates and did

not admit anyone into the compound while the

disease raged and decimated the city outside.

In desperation, the few remaining city leaders

commandeered a vacant three-story, Georgian

country house on William Hamiltons Bush

Hill estate just outside the city for emergency

quarantine purposes.15 In the epidemics

14 The Board of Health informally called the pub-lic hospital intended for Philadelphia the city

hospital as early as 1795 [MBH, 10 Jun. 1795]. The 1798

amendment to the prior health laws referred to alocation commonly called the City Hospital, meaning

the public hospital, and changed the name of the

%RDUGRI,QVSHFWRUVRIWKH+HDOWKRIFHWR0DQDJHUV

of the Marine and City Hospitals of the Port and

&LW\RI3KLODGHOSKLDVKRZLQJWKDWLQWLPHRIFLDOVIRU-

mally adopted the once casual moniker See A A t

aftermath, the Board of Health negotiated

Bush Hills use as a public hospital for the

city through March 25, 1795.16 Anticipating

this deadline, the Board of Health purchased

a lot on the west side of the Schuylkill River

near Market Street and began planning for a

permanent city hospital early in 1795.17

In contemplating this structure, the Board

conferred with members of the College of

Physicians, an academic organization of

medical doctors founded in 1787, about various

design requirements. Eminent doctors Adam

Kuhn, Thomas Parke, and Caspar Wistar

lic Gardens of Paris. The house burned in 1814 and the

UXLQVZHUHUHFRQVWLWXWHGDVDIDFWRU\EHIRUHQDOO\EHLQJ

razed entirely in 1875. See Henry A. Boorse, Bush Hill:

An Historic Philadelphia House,Imprint9 (Autumn

1984): 12-18; [Philadelphia] Committee to Attend to and

$OOH LDWH WKH 6 IIHULQJV RI WKH $ILFWHG LWK WKH 0DOLJ



12/194




13/194


have been working as a team, and the lack of

an entry in the city directories for Desaurau

and a smaller proposed fee implies that he

was perhaps Bowess apprentice and possibly

living in his household. Ultimately, Desaurau

was paid forty dollars for drawing plans for

the City Hospital, and Bowes, whose plan

was approved, compensated sixty dollars for

design expertise in addition to drafting.24 The

board minutes never mentioned either man

again and they ultimately never built the City

Hospital on these plans. In November 1796, the

board treasurer, Gideon Wells, reported that the

repairs to the quarantine station on State Island

required withdrawals from the City HospitalTax account, which was already far short of

what will be necessary to complete a Hospital

because of the present high price of Labour.25

The City Hospital built by the board in 1808-09

on a portion of the Bush Hill estate is not the

one imagined in the 1795 plans. On January

16, 1808, the Board awarded Alexander Steel

a contract to furnish materials and oversee

construction of a hospital: 108 feet in length

by 22 feet in breadth, with a piazza to both

stories, of 12 feet in depthwindows opening

ceiling...to be divided into seven wards.28

This description suggests a rectangular

footprint, simpler in concept than the three-

part structure proposed over a decade earlier.29

The unexecuted drawings of the City Hospital

basement, but the cash-strapped and crises-rich

Board of Health might have also pragmatically

used them to build the new quarantine station



14/194


On June 11, 1799, just three weeks after

negotiating the purchase often acres on

facility exhibited the Plans for the proposed

Health.31 At this gathering, the Board studied

the drawings, scaled back aspects of the plan,

principal structure. They described the three-

Fifty feet square with Cellars under and three

story [sic]

two story [sic] high and without cellars under

them, the length of each about sixty four feet,32

Unlike the months-long discussion of the City

Hospital design in 1795, the minutes record

reason to think that the Board would have used

them for another, similar need.

The acreage purchased by the Board of Health

part of a tract owned by the Taylor family since

at least 1725.34 Rebecca Smith, one of the party

selling the tract to the Board of Health, was

widowed at a young age by one of a number of

eighteenth-century Thomas Taylors.

Rebecca Smith and her son, Thomas, sold

approximately ten acres of land on Tinicum

Island, Delaware County, Pennsylvania for

$2000.00.35 A second transaction for $1.00 made



15/194


property to the City of Philadelphia, although

the complex remained in use until the opening

of the immigration station at Marcus Hook in

1895. A city council ordinance of

September 1, 1936, called for the divestment

of unproductive salable real estate owned by

the City.38 E. M. Harris resurveyed the Old

11+ acres for $10,500.00. They subsequently

partitioned the tract and sold a riverfront

portion containing the former resident

physicians house to the Riverside Yacht Club

on November 15, 1939, for $4,000.39

40 Anna L. Mills inherited the

acreage from her husband upon his death on

December 29, 1940. She and her new husband

The

three proposals put forth by Island Marine

Partners in 2000 all called for the demolition of

the historic structures on the site. Preservation

advocates responded quickly and founded

raise awareness and funds to thwart the sitesdestruction and planned redevelopment. The

public campaign gained momentum and in

2001 the Pennsylvania legislature authorized

$400,000 towards the down payment on the

property; however, Tinicum Township was

not able to complete the purchase of the site

until 2005 after the state agreed to grants andallocations totaling approximately $11,000,000

for the ten acres ($3,100,000), stabilization of

the historic structures present on the property

($2,000,000), and construction of a new



16/194


Philadelphia Board of Health

Pennsylvania State Quarantine Board

The Orchard Club

Philadelphia School of Aviation (Essington School of Aviation); Philadelphia Seaplane

Base

Most of the workmen and suppliers for the initial building campaign are unknown at this time.

It is likely that a number of their names were documented in the Minutes of the Board of Health;

unfortunately, the volume covering the period during which most of the construction occurred, is

missing from the Philadelphia City Archives.



17/194



18/194


Orientation to south and sites relationship with the Delaware River


19/194


Cupola

INTERIOR


20/194


II. Existing Conditions


21/194


Descriptive Analysis

feet from the riverfront. The building is divided into three wings. The central, administrative wing hasa hipped roof and large chimneys, and is topped by a cupola and decorative gilded weathervane. The

from the west to the central wing. The brick structure rests on a Wissahickon Schist foundation.

The entire structure is symmetrical in plan, which was echoed by the mirrored outbuildings that

once stood on the property. The plan, massing and interior decorative work is representative of an

evolving use over time. The building features numerous hierarchical decorative schemes, which will

be thoroughly discussed in the following sections.

THE LAZARETTO QUARANTINE S


22/194


University of Pennsylvania | Graduate Program in Historic PreservationHSPV-741 Architectural Archaeology | Spring 2012

Note: HABS drawingsre-printed at 25% of

original size

Historic AmerBuilding Sur

Draw

PA-



23/194




original size



24/194




original size



25/194

Q



original size

THE LAZARETTO QUARANTINE STHE LAZARETTO QUARANTINE S


26/194



original size


TH ELA ZARE TTO QUA RAN TIN ESTA TION

U nivers ityof Pennsy lvania |Gra duate Prog ramin Histo ricPres erva tionH SPV-7 41Arc hitect uralA rchaeo logy |Sprin g201 2 5

N ote: HAB Sdra wing sre-pri nted at25 %ofo rigin alsiz e



27/194



original size



28/194



original size



29/194



original size



30/194



original size



31/194



original size


32/194


III. Architectural Investigations


33/194


Stone and Brick Masonry


34/194


th

and early 19th

1 One


35/194


wall. .


36/194



37/194



38/194




39/194




40/194


Structural Framing Investigations



41/194


METHODOLOGY

Structural framing investigations were

carried out to understand the principles and

logic of the construction as well as to determine

alterations that have occurred since the original

date of construction (1799-1801). The framing of

the main block was documented and a structural

framing diagram was produced using Auto-

CAD. Detail drawings of joinery and special

Dendrochronology was carried out on select

test is unlikely to yield great results due to the

narrow dimensions of the framing elements.

primarily of oak and pine. These members

bear on a stone foundation and brick masonry

walls in the upper stories. The cupola framing is

were visible as the plaster ceiling had been

and plaster appeared to be of the same date by

visual observation of the plaster and the nails

consistency in dating could be obtained through

analysis of the binder and aggregate within the

plaster itself. The function of doubling plaster

This doubling of

plaster and lath can be seen in other Philadelphia

Measurements of the width and height



42/194


the outermost header sits sixteen inches from the

bearing wall and is made of two joists sistered

together. It is clear that the framing in this room

was designed to support a much larger hearth

than observed anywhere else in the building.

revealed through archaeological investigation

for what this opening was framed.

It can be surmised that the builders of the

the intention of installing large hearths and

the 18th

ANALYSIS

constructed to accommodate large hearths.

that extend approximately twenty inches beyond

the framing in each room was intended for alarger hearth because of the presence of two

or to assist in supporting a hearth (see image

below).



43/194


upper stories had not been altered since their

documented using the same techniques as

it was necessary to remove small areas of

the connection of trimmers and headers that

on the upper stories were original and that their

original dimensions are still intact.

carried out included removal of the ceiling plaster

in room 105 of the main block. A small amount

of plaster was removed north of the hearth to

expose the intersection between the header and

there had been later interventions in this area

to repair damage to the members and original

joinery was not evident. Therefore it was

determined that investigation of another room

would be necessary.

Due to the current conditions of the

excavate room 104. The other two rooms were

less accessible due to others using the rooms

dropped ceiling prohibited easy excavation.

ceiling and lath was removed south of the



44/194


was constructed using a mortise and tenon and

was set into the brick work as if constructed

framing likely dates to the original date of

not oversized and was constructed to support

the smaller hearth that is typical of a Rumford

This excavation provided the evidence

necessary to understand the logic and the

methodology that guided the craftsmen and

designers who built the framing for this

by the decision to build a more contemporary

construction decisions. Solidly built framing

1) Initial Framed Opening 2) Exploded Hearth Framing 3) Assembly

B

C

D



45/194


possible comfort to the occupants of the building

0 4-02-0 6-0

HEARTH MASONRY

DOVETAILED TRIM

FIREPLACE MASONRY

Tyical plan detail of hearth flooring trim

(Room 205). Trim is dovetailed into an

un-interrupted floor board.

FLOORBOARDS



46/194


3S2.1

1S2.1

2S2.1

4S2.1

4S2.1



47/194


LIKELY REPAIR



48/194




49/194


SISTERED

MEMBER ALONG

SILL PLATE, WITH

MITERED END.

AREAREQUIRES

FURTHER STUDY

4 x 7 RAFTER PLATE



50/194


1S2.2

1S2.2



51/194


LENGTH AND WIDTH, NO

MORTISED TO HEADER



52/194


NOT TO SCALE



53/194

Exterior Millwork: Porches and Doors



54/194

Porches

played an integral role in the day-to-day

operations of the site. Because the structure was

originally divided into three separate wings

with limited access between to prevent the

transmission of disease, the porch served as an

exterior hallway linking all three portions of the

building. This would allow for administratorsand physicians to travel around the structure

with protection from the elements. The porch

also served as gathering place for social events,

as evidenced by the instillation of furniture.

Some of the original fabric of the porch exists,

but much is hidden under concrete or later

alterations, and many of the original structuralmembers are in advanced stages of decay.

The one story, covered piazza originally ran

was removed. The only other covered porch at

structure, stretching along the western wall of the

central wing and covered the door leading to the

presumed bake house. This porch was probably

not original but was likely added when the

exterior door in this room was installed (which

is discussed in the door section). This porch is no

longer extant however there are several physical

indications of its existence including a shadowline of the roof and nails in the brick wall from

Wooden steps up to the porch were located

at each entryway on the three wings. There

were also steps at the west end of the porch and

likely on the east end. Photographic evidenceindicates that paneled wooden cheek walls

encased the stairs in front of the main entrance,

a feature only present at the main entrance. The

stairs today are constructed of modern concrete.



55/194

nailed to the structural beams. The only major

19th century when a long bench was installedalong the western wing of the faade. This bench

the wall with metal pins that were inserted into

mortar joints. This feature was removed by the

mid 20th century. Around the time the benches

were removed, a thick layer of concrete was

material.

White Roman Doric columns, situated

over the brick piers, support the edge of the

porch roof structure. These columns are topped

with a large abacus with applied trim. The

original bases were simple, and typical of the

the porch deck, probably by wooden plinths, to

prevent rot. The appearance of the columns has

evolved over time. During the late 19th century,

The porch structure is of a fairly common

construction system for its time period. Large

beams (3 by 8) were notched and rested ona ledge at the top of the stone foundation (see

drawing one). These beams spanned to the top

of brick piers, forming a gentle slope in the

into the top of each structural beam and small

joists, or sleepers were installed in each opening.

these sleepers, running parallel to the structural

porch. The width of these boards varied slightly

from 3/4 wide to 1.5 wide. The boards were

connected to each other via a tongue and groove

a number of basement windows. These windowswould probably have been operable and used to

ventilate and provide light into the basement,

a function that would have been impossible if

covered by a porch deck The builders accounted



56/194

joists and rafters meet at this point. A small piece

of blocking extends over the rafter, with a drip

edge nailed to the end. A cornice was appliedto the overhang and the architrave. The rafter

runs from the architrave to the faade, and is

notched in to the brick belt course between the

architrave to the faade, where three-brick high

pockets were cut into the wall. Beaded sheathing

are asphalt shingles on the roof deck, but the

original material was probably wood shakes

The rafters and joists were connected near

the wall via a vertical board that that was pegged

into the rafters, and nailed to a horizontal

board that spans across the joists. Some of the

was added to the architrave (see drawing two).

A tapered plinth with applied trim replaced

traditional bases. In the mid twentieth century

these embellishments were removed. Metal

poles run through the middle of the columns,

and anchor them to square concrete plinths

These reinforcement poles are a twentieth

century addition. A variety of factors, including

rot, corrosion, and shifting loads have caused

the failure of a few of the columns, and threatenthe remaining members.

The columns support an architrave

which consists of sistered three inch by seven

and a half inch beams, as illustrated in drawing

one. The architrave is encased with three, three

and a quarter inch thick boards. The ceiling



57/194

Exterior Doors

Many of the original exterior doors are

schedule over time are indicative alterations to

the circulation of the building, as well as the

buildings use.

The south faade has four entrances,

entrance on the eastern wing was added in the

mid twentieth century. The addition of this

stairs was the reason for the demolition of

eastern portion of the porch. Three doors, one

in the center of each wing, all contain originalfabric (See drawing three). The main entrance of

the central wing is slightly larger (four inches)

like the other faade doors, is recessed into

original rafters and joists exist today, but are in

advanced stages of deterioration, especially near

the cornice where there has been extensive water

has begun to separate from the faade.

Sometime in the early to mid nineteenth

century, a decorative ceiling was added to the

at each column and along the wall and eave edgeforming panels on the ceiling. Beaded, tongue-

laid on above these wide boards, running east

to west. Trim was added along the edges of the

large boards, and the top of the columns were

boxed in. This decorative system was painted

blue (on top of white primer), a typical colorfor outdoor roofs in the 19th century. Nails

found in the joists indicate that this ceiling was

probably added around 1830-1840. Much of the

roof structure and detailing is in fair condition



58/194

quite complex and diverse on this face and will

be summarized one by one from east to west.

The door on the eastern corner of the

north face is not original to the structure, and

was probably added sometime in the early to

mid 20th century. The door leads to directly

brick patio. This was probably added to allow

bathrooms without having to enter the building.

Visible evidence in the brickwork around the

door shows that there was originally a window

in this location. The door and surrounding frame

and molding are in poor condition.

Proceeding west, there is an extremelylarge, machine-shop door opening that is now

boarded over. This expansive opening was cut

to allow large plane or boat motors to be brought

indoors for maintenance in the repair shop that

nails. These three doors are the largest and most

elaborately embellished doors on the structure.

This correlates with the general decorativescheme of the building, in which more time,

money, and resources were allocated to the

south wall of the structure facing the river. All of

the doors on this wall appear to be original. Only

one of the sash transom windows (in western

door) is still extant, while the others have been

replaced. Some of the panels are missing fromthe doors, but they are in decent condition

overall. The trim work protected by the porch

roof is in good condition, while the molding

on the eastern wing has weathered extensively.

Both of the side wing doors have an additional

wood frame for screen doors, installed sometime

in the mid 20th century.

The remaining doorways are all located

on the rear or north side of the structure. Unlike

the south faade, the system of entryways is



59/194

door. This door also took the place of what was

originally a window. A small amount of plaster

removal on the interior revealed the lintel of aformer window still in place. A concrete block,

brick, and cement stairway leads up to this

entrance. The door itself is shorter than those

elsewhere on the building, and is actually a

frame. This door was probably constructed

when cooking activities were moved to the bakehouse, which is still extant and lies just outside

the door. The door and the former porch would

have provided quick and easy access between the

bake house and the dining room (into which the

door opens). The basement shows that some sort

of bulkhead doorway led from the basement out

to where this patio is now located. If, originally,cooking functions were carried out in the large

steps would have provided direct access to the

exterior for supplies water and other cooking

that of the northern side of the western wing.

Moving to the central wing of thestructure, the original exterior door is still in place

on the north side. It is located just east of center

on the wing to allow for stairs on the interior of

the central hall. A porch that leads to this door

is constructed of brick, Wissahickon schist stone,

and iron angles, covered in concrete. Pockets

in the wall near this porch indicate that thisstoop was originally constructed of wood joists

with railings. Unfortunately no photographic

evidence has been found. The large stone

embedded in the ground in at the base of the

steps could date to the earlier porch. This door

and surrounding trim, as well as the lintel, are in

exceedingly poor condition, and the brick abovethe door is failing due to the deteriorated lintel.

Around the corner, on the western face

of the central wing, is another non-original



60/194

needs without using the main stair. Future

paint sampling and mortar analysis could help

to determine exactly when these alterationswere made, but a nail survey indicates that this

was probably a very early addition. Today, the

molding and door are in poor condition due to

weathering.

Plaster removal showing original windowlintel.



61/194

The next door proceeding west is also not

original. Tucked in the corner between of the

central and western wing, this door is muchplainer in detail than the originals and early

seaplane base, and would have been covered by

the roofed porch that also covered the dining

room door. Unlike all the other doors on the

structure, this one features a concrete instead of a

wooden sill. Like many of the added entryways,this later addition is located in what used to be

a window. This door and the surrounding frame

and trim are in good condition.

The last exterior door on the north faade

is an original opening, and represents the back

door of the central hall in the western wing.

repairs, and plywood covering have kept this

entry in good condition. Like the northern door

of the main block, it is shorter than the south



62/194


The

Lazaretto

Title:

Date:

FT.5 1 2

Ben Buckley

HSPV 744U Penn

Column Elevations: Proposed Original and Late 19th Century

05/02/2012

1799 Aprx. 1890

1

Exterior Millwork: Porch and Doors



63/194


FT.5 1 2

HSPV 744

U Penn 3TheLazaretto

Title:

Date:

Ben Buckley

Western Facade Door Elevation and Section

05/02/2012




64/194


The

Lazaretto

Title:

Date:

Porch Section

05/02/2012

Ben Buckley

HSPV 744

U Penn

FT.5 1 2

2




65/194

Windows



66/194

Ri d it f ti ti t ti

1

3 2



67/194



68/194

Fig. 7



69/194



70/194

3 (

ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION +

CURRENT CONFIGURATION 4



71/194


Type AHorizoSectio

Type BHorizoSectio


1310

1 MUNTIN

FRAMECONSTRUCTIO


72/194


11

2

4

3 6

8

9

12

7

5

1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

MUNTIN

PANE

STILE

UPPER SASH

PARTING BEAD

WEIGHT

FRAME

COVER BOARD

SIDE JAMB

TRIM

SILL

BRICK

PLASTER


TION


73/194


TYP

EA,VERTICALSECTI

ON

TYPEB,VERT

ICALSECT

DET

AIL,SASHMEETINGRAILS


12


74/194


1 2 3 4

5 6 7 8

9 10 11 12

BRICK

EXTERIOR

MOULDING

SHOWS

ILL

FRAME

MUNTIN

PANE

RAIL

FRONTTRIM

SIDEJAMB

SILL

B

RICK

PLASTER

FRAMECONSTRUCTI

ON5 6 7

4

10

9 11

3

1

2

8


SASH TYPE A

SASH TYPE B

SASH TYPE E

SASH TYPE F


75/194


SASH TYPE D

SASH TYPE C

SOUTH ELEVATION

WEST ELEVATION EAST ELEVATIONElevation drawing mirroredfor window conguration

reference only

SASH TYPE G


CELLARAll drawings provided by theHistoric American Buildings Survey

B16B17B18B19

TYPE A

WINDOW SASH


76/194


B01

101

FIRST FLOOR

B02 B03 B04 B05 B06 B07 B08 B09 B10 B11

B12B13B14B15

B20B21B22

102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120

137 136135

134 133 132

131 130 129 128

126

125

124

123

122

121

127

TYPE B

TYPE C

TYPE D

TYPE E

TYPE F

INFILLOR VINYLWINDOW

REPLACEMENT

TYPE G


SECOND FLOOR 237 236 235 234 233

238 232TYPE A

WINDOW SASH


77/194


326 325 324

301 302 303304 305 306

327

328

307 308309 310 311

316 315 314

313

312

323 317

322 321 320 319 318THIRD FLOOR

210 211 212 213 214215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222

231 230 229 228 226 225 224 223227

201 202 203 204 206 207 208 209

247 246 245 244 242 241 240 239243

205

TYPE B

TYPE C

TYPE D

TYPE E

TYPE F


REPLACEMENT

TYPE G


TYPE A

WINDOW SASH


78/194


TYPE B

TYPE C

TYPE D

TYPE E

TYPE F


REPLACEMENT

TYPE G

FOURTH FLO OR + CUPOLA,CENTRAL PAVILION

401 402

403

404

405

C1C2

C3

C4C5

C6

C7

C8



79/194

Type A



80/194

Type A



81/194

Type B



82/194

Type B



83/194

Installed in windows:

Type C

Window Type C is featured in the third



84/194


Type D

t t t t



85/194

Type F


Type E

t t

Window Type E refers

to the two windows in


T G


86/194


Type G

t t t t



87/194

Metals



88/194



89/194



90/194



91/194



92/194



93/194



94/194

Victorian Decorative

Art: A Photographic Study of Ornamental Design

in Antique Doorknobs1


A ti D k b


95/194

Antique Doorknobs

2



96/194



97/194



98/194



99/194



100/194



101/194



102/194



103/194



104/194

1

1 Lee H. Nelson, Nail Chronology as an Aid to DatingOld Buildings (Nashville, Tennessee: American Associa-

tion for State and Local History, 1968) Technical Lea

etNo. 48.



105/194



106/194

Interior Millwork



107/194

213 year-old history, the structure retains an

extraordinary amount of original millwork. A vast

window frames, crown molding, and doors, appear

displays a hierarchy highly indicative of the relative

FIRST FLOOR HIERARCHY

the rooms closest to the main entrance, rooms103 and 105, are furnished with millwork accents

more intricate than those in the corresponding

symmetry found elsewhere throughout the



108/194

detailing likely adorned the top central panel.

now lost, it is presumed that it likely matched, or

closely approximated, that of room 103. A direct

symmetry of the layout of these two rooms, along

with consistencies in many of the major molding

and doorway locations mirror one another in each

of these spaces. Though room 105 includes a door

and room 103 appears to only have a solid wall,

room 103 did indeed include an opening at the

changes in the plaster, and a change in millwork in


this area.


109/194

More intricate millwork is placed in the

:

rooms as well. While the chair rails in rooms 303, 304

and 305 match, the chair rail in room 302 appears to

The interior doorframes of rooms 402, 403,

404 and 405 all match one another, as do the

common, traditional style that was used during

and County of Philadelphia. Curiously, the exterior

door frames are less formal than those gracing the



110/194



111/194



112/194



113/194



114/194



115/194



116/194



117/194



118/194



119/194



120/194



121/194


Baseboards


122/194


Baseboards


123/194


Chair Railings


124/194

CR1 CR2


Chair Railings


125/194

CR5 CR6


Door FramesDF1


126/194

Room104

DF2


DF5 =Door Frames


127/194

hallway

interior202, 203,

DF5

CBF5

DF6


Cabinet Frames


128/194

Rooms103 & 105

CBF1

CBF2


Window Frames


129/194

Room

104

W2

W1


Openings


130/194

OP1

OP2

102 and103


Crown Molding


131/194

CN2

Rooms 103 and 105CN1


Fireplace Surround FP1: Room 103


132/194


Fireplace Surround Details FP1: Room 103


133/194

Pilaster capital detail

U d t il


Fireplace Surround FP1: Room 103


134/194

a.


FP1: Room 103Fireplace Surround


135/194

c.

d.




136/194

a.

a.




137/194

d.

a.c.

d.


Fireplace Surround


138/194

FP3:

a.

b.

a.



139/194


Matrix of Interior Millwork



140/194




141/194



142/194



143/194



144/194



145/194



146/194



147/194



148/194


The Bargemans Tower


149/194


The decorative faade of the structure

faces the Delaware River, while the entrance


150/194

stucco on the structure indicate that a shallow

1

the structure would have provided convenient



151/194



152/194



153/194



154/194

B

B

CD



155/194



156/194

were not vital to the initial operation of the site

1


7


157/194



158/194


A Trumpet at a Distant Gate


159/194



160/194



161/194



162/194



163/194


Approximate date of construction

Although it is impossible to pinpoint the


164/194

planning for or its subsequent execution

1



165/194

8

to the left and the right of both the upper and



166/194

13

ModernMachine- Cut NailLate1830s to present

Heads tend to beuniformly convex on

each side, and uniform insizeand shape.

Fig. 1: Modern Machine-CutNailfrom the Lazaretto Barn.


additional research on the structure to see if


167/194

combing extant literature on these building


168/194



169/194

Fig. 3: 1909 Map of Tinicum Township. Image from http://delawarecountyhistory.com/tinicumtownship/images/Tinicum-Twp.1929.jpg.


30


170/194

31

stabling area and located to either side of

Fig. 5: Abiah Taylor Ground Barn. S. Reid, photographer, 2012.



171/194

Fig. 6. 1798 Ground Barn in Warren County, NJ. Image courtesy ofGreg Huber, 2012



172/194

rare example of a turn-of-the-nineteenth-

Endnotes


in American Association for State and Local


173/194



174/194

24

25


/D]DUHWWR%DUQ&KDUDFWHU'HQLQJ)HDWXUHV

Planning for the future preservation

and the possible adaptive use of the Lazaretto

remaining brick ground barns from the turn

of the nineteenth century. The barn is also

VLJQLFDQWDVDFRQWULEXWLQJHOHPHQWWRWKH

Lazaretto Quarantine Station. Although some


175/194

%DUQUHTXLUHVWKDWWKH%DUQVVWHZDUGVUVW

recognize this historic structures character

GHQLQJIHDWXUHVZKLFKVKRXOGEHUHVSHFWHG

during the planning process. As a consequence,

this section includes both the general listing

and a subsequent summary of each of the

Lazaretto Barns extant interior and exterior

FKDUDFWHUGHQLQJIHDWXUHV0LVVLQJIHDWXUHV

that are evidenced by existing physical details

or materials are also recorded in this segment.

of the Barns millwork dates to the second

quarter of the nineteenth century, it coincides

with an aesthetic improvement campaign that

is believed to have been implemented more

widely at the Lazaretto Quarantine Station.


Gable roof with moderate pitch

The Barn retains its original c. 1799-

1801 roof slope. The pitch of this gable roof

is moderate with the ridge running east to

a common bond pattern. The north, south, east

and west faades are each three wythes thick

up to the level of the eave. The gable end walls

(east and west) transition to two wythes thick


176/194

west. Although the Barns rafters are original,

its sheathing is not. Most likely, the roof was

originally sheathed with wood shingles nailed

to wood lath strips.

Hand-molded brick masonry walls

The Lazaretto Barn is constructed of

brick masonry exterior bearing walls. With

the exception of a few replacement bricks, the

Barn is constructed entirely of hand-molded

up to the ridge.

Fenestration pattern

The buildings north and south facades

mirror one another in terms of their respective

fenestration patterns. Each exhibits a central

DUFKHG%DUQGRRUGRXEOHGRRUDQNHGE\RQH

UVWVWRU\ZLQGRZDUVWVWRU\KXPDQVFDOH

door, and one smaller, second story windowthat is aligned in both placement and width


This purposely designed framing

system, with its lack of numerous full-span

joists, appears to have allowed the Barns users

access to three lofty upper-level storage areas


177/194

Roof and Eave Framing: c. 1799-1801

The Lazaretto Barn evidences a rarely

d d t f th i t th t f

mows. Were this framing system not used, it

would not have been possible for the Barn to

contain a high central mow. Nor would it have

been possible for either of the side mows to

have more than an approximately seven foot

high ceiling clearance.

Period barn door openings, human-scale doors,

windows, and hardware

It is believed that during the second

quarter of the nineteenth century the Barn

Fig. 10: South facade of Lazaretto Barn, fenestration pattern. A.Berger, photographer, 2012.


andshutters, and its cornice (both north and

south sides). This campaign resulted in the Barn

EHLQJRXWWWHGZLWKWKHIROORZLQJQHZIHDWXUHV

Wood-frame window openings with

Period millwork: 1830s-1840s era cornice

Apparently, the Lazaretto Barns cornice

ZDVDOVRDHFWHGE\WKHDIRUHPHQWLRQHG

improvement campaign. The replaced, extant


178/194

board and batten shutters and period hardware;

Wood-frame door opening with board and

batten doors and period hardware; Wood-

framed, double doors, each board and batten,

with period metal hardware. This double door

is missing along the north side of the building,

but since the door on the south side is intact,

the north door could be reproduced to match.

These doors and windows also evidence period

hardware, including: hinges; handles; and

cornice is of plain architectural detail, consisting

of an unornamented wooden crown board,

IDVFLDERDUGVRWERDUGDQGEHGPROGLQJ

(Reference Figure 1).

7KUHHED\LQWHULRURRUSODQLQFOXGLQJPRZV

The Lazaretto evidences a three bay

LQWHULRURRUSODQWKDWLQFOXGHVDFHQWUDO

WKUHVKLQJRRUDQNHGRQHLWKHUVLGHE\DQ

DQLPDOED\V7KHVWRQHWKUHVKLQJRRUZDOOV


East and west gable-end windows

The eastern facade of the Barn evidences

a bricked-in window opening. The dimensions

of this opening were documented and it

to the greatest extent possible, compromising

WKHFRQJXUDWLRQRIERWKWKHVWUXFWXUHV

existing exterior walls and roof. Furthermore,

it is recommended that the stone walls that


179/194

could be reopened. The west facade evidences

two openings. These openings are, however,

currently covered with sheathing and not

accessible for examination. (In preparation for

this report, a series of conjectural drawings

were made. Please reference these drawings

in the proceeding section titled, the Lazaretto

Barns Drawing Set.)

Rationale for inclusion of the list of&KDUDFWHU'HQLQJ)HDWXUHV

represent both the presence of the central

WKUHVKLQJRRUDQGWKH%DUQVKD\PRZVEH

both preserved and interpreted.

(QGQRWHV

1 Rebecca Sell, The Lazaretto: The Cultural6LJQLFDQFHDQG3UHVHUYDWLRQ3ODQLQWKH%XUUDCharter, (2005), 31.



180/194




181/194




182/194




183/194




184/194




185/194




186/194




187/194




188/194




189/194




190/194




191/194




192/194




193/194




194/194


Lazaretto Architectural Investigation

Documents