Each May we take the opportunity to “celebrate” Historic Preservation in the United States. May is officially National Historic Preservation Month – and a time to reflect back on the events that created the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, the State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPOs), the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and the many graduate and a handful of undergraduate degree programs in the study of Historic Preservation Planning, Preservation Law, and Architectural Conservation. In understanding the origins of the preservation movement and discipline as a whole, it is not surprising that it shared many similarities in terms of mission, methods and goals as the environmental and natural conservation movement. In fact most preservationists consider themselves environmentalists and work to find preservation solutions that positively impact or protect both our cultural/historic resources and our natural resources. It has long been an assertion by the Historic Preservation field that we were the first “recyclers” [of buildings] and in terms of the relatively young “green building movement”, preservationists have been following green practices from day one, as “the greenest building is the one already built.”
Along these lines, we feel it is worth celebrating both Earth Day and National Historic Preservation Month reflecting on the green and recycling philosophy that is the underlying inspiration in the rebuilding of 13 River Street. As past posts have indicated, the house that we (Jack & Kim Alvarez) bought was clearly old (c.1810s), but had been continuously expanded and altered between the mid-19th and 20th centuries. We knew we had a large undertaking ahead of us, and despite the fact that 2020 building materials were skyrocketing due to shutdowns, shortages, and home improvement demands, we set out from the beginning to salvage and reuse every timber wherever possible. This meant that the effort to take down the deteriorated section of the house didn’t involve an excavator and demo crew, but rather was methodically disassembled and the timbers de-nailed before being stacked and stored in a nearby barn awaiting re-use. Centuries-old hand-hewn heavy timbers were used to replace rotted members of the original house framing. Also carefully removed from the house were all the original 9 and 6-lite window sash and the later 2-over-2 window sash – complete with wavy crown glass. At least eight early 19th century paneled and batten doors with rim locks and porcelain knobs were surveyed and stored for later refinishing and reinstallation.
Now that the exterior is approaching completion, these window sash have all been restored, re-glazed and repainted and reinstalled. They face River Street as they have since the 1860s, but now restored are viewed as part of the cohesive row of historic homes. On the rear, river-facing elevation, the house reflects a later style and with the desire for more glass to take in the water views, we have salvaged and had restored several c.1920 steel casement windows. Similarly historic entry doors were purchased from regional architectural salvage warehouses for a fraction of what new quality exterior doors would cost. With each salvaged item that is repurposed, recycled and restored we have kept these elements and materials out of local landfills, saving the embodied energy not only comprised in the material that was forested or forged more than a century ago, but the craftsmanship that is hard and expensive to buy today.
The choice of materials and the planned approach for heating and cooling the house also reflect a green philosophy. Prior to finishing the exterior cladding the house was equipped with ground-source geo-thermal system via two 200-ft wells in the front lawn to circulate water to heat and cool the house without the need for any visible obtrusive exterior mechanical equipment or fuel source (oil, gas or propane) aside of electric. 
Additionally all traditional materials where used to support, frame, sheath, insulate and clad the building. Local New York quarried limestone, the vein which runs east-west through the state, was used to match the original dry-laid stone foundation walls, as well as for the fireplaces and landscaped walks, walls and steps. Instead of using polystyrene, fiberglass or spray foam for achieving the exterior wall insulation, the R-28 stone rockwool batt and panel system was used. No synthetic, plastic or cementious siding was used to clad the house; instead we opted to continue the use of clear cedar siding and trim to finish the exterior walls, while copper and slate are planned for the roofs in order to avoid the use of any asphalt product (produced by refining petroleum crude oils).
We understand that with each material choice we make there is an economic impact…and for us it may mean the project will take longer to complete based on our finances. However, one of the major and most important tenets of this project it is that the resulting product will last another 100+ years without the need for any significant repairs or replacement. This ideally will keep construction debris out of our landfills and will eliminate the need for expending energy on the manufacture of new products. If historic preservation is ultimately about preserving architectural resources, craftsmanship and the collective built environment for future generations to learn from, appreciate and experience, then it is ever more important that we design and build for the ages, with works worthy of ongoing preservation, and which continue of the story that started nearly two centuries ago on this river-side parcel.