Surprises abound at 2009 Golden Leaf Awards

In a year with some very high-profile new and re-made buildings in Durham, the judges for the 2009 Golden Leaf Awards had plenty of tough decisions to make.  

Unfortunately, while the quality of nominees was high, the number of nominees was low.  Two awards normally given out at the Golden Leaf Awards, the Landscaping and Maintenance Awards and the Keep Durham Beautiful Awards were not given out this year due to a lack of nominees in those categories.

Still, the awards that were given out promise to provide a lot of fodder for discussion in the coming days.

The 7th annual Golden Leaf Awards, an event that celebrates good design and appearance in the Bull City, were held in the perfectly-chosen Rigsbee Hall Thursday evening to a packed house. 

And much like the Oscars, the night had plenty of free booze, overly long speeches, beautiful montages, awkward award announcements, and most importantly, controversial choices (though thankfully, unlike the Oscars, the event only lasted one hour).

The first set of awards were for Commercial Properties.  Two heavyweights predictably won Awards of Merit (essentially honorable mentions) in this category: the sidewalk-less new Quintiles behemoth in the Imperial Center and the mixed-use Pavilion East at Lakeview on Erwin Road. 

But the first Golden Leaf Award of the night was also the first surprise of the night, going to Phil Szostak's Republik building renovation, right across the street from Rigsbee Hall at 211 Rigsbee Ave.

There were plenty of other good options to choose from in this category.  This correspondent's personal favorite nominee was the 810 Iredell St. building, a funky little gem often overlooked between Ninth Street and East Campus.  The Trinity Park Family Fare also deserves some love - it's not often a gas station fits well into its surroundings.

The next category, Community Properties, also contained some big projects.  One relatively small project, the Birchwood Community Center, won one of the Awards of Merit. 

But in what has to be considered a pretty big upset, Durham Station won the Golden Leaf Award over the Durham Performing Arts Center, which had to settle for the other Award of Merit.

Perhaps the judges didn't want Szostak Design to win two straight, but it's a little hard to believe that the signature addition to Durham this year didn't come out on top. 

Still, Durham Station is certainly a deserving winner -- and its design will likely be appreciated that much more if/when a pedestrian bridge is built to a regional rail station across Chapel Hill St. creating the type of seamless transportation hub the city has needed for decades.

The surprises kept coming in the third category, Residential Properties.  The only single-family residence that won an award was 1106 Anderson Street, beating out two renovated properties on Watts Street for an Award of Merit.  Southpoint Village, the South Durham empire's latest set of McApartments, won the other Award of Merit. 

The Golden Leaf Award in the category went to the Trinity Park Townhomes on the corner of Duke and Club, a distinction that might not sit well with some TPers; the teardown-and-rebuild project gets some occasional listserv snarkiness in the urban neighborhood.

The final category was Sustainable Properties.  This one went a bit more to form, although the fact that the Research Triangle Foundation's excellent new headquarters came away empty-handed was a bit of a surprise. 

The first Award of Merit went to EPA's National Computer Center in RTP which apparently has more solar panels than any building in North Carolina.  Still, while somewhat understandable due to security concerns, the fact that the EPA decided to locate in a place where walking, biking, or taking public transit is nearly impossible for employees makes a sustainability award a bit dubious at best.

The other Award of Merit went to the fabulously renovated King's Daughters Inn. 

The Golden Leaf Award went to Scientific Properties' Golden Belt, probably the biggest slam dunk choice of the evening.

So, what say you, gentle readers?  Did the judges get it right?

Comments

[Bass]

There's no way the Durham Station beats the DPAC in the Golden Leaf award. The Durham Station is nice but the DPAC is on a completely different level as far as design and impact.

[aburtch]

@Bass

I second the motion

[Mark H]

Speaking of buildings, what IS that monstrosity that they are building on what I think is the corner of Mangum and Gregson. In the middle of historic Trinity Park, there's a house? that looks like a cross between a Sonic and a bus station.

[B]

I work on the same campus as that EPA building, and (very occasionally) bike to work from NG Park. But yeah, I couldn't make that a daily thing.

What I find funny is how often I am nearly run off the road by EPA employees coming out of their parking lot...

[Golden Belt]

I realize the significance of DPAC, but I think Durham Station is a prettier design - particularly in light of what it replaced.

[obsure onlooker]

The Gold Leaf awards are a sham. It's a game of who knows who, where merit has little input into the criteria. Durham is great, and some of these projects are great. It's clear the awards are based more on the owners or architect's lobbying skills, and little else.

[anon]

@Mark H, Is is necessary to make such an ugly comment? You seem to be going for laughs, but this is going to someone's home and they are going to be neighbors (probably good ones). Your ugly comment is going to be here forever.

[John Martin]

I also went to this ceremony, and I was stunned by what I witnessed. As Eric says, there was "plenty of free booze" and a lavish, free buffet as well. Although there was a cop at the door, anyone was free to walk in and gorge himself. The "perfectly-chosen" Rigsbee Hall is privately owned, and therefore the rental fee for this event certainly wasn't cheap. Couldn't this have been held in a public building, and couldn't there have been a cash bar? And is it really necessary to provide free food for the well-to do? In this period of economic crisis, when the city and county are debating how to cut vital public services, this expenditure of public money was tone-deaf to say nothing worse.

And then there were the awards themselves. What I'm going to say will, no doubt, sound like sour grapes because I was one of the unsuccessful nominees. Sobeit. There was so little information provided about the unsuccessful nominees that it is impossible to make very many judgements about several of them. (What was the "Soo Moses Residence addition?" Dunno.) But Eric is incorrect when he says that two of the unsuccessful nominees were "two renovated properties on Watts Street." One of those properties was a renovation. The other was a brand new house built, after some controversy, on the site of a former cemetery. And he neglects to note that one of the other single-family residences that didn't win was my house: listed as "former 1704 W. Markham Ave," also known as the Tate House. As readers of Endangered Durham will know, the Tate House is a c. 1910 mill house that I moved last May to Edith St. because the former owner wanted to tear it down to build a much larger rental house on the site (which he has now done). My contractor, David Parker of Riverbank Construction, spent six months, and I spent a great deal of money restoring the house. We kept the original siding, windows, doors, floors, ceilings, mantel, and millwork, and added new bathrooms, bedrooms, and a redone kitchen. I wouldn't have minded losing to another restoration, but I lost to a South Point apartment complex and some "townhomes" stuffed on a lot that formerly held one early-twentieth-century, single-family house. What strikes me about these properties is: nothing. They could be from Anywhere, U.S.A., and you can find their identical twins in Everywhere, U.S.A. Durham might as well give an award to a McDonald's or a Holiday Inn.

There is a lesson here. Once again I am reminded how many people in Durham just don't get historic preservation, and, unfortunately, many of those people occupy important positions in city and county government. To these people, almost anything new is better than anything old and while, they may not be in favor of bulldozing, say, the Duke Chapel, they're not in favor of going to any trouble to save very much. Those people think I should have let the Tate House go to the landfill, and built a nice "townhome" on Edith St.

Now I know that the Golden Leaf awards were for "community appearance" not historic preservation, and that's fine. But if Durham ends up looking like Cary, we'll have a very nice "community appearance." But we won't be Durham anymore, and that's a shame.

[Will]

@ John Martin. I can't believe given the amount of news coverage on moving and restoring your home, the historical significance of your property and the amazing renovation and design that David and Robert completed that you could have lost this award. It honestly doesn't make sense.

It seems then that this might not have been an award worth winning after all.

[Erik Landfried]

@John - Thanks for the corrections and bringing up your house. My apologies for not mentioning it - I wrote this post right after the awards ceremony, so I didn't have a chance to do as much research as I would have liked. I appreciate any extra info folks can provide about any of the nominees.

Do you (or anyone else) have more details about how much public money was put into the event? The City and County were at the highest sponsor level, but there were several private companies who sponsored the event as well.

These were the first Golden Leaf Awards that I've been to or have even paid attention to. My overall impression is that they are good for creating a debate and hobnobbing, but not much else. The criteria for selecting these awards seems murky at best and the judges all work for private companies in Durham (getting completely unbiased judges is impossible, but choosing folks that must have lots of professional and personal connections with the nominees and their clients seems a bit much).

I thought it was interesting that there weren't enough nominees for two whole categories. The economy was blamed for this, but the Landscaping and Maintenance Awards are "given for projects over two years old, which have consistently maintained high standards of upkeep and appearance, contributing to a better image for Durham." If the economy is to blame for nothing being maintained in Durham this year, then I've got a new excuse for my screen door having a cat-sized hole in it right now ("It wasn't my cat, it was the economy").

Point is, if people believe the awards are meaningless, deserving projects will stop being nominated. It's possible this has already started. Rewarding good design is a great idea, but it has to be done in a transparent and trustworthy way if we are supposed to take them seriously.

[John Martin]

Erik,

First let me apologize for misspelling your name. And I'm not at all surprised that you didn't mention my house in your original story simply because very little information was given about the nominees, or why they were nominated. That was also my point about the Watts St. houses: one was a major renovation and the other was a new house, but no one would know that from the program.

And I completely agree that the criteria are obscure. The descriptions in the program are gushing but not very informative: "this project took a nondescript house and turned it into a small treasure." Trinity Park Townhomes are described as having "plenty of old-world charm." This sounds like bad ad copy from a novice realtor.

Finally, I don't know exactly how the funds were allocated for this. But since both the city and the county are major contributors, it seems to me that elected officials ought to be questioning this kind of conspicuous consumption.

[Alex]

John -

Good comments.

A great analogy of the copy: "Trinity Park Townhomes are described as having "plenty of old-world charm." This sounds like bad ad copy from a novice realtor."

What a wonderful description.

As for "it seems to me that elected officials ought to be questioning this kind of conspicuous consumption." Well, I found the cold beer provided, um, refreshing :>!

[hurley]

The reason you didn't get an award is because what you preserved is a tiny $1500 house that some speculator slapped up in about 2 weeks a hundred years ago.

Aim larger next time.

[John Schelp]

I just sent this note to the folks in charge of the Golden Leaf Awards...

FYI, below is a post from the popular local blog, Bull City Rising.

It does seem strange to see a 100 year old house that was saved from demolition, carefully moved, and then lovingly restored -- lose in the same category to an apartment complex at Southpointe.

Can I suggest that the Gold Leaf Awards create a new category for "Historic Preservation?" I think that would help address some of the many comments raised on Bull City Rising...

http://www.bullcityrising.com/2009/05/surprises-abound-at-2009-golden-leaf-awards.html

Recent nominees can then be re-reviewed for the Historic Preservation category.

I do want to quickly acknowledge how past Golden Leaf Awards have gone to the "little guy" -- such as little Old West Durham properties beating out Duke's campus, the Imperial Center, and Treyburn in 2003... :)

1) Residential Properties 901 Carolina Ave (for its "Drought Garden" and for hosting droughts workshops last summer). Proud moment for neighbors, Vicky and Eric. Nominated by OWDNA.

2) Ninth Street North/Phase 1 (for its architectural style that blends into the surrounding neighborhood). A stunning winner of the Golden Leaf in a competitive field of 23 entries. Nominated by OWDNA.

3) Landscaping Erwin Square (for its... landscaping). OK, we didn't nominate them but they are in OWD.

(More than 50 properties were nominated in 2003. Finalists not selected included: West Village, Mangum Court, Imperial Center, Peabody Place, Washington Duke Inn, Brodie Duke Warehouse, Foster's, Rockwood Building, Hope Valley Shopping Center, Triangle Biotechnology Center, Treyburn, Woodcroft, and the Duke Campus.)

Having said that... I do think it would be good for the Golden Leaf Awards, good for local historic preservation efforts, good for neighborhoods, and good for Durham... to create this new category.

with appreciation,

John Schelp, OWDNA president
Winners, 2006 Golden Leaf Award
http://www.keepdurhambeautiful.org/resources/pdfs/GLA/GLA-2006.pdf

****

post on Bull City Rising...

I also went to this ceremony, and I was stunned by what I witnessed. As Eric says, there was "plenty of free booze" and a lavish, free buffet as well. Although there was a cop at the door, anyone was free to walk in and gorge himself. The "perfectly-chosen" Rigsbee Hall is privately owned, and therefore the rental fee for this event certainly wasn't cheap. Couldn't this have been held in a public building, and couldn't there have been a cash bar? And is it really necessary to provide free food for the well-to do? In this period of economic crisis, when the city and county are debating how to cut vital public services, this expenditure of public money was tone-deaf to say nothing worse.

And then there were the awards themselves. What I'm going to say will, no doubt, sound like sour grapes because I was one of the unsuccessful nominees. Sobeit. There was so little information provided about the unsuccessful nominees that it is impossible to make very many judgements about several of them. (What was the "Soo Moses Residence addition?" Dunno.) But Eric is incorrect when he says that two of the unsuccessful nominees were "two renovated properties on Watts Street." One of those properties was a renovation. The other was a brand new house built, after some controversy, on the site of a former cemetery. And he neglects to note that one of the other single-family residences that didn't win was my house: listed as "former 1704 W. Markham Ave," also known as the Tate House. As readers of Endangered Durham will know, the Tate House is a c. 1910 mill house that I moved last May to Edith St. because the former owner wanted to tear it down to build a
much larger rental house on the site (which he has now done). My contractor, David Parker of Riverbank Construction, spent six months, and I spent a great deal of money restoring the house. We kept the original siding, windows, doors, floors, ceilings, mantel, and millwork, and added new bathrooms, bedrooms, and a redone kitchen. I wouldn't have minded losing to another restoration, but I lost to a South Point apartment complex and some "townhomes" stuffed on a lot that formerly held one early-twentieth-century, single-family house. What strikes me about these properties is: nothing. They could be from Anywhere, U.S.A., and you can find their identical twins in Everywhere, U.S.A. Durham might as well give an award to a McDonald's or a Holiday Inn.

There is a lesson here. Once again I am reminded how many people in Durham just don't get historic preservation, and, unfortunately, many of those people occupy important positions in city and county government. To these people, almost anything new is better than anything old and while, they may not be in favor of bulldozing, say, the Duke Chapel, they're not in favor of going to any trouble to save very much. Those people think I should have let the Tate House go to the landfill, and built a nice "townhome" on Edith St.

Now I know that the Golden Leaf awards were for "community appearance" not historic preservation, and that's fine. But if Durham ends up looking like Cary, we'll have a very nice "community appearance." But we won't be Durham anymore, and that's a shame.

source: http://www.bullcityrising.com/2009/05/surprises-abound-at-2009-golden-leaf-awards.html

[bb]

I was there too - totally agree with everyone's comments, except for the food. It seemed more like a handful of tables stocked with big plastic trays of cheap finger food and a couple of cases of Sam Adams. Although I had already eaten and didn't partake of the goods, it didn't strike me as a gluttonous buffet Durham Fatcats were gorging themselves on... Although not the politically wisest expenditure in this economic climate, I can't imagine the price tag was that lavish...

[John Schelp]

New look for this old house
Anthony Wilson, ABC-11/WTVD, 31 Dec 2008
Video clip... http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=6580329

A former neighborhood eyesore has a new address and a new look. It's the old Tate House, which once stood - barely - across the street from the Duke campus.

New owner John Martin is proud of his historic dwelling, and after a quick look around, it's easy to see why.

"This room, in a lot of ways, original windows, looks much the way it would have looked when the house was built, probably around 1910," said Martin as he showed Eyewitness News around Wednesday.

It's hard to believe the house looks so good when you consider that just a year ago the former owner was willing to give it away to anyone who would move it.

Skeptics back then noticed cracks and other structural flaws, but Martin was not to be deterred. He paid to have it moved from its location on Markham Street to a different lot over in Old West Durham.

"It was in rough shape as it stood over on Markham, and it was in even worse shape when we hauled it down the road," offered David Parker with Riverbank Custom Homes.

Despite spending thousands, Martin says the project was a good deal.
"The house is worth more than what I put into it, so I'm happy about that," he said.

Preservationists hope others will follow Martin's example.

"There are houses available across Durham where folks can come in and save a page of Durham's history," offered John Schelp with the Old West Durham Neighborhood Association.

But you'll have to find your own. John Martin's is not for sale.

-> Broadcast (before & after)...
http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=6580329

[Tar Heelz]

Sure categories are important, but criteria? Adding objective criteria risks building an award series that becomes quickly out-of-date/style. Today's "great design" is sometimes tomorrow's tacky example of a former era.

As Kevin remarks these were the "Oscars," let's stick with the Academy's model of no criteria -- just politics and style du jour.

PS - As note above, an historic preservation category may be a good idea. (Although there are plenty of other competitions for historic preservation work.)

[Sara Young]

Since the Golden Leaf Awards event has generated much discussion in this forum, staff wanted to take the opportunity to clarify a few misconceptions about the program.

The Golden Leaf Awards for Community Appearance are presented annually by the Durham City–County Appearance Commission and Keep Durham Beautiful. These awards have been given for the last seven years with the goal of encouraging better designed and maintained properties in Durham. The focus of the awards is overall visual impact in the community.

Since the program’s inception, the Appearance Commission has worked closely with Preservation Durham, with the understanding that the existing Pyne Preservation Awards recognize outstanding efforts in Historic Preservation. We continue to honor Preservation Durham’s request to not duplicate their recognition efforts and thereby dilute their program. For this reason when adaptive reuse projects are submitted they fall into the appropriate category (i.e. commercial, residential, etc) instead of a category of their own. The focus of this program is not to recognize historic preservation efforts, but to recognize contributions to overall community appearance.

Each year the Awards committee, composed of Appearance Commission members, Keep Durham Beautiful members, Environmental Affairs Board members, and staff, puts together a list of potential judges that cover four areas of expertise: architecture, landscape architecture, arts, and development. The committee aims to select a panel of judges that is diverse in their background and has strong ties to the Durham community. Lobbying of the judges is highly unlikely given that the judges selected are not made public until the awards ceremony and the owners and designers often do not even know their project has been nominated until after the winners have been selected.

The criteria used by the judges are certainly broad, but the flexibility in the criteria allow the judges to give equal consideration to large- and small-scale projects alike, keeping in mind the focus of the program – community appearance. The general criteria are as follows:
• Exhibit excellence in the design and execution of new development or in the redevelopment or improvement of an existing site or structure.
• Raise community awareness of the value of good appearance and of careful stewardship of the land.
• Improve the livability, character, or environment of a neighborhood or area.
• Demonstrate a commitment to ongoing property maintenance in signage, landscaping, and general upkeep.
In addition, projects considered in the Sustainable Properties and Keep Durham Beautiful categories are required to meet additional criteria to be eligible.

The Golden Leaf Awards are primarily funded by private sponsors. Each year the Awards Committee holds a fund-raising campaign and accordingly develops a budget for the event. While the City and County have contributed annually, the majority of the program is funded by private donations. Keep Durham Beautiful and the Environmental Affairs Board also contribute financially to the event. This year the net public dollars used for the event amounted to less than one tenth of the total program cost. No public money was spent on food or drink.

Shortly after the awards event each year we evaluate the awards program and discuss changes for the coming year. We are happy to entertain suggestions to improve the program. Comments can be directed to Sara Young in the Durham City-County Planning Department at sara.young@durhamnc.gov.

[Erik Landfried]

@Sara - Thanks for your comment and I'd encourage folks to send their suggestions Sara's way.

[Scientific Properties]

Just to clear up any confusion, the comments above made by "Golden Belt" are not from Scientific Properties or our development, Golden Belt. If only buildings could talk...