Alaska Region Office Historical Architects Grant Crosby and Annie Matsov (from the National Park Service, Anchorage) visited Cordova multiple times to gather information for this Building Condition Assessment Report with Recommendations for Treatment of the Red Dragon Reading Room. The report’s content is final, although a professionally laid-out publication with photos is still in process.

 

1      Executive Summary

In Spring of 2014, National Park Service (NPS) – Alaska Region Office Historical Architects, Grant Crosby and Annie Matsov, traveled to Cordova, Alaska at the request of the priest and congregation of the St. George’s Memorial Episcopal Church to inspect their historic buildings and provide preservation planning assistance. The result is this Condition Assessment Report with Recommendations for Treatment for the Red Dragon Reading Room which will provide guidance for future preservation of the building.

The Red Dragon Reading Room (Red Dragon) was constructed in 1908 in Cordova, Alaska and is a contributing resource to the Red Dragon Historic District which was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1982 for its significance in the history, art, and folklore of Alaska.[1] The Red Dragon was constructed by the Episcopal Church to provide a social outlet for men who worked on the Copper River and Northwestern Railway looking to fraternize outside the saloon and gambling halls of Cordova.

The Red Dragon sits on a bluff at the south end of downtown in a wooded lot shared with the St. George’s Memorial Episcopal Church, constructed in 1919. It is a one-and-one-half-story, 24′-7″ x 36′-6″ building with a rectangular plan. It is covered by an 11:12 gable roof clad in cedar shingles. The building’s primary access is through a gabled 7′-1″ x 12′-4″ arctic entry centrally located on the north side of the building.

2      Introduction

The St. George’s Memorial Episcopal Church congregation was awarded a $12,000 Anniversaries Grant from the Alaska Historical Commission.  The grant covered the writing of this Condition Assessment with Recommendations for Treatment for the Red Dragon, a site visit and report from a structural engineer to look at the foundation and roof of the Red Dragon, and the purchase of roofing materials for the future reroofing of the building. At the request of the congregation, NPS Historical Architects, Grant Crosby and Annie Matsov, traveled to Cordova from April 29 to May 1, 2014 to inspect and document the Red Dragon and provide preservation planning assistance. Reverend Belle Mickelson, vestry member Cece Wiese, and congregation members Nancy Bird and Neva Nolan were on-site and provided background information.

 

For ease of describing the building and its parts, in this report, the building will be divided into three sections: the primary space (made up of the main room, kitchen, and bathroom), the north artic entry, and the south arctic entry.

 

3      Brief History

This brief history of the Red Dragon is intended to give context on the building and changes that happened throughout its history. The Red Dragon was constructed in 1908 in Cordova, Alaska and owes its existence to the discovery of copper deposits in the Copper River Area, as well as the missionary efforts of the Episcopal Church during the turn of the 20^th century. It is currently the oldest standing building in Cordova and its story is tightly woven with the history of the community.

Prior to the development of Cordova, the Eyak people traditionally occupied the Copper River Delta and area around current day Cordova. Traditionally there were four Eyak villages: Alaganik, near Mile 21 of the present day Copper River Highway; Eyak, located near Mile 5.5; an abandoned village site at the Fort, about 800 yards south of Eyak; and Orca located within the boundaries of present-day Cordova. The Eyak played an important role in 19^th century trade linking the coastal and interior areas.[2]

The late 19^th century brought commercial fishing to the Prince William Sound.  Two canneries were located near present day Cordova. But it was not until the discovery of the first copper lode was discovered at the mouth of Dan Creek in 1899 that Cordova came to be. With the prospect of large copper deposits in the Copper River area, transportation to carry the resources was evident. The site of Cordova, along the coast of Prince William Sound was the optimal location for the terminus.

The Copper River and Northwest Railway (CR&NW) was constructed from 1908 to 1911 to take copper ore from Kennecott, which at the time, was the richest known concentration of copper in the world[3], to coastal Cordova, Alaska.  The 196 miles route was the only one of five Prince William Sound railways to be completed due to the backing of Daniel Guggenheim. Michael James Heney, who was already well-known as the builder of the White Pass & Yukon Railroad during the Klondike gold rush in Skagway, Alaska, secured the right-of-way for the CR&NW Railway in 1904. Heney set up his construction headquarters near Lake Eyak and named the new town “Cordova” after the name given by Spanish explorer, Salvador Fidalgo. Thousands of men were employed to construct the railroad, creating a boomtown along the coast of the Prince William Sound.

After the Klondike gold rush only ten years earlier, Peter Trimble Rowe, the first Episcopal Bishop of Alaska, decided the Episcopal Church mission would not only serve the Alaska Native population, but the transient population who came to Alaska to seek work and prospect. The need for constructive recreation away from the local saloons for these workers became apparent. Reverend E.P. Newton came to Cordova in 1907 and felt a clubhouse, open seven days a week would be more useful in the mining camp than a church building.[4] And it was then that the Red Dragon Reading Room was conceived.

Located on land donated by the CR&NW, just off the new townsite proper, the small one-and-a-half story building was completed on July 14, 1908. The decision to name the club house the Red Dragon was explained by Rev. Newton in an article in the Alaska-Yukon Magazine:

Several Considerations entered into the choice of the name. We wished to get far away from the church idea, the faintest suggestion that preaching and praying religion might be served up daily by stealth on the unwilling, (the religion of human sympathy and helpfulness is there all the time without any advertising of itself). The future church will be called St. George’s, and the dragon is a proper concomitant…[5]

The club house was painted in a bright red color that would be a trademark of the CR&NW Railway and solidified the Red Dragon name. The unpretentious building had an open fireplace and was stocked with magazines and writing materials. On Sundays, an altar was lowered from a landing above the rafters and the Red Dragon was transformed for church services and Sunday school.[6] The Red Dragon became a popular spot for the transient workers to recreate and opened seven days a week, night and day, it was accessible to all.

In January 1909, Eustace Paul Ziegler came to serve as the priest of the Red Dragon. Ziegler and the Red Dragon were a good match.  Understanding Rev. Newton’s vision, Ziegler scheduled activities and acquired magazines and books which led to the Red Dragon having the best selection of reading material in Cordova.[7] The Red Dragon gained in popularity with the charismatic Ziegler at the helm. He became the editor of the Alaskan Churchman and would often write about his experiences as priest of the Red Dragon.

In 1918, St. George’s Church was constructed on the church’s property just east of the Red Dragon.  Designed by Ziegler, the long-awaited church was consecrated on Easter Sunday, April 20, 1919.[8] A year earlier, a wood plank sidewalk was laid from the Red Dragon to the main street paid by the city of Cordova, the CR&NW Railway and by the women’s guild of the church.[9] In 1924, Ziegler decided to leave Cordova and the Episcopal Church to pursue a career as an artist.

In 1925, the Red Dragon began serving the community as a public library. In anticipation of the new reverend, work was done on the Red Dragon. New steps were built making the Red Dragon assessable by two streets, a new foundation for the building was completed and the building painted.[10]

The 1930s saw decreased production in the copper mines. The ore was largely depleted and Kennecott Mine closed in 1938. At that time, the railway also closed and Cordova saw a decrease in population. In 1944, the rectory which housed the reverend was sold and the current Rev. Mervin L. Wanner took up residence in the Red Dragon. It was at this time that the Red Dragon experienced modifications to be converted into a residence. A bedroom and “fine room for parish meetings” partitioned the small building.[11]

The 1950s were a time of growth for the congregation; and with growth comes change. The bookshelves which lined the Red Dragon were removed and the books were transferred to the Cordova library. The rafters were enclosed and the interior altered to make room for a parish hall and office for the priest. During this time, a chimney fire had also led to the demise of the stone fireplace. It was also at this time that the exterior of the Red Dragon was clad in green asbestos siding.[12]

The Good Friday Earthquake of 1964 had taken its toll on the town of Cordova, but luckily the Red Dragon was spared any significant damage.  However, later that year, the State Highway Department was planning a road widening project which would cut in to the bluff where the Red Dragon sits, as well as impact the building itself. Luckily, through protest, a compromise was reached and a retaining wall was erected so the Red Dragon continued to rest in its original place.[13]

In 1969, to raise money for the congregation, it was decided that the Red Dragon was to be converted into a “comfortable house”. From 1969-1978, the Red Dragon was rented out to six different families.[14]

In 1982, the Red Dragon Historic District was listed on the National Register of Historic Places. With that designation, the congregation was able to apply for Historic Preservation Grants-in-Aid program through the Office of History and Archaeology for the rehabilitation of the Red Dragon in 1983. The grant allowed the Red Dragon to return to its former self. The green asbestos siding was removed and wood siding painted the CR&NW red was replaced.  The interior walls were removed which opened up the space as it had been originally.[15]

Throughout its 100 year history, the Red Dragon has been an integral part of the community of Cordova. What started out as a social space for transient workers, remains a meeting place for the citizens of Cordova. This oldest remaining building of Cordova continues to tell the important story of mining and community in Alaska.

4      Legislative Authority for Technical Assistance

The National Park Service, through the legislative authority of the Historic Sites Act of 1935 and the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (as amended), is permitted to provide technical assistance to the owners of historic properties. The Historic Sites Act established cultural resource preservation as a national policy and assigned the Secretary of the Interior to carry out the mission. The act authorizes the NPS to administer the National Register of Historic Places program which includes inventory, evaluation, registration, and preservation treatment. Moreover, the act explicitly stresses technical assistance to and partnerships with states, local communities, and associations. This Condition Assessment Report and any additional assistance provided by the Alaska Regional Office of the National Park Service supports our mission to provide educational and technical assistance to preserve our nation’s cultural heritage.

4.1     Understanding The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties

In 1976, the Secretary of the Interior established standards for the purpose of advising federal agencies undertaking preservation work on properties listed, or eligible for listing, on the National Register of Historic Places. The standards are codified as program requirements which determine the appropriateness of proposed work on eligible or listed properties related to the following treatments: preservation, rehabilitation, restoration, and reconstruction. These standards were later adopted by state and local officials, historic districts, and planning commissions as a basis to review proposed preservation projects.

 

Accompanying the standards are guidelines for the treatment of historic buildings which were developed in 1977 to help in applying the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and provide general design and technical recommendations for individuals and agencies during the planning of a proposed project. Both the standards and guidelines are applicable to historic landscapes as well as related landscape features associated with an historic building. Together, the standards and guidelines assist the long-term preservation of a property’s significance through the preservation of historic materials and features. The information in this document is based on The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, & Reconstructing Historic Buildings.

 

Preservation Treatment

According to the standards established by the Secretary of the Interior, preservation is “the act or process of applying measures necessary to sustain the existing form, integrity, and materials of an historic property.”[16] The primary intent of preservation treatment is to protect and stabilize historic fabric through cyclical maintenance and repair thereby minimizing replacement and new construction. This treatment relies on the historic integrity of a property and strives to retain as much of the original character defining features as possible.

 

Rehabilitation Treatment

The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards recognize rehabilitation as “the act or process of making possible a compatible use for a property through repair, alterations, and additions while preserving those portions or features which convey its historical, cultural, or architectural values.”[17]

 

Restoration Treatment

In The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, restoration is defined as “the act or process of accurately depicting the form, features, and character of a property as it appeared at a particular period of time by means of the removal of features from other periods in its history and reconstruction of missing features from the restoration period.”[18]

 

Reconstruction Treatment

The Secretary of the Interior defines reconstruction as “the act or process of depicting, by means of new construction, the form, features, and detailing of a non-surviving site, landscape, buildings, structure, or object for the purpose of replicating its appearance at a specific period of time and in its historic location.”[19]

 

Maintenance

Routine maintenance is essential for the preservation of any structure, historic or otherwise, and unfortunately, misperceptions about the cost saving value of timely and routine maintenance abound. Maintenance costs money, requires time and energy, and worst of all, the work is typically not revealing or rewarding. But the importance of routine maintenance cannot be emphasized enough. Seemingly insignificant issues that plague all buildings can quickly expand to demand not only a considerable expense, but can drastically affect the structural and historic integrity of a building. If no other efforts to preserve a structure are employed, at the very least, a routine maintenance plan should be implemented.

 

Stabilization and Monitoring

Stabilization and monitoring may be considered sub-categories of maintenance and are recommended to be employed in conjunction with a thorough maintenance plan. Historic structures often sustain periods of neglect when an appropriate maintenance program is overlooked or non-existent. This, in turn, allows elements to begin to deteriorate. In some cases, elements can be stabilized through a process of repair or consolidation that prevents further deterioration. The stabilization process can be challenging, requiring skilled workers and financial capital. However, it preserves the historic fabric and prevents far more significant problems in the future. To determine what features require stabilization, affected areas should be closely monitored to determine the rate and severity of the condition. Monitoring is also helpful in prioritizing issues that need to be stabilized or in a worst case scenario, replaced with in-kind material.

 

Replacement Materials

The Secretary of Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties uses the term “in-kind” when referring to replacement materials. Deteriorated materials which cannot be preserved through an effort of repair or consolidation should be replaced in-kind, meaning the material has the same characteristics. For example, an original finished floor of a building consisting of clear, vertical grain, Douglas fir should be replaced with the same material. The use of knotty pine is not recommended because it alters the historic appearance of the floor. Siding should be replaced in-kind when possible or with comparable material of the same size, profile, and general appearance. Known hazardous materials, such as lead paint and asbestos, were a commonly used building materials during the Red Dragon’s historic period of significance. Contemporary replacement material in this circumstance should match the scale, pattern, and appearance of the historic material.

5      Site

 

Figure 1: Earliest known photograph of the Red Dragon ca. winter 1908. (Cordova Historical Society, 86-40-2)

 

Figure 2: Early photograph of the Red Dragon ca. 1910. (Cordova Historical Society, 70-51-31)

5.1     Historic Appearance

Historic photographs of the Red Dragon illustrate a site generally clear of large trees and underbrush at the time the building was constructed. The amount of clearing varied, with the north and east yards of the property clear cut, while its south and west portions included a line of large (50′-100′) trees standing approximately 40′-0″ from the building [

Figure 1 &

Figure 2].

 

Visitors accessed the Red Dragon by a wood boardwalk and steep ramp that led from the northern end of the property to the front door of the building on the north façade. Early site features, that are no longer extant, included a lantern that sat atop an approximately 6′-0″ long square post northeast of the Red Dragon and a pine tree snag that served as a telephone pole west of the building [

Figure 2].

 

Historically, other structures shared the site with the Red Dragon. The ca. 1910 photograph shows that a canvas tent[20]  with a stick frame and canvas roof sat along the tree line behind the Red Dragon. The tent’s gable roof was oriented east-west and a stove pipe projected from the east wall. A one-story, wood-clad structure with a shed roof sat to the west of the Red Dragon. To the east, a one-story, wood-clad building with a gable roof sat where a wood shed sits today [Figure 2]. The ca. 1908 photograph shows that this wood-clad structure originally sat northwest of the Red Dragon, approximately 5′-0″ from the building’s front entrance [

Figure 1].

5.2     Present Appearance

 

Figure 3: The Red Dragon Historic District (Site Plan, Historic American Buildings Survey, National Park Service, Jeremy Mauro & Mark Schara delineators, 2014)

Today, the Red Dragon and St. George’s Episcopal Church reside on a triangle-shaped lot bordered by an abandoned stretch of Lake Avenue to the north, Second Street to the east, and First Street to the southwest, with the Red Dragon in the northwest corner and the church in the northeast. The lot’s topography descends steeply to the south and west and is densely wooded. A concrete retaining wall is located along First Street. The Red Dragon’s longitudinal axis runs east-west; its primary façade faces Lake Avenue. Mature conifer trees and low to medium understory plants surround the building, concentrated at the south end of the lot and between the Red Dragon and Church. The large trees shade the lawn, while their roots lift the lawn causing swales and resulting in an uneven surface [

Figure 3].

 

Figure 4: The wood ramp leading to the north arctic entry. (NPS 2015)

A gravel area, measuring 40′-0″ x 27′-0″, at the north end of the property between the two buildings allows for limited parking. A 3′-11″ x 28′-3″ wood ramp runs west from the gravel area to provide access to the Red Dragon’s front entrance [Figure 4]. The surface of the ramp is covered in fishing net for a slip resistant finish. The ramp has a simple, pressure treated wood handrail supported by 4-1/4″ square pressure treated posts. The handrail is wrapped in holiday lights with orange and green extension cords running along the ground and up the side of the building to an exterior outlet. Evidence of posts from an earlier ramp remain on site just north of the existing ramp.

 

Figure 5: South arctic entry. (NPS 2015)

The small, enclosed rear entrance to the building is a contemporary addition [Figure 5]. The door was likely added when use of the building changed to accommodate a permanent resident; the enclosure was likely added during the 1983 rehabilitation. A photograph taken during the renovation[21] shows a five-panel, wood door accessed by exterior steps, but no enclosure. The existing arctic entry is east of center on the south wall, has a post-on-pier foundation, a gable roof, and is accessed by six wood steps necessitated by the sloping of the site to the south.

 

 

Figure 6: Oil tank sits northwest of north arctic entry. (NPS 2015)

Figure 7: Oil tank at northeast corner of building. (NPS 2015)

Northwest of the main entrance sits an oil tank painted red to match the building’s color [Figure 6]. A smaller tank is located at the northeast corner of the building and supports the kitchen stove [Figure 7]. This tank is also painted red to match the building.

 

Figure 8: Wood and storage shed east of Red Dragon. (NPS 2015)

A three-sided wood and storage shed with a corrugated metal shed roof, is located directly east of the building. It currently houses split firewood, cleaning appliances, and a barbeque grill [Figure 8].

5.3     Existing Condition

The site is generally overgrown. The 50′-100′ conifers around the building have branches within close proximity of the walls and roof and may restrict air circulation in those areas. The possible loss of a branch could cause damage to the building.

5.4     Recommended Treatment

1. Trim or remove trees and vegetation within 3′-0″ of the building and foundation.
2. Remove debris and abandoned materials around the perimeter of the building.
3. Remove the storage/wood shed and consider building a more permanent outbuilding. Neither the church nor Red Dragon has a wood-burning stove; there is no need to house wood on site. The structure and wood are attractive nuisances and contribute unnecessarily to fuel loads on the site that increase the risk of fire.
4. Remove the holiday lights along the ramp. If exterior lighting is necessary, consider installing permanent fixtures that are either recessed under the handrail and illuminate the ramp while concealing the bulbs or exposed fixtures that illuminate the space but do not distract from the historic context of the property.
5. Consider installing a French drain system along the roof’s drip line to minimize splash back, avoid moist soil under the building, and carry water away from the building’s foundation.
6. To comply with building code, maintain a positive grade away from the building, allowing 6″ between soil and the wood skirting of the building.

 

North Arctic Entry

Primary Space

South Arctic Entry

Figure 9: Reference to names of building spaces used in this document. (First Floor Plan, Historic American Buildings Survey, National Park Service, Jeremy Mauro & Mark Schara delineators, 2014)

6      Foundation

Figure 10: Access to crawl space. (NPS 2015)

Figure 11: Perimeter foundation post on concrete block pier. (NPS 2014)

Figure 12: Interior post-on-pier foundation with wood blocks bearing directly on grade. (NPS 2014)

6.1     Historic & Present Appearance

The crawl space below the main portion of the building is accessed through a 2′-0″ x 2′-10″ panel opening in the plywood skirting on the south wall [Figure 10]. The crawl space is vented through a 1′-2 1/4″ x 2′-0″ louvered opening on the south corner of the east wall. Historic photographs show that the original access door to the crawl space was on the south end of the east wall [

Figure 1 &

Figure 2].

 

Primary Space

The Red Dragon is supported by a post-on-pier foundation in a grid of 4 posts running north-south and 6 posts running east-west. Around the perimeter, concrete block piers topped with a 2″ x 4″ shim support 5-1/2″ square posts [Figure 11]. The concrete blocks and shims were added during the 1983 building rehabilitation. The interior piers are 2″ x 12″ untreated, wood blocks bearing directly on grade. These wood piers have deteriorated and the 5-1/2″ square posts they support are damp up to 16″ from the piers [Figure 12]. The 5-1/2″ square posts support 5-1/2″ square beams oriented east-west. There is no evidence of any fasteners connecting the posts, beam, or joists, nor is there evidence of a concrete pad beneath the wood piers. The crawl space has 3/4″ plywood skirting on all sides.

 

The grade in the crawl space increases in the north and west. Fiberglass insulation is stapled to the sub-floor between the floor joists. Pipes and vents from an abandoned HVAC system are extant. The crawl space is used as storage for building materials including: roof shingles, exterior siding, wood windows, and an enameled sink.

 

North Arctic Entry

The foundation under the north arctic entry was inaccessible. From the exterior, it appears to be on a post-on-pier foundation similar to the main portion of the building. It has 3/4″ plywood skirting on all sides.

 

South Arctic Entry

This portion of the building has a post-on-pier foundation with no skirting. Two concrete block piers support 3-1/2″ square posts. Each post has a 1-1/2″ x 3-1/2″ knee brace tying it to the floor beam.

6.2     Existing Condition

Figure 13: Drawing illustrating north arctic entry pulling away from the main portion of the building. (West Elevation, Historic American Buildings Survey, National Park Service, Jeremy Mauro & Mark Schara delineators, 2014.)

The foundation under the historic portions of the building is in poor condition and should be addressed immediately. The north arctic entry is visibly pulling away from the main portion of the building [Figure 13]. The interior foundation posts are failing due to contact with damp soil. The foundation of the south arctic entry is in good condition.

6.3     Recommended Treatment

1. Remove and appropriately store historic or valued materials in the crawl space prior to any foundation work. Dispose of unwanted debris; remove abandoned HVAC and materials.
2. To comply with building code requirements, remove soil in the northwest corner. Code requires 12″ between the ground and floor beams. Increasing the height will improve access for future work and increase the air circulation in the crawlspace.[22]
3. Develop a plan to implement the foundation structural recommendations made by Troy Feller, structural engineer, BBFM Engineers Inc. in the fall of 2014.[23]
4. Install a 10-mil reinforced plastic ground cloth in the crawl space ensuring that seams are overlapped by 6″ and adequately taped.

Consider installing treated plywood [Alkaline Copper Quaternary (ACQ)] over the foundation skirt framing and cover with Grace Ice and Water Shield moisture barrier. Using a rain screen product such as Benjamin Obdyke’s Homeslicker, install 5″ vertical-board, wood skirting to replace in-kind the skirting seen in historic photographs [

Figure 1 &

5. Figure 2]. Ensure to back prime the material.
6. If ground cloth is installed, include 1 square foot of net crawl space venting divided between the east and west walls of the skirting to comply with current code requirements. The vents should be placed in the south end of the east wall and the north end of the west wall skirting.[24]

7      Floor Assembly

 

Figure 14: Finished floor pattern with patches from abandoned HVAC system. (NPS 2014)

Figure 15: Rolled vinyl finished floor in kitchen and running south to rear exit. (NPS 2015)

7.1     Historic & Present Appearance

Primary Space

The floor structure is comprised of 5-1/2″ x 1-5/8″ joists at 24″ on-center, oriented north-south. The sub-floor consists of 7-1/4″ x 3/4″ Douglas fir shiplap oriented diagonally to the joists. The 3-1/4″ x 3/4″ Douglas fir tongue-and-groove finished floor was installed in a unique pattern that starts at the approximate center of the room and radiates outward creating ever-increasing squares [Figure 14].

 

The Douglas fir flooring was patched in three locations, providing evidence of an abandoned HVAC system [Figure 14]. The patches also illustrate where interior walls existed to provide private sleeping space during the decades when the building was used as a residence (1969-1978). These patches are 1′-0″ x 4-1/2″ and indicate were HVAC vents once penetrated the floor system.

 

In the kitchen and running south to the rear exit, a layer of plywood is laid over the Douglas fir floor boards and is covered with rolled vinyl finished flooring [Figure 15]. In the bathroom, the plywood is covered with 12″ vinyl tiles. A 1/4″ metal transition strip runs across the bathroom door threshold; a similar strip runs along the edge of the rolled vinyl finished floor to accommodate the transition from Douglas fir to vinyl.

 

The loft area has a plywood floor with a 2′-11″ x 1′-8″ access panel to a folding, wood attic ladder.

 

North Arctic Entry

The floor structure of this space was inaccessible. The finished floor is comprised of 3/4″ plywood.

 

South Arctic Entry

The floor is supported by 5-1/2″ x 1-1/2″ floor beams that run north-south. The beams are bracketed to a 5-1/2″ x 1-1/2″ ledger that runs along the south wall of the building. The floor beams are spaced 1′-5″ on-center and support 5-1/2″ x 1-1/2″ skip sheathing. The finished floor is comprised of 3/4″ plywood [Figure 15].

7.2     Existing Condition

Primary Space

The floor joists, sub-floor, and Douglas fir finished floor are dry and in good condition. There is no evidence of deflection or dry rot. The rolled vinyl flooring is in fair condition with damage evident in front of the south exit door.

 

North Arctic Entry

The condition of the floor structure is unverified, as the space was inaccessible. Water stains visible on the exterior plywood skirting, the height of grade along the exterior walls, and the sloped nature of the floor, indicate that the floor structure is in direct contact with soil and has been compromised by water damage. The plywood finish floor is in fair condition.

 

South Arctic Entry

This space is elevated approximately 4′-0″ above grade and is well ventilated without skirting. The joists and sub-floor are in good condition. The plywood finish floor is in fair condition with signs of wear from traffic and water.

7.3     Recommended Treatment

1. Develop a plan to implement the improvements needed to bring the floor assembly up to code, as recommended by Troy Feller, structural engineer, BBFM Engineers Inc. in the fall of 2014.[25]
2. Consider removing the vinyl flooring in the kitchen and bathroom and exposing the original Douglas fir floor boards.
3. Install 3-1/4″ x 3/4″ Douglas fir flooring in the north and south arctic entries to match the finished floor in the main portion of the building.
4. The recommended foundation work will permit access to the crawlspace under the north arctic entry. (See “Recommended Treatment” under Foundation, page 13) Assess the condition of the floor beams, joists, and sub-floor under the north arctic entry once accessible.

8      Wall Structure

8.1     Historic & Present Appearance

Figure 16: Exterior view, looking southwest, ca. 1980. (Cordova Historical Society)

Figure 17: Exterior view, looking southwest. (St. George’s Episcopal Church Records, Roll 2-11A, photographer unknown, 1983)

Figure 18: Detail of west wall of north arctic entry showing extant window opening. (St. George’s Episcopal Church Records, Roll 2-4A, photographer unknown, 1983)

Figure 19: Exterior view, looking southwest. (NPS 2015)

Primary Space

The primary space of the Red Dragon building measures 24′-7″ x 36′-6″ on the exterior and was constructed of 1-1/2″ x 3-1/2″ wall studs at ­­­24″ on center with a 3/4″ x 7-1/4″ diagonal sub-sheathing. The exterior is clad in 5-1/4″ horizontal shiplap painted “Farm House” red[26] with white corner boards. Both paint colors tested negative for lead paint.[27] By 1958, the exterior was covered in a green-grey, raked, asbestos shingle [Figure 16].^[28] During the 1983 rehabilitation, the asbestos shingles were removed and the shiplap siding was replaced in-kind where needed. All corner boards were replaced with shiplap boards that match the exterior cladding [Figure 17]. Based on historic photos, the corner boards were originally 4″ x 1/2″ flat boards with no profile [Figure 1 &Figure 2].

 

North Arctic Entry

The north arctic entry is constructed of wall studs spaced 16″-24″ on-center. The exterior is clad in 5-1/4″ horizontal shiplap painted “Farm House” red with white corner boards, matching the rest of the building. The east wall has a 1′-2 1/4″ x 2′-0″ louvered vent opening. The skirting wall below the north arctic entry is comprised of 1-1/2″ x 3-1/2″ studs with varying spacing. The exterior surface is sheathed with 3/4″ plywood. Evidence of an additional window can be found on the west wall of the north arctic entry. A 5′-2-1/4″ sill remains, painted red, to match the exterior siding. In photographs from the 1983 rehabilitation work, the full window opening and trim are visible [Figure 18].[29] It is unknown if the sash and trim are extant.

 

South Arctic Entry

The wall structure of the south arctic entry is constructed of 1-1/2″ x 3-1/2″ studs at 16″ on-center and is exposed on the interior. The exterior is clad in 5-1/4″ horizontal shiplap painted “Farm House” red with white corner boards, matching the rest of the building. There is no skirting.

8.2     Existing Condition

Primary Space

The wall structure of the primary space appears sound with no evidence of being out of plumb or having issues related to deterioration. The 1983 rehabilitation efforts included replacement in-kind of exterior cladding. The exterior walls show at least 3 different colors of red paint. There is evidence of an ivy vine that once climbed the exterior of the west wall. The building’s plywood skirting exhibits signs of moisture damage caused by both rising damp wicked from duff build-up around the building and also deep snow around the base of the building during the winter months. This damage is the most severe on the north wall where both the skirting and the bottom four rows of cladding are peeling, warped, and wet.

 

North Arctic Entry

The wall structure of the north arctic entry appears sound with no evidence of being out of plumb or having issues related to deterioration. The arctic entry’s plywood skirting is deteriorating from moisture contact and duff build-up. As a result, the skirting is in constant contact with the ground and moisture laden snow causing the boards to be saturated and frozen throughout the winter. The interior cladding is in good condition but requires cleaning, particularly on the north wall where the door configuration was changed.

 

South Arctic Entry

In general, the wall structure of the south arctic entry appears structurally sound. The siding materials on the east and west walls illustrate signs of excessive moisture with peeling paint and moss on the surface from roof runoff and splash back.

8.3     Recommended Treatment

1. Have lead paint tests performed by a certified hazardous materials tester prior to undertaking any work on the walls.
2. The existing, plywood skirting should be considered to have a short life span because of its constant exposure to moisture. The treatment recommendations for the building’s foundation (See “Recommended Treatment” under Foundation, page 13) will alleviate some of the impact from rising damp by allowing 6″ between the skirting and the ground. Back priming the boards and using a rain screen at installation will also extend the life of the boards. However, a routine maintenance schedule should be established that includes painting of the skirting (and entire building) every seven years.
3. The bottom four rows of exterior cladding on the north wall should be replaced in-kind.
4. The east and west walls of the south arctic entry should be evaluated for deterioration and replaced in-kind as needed. The peeling paint should be scraped and repainted.
5. The remains of the ivy vine on the west wall should be removed by scraping and light sanding. Mechanized sandblasting should not be used, as even the lowest setting will damage the boards and stone chimney.
6. The entire building should be repainted with at least two coats of Sherwin Williams “Farm House” red (SW2301).
7. Consider painting the window trim, rake boards, barge boards, front doors, and corner boards a dark color to match the historic photos of the building [Figure 1 &Figure 2]. To identify this color, consider working with an historical architect to conduct a paint analysis on the window trim, rake boards, or barge boards which are possibly original. The door and corner boards, which are known to be replacements, will not provide paint history.
8. Install the “THE RED DRAGON. FREE READING ROOM.” sign reproduction, constructed in 2015 based on historic photographs, on the east wall of the building north of the first floor window.

9      Interior Finishes

9.1     Historic & Present Appearance

 

Figure 20: Interior detail of fireplace along west wall. (St. George’s Episcopal Church Records, Roll 1-0, photographer unknown, 1983)

Figure 21: Detail of west wall showing beadboard cut along once-present fireplace cornice. (NPS 2015)

Figure 22: Measured drawing showing detailed fireplace cornice outline cut into beadboard and drawn to scale for ease of reproducing cornice dimensions. (Section, Historic American Buildings Survey, National Park Service, Jeremy Mauro & Mark Schara delineators, 2014.)

 

Figure 23: Tension rod running north-south across primary space at the height of the collar ties. (NPS 2014)

Primary Space

The interior wall surface is clad in a 3/4″ x 1-1/2″ varnished, horizontal beadboard with a 3/4″ x 8″ baseboard. Four radiant wall heaters sit along the baseboards of the north and south walls. During the 1983 rehabilitation of the building, an interior layer of faux, vertical board, wall paneling was removed, exposing the original beadboard [Figure 20].[30] The beadboard was restored and replaced in-kind where needed.^[31] On the west wall, the beadboard is cut to fit around the once-present cornice of the fireplace mantel. These cuts remain and could be used to replicate the cornice profile, if desired for future restoration work [Figure 21 &Figure 22]. The interior walls of the bathroom are covered in drywall painted yellow.

 

A 3/4″ tension rod with a turnbuckle runs north-south through the middle of the primary interior space at the height of the collar ties. This rod was installed by 1982, when an account of the renovation work was described in The Cordova Times.[32] Presumably, the rod was needed because the north and south walls were separating [Figure 23].

 

North Arctic Entry

Figure 24: Existing exterior door into north arctic entry and infill around door showing conversion from original double doors to single door. (NPS 2015)

The interior surface is covered with 3/4″ x 7-1/4″ shiplap sub-sheathing covered with 3/4″ plywood painted white. The north wall was infilled to convert the primary entrance from double doors to a single door [Figure 24].

 

South Arctic Entry

The wall structure of the south arctic entry is constructed of 1-1/2″ x 3-1/2″ studs at 16″ on-center and is exposed on the interior.

9.2     Existing Condition

Primary Space

The interior beadboard is in good condition, as is the drywall in the bathroom.

 

North Arctic Entry

The interior cladding is in good condition.

 

South Arctic Entry

The walls on the south artic entry have no interior finishes.

9.3     Recommended Treatment

1. Feasibility studies for the kitchen and bathroom may permit more period specific finishes and also allow the parish to program future uses. Evaluate the need for the existing bathtub, washing machine, and dryer. These amenities utilize valuable floor space. Consider their removal. Or, if they are required for church operations, weigh options that economize space. Consider installing a shower and stackable washer & dryer. Discuss options with an historical architect.
2. In the south arctic entry, add beadboard interior finish to match in-kind the existing beadboard in the primary space to reduce air infiltration. Because the space is not heated, insulation may not be necessary.
3. All interior wall surfaces should be cleaned with soap and water.
4. After cleaning, consider refinishing the beadboard as needed.
5. Based on the 2015 HABS drawings, restore the fireplace opening and reconstruct the decorative cornice surround and mantel.

 

Figure 25: Historic interior photograph showing original fireplace configuration and furnishings. (Cordova Historical Society, 93-21-1)

Figure 26: Historic interior photograph showing original fireplace configuration and furnishings. (Cordova Historical Society, 93-21-5)

6. Consider applying for a Cynthia Woods Mitchell Grant from the National Trust for Historic Preservation for an historic interior study to evaluate the finishes and furnishings of the building. The original furnishings are seen in historic photographs [Figure 25, Figure 26, Figure 44, Figure 45] and described in early accounts of the building by Reverends E.P. Newton and E.P. Ziegler. This information can be used to replicate the furnishings originally found in the Red Dragon.

10  Doors

10.1  Historic & Present Appearance

Figure 27: Existing main entry door into Red Dragon. (NPS 2015)

The Red Dragon building includes two exterior doors and four interior doors. The original main entry to the building was through double doors on the existing north arctic entry. Historic photographs show a pair of wood sash doors with a single-light over three horizontal inset panels. [Figure 1 &Figure 2] Today, this entry is in-filled to accommodate one metal door with a single, 3/4 light. This door has no trim on the interior and white-painted 5-1/2″ x 3/4″ trim on the exterior. The head trim extends past the vertical door trim 3″ on either side and has miter cut ends [Figure 27].

 

Figure 28: Interior doors between north arctic entry and primary space. The only original doors remaining in the building. (NPS 2015)

Figure 29: Detail of door handle on interior double doors between north arctic entry and primary space. (NPS 2015)

The pair of interior doors at the north arctic entry are the only original doors that remain in the building. They are wood sash doors with a single-light over three horizontal inset panels, matching the doors shown in historic photographs of the building’s exterior. These doors are 2′-8 1/2″ x 6′-11″ x 1-5/8″ and maintain their original decorative hinges and handles. They are painted “Farm House” red on their north side and cream on the south. They have a plain trim that is 5-1/2″ x 3/4″ and a 3″ threshold. [Figure 28 &Figure 29]

 

The door to the bathroom is a wood sash, five panel door painted cream. It has 1″ x 2-3/4″ trim painted white and a 1″ metal strip threshold.

 

Prior to the 1983 rehabilitation work, the rear of the building was modified by converting a window opening into a door opening. This was likely done when the building was converted to a residence in the 1940s. This door, which now leads to the south arctic entry, is a wood sash, five panel door that matches the door to the bathroom. On its north face is a continual sheet of 1/8″ plywood painted cream that covers the panels. The panels are exposed on its south face and painted white. This door has a 2″ x 5/8″ decorative trim on the interior of the door opening that is unique to the building. There is no trim around the south door opening; however, ghosting of the original window trim is still visible on the west side of the door opening.

 

 

Figure 30: Existing exterior door of south arctic entry. (NPS 2014)

The exterior door of the south arctic entry is a wood sash door with a single-light over an “X”-shaped panel. Faux window muntins are added to the exterior of the light, giving the appearance of a nine-light opening [Figure 30]. The door is 11″ off-center to the east. It is painted “Farm House” red on the exterior and unpainted on the interior, has a 5-1/2″ threshold, and plain 3/4″ x 3-1/2″ trim on the exterior that is painted white.

10.2  Existing Condition

The doors, in general, are in good condition. The pair of interior doors of the north arctic entry were adjusted in 2015 and now the east door is nailed closed (See “Recommended Treatment” under Accessibility, page 42). The interior door of the south arctic entry exhibits water damage to the two lowest inset panels. The plywood attached to the back of the door makes the damage inaccessible on that side.

10.3  Recommended Treatment

1. Consider having doors manufactured to match the original double doors at the north arctic entry, while meeting egress code requirements. Their design should be based on historic photographs and the existing interior double doors. This effort should include returning to the original door trim design.
2. Restore the original hardware of the interior double doors through a non-abrasive process. Remove the layers of paint in the gentlest means possible so as not to damage the detailing.[33] Use a gentle brush so no patina on the hardware is lost. Rehang the doors so they are both operable.[34]
3. Consider adding an astrigal to the double doors on the north face. This would provide weather proofing without detracting from their historic appearance.
4. Clean, prime, and paint all the wood doors. Consider a paint analysis of the original double doors as part of a Cynthia Woods Mitchell interior study grant application (See “Recommended Treatment” under Interior Finishes, page 22).
5. Remove the plywood on the south face of the interior door leading to the south arctic entry. Based on further assessment, replace in-kind the damaged inset panels.

11  Windows

11.1  Present Appearance

The Red Dragon has twelve window openings, ten of which are original to the building. The original openings are:

• 1 pair of hopper[35] sashes on the north wall over the kitchen sink,
• 3 pairs of hopper sashes along the south wall,
• 1 pair of hopper sashes on the north wall in the west corner,
• 2 pairs of sliding sashes that flank the fireplace on the west wall,
• 1 stationary pane centered on the east wall on the ground floor (this window opening originally housed a pair sliding sashes, identical to the existing sashes on the west wall),
• 1 double-hung window in the loft, and
• 1 opening on the west wall of the north arctic entry (it’s sash style is unknown)

 

Two sashes are not original:

• 2 multi-lite stationary sashes flanking the rear door on the south wall of the south arctic entry

 

Primary Space

Figure 31: Paired sashes on the north elevation with missing trim and modified window openings on the east wall. (NPS 2015)

 

Figure 32: Paired sliding sashes on the west wall flanking the fireplace and paired hopper sashes on the south wall. (NPS 2015)

Figure 33: Paired hopper sashes on the south wall. (NPS 2014)

Figure 34: Ghosting of original trim around window opening on south wall converted into exit door to south arctic entry. (NPS 2015)

Figure 35: Interior of the loft looking east and showing diagonal sheathing, beadboard, and boards across window opening. (St. George’s Episcopal Church Records, Roll 1-3, photographer unknown, 1983)

The building has three pairs of hopper sashes on the north and south walls that are unaltered. The north façade includes a pair of hopper sashes over the kitchen sink [Figure 31] and another in the northwest corner. The third pair is located in the southwest corner of the south wall [Figure 32]. These three window openings maintain two single-light sashes that are 2′-8 3/4″ x 2′-4″ and sit divided by a 6″ mullion. The window openings, except over the kitchen sink, have 4-3/8″ trim on the interior and 5-1/2″ trim on the exterior. The trim is flat and lacks ornamentation; the sashes and trim are painted white. The exterior trim around the window opening over the kitchen sink was replaced during the 1983 building renovation with exterior drop siding boards painted white. This includes the trim under the window sill and on either side. The head trim has been removed.

 

The remaining two window openings on the south wall are original to the building but were modified from their original configuration. In the center of the wall [Figure 33], a pair of sashes that were originally hoppers, matching dimension, trim, and paint of those described above, have been modified so that the sash on the west is stationary and the sash on the east is hinged at the window header and opens to the interior of the building as an awning window. This awning window is currently caulked closed and does not operate.

 

Located on the east end of the south wall, originally a pair of hopper sashes matching the others on the building. This opening was modified so that the east sash remains in place but is taped and covered by Styrofoam, and therefore, no longer operates. This sash is now located in the building’s bathroom. The sash and trim are painted yellow, matching the wall color in the bathroom. The west sash was removed and the opening was widened to accommodate the rear exit door. Ghosting of the original window trim is evident inside the south arctic entry along the west side of the door [Figure 34].

 

The west wall has two window openings that flank the fireplace. Each window opening has a pair of sliding, single-sashes [Figure 32]. The sashes are 2′-9 1/2″ x 2′-4 1/2″ and are surrounded by 4-1/2″ trim on the interior and 6″ trim on the exterior. The trim is flat and lacks ornamentation; the sashes and trim are painted white.

 

The east wall has two window openings [Figure 31]. On the ground floor, a single-light, triple-pane of glass is centrally located in the wall. It has no sash, but is held in place by a 3″ decorative trim on the interior and a 6″ flat trim on the exterior. This is an original window opening seen in historic photographs [Figure 1 &Figure 2], however, the current glass replaces an original wood sliding sashes that matched those found on the west wall.

 

The east wall also has a window in the gable end that opens to the loft. [Figure 31] Historically, this window was a double-hung, wood sash window with sashes of equal dimension. During the 1983 rehabilitation, the opening was enlarged to meet code for egress. The existing opening is 2′-8″ x 5′-5″ with a 3′-3″ operable, wood, bottom sash and a 2′-3″ fixed, wood, top sash. The opening has 4-1/2″ flat and squared trim on the interior that is unpainted and 4-3/4″ trim on the exterior that is painted white. An interior photograph from the 1983 rehabilitation project shows this window opening filled with horizontal boards. It also shows beadboard covering the wall to the height of the window sill [Figure 35]. This window is obscured by trees and scaffolding in all existing photographs of the exterior in the rehabilitation photographs.

 

North Arctic Entry

 

Figure 36: West wall of the north arctic entry with protruding window sill extant. (NPS 2015)

An extant, original window sill can be seen on the exterior of the west wall of the north arctic entry. It is 5′-2-1/4″ long and painted red to match the exterior siding. In photographs from the 1983 rehabilitation work, the full window opening and trim are visible [Figure 18].[36] It is unknown if the sash and trim are extant.

 

South Arctic Entry

Figure 37: Door and window configuration of the south wall of the south arctic entry. (NPS 2014)

The two windows not original to the building are on the south wall of the south arctic entry [Figure 37]. Four-light, stationary sashes flank the rear door. These sashes are painted white with 4″ trim on the exterior.

11.2  Existing Conditions

The windows of the Red Dragon are in good condition. However, many have been modified and are no longer operable. The window in the loft does open, however, the rail of the bottom sash is growing mold and should be cleaned. The only other window that opens in the building is in the southwest corner and is marked by an “exit” sign.

11.3  Recommended Treatment

1. Check that each sash opens properly. If sashes have been painted or caulked closed, cut with a razor blade making sure not to cut into the sash, sill, or trim.
2. Restore the original configuration of the hopper sashes in the center opening on the south wall. This includes rehanging the east sash so that it is a hopper rather than an awning opening.
3. Replace the contemporary window on the east wall with a double sash slider, as seen in historic photographs [Figure 1 &Figure 2]. Replace the interior trim of this opening with the plain, square, flat profiled trim that surrounds the other windows on the building.
4. Replace the trim on the exterior of the window over the kitchen sink with the plain, square, flat profiled trim that surrounds the other windows on the building.
5. Hang heavy curtains on the interior of the windows to provide additional energy efficiency to the building. This will also allow the Styrofoam blocks to be removed from the window openings and allow more daylight into the space.
6. Scrape and paint all the windows, sills, and trim (For paint color, see “Recommended Treatment #7” under Wall Structure, page 19).
7. In the loft, pull curtains away from the window to allow more air circulation. This will help prevent mold growth on the sash. Adding mechanical venting to the building will also increase air circulation (See “Recommended Treatment #3” under Mechanical Systems, page 37).

12  Roof

12.1  Present Appearance

 

Figure 38: Stove pipes piercing roof on east slope of north arctic entry and along west wall of the main gable ridge. (NPS 2014)

Figure 39: Original roof rafters and contemporary rafters with insulation between. (St. George’s Episcopal Church Records, Roll 2-2A, photographer unknown, 1983)

Figure 40: King posts, diagonals, and ceiling joists supporting the roof of the primary space. (NPS 2015)

Primary Space

The Red Dragon’s 11:12 pitched gable roof is oriented east-west and is clad in cedar shingles with 8″ to the weather. Today, the sub-roof is inaccessible due to interior finishes; however, according to the 2014 Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS) drawings [Figure 22], there is a 1-1/4″ space between the rafters and cedar shingles. An article in the Cordova Times from July 1985 discusses the structural repairs made to the roof. Although it does not specifically mention sub-sheathing, it suggests changes made in the roof structure. The building was deemed structurally sound with its “roof jacked up, the sides pulled in, and additional supports and rafters installed.”^[37] 1983 photographs taken during the renovation work show a tongue-and-groove sub-sheathing. Also visible are the original rafters and the larger, contemporary rafters that are offset about 2″ from the original [Figure 39].[38]

 

The contemporary rafters are 7-3/8″ x 1-1/2″, sit 2′-0″ on-center, and bear on the north and south stud walls. At the exterior, the rafter tails are plumb cut and the soffits are enclosed. Five modified king post trusses, consisting of 5-1/2″ x 1-1/2″ king posts, diagonals, and ceiling joists, are spaced 6′-0″ on-center; 4′-0″ from the west wall and 8′-0″ from the east wall [Figure 40]. On the interior, the roof is insulated between the rafters with a 1-1/2″ square trim board running the length of the rafters to hold the rigid insulation in place. The roof is pierced by a metal pipe at the west end of the ridge.

 

North Arctic Entry

The north arctic entry has an 11:12 pitched gable roof that ties into the north slope of the building’s main roof. It is clad in cedar shingles with 4-1/4″ exposure. The structure of the roof is inaccessible, however, based on the nail patterns of the gypsum board on the ceiling of the arctic entry, it is assumed that the ceiling joists are spaced irregularly 16″ to 24″ on-center. The roof is pierced by a metal pipe on the east slope [Figure 38].

 

South Arctic Entry

Figure 41: V-crimped metal roofing over the south arctic entry. (NPS 2015)

Figure 42: Drawing illustrating how the offset tie-in of the south arctic entry roof to the roof over the primary space. (South Elevation, Historic American Buildings Survey, National Park Service, Jeremy Mauro & Mark Schara delineators, 2014.)

With a 10:12 pitched gable roof clad in red v-crimped metal roofing, the south arctic entry roof ties into the south slope of the building’s main roof 9′-3″ east of center [Figure 41 &Figure 42]. The roof is supported by 1-1/2″ x 5-1/2″ rafters spaced 16″ on-center. The sub-sheathing is comprised of 1/2″ plywood.

12.2  Existing Condition

The existing roof is in poor condition and requires immediate attention. Moss, duff, and debris build-up has trapped moisture and caused leaks at the valleys around the north arctic entry. The ridge of the primary roof deflects 7″ at the mid-span and 8″ at the east end. The metal roof of the south arctic entry is in good condition with no evidence of leaks or deflection.

12.3  Recommended Treatment

1. Replacing the cedar shingles should be a priority. Consider returning to the original 47 courses of shingles on the primary roof and 24 courses of shingles on the north arctic entry as visible in historic photographs [Figure 1 &Figure 2]. This would decrease the amount of shingle exposed to the weather.
2. Check the condition of the sub-sheathing and replace in-kind, as needed.
3. Consider installing Grace Ice and Watershield and Cedar Breather over the plywood roof deck to allow the air to circulate under the shingles and improve the moisture control.
4. Replace all metal valleys around both arctic entry roofs. Consider using copper or zinc to help control moss growth.
5. Remove the non-historic stove pipe that pierces the roof of the north arctic entry; it is no longer in use. The pipe at the west end of the primary gable could remain, as it is original, even if it’s no longer used. Consider replicating its original cap. Consider adding a replica pipe on the north slope of the main roof, as seen in historic photographs [Figure 1,Figure 2,Figure 25,Figure 26, &Figure 45], to return the building’s exterior to its original appearance.
6. Continue consultation with Troy Feller, structural engineer, to improve the structural integrity of the roof framing. This effort may include sistering rafters and ceiling joist, adding fasteners to connections, and installing a plywood diaphragm to the sub-roof.
7. Develop a cyclic building maintenance schedule that includes cleaning the roof valleys of duff and debris. Use laundry detergent with bleach or consider installing a copper strip in the courses of roof shingles to kill moss.

13  Interior Furnishings

13.1  Present Appearance

Figure 43: Wall clock hanging on north wall of primary space directly west of double doors. (NPS 2015)

Figure 44: Interior view of the Red Dragon showing wall clock, pool table, and loft overhead. Date unknown but prior to building’s conversion into living quarters in the 1940s. (Cordova Historical Society, 93-21-4)

The wall clock [Figure 43 &Figure 44] is the only original furnishing that remains in the building. Original book shelves, tables, chairs, pool table, couch, and artwork no longer remain.

 

Figure 45: Interior detail of the fireplace in its original configuration with chafing dish and coffee percolator on wall shelf to north. (Cordova Historical Society, 06-24-1)

Figure 46: Detail of beadboard on wall north of fireplace. Ghosting of original wall shelf apparent. (NPS 2015)

Figure 47: Meteor Percolator, “The Chafing Dish” Manning, Bowman& Co. Catalog, 1907, p.39.

Faint ghosting and aligned nail holes in the beadboard on either side of the fireplace suggest the former location of a shelf to the north and hooks to the south. [Figure 46] Historic photographs confirm that the shelf was used to hold a chafing dish and coffee percolators while the hooks held fireplace tools [Figure 25,Figure 26,Figure 45, &Figure 47].[39]

13.2  Existing Condition

The wall clock appears to be in good to fair condition.

13.3  Recommended Treatment

1. Consult with a clock maker to maintain and preserve the time piece.
2. The existing contemporary furnishings such as pianos, tables, chairs, filing cabinets, couches, and bookshelves detract from the historic ambiance of this significant building. Consider removing unnecessary furniture to de-clutter the space and researching period furniture that replicates the original furnishings from the period of significance.
3. Update fixtures and finishes in the kitchen to improve efficiency. (See “Recommended Treatment #1” under Interior Finishes, page 22)

14  Mechanical Systems

14.1  Present Appearance

Historic photographs [Figure 1 &Figure 2], a first-hand account of the building by Reverends E.P. Newton,[40] and extant evidence suggest that a wood-burning fireplace along the west wall of the Red Dragon and a wood-burning stove in the northeast corner were the original heat sources for the building. A 7′-6″ x 5′-2″ portion of the stone chimney remains on the exterior of the west wall;[41] on the interior, a 3′-10 1/2″ x 5′-9″ poured concrete hearth remains. This hearth is surrounded by a patch of in-fill Douglas fir flooring that indicates that a larger hearth was once there. Based on historic photographs [Figure 45], the original hearth was constructed of one course of rowlock bricks capped with railroad rails with mitered corner joints and in-filled with a layer of brick. The facing of the fireplace was bordered with plain, concave legs that support the mantel. The beadboard finish on the interior of the west wall was cut around the decorative mantel and is still visible today. The mantel was capped with a metal chimney flue that tapered to a round pipe at the height of the ceiling joists. The pipe penetrated the roof at the peak.

 

Figure 48: Bathroom wall radiator and floor register visible under window on south wall. (NPS 2015)

The five radiant heaters along the north and south walls have been abandoned in place. The four in the primary space are 2′-2 1/2″ x 6-1/2″ x 5′-4″ and are painted a cream color. The fifth, a smaller heater of 2′-2 1/2″ x 6-1/2″ x 2′-4″, is located along the south wall of the bathroom [Figure 48].

 

A Toyostove Laser 73 oil heater that sits on the extant fireplace hearth along the west wall serves as the primary heat source for the building. After a chimney fire in 1954, the open fireplace was abandoned.^[42] Today, the fireplace is covered with gypsum board [Figure 40]; it is unclear what historic fabric remains behind the covering.

 

An abandoned forced air mechanical system is in place with a floor register visible in the bathroom and the duct work extant in the crawlspace. A 90-gallon hot water heater remains in the bathroom at the head of the shower. It is enclosed by a built-in cabinet that also provides linen storage. A Toyotomi OM-148 on-demand water heater sits along the east wall of the north arctic entry.

14.2  Existing Condition

The gypsum wall board finish around the fireplace makes it difficult to ascertain how much of the fireplace ornamentation remains in place and its current condition. The Toyostove heater is in good condition.

 

The radiant baseboard heaters and forced air furnace and ducting have been abandoned in place.

14.3  Recommended Treatment

1. Remove the gypsum board covering the fireplace to assess the extant ornamentation. Consider replacing in-kind the mantel, using historic interior photographs and the remnant profile information cut into the beadboard. Consider returning the fireplace to its original appearance, even if it no longer functions as a heat source for the building. Consider placing the Toyostove inside the hearth and allowing it to continue to heat the space.
2. Remove the abandoned forced air and radiant heat mechanical systems and associated ducting along with the water heater in the bathroom. Carefully repair the holes in the floor where registers were located using in-kind materials.
3. Consider applying for a National Trust for Historic Preservation grant for mechanical engineering. Consult with the mechanical engineer about the possibility of a Heating Recovery Ventilation system to circulate air in the building and the opportunity to update mechanical equipment to more compact, space-saving models.
4. If a new mechanical equipment requires roof venting, consider replicating the chimney and stove pipe illustrated in historic photographs [Figure 1 & Figure 2].

15  Electrical Systems

15.1  Present Appearance

The building’s electrical systems appear to have been installed in several different eras. Evidence of the original knob and tube system is visible but it has since been abandoned.

 

Figure 49: Ceiling-mounted light fixtures in the primary space installed during the 1983 rehabilitation. (NPS 2015)

Figure 50: Recessed fluorescent tube lights in the kitchen. (NPS 2015)

The primary space includes four, ceiling-mounted, suspended lights installed during the 1983 rehabilitation [Figure 49]. The fixtures were installed to replicate the original fixtures seen in historic photographs [Figure 25, Figure 26, & Figure 44]. Prior to the rehabilitation, fluorescent lights illuminated the space, attached to a drop ceiling that hung below the collar ties.[43] The kitchen includes recessed, ceiling-mounted, 4′-0″ fluorescent tube lights with plastic diffusers [Figure 50]. The bathroom has a five-bulb vanity light mounted over the sink.

 

The loft and north arctic entry have exposed bulbs on surface-mounted junction boxes that illuminate the space. There is no light in the south arctic entry.

15.2  Existing Condition

The existing wiring receptacles and switches appear to be functioning and the switches and lights were carefully installed, successfully concealing the wiring. The exposed plastic-coated wiring (romex) functions properly but the installation may not meet current code.

 

The ceiling-mounted fluorescent light fixtures in the kitchen provide adequate illumination but detract from the historic character of the building and create an institutional or commercial ambiance.

15.3  Recommended Treatment

1. Determine the long-term power use for the space. This determination will help calculate the number of receptacles and the power needed for the building and site. Are the washer and dryer needed? Will the appliances in the kitchen be updated, changed, or removed? Can permanent exterior lighting replace the existing holiday lights?
2. Consider consulting with a licensed electrical engineer or licensed electrician to inspect the electrical systems and make recommendations. Depending on the scope of the project, new wiring may be required. This work could be part of a grant application to the National Trust for Historic Preservation, paired with mechanical engineering design.
3. All splices in the wiring should be removed and wired into a junction box.
4. Consider upgrading the breaker panel and installing Ground Fault Circuit Interrupters (GFCI) on all circuits.
5. Consider replacing the existing fluorescent lamps in the kitchen by researching period appropriate light fixtures from historic photographs or catalogues.

16  Fire Suppression and Prevention

16.1  Present Appearance

The building is constructed almost entirely of wood and contains numerous combustible contents which create a considerable fuel package in the event of a fire. The building has few fire resistant finishes and there are several ignition sources including electrical equipment and a residential cooking range. Under the circumstances, the possibility of a fire spreading to engulf the entire building could take just minutes. The Cordova Fire Department may be relatively close, but the response time may not be quick enough to stop the fire after a matter of minutes.

16.2  Recommended Treatment

1. Consider consulting with a fire protection engineer to install an inconspicuous fire suppression system to protect the structure. A high pressure mist system may be an appropriate solution for the building because the impact of a release is minimized by mist rather than a full deluge of water.
2. Conduct routine inspections to ensure potential fire threats are abated. The use of space heaters or other items capable of starting a fire should be removed.
3. Routinely check fire extinguishers and ensure they are placed in conspicuous locations.
4. Install automatic fire detection devices. Ensure the units are tested on a frequent basis to ensure battery back-up is functioning.
5. Avoid the use of electrical power strips connecting numerous electrical appliances to one outlet.
6. Inspect the electrical systems frequently to ensure no imminent hazards are present.
7. Provide a UL-listed stove and ensure the adjacency requirements meet the manufacturer’s specifications.
8. Provide a master shut off switch for electrical equipment in the event of an earthquake or nearby fire to reduce the risk of ignition.
9. Plan accordingly for maintenance or repairs which involve activities that may pose a fire risk.
10. Do not use the crawlspace as a storage area for flammable materials. If no other storage is available, consider covering the bottom of the floor joists with sheet metal.
11. Schedule a tour of the building with the local fire department to identify threats and to gain familiarity with the space.

17  Accessibility

17.1  Present Appearance

Accessibility in the United States is a relatively new concern stemming from the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s. The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) is credited with establishing the first set of guidelines in 1961 to ensure that persons with disabilities could enter a public facility. The first law in the United States to ensure access for the disabled in the built environment soon followed and was The Architectural Barriers Act of 1968 (ABA). The ABA mandated that the ANSI guidelines be followed. Additional efforts regarding accessibility continued and culminated in the formation of The American’s with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) which provided the most comprehensive regulations to date in the U.S. or any other country. The ADA is the basis for nearly all accessibility guidelines today.

 

Modifying historic buildings to comply with the ADA has been a challenging design issue for building owners. The International Existing Building Code (IEBC) provides some allowances to preserve the historic integrity of a building but the code clearly requires the Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ) to make the final determination. The intent of the IEBC “is to provide flexibility to permit the use of alternative approaches to achieve compliance with minimum requirements to safeguard the public health, safety and welfare insofar as they are affected by the repair, alteration, change of occupancy, addition and relocation of existing buildings.”[44] Local and state building officials will require that the building be compliant with current code. There are, however, some allowances for historic buildings as code officials recognize that drastic changes would affect a building’s historic integrity.

 

Figure 51: (NPS)

17.2  Existing Condition

The Red Dragon currently does not meet the American’s with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990. The north arctic entry is accessed by an exterior ramp [Figure 19Error! Reference source not found.], however there is a 4″ step over the threshold into the primary space of the building. The south arctic entry has six steps down on the exterior [Figure 51].

 

Successful compliance with the ADA also requires meeting door width minimums of 32″ when open at 90 degrees. The primary door into the north arctic entry is 36″ and the interior double doors are 32″ each, making all three doors compliant. However, the egress doors on the south arctic entry and the restroom door do not meet the minimums. Further study is also required at the exits to determine the occupant load and exit width requirements. This can be determined through a detailed code study.

17.3  Recommended Treatment

1. Consult with an historical architect to prepare an accessibility study of the building. The report should highlight areas of concern and provide feasible options to comply with the code, if required, with as minimal impact as possible to the historic fabric and integrity.

18  Egress

18.1  Present Appearance

The Red Dragon has two exits; the primary entry through the north arctic entry and a secondary exit through the south arctic entry.

 

The building is an assembly space used for classes and meetings with moveable chairs and tables where food and drinks may be served. As such, the building would be considered an Assembly Occupancy by the International Building Code. The International Building Code defines a variety of occupancy types based on the intended use and number of occupants in a space. The Occupant Load and Egress requirements are calculated based by several factors. The scope of this report does not include a code study, but meeting code egress requirements is an important consideration as this project moves forward.

18.2  Existing Condition

Currently, the building’s two exits which meets the minimal number required for egress code compliance.

18.3  Recommended Treatment

1. Consider consulting with an historical architect to ensure egress requirements for the Red Dragon are code compliant.[45]

19  Historic Building Zones

All four of the treatment approaches identified by The Secretary of Interior Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties require identification and retention of the building’s character defining features. Character defining features are those aspects of a building’s form, materials, and detailing that are important in defining the building’s historic character.

 

There are several important factors to consider when deciding which treatment option is appropriate for an historic building. These factors include the relative historic importance of the building or its features, current condition and level of historic integrity, current or proposed use, and mandated code requirements. These factors can vary between different façades and spaces within a single structure.

 

Establishing a hierarchy of significant zones of the Red Dragon, both interior and exterior, assists in determining how The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards should be applied to the building. For the purpose of this report, the building has been divided into four zones: Primary, Secondary, Contributing, and Non-Contributing.

 

Primary:

Primary zones are those considered to be the most important to the historic significance of the building. These zones contain the building’s most outstanding architectural features. For the Red Dragon, these zones include the north and east elevations, and the interior of the open area of the primary space. The massing and form of the north arctic entry may also be considered primary due to its original construction date. The interior of the north arctic entry, however, has been altered.

 

Primary spaces should be treated in accordance with The Secretary of the Interior’s standard for preservation. Where significant alterations have occurred, the space should be restored in accordance with the restoration standards. With the exception of restoration work, further alterations of these spaces should be avoided.

 

Secondary:

Secondary zones are areas considered historically important, but slightly less significant than those areas listed as primary. For the Red Dragon, these spaces include the west and south façades, the site, the loft, and the north arctic entry interior. The west façade, while significant, is not part of any view shed. Characteristics of the west wall should remain intact, such as the stone chimney, exterior cladding, and paired sliding windows. The south façade has been altered to include egress through the south arctic entry. Characteristics of the south wall should remain intact, such as the remaining window configuration and exterior cladding.

 

The minimum standard for treatment of secondary zones should be The Secretary of the Interior’s standard treatment for rehabilitation. This treatment approach acknowledges that changes to the spaces have already occurred and that further alterations may need to occur in order to allow the building to continue to serve its purpose. However, these areas are still significant and further alteration should be avoided and character defining features should be preserved where possible.

 

Contributing:

Contributing zones are those areas which contribute to the overall significance of the building but are less prominent than the more significant spaces. For the Red Dragon, these spaces include the the kitchen and the bathroom.

In 1944, the building was altered to provide living space for Father Mervin L. Wanner.[46] It is assumed that at this time, the bathroom and kitchen were established at the east end of the primary space, which was previously one open room. This modification is more than 50 years old and is considered historic by the standards set in the 1966 National Historic Preservation Act (as amended).

 

Contributing spaces should also be treated in accordance with Secretary of the Interior’s standard treatment for rehabilitation. More modifications may be acceptable in these areas than in more significant areas, but care should be taken to preserve the character defining features of the spaces.

 

Non-Contributing:

Non-contributing zones include utilitarian spaces that do not contribute to the building’s historic significance and spaces that have either been added or altered to the extent they have lost their historic character. In the Red Dragon, these spaces include the crawlspace and the south arctic entry.

 

Non-contributing spaces are governed by the Secretary of the Interior’s standards only to the extent that actions within these spaces might impact the more significant zones of the building. Although aspects of the foundation contribute to the history of the building, the crawl space is not visible and provides limited or no capacity to function. Alterations, if possible, may be suitable in these areas to improve the functionality of the building without jeopardizing the historic appearance.

20  Character Defining Features

A building’s character defining features are the attributes that make it unique. The distinguishing characteristics of a property focus on the building’s overall shape, materials, craftsmanship, decorative details, and interior spaces, but also on the features and various aspects of a property’s site and environment.

20.1  Exterior

Building Form

• Rectangular plan
• Steep (11:12) pitched gable roof with 47 courses of cedar shingles
• Centrally located arctic entry on north with a steep (11:12) gable roof with 24 courses of cedar shingles
• 5-1/4″ painted, horizontal shiplap exterior cladding with 4″ x 1/2″ flat corner boards with no profile

Fenestration

• Centrally located windows at east façade and grouping of equally sized windows at north and south façades
• Equally spaced windows flanking the stone chimney on west façade
• Paired, one-by-one, wood sash, sliding windows
• Paired, one-by-one, wood sash, hopper windows divided by a 6″ mullion

20.2  Interior

Primary Space

• Open floor plan
• Ornate fireplace surround with decorative mantel
• 1-1/2″ varnished, horizontal beadboard with a 3/4″ x 8″ baseboard
• 3-1/4″ x 3/4″ Douglas fir tongue and groove finished floor
• Modified king post trusses, made up of 5-1/2″ x 1-1/2″ king posts, diagonals, and ceiling joists spaced 6′-0″ on-center

North Arctic Entry

• Pair of 2′-8 1/2″ x 6′-11″ x 1-5/8″ wood sash doors with a single-light over three horizontal inset panels
• The original decorative hinges and handles on interior paired doors

21  Additional Planning & Funding

21.1  Planning Documents

Along with the recommended design work by engineers, historical architects, and specialists previously mentioned, additional studies should be considered as preservation planning continues for the Red Dragon. These additional studies are important pieces in the planning process and should be undertaken as early as possible to provide a concise direction and a long range view of preservation of the building as a whole.

 

Historic Structure Report

Historic Structure Reports (HSR) provide a detailed overview of a building’s history, construction, and preservation concerns to help guide the owner in the formation of a preservation plan. HSRs may vary depending on the complexity of a resource, but typically include a history detailing the building’s development, significant organizations or personalities associated with it, changes over time, and a physical description. This component of the project usually contains period photographs, newspaper articles, and other significant findings that contribute to the developmental history of the building. HSRs typically include a detailed condition assessment and a recommended treatment section which details a road map for how the building may be preserved.

 

Historic Structure Reports benefit an historic resource because they become a key reference document for the owner and consultants embarking on the preservation plan.

 

Hazardous Materials Assessment

Consulting with an environmental engineer or environmental company to conduct a hazardous materials assessment is highly recommended. Identifying hazardous materials early in a project is beneficial because abatement solutions can be included in the overall schedule of the construction project. Locating hazardous materials such as asbestos, lead paint, or contaminated soil in the middle of a project can disrupt the construction schedule and be very costly.

 

International Existing Building Code

Consulting with an historical architect who is familiar with the International Existing Building Code may be advantageous for the preservation of the Red Dragon. The intent is not to avoid life safety code concerns, but to look closely at allowances that are permitted by the code for existing historic structures. The allowances will require review by the local Authority Having Jurisdiction, but understanding what may be permissible will be important to initiate that discussion.

 

Level-1 Fire Analysis

According to a Level-1 Fire Analysis report of the historic St. Nicholas Church in Juneau Alaska, “The speed and totality of a fire’s destructive forces make it one of the most significant threats to historic buildings. The adverse impact of environmental factors, insects, and moisture can often be stabilized or reversed, but a fire will cause irreversible damage and may completely obliterate a structure and its contents within one or two hours.”[47] An analysis of this kind includes an inspection by a fire suppression engineer and results in a report that outlines the fire safety concerns seen on site with recommendations for mitigation.

21.2  Historic Preservation Funding

When seeking grant funding, it is important to remember, depending on the granting organization, that religious organizations may be ineligible recipients. By partnering with a local non-profit, possibly the Cordova Historical Society, the Red Dragon can be eligible for funds that would not be available to the local parish or Episcopal Diocese.

 

National Trust for Historic Preservation

The National Trust Preservation Fund grant provides non-profits with financial assistance for preservation planning or preservation emergencies (immediate stabilization requirements) from $500 to $5,000. The grant funds must be matched 1:1. This grant is ideal for hiring professional consultants such as historical architects or engineers. Grants are awarded annually in three competitive rounds: February 1, June 1, and October 1. The application materials can be found at the National Trust’s website.

 

Possible Red Dragon projects that could be funded with support from the National Trust Preservation Fund: Electrical & mechanical schematic designs, Egress & building code compliance, Hazardous materials assessment, and Level-1 fire analysis.

 

Also from the National Trust for Historic Preservation are grants from the Cynthia Woods Mitchell Fund for Historic Interiors. These grants are available to assist in the preservation, restoration, and interpretation of historic interiors. This funding source is ideal for hiring an historic interior’s specialist to create an Interiors Study Report outlining the history of the Red Dragon’s interior finishes. This is done through field analysis and conceal item investigations, along with archive research, private collection research, and oral interviews. The report can then be used to inform future rehabilitation, maintenance, and preservation planning. The grant funds must be matched 1:1 and generally range from $2,500-$10,000. Additional information can be found at the National Trust’s website.

 

Alaska Association for Historic Preservation

The Alaska Association for Historic Preservation (AAHP) is an Anchorage-based non-profit supporting historic preservation throughout the state. In 2014, the Red Dragon & St. George’s Episcopal Church were enumerated on the AAHP’s “10 Most Endangered Properties” list which helps raise awareness for historic buildings. Properties successfully listed are eligible to apply for a grant of up to $5,000 which may be used for bricks and mortar projects or to match other grants. Due to lack of funding, the AAHP did not offer the grant for properties listed in 2014. Those listed will be eligible to compete for the grant in 2015. Visit the AAHP website for more information.

 

Alaska Historical Commission

In anticipation of the 2017 100th anniversary of Alaska statehood, the Alaska Historical Commission (AHC) is offering a matching grant for commemoration projects that will contribute to understanding the history and significant events of Alaska’s history. Eligible projects include historical research and publications, restoration of significant historic properties, and heritage tourism development and information services. The Red Dragon was awarded an Anniversaries Grant in 2014 for structural engineering, the writing of this condition assessment, and the purchase of roofing materials. Once the scope of work for the 2014 Anniversaries Grant is complete, the Red Dragon is eligible for additional AHC funding. More information can be found on the Alaska Historical Commission’s website.

 

Alaska Humanities Forum

The Alaska Humanities Forum (AKHF) supports humanities-related projects with general and mini grants. Considering history-related projects that will support the overall preservation of the Red Dragon may be appropriate. Visit the AKHF website for more information.

 

Certified Local Government Grant Program

The Alaska Office of History & Archaeology administers the Certified Local Government (CLG) Program which supports grant funding when available. Cordova is a CLG and in 2015 the Red Dragon was awarded a CLG grant for foundation stabilization and roof replacement. Once this work is complete, an application for the Red Dragon could help support the preservation planning effort, including hiring professionals for design related work. Visit the Office of History & Archaeology website for additional information.

 

State of Alaska

The State of Alaska Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development Division of Community and Regional Affairs Grants Section administers Designated Legislative Grants. Communicating with your legislative representative about a grant for the Red Dragon is highly recommended. The State Legislature has eliminated the requirement for narrative and financial quarterly or monthly reporting for any grant of $50,000 or less. Drafting a grant request for this amount streamlines the project. Larger requests are also recommended, however they require administration. Visit the state Department of Commerce website for more information.

 

22  Appendix

22.1  BBFM Engineers, Inc. Red Dragon Repairs Sheet Set (2015) & Site Visit Report (2014), Troy J. Feller, Professional Engineer

22.2  Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS AK-241)

 

[1] Nielsen, Nicki J. and Michael S. Kennedy. “Red Dragon Historic District (AHRS #COR-170)” National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form. Episcopal Diocese and ADP-OHA, Anchorage, Alaska, August 31, 1982.

[2] “The Eyak People.” Retrieved from http://cordovamuseum.org/history/people-of-the-region,  on 21 September 2015

[3] Caldwell Hawley, Charles. “A Kennecott Story.” University of Utah Press, 2014.

[4] Newton, E.P. “The Red Dragon of Cordova”, Alaska-Yukon Magazine, December 1910.

[5] Newton, E.P. “The Red Dragon of Cordova”, Alaska-Yukon Magazine, December 1910.

[6] Newton, E.P. “The Red Dragon of Cordova”, Alaska-Yukon Magazine, December 1910.

[7] Nielson, Nicki J. The Red Dragon and St. George’s: Glimpses into Cordova’s Past. Fathom Publishing Company, Cordova, Alaska 1983.

[8] “Dedicate Episcopal Church Tomorrow”, The Cordova Daily Times, April 19, 1919, p. 8.

[9] Ziegler, E.P. “Cordova Opportunities”, The Alaskan Churchman, August 1917, p. 110.

[10] The Alaskan Churchman, July 1925, pp. 79-80

[11] The Alaskan Churchman, February 1945, pp.6-7.

[12] Hodgkins, Barbee. “The Red Dragon’s Birthday”, The Alaskan Churchman, June 1958, p. 16

[13] St. George’s Memorial Episcopal Church Records, Cordova, AK

[14] Grabinska, Kornelia. “Red Dragon was once center of social activity here” The Cordova Times, August 17, 1978, pp. 9-10.

[15] St. George’s Memorial Episcopal Church Records, Cordova, AK

[16]            “Preserving,” The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties website, http://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/four-treatments/standguide/preserve/preserve_index.htm, accessed 17 February 2015.

[17]            “Rehabilitating,” The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties website, http://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/four-treatments/standguide/rehab/rehab_index.htm, accessed 17 February 2015.

[18]            “Restoring,” The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties website, http://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/four-treatments/standguide/restore/restore_index.htm, accessed 27 February 2015.

[19]            “Reconstructing,” The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties website, http://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/four-treatments/standguide/reconstruct/reconstruct_index.htm, accessed 27 February 2015.

[20]            In a letter, dated 11 May 1958, to Lewis Hodgkins, reverend of the parish during the 1950s, E.P. Ziegler writes, “I wish I were as rich and prosperous now as I was at that time, getting $750 a year and living in the Red Dragon- a tent beside it. The Red Dragon and Cordova paid me more than I can express.” (Ziegler, E.P. Letter to: Lewis Hodgkins (St. George’s Memorial Episcopal Church) 1958 May 11, 1 leaf. Located at: St. George’s Memorial Episcopal Church Records, Cordova, AK)

[21]            No known photographer, “Cordova’s Red Dragon Renovation” Photographs, 1983. Images: Roll 2-4A, Roll 2-10A.

[22]            “2304.11.2.1 Joists, girders [floor beams] and subfloor,” 2009 International Building Code (Country Club Hills, IL: International Code Council, Inc., 2009), 465. “Where… wood girders [floor beams] are closer than 12 inches (305 mm) to the exposed ground in crawl spaces … the floor construction (including posts, girders [floor beams], joists and subfloor) shall be of naturally durable or preservative-treated wood.”

[23]            “Red Dragon Repairs S1-S5,” BBFM Engineers, Inc., Anchorage, AK. Drawn by CMS, checked by TJF, 31 May 2015. See Appendix 1, page 31.

[24]            “1203.3 Under-floor ventilation” and “1203.3.2 Exceptions,” 2009 International Building Code (Country Club Hills, IL: International Code Council, Inc., 2009), 271. “The space between the bottom of the floor joists and the earth under any building…shall be provided with ventilation openings through foundation walls…Such openings shall be placed so as to provide cross ventilation of the under-floor space.” “…The minimum net area of ventilation openings shall not be less than 1 square foot for each 150 square feet of crawl-space area.” “The total area of ventilation openings is permitted to be reduced to 1/1,500 [square feet] of the under-floor area where the ground surface is covered with a Class I vapor retarder material and the required openings are placed so as to provide cross ventilation of the space.”

[25]            “Red Dragon Repairs S1-S5,” BBFM Engineers, Inc., Anchorage, AK. Drawn by CMS, checked by TJF, 31 May 2015. See Appendix 1, page 31.

[26]            Based on extant paint samples taken from buildings in Kennecott, this Sherwin Williams color (SW2301) is known to provide the best match to the historic red paint used at Kennecott Copper Mine.

[27]            Test performed using a 3M Lead Check Swab on April 30, 2014 by National Park Service Historical Architect Grant Crosby, and should not be considered conclusive evidence that no lead paint is present.

[28]            Barbee Hodgkins, “The Dragon’s Birthday,” The Alaskan Churchman, June 1958, Vol. LII Number 2, published Fairbanks, AK, pp. 15-16.

[29]            No known photographer, “Cordova’s Red Dragon Renovation” Photographs, 1983. Images: Roll 2-4A, Roll 2-5A.

[30]            No known photographer, “Cordova’s Red Dragon Renovation” Photographs, 1983. Images: Roll 1-0, Roll 1-7, Roll 1-8, Roll 1-9, Roll 1-10.

[31]            No author, “Picnic, open house to fete Red Dragon,” The Cordova Times, July 11, 1985.

[32]            No author, “Picnic, open house to fete Red Dragon,” The Cordova Times, July 11, 1985.

[33]            It is important to first test the paint for lead. If lead is found, try PreTox or LeadTox brand paint strippers, products that render lead paint harmless and allow it to be safely diposed of in regular trash.

[34]            See National Park Service Preservation Brief 6: Dangers of Abrasive Cleaning to Historic Buildings by Anne E. Grimmer for further instructions on non-abrasive cleaning. http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/briefs/6-dangers-abrasive-cleaning.htm

[35]            A hopper window’s sash tilts into the space with hinges on the window sill.

[36]            No known photographer, “Cordova’s Red Dragon Renovation” Photographs, 1983. Images: Roll 2-4A, Roll 2-5A.

[37]            No author, “Picnic, open house to fete Red Dragon,” The Cordova Times, July 11, 1985.

[38]            No known photographer, “Cordova’s Red Dragon Renovation” Photographs, 1983. Images: Roll 1-00, Roll 1-0, Roll 1-1, Roll 1-3, Roll 1-6, Roll 1-7, Roll 2-0, Roll 2-0A, Roll 2-1A, Roll 2-2A, Roll 2-3A.

[39]            E.P. Newton references the coffee percolator and chafing dish in his description of the Red Dragon in a December 1910 Alaska-Yukon Magazine article, “…when storms were raging we have up our coffee pot and chafing dish into commission, and with such viands as we could scrape together served a light luncheon to the crowd, that none of us need to forsake the cozy hearthstone, and face the storm.”

[40]            E.P. Newton, “The Red Dragon of Cordova,” Alaska-Yukon Magazine, December 1910, pp. 403-404.

[41]            Written in 1982, the National Register nomination for the Red Dragon Historic District described the fireplace and chimney, “The original chimney had to be rebuilt in 1956-1957, after it fell down; with the second one now covered up (and used for a Franklin stove) in the original location. Parts of the original chimney are still visible on the exterior wall.” Nicki J. Nielson and Michael S. Kennedy, “Red Dragon Historic District (AHRS #COR-170),” National Register of Historic Places, Cordova, Valdez-Cordova, Alaska, National Register #82004899.

[42]            Barbee Hodgkins, “The Dragon’s Birthday,” The Alaskan Churchman, June 1958, Vol. LII Number 2, published Fairbanks, AK, p. 15.

[43]            No author, “Picnic, open house to fete Red Dragon”, The Cordova Times, July 11, 1985.

[44]            “101.3 Intent,” 2009 International Existing Building Code (Country Club Hills, IL: International Code Council, Inc., 2009), 1.

[45]            “308.1 Historic Buildings,” 2009 International Existing Building Code (Country Club Hills, IL: International Code Council, Inc., 2009), 19. “The provision of the code relating to the construction, repair, alteration, addition, restoration, and movement of structure, and change of occupancy shall not be mandatory for historic buildings where such buildings are judged by the building official to not constitute a distinct life safety hazard.” The Authority Having Jurisdiction in Cordova will have to approve the historic nature of the narrow egress doors.

[46]            Barbee Hodgkins, “The Dragon’s Birthday,” The Alaskan Churchman, June 1958, Vol. LII Number 2, published Fairbanks, AK, p. 15.

[47]            Heritage Protection Group, St. Nicholas Russian Orthodox Church Fire Protection Analysis, June 2010.