|

CHARLOTTE
ARCHITECTURE: Design Through Time Part 1
by Dr. Thomas W. Hanchett
Architecture is many things. It encompasses the technology of building,
the assembly of bricks and wood, glass and steel. It includes the
organization of spaces inside and outside of structures so that activities
flow easily. It also involves the artistic creation of visually pleasing
forms and areas. Architecture, it may be said, is walk-in sculpture.
This essay is largely concerned with this last facet of architecture. It
traces the evolution of Charlotte's built environment and attempts to
understand why the look of the city has changed over time. To a large
extent, the appearance of any city is determined by national and
international trends, architectural fashions that fade in and out of style
much as clothing fashions come and go. 1 The pendulum of American
architecture has periodically swung from simplicity to complexity and back
again.
The symmetrical, classically trimmed houses and stores of the late
eighteenth and early nineteenth century gave way to increasingly complex,
asymmetrical Victorian era buildings after the Civil War. At the very end of
the nineteenth century, Victorian complexity abruptly went out of fashion
and the United States rediscovered Colonial forms and invented other
straightforward architectural modes. The 1920s saw a return to complexity
and artifice, especially in the quaint Tudor Revival style imported from
Europe. By the early 1950s the pendulum had swung back to stark simplicity
with the popularity of International style commercial buildings and
a-historic Ranch houses.
The changing national ideas of what constitutes a beautiful building
apply to all cities, yet each looks different. The architecture of a place
inevitably reflects its location, its history, its economy, and its people.
Charlotte is no exception to this rule.
Charlotte's architectural history speaks of a prosperous and conservative
city. Since the opening of the New South era after the Civil War, Charlotte
has been playing catch-up, wanting to be recognized as a big city. Leaders
have perpetually looked around to see what other places have built, then
copied it. As a consequence, the city has always been at least a decade
behind the prevailing thought, even in the present era of instantaneous
communication.
The bankers, developers, and business managers who have determined
Charlotte's architecture have built more for image and investment than for
function. The same generation that commissioned miles of tree-lined streets
in
Dilworth and
Myers Park in order to emulate big-city suburbs, for instance,
blithely chopped down the trees that lined Tryon Street with exactly the
same reasoning. Even the finest buildings have seldom lasted their natural
life in Charlotte; less is left of the city's heritage than would be
expected even with its rapid growth. Charlotte's continuous prosperity has
meant that as soon as a structure or area loses its image of newness, it is
likely to be replaced. No county courthouse has outlived the generation that
erected it. Barely a handful of the grand mansions built for Charlotte's
wealthy before 1910 survive in the 1980s. Even before all the lots were sold
in elite Myers Park, hailed as the finest suburb south of Baltimore, city
fathers zoned much of it for redevelopment. Charlotte has shown little
reluctance to spend money for things of beauty, hiring some of the nation's
top planners and architects. But, like a five-year-old, it has been quick to
discard its new toys.
The rapid changes in the city do not mean that it has no architecture of
historic importance, however. On the contrary, however, it has some of North
Carolina's finest buildings and neighborhoods. Charlotte's most historic
architecture today dates from the 1890s through the 1920s when the city took
the lead among Carolina urban centers, assuming the place as a financial and
management center that had been long held by august Charleston.
Charlotte destroyed its antebellum mansions in the 1950s. It demolished
miles of Victorian houses in the early 1970s even as the rest of America
experienced a boom in Victorian renovation. It is not yet clear that
Charlotte will avoid making the same mistake with its New South
neighborhoods, its early skyscrapers, stores and mills.
II. The Colonial and Antebellum Period:
Vestiges of pre-Victorian building patterns in Charlotte are few. The
frame and brick store buildings that made up the heart of the early village
survive only in photos and drawings. The only remaining dwellings are those
that originally stood farms outside the hamlet, and have been subsequently
incorporated into the city.
Tradition and a few surviving rural examples indicate that log
construction was the natural expedient for the Scotch-Irish and German
immigrants to this timber-rich land. Charlotte architect Jack Boyte has
written that structures of hewn timbers ". . .housed families, sheltered
animals, protected farm equipment and produce, and enclosed all community
activities, including churches." 2 Well into the nineteenth
century, newcomers often built their first dwellings of logs, even when
longer-established neighbors already had residences of more expensive timber
framing and sawn boards.
A few of the most successful members of the county's settling generation
were able to erect more substantial and permanent houses that echoed the
traditions of the mid-Atlantic colonies whence they had come. One of these
dwellings survives today, the only pre-Revolutionary structure in the
county. Hezekiah Alexander, a prosperous farmer and community leader who is
said to have signed the Mecklenburg Declaration of Independence, had a solid
stone house built on his land east of the village in 1774. Its four room
plan, stone work, and general character resemble the great stone houses of
piedmont Cecil County, Maryland, from which Alexander had emigrated.

Hezekiah Alexander House
More buildings survive from the post-Revolutionary decades in the county,
and they give an indication of the growing plantation economy of the era.
The model for much of the architecture of the early nineteenth century was
directly or indirectly that of ancient Greece and Rome. The first
post-Revolutionary style, aptly named "Federal", drew on the work of a pair
of English designers, the Adam Brothers, who had adapted the elegant,
orderly, symmetrical forms of Roman architecture to the requirements of 18th
century housing. In the United States the delicate Adamesque trim soon gave
way to the more robust Greek Revival, derived directly from Grecian temple
architecture, but buildings retained their symmetrical forms. Larger houses
in the period were often two stories tall with a gable roof and a central
entry, and they were usually painted white to recall the stone structures of
Greece.
Two frame houses in the present day city illustrate these tendencies.
Rosedale, at 3427 North Tryon Street, was built about 1800, and for many
years was the seat of the William Davidson plantation. It is made up of a
main two-story block with a center entrance, flanked by a pair of one story
wings. The interiors feature "Adamesque mantels, cornices, and ornamental
blinds exhibit a correctness unique in Mecklenburg County, where vernacular
interpretations of Adamesque interior detail was more usual in houses of the
Federal period." 3
The Cedars, at 123 Grandin Road, by contrast, shows a more
vernacular approach. Believed built in the 1830s, its heavy exterior
cornices and gables with returns appear to be the work of a local carpenter
only partially familiar with Greek Revival and Federal niceties.
Other fine houses are scattered outside the present day city. Known by
names like Latta Place, Holly Bend,
Beaver Dam, and Oak Lawn, many are today designated by
Mecklenburg County as historic properties. Perhaps the finest is
Cedar Grove on Gilead Road. Built in the early 1830s for planter
James Torrence, it features handsome brickwork and stepped gables.

Cedar Grove
Torrence's mill and store also survive near his house, and solve as a
reminder of the dozens of commercial buildings that once dotted the
countryside crossroads around the grand mansions. Downtown Charlotte, of
course, had the greatest concentration of Greco-Roman influenced commercial
structures. Old drawings show the Osborne house and store which stood where
the Independence Center now stands, from the 1810s to the 1900s. Its
two-story, gabled form was in the Federal tradition, even to the delicate
dormer windows it shared with Rosedale. The Granite Row built
slightly later across the street had the severe rectangular forms of the
Greek Revival, and used the same stepped gable seen at Cedar Grove.
The most common house type built in early nineteenth century Mecklenburg
was what folklorists now term an "I" house. 4 It was two stories
tall and one room deep, a long, narrow shape that looks like a sans-serif
"I" when viewed from the air. Its central front door led to a central stair
hall, with one room to the left and one room to the right on each floor.
These symmetrical "I" houses continued to be built even after Greek
decoration had fallen from favor. An example of the form constructed after
the Civil War and clothed in Victorian trim may be seen on the campus of
Johnson C. Smith University, originally used as a teachers' house.
III. Victorian Period:
Beginning before the Civil War, builders and architects all over America
began turning away from the severe, symmetrical formality of the Greek
Revival. They created new freer, more ornate designs inspired by a diverse
array of Italian, French, English, Roman and other prototypes. As years went
by, they also tended to combine motifs of different ages and eras, a
practice known as "eclecticism." This period is now called by the general
name "Victorian", because it coincided roughly with the reign of English
Queen Victoria (1837-1901) and took its initial inspiration from the
experiments of English architects.
As Charlotte boomed with railroad prosperity after the Civil War,
businessmen eagerly adopted the new mode of architecture. Many of the
post-war commercial buildings in the expanding central business district
seem to have been in the Italianate style. Lithographs show boxy brick
structures with elaborate window moldings and heavy bracketed cornices,
modeled on the townhouses of Florence. Their flat roofs were a marked
contest to the pre-war Greek Revival shops topped by gables.
Among the Italianate store buildings of the post-war boom were the
original First National Bank (demolished), erected in the first block
of South Tryon in 1868, and the Central Hotel across the street
(demolished), the city's main hostelry in the 1870s and 1880s. A single
Italianate commercial edifice remains in good condition today. 123 East
Trade Street was erected for the thriving
Merchants and Farmers Bank in 1871-72. Its cast iron window trim and
sheet iron cornice were a source of special pride for the growing city
because they were among the first produced locally, at the Mecklenburg Iron
Works. The Charlotte Democrat rejoiced, "There is no further
necessity of sending North for such work." 5

First National Bank
Businessmen used the Italianate for their residences as well as their
stores. The best remaining example may be seen in a house built in 1874 by
merchant Jacob Rintels. Though it was relocated from West Trade Street to
suburban Myers Park in the 1910s, it still retains the characteristic heavy
cornice and boldly decorated windows. Factory owner John H. Newcomb's 1884
house at 324 West Ninth Street also incorporates some Italianate touches,
primarily in its bracketed cornice and porch.
In this period national building fashions arrived in Charlotte
principally via nationally published pattern books and magazines. There were
no full-time local architects in the small town. Carpenters and masons took
on the task of building design, drawing their inspiration from what they
read and what their clients had seen on trips to other cities. Though few
houses survive from the 1880s and 1890s, there are indications that each new
national style had its local adherents. Evidence may be seen in the
Stick-style exterior framing of the bay windows of merchant William
Treloar's townhouse at 328 Brevard Street, in the Eastlake style gable
decoration of the Johnson C. Smith Teachers' House, and in the
Shingle style treatment of the upper floors of the Liddell-McNinch House
at 511 North Church Street.
The ultimate residential style of the Victorian period was the Queen
Anne. This mode thrived on eccentricity. Builders combined a wide variety of
asymmetrical building shapes, surface materials, paint colors, and historic
motifs on a single house. This flamboyant style was evidently a favorite in
Charlotte around the turn of the century, as the successful campaign to
"Bring the Mills to the Cotton" transformed the town into a city. One of the
earliest surviving examples is the residence built by J. M. Miller, son of
an officer of the D. A. Tompkins mill-construction company. Miller's 1891
house sported a corner turret with a conical roof, a variety of gabled
wings, walls of beveled wood siding and shingles, and a wrap-around porch
featuring turned and scroll-sawn ornament. The house was moved from its
North Tryon Street location to suburban
Plaza-Midwood in 1915, and has been recently restored to its
Victorian glory.
A number of other Queen Anne dwellings are scattered around the city
today. John Price Carr, who ran the city's main hauling and delivery company
at the turn of the century, built a handsome Queen Anne residence in 1903,
that may be seen today at 200 North McDowell Street. Methodist minister
Elias Overcarsh enlarged and remodeled an old Fourth Ward house in the new
style in the 1880s or 1890s. One hundred years later the residence, at the
corner of Eighth and Pine Streets, is still a major neighborhood landmark.
Most examples of the style are two stories tall, but another minister built
a one-story Queen Anne house at the corner of Sunnyside and Piedmont avenues
in the new suburb of Piedmont Park about 1903. The
Reverend Detwiller House features a corner tower, elaborate porch,
and complicated roofline just like larger examples of the style.
Charlotte had hundreds of Queen Anne houses by the time the turn of the
century building booms had passed. Few are left today. When the style was at
its height of popularity the city consisted only of Wards One through Four
in the Center City, and the beginnings of
Dilworth,
Belmont, and
Elizabeth. Almost all the well-to-do residential streets of those
areas -- Trade and Tryon, College and Church, McDowell, Elizabeth Avenue,
South Boulevard -- have since been cleared of residential development.
Charlotte's less wealthy citizens seldom had money to bused full-blown
copies of the latest Victorian fashions, but once the new ideals of complex
form and abundant ornament were well accepted, middle-class builders began
to adopt them. Joseph Harrill, a shoe store clerk and part-time builder, is
a good example. The two story frame house he built for himself in 1894 at
429 Kingston Avenue in Dilworth is too simple to be considered a
full-fledged example of the Queen Anne style, but its gable trim, and its
asymmetrical massing with a projecting front wing pick up some of that
style's feeling. The James B. Galloway House at 702 Brevard Street,
today believed to be the oldest remaining structure in the center city, is a
good one story example of the same tendency. When Galloway built his frame
cottage in 1870, using money he had saved while working as a mechanic at the
nearby Confederate Naval Yard during the Civil War, he chose simple
trim in the Greek Revival fashion. When his children expanded and modernized
the dwelling in the 1900s, they chose new Victorian trim. Today the house
boasts Victorian "gingerbread" in the gables, and porch columns topped by
scroll-sawn brackets. Diagonal boarding enlivens the front gable wall.
Windows are tall and narrow to make the house seem taller, a favorite trick
of highstyle architects in the Victorian period.
There are more of these middle class Victorian dwellings surviving in the
1980s, surprisingly, than there are high-style examples. In the Victorian
era, the wealthiest residents built their residences on the busiest streets
closest to the center of the city, but the middle class built on side
streets which have been less often cleared. Today clusters of Victorian era
middle class dwellings may be found in Fourth Ward, in Dilworth, and
especially in the working-class streetcar suburb of Belmont.
Even mill housing sometimes showed the influence of the Victorian ideas.
By the early 1900s over a dozen cotton mills ringed the city, and each built
housing for the workers it drew from the rural countryside. Charlotte's
oldest surviving mill village is adjacent to the 1889 Ada Cotton Mill
at 12th and Brevard Streets at the Edge of First Ward. The Ada's owners
wasted no money on ornament for their rows of cottages, but the tall
windows, multi-gabled roofs, and relatively complex T-shaped massing
definitely reflect Victorian design ideals. Other mill villages show the
same tendency through the 1910s. Later, massing would simplify and porches
become larger, to follow Bungalow patterns, and by the 1950s mill houses
would come to resemble miniature ranch houses with gentle roof slopes and no
porches, as each generation adapted current styles to inexpensive housing.
Charlotte's Victorian builders favored detached single-family dwellings
usually set back a few feet from the street on fairly spacious lots, even
close to downtown. The city never widely adopted rowhouse construction, a
popular residential mode in larger United States cities in which dwellings
shared sidewalls much as in today's townhouse condominium projects. This
Charlotte characteristic may possibly be traced back to the antebellum
distrust of city living. Southerners leery about urban life in general had
no desire to give up their accustomed single family living arrangements as
well. As important was the city's small size. In the Victorian period, the
newcomer could still find vacant land within a fifteen minute walk on which
to build his detached single family home.
Nonetheless, old photographs indicate that a handful of Victorian
rowhouses were erected in the center city area. Two survive in the 1980s.
St. Peters Catholic Rectory, with its whimsical "keyhole" window,
probably owes its rowhouse configuration to the fact that the congregation
had only a narrow sliver of land left over on fashionable residential South
Tryon Street after the church building had been erected: it would have been
disrespectful to have the priest's house face onto the less prestigious
sidestreet. The William Treloar double house at 328 North Brevard, with its
cast iron trim, is a second variation on the urban house type. Built to
house different parts of the extended Treloar family, it is a duplex that
sits close to the street and has the characteristically long, rectangular
urban form, quite unlike single family dwellings.
Commercial architecture in Victorian Charlotte was not subject to as many
changing styles as was residential design. The blocky form of the Italianate
proved economical to build, and it remained popular through the turn of the
century. Old photos indicate that Roman influence -- pilasters and
especially elaborate masonry arches -- became more important as years went
by, but downtown facades continued to be tall and narrow, and topped by a
heavy cornice.
Red brick was the favorite building material for downtown structures in
Charlotte from the 1860s through 1900s. Charlotte masons seem to have
enjoyed exploring the decorative possibilities of their craft. Even minor
buildings were enriched with arched windows and corbelled brickwork -- brick
stepped out from the face of the building to create ornamental patterns. Two
good examples of this today are the 1903 side-street commercial row in the
first block of West Fifth Street and the 1908
Philip-Carey Warehouse at 301 East Seventh in First Ward. In
addition to corbelled arches and cornices, the masons of both buildings used
vertical pilasters of projecting brick to break up wall surfaces and give
added vertical emphasis.
Most of Charlotte's churches in the period also exhibited elaborate
brickwork. The Gothic was the preferred style for Victorian churches, and
its distinctive corner buttresses and pointed window arches could be
expressed well in brick. The forms had been developed by Medieval architects
to make their churches seem to soar toward heaven, and fitted easily into
the Victorian desire to make all buildings seem taller. Charlotte's grandest
Victorian church, First Presbyterian (spire 1884, sanctuary lays) has
its Gothic forms sheathed in stucco. All the other religious edifices
remaining from the textile boom years of the 1890s and 1900s are brick,
ranging from Saint Peters Catholic (1893) to humbler First United
Presbyterian (1893) and
Grace A. M. E. Zion (1902).

First United Presbyterian Church
Charlotte's finest specimens of the Victorian mason's art are
Biddle Hall on the Johnson C. Smith campus, and St. Peter's
Episcopal Church at North Tryon and West Seventh Street in Fourth Ward.
Both use elaborate combinations of brick and brownstone trim. Biddle Hall,
built in 1884, is a cluster of bays, towers, and dormers, somewhat
resembling Jubilee Hall erected earlier at prestigious black Fisk University
in Nashville, Tennessee. The main block of Biddle Hall is three and one-half
stories tall with a four story pavilion projecting from the front, topped by
a clock tower that rises to six stories and is visible from many parts of
the city. Decorative masonry includes a variety of window arches, pilasters,
buttresses, heavily corbelled cornices, and sawtooth string courses marking
the tops and bottoms of the window openings. Brownstone trim highlights the
entrance, and a cornerstone of the same material is inscribed with the motto
"Sit Lux": let there be light. The intricate brickwork continues to the
former chapel and assembly hall projecting from the rear of the main block,
which has corbelled brick crosses worked into its chimneys.
The later Saint Peter's Church, 1893, is even more elaborate in its
combination of brick and stone textures. Its architect may well have been
inspired by the work of New England designer Henry Hobson Richardson, whose
skillful masonry detailing was widely emulated in the era. Saint Peter's
designer only used two materials, red brick and brown sandstone, but managed
to create half a dozen different surface textures. Walls are of rough brick
with highlights of smooth brick. The regular bond gives way to basketweave
bond below the large rose window, and carved brick is used for several
window hoods. Stone is carved smooth for the crocketed Gothic parapet and
cross that top the front facade, for the rose window, and for the belt
courses. In blunt contrast are the rough stone window sills, lintels, and
tower belt courses. The resulting interplay of textures makes for a building
that becomes more interesting with each repeated viewing.
Today Johnson C. Smith University's Biddle Hall, adjacent turreted 1895
Carter Hall, and the handful of churches are all that remain of Charlotte's
Victorian institutional buildings. In the period, nearly all the city's
public structures exhibited elaborate Victorian design, from the ornate
brick Post Office on West Trade Street to the brownstone tower of the 1800s
City Hall at North Tryon and Fifth. They reflected the city's rising
prosperity as the textile economy took hold, but they were soon to fall for
newer structures as growth continued unabated.
IV. The Anti-Eclectic Years:
The 1900s and 1910s saw a revolution in architectural taste in the United
States. The Victorian fascination with complex decoration, eclectic
combinations, colors, shapes, and historical motifs, came to an end. A new
concern with simplicity and symmetry expressed itself in new styles for
houses, stores and public buildings -- the Colonial and NeoClassical
Revivals, the Rectilinear, and the Bungalow. Charlotte was flush with money
from the growing Piedmont industrial region and attracted its first resident
body of professional architects. They and their New South clients eagerly
adopted the national trends.
In residential architecture, the national backlash against the ornate
Queen Anne style had started in the 1880s. First a few leading architects,
then the professional building journals, and finally even the popular
household magazines cried out for a simpler approach to residential design.
As early as 1885 a west coast architecture magazine flatly stated, "The
general tone of Eastern journals is against continuance of the Queen Anne as
a style of domestic architecture." 6
Writers criticized complex Victorian massing, pointing out that it
"certainly leads to a very large increase in the cost, not in the item of
material only, but in that of labor." 7 They ridiculed the
characteristic elaborate roof shapes as "Crazy and Sham Roofs." 8
Architects castigated the widespread use of machine-made ornament, one
calling the Queen Anne an "architecture of pretense" because of "its
ambition and its desire to make a vain show with small means. The facility
with which wood and galvanized iron may be molded, painted and sanded to
imitate stone or other nobler materials makes this baleful process
possible." 9 Even newspaper humorists took aim at the style.
Columnist Bill Nye mocked its fanciful window treatments and complicated
paint schemes, describing a Queen Anne dwelling whose builders "throw in odd
windows nobody else wanted, then daub it up with colors they have bought at
an auction and applied to the house after dark with a shotgun. . . ."
10
All across the country, architects began searching for alternatives to
the Queen Anne. The most radical ideas came from Chicagoan Frank Lloyd
Wright. He proposed to remedy the excesses of Victorian eclecticism by
discarding all historic ornament. He went on to do away with attics,
basements, and conventional ideas of interior arrangement, as well. Many of
his proposals were incorporated in the suburban Ranch houses built after the
Second World War, but in the 1900s and 1910s his houses seemed too unusual
to most people. Few "Prairie School" designs were built in the South, and
none are known to have been erected in Charlotte.
The most popular alternative to the Queen Anne turned out to be the
Colonial Revival. In New England, architects such as McKim, Mead and White
had already begun to explore the possibilities of American Colonial forms.
Now they became less and less free in their interpretation of the Colonial
prototypes, moving "toward geometric and spatial discipline in design," in
the words of architectural historian Vincent Scully. 11 Designers
might still combine forms from different Colonial buildings, and might even
go back to the Colonial's European antecedents, but they now restricted
their eclecticism to one tradition rather than drawing from many. Colonial
houses, with their white or brick red exteriors, their symmetry, and their
symbolic ties to our supposedly plain, honest forebears, were the perfect
antidote to Victorian opulence. Beginning in the 1890s the Colonial Revival
style swept the country.
The Colonial Revival came to Charlotte in 1894 at the urging of C. C.
Hook, the booming city's first full-time architect. Hook had arrived in
Charlotte about 1890 after schooling at Washington University in St. Louis
to take a job as a drafting teacher at the Charlotte Graded School. He was
quickly drawn into providing building plans for Edward Dilworth Latta and
other New South developers who were transforming Charlotte from a crossroads
town into a city. His earliest designs, like the
Mallonee-Jones house with its many sunburst gables, on Kingston
Avenue in suburban Dilworth, were in the Queen Anne style.
Hook evidently began reading the architectural journals of the day, for
he soon became convinced that Victorian architecture was passe. In September
of 1894 he announced plans for a
"genuine 'ye olden time' house. . .after the style of the typical
Southern home, with four large columns, two full stories high, surmounted
by a classic pediment. Mr. Hook. . twill make the plans after the true
classic style of architecture, which at one time predominated in the South
and is being revived. The most striking feature of the house will be its
simplicity of design and convenience of arrangement. The so-called
'filigree' ornamentation will not be a consideration, and only the true
design will be carried out and thus give Charlotte another new style. .
.." 12
The house, for J. Frank Wilkes on Morehead Street, no longer exists, but
a handful of early Hook-designed Colonial Revival residences do survive in
Dilworth to illustrate Charlotte's first experiments with the new mode. The
1896
Gautier-Gilchrist house at 320 Park Avenue, the 1900-1901 Villalonga-Alexander
residence across the street at 301, and the 1902 Walter Brem house nearby at
211 East Boulevard are all two story frame structures. They are heavily
decorated compared to later Colonial designs, an indication of lingering
Victorian sensibilities. Massing is also relatively complex for the genre,
especially in the Brem house with its projecting corner pavilions and
recessed center porch. Their symmetrical massing, and simple hip or gable
roof shapes, however, represented a definite break from Hook's earlier
complex Queen Annes. Hook combined Georgian, Federal, Greek, and Renaissance
details in his decoration, including pilasters, dentil molding, and
classical porch columns, but all of it was drawn from a single line of
architectural tradition. Hook had clearly pointed the city in the new
national architectural direction.
As additional professional architects flocked to the city with the 1900s
building boom, more and more houses appeared in the new Colonial style.
Louis Asbury, son of a respected Charlotte builder, returned from
architectural training at the prestigious Massachusetts Institute of
Technology and plunged into designing houses for the new Myers Park elite.
Most showed some colonial influence, a good example being the 1913
Charles P. Moody house at 830 Providence Road with its symmetrical red
brick facade, white columned entry, and characteristic tripartite Palladian
dormer window. Perhaps the grandest early Colonial house to survive in the
1980s is the 1906-07
F. O. Hawley mansion at 923 Elizabeth Avenue. Newly arrived
architect L. L. Hunter created a massive pedimented front portico, with
two-story fluted Corinthian columns, which shelters a smaller Ionic columned
entrance.
The mid-1900s also saw introduction of the Dutch Colonial variant of the
Colonial Revival to Charlotte. The trademark of the style was a barn-like
gambrel roof, borrowed from Dutch building in the New York area. Both Hook
and his partner W. G. Rogers erected gambrel-roofed Dutch Colonials for
their own residences in Dilworth, and several similar designs followed.
C. C. Hook's most influential Colonial Revival design came in the late
1910s. In 1915 he and partner W. G. Rogers built a two-story white-columned
Colonial residence for Southern Power executive Z. V. Taylor. Four years
later utility and tobacco magnate J. B. Duke bought the residence and had
Hook triple it in size. The mansion became the architectural centerpiece of
the city's most prestigious neighborhood. Duke's adoption of the new mode
undoubtedly was partly responsible for the Colonial Revival's overwhelming
popularity during the next decade.
The same urge for simplicity that informed the well-known Prairie and
Colonial styles also led to development of a third anti-eclectic mode in the
United States during the 1890s, a mode which some architectural historians
now identify by the term Rectilinear. 13 Designers in the
Rectilinear mode abandoned historic ornament, as had Frank Lloyd Wright, but
they did not give up conventional ideas of interior arrangement. The result
was an array of new, boxy, plainly-trimmed house forms, popular for both the
middle class and the well-to-do.
Charlotte's prosperous New South leaders seized on this mode in the 1900s
and l910s almost as eagerly as they did the Colonial. The clean-cut
Rectilinear forms evidently appealed to the businessman's desire for
efficiency. Most of the well-known Charlotteans who built Rectilinear houses
were entrepreneurs involved in creating new businesses, men who were willing
to take risks in the name of efficiency. Charles W. Parker may have been the
first to adopt the mode. He was a self-made man who had recently founded the
Parker-Gardener Company, selling furniture and later musical instruments. In
1903-1904 he bought a spacious lot on prestigious suburban Central Avenue
and had a large house erected. It was considered a work of architectural art
worthy of inclusion in the 1905 photo book Art Work of Charlotte, North
Carolina, by the Gravure Illustration Company of Chicago.
Charles W. Parker's house is a two-story cube with a pyramid-like hip
roof and a one-story porch across the front. The original interior plan had
four rooms upstairs and four rooms plus a kitchen downstairs. The winding
stairs were at the side of the structure, rising from the entry hall that
made up one of the downstairs rooms, quite unlike the typical Colonial
Revival center-hall plan. Architectural historians now call this distinctive
house type the Four Square variant of the general Rectilinear style. 14
Not only is the basic form of Parker's residence without historic
precedent, but all the trim of the house is geometric and a-historic, making
it an excellent example of Rectilinear design. Eaves are wide and
undecorated. The grooved wooden exterior siding is broken by plain trim
boards. Window sashes have large diamond-shaped panes, and inside the
fireplaces are flanked by columns turned on a lathe in such a manner as to
emulate no historic form. Even the balusters that support the front porch
rail have a square profile.
Numerous other wealthy Charlotteans chose to use the mode in the years
before World War I. 15 In 1914 retired Trinity College (now Duke
University) president and Methodist Bishop J. C. Kilgo had Louis Asbury
design a frame Rectilinear house at 2100 The Plaza in the present-day Plaza-Midwood
area. Kilgo was known for his businesslike approach to college
administration, and he introduced the school to co-education, and also gave
black leader Booker T. Washington his first speaking engagement at a white
institution. The same year that Kilgo had his Rectilinear house built, David
Clark commissioned a stuccoed mansion in the new style on a prominent corner
in Myers Park at 100 Hermitage Road. David Ovens, the efficiency-minded
president of the J. B. Ivey Company who did much to build the department
store into a regional chain, had a large Rectilinear residence erected in
1916 at 805 Ardsley Road in the heart of Myers Park.
Many large houses show influences of the Rectilinear movement in
combination with other styles. 802 Providence Road, designed by Louis Asbury
for hotel owner J. M. Jamison in 1912, includes a Colonial bracketed cornice
and a Palladian-influence dormer, but otherwise exhibits Rectilinear
severity of line. Rectilinear influence may also be seen in Asbury's grand
design for bank president H. M. McAden at 920 Granville Road. Completed in
1917, the mansion is a simple symmetrical hip-roofed block, with
NeoClassical front porch and side porch columns enlivening its otherwise
plain exterior.
As with the Colonial, the Rectilinear style went on to become quite
popular with middle class home builders following its adoption by the
wealthy. Both the center-entry and the Four Square Rectilinear house types
were popular in middle class neighborhoods through the 1920s, even after the
upper class had moved on to other styles.
A fourth national residential style which developed to counter the
excesses of Victorian eclecticism was the Bungalow. It rose to popularity in
California at the end of the 1890s and swept across the country in the next
decade. The basic form of the house was borrowed from British India, where a
"bangle" was a "low house with porches all around," a rustic back-country
dwelling. 16 The American Bungalow was likewise low and compact
and usually sported a wide front porch. The roof was a prominent feature of
the design, an unbroken sweep that spread its wide eaves over the porch and
any other projections. A Bungalow might include two or three floors but the
sloping roof always made it appear to be a low, one-story dwelling from the
front.
The Bungalow's horizontal emphasis was the exact opposite of the
Victorian accentuation of height. Its decoration tended to be rustically
plain, unlike the Victorian reliance on elaborate machine-carved ornament.
Architects often specified wood-shingled exterior walls, porches and
chimneys built up of rough stone borders, and heavy, square molding.
The Bungalow's compact form was best suited to middle class dwellings,
and that was where it was evidently first used in Charlotte. In 1908
architect Fred L. Bonfoey arrived in town and made the Bungalow his
province. A 1911 newspaper article noted that Bonfoey "during the course of
the past year has designed more than fifty of these homes which have become
so popular with suburban residents of the Queen City.'' 17
Building permits indicate that Dilworth's Four Cs company was a major
Bonfoey Bungalow client. Hundreds of other examples of the style were copied
by builders or owners from the house plan books and magazines that
proliferated in the period. Today, excellent collections of Bungalows dating
from the 1910s may be seen lining Worthington and Sarah Marks avenues in
Dilworth, Grove Street and the 1000 block of West Fourth Street in Third
Ward, and the 1500-1700 blocks of East Eighth Street in the Elizabeth
neighborhood. Hundreds of others are scattered throughout the city.
Charlotte's New South entrepreneurs admired the Bungalow for its
"up-to-date" ideals, and were not content to leave the new style to the
middle class. Norman Cocke, the power company official for whom Lake Norman
is named, built a large wood-shingled bungalow for his family at 816 Harvard
Place at the center of Myers Park in 1914. The style's spreading roofs, wide
bracketed eaves, and rustic details also found their way into large mansions
that made no effort to appear compact. The best example is realtor
Charles Lambeth's house for himself at 923 Granville Road in Myers Park.
The rambling two-story design has wood-shingled walls and spreading eaves
supported by large, plain brackets. A subsequent long-term owner of the
house was Benjamin B. Gossett, a leading textile magnate who controlled half
a dozen companies across the Carolinas. Cotton broker Ralph Van Landingham's
estate across town at 2010 The Plaza is another good example of the
tendency. The Hook and Rogers design features wood-shingled walls and stone
chimneys. Other mansions freely combined Bungalow and Colonial motifs,
including bank president Walter Alexander's residence at 509 Clement Avenue
in Elizabeth or developer George Stephens' home at 821 Harvard Place in
Myers Park.

Lambeth -Gossett House
The adoption process for the Bungalow apparently differed from the
Colonial and Rectilinear styles in Charlotte in that the new mode was used
first for the middle class and then for the wealthy. Once adopted, however,
the Bungalow followed a familiar pattern. By 1920 the well-to-do had moved
on to other styles, but middle-class homeowners continued to build Bungalows
throughout the decade.
The shift in architectural taste away from Victorian styles was seen in
Charlotte commercial and institutional buildings as well as residences in
the 1900s and 1910s. The New South movement's success in making Charlotte an
industrial hub meant the city had abundant resources to invest in new
architecture. Perhaps the best illustration of the mood of the period could
be seen in the fate of the opulent 1891 City Hall on North
Tryon Street. In 1925, barely 30 years after it had been built, before the
government outgrew its space, it was demolished. City fathers wanted to be
rid of the Victorian building so that they could erect a modern NeoClassical
structure, which still stands on East Trade Street.
The NeoClassical style was an extension of the same impulses that saw
rediscovery of the Colonial in residential architecture. Architects working
in the NeoClassical style abandoned playful Victorian brick and stone work,
and went back to the time-tested purity of ancient Greek and Roman forms.
Commercial and institutional buildings increasingly came to be decorated
with dentil molding, pilasters, and classical columns, and sheathed in white
stone or beige brick to imitate stone temples. The
1925 City Hall, built of limestone with a rectangular outline and
colonnaded facade designed by C. C. Hook, was by no means the first public
building in the NeoClassical style. The earliest was probably the 1897
County Courthouse at South Tryon and Third Street, now replaced by the
tower of First Union Bank. Old postcard views show a rectangular stone
structure with a projecting temple-like portico, topped by a tall dome that
resembled the one atop the United States Capitol. Architect J. M. McMichael
created a very similar structure for the Carnegie Free Library at the
other end of Tryon in 1903. Until it was demolished for the present Public
Library, McMichael's building sported a dome and a handsome pedimented
entrance with tall Ionic columns.

1925 City Hall
As with the City Hall, Charlotte's Victorian Post Office gave way to a
new NeoClassical structure. The 1915 building with its limestone columns
still stands, though much enlarged in a 1934 expansion. The oldest
NeoClassical building to survive today in its original form is the
Carnegie Library erected on the campus of Johnson C. Smith University in
1912. Steel magnate Andrew Carnegie donated half its cost, and half was
raised locally through the efforts of University president H. L. McCrorey.
There was not enough money for a carved stone exterior, so architects Hunter
and Gordon used white-glazed terra cotta to create an impressive
whitecolumned facade.
As Charlotte leaders modernized the city's public face with civic
buildings in the new style, they also used the modern mode in their
religious architecture. Three center city churches designed by Charlotte's
J. M. McMichael between 1908 and 1914 illustrate the new influence of Greek
and Roman forms.
Old First Baptist (now Spirit Square) at 318 North Tryon Street, old
Little Rock A. M. E. Zion at the corner of East Seventh and North
Myers in First Ward, and East Avenue Tabernacle on East Trade near
McDowell all include white classical columns and triangular pediments. There
is not a Gothic pointed arch, buttress or soaring spire to be seen. The most
striking motif shared by the three structures is McMichael's use of domes, a
feature first perfected by the ancient Romans.

First Baptist Church
Charlotte's civic leaders were also her business leaders, and it was not
surprising that they eagerly embraced the new mode of architecture for their
stores and offices as well as their civic and religious buildings. Just as
with the Italianate style four decades earlier, banks seem to have led the
way. Every new banking building built after 1900 was a replica of a Roman
temple. The massive stonework and ancient associations of the style were
favored by bankers because they projected an appearance of solidity and
permanence.
In 1913, architect Louis Asbury already becoming known for his
Rectilinear and Colonial houses, designed a new NeoClassical facade for the
Southern Loan and Savings Bank at 102 South Tryon Street. He used
white-glazed terra cotta to form classical pilasters with Ionic capitals,
topped by a Roman frieze, architrave, and attic. Entrepreneur George
Stephens' American Trust Company followed suit and commissioned a
larger white-columned bank at South Trade and Third Street, now demolished.
The city's finest example of the trend may still be seen at the corner of
South Tryon and West Fourth streets. The
Old Charlotte National Bank, now First Citizens Bank and Trust, was
designed in 1918 by New York City architect Alfred Bossom. He created a
full-scale Roman temple, with massive columns carved from Carolina granite
along the street facades. The columns support a stone and terra cotta
frieze, architrave and cornice, making the building a literal "temple of
commerce."
The grandest expression of Charlotte's textile boom wealth was the crop
of skyscrapers that began rising in the 1900s. To the New South businessmen
they were an important symbol of the former small town's transformation into
a major industrial city, a visible assurance that Charlotte had "arrived."
Where more self-assured, longer-established cities like St. Louis, New York
and especially Chicago might experiment with a-historic forms for their tall
buildings, Charlotte played safe and used the NeoClassical style. It was
up-to-date when compared to the Victorian, and left no question about the
grandeur and permanence the New South leader wished to convey.
Real estate promoter F. C. Abbott kicked off the skyscraper boom with the
1907 completion of his seven story Realty Building on South Tryon
Street. Old photographs show that the Hook and Sawyer design featured
abundant "filigree work," soon to disappear from Charlotte office towers. It
burned shortly after its completion, and was replaced by the present
Johnston Building, in the NeoClassical style.
Charlotte's crowning architectural achievement in the New South era,
literally as well as figuratively, was the 1909
Independence Building (originally Realty Building). A consortium of
the city's leading businessmen funded the venture ostensibly to provide
space for a bank, real estate company, and other offices. The twelve story
tower was the tallest in North or South Carolina, and was the first example
of steel frame high-rise construction in the state. 18 It was
evident that its major purpose was to function as a symbol of Charlotte's
emerging power in the region. The tower far outstripped the actual needs of
a town that had only just passed the twenty thousand mark in population.

Independence Building
The investors held a design competition with entrants from all over the
east coast. The winner was Frank P. Milburn, who at that time was becoming
known as the leading architect of public and commercial buildings in the
Carolinas. He clothed the steel frame in stone and beige brick. Tall brick
arches harked back to Victorian Romanesque precedents, but the light stone
and brick as well as most of the details were drawn from Greece and Rome.
Milburn's NeoClassical touches were most pronounced, not unexpectedly, at
the ground floor bank level. It consisted of "a high granite foundation,
wide quoined piers surfaced with finely striated limestone, Doric capitals,
a wide frieze, and molded cornice." 19 The building dominated the
corner of Trade and Tryon until its demolition in 1981.
One noteworthy group of commercial buildings in the l910s and 1920s did
not rely on NeoClassical precedent. In 1914 streetcar and real estate
magnate Edward Dilworth Latta commissioned architect William Peeps to design
a new headquarters for Latta's business interests. Peeps' beige brick
structure on South Tryon Street had a simple, almost undecorated exterior.
Inside was a breathtaking two-story office and shopping arcade, a glass and
steel design with sunlight streaming in through skylights. Peeps repeated
the arcade motif in the next decade on East Trade Street. This Court Arcade,
however, had NeoClassical exterior trim. A third arcade, also dating from
the 1920s, made up the first level of the Builders Building on West Trade.
Shopping arcades, the predecessors of enclosed shopping malls, were not an
uncommon feature in cities at the turn of the century, but Charlotte is
unique in North Carolina in that it has three surviving examples of this
genre.
|