The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)
Historic Structure Report

Episode 2: 1911 - 1984

Sometime prior to 1911 the building was converted single family dwelling, based on the 1911 Sanborn Map.
The 1911 map shows that a bay window replaced the north entrance at each floor. By 1918, the easternmost
addition was removed, and a porch was built for the remaining addition along the north elevation of the main
building. The 1918 Sanborn Map indicates the building was now divided into two residential flats, one per
floor. Photo documentation circa 1940 shows the building with significant modifications, divided, top from
bottom, into two separate residences. This was the manner in which the building was being used when Aviation
Trail, Inc. acquired it. As of this writing no known written documentation analyzed the condition or the physi-
cal observations of the building before its restoration by Aviation Trail, Inc. in 1985. However, there are several
undated and unidentified photos of the restoration process, both exterior and interior.

Exterior observations of the north and west elevation of the building as a two-family residence are detailed in
Section B of this report, based upon the circa 1940 photo of the building. These observations include the
removal of the shop fronts, main entrance and fenestration; the addition of a new entry facade on the ground
floor of the west elevation for each of the residences; the addition of bay windows at both floors on the north
elevation; and the addition of gutters and downspouts. The fower sash of the southernmost window on the west
elevation was replaced and two windows were added to the ground floor at the north elevation. One new
window and two new doorways were part of the new fabric on the ground floor at the west elevation. A two-story
bay window with its own roofing was added at the north elevation where the doorways had been. Most of this
addition and all of the west elevation addition were wood construction with horizontal wood siding. There is
also a new concrete porch evident along the west elevation that must have replaced the one when this elevation
was remodeled.

The best source for the documentation of interior alterations is a set of construction drawings prepared by
Robert C. Gaede Architects Incorporated, of Cleveland, Ohio, for Aviation Trail’s restoration efforts in 1985.
These drawings show two sets of stairs leading to the second floor. It appears that the stairs in the southwest
corner of the building were added when the building became purely residentia). There is a note indicating that
there were original shutters stiil in place at a stair landing window on the south elevation. Perhaps this was the
only original window on the second floor, south elevation, though another window is shown just west of the one
with shutters. These documents also reveal that the only other second floor window, though noted by the archi-
tects as “not original,” was scheduled to be left in place for the restoration. At some point, a small window was
added to the east elevation at the second floor, south corner.

There is no documentation as to whether any part of the second floor partitions, in place during this period,
were original to the building. Based upon conjecture, it is likely that these partitions were part of the remodeled
residential space, for they closely follow the first floor partition layout. It is known that the Wright brothers did
make some alterations to the second floor space while their print shop was there.? Perhaps much of the original
partitioning was already gone before the building was split into two residences.

The first floor appears to have been completely re-configured from that of an open plan. Several walls were
added, creating separate rooms and closets, to accommodate residents. Two windows were added on the south
elevation, one in the kitchen and a smaller one in the bathroom. The addition at the east elevation seems as
though it could have served as a third apartment, as evidenced from the construction documents of 1985. Photos
taken during Aviation Trail’s restoration show the presence ofa chimney stack at the far east wall that may have
been original.

The basement area was parceled into odd-shaped spaces by several masonry walls. Most of these walls were
constructed of concrete masonry units, and therefore could not be original. One brick partition may have been
original. At the north elevation there was a set of exterior concrete stairs leading to the basement from ground
level. There is no evidence that these were original to the building.

Part G: Building Chronology 59



= Peeazve
een

erry

seestnerte

senme/

‘Suppore tor accesaHacen?snet—/ /

‘ecess HsechPanet —/

~

Wallseparating seat tromottice space

DETAIL A_A: Cross Section of Attic Access Hatch

° * 7 we
i i ae
Sete; = 1-0"
Aecesstatch E
Seale, Va = 1-0"
FEVEED PREPARED THE OF REET ‘Aracsone ne cenmne
Lv y UMTED STATES,
eC Fitzpatrick a = re 7 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
e ETS wesicnen NATIONAL PARK SERVICE spontno Bove
Engineering, P.C. mo - — Attic Floor

a 5 we Plan {THE WRIGHT CYCLE COMPANY SHOP ¢15-01) seer ca

2G VEN Man» AnnActor * MI 48041 ARCHITECTS GHecxeD DAYTON AVIATION HERITAGE NATIONAL HISTORIC PARK EXS - 103
Fax 99-709: 206| pean oe PAYTON, OF80 °
ery



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Comparable Structure
Analysis



GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

This is to certify that
Todd Taylor

has successfully completed

Lead-Based Paint
Detection and Abatement

conducted by

GEORGIA TECH
CONTINUING EDUCATION
Atlanta, Georgia

June 22-26, 1992

P. Crecine W. Denney Freeston VA
President Director, Continuing Education



ATC Associates inc. Lead Based Paint Survey Data Record

Date: 1/26/98

Client: Quinn Evans Architects
Client # 17960.0001
Survey Site: The Wright Cycle Shop

Inspector:

Todd Taylor
Project Name/Location: 22 South Williams Street
RMD; LPA-1- #1221

Initial POSITIVE
Room Type Wail Component Substrate} Condition] Color K.Shell_ } NEGATIVE
Front Room Second Floor Cc Baseboard Wood Good Tan 0.1 N
Front Room Second Floor B Window Well Wood Fair Red >9.9 P
Front Room Second Floor 8B Window Track (exterior) Wood Fair Red >9.9 P
Front Room Second Floor B Exterior Shutter Wood Fair Red -0.2 N
Center Offices 2nd Floor A Ceiling Drywall Good White -0.1 N
Center Offices 2nd Floor A Wail Drywall Good Cream -0.1 N
Center Offices 2nd Floor B Wall Plaster Good Cream -0.3 N
Center Offices 2nd Floor Cc Wall Plaster Good Cream -0.2 N
Center Offices 2nd Floor D Wali Plaster Good Cream 0.0 N
Center Offices 2nd Floor B Window Sill Wood Good Tan 0.4 N
Center Offices 2nd Floor B Window Casing Wood Good Tan 0.0 N
Center Offices 2nd Floor A Window Sash Wood Good Tan 0.4 N
Center Offices 2nd Floor B Window Welt Wood Good Red 0.4 N
Center Offices 2nd Floor B Window Track Wood Fair Red >9.9 P
Center Offices 2nd Floor Cc Baseboard Wood Good Tan 0.0 N
Center Offices 2nd Floor 8 Door Wood Good Tan 0.1 N
Center Offices 2nd Floor B Door Jamb Wood Good Tan 0.2 N
Exterior Balcony B Exterior Door Wood Good Red 0.2 N
Exterior Balcony B Exterior Handrail Wood Good Red 0.0 N
Second Floor, Rear Offices [ A Wail Drywail Good Cream 0.0 N
Second Floor, Rear Offices [ B Wail Drywail Good Cream 0.2 N
Second Floor, Rear Offices | C Wall Drywall Good Cream 0.1 N
Second Floor, Rear Offices | D Wall Drywall Good Cream 0.0 N
Second Floor, Rear Offices [ A Ceiling Drywall Good White 0.0 N
Second Floor, Rear Offices | C Door Wood Good Tan 0.1 N
Second Floor, Rear Offices [ C Door Casing Woad Good Tan 0.0 N
Second Floor, Rear Offices | A Ceiling Drywall Good White -0.1 N
Second Floor, Rear Offices | A Wall Drywall Good Cream 0.0 N
Second Floor, Rear Offices | B Walt Plaster Good Cream 0.0 N
‘Second Floor, Rear Offices | C Wall Plaster Good Cream 0.0 N
Second Floor, Rear Offices | D Wall Plaster Good Cream -0.1 N
Second Floor, Rear Offices | A Door Wood Fair Tan 0.1 N
Second Floor, Rear Offices [A Door Jamb Wood Fair Tan 0.2 N
Second Floor, Rear Offices | B Window Sill Wood Fair Tan ~0.3 N
Second Floor, Rear Offices | B Window Casing Wood Good Tan 0.3 N
Second Floor, Rear Offices | B Window Sash Wood Good Tan 0.3 N
Second Floor, Rear Offices [ B Exterior Window Well Wood Fair Red -0.5 N
Second Floor, Rear Offices | B Exterior Window Track Wood Fair Red >9.9 P
Exterior A Exterior Front Door Wood Good Red -0.2 N
Exterior A Exterior Window Sill Wood Fair Red 0.3 N
Exterior A Exterior Posts Wood Fair Red 0.0 N

Page 3



HISTORIC STRUCTURE REPORT
The Wright Cycle Company Building
(HS - 01)

Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park
Dayton, Ohio

May 30, 1999
Final Submission

QUINN EVANS/ARCHITECTS
219 1/2 North Main Street
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48104
(734) 663-5888



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

80

Appendix B



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

68 Part H: Building Recommendations



ATC Associates Inc. Lead Based Paint Survey Data Record

Date: 1/28/98 Client: Quinn Evans Architects Inspector: Todd Taylor

Client # 17960.0001 Project Name/Location: 1060 West Third Street
Survey Site: Hoover Building RMD; LPA-1- #1221

Initial POSITIVE

Room Type Wall Component Substrate] Condition Color K.Sheil | NEGATIVE
Third Floor A Door Casing Wood Fair Brown ~0.2 N
Third Floor [>) Chair Rail Wood Fair Blue +0.2 N
Third Floor D Wall Plaster Poor Pink 0.5 N
Third Floor P) Cupboard Wood Fair Green 0.0 N
Third Floor Cc Door Wood Fair Brown 0.3 N
Third Floor A Stairweil Ceiling Plaster Poor Yellow 0.0 N
Third Floor [s) Stairweil Wall Plaster Poor Yellow 1.3 P
Third Floor D Handrail Wood Fair Varnish -0.1 N
Third Floor [°) Chair Rail Wood Fair Varnish 0.2 N
Third Floor D Stair Tread Wood Fair Tan -0.2 N
Third Floor D Stair Riser Wood Fair Tan -0.1 N
Third Floor i) Stair Stringer Wood Fair Tan 0.0 N
Third Floor B Stairweil Wall Plaster Fair Yellow 0.0 N
Exterior A Mural Picture Wood Fair All Colors 0.3 N
Exterior [») Wall Brick Poor White -0.2 N
Calibration NIA NIA N/A N/A N/A 2.0 en
Calibration N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.9 =e
Calibration N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 24 ~~

Page 2



Ne Fem 10.000 fon, Sn Owe wo 10240018
United States Department of the Interior
National Park Service

\~Z2S5~- 34

National Register of Historic Places NG@
Registration Form

This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations of eligibility for individual properties or districts. See instructions in Guidelines
tor Compisting National Register Forms {National Register Bulletin 16). Complete each item by marking ‘x"' in the appropriate box or by entering
the requested information. !f an item does not apply to the property being documented, enter "N/A" for “not applicable.” For functions, styles, materials,
and areas of significance, enter only the categories and Subcategories listed in the instructions. For additional space use continuation sheets

(Form 10-900a). Type all entries.

1, Name of Property
historic name N/A
other names/site number eet Third Street Historic Di trict

2. Location

street & number_W. Third St. between Shannon St. and Broadway N/A _[_Jnot for publication
city, town Dayton N/A [_Jvicinity
state Ohio code OH county Montgomery code 113 zip code 45407
3. Classification
Ownership of Property Category of Property Number of Resources within Property
private | buitding(s) Contributing Noncontributing
(1 public-iocat district 28 4___ buildings
CJ public-State CJsite sites
(J public-Federal {| structure structures
object objects
28 4 Total
Name of related multipte property listing: Number of contributing resources previously
N/A listed in the National Register_____ 1)

4. State/Federal Agency Certification

the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, | hereby certify that this “|
jomination CJrequest for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the
National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and pelesns duran set forth in 36 CFR Part 60.

tn my opinion, the propery [Xlmeets Oa Nok meet the National istér_eriteria. CJse6 continuation
r ' sisson “ a x
Signature of certifying official ) 6) | : bate/ 7
Hy

State or Federal agency and bureau

tn my opinion, the property Cmeets [a] does not meet the National Register criteria. [_}See continuation sheet.

Signature of commenting or other official Date

|__ State or Federal agency and bureau

5. National Park Service Certification
|, hereby, certify that this property is:
{Jentered in the Nationa Register.

See cohtinuation sheet.

LC eetermined eligible for the National
Register. [_] See continuation sheet.
determined not eligible for the
Nationa! Register.

{_]removed from the National Register.
(other, (expiain:)

Signature of the Keeper Date of Action



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Historic Map Analysis
Sanborn Map 1887

Figure 5, Drawn shortly after the Wright building was constructed in 1886, this map shows the original outline of
the building (circled). There is an exterior stair on the north side, no additions at the back, and the northwest
corner is beveled. A porch or unknown structure extends from the west elevation into the street. The lot to the
immediate south is empty.

Figure § Sanborn Insurance Map, 1887. (The Sanborn Perris Map Co., Ltd., New York, New York)

Part B: Historic Documentation Summary 15



C. Existing Conditions and Physical Investigation

The existing conditions were noted during the on site physical investigation carried out in
conjunction with QUINN EVANS/ARCHITECTS on October 22 and 23, 1996.

Due to early and later renovations to the structure very little original finish material remains,
except for the miscellaneous artifacts sampled in the basement and those submitted by
Roger McClure that were collected during the last renovation from the second floor; and
existing samples of a corner guard from a pile of basement artifacts, a door casing from the
second floor, a baseboard from the second floor, and an exterior window molding.

D. Finishes Analysis

The following Finishes Analysis Listing is a record of the chromachronology of the
samples taken from the interior and exterior of the Wright Cycle Company Shop on
October 22 and 23, 1996. A cross-section of painted finishes was tested to determine the
type, or base, of paint originally used. Solvent and chemical testing proved that earlier
finishes were solvent (oil) based paints, with lead present; while later finishes were alkyd
on trim and alkyd and acrylic on ceilings and walls.

The list below records the Room/Location first, followed by the Surface name, then listing
the Chromachronology of the finishes for the given surface. Under Chromachronology the
substrate is listed first (i.c.: Wood, Plaster, etc.), followed by the subsequent layering of
wallpaper or paint, with the painted finishes matched to The Munsell Color Notation
System/Glossy Collection.

Immediately following each Munsell Color Notation a letter, or series of letters, may be
identified as listed below to describe the closest sheen, and whether or not the finish was a
primer:

P Primer
f flat finish
e eggshell finish
sa satin finish
se semigloss finish
g gloss finish
a underline denotes first probable finish
INTERIOR SAMPLES
Room/Location Surface Chromachronology
Ast Floor/Front Rm Wall Wallpaper
Comments: Wallpaper most likely applied straight onto finish coat of
plaster. No traces of finishes present.
1st Floor/Front Rm Ceiling Wallpape:

T
2.5G 8/4 & 7.5R 8/4



Historic Paint Analysis: Sample Locations

EPISODE 1: 1886-1910
|
&
pow
(orm: “|
secon FLOOR PLAN
0 2'4 8’ 16
EE DU
| ‘
( Lo]
AA
c __ a .
@pepsl FLOOR PLAN
024 8 16
— |
a
| |
| CAT

CISBRSEMENT FLOOR PLAN
mt

an



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

4 References



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

32 Part D: Comparable Structure Analysis



ase
)

United States Department of the Interior

National Park Service ; ;
Ngati 1 Historic Landmark Nomination
National Register of Historic Places" <—

Registration Form

This form is for use in nominating w (Natonal Ragin Bales” URRY 1" Invidual properties or dtc. See intrusions in Guitedines
stig omen nae etapeenin een ay eg TN cee
the requessed an enter “NIA for “nee applicants
(Fam Tota Ton tong "YS nd nna cts he See ee Pe
(Form 10-000a). Type ail entries, .
1. Name of
+ historig name right Cycle Company and Wright and Wr g Tintin
other nameassite number Wright Cycle Shop
2, Location
Street & number "22. South Williams Street Tet for
City, town Dayton vicinity
state Ohio code OH county Montgomery code 3 Zp coe TOTO?
3._Classification
Ownership of Property Catagory of Property Number of Resources within Property
private Duikding(s) Neoncontributing
public-local istrict tating
Dublic-State site . sites
— object _— ————— jects

thers:
4. Stara/Fderai Cestificedion
CA ronan Cee Nee Hore Prearaon Ac 108 es anenied Tho aE
{Zrorinaton lreguen fr cetranats a abgtay meee te noone nes Properties in the

my conn, ee mopar Trew Teoee not meet the Noa Regn caena Uses coancee ae

Signature of commenting or other official Oate

L_ State or Fecera agency and bureeu

5. National Park Service Certification
1 nerepy, canity that tms property is:
Centered in the National Register.
LL! See continuation sneer.
CT aatermined eligible for the Nationa!
Register. ( ]see continuation snee,
_ determined not Btigible tor the
Nationat Register.

im removed from the National Register.

{Jother, (expiain:) _"
nee



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

exterior door on the west, first floor, porch was added in the southwest corner, and a bay window was added in
place of the door at the north elevation. At the east elevation, a small window was added in a closet space that
aligned with the eastern stair. Another window was added at the new kitchen at the south elevation.

The final renovation of the second floor, conducted by Aviation Trail, consisted of the removal of the southwest
staircase and enclosure, and the bay window at the north elevation. The bay window was replaced by a recreation
of the doors and small porch that had been there previously. A doorway leading to the western-most living space
was widened and the doors removed. The kitchen was gutted and an interior window removed but not walled off.
The bathroom, between the kitchen and the top of the east stairwell, was remodeled, and a closet added next to the
entrance to the stairs. The small window at the southeast corner appears to have been boarded up from within, but
its frame is still in place. As there was no historic documentation for the original second floor space, Aviation
Trail rehabilitated it for use as a caretaker's apartment.

Part E: Architectural Analysis 39



o/Z

"DRAWING NO.

TLE OF SHEET
NORTH ELEVATION
EXISTING CONDITION
WRIGHT CYCLE COMPANY BUILDING
DAYTON AVIATION HERITAGE NATIONAL HISTORKG PARK

~SMESHEET NO

A200

SCd

CY
e
04/29/97

DESIGNED
—__ DARI
DRAW
——— DA

ARCHITECTS | TECHREEN

NON
VANS
aEs
BeBe
219 /2N. Mah Street

‘Ane Astor, Michigan 48104 | DATE:
313 669 5888

Qui
E

|_|
{
COE ET
ACIDE EE
! |

EE

TTT
f ===
u ===]

(

NORTH ELEVATION

SCALE: 14ST"
or, «#



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

64 Part H: Building Recommendations



ATC Associates Inc. Lead Based Paint Survey Data Record

Date: 1/26/98

Survey Site: The Wright Cycle Shop

Client: Quinn Evans Architects
Client # 17960.0001

Inspector:

Todd Taylor
Project Name/Location: 22 South Williams Street

RMD; LPA-1- #1221

Initial POSITIVE
Room Type Wall Component Substrate] Condition] Color K.Shell_| NEGATIVE
First Floor R.R. D Wail Drywall Good Cream ~0.5 N
First Floor R.R. Cc Window Sill Wood Good Gray -0.4 N
First Floor R.R. Cc Window Casing Wood Good Gray -0.4 N
First Floor R.R. Cc Window Sash Wood Good Gray 0.0 N
First Floor R.R. D Door Wood Good Gray 0.3 N
First Floor R.R. D Door Casing Wood Good Gray 0.1 N
First Floor R.R. A Ceiling Wood Good Cream -0.1 N
Office First Floor A Wall Drywail Good Cream -0.2 N
Office First Floor B Watt Drywall Good Cream 0.0 N
Office First Floor Cc Wall Drywall Good Cream 0.0 N
Office First Floor [3) Wail Drywall Good Cream 0.0 N
Office First Floor D Ceiling Drywall Good Gray 0.0 N
Office First Floor B Baseboard Wood Good Gray -0.4 N
Office First Floor B Window Casing Wood Good Gray 0.1 N
Office First Floor B Window Sash Wood Good Gray -0.1 N
Office First Floor B Window Sill Wood Good Gray | No Access were
iOffice First Floor D Door Wood Good Gray 0.0 N
Office First Floor D Door Casing Wood Good Gray 0.1 N
Office First Floor A Lower Wall Wood Good Gray -0.2 N
Office First Floor A Lower Wall Trim Wood Good Gray -0.1 N
‘Stairwell to Second Floor B Wail Drywall Good Cream -0.3 N
‘Stairwell to Second Floor D Wail Plaster Poor Cream -0.3 N
Stairwell to Second Floor B Stair Stringer Wood Good Tan 0.1 N.
Stairwell to Second Floor B Door Metai Good Tan -0.1 N
Stairwell to Second Floor B Door Frame Metal Good Tan -0.1 N
Stairweil to Second Floor B Handrail Support Wood Fair Cream -0.1 N
Stairwell to Second Floor D Wail Divider Wood Good Tan -0.1 N
Stairwell to Second Floor i) Baseboard Wood Food Tan -0.2 N
‘Stairweil to Second Floor (9) Wail Plaster Fair White -0.1 N
Stairwell to Second Floor B Wall Plaster Fair White -0.4 N
Stairweil to Second Floor D Window Sill Wood Good Tan 0.2 N
'Stairwell to Second Floor D Window Apron Wood Good Tan -0.1 N
Stairwell to Second Floor [®) Window Sash Wood Good Tan ~0.6 N
‘Stairwell to Second Floor D Window Well Wood Poor Tan -0.1 N
Front Room Second Floor B Window Sill Wood Fair Tan 0.2 N
Front Room Second Floor B Window Casing Wood Good Tan -0.1 N
Front Room Second Floor A Wall Plaster Good Cream 0.0 N
Front Room Second Floor B Wall Plaster Good Cream 0.0 N
Front Room Second Floor c Wall Drywall Good Cream 0.0 N
Front Room Second Floor D Wall Plaster Good Cream -0.1 N
Front Room Second Floor B Ceiling Drywall Good White -0.2 N

Page 2



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)
Historic Structure Report

Part E: Architectural Analysis

General Analysis

The building at 22 South Williams Street underwent three identifiable periods of construction modifications: the
construction of the east addition, the conversion into two separate residential flats, and the reclamation as a
historical landmark. These periods have been established by reviewing historic photos, oral accounts, and docu-
ments prepared for Aviation Trail, Inc.’s renovation of the site, rather than by physical observation. Little about
the construction history can be determined by physical observation without more invasive procedures. As the
building is in good condition, is being occupied, and was recently renovated, such procedures are not justified.

Exterior Analysis

The building was constructed in 1886 as mixed-use project, with commercial space on the first floor and a single-
family residence on the second. It was a two-story brick building with a chamfered northwest corner. The storefront
windows at the first floor were defined by four one-story stone columns. Across the tops of the column capitals
was a wooden frieze that ran the length of the west and northwest elevations. The central bay served as the main
entrance, with double-doors, glass lites, and a transom. The flanking bays were large divided windows. A narrow,
uncovered wooden porch ran the length of the storefront. At the second floor, there were large double-hung
windows, one per bay, with shutters. The roof was gabled over the northwest comer elevation.

The north elevation contained two doorways, one per floor, with a roof gable just above them. The upper door-
way led to a very small exterior landing. Stairs came down from this landing on the west side, along the north
elevation. At the first floor, there was only one other opening: a small square window located midway between the
door and the east edge of the elevation. At the second floor level, there were two windows at either side of the
doorway. The window style matched those of the west and northwest elevations. One chimney stack was located
on the roof, between the two windows at the west half of the north elevation.

The east elevation, which is the rear of the building, originally contained two doorways at the south end. One led
to the first floor interior, which was originally a dry-goods store, while the other provided direct access to a
second floor residential suite. In addition, there was a bulkhead for an exterior basement stair near the center of
the elevation. Originally, there was no chimney stack at the east wall. This was one of the first elevations to be
modified. The 1897 Sanborn shows that a single story, wood-sided addition, slightly wider than the main build-
ing, was added at this elevation. Probably as part of the addition's construction, the basement stair and bulkhead
were removed and a chimney stack was added near the center of the original east exterior wall. The new chimney
may have been added to accommodate new stoves needed to heat the addition or to provide better heat at the east
end of the building.

Where the addition’s west elevation extended beyond the main building’s north elevation, there was one exterior
opening. The addition also had one large window at the center of its north elevation. The east elevation was
gabled, with a chimney stack at the peak of the elevation. The southern half of the east elevation was shaded by a
small covered porch, which concealed a door and another large window. There is no evidence of any feature along
the south elevation of the addition, which lies on the property line. The adjacent building could have abutted this
facade.

The south elevation of the main building was fairly plain, as there was another building constructed within two
feet of this elevation. There were only three window openings. Two were at the basement stair, near the eastern
end of the elevation, and the third was directly above the western-most of these, at the second floor stair landing.

Between 1911 and 1936, the building was remodeled as two separate, single-family dwellings. Along the west and
northwest elevations, a poured concrete porch replaced the previous wood porch. The windows and entrance
between the columns were removed, and a recessed wall with horizontal siding was built across two thirds of the
west elevation, behind the line of the northernmost column. An enclosed staircase, also with horizontal siding,

Part E: Architectural Analysis 35



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-O1)

Historic Structure Report

Historic Paint Treatment Recommendations

Considering the number of physical changes that have taken place at both the exterior and interior of The Wright
Cycle Company building as described in the Architectural Analysis section of this report, and the limited amount
of period finished surfaces of the building, it is recommended that the Historic Paint Analysis, Appendix C, be
used as a guideline for paint interpretation. Inspection of the photograph listed as Figure 1 in Part B of this report
shows the presence of a darker trim color or finish, as can be seen at the eaves and window casing surfaces.
Although visual inspection of such historic black and white photographs is often confusing, the values (dark, light
and gradient values between dark and light) in the photograph do provide a basis from which we can consider a
general range of colors that we have found present in a sample.

With respect to the exterior window molding sampled and analyzed, the first paint film present matching 10R 4/
4 would be an appropriate value match to that observed in the photograph in Figure 1, Part B. Further inspection
of this photograph provides us with a lighter surface at the window shutters, and on the front doors and door
surround. Where evidence is available, it is recommended that the interior ceiling and wall surfaces be re-papered
to match the original paper in pattern and color make up. Interpretation of the interior trip moldings should be
executed based on the final color choices for the wallpaper.

In summation we can conclude that a limited amount of evidence is available for interpretation of an accurate
finishes campaign, but use of the evidence at hand can help in providing an historically appropriate campaign.
The most accurate re-creation of the interior paint scheme will be provided by the architectural and archeologi-
cal evidence, and not from the limited finishes information.

Part H: Building Recommendations 67



6. Function of Use TT
feoric Functions (enter categone. 1. snetructions) Current Functione (ertter categories from inetroctona)
oS i ors RECREATION. AND CULTURE: museum
INDU R |
7
7, Description
Architectural Classification
Archi aiicat , Materiais (enter categories trom instructions)
Late Victorian walle brick
wood siding on addition
root wood shingle
other limestone columns

Describe present and historic physical appearance,

The Wright Cycle Company building is a two-story detached
rectangular commercial brick structure with a full basement and a
single-story frame addition on the rear. The building is three
bays wide and six bays deep. The hipped wood~shingled roof of the
main section features a projecting gable on the north side and a
diagonally projecting gable on the northwest. The addition has a
gabled roof which, like the main roof, was covered with wood
shingles.

The first floor main facade, which fronts on Williams Street,
featured storefront display windows capped with a limestone lintel
supported by four one-piece limestone columns with stylized
capitols.' Comprising eight lights each, the display windows
flanked the central double door entryway. There was another double
door entryway with a transom window on the north side of the
building; this door Probably served as a freight entrance. A third
main floor entryway, a single door, provided access to the rear
addition. Situated directly over the double door entry on the
ground floor was another double door which opened onto a small
metal balcony; it was Probably used to move equipment in and out
of the second floor by means of a hoist with pulleys located in the
gable end above the door. With the exception of the storefront
described above, the building's windows were 2/2 double-hung sash
windows with dark painted wood shutters. All of the window and
door openings had limestone lintels and sills.

The first floor. interior of the main Section of the building was
one large room used as a showroom and workspace. The room had
light colored plaster walls with dark wood. baseboards. Interior
ornamentation was restricted to tapering the sides of the door and
window lintels to suggest a pediment. The rear addition was
divided into two rooms and probably served as office space. A
stairway in the southeast corner of the building provided access
to the unfinished basement below and up to the second floor. The
upper floor was divided into five rooms of various sizes. The

Se

"similar columns also made of local limestone appear on
several neighborhood commercial buildings of the same vintage.

CX] See continuation sheet


The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

82

Appendix C


The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Figure 1 View of the cracked and missing parging of the south
# foundation wall at the stair, 1996 (Fitzpatrick Structural
4 Engineering)

Basement:

The basement of The Wright Cycle Company building (HS-01) is composed of the stone walls described under
the Foundations section of this report, a concrete slab-on-grade, and wood posts running east-west along the
center of the basement. Markings on both the floors and the walls indicate brick partitions existed previously, but
because of their placement within the building's structure, they are not believed to be original.

Four of the eight columns spanning the center of the basement (those referred to as B, C, F and G on EXS-100 in
Appendix B) appear to be original columns. These original columns rest on concrete foundations that are "mound"
shaped. Column B, though, is on a rectangular concrete footing that protrudes out from a concrete ramp in the
floor as opposed to the "mound" shape. The footing for column F has been chipped away, exposing a wood plate
ona concrete footing. The remaining columns, A, D, E, H, and K, are newer 4x4s (nominal). They are resting on
concrete block footings. Column J bears directly on the slab.

The columns appear to be in fair condition, but are not vertically plumb. When measured with a four-foot mason's
level, only column G was reasonably plumb in both the north-south and the east-west directions. All of the
columns that have "moved" in the north-south direction have consistently "moved" only to the north (bottoms to
the south). Refer to Table | for specific measurements for all of the columns. Note that column D is bowed in the.
north-south direction (i.e. the top and the bottom of the post are both leaning toward the north wall),

Part F: Existing Conditions Analysis 45



NPS Form 10-6008 OMB Approval No. 10240018
06)

United States Department of the Interior

National Park Service

National Register of Historic Places
Continuation Sheet

West Third Street Historic District, Montgomery Co., Dayton, Ohio
Section number _° Page a

Apart from the Wrights, the district is associated with Paul Lawrence Dunbar (1872-1906),
the internationally renown black poet. Dunbar was born in Dayton and grew up in and
around the district. The Dunbar family home is located just outside the district.
Although both his parents were illiterate, his mother was a former slave, they encouraged
Dunbar to learn to read and write and to get an education. He showed his literary talents
early. In high school he became the president of the Literary Society and was also the
chief editor of the school paper. He graduated from Dayton Central High School in 1890,
the only black man in his class.

A mutual interest in printing and newspapers brought Dunbar and Orville Wright together
and they collaborated on Dunbar's shortlived Tattler, a black neighborhood paper. Dunbar
contributed frequently to local newspapers, including the Wrights' Westside News. Some
of his early poetry was published by the Wrights at their presses located in the Hoover
Block, Although no buildings in the district are associated specifically with Dunbar, the
thriving commercial strip is representative of the neighborhood in which he grew up and
worked.

The West Third Street Historic District is also significant architecturally as a suburban
streetcar commercial block of the late 19th and early 20th century. In 1869 W. P. Huffman
and H. S. Williams established the Dayton Street Railway as a way of opening up to the
real estate market the farms lying within a short distance of Dayton. The West End was
already starting to blossom when the railway was put down on West Third Street. The
street car added the needed impetus behind the West End development and shops sprung up
along the line with residential areas growing up behind.

The architecture of this period has the mixed character of the turn~of-the-century. Common
unifying elements are the metal cornices, brick, and overall rhythm of the facades. The
east end of the district decreases in scale and contains only the Gem City Ice Cream
plant. Other unique buildings include the Mediterranean style Dr. Allaman Building built
in 1914 (1002), the mixed residential commercial facade on the Nedham Building, built in
1897 (1010-1012) and the tiny Midget Theater, built in 1912 in Neo-Classical Revival style
(1019-1021). The middle cluster around the Williams Street intersection is more Victorian
and Romanesque Revival. Here we have excellent examples in the Booth Building built in
1890 (1018-1020), the Enterprise Building buiit in 1890 (1026-1028) both Romanesque
Revival, and the Gunkel Building built in 1898 in Victorian Italianate. The west terminus
is 20th century in character. ‘The north side has a series of buildings with oriel bays
including the Hoersting-Hortman building of 1909, Groheweg Building of 1913, and William
Webbert Building, circa 1912 (1137-1143). The Sapp Building is the districts one Prairie
style building built circa 1912. On the south side of the west end of the district There
is a Georgian Revival apartment, the Mariette Flats built in 1913 (1146) and a
Neo-Classical Revival style bank, built in 1924 (1154).



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

In April of 1890, Orville, with Wilbur as his partner, converted the West Side News from a weekly to a four-page,
five-column daily called The Evening Item. After about four months, they suspended the paper. Although the
paper was never in debt, the profits apparently did not justify the time and energy required. For a short time they
then embarked on publishing a small two-column weekly called Snapshots which was devoted to vigorous com-
ments on current local events. They began publishing the magazine on October 20, 1894 with publication continuing
for about two years. In 1895, the Wrights moved their printing business from the Hoover Block to 22 South
Williams Street, which was located directly south of the Hoover Block.

Two years prior to the first issue of Snapshots being published, the Wright brothers had developed a keen interest
in bicycles, as did the rest of the nation, which was caught up in a bicycle craze. Although the Wrights’ printing
business was financially successful, they yearned “to get involved in another business enterprise to satisfy their
pioneering temperaments and to challenge their mechanical minds.” As a result, they opened the Wright Cycle
Exchange, their first bicycle shop, in December 1892. Located at 1005 West Third Street, the shop required they
divide their time between the printing and bicycle businesses. The name of the bicycle shop was changed to The
Wright Cycle Company in 1894. The shop moved to two other locations before being combined with the printing
business in 1895 at the 22 South Williams Street building.

The 22 South Williams Street building, rented by the brothers from 1895-1897, was the first location in which
their bicycle and printing businesses were brought together under the same roof. It was the fourth bicycle shop
(out of an eventual five) operated by the Wright brothers, and is the only building that remains intact in its original
location. Further, “two significant events occurred during the years [that] Wilbur and Orville occupied the 22
South Williams building: the death of Otto Lilienthal, a German aeronautics experimenter, and the expansion of
their bicycle business from merely sales and repairs into the manufacture of their own brands.”

Anxious to put their own mechanical skills to better use, and to expand their business, the Wright brothers decided
to begin manufacturing their own line of bicycles in late 1895. In order to do this, however, they had to transform
their sales and repair shop into a well-equipped light machine shop. They designed and built their own one-
cylinder gasoline engine to drive an overhead line shaft that provided power to the machine tools.

As the bicycle business continued to increase, and the production of the Wrights’ own line of bicycles was
underway, the importance of the printing business dwindled. The last issue of Snapshots was published April 17,
1896 and “carried an advertisement for the first bicycles manufactured under the Wright brothers’ own brand
names.”* They released samples from which to order on April 24th, with full production beginning on May 15,
1896. The first model to be produced was the Van Cleve, named for the Wrights’ great-great-grandmother, who
was one of the original white settlers of Dayton. It is the production of the Wrights’ bicycles that provided the
brothers with the mechanical experience and financial resources necessary to later begin their airplane experi-
ments.

In August of 1896, Orville contracted typhoid fever from the well at the rear of The Wright Cycle Company
building. It was during his recuperation that he and Wilbur learned of the death of Otto Lilienthal in a glider crash.
The Wrights had been aware of Lilienthal’s glider experiments for some time and had included an article about
him in their newspaper. Lilienthal's death sparked their earliest serious discussions on the subject of flight, and
provided the “emotional impetus that set them on the path to manned flight, culminating in the invention of the
airplane in 1903.” As Wilbur recounted:

My own active interest in aeronautical problems dates back to the death of Lilienthal in 1896. The brief notice of his
death which appeared in the telegraphic news at that time aroused a passive interest which had existed from my child-
hood... and as my brother soon became equally interested with myself, we soon passed from the reading to the thinking,
and finally to the working stage."

8 Part B: Historic Documentation Summary



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Introduction



Date: 1/26/98

Survey Site: The Wright Cycle Shop

ATC Associates Inc. Lead Based Paint Survey Data Record

Client: Quinn Evans Architects
Client # 17960.0001

Inspector:

Todd Taylor

Project Name/Location: 22 South Williams Street

RMD; LPA-1- #1221

Initial POSITIVE
%oom Type Wall Component Substrate] Condition| Color | K.Shell_| NEGATIVE
ixterior A Stair Riser Wood Fair Red 0.2 N
ixterior B Porch Ceiling Support Wood Fair Red >9.9 P
B Porch Ceiling Wood Fair White >9.9 P
B Ceiling Wood Fair Red >9.9 P
B Threshold Wood Poor Red >9.9 P
B Corner Board Wood Good Red 0.0 N
B Exterior Window Casing Wood Fair Red 0.2 N
B Exterior Window Sash Wood Fair Red 0.2 N
B Exterior Window Sill Wood Fair Red -0.1 N
Zalibration N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2.5 ere
Jalibration N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.9 “_
2alibration N/A N/A N/A NIA N/A 2.0 ~

Page 4


The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

42 Part F: Existing Conditions Analysis


®

fi

BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN 45)
SCALE: W4=tar
orz « ra

e

a

QUINN
EVANS
aan
Seen
ARCHITECTS
219 1/2N. Main Stest

‘Ann Atbor, Michigan 48104
313-669 5588

A100

WE OF SHEET

BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN
EXISTING CONDITION

WRIGHT CYCLE COMPANY BUILDING
DAYTON AVIATION HERITAGE NATIONAL HISTORIC PARK



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

73



NPS Ferm 10-0000 OMB Approvas No 10240018
(6-08)

United States Department of the Interior
National Park Service

National Register of Historic Places
Continuation Sheet

West Third Street Historic District, Montgomery Co., Dayton, Ohio

Section number __? Page 4

The twin Groneweg Building, built in 1913 (1139), and William Webbert Building, circa
1912, (1143-1145) with their second story oriels and metal cornice are excellent
representatives of their time. The Sapp Building circa 1912 {photo 16), shows the
influence of the Prairie style (1147). The Olney Flats (1153) (photo 16) anchors the
district on the north side. The Olney Flats 1913 is a three story yellow brick building.
Originally a grocery store, it was renovated into a restaurant in the 1940's. There are
three recessed bays with corbelled tops on the upper stories. The center bay has a
stairway window with stone surround and a blind segmental arch encompassing three round
headed mullion windows. The side bays have paired rectangular windows with stone lintels
and sills. Over each third story window is a brick panel. The metal cornice has brackets
and attic windows. The west side has storefront bays, seven bays of apartment windows and
a round arched recessed porch in the northwest corner.

The West Side has suffered serious economic decline since the violent race riot of 1966.
The 1200 block of West Third Street has been excluded from the nomination because of
extensive demolition (photo 17). While demolition hes had an impact, the districts
historic character is intact. The district as it stands represents a significant
collection of related historic buildings worthy of preservation for its architecture and
its local association with historic persons of national significance.

**



S02 fpf

HISTORIC STRUCTURE REPORT |
The Wright Cycle Company Building
(HS - 01)

Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park
Dayton, Ohio

L

March 31, 1999
Final Submission

QUINN EVANS/ARCHITECTS,
219 1/2 North Main Street
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48104
(734) 663-5888

PLEASE RETURN TO:

TECHNICAL INFORMATION CENTER
DENVER SERVICE CENTER
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE

_ ee



10 Pom e-em am Aa,
L od

United States Department of the Interior
National Park Service

National Register of Historic Places
Continuation Sheet

Section number__°__ Page __3

Hoover Block, was continued at 22 South Williams Street as a means
to enhance and publicize the Wright Cycle Company:

SNAP-SHOTS will be devoted to the interests of its
publishers and of the business men of our city in
general. It will inform its readers why and where to buy
bicycles and other articles, and will also keep them

Late in 1895, the Wrights were again thinking of expanding their
cycle business; however, this time they sought not only to enlarge
their sales and repair operations, but also to manufacture their
own brands of bikes. In a pamphlet printed early in 1896, the
Wrights announced:

With the new year we begin our fourth season in the
bicycle business, and we take this occasion to thank the
public for its increasing favor. Each year we have more
than doubled the business of the preceding one. For this
reason we feel that we are justified in making special
preparation for the accommodation of our customers in
the coming year. our salesroom at 22 South Williams
Street is being nicely refitted, and a visit from you
will be much appreciated. We are adding new machinery
to our shop, and hefore the riding season opens we hope
to have on the market a bicycle of our own make, which
in commemoration of Dayton's Centennial Year and in honor
of our own ancestor, we have decided to call it the "van
Cleve." . . .We shall also put out a cheaper bicycle
which will be known as the "Wright Special."

In preparation to produce their own line of bicycles, the Wrights
transformed the Property into a well equipped machine shop. Within
no time, the backroom and upstairs of the bicycle shop were

a
“Dayton Snap-shots, 29 February 1896.

Suthe Wright Cycle Co. van Cleve Pamphlet," cited in Freda c.
Fisk, "How the Wheelmen Helped Save a Wright Brothers Bicycle
Shop," Wheelmen, November 1986, p. 15.



E. Sample Location Record

The sample location record for the Wright Cycle Company Shop is limited to two (2)
samples removed from the second floor, as indicated on the floor plan below.

Both samples were taken from intact surfaces at the top of the stair case. The surfaces

sampled were a Door Casing labeled on the plan as D, and a Baseboard labeled on the plan
as B.



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

86

Appendix E



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Part A: Introduction

Part B: Historic Documentation

Summary

History of the Site
Photographic Chronology
Historic Map Analysis

Part C: Archeological Analysis
Floodplains and Wetlands
Vegetation
Topography and Climate
Geology and Soils

Part D: Comparable Structure
Analysis
Neighborhood Context
Architectural Features
Suburban Architecture

Part E: Architectural Analysis
General Analysis
Exterior Analysis
Interior Analysis

Part F: Existing Conditions
Analysis
Exterior Fabric Analysis
Interior Fabric Analysis
Mechanical and Electrical Analysis
Structural Analysis
Loading Analysis
Historic Paint Analysis
Lead Paint Analysis

Part G: Building Chronology
Analysis of Episodes

Historic Structure Report

1 Part H:
Building Recommendations 59
Restoration Recommendations 61
5 Historic Paint Treatment
7 Recommendations 62
10
15 Part I:
Research Recommendations 63
21
23 References 67
23
7 Appendix A:
National Register Forms 71

25 Appendix B:

7 Structural Drawings 73
29

31. Appendix C:

3 Historic Paint Analysis 75

35 , .
35 Appendix D:

36 Lead Paint Report 77

Appendix E:
39 Existing Conditions Drawings 79
41
41
41
41
48
50
50

51
53



United States Department of the interior
National Park Service

National Register of Historic Places
Continuation Sheet

eed

Section number __°___ Page 4

outfitted with a turret lathe, drill press, brazer, tube cutting
equipment, and an overhead line shaft.® Likewise, the Wrights made
Many other tools such as files and wrenches which would be
necessary to manufacture bicycles. However, most important among
the Wrights’! engineerings for the bicycle shop was an experimental
gas engine. The one-cylinder internal combustion engine was
designed by Wilbur and Orville to power the bicycle machinery and
was the first engine they ever built.®

In the April 17, 1896, edition of =! ts, which was the final
issue of the publication, the Wrights again announced their
forthcoming line of bicycles:

For a number of months, Wright Cycle Co. have been making
Preparations to manufacture bicycles. After more delay
than we expected, we are at last ready to announce that
we will have several Samples out in a week or ten days
and will be ready to fill orders before the middle of
next month.’

The first bicycle produced, as announced, was the Van Cleve. Named
for pioneer ancestors of the Wrights, it was always the top of the
line of Wright bicycles and sold for sixty-five dollars, .The St.
Clair, a lower priced model marketed towards school children, was
also introduced in 1896.

The year 1896 at the bicycle shop was significant for other reasons
as well. in August, after the line of Wright bicycles had been
successfully introduced to the Dayton community, Orville contracted

‘tom D. Crouch, The Bishop's Boys: a Life of Wilbur ana

Orville Wright (New York: wW. W. Norton, 1989), p. 112.

"Fisk, "Wright Brothers! Bicycles," p. 6.

®crouch, Bishop's Boys, p. 112.
*Dayton Snap-shots, 17 April 1896.

crouch, “Wright Cycle Company," pamphlet.



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

eaeeasmeeanernt fe

Figure 5 The northeast corner of Second and Ludlow Streets in downtown Dayton, taken between 1913-14, (Dayton and Montgomery
County Public Library, Futzenberger #149)

‘ ae

Figure 6 The east side of South Williams Street, showing No. 22 (The Wright Cycle Company building), No. 26, and No. 30. The west
elevation of the Hoover Block is visible at the extreme left. (Aviation Tratl, Inc.)

30 Part D; Comparable Structure Analysis



SNPS Form 10-9004 OMB Approval No. 10260018
(88)

United States Department of the Interior

National Park Service

National Register of Historic Places
Continuation Sheet

West Third Street Histroic District, Dayton, Montgomery Co., Ohio

Section number __10 Page ___2

Williams to the south lot line of parcel 32 lot 6353 and on to the back lot line, thence
northerly along the back lot line to the north side of Peck's Alley, thence westward to the
intersection with Broadway, thence northward along the east side of Broadway to the

start point.



NPS Form 10-9008
co)

United States Department of the Interior

National Park Service

National Register of Historic Places
Inventory—Nomination Form

West Third St. Historic District, Dayton, Montgomery County, Ohi
Continuation sheet

Properties List

item number 7 & 10

OMB No. 1024-0018,
Exp. 1-31-84

Page 3

Address

Architectural Impression

West Third Street

1002
1010-1012
1005
1017
1018-1020
1019-1021
1023-1027
1026-1028
029-1039
1032
1034-1040
1042-1046
1101-1107
1109-1111
1114-1118
1117-1119
1120-1130
"127
-129
1131-1137
1139-1141
1143-1145
1146-1148
1147-1151
1152
1153
1154

Mediterrean influence

mixed Residential commercial
industrial

intrusion

commercial Romanesque
Neoclassic Theater
commercial Romanesque
commercial Romanesque

Early 20th Century commercial
vernacular

commercial Romanesque
commercial Romanesque
Victorian commercial
commercial Romanesque
intrusion

commercial Romanesque

High Victorian Italianate
intrusion

early 20th Century commercial
Eastlake influence

Early 20th Century Commercial
Early 20th Century Commercial
Georgian Revival

Prairie influence

intrusion

commercial Romanesque
Neoclassic Bank

South Williams Street

22
23-25
26
29
30

Victorian shop

Queen Anne influence
Queen Anne influence
Victorian Vernacular
Victorian Vernacular

North Williams Street

United States Post Office an intrusion

\

Building Historic Name

Allaman Building
Needham Building
Gem City Ice Cream Building

Booth Building

The Midget Theater a.
Mory's Block and Hal1~TM
Enterprise Building a,
J. A Prior Building.»

Setzer Building
Hoover Block
Gunkel Building
Gunkel Block

Webbert Flats

Walters' Block

Wright Cycle company Site
Hale Building
Hoersting-Holtman Building
Groneweg Building

William Webbert Building
Mariette Flats

Sapp Building

Olney Flats
West Side Building and Loan

Wright Cycle company
residential
residential
residence

residence

Date of Const.

1914
1897
1886-1914

1890

c1912
1884.
1890

1924
unknown
1906
1890

ou 108

1908
1885-1893

¢1923
1909
1913
1912
1913
c1912

1913
-1922

1886

(facility leased from private owner)


The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

cladding material, presumably wood. An exterior doorway appears in the west face of the addition. There is no
porch on the west elevation of the building. There also seems to be a small protrusion at the roof of the addition,
which might be a chimney stack.

The Wright Cycle Company Building: Circa 1940

Figure 2. This photo, circa 1940, was taken by Roger McCure, and shows The Wright Cycle Company building
modified and being used as a two-family residence. This is the only known photo of the building from the time
period between 1896 and 1980. This photo shows the north and west elevations of 22 South Williams Street, with
a chamfered northwest corner. The storefront windows and entrance doors have been removed, and a new, re-
cessed wall has been created, running north to south from the back of the northernmost column to approximately
one quarter of the way into the southernmost bay. From this point, a second, north-facing wall extends westward,
to within two to three feet of the outer face of the west-facing columns. It is picked up by a west-facing wall that
returns to the inner side of the south wall of the building, behind the southernmost column. These three walls are
clad with narrow, horizontal wood siding. The storefront columns remain in place, now freestanding and support-
ing the upper facade. The northernmost portion of this ensemble, on the left, contains a one-over-one window,
behind the northernmost column on the west elevation. To the south of this window are two new entrances; the one
on the right presumably leads up to the second floor. Both floors show paint ghosting from shutters that are no
longer installed.

At the north elevation, a bay window has been added in the center of the elevation, where the 1896 doorways were
once located. There is a one-over-one window in each of the bays, the body of which is also narrow, horizontal,
wood siding. On the ground floor of the original structure, there are two newer window openings aligning with the
two western-most windows of the second floor. The glazing of these four windows is not visible, but the second
floor windows appear to be original; again, there are no shutters. Beyond the bay window, a portion of the rear
addition is visible.

Gutters have been added to the roof. There is a downspout at the left side of the northwest elevation's gable, and
another at the southwest corner of the building.

Figure 2 This circa 1940 photo shows The Wright Cycle Company building after its conversion to a two-family residence.
(Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park Archieves)

12 Part B: Historic Documentation Summary


The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Episode 1: 1886-1910

EPISODE 1: 1886-1910

Original interior partitions undocumented

ow

——t

| =
_ _ |
| J ———t Pep =- _
'
|
\
|
{
|

SECOND FLOOR PLAN

TM~
to)

Va eK KY
4
Mall
cee of |
_ TE
FIRST FLOOR PLAN

(/\\BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN
€ o274 8 16
———

/— SoesSae Ritetion

54 Part G: Building Chronology





The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Bibliography

Architecture and Construction in Cincinnati: A Guide
to Buildings, Designers, and Builders. Vol. 1. Cincin-
nati: The Architectural Foundation of Cincinnati, June
15, 1987.

Deines, Ann. Dayton Aviation Heritage National His-
torical Park Historic Resource Study (Drafi). Omaha,
NE: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Ser-
vice, Midwest Regional Office, September 1996.

Fisk, Fred C. and Todd, Marlin W. The Wright Broth-
ers: From Bicycle to Biplane. West Milton, OH: Fred
C. Fisk and Marlin W. Todd, 1993.

Gannon, Loren S., Jr. Gannon Historical Services. Na-
tional Register of Historic Places Registration Form
Sor the West Third Street [now called the Wright-
Dunbar] Historic District. Dayton, OH: September 2,
1987.

Johnson, Mary Ann. 4 Field Guide To Flight: On the
Aviation Trial in Dayton, Ohio. Dayton, OH:
Landfall Press, 1986.

Kelly, Fred C. The Wright Brothers: 4 Biography. New
York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1989.

Longstreth, Richard. “Main Streets,” In Built in the
USA: American Buildings From Airports to Zoos. Ed-
itedby Diane Maddex. Washington, D.C.: The
Preservation Press, 1985.

Longstreth, Richard. The Buildings of Main Street.
Washington, D.C.: The Preservation Press, 1987.

Maddex, Diane, ed. Built in the U.S.A.: American Build-
ings From Airports to Zoos. Washington, D.C.:
The Preservation Press, 1985

O’Bright, Jill York, Richardson, David G., and Harlow,
William S. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park
Service, Midwest Regional Office. National Historic
Landmark Nomination Form [for the Hoover Block].
Omaha, NE: 1987-88.

Historic Structure Report

O’Bright, Jill York, Richardson, David G., and Harlow,
William S. U.S, Department of the Interior, National Park
Service, Midwest Regional Office. National Historic
Landmark Nomination Form [for the Wright Cycle
Company Building]. Omaha, NE: January 18, 1990.

Read-Miller, Cynthia, ed. Main Street, U.S.A, In Early
Photographs. New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1988.

Rifkind, Carole. A Field Guide to American Architec-
ture. New York: The New American Library, Inc., 1980.

Rifkind, Carole. Main Street: The Face of Urban
America, New York: Harper & Row, 1977.

United States Department of the Interior, National Park
Service, Division of Interpretive Planning, Harpers Ferry.
A Plan for the Interpretation of Dayton Aviation Heri-
tage National Historical Park Ohio. Harpers Ferry,
West Virginia: October 22, 1996.

United States Department of the Interior, National Park
Service. Dayton Aviation Heritage National Histori-
cal Park Ohio (brochure).

United States Department of the Interior, National Park
Service, Denver Service Center. Draft General Man-
agement Plan/Environmental Assessment: Dayton
Aviation Heritage National Historical Park + Ohio.
Denver, CO: November 1996.

United States Department of the Interior, National Park
Service, Denver Service Center. General Management
Plan/Interpretive Plan: Dayton Aviation Heritage Na-
tional Historical Park * Ohio. Denver, CO: November
1997.

United States Department of the Interior, National Park
Service, Midwest Regional Office. Study of Alterna-
tives: Dayton’s Aviation Heritage * Ohio. Prepared in
conjunction with The 2003 Fund Committee. U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1991-573-040/20,039,
Region No. 8.

References 78



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

made up the rest of the west elevation, taking up the majority of the southernmost bay. This stair led from the face
of the columns at the font porch to the second floor. A new entry for the first floor and a window were built in the
recessed wall, and a door at the bottom of the enclosed stairway became the entrance for the second floor.

At the north elevation, the first and second floor doors were replaced with bay windows. At the first floor, two
windows were added at the west half of the elevation, and the small window at the east half of the elevation was
replaced by a third full size window and adjoining door. Below the west end windows, an exterior concrete stair
leading to the basement was added. Just outside the east end openings was a small covered porch, the roof of
which extended from the roof of the wood frame addition at the east. At the east elevation of the main building,
another window was added to the southern corner of the second floor, while at the same elevation of the addition,
the window was made smaller, and another door was added at the southern corner. Three windows were added to
the south elevation: two at the middle of the second floor elevation, and the third just below the western-most of
these, at the first floor.

Most of the window shutters were removed, except for those at the window on the second floor stair landing. With
the exception of the base of the bay windows, the porch, the door, and the window frames, the entire building was
painted white.

In 1985, the building was reclaimed as a historic site. The paint was cleaned from the brick, and new shutters were
placed at the second floor windows at the north, northwest and west elevations. A wood porch replaced the
concrete porch, although no porch is shown in the 1896 documentation. The large windows and the entrance at the
west and northwest elevations were recreated. The recessed west facing wall, and southwest enclosed stair, were
removed, as were the bay window and the two windows at the western end of the north elevation. The window just
east of the bay window, was re-sized to a smaller opening, and the doorway was reused. The addition and its porch
along the north elevation of the main building were completely rebuilt, with the addition of an accessible ramp.
Along the south elevation, the easternmost window of the first floor was removed and infilled, as was a small
bathroom window.

Most of the actions taken during this restoration procedure were accurate to the 1896 image (Figure 1), with some
exceptions. First of all, the sizing of some materials varies. This is the case at the base of the storefront window
in the two outer bays, where the sill is now more pronounced. Similarly, the horizontal transom support above the
entrance doors is thinner and aligns differently than the original. Secondly, some of the replacements that were
made were not done precisely, The railings on the balcony are more substantial, and the chimney corbelling detail
is different, than the original. In addition, the replacement shutters have only two divisions, as compared to the
original three, and the small square window on the first floor at the north elevation is no longer in the same
location.

Interior Analysis
Basement

The basement is constructed of original stone rubble walls. The walls at the northwest corner are chamfered,
reflecting the above-ground building configuration. At the east wall is an additional, partially excavated, 4’x6”
area with masonry walls and a sloped, unfinished floor. This was an exterior stair to the basement (Figure 1) which
was probably closed off when the rear addition was constructed prior to 1896. The basement floor is a concrete
slab. On the floor north of the stair opening is a semicircular concrete pad which is believed to be original. This
may have served as a stove or furnace base.

36 Part E: Architectural Analysis



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Figure 4 View of the joists
rolled on the south bearings
and new metal joist hangers,
1996 (Fitzpatrick Structural
Engineering).

scadinaalanirnnssanneersehiercclces

Figure 5 View of the insect
damaged joist, 1996
(Fitzpatrick Structural
Engineering).

joist is an original joist that has not been reinforced. The sixth and seventh western-most joists have been sistered
on their south halves with newer 2x12s (nominal).

The joist in the first floor structure at the chimney in the north wall of the basement are headered to prevent the
joists from bearing on the chimney structure. The header supports a single joist which is split along the entire
length of the member. The joists adjacent to this member support the header and show no signs of distress at the
time of the inspections. The west connection, however, between the header and the joist's stringer, is separating.
The spikes can be seen between the members. In addition, the header is rotated at the bearings.

48 Part F: Existing Conditions Analysis


Mapped, edited, and p

WS
ye odo
orig

hed by the Geotogical Survey

in cooperation with the Army Map Service
Revised

S an
y by phot
4 F

th State of Ohio agencies
ul NOS/NOAA

logrammetiic
checked 1!

Revised trom aecial
1965

acks based an Ohio coordinate

he Miami Raver Survey
he Between the Mua
River Base

10s of

Home:

AND 191 MAGNE
NATION AL CCN

WES? CARROLLTON 6 Mt
CINCINNATI 50 M1

1000 )

bry pa Beat =

1 s
GIES ey 1

CON
NATIONAL

THIS MAP COMPLIES WITH NATIONAL MAP ACCURACY STANO
FOR SALE BY U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY. RESTON, VIRGINIA
A FOLDER DESCRIRING TOPOGRAPHIC. MAPS AND SYMBOLS IS AVAILABLE

Mr (DAYTON SOUTH!

WI62 1NW

SCALE | 24000
a

Bor
2000 x
4

2-8

toe

TOUR INTERVAL 10 FEET
C VERTICAL DATUM OF

4000 S000 ‘
t

1929



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Building Chronology

53



2.5GY 5/4 5GY 7/2

. . T.5GY 5/2 OGY 4/4

5GY 9/2 e | 7.5GY 7/2 10GY 8/4

5GY 7/4 : {| 7.5GY 7/4 10GY 5/6

ann one

2.56 5/2 5G 3/2 5G 9/1 7.5G 3/2

| 2.5G 8/4 5G 3/4 5G 9/2 7.5G 6/2
7.5G 3/4

1.5G 8/4

e denotes (HS-01)



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-O1)

Historie Structure Report

Figure 6 View of the western end
Of the first floor framing, 1996
(Fitzpatrick Structural
Engineering).

The center beam spanning east-west and running the entire length of the building is comprised of three members
similar in size to a nominal 4x6. The beams are not connected together at their ends, which occur over columns C
and F, A bit more than two feet is cantilevered off of column H. The condition of the beam was inaccessible at the
time of the inspection due to miscellaneous wood blocking or reinforcing covering most of the original wood
beams.

Second Floor:

The second floor is currently being used as office space for the NPS personnel on-site. There is a possibility that
this floor will be for interpretative purposes in the future; however, due to handicapped accessibility issues public
access to the second floor is not planned at this time.

The exact nature of the second floor structure was inaccessible at the time of the survey. However, some dimen-
sions were estimated with the help of electronic devices, the stair accessing the first and second floors, and past
photographs. The spacing of the joists was determined using a deep stud sensor - an electronic device that reacts
to differing densities of objects when passed over them. The depth of the joists was determined from measuring
the top of the second floor down to the first floor stair landing and the floor to ceiling height of the first floor. These
measurements were then subtracted and the possible materials between the top and bottom of the second floor
considered, leaving the depth of the joists. The width of the joists was assumed to be the typical 2- inch nominal
width found throughout the building. Old photographs revealed that the joists span from north to south the entire
width of the building’. However, it is uncertain if the joists have been replaced since the time that these photo-
graphs were taken. No apparent structural distresses were apparent at the time of the inspection.

Attic Floor and Roof Framing:

Both the attic floor framing and roof framing can be observed through an access hatch in the second floor ceiling.
The attic space currently houses some of the building's mechanical units. The use of the attic space is not expected
to change. The attic floor joists, again, span north-south the entire width of the building. The roof members are
sloped and connect at a ridge board at the top. Skip board sheathing is attached to the rafters, which is a typical
form of construction for shake, tile, or slate roofs of the era. No apparent structural distresses were observed at the
time of the inspection.

Part F: Existing Conditions Analysis 49



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

78 Appendix A



NPS Foem 10-9004 OMB Approval No, 10240018
(00)

United States Department of the Interior
National Park Service

National Register of Historic Places
Continuation Sheet

West Third Street Historic District, Montgomery Co., Dayton, Ohio
Section number __s Page 2 __

This streetcar commercial block is considerably different from the other examples in
Dayton, It is more urban, compact and architecturally distinguished, and is on a greater
scale than others found in Dayton, dominated by two and three story buildings. Those
structures that have survived in similar areas are one and two story strips, primarily at
intersections and are interspersed with residential buildings. One of these is part of
the Huffman Historic District (NR: 8-24-82) on East Third Street. The other west side
streetcar commercial block is on the West Fifth Street. It is smali and nearly
demolished.


The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Part F: Existing Conditions Analysis

Exterior Fabric Analysis

In general the building fabric is in good condition, having been recently renovated. The west, northwest and east
facades are in particularly sound condition, the only issue of note being the amount of residual white paint remain-
ing behind shutters and around window areas in general. The north elevation has only a few questionable conditions.
At the first floor, at the western half of the elevation, residual paint is, once again, an issue. It seems especially
heavy around the location of the two former windows. Above this area, just below the fascia board at the roofline,
there is an area of inappropriately repointed brick. The mortar is particularly dark and does not match the historic
mortar color. There also appears to be two replacement bricks, one at either side of the first floor door, that do not
match the historic brick and have poorly pointed mortar joints.

The south elevation, like the other elevations, has noticeable residual paint at the brick, but the larger issue is the
water damage occurring to the masonry fabric. The proximity of the house to the south, the lack of proper drain-
age, and the retention of moisture by surrounding materials have combined to accelerate deterioration of the
foundation wall at this area. Although there are existing gutters at both buildings, the narrow gap between them
prohibits ground water from being evaporated by sun and wind. Lack of foundation drains allows the water to
percolate through the soil and eventually into the porous masonry walls. There are patches of cementitious parg-
ing over the brick along the ground level. The moisture being retained in the masonry by this parging has created
missing mortar joints and brick elsewhere along the elevation.

Other materials such as the wood trim, gutters and downspouts, and the roofing materials all appear to be in sound
condition.

Interior Fabric Analysis

Most of the interior fabric has been replaced or repaired and refinished. The only failing fabric appears to be the
painted plaster all along the south elevation at the upper floors. At both the first and second floors there is
evidence of cracking and peeling, as well as general moisture damage, to the plaster. All other fabric at the first
and second floor, and the basement, is in sound condition.

Mechanical and Electrical Analysis

Dayton utility company records do not go back more than 30 years, so no definitive information is available
concerning the history of the building systems. The original heating system was coal-fired furnaces. However,
The Wright Cycle Company building contains almost no evidence of the original systems.

Presently, heat for the first floor is provided by furnaces located in the basement. Heat for the second floor is
provided by a furnace in the attic, which is almost impossible to service. Portions of the insulation on the attic
airduct work is torn and in need of repair. The basement has a fire suppression sprinkler system, while the rest of
the building is unprotected.

There is no electrical equipment of historical significance at the site.

Structural Analysis

The structural observations and recommendations of The Wright Cycle Company building (HS-01), Dayton Aviation
Heritage National Historical Park in Dayton, Ohio, described throughout this report are based on physical inves-
tigations performed on October 21-23, 1996, and on August 28, 1997, by Tom Fitzpatrick, P.E., and Cheryl
Kryscynski, both of Fitzpatrick Structural Engineering, P.C. During these investigations, photographs were taken
and a corresponding log was produced. Field notes were also taken and were reproduced on the following draw-
ings attached in Appendix B:

Part F: Existing Conditions Analysis 43



Room/Location
Ist Floor/Front Rm

ist Floor/Center Rm

Ist Floor/Center Rm

1st Floor/Rear Rm.

INTERIOR SAMPLES - Continued

Surface Chromachronology
Ceiling - Continued

Comments: Wallpaper fragment from ceiling with green painted
finish retained beneath at the edges, which may have been original
trim color, and with traces of red painted finish on top at edges,
which may have been from trim or wall painting.

Wali Wallpaper

Comments: Sample was taken from behind door frame and appears
was likely applied straight onto finish coat of plaster. No traces of
painted finish present.

Wall Wallpaper

Comments: Sample was taken from unknown wall location and
removed from site prior to architectural changes that took place
during Episode 3: 1985 - 1997.

Wall Wallpaper - 4 consecutive layers
Numerous painting campaigns

Comments: The sample was removed from behind shelf bracket.
The first four treatments of this wall sample were wallpaper, the first
applied directly to finish plaster. Heavy amounts of recent (within
ten years) paint applications have been made directly over the older
papers.

2nd Floor/Top of Stairs Wall Wallpaper

Comments: The wallpaper fragment was removed from behind the stair hand-rail mount.
No coating was found between the paper and finished plaster surface, with only traces of a
green painted finish found at the top, outer edge of the paper.

Sample of artifact from Basement Pile

2nd Floor

Comer Guard Wood
Varnish -
LOYR 5/6
NO.5
Dirt layer
SY 9/6

Comments: The first finish of this element was a resinous varnish,
now oxidized. It was subsequently painted on three separate
occasions, with a heavy dirt layer building up between the third
(NO.5) strata, and the top (SY 9/6) strata.

Door Casing Varnish - g
SYR 4/2



a 00th. CNB Angee tm, 14,

United States Department of the interior
National Park Service

National Register of Historic Places
Continuation Sheet

Section number __2 Page 8

Major Bibliographical References

Crouch, Tom D. i ' A ife of Wilbur and Orville
Wright. New York: wW. W. Norton, 1989.

- “The Wright Cycle Company." Pamphlet. Dayton, Ohio:
Aviation Trail, Inc., n.d@.

Dayton Snap-shots, 29 February 1896; and 17 April 1896.

Fisk, Fred c. “How the Wheelmen Helped Save a Wright Brothers
Bicycle Shop." Wheelmen, November 1986.

- "The Wright Brothers! Bicycles." Wheelmen November

1980.

Johnson, Mary Ann. A Field Guide to Flight: On the Aviation Trail
in_Dayton, Ohio. Dayton, Ohio: Landfall Press, 1986.
Kelly, Fred ¢c., ed. i H of Wilbu

. New York: Farrar, Straus and Young,
1951.
. A orjized b

: + New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1943; reprint
ed., New York: Farrar, Straus and Young, 1950..

McFarland, Marvin W., ed The Papers of Wilbur and orvilie wrignt:
on ers of
Qctave Chanute. 2 vols. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1953.

Renstrom, Arthur G. ww. Orvi Wright: A Chronology
i th Anniversary of the Birth of
Orville Wright, August 19, 1871. Washington D.c.: Library

of Congress, 1975.
Weaver, Margaret (Lanny) . "The Wright Brothers at 22 South
Williams Street 1895 to 1897." Mimeograph. Dayton, Ohio:

Aviation Trail, Inc., 1983,



‘Second Floor Part tions are shown over Second Foor Joists.

ses, veo o>
e eee Mla FEED a a Tr ae
, unrepsrares
AC" Fitzpatrick ovine Pore a DEPARTMENT OF HE RTERIOR Zee
Structural ossig7| Ce DESIGNED: a eT
oan econ NATIONAL PARK SERVICE gma zc
Engineering, P.C. a co Bost
Oooo DRAMA Floor
Se 12H Mais Anmartor * i aBxp me Plan THE WRIGHT CYCLE COMPANY SHOP (H5-01)
soar vn: maner soe ARCHUTEETS an pr ecnia coterie EXS - 102| *
2S-769- 0520 Fox 30-769 205 | ender smcigmnanes [——}-——} -,oner— DAYTON. OHIO « 2
Poem _—



Historic Paint Analysis

Executed by

Steven C. Seebohm/SEEBOHM, Ltd.

P.O. Box 616

Petoskey, Michigan 49770

A. Introduction and Description

The purpose of this report is to document the chromachronology of limited interior and
exterior finishes of the Wright Cycle Company Shop, or HS 01, in the Dayton Aviation
Heritage National Historic Park, Dayton, Ohio.

The report includes the following sections:

Part A: Introduction and Description

Part B: Methods and Analysis

Part C: Existing Conditions and Physical Investigation

Part D: Finishes Analysis

Part E: Sample Location Record

Part F: Recommendations

Part G: Summary and Conclusion

B. Methods and Analysis

Sampling was executed with a flat-bladed Exacto knife, with samples being stored in
individually-marked envelopes. Envelopes were then placed in storage bags marked for
each area of the interior, labeled and dated.

All samples were inspected under a 60X and 120X Meiji binocular microscope with a
Stocker & Yale 7,000 degree K illuminator; this illumination insures a color match under
conditions simulating natural light.

Finish Colors were then matched to The Munsell Color Notation System (Glossy
Collection).

Wallpaper existing was noted, but not analyzed.



ATC Associates Inc. Lead Based Paint Survey Data Record

Date:1/28/98 Client: Quinn Evans Architects inspector: Todd Taylor
Client # 17960.0001 Project Name/Location: 1060 West Third Street
Survey Site: Hoover Building RMD; LPA-1- #1221
Initial POSITIVE

Room Type Walt Component Substrate] Condition Coior K.Shell__ | NEGATIVE
Calibration N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2.1 wee
Calibration N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2.3 bial
Calibration N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.8 wean
Calibration N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.8 ae
Calibration N/A N/A N/A N/A NWA 2.1 bail
First Floor Cc Wall Plaster Poor Green 0.6 N
First Floor D Wall Plaster Poor Yellow 0.4. N

st Floor D Ceiling Plaster Poor Yellow -0.1 N
First Floor A Wall Plaster Poor Yellow -0.1 N

rst Floor B Wall Plaster Poor Green -0.1 N
-irst Floor A Baseboard Wood Poor Green -0.3 N

irst Floor B Support Post Metal Poor Green 0.0 N
“irst Floor D Door Wood Poor Varnish 0.0 N
Second Floor D Door Wood Fair Varnish 0.1 N
Second Floor [2) Door Casing Wood Fair Varnish 0.2 N
Second Floor B Chair Rail Wood Fair Green 0.3 N
Second Floor B Wall Plaster Fair Yellow 0.3 N
Second Floor B Wall Plaster Poor Yellow 0.0 N
Second Floor Cc Cupboard Wood Fair Yellow 0.1 N
second Floor D Window Casing Wood Fair Varnish 0.1 N
second Floor B Shelf Support Wood Fair Varnish 0.2 N
second Floor A Floor Wood Fair Brown 20.2 N
second Floor D Baseboard Wood Fair Varnish 0.0 N
second Floor D Pillar Wood Fair Varnish -0.1 N
second Floor D Wail Plaster Poor Yellow 2.2 P
second Floor (>) Bathroom Chair Rail Wood Fair Yellow 0.7 N
second Floor Cc Wail Plaster Poor Green 0.5 N
3econd Floor Cc Baseboard Wood Poor White 70.4 N
second Floor Cc Cupboard Wood Fair White 1.4 P
second Floor B Wall Plaster Poor Pink 0.4 N
second Floor D Door Wood Poor Green 0.0 N
second Floor B Pillar Wood Fair Varnish -0.1 N
second Floor D Shelf Support Wood Fair Varnish -0.4 N
3econd Floor Cc Door Casing Wood . Fair Varnish 0.0 N
econd Floor D Ceiling Plaster Poor Yellow -0.3 N
hird Floor D Door Casing Wood Poor Green/Blue 0.1 N
hird Floor D Door Wood Fair Green/Blue 0.0 N

rd Floor A Wail Plaster Poor Pink 2.6 P
hird Floor Cc Wall Plaster Fair Tan 79.9 Pp
hird Floor B Wall Plaster Poor Blue 16 P
hird Floor B Baseboard Wood Fair Blue -0.4 N

Page 1



Tbe Georgia Institute of Technology

This is to certify that
Cnudd Cavlor

has attended and satisfactorily passed an examination
covering the contents of a continuing education course entitled:

LEAD-BASED PAINT DETECTION AND ABATEMENT

676

Certificate Number Georgia Tech Research Institute Course Director

Environmental Science and Technology Laboratory
June 22-26, 1992 Training Programs Office
Atlanta, GA 30332
Dates of Attendance Phone: (404) 894-7430; FAX: (404) 894-8281



HISTORIC STRUCTURE REPORT

The Wright Cycle Company Building
(HS - 01)

Prepared by
QUINN EVANS/ARCHITECTS

219 1/2 North Main Street
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48104

Recommended: \ ee eS Date: Hf. 2. 3 “49

Superintendent, Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park

Concurred: KY nd CL Athi fe Date: 4Y- Q 7: 7

Superintendent, Midwest Support Office

avrg?) AY Free Date: ¢,/2% 196

Approved:

Regional Director, Midwest Regional Office

Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park
Dayton, Ohio

National Park Service

United States Department of the Interior

May 1999



ATC appreciates the Opportunity to assisting Quinn Evans Architects during this upcoming renovation
Project. Please feel free to call us if you have any questions regarding this project or any other project
at (513) 771-2112.

Sincerely,

ATC Associate,

Todd Taylor
Project Manage

attachments



& Statement of Significance -

~erstyig official has consicered i... _Acance of this property in ion 1o Ge proseriew —
(C)nationaity —(] statewicg Ctecaity

Applicable National Register Crtwia (Ja Cle Cle Cp

National Historic La d k iterj , 2
Criteria Considerations (Exceptions) mary Gia Te mr) Ce Cr Ole

Areas of Significance (enter categories from instructions Period of ifleance
Invention ) Sign Significant Dates
Transporrarion ie 1896
Commerce
Communications Cultural Afiiation
n/2

Significant Person Architect Builder
right, Wilbur and Orville Nicholas. Abraham and Joseph. puil

Stata significance of property, justity criteria, criteria considergtions, 7

The Wright Coole Company building is Of Slane Me pores SE Bmrifeares poted above.
association with and role in the careers of Wilbur and orville
Wright as printers and bicycle manufacturers, and in their
invention of the airplane. The bicycle shop at 22 South Williams
Street, which operated between 1895 and 1897, is where the brothers
began to manufacture their own brand of bicycles which gave the
brothers the mechanical experience and financial resources
necessary to begin their experiments on an airplane. Working with
sprockets, spokes, chain drives, tires, metals, lathes, drills and
engines assisted the Wrights in designing and building their first
gliders and flying machines. Further, it was while the Wrights
occupied the building at 22 South Williams Street that they became
seriously and actively interested in solving the problems of
heavier-than-air powered flight. Also operating out of the
Williams Street building was Wright and Wright Printing which was
located on the second floor of the building; the printing business
required access to national news wires, which carried word of Otto
Lilienthal's death to the shop in 1896. This event catalyzed the
brothers' interest in developing a safe and practical flying
machine.

History

Prior to the Opening of the first Wright cycle shop in 1892, the
Wright brothers had been involved solely with their printing
business located in the Hoover Block at Lo West Thi et
(adjacent to the 22 South Williams Street property). However,
since the demise of their daily newspaper, the Evening Item, in
1890, the brothers had been looking for another business to
complement their ongoing job printing trade. In 1892, the brothers

ee

‘Fred c. Fisk, "The Wright Brothers! Bicycles," Wheelmen,
November 1980, p. 3.

i] See continuation sheet



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

covering. These measures will also stop the plaster damage that is occurring at the interior elevations of the south
wall, and may prevent the need for the plaster to be replaced.

Another issue that concerns the interior of the building is the possibility of using the second floor space for
interpretive or other Park functions. It is not recommended that these possibilities be pursued, as they would lead
to the destruction of historic fabric and considerable alteration to the appearance of the building. In order for the
second floor to be opened to the public, or to serve as more than minor storage for the Park Service in the future,
fire egress and ADA accessibility measures would have to be incorporated into the building. The building’s size
and configuration will not readily accommodate the addition of the required second egress stair or an elevator.

Mechanical and Electrical Recommendations
During the physical inspection of The Wright Cycle Company building, it was noted that portions of the insulation
on the attic supply air ductwork are torn and need to be repaired or replaced.

Structural Recommendations

Overall, The Wright Cycle Company building (HS-01) is in good structural condition after the renovation effort
completed in the late 1980s. Some repairs and reinforcement are necessary to achieve 100 psf live load required
by BOCA for public use of the first and second floors. The following recommendations will obtain the 100 psf
floor loadings.

To Acheive 100 psf live load at First Floor:
+ Replace concrete block foundations with properly designed and constructed foundations
+ — Align basement columns to a vertical plumbness or replace
* Secure connections between basement columns and beams with metal column caps
+ Replace center beams of first floor framing with properly sized wood (parallam) beams or shore below
with steel beams
+ Repair joist bearings at first floor, north wall where there is extensive shimming

+ Replace or reinforce split joist and header at chimney location. Use joist hangers to attach header to joist
stringers

+ — Install solid wood blocking between (at a minimum of) every other joist over the center beam

Second Floor (if opened to the public):
+ Either reinforce the second floor joists to obtain 100 psf live load capacity

+ Or, limit the number of persons and the nature of the exhibits on this floor at one time

Some minor recommendations have been made to both maintain and improve the structural integrity of the
building. Proper shoring systems and reinforcement of the current floor systems should be completed in order for
the building to be used for public interpretive tours. Stone repair should be completed to maintain the integrity of
the building's foundation walls. Additional analysis may be desired of the attic floor if its use is expected to differ
from what it is now.

66. Part H: Building Recommendations


The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)
Historic Structure Report

The second floor is adequate for its current use, however, for public use, strengthening of the joists may be
desired. The actual dimensions of the attic floor joists should be determined and additional analysis performed
before the 11 psf safe live load capacity governs any decisions. At the time of the field inspections, no structural
stresses were observed regarding the attic floor. The attic floor framing system is most likely adequate for its
current use, providing additional items are not stored there.

All of these analyses are limited by the many assumptions that have been made. Dimensions and spans taken from
photographs should be verified. Also, header conditions at the staircase and hatch openings for the respective
floors should be verified. Framing of the roof dormer and east and west roof elevations should also be verified.

Historic Paint Analysis

The complete report of the paint analysis executed by Steven C. Seebohm/SEEBOHM, Ltd. is contained in Ap-
pendix C. The existing conditions were noted during the on-site physical investigation carried out in conjunction
with QUINN EVANS/ARCHITECTS on October 22 and 23, 1996. Sampling was executed with a flat-bladed
Exacto knife, with samples being stored in individually-marked envelopes. Envelopes were then placed in storage
bags marked for each area of the interior, labeled and dated. All samples were inspected under a 60X and 120X
Meiji binocular microscope with a Stocker & Yale 7,000 degree K illuminator; this illumination insures a color
match under conditions simulating natural light. Finish Colors were then matched to The Munsell Color Notation
System (Glossy Collection). Existing wallpaper was noted, but not analyzed.

Due to early and later renovations to the structure very little of the original finish materials remain, except for the
miscellaneous artifacts sampled in the basement, those submitted by Roger McClure that were collected during
the last renovation from the second floor, existing samples of a comer guard from a pile of basement artifacts, a
door casing from the second floor, a baseboard from the second floor, and an exterior window molding.

Lead Paint Analysis

The following is a summary of the lead paint analysis executed by ATC Associates, Inc. The complete report is
contained in Appendix D. Paint testing was conducted at The Wright Cycle Company building on January 26 and
28, 1998. The purpose of this inspection was the measurement of lead concentrations in existing paint treatments.
Mr. Todd Taylor, Ohio Department of Health Certified Risk Assessor #OH000137 conducted field operations at
the site. The testing for lead-based paint was conducted using a Radiation Monitoring Device; LPA-1 RMD
Spectrum Analyzer; and the "XRF Performance Characteristics Sheet" for the RMD LPA-1 Spectrum Analyzer.
Numerous samples at the site were found to contain lead greater than 1.0 mg/cm?, Maintenance, renovation, or
demolition work at the site has the potential to cause occupational exposures to lead.

1 Scope of Work, Indefinite Quantities Task Order Architect/Engineer Contract Design Services Contract No. CX600094014
Quinn Evans/Architects, Ann Arbor, Michigan Title I Design Services; Historic Structures Report Wright Cycle Company
Building (HS-01) Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park, Dayton, Ohio. United States of America, Department of
the Interior, National Park Service, August 23, 1996, page 3.

2 Photographs were found by Ann Deines, Historian of the Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park, Dayton, Ohio, in
the basement of The Wright Cycle Company building (HS-01). January 1997.

3. Taken from Robert C. Gaede Architects, Inc., Cleveland, Ohio. Restoration of The Wright Cycle Company. Drawing "EX-2,
Basement Plan,” July 5, 1985.

4 Taken from Quinn Evans/Architects, Ann Arbor, Michigan, The Wright Cycle Company Building, Dayton Aviation Heritage
National Historical Park. Draft Drawing "A200, North Elevation, Existing Conditions," October 1996.

52 Part F: Existing Conditions Analysis



NATIONAL MUSEUM OF AMERICAN

HISTORY

SCLENCE. TECHNOLOGY, AND CULTURE

September 1, 1987

Ohio State Preservation Advisory Board
Ohio Historical Society

1985 Velma Ave.

Columbus, Ohio 43211

Attn: Mr. W. Ray Luce, SHPO
Dear Mr. Luce:

I am writing in support of the nomination of the
Wright~Dunbar area of West Dayton as a historic district,
As a historian I have developed some familiarity with the
area over the years. This includes walking the streets
of West Dayton with Sanborn insurance maps in one hand
and sheets of late-nineteenth century census records in
the other, identifying buildings that have survived from
the Wright era and matching them to their occupants at
that time.

The neighborhood began as a classic street car sub-
urb, a fact that remains in evidence today. Both along the
major thoroughfares of the commercial district and in the
residential areas set a block or two back from Third Street,
you can still see many elements of the neighborhood that
would have been familiar to the Wrights. Although there
have been major changes and alterations over the years,
much of the architecture is representative of their era.

There are other factors that make West Dayton espe-
cially interesting. As I noted above, the pattern of a
typical first generation street car suburb; the rich racial,
cultural and ethnic mix; and the fact that residential and
commercial buildings have survived from the late nineteenth
century combine to make West Dayton an ideal candidate for
recognition as a historic district. .

Sincerely,

ony

JZ
T D. Crouch
Chairman
Department of Social and
Cultural History

TDC: aMc
cc: Jerry Shank

Smithsonian Institution Washington, D.C. 20560



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Figure 1 Map of the West Third Street Historic District. (National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form for the Wright-Dunbar
Historic District [now the West Third Street Historic District), 1988)

26 Part D: Comparable Structure Analysis



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

22

Part C: Archeological Analysis



me AMO Aamroes ta Hee

United States Department of the Interior
National Park Service

National Register of Historic Places
Continuation Sheet

Section number _” Page

walls were of light colored plaster with a decorative pattern
frieze.

The building was altered considerably sometime between 1897 and
1911 as the commercial building was transformed into a two-family
residence. The original storefront was removed and a recessed
exterior wall of novelty wood siding erected. The display windows
were eliminated and bay windows installed in their stead. The
front columns from the original west facade remained, forming a
porch. A new stairway provided access to the second floor from
this porch. A bay window replaced the freight door. All shutters
were removed, and the exterior of the structure was painted white.
Exterior access to the basement on the north side of the building
was provided via an external stairway and door. The first floor
interior was divided into five rooms.

The Wright Cycle Company building was recently restored to its
historic turn-of-the-century appearance. Aviation Trail, Inc., the
current owners, oversaw the restoration project which was based on
construction documents Prepared by Gaede, Serne, & Zofcin
Architects, Inc. The restoration work included replacement of the
roof; chemical removal of paint from the brick walls; removal of
the bay windows, basement exit, and two first floor windows dating
after 1897; elimination of nonhistoric interior partitions;
reestablishment of historic doorways; application of new siding to
the rear addition; and replication and installation of shutters
based on an original shutter found in the tight space between the
Cycle Shop and the adjacent residence. The resulting restoration
closely resembles a photograph taken by Orville Wright in 1896 or
1897. Modest concessions to public usage include a concrete ramp
to the side porch which provides access for handicapped visitors,
and improvements required to meet current fire and safety codes.

Aviation Trail, Inc. opened the Wright Cycle Company building as
a museum on June 28, 1988. The structure also includes office
space for the organization's staff.



J
5 oO

al me.
ial | ‘
Lees a
FIRST FLOOR PLAN ap
SCALE eT
orz « 8 6
a
ae ated poe
ane mea al A101 FIRST FLOOR PLAN £
aman EXISTING CONDITION to | ee
AECHITECT $ | OE =|]
Ann atoor Michigan 8104 | BATE | WRIGHT CYCLE COMPANY BULDING -
313.663 5008 iad DAYTON AVIATION HERITAGE NATIONAL HISTORIC PARK — | —. | OF 2



— MESSING BUCKS AY SOUTH ELEVATION
HOUROUGHLY CLEAN ENTIRE SURFACE.
‘WITH MILD | .
APPLY “WEATHER SEAL
Soca.tne MANGAS CITY ESTO
ENTIRE BRICK SURFACE F
REPLACEMENT,
eS =
|
rat APPROX. 57-0" +
\
a _
REPOINT ALL (1( | MASONRY.
REPLACE ALL | ), CRACKED OR
MISSING BRICKS AT SOUTH ELEVATION:
SURFACE
MLD \
= ENT \
APPLY WEATHER SEAL S1LOKANE = GENTLY REMOVE
Pasco Ne KANSAS CITY, KS 70_ PARSING AND \
ra rig BLmt nce roxtOnmmo-———*}— 4} FS ener ~———— ~~ | ene
-, REPOINTING, | Ce ‘DAMAGED BRICK \
a) a) — \
¢
E :
LL oJ
REPLACE MISSING BRICK. 5 i
FROM OPEN JOIST POCKETS: : “ FREMOLDED
375,
35 STRIPPING
MY wr Ne, ~ ws Ve) \
Ress a LR a a)
= == aoe = Ar
= = ATA ANN . 7 y NANA INININGN NIN NY AYR ANYANV AW AR WAN ANY ANY AN AAA
TRTIRAINUINTINTIYINUINT NNO DPR DVIS PY DYDD SNZNZ \
YNYOINO IVD VININININIVIAVIION SES NA UNNI AN
VAY AAO
TORATED PVC PPE BELOW
COVER NEW PVC PIPE WITH . LAY NEW 4" DIAMETER PERFORATED. REMOVE ENTIRE LENGTH
Sion ar seerr Gren. Bossi nent Eon Rebrenmiderenmenc ACP MTR ore Ane BOE OF CONGETEGALEY, NP
PIPE OUTFLC
(GENERAL NOTES: SOUTH ELEVATION aN
SCALE a= tr Baxi
TRpmUE GOLOn TO OREATEST ONT ovz ¢ ¢ A
Re a cee TEEN a
ELEVATION AND NEIGHBORING BUILDING
QUTNN | 06S.” | SuRSHEETNO THLE OF SHEET ‘DRAWING NO.
EVANS |___ DR] 633-A201
ane ame SOUTH ELEVATION 7
wane Px. | SHEET
at 8 |e] A201] EXISTING CONDITION ng
219 1/2N. Main Street Stu | _ @ ]
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48104 | DATE: WRIGHT CYCLE COMPANY BUILDING _ 7
— —_ 313 663 5888 oasee/e7 DAYTON AVIATION HERITAGE NATIONAL HISTORIC PARK = | —_ | oF 2
——— —_———



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Part E: Architectural Analysis



OME Anarene te,

United States Department of the Interior
National Park Service
National Register of Historic Places
Continuation Sheet
Section number __10_ Page __ 2

Major Bibliographical References

Crouch, Tom D. U H : Wilbur and orville

Wright. New York: W. W. Norton, 1989,

- "The Wright cycle Company." Pamphlet. Dayton, Ohio:
Aviation Trail, Inc., n.d.

Dayton Snap-Shots, 29 February 1896; and 17 April 1896.

Fisk, Fred Cc. “How the Wheelmen Helped Save a Wright Brothers
Bicycle Shop." Wheelmen, November 1986.

- "The Wright Brothers’ Bicycles." Wheelmen November

1980.

Johnson, Mary Ann. 30) i Trail
i io. Dayton, Ohio: Landfall Press, 1986.
Kelly, Fred ¢c., ed. 2 b Wilbu

i . New York: Farrar, Straus and Young,
1951.

. 4 . i b
+ |New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1943; reprint
ed., New York: Farrar, Straus and Young, 1950.

McFarland, Marvin W., ed. = WE Wi :
Octave Chanute. 2 vols. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1953.

Renstrom, Arthur G. Ww @ Orvi Ww H A_Chronolo
Commemorating the Hundredth Anniversary of the Birth of
Orvj W. 71. Washington D.cC.: Library ~
of Congress, 1975.

Weaver, Margaret (Lanny). "The Wright Brothers at 22 South
Williams street 1895 to 1897." Mimeograph. Dayton, Ohio:

Aviation Trail, Inc., 1983.



2.5Y 7/2

2.5Y 8/2

2.5Y 8.5/2

2.5Y 7/4

a

2.5Y 8/6

2.5Y 8/8

2.5Y 8.5/8

The Munsell

5Y 8/2

5Y 8.5/2

SY 9/2

SY 8/4

SY 8.5/4

5Y 9/4

5Y 9/6

BY 8.5/10

T.5Y 8/2

7.5Y 9/2

7.5Y 8/6

ook of Color |

@

10Y 4/2

10Y 3/4

10Y 6/1

denotes (HS-01)



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Episode 2: 1911-1984

EPISODE 2: 1911-1984
is

Ff I =

= DINING ROOM ae . |
Living GOM & i
7 !
__|e al TG HEN a Ty iz = i x
ial oe ena eal
SECOND FLOOR 3 PLAN
oA NP ee
a a

/ / C
( ) / \ | | unexcavateo

UNEXCAVATED

C]SPASEMENT FLOOR PLAN
—————————=

58 Part G: Building Chronology


we Pom ete Ae haan te renscee

United States Department of the Interior
National Park Service

National Register of Historic Places
Continuation Sheet

Section number__8 _ Page 7? __

The bicycle shops also had two other advantageous aspects which
fostered the Wrights brothers' aviation interests--it provided the
funds for the Wrights' work in aviation and afforded them suffi-
cient time to pursue their interests in flying. The bicycle
business was extremely seasonal in nature with the Wrights working
twelve to fourteen hours daily in the spring, but considerably less
in the summer and almost not at all in the fall and winter." Those
free months provided ample time for Wilbur and Orville to conduct
their aeronautical experiments.

Likewise, the bicycle business was quite profitable. Although
their income from the bicycle shops never exceeded more than three
thousand dollars a year, it was sufficient for the Wrights to
finance all their early aeronautical experiments in both Dayton
and Kitty Hawk. In fact, the success of their bicycle shop paid
for the construction of all of their early gliders, airplanes,
engines, and experimental apparatuses. A story recounted by Dayton
wheelman Fred Fisk concerning the Wright brothers: wind tunnel
illustrates the point:

The wind tunnel, with the fan sending a current of air
through the large tube, was running one day when a
customer came in the shop. He asked what that thing had
to do with making Van Cleve bicycles. orville smiled and
said, "It has nothing to do with the van Cleve, except
that the van Cleve paid for it.” :

a
“Pred c. Kelly, The Wright Brothers: A Biography Authorized

by Orville Wright (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1943, reprint eq.,

New York: Farrar, Straus and Young, 1950), p. 49.

“wilbur Wright to Octave Chanute, 17 May 1901, in Papers of
Wright, ed, McFarland, 1:55,

YPisk, "Wright Brothers! Bicycles," p. 8.


The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

716

References


The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Figure 3 This aerial photo, taken April 26, 1986, of
@ portion of South Williams Street shows The Wright
Cycle Company building immediately in the
foreground. The two houses to the south of the
building and the two houses across the street on
the west stde of South Williams are also part of the
West Third Street Historic District.

Figure 4 This is a detail, showing The
Wright Cycle Company building in
1896, from a photo taken by Lura
Hoover. (Wright State University,
Archives and Special Collections)





The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

In late 1897, the Wright brothers once again moved their bicycle and printing businesses, selecting 1127 West
Third Street. This new shop was to be the final location of both the bicycle and printing businesses. It was in this
building that the brothers built their experimental gliders, their first airplane, and conducted much of their aero-
nautical research that launched them into a new career and business.

As their interest in bicycles grew, the brothers’ involvement in their printing business decreased, leaving their
friend Ed Sines solely responsible for the printing business. In late 1899, when Sines was injured and could no
longer manage the business, they decided to give up the printing business entirely and concentrate on their bicycle
business and the mechanics of flight. The experience they gained while manufacturing their bicycles proved
invaluable to them as it eventually resulted in the invention of the first power-driven, heavier-than-air machine in
which humans obtained free, controlled, and sustained flight.

Little is known about the tenants or owners of the 22 South Williams Street building after the Wrights moved out
in 1897. Sometime prior to 1911 the building was transformed into a two-family residence."'

In November 1980, Fred C. Fisk, an antique bicycle aficionado and collector, published an article for The Wheelmen
magazine. Fisk was assisted in his research by Marlin Todd, who had studied the Wrights brothers for most of his
adult life. In the process, Todd revealed that he had “a very rare unpublished photo of the Wright Bicycle shop [at
22 South Williams]”" Entitled “The Wright Brothers Bicycles,” Fisk's article featured Todd’s photo for the first
time. Around the same time that the article was published, Mary Ann Johnson discovered that the building at 22
S. Williams was still standing. She had been researching aviation heritage sites in the Dayton region for Aviation
Trail, Inc., a nonprofit organization she helped found, when she came across the building. The mission of the
group was to preserve and promote Dayton’s aviation heritage by mapping key historical sites in the Miami Valley
to form an "Aviation Trail” for tourists to follow. By including the Hoover Block and The Wright Cycle Company
building on the Aviation Trail, Johnson brought recognition to the forgotten structures. Aviation Trial, Inc. had
“just finished a project of printing thousands of brochures on aviation sights in the Dayton area. They jumped at
the chance to save and restore this shop and the Hoover Block.”!

Dr. Jerry Meyer, a retired doctor and authority on aviation purchased The Wright Cycle Company building at 22
South Williams Street with $11,500 of his own money to save it from demolition by the city. In 1982, after raising
enough money to pay Dr. Meyer back, Aviation Trail, Inc. became the new official owners of the building, with
the intention of restoring it to its 1895 appearance. Johnson and Aviation Trail, Inc. began a drive to raise federal,
state, local, and private money for the building’s restoration. In mid-1985, the restoration work began, and on
June 25, 1988, a grand opening of the shop celebrating the completed work took place. With the restoration
complete, Aviation Trial, Inc. turned its attention to other non-restoration matters.

On January 25, 1989, the West Third Street Historic District, which includes The Wright Cycle Company build-
ing and the Hoover Block as contributing structures, was listed in the National Register of Historic Places. In
1990, The Wright Cycle Company building itself was listed as a National Historic Landmark. On October 16,
1992, Congress passed legislation establishing the Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park to “com-
memorate the legacy of three exceptional men - Wilbur Wright, Orville Wright, and Paut Laurence Dunbar - and
their work in the Miami Valley.” Properties included in the park were four new national historic landmarks: (1)
a core unit consisting of The Wright Cycle Company building, the Hoover Block, and the vacant land between
those two structures; (2) the Huffman Prairie Flying Field at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base; (3) the 1905
Wright Flyer HI in Carillon Historical Park; and, (4) the Paul Laurence Dunbar State Memorial. Of the four
landmarks, only the first one was designated for ownership by the National Park Service. The other three were
(and continue to be) owned and administered respectively by: the Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, the Carillon
Historical Park, and the Ohio Historical Society.

Part B: Historic Documentation Summary 9



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

National Register Forms

77


6. Function or Use

His.oric Functions (enter categories from instructions) Current Functions (enter categories from instructions)
COMMERCE/TRADE - business COMMERCE/TRADE - business

7. Description

Architectural Classification Materials (enter categories from instructions)

(enter categories from instructions)
foundation __stone

Italianate walls brick

Romanesque tone

Classical Revival roof asphalt
other

Describe present and historic physical appearance.

The West Third Street Historic District is a commercial district of two and three story
brick buildings built between 1885 and 1924. The buildings have stores on the ground
level with offices and apartments above. The facades are made primarily of brick, with
stone and metal trim. The one stone facade belongs to a Neo-classical Revival bank
building at 1154 West Third Street (photo 11). Styles are wide ranging from the
outstanding High Victorian Italianate Walters Block at 1120 West Third Street (photo 10),
through turn-of-the-century Italianate (photo 12) and commercial Romanesque Revival (photo
6), to the Neo-classical Revival theater and bank building (photos 3 & 11). The district
is linear, only three blocks long. There is a short extension south on Williams Street
that encompasses the historically related Wright Cycle Company building built in 1886 (NR:
2-13-86), and four residential structures that help convey the area's context. The
district is surrounded by blighted residential lots heavily impacted by demolition.
Located only ten blocks from the center of the city it was one of Dayton's earliest
streetcar suburbs (1869). While the district has suffered demolition it fully conveys its
character as an early suburban streetcar commercial block that evolved at the turn of the
century.

Third Street is the city's main east-west thoroughfare. East of the river on Third Street
is an Urban Renewal area that was once one of the most prestigious residential locations
in Dayton. It is now a widely spaced starkly modern area, encompassing the urban campus
of Sinclair Community College and the Montgomery County Administration Building both
designed by Edward Durrell Stone. Near the district across the Great Miami River bridge
is an area of extensive demolition and several industrial buildings. The center of the
city is clearly visible from the edge of the district.

The first building at the southeast end of the district is the Gem City Ice Cream
Building, an industrial building at 1005 West Third Street (photo 1). The present facade
dates to 1914. The building actually consists of a series of additions wrapped around the
structure (right center bay) that housed the first Wright bicycle shop in 1893. Gem City

- Ice Cream was the first manufactured ice cream in Dayton. On the opposite side of the
street (south side) is the unique Mediterranean style three story building of 1914 (photo
4) that housed Dr. Alaman's offices on the second floor and apartments on the third floor.
Past an adjacent vacant lot is the Nedham Building of 1897 (photo 5), a significant
survival \ef the mixed residential and commercial facade, now rare in Dayton. Back on the
north side there is a brick walled lot and a noncontributing, out~of-period building
followed by the diminutive Neo-classical Revival Midget Theater (1019-1021) of 1912 (photo
3). Across the street is the fine commercial Romanesque Revival style Booth building of
1890 (photo 5).

K_JSee continuation sheet



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Historic Documentation
Summary



a 0b ONE Ae te 5,

United States Department of the interior
National Park Service

National Register of Historic Places
Continuation Sheet

Section number __8 Page 6

1897 represented the peak years of the Wright Cycle Company. In
the fall of 1897, after the bicycle season had ended, the Wrights
shifted their operations to 1127 west Third Street, the final
location of their bicycle enterprise. It was in this building that
the brothers built the world's first airplane, constructed their
experimental gliders and later machines, and conducted much of
their aeronautical research. Today, this structure is enshrined
at Henry Ford's Greenfield Village in Dearborn, Michigan, thus
lacking a quality of integrity in location, setting, and feeling.

building, but it also maintains the historical feeling of time and
Place associated with the westside neighborhood in which it is
located and where the Wrights lived and worked most of their lives.
In fact, this is the only property intact today associated with the
Wright brothers! bicycle business and one of only two structures
remaining related to their careers as printers.

The years in the bicycle business were instrumental to the
invention of the airplane. Through their experiences of manufac-
turing, selling, and repairing bicycles and in designing the
bicycle shop machinery, the Wrights sharpened their mechanical
skills and ascertained knowledge that would prove invaluable to the
invention of the airplane. The gas engine the Wrights first
assembled in the bicycle shop would later aid them in their design
of a suitable engine for a flying machine, and their experience
with chain drives on bicycles assisted them in developing a
workable transmission for the airplane.’ Indeed, many of the parts
of the early airplanes were mere adaptations of bicycle parts and
were made by the same equipment and tools that were used to build
bicycles.

Many deronautical principles were also derived from the bicycle
business. One day while toying with an empty inner tube box,
Wilbur discovered the necessary mechanical corollary to the

ee

; “Mary Ann Johnson, A Field Guide to Flight: on the Aviation
Trail in Dayton Ohio (Dayton, Ohio: Landfall Press, 1986), p. 36.



NPS Ferm 10-0008 OMB Approval Ho 1024-cor8
ee

United States Department of the Interior

National Park Service

National Register of Historic Places
Continuation Sheet

West Third Street Historic District, Montgomery Co., Dayton, Ohio
Section number __’ Page a

The Walters Block, built between 1885~1893 (photo 10), is the only remaining High
Victorian commercial block left in Dayton that clearly represents its time in history.
The Walters Block is a brick three story High Victorian Italianate commercial block built
in three parts; circa 1885, 1888 and 1893. There are six storefront bays with cast iron
pillars (several have been reconstructed) the left two bays have cast iron pillars
(several have been reconstructed) and the right four bays have limestone pillars. A
stairway bay leads to apartments on the second floor. The third floor has a lodge hall.
Both second and third floor interiors are in excellent condition, There are seventeen
bays of one-over-one double hung sash windows with metal pediments on the second level and
cornices on the third. The facade has two open fire escapes. A sheet metal cornice
defines the upper terminal.

Across from the Walters Block is a nonconforming modern building (1127) and vacant lot
(photo 13) both which occupy the historic site of the last Wright Brother's bicycle shop
were the first airplane was invented. The historic building was moved to Greenfield
Villege in Dearborn, Michigan. The adjacent Hale Building, circa 1923, is a contributing
early twentieth century structure. The void next to the Walters Block is the result of a
serious fire in 1986.

The Mariette Flats, built in 1913 (1146-1148), represents the influence of early twentieth
century cultural expression in architecture. The Mariette Flats located on the north side
is a three story pressed brick, mixed commercial and apartment building in Georgian
Revival style. The margins have rusticated brick quoins. The center bay is an elaborate
cast iron entrance with Doric pilasters, cornice with label and segmental pediment with
foliated tympanum. The large door is heavily paneled and has a transom. Above the
doorway on the second floor level is a bulle-eye window with swagged garlands. On each
side, three bay storefronts have central doors, The right and left bays of the upper
facade have a recessed muliion window that has a molded segmental head and paneled
spandrels. The windows are six-over-six double hung sash. There is a strong dentiled
cornice above the third floor level. Over the cornice is an attic with three-over-three
double hung sash windows, rusticated brickwork and a secondary cornice.

Next on the south side is a nonconforming infill building constructed after the périod of
significance. Last at the corner is the Neo-classical Revival West Side Building and Loan
Association Building of 1922. It has the district's only stone facade. The north-side,
of the west-end of the block suffered a major fire in 1911 which seriously damaged or
destroyed all of the buildings west of the alley (photo 15). The Hoersting-Holtman
Building at 1131-1137 West Third Street was "rebuilt." The Hoersting-Holtman Building 1909
has four mary bays and two stairway bays. The storefront bays are mixed in pattern and
appear to have considerable original fabric. Each stairway bay has a multiple light
transom and stair light above. There are four 3-part polygonal oriels with elaborate
scroll sawed Eastlake like detailing. The cornice is whimsical with panels, pendants,
rosettes, variformed dentil like devices and modillions.



meme : et Aegon te. sens-cere

United States Department of the interior
National Park Service

National Register of Historic Places
Continuation Sheet

Section number__§ page 2

skill in the repair of bicycles Provided the supplementary business
enterprise the Wrights were seeking.

Dayton, the nation was already in the midst of a cycle craze. In
fact, so great was the appeal for the newly developed safety
bicycle, that it was extolled as the "greatest invention of the
nineteenth century," and the decade of the 1890s was celebrated as
the golden age of the bicycle.’

The bicycle enterprise, founded in 1892, provided a brisk business
for Wilbur and Orville, and necessitated the relocation of their
cycle shop to more commodious quarters. In early 1895, the Wrights
once again had made the decision to move their bicyclé business to
larger facilities; however, this time they chose to combine their
bicycle and printing interests under one roof,

The location chosen for their new shop was the two-story building
at 22 South Williams Street erected by Abraham and Joseph Nicholas
behind the Hoover Block. Built in 1886, the structure served as
a grocery store, feed store, saloon, and boarding house before the
Wrights rented it and refitted it to suit their needs.’ The newly
located Wright Cycle Company and Wright and Wright Printing opened
in the spring of 1895. In general, however, since the Wrights
first opened a bicycle shop in 1892, the printing business
diminished in importance. Although the job printing business was
still turning a Profit for the brothers and would continue to do
so until it was sold in 1899, the Wrights realized that the cycle
industry provided More earning potential and offered more of a
challenge to then. Hence, their printing interests became
subordinate to their cycling interests and were developed into a
very successful promotional aid for the Wright cycle Company.
Snap-Shots, the weekly westside newspaper started in 1894 at the

Tom D. Crouch, “The Wright Cycle Company," pamphlet (Dayton
Ohio: Aviation Trail, Inc., n.d.)

Margaret (Lanny) Weaver, "The Wright Brothers at 22 South
Williams Street 1895 to 1897," mimeographed (Dayton, Ohio:
Aviation Trail, Inc., 1983), p. 6-7.





The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historie Structure Report

Episode 3: 1985-1997
-

EPISODE 3: 1985-1997

DINING ROOM
202

LIVING ROOM

PARLOR J

201

His Ui

KITCHEN i]

IL. iC "209
—- —_—_ =

SECOND FLOOR PLAN

OFFICE
102

é SPAS EMENT. FLOOR PLAN
8 6

60 Part G: Building Chronology


The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Episode 1A: Circa 1896
EPISODE 1A: Circa 1896 oe
pe ee l |
= TA
————o
a | |
I |
on} | a |
SECOND FLOOR PLAN
ee}
iw
“ IA _ ft
pot
WET
ah \
. fA cd
CMA |
ta ae
FIRST FLOOR PLAN _
-_
ame I =
BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN

56 Part G: Building Chronology



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Sanborn Map 1918
Figure 8. Changes to the Wright building (circled) indicated on this map include the removal of the north exterior
stair and the addition of a bay window to the same elevation. The smaller of the two previous additions has been
removed from the back. The occupancy designation has been changed to "F", which in the Sanborn code repre-
sents "flats": a single family dwelling at each floor of the building. A dashed line at the west end of the building
indicates that the storefront windows have been converted to a porch by this time. The original storefront has been
removed, with the columns remaining as freestanding supports for the upper story. The new first floor facade is
now recessed into the body of the building, bringing it in line with the house to the south.

HAWTHORN LANE (HERBERT LANE) .

Figure 8 Sanborn Insurance Map, 1918. (The Sanborn Perris Map Co., Ltd., New York, New York)

18 Part B: Historic Documentation Summary



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Figure 2 View of columns E (in the foreground) and D (in the Figure 3 View of the eastern connection between the stair header,

background), 1996 (Fitzpatrick Structural Engineering). joist and wood post, 1996 (Fitzpatrick Structural Engineering):

In general, the joists are in good condition with few splits, shakes, checks, or knots. A double header is used to
frame the stairway. Double mortise and tenon connections are used and can be observed in the single joists
picking up the header load. In addition to the single joists, two newer wood posts are supporting the double
header.

At the south foundation wall, several joists were observed to have rolled on their bearings. Metal joist hangers
have been installed connecting these joists and the south mudsill. This corrective action appears to have arrested
any further rolling of the joists. Also, the south mudsill is newer lumber suggesting that the original mudsill had
rotted to the point of replacement. The size of the newer mudsill indicates that the original must have been a large
member. Just east of the infilled north basement door, extensive shimming of the joists was observed. This heavy
shimming provides uniform bearing on the north foundation wall; however, because of the amount of shimming,
other alternatives may be desired.

On the west end of the first floor, several joists have been either replaced or doubled with newer members.
Extensive water and/or insect damage warranted the new reinforcement. Some insect damage was observed on the
sixth joist from the west foundation wall. Destructive insects and wood rot require relatively moist environments
to survive, This related water damage of both the west end of the first floor and the south mudsill may be related
to the water problems associated with the south foundation wall discussed earlier in the report.

This insect damage appears to have ceased and the new members have reinforced this western end of the first
floor. The four western-most members have been replaced with newer 2x12s (nominal). The fifth western-most

Part F: Existing Conditions Analysis 47



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)
Historic Structure Report

Because the columns are all adequate, this further supports the idea that the columns were originally built with a
jean in them or the lean was the result of the construction and/or demolition of the brick partitions that were built-
up around the columns.

First Floor:

The analysis performed for the first floor framing structure used the assumptions stated in the beginning of the
Structural Analysis section of this report. The joists are two-span continuous and are notched to a joist depth of 9
inches at the center support (the wood beam and column system). Computer models were used to determine the
stresses in the members.

Table 3: Results of Analysis of First Floor Members

Member | Size [Limited By... Live Lonel Capacity (psf)
Typical Joist 1-3/4" x 1-3/4" —
[Stair Header | "DBL 1-3/4" x 12" —
Joist Stringers | 1-3/4" x 11-3/4" i — 100+
“ 3.778"x 5-7/8" | ‘Bending “19
3-7/8" x 5-7/8" Shear -37Ct~*C
3-3/4" x 6-3/4" Shear “a7 |

The joists, stair header, and joist stringers (the joists connected to the stair header) are all adequate for supporting
15 psf dead load and 100 psf live load. However, all of the center beams fail to meet the 100 psf live load requirement
as per BOCA. The most critical beam capacity, the capacity of Beam A-B-C, is limited by bending. However, shear
is also critical for this member, as it is for Beams C-D-E-F and F-G-H. These beams were analyzed as the original,
single members. The miscellaneous reinforcement pieces were not considered in the analysis. The size of the
members is comparatively small for the required loading.

Second Floor, Attic Floor, and Roof Framing:

Both the second floor joists and the attic floor joists span continuously from the north bearing wall to the south
bearing wall as per the undated photographs discussed under the Existing Conditions section of this report. It was
assumed that the mechanical units in the attic space are properly supported. The roof members are sloped at 32
degrees from the horizontal‘ and are connected at the top with a ridge board. Computer models were again used in
the analysis.

Table 4: Results of Analysis of Typical Joists of the Second Floor, Attic Floor, and Roof Members

Member Size | Assumed | Limited By. | Live Load
| Dead Load | Capacity (psf)
Second Floor Joist | -12"x11-14" 15 ps | LiveLoadDeflection == 1
| Attic Floor Joist 1-3/4"x7-1/2" | 10psf | TotalLoadDeflection | =
| RoofRafter 1-3/4" x5-1/2" pst Capable of supporting the required 12 psf dead

i load and 10 psf snow load.

Part F: Existing Conditions Analysis 51



APS Foem 10-9008 (OMB Approval No. 10240018
25)

United States Department of the interior

National Park Service

National Register of Historic Places
Continuation Sheet

West Third Street Historic District, Montgomery Co., Dayton, Ohio
Section number Zz Page __2

Next to the Midget Theater is Mory'’s Block built in 1884 (1023-1027), a pivotal early
commercial structure. Mory's Block is a brick two story building with a stairway bay ane
three storefront bays on the street level. The original iron columns and metal store
front cornice have all survived. Seven window bays with stone sills and a continuous
lintel service Mory's Hall. Above the lintel are recessed panels with corbelled tops anc
a label panel. A stone string course supports a blind arcade just below the metal
cornice. The store windows have been infilled with smaller windows and siding, however,
the original storefront configuration is still apparent.

Adjacent to Mory's Block at the corner of Williams Street is the early twentieth century
store and office block, the J. A. Prior Building built in 1924 (photo 2). The south side
of the street has an important late nineteenth century collection of commercial Romanesqu
buildings at the east end of the block (photo 6). The Enterprise Block built in 1890
(1026-1028) has a hall on the third floor. The one story stucco structure next door
(1032) is clearly a survivor of the earlier low scale buildings present before annexation
by Dayton. Little else is known about this building in spite of extensive research. The
Setzer Building built in 1906 is a fine early twentieth century commercial structure. Th
Hoover Block is the location of the Wright Brothers’ printing business built from 1890 to
1895. This building is to be rehabilitated as an aviation museum related to the Wright
Cycle Company Building located to the rear of the Hoover Block at 22 Williams Street.

The Williams Street extension south is focused on the Wright Cycle Company Building. Thi
is where the Wright Brother's aviation experiments began. It is a typical neighborhood
grocery store type of the period. The four additional houses (23-25, 26, 29 & 30 South
Williams Street) (photo 7 & 8) are all properties built as a part of the streetcar
suburban development after 1869. They create a vital setting for the cycle shop. The
district ends with modern structures and demolition sites on South William Street.

The 1100 block is in full urban scale resembling a small "main street". There is an
unfortunate void on the southwest corner of Williams and West Third Streets. The
Victorian Italianate commercial Gunkel Building built in 1898 (1101-1107) on the northwes:
corner is a significant contributor to the district architecturally and historically. It
housed the Hamburger Hardware Store for many years and also Dayton's first branch post
office (photo 12). The Gunkel Building has three storefront bays on West Third Street.
The left store cornice is elaborately decorated while the right is quite plain. The
apartments above have semicircular windows with stone head molds and on each side a
Chicago type window with stone sill and decorated lintel. The metal cornice is lavishly
decorated. The storefront bays have been badly renovated.

\
Adjacent to the Gunkel building are the Gunkel Block built in 1893 (1109) and the Webbert
Flats built in 1908 (1117) both are fine three story examples of turn-of-the-century
commercial architecture with first floor storefronts and apartments above. Unfortunately,
the building across the street at 1114-1118 West Third Street (photo 9) was badly
renovated in the 1950's. It has been compatibly rehabilitated as part of the Walters
Block project.


The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

84

Appendix D


Historic Paint Analysis: Sample Colors

The following pages contain color photocopies of Munsell Color Notation chips. These chips have
been selected by Seebohm, Ltd. as the best color matches for the historic finish samples taken from
the Wright Cycle Company building (HS-01) and the Hoover Block (HS-02). Due to the limitations
of the color photocopy process, the colors are approximate and are for informational use only. The
Munsell Book of Color or the notebook of Munsell Color chips provided to the Dayton Aviation
Heritage National Park by Seebohm, Ltd. should be consulted for the exact colors. Color samples
marked with a red dot are the colors found only at the Wright Cycle Company building. All other
colors were found only at the Hoover Block. The historic buildings had only two colors in common:
7.5R 8/4 and N 0.5.



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

The Wright Cycle Company Building: 1982

In this photo, Figure 3, the changes to the first floor are more visible. The north window is a double-hung, one-
over-one sash. At the center bay is an entrance with a wood paneled door and wooden screen door, complete with
a wall-mounted porch lamp and mail box. At the southern end, at the bump-out, is another entrance with another
wall-mounted porch lamp and the address numbers “24.” The wood trim is the same for both of these entrances
and the one window. Along the west elevation, there is a concrete porch that includes the chamfered corner, with
two steps down in front of the southern entrance. Above, on the second floor, the windows appear to be original,
though the shutters are missing. Only the bottom sash of the southernmost window appears to have been replaced
with a single-pane sash.

At the north elevation, a bay window has been added in the center of the elevation, where the 1896 doorways were
once located. There is a one-over-one window in each of the bays, the body of which is also narrow, horizontal,
wood siding, and the base of which is unpainted brick. On the ground floor of the original structure, there are two
newer window openings that align with the two western-most windows of the second floor. The glazing of these
four windows is not visible, but the upper windows appear to be original; again, there are no shutters. The bay
window blocks the view of the eastern half of the north elevation.

The brick chimney on the north elevation is still in place although it is missing its corbelled detailing. The second
chimney visible in the photo belongs to the adjacent house to the south. The shingles at the roof appear to have
been replaced with rolled roofing membrane over the main body of the building, and dark shingles are visible over
the bay window. The exterior stairway to the basement can seen at the north elevation. Almost every surface of the
building has been painted white.

So Figure 3 View of The Wright Cycle Company
cu" building in 1982. (Aviation Trail, Inc.)

Part B: Historic Documentation Summary 13



The Munsel! Book of Color

75R 2/2 10R 7/2 2.5YR 5/6 BYR 4/2
p
7.5R 9/2 TOR 4/4 2.5YR 6/6 . 5YR 9/2
| 7.5R 3/4 OR 4/6 SYR 4/4
7.5R 8/4 10R 6/6
7.5R 2/6 10YR 6/4
7.5YR 9/2 | 10YR 7/4
7.5YR 4/4 1OYR 8/4
7.5YR 8/4 1OYR 5/6
| 7T.5YR 7/12 10YR 5/8

° denotes (HS-01)

|



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Part G: Building Chronology

Analysis of Episodes
Episode 1: 1886 - 1910

This building was originally built by Abrabam and Joseph Nicholas in 1886 to house a grocery store on the first
floor. In 1888, the property was sold to Joseph H. Hohler who continued to operate the ground floor asa grocery,
then a feed store, while living with his family on the second floor. After 1891, the building, still under the
ownership of Hohler, was leased as a saloon, then a boarding house before being leased to the Wrights in 1895.

The second floor was apparently a residential unit from the time of construction. It is speculated that modifica-
tions were made to the second floor by the Wrights, as part of their expansion of the bicycle business. The
National Historic Landmark Nomination Form for The Wright Cycle Company building describes the original
second floor configuration as "divided into five rooms of various sizes. The walls were of light colored plaster
with a decorative pattern frieze."'In a later section, the Form refers to modifications made to the upstairs to
transform it into a machine shop.

Though the modifications which occurred to the interior of the building when the Wrights moved in can only be
speculated upon, the exterior condition of the building during the period of their occupation is well documented
by both an 1896 photograph and an 1897 Sanborn map. There is no evidence that the exterior of the structure
went through any significant change from their occupation in 1895 until the time the Wrights moved out in
1897.

Based on the analysis of the 1896 photo and physical investigation, the main body of the building was originally
constructed of brick, with stone accents. Three glazed bays on the ground floor constituted a shop front, sepa-
rated and flanked by squared, stone columns. Two of the bays made up the entire ground floor of the west
elevation, while one made up the ground floor of the chamfered northwest elevation. The main entrance into the
shop was the central bay of the three-bay storefront.

Above the storefront, on the second floor, were two-over-two wood frame windows, one over each bay. At the
center of the north elevation, on each floor level, was a doorway, the doors of which are not visible in the photo.
The only other interruption in the brick elevation on the ground floor was a square window just east of the
doorway there. Each opening has a stone header and sill: however, none of the glazing on the north elevation is
visible in the photograph. Two windows similar to those above the storefront bays were at cither side of the door
of the second floor doorway, and in front of it was a small balcony, little wider than the doorway.

Part G: Building Chronology 55



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

2 Part A; Introduction



|

SCALE: 4ST
orz ¢« g e

(coe

SECOND FLOOR PLAN <p

4

i

3
ig #

ARCHITECTS
219 1/2. Moin Street
‘Ann Arbor, Michigan 48104

;

THLE OF SHEET

SECOND FLOOR PLAN
EXISTING CONDITION

WRIGHT CYCLE COMPANY BUILINNG
DAYTON AVIATION HERITAGE NATIONAL HISTORIC PARK

i

hls

BL

111 3B

g

ne


The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-O1)

Historic Structure Report

RQ Part I: Research Recommendations



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Part D: Comparable Structure Analysis

Neighborhood Context

The Wright Cycle Company building is located on the west side of Dayton, in the West Third Street Historic
District, and in 1989 was listed on the National Register of Historic Places as a contributing structure in the
district.

In 1869, when Orville and Wilbur Wright's parents moved from Indiana to what was then known as Miami City or
the West Side, the area had only recently been annexed by the City of Dayton. Located ten blocks and across the
Miami River from the center of Dayton, it was one of the city's earliest streetcar suburbs. The extension of the
horse-drawn car line across the Miami River bridge into West Dayton made practical the development of new
residential neighborhoods for commuters and commercial districts to service them.

The West Third Street Historic District is composed of three blocks of West Third Street, with a short extension
south on South Williams Street. A map of the district is shown in Figure | . Third Street is Dayton's main east-west
thoroughfare, and is divided by the Miami River. The Third Street section of the historic district largely consists
of two- and three-story, dark-red brick buildings erected between 1885 and 1924. Typical details include corbel-
ling, decorative cornices, and stone trim. Styles range from the High Victorian Italianate and turn-of-the century
Italianate to commercial Romanesque Revival and Neoclassical Revival.

Figure 2 shows part of the 1100 block of West Third Street, circa 1937. The empty lot at the center of the photo is
the site of the Wright brothers' fifth and final workshop, which was relocated to Dearborn, Michigan, in 1936, by
Henry Ford. The tall storefronts meeting the edge of the sidewalk, the common walls, and compatible rhythms and
proportions of windows, doors, and details all serve to unite the block visually. This density and styling was
characteristic of urban American commercial architecture at the time.

Figure 2 View looking west at the north side of the 1100 block, West Third Street, (Marvin Christian Collection,
William Preston Mayfield Photos, ca. 1937)

Part D: Comparable Structure Analysis 27



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

710 Part I: Research Recommendations


Wright Cycle Shop



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Building Recommendations

63



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Mary Ann Johnson, A Field Guide To Flight: On the Aviation Trail in Dayton, Ohio (Dayton, Ohio: Landfall Press, 1986), 35.
Fred C. Kelly, The Wright Brothers: A Biography (New York: Dover Publications, Inc. 1989), 37
Ibid., 37

Fred C, Fisk and Marlin W. Todd, The Wright Brothers: From Bicycle to Biplane (West Milton, Ohio: Fred C. Fisk and Marlin
W. Todd, 1993), 21

Ann Deines, Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park Historic Resource Study (Drafi), (Omaha, NE: U.S. Depart-
ment of the Interior, National Park Service, Midwest Regional Office, September 1996), 65

United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service (prepared in conjunction with The 2003 Fund Committee),
Study of Alternatives: Dayton’s Aviation Heritage + Ohio (U.S. Government Printing Office: 1991-573-040/20,039, Region
No. 8), 9-10.

Johnson, 35
Johnson, 35.
Johnson, 35.

Jill York O’Bright, David G, Richardson, and William S. Harlow, U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service,
Midwest Regional Office, National Historic Landmark Nomination Form |for The Wright Cycle Company building}, (Omaha,
NE: January 18, 1990), section 8, p.5.

Ibid., section 7, 2.
Fisk and Todd, 42
Fisk and Todd, 43.
U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, "Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park Ohio" (brochure).

U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Denver Service Center, Draft General Management Plan/Environ-
mental Assessment: Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park + Ohio (Denver, CO: November 1996), 3

Ibid. 14.

20

Part B: Historic Documentation Summary



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Figure 1: The cavity of the former exterior basement stair. Figure 2: The chimney was constructed at the time of
the addition, The brick infill at the left of the chimney
indicates that it was not part of the original wall.

Two chimney chases are currently located at the basement level: one at the western half of the north wall, the other
near the center of the east wall. The east chimney is not original, as indicated by the brick infill used on the north
side and the former stairwell behind it (Figure 2). This chimney was probably added as part of the addition
construction. One interior wood stair at the east end of the south wall leads up to the first floor. There is one small
window over the stair, high in the south wall. An original window in the east wall, south end, was bricked up,
probably when the addition was built.

Five wood columns running east-west supported a wood beam, which, in turn, supported wood floor joists. Vari-
ous partition walls were built around and between the wood columns over time. It is speculated that some of these
walls partitioned off a coal storage room at the west end of the north elevation, in front of a chimney chase. Walls
were built in the southwest corner to support an additional interior stair. The floor at the west, in the area of this
stair, was sloped up. Foundation walls for the addition at the east end of the building and for the porch along the
west elevation are unclear. Foundations were also laid to support a bay window addition at the center of the north
elevation. At some point in time, an exterior concrete stair was added to the western end of the north elevation,
restoring the direct access to the basement from the exterior.

Later restoration efforts gutted all but the exterior walls and the wood columns from the interior of the basement.
The exterior stair and the foundations for the bay window were removed, and the opening sealed. The basement
window, together with its sill stone and head stone, was removed and the opening bricked in.

First Floor

Originally there were three bays making up the ground floor elevation of the west and northwest walls: two large
bays of windows flanking a glass entrance bay, with stone columns framing the bays. There was one first floor
door opening in the center of the north elevation. Halfway between this opening and the east edge of the building,
‘was a small, square window. There is no indication as to the appearance of either of these openings. There were

Part E: Architectural Analysis 37



State of Ohio

Department of Health
Lead Poisoning Prevention Program

BE IT KNOWN THAT

TOBD TAYLOR

has successfully completed the requirements to be licensed as a
Lead Risk Assessor in the State of Ohio

License No.
OH 000137

Issue Date
November 24, 1997

Expiration Date
October 2, 1999

VOID IF ALTERED NON-TRANSFERABLE

— —



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Episode 1A: Circa 1896

The 1896 photo reveals a wood-frame, one-story addition that is not shown on the 1887 Sanborn map. The
Sanborn map and physical observation indicate that this construction was not original to the building, but it
does appear on the 1897 Sanborn map. When the addition was built, the exterior stair to the basement was
closed off and the window in the south end of the original east exterior wall was bricked in. A chimney, was also
added near the center of the original east wall, partially blocking the former basement exterior stair.

Part G: Building Chronology 5T



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Part C: Archeological Analysis

Limited archeological investigation was conducted around The Wright Cycle Company building by Wright State
University prior to the National Park Service becoming the owner. According to the park's November 1996 Draft
General Management Plan/Environmental Assessment:

. . no documentation of the investigation findings was produced, Maps from the historic period indicate the location of a paint
and metal finishing shed at the rear of the cycle building. Maps also indicate three buildings with auxiliary structures on the land
between the Hoover Block and the Cycle Building, One of the structures housed a storefront hat shop and residences.

In 1996, National Park Service personnel “monitored grading of the plaza area between The Wright Cycle Com-
pany building and the Hoover Block for the discovery of subsurface archeological features.”? According to the
General Management Plan, “continued historic archeological work in this area is highly probable.”’ Further, the
1996 Interpretive Plan for the Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park identifies additional studies,
plans, and pieces of research needed to complete implementation of the plan including historic site archeological
assessments. The goal of the archeological assessments is “to recover data, determine the size and location of
missing structural elements and features, and increase the historical base of information for the park.”* Accord-
ingly, assessments will be needed for, among other sites, “the Hoover Block, and the adjacent vacant lot behind
the structure,” as well as for “The Wright Cycle Company building with its adjacent yard.”*

Floodplains and Wetlands

According to the General Management Plan/Environmental Assessment, the core unit (consisting of The Wright
Cycle Company building and the Hoover Block) is not within either a 100-year or 500-year floodplain (although
the area did flood in 1913). The closest designated 100-year and $00-year floodplains to the core unit are associ-
ated with Wolf Creek, which is approximately one quarter mile from the sites, and the Great Miami River, which
is less than one mile away.

No wetlands have been identified at the core unit. However, the channels of Wolf Creek and the Great Miami
River that are located within one quarter mile of the core unit are “delineated as riverine lower perennial wetland
systems.”*

Vegetation

Prior to the white settlement of Greene and Montgomery Counties, forests covered about 95 percent of the land.
A majority of the woodland cover consisted of hardwood forest types including beech, mixed oak, elm-ash, and
oak-maple. Development and agricultural activities soon “reduced the original forest cover to small scattered
woodlots on poorly drained soils unsuitable for other crops. However, with management, woodland acreage has
been steadily increasing in recent times.”

The core unit is located in a developed urban setting in West Dayton. Because of this, no undisturbed native
vegetation types exist. What vegetation there is, on or near the core unit, is “typical of disturbed urban areas and
consists primarily of maintained lawn and ornamental vegetation...”*

Topography and Climate

The terrain in the project area is primarily flat, the result of the grinding-down and filling-in process of glacial
action. The core unit is about 740 feet above mean seal level (MSL).

The climate is classified as continental with warm, humid summers and cold, cloudy winters. July is normally the
warmest month with an average daily maximum temperature of about 86 degrees while January is typically the
coldest month with an average daily maximum temperature of 38 degrees. Precipitation is well-distributed through-
out the year and averages about 38 inches annually.®

Part C: Archeological Analysis 23



The levels to classify a material as containing lead-based paint, as provided in the RMD LPA-1
Performance Characteristics Sheet, are as follows:

Substrate XRF Mode Threshold Inconclusive Range
{mg/cem2) {mg/em2)

Brick Quick 1.0 None

Concrete Quick 1.0 None

Drywall Quick 1.0 None

Metal Quick None 0.9 to 1.3

Plaster Quick None 0.9 to 1.3

Wood Quick 1.0 None

Conclusions

Numerous components at both buildings were found to contain lead greater than 1.0 mg/cm2. See
attached XRF field sheets for components and locations. ATC did not accomplish a lead-based paint
inspection in compliance with the Housing of Urban Development "Guidelines for the Evaluation and
Control of Lead-Based Paint Hazards in Housing" or the Ohio Department of Health "Ohio Childhood Lead
Poisoning Prevention Rules". The results of the XRF testing can only be applied to the exact area that
the XRF was placed and cannot be considered representative of other locations.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulates workplace exposures to lead;
however, OSHA does not define lead-containing materials, or specify a lead content for materials
involved in construction/demolition activities that could cause occupational exposures to lead above the
permissible exposure limits specified in the OSHA Lead Construction Standard (29 CFR 1926.62).
Therefore, because the XRF cannot accurately detect lead in paint at concentrations below the HUD
action level, lead must be assumed to be present, in low levels (<1.0 mg/cm2) on all painted surfaces
which tested “negative” by the XRF. Maintenance renovation or demolition work with any lead-
containing material has the potential to cause occupational exposures to lead. OSHA requires that any
manual activities which has the potential for causing lead exposures be conducted by specially trained
and equipped workers utilizing controlled work practices in accordance with the OSHA lead construction
standard. Worker exposures must be measured during work activities. The Wright Cycle Shop and the
Hoover Building do not meet the Ohio Department of Health definition of a “structure”, therefore, lead
related work does not need to be accomplished by a Ohio Licensed Lead Abatement Contractor.


9. Major Bibliographical Re, -nces

Conover, Charlotte Reeve, Dayton and Montgomery County Resources and People. New Yo:
Lewis Historical Publishing Co. Inc. 1932.

Crouch, Thomas. Unpublished draft biography of the Wright Brothers.

Fisk, Fred-C. "The Wright Brothers from Bicycle to Biplane." The Wheelmen.
No. 29; November 1986.

Howard, Fred. Wilbur and Orville. New York; Alfred A. Knopf, 1987.

Johnson, Mary Ann. A Field Guide to Flight. Dayton, Ohio; Landfall Press, 1986,

Montgomery County Register of Deeds and Tax Duplicates

Cisee continuation sheet
Previous documentation on file (NPS): N/A

(preliminary determination of individual listing (36 CFR 67) Primary location of additional ‘data:
has been requested [state historic preservation office
LI previousty listed in the National Register {_Jother State agency
(_]previousty determined eligible by the National Register (_]Federat agency
(Teesignatea a National Historic Landmark [JLocal government
[" Jrecorded by Historie American Buildings {_Juniversity
Survey # im Other
(recorded by Historic American Engineering Specify repository:
Record #

10. Geographical Data
Acreage of property 10.1

UTM References

A L416] (713,819,910) [4,4/0,4}2,8,0 8 ELi tua j Lititii

Zone = Easting Northing Zone Easting Northing
C (46! (71313174210) 14,440,411,0,0] D LhLitivi) Lititias

[Jsee continuation sheet

Verbal Boundary Description Broadway and the alley between W. 2nd St. and W. 3rd St., thence
easterly along the south side of the alley past Williams to the vacated alley east side
lot 6308, thence southerly along lot 6308 and diagonally across W. 3rd St. to the corner
Shannon, thence southerly west side Shannon to Peck's Alley thence westerly along the

north side of Peck's A-ley to the back lot line of lot 7794, thence southerly along the

back lot line to the south line of lot 7793, thence westward along the lot line crossing
[ise continuation sheet

Boundary Justification The W. Third Street Historic District's boundaries were defined to
incorporate the best examples of the area's commercial buildings, and with a short extens
south along Williams St., to include the Wright Cycle Company building. To the east of
Stx« and west of Broadway are extensive areas of demolition. What buildings remain outsic¢
the district are of insufficient integrity for inclusion in the nomination.

~ Clsee continuation sheet

11. Form Prepared By

namettitle Loren Gannon Jr, /Historian
organization Gannon Historical Service: date 2 September 1987
street & number __20 Park Avenue, Oakland telephone __(513) 298-1110

city or town Dayton state __Ohio zip code _ 45419



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)
Historic Structure Report

Basement Plan EXS-100
First Floor Plan EXS-101

Second Floor Plan EXS-102
Attic Floor Plan EXS-103
Roof Plan EXS-104

Photographs used within this report are also keyed on these drawings. The investigation was limited to only those
items that were readily accessible and visually observable at the time of the surveys. No destructive access was
permitted or performed.

In the late 1980s, Aviation Trail, Incorporated (ATI), with the assistance of Robert C. Gaede Architects, Inc.,
organized a volunteer effort to restore the building. During this restoration, a majority of the original and contem-
porary interior finishes were replaced.’ The first floor of the building is now being used for public interpretations;
the second floor is occupied by National Park Service (NPS) personnel. This report evaluates the structural
integrity of the building to be used for public interpretive use on both the first and second floors.

General:

Overall, The Wright Cycle Company building (HS-01) is in good condition. Few areas of severe structural dis-
tress were observed at the time of the inspections. Each observed area of distress is discussed in detail below.

Foundation Walls: -

No apparent cracking or similar stresses were observed in the stone foundation walls of The Wright Cycle Com-
pany building (HS-01) with the exception of the south wall. The south wall has a layer of parging covering the
stone foundation wall, The parging is severely cracked and pieces have fallen off in several locations. The poor
condition of the parging can be directly related to the condition of the stone foundation wall. Any moisture
penetration into or between the wall and the parging will damage the wall and the parging. When moisture is
trapped in or between the wall and the parging, it will try to escape. Through its attempted escape, the moisture or
vapor will deteriorate the stone wall resulting in a loss of strength of the wall. The water will also cause the parging
to crack. These cracks expose more surface area for water penetration to occur, thus allowing more deterioration
to occur.

The moisture penetration into the south foundation wall of The Wright Cycle Company building (HS-01) may be
due to a combination of reasons. During the inspections, NPS personnel stated that the relationship between the
gutters of The Wright Cycle Company building (HS-01) and the residence to the south of The Wright Cycle
Company building (HS-01) is problematic. The gutters on the residence are ineffectual and leak heavily into the
space between the buildings. Water can easily be collected in the ground between these two buildings due to the
small distance -- only two feet -- between them. This small space prohibits wind and sun to either move or
evaporate the water. Therefore, the water gravitates downward through the soil, creating a larger soil pressure on
the foundation walls of both buildings. The "wet" soil pressure can be two to four times the normal "dry" soil
pressure depending on the in-situ soil makeup. As the water progresses, some of it may be moving through the
south foundation wall of The Wright Cycle Company building (HS-01). As it migrates through the walls, the
water may chemically react with and dissolve the cementitious materials and aggregates in both the mortar and the
parge. This chemical reaction causes the mortar and the parge to lose strength, begin deteriorating, form cracks,
and show other signs of distress.

As stated earlier, the other foundation walls are in good condition. However, the mortar of the stone walls crumbled
when touched in various locations. This is a typical condition due to moisture penetration and the age of the
mortar.

44 Part F: Existing Conditions Analysis





The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historie Structure Report

62 Part G: Building Chronology


8. Statement of Significanc
Ceriifying official has considered the significance of this property in relation to other properties:
nationally CI statewide Rflocany

Applicable National Register Criteria Da ke le Co
Criteria Considerations (Exceptions) [JA [Je Cje Co Ce Clr (Je

Areas of Significance (enter categories from instructions) Period of Significance Significant Dates=
Invention 1885-1924
Architecture

Cultural Affiliation

N/A
Significant Person Architect/Builder
Wilbur and Orville Wright unknown

State significance of Property, and justify criteria, criteria considerations, and areas and periods of significance noted above.

The West Third Street Historic District is significant under Criterion B for its
association with Orville and Wilbur Wright, the inventors of the airplane. Several Wright
Brothers’ printing and bicycle shops were located in the district. For example, the
printing shop in the Hoover Block and the Wright Cycle Company Builders located at 22 West
Third Street. The district is also significant under Criterion C as a cohesive collection
of late 19th century and early 20th century commercial buildings representing a suburban
streetcar commercial block. It has a strong commercial Romanesque Revival character with
dark red brick, corbelling and round arches. There are also excellent Victorian
Italianate and Neo-Classical buildings dating from 1885 to 1924.

The Wrights lived near the district at 7 Hawthorne Street (demolished). Orville Wright's
earliest enthusiasm was for printing and he set up his first printing shop at home. In
1889 he took the business to 1210 West Third Street (demolished) and in 1890 moved it

to the second floor at the new Hoover Block. While mainly job printers, the

brothers also published a weekly magazine and several newspapers including the Westside
News. Wilbur Wright, though associated with the printing business, soon took an interest
in the booming bicycle fad. In 1892 he opened the Wright Cycle Exchange at 1005 West
Third Street which is now incorporated within the walls of the Gem City Ice Cream
Building, present appearance dating to 1914. The shop moved next door and then across the
street to 1034 West Third Street until 1894. In 1895 the printing and bicycle businesses
were brought under the same roof at 22 South Williems Street. There, the Wright brothers
began experimenting with aviation. The printing business was finally sold in 1899. In
1897 the Wrights moved to 1127 West Third Street where, in 1903, they invented the first
airplane.

The Wright Cycle Company closed its doors in 1908, but the Wrights’ office stayed at 1127
West Third Street until 1918. Henry Ford moved the building to Greenfield Village in
1936. Orville maintained an office and laboratory (demolished) at 15 North Broadway until
his death in 1948.

[X]See continuation sheet



BM" ATLA" Jett Notenedover Center Seam

Th
z
i

‘\

\ Center Seam

DETAIL A-A: Joists Notched over Center Beam

First Floor Partivions are chown over First Floor Joists.

°

no

156

eee Maia FERED Teor aET remem mance
seepatris usrepsrars
PC Fivzpatrick auinw 1 DEPARTMENT OF THE RITERIOR Bee

tN my panna ,
i EVAN Ered mar ary
aa aia van ee NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, omer poole

Engineering, P.C. First Foor
Plan

‘mason

good = THE WRC CYCLE COMPANY SHOP #09
saan ce
zeronton amnesiac ARG ITEC TE ake onriieamemteracownraireeon | | eve ay
28: 769-0920 Fax 32-769. 2015] wrama weneretos ee DAYTON, OF0 « SS



V2 5:12" oisee ® 24" cle Assumed

[Le PREPARED THE OF SHEET TeooREH pavers
ureostates
PC Fivapatrick QUINN ate DEPARTMENT OF THE BERIOR Bee
Structural EVANS [osossi cir Tesinco NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, seoerno Deve
ooo ci Roof
Engineering, Pc) OOO Tea Framing
wes Plan THE WRIGHT CYCLE COMPANY SHOP (5-01) exer
2s rennanctmane “ws oe] ARCHITECTS aces DAYTON AVIATION HERITAGE NATIONAL HISTORIC PARK, EXS - 104
wy
38-769-0300 Fox 318-762-2016) ence aed DAYTON, OHO »
‘Toe



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Figure 5 is a photograph of the northeast corner of Second and Ludlow Streets in downtown Dayton, taken
between 1913-14. The building at the left, "THE RIKE-KUMLER CO." also shows mixed commercial/residen-
tial characteristics. The end-gabled roof is visible from the street, and the upper story windows are not only
shuttered, but contain six-over-six divided-light, double-hung windows. The building to the right of "The Inn"
was the location of the Wrights' downtown bicycle shop in 1895. They were only in that location for one year.

The Wright Cycle Company building and the four houses in the historic district, although of different styles, share
certain features common to American suburban residential architecture of the time. All three buildings have their
narrow, gabled ends facing the street. This characteristic is largely determined by the long, rectangular city lots.
However, unlike the commercial buildings on West Third Street, the houses are freestanding, even though the
space between them is nominal. The front setback, although very small, further separates the house from its
surroundings. This reflects the desire of the new suburbanites for an independent homestead, and an escape from
the more densely packed row houses of the older city core.

The houses to the south and across the street share the scale and many features of The Wright Cycle Company
building. No. 26 is wood-framed, one window bay wide, with a side porch. No. 30 is two window bays wide and
constructed of brick. Although the Wright building is composed of three bays, and therefore wider, the chamfered
northwest bay makes the building seem narrower. Visually, the three buildings are similar in width (Figure 6). All
three buildings have visible, peaked roofs. The upper windows at No. 22 are double-hung, as are all of the
windows that are visible on the other two houses.

Across the street, at No. 23-35 and No. 29, are two more houses styled in the late Victorian vernacular. They are
two stories, with complex roofs (hipped, gabled, cross-gabled), as clearly shown in Figure 4. They both have
porches, and are set back from the street. In Figure 4, the roof lines of the four houses in the historic district,
peaked and gabled, are clearly reflected in the roof of The Wright Cycle Company building, and contrast with the
flat roofs of the commercial structures along West Third Street. Modern infill buildings, although commercial, to
the south (left) of the historic district have retained the residential-style roofs.

The Wright Cycle Company building provides a visual and physical transition from the dense commercial district
along West Third Street to the freestanding houses in the surrounding neighborhood.

Part D: Comparable Structure Analysis 31



PN oN

Kas ZC

Citi ickle ¢ Acienement

This is to certify that

Todd Taylor
of Lead Safe Home, Inc.

on the 11th day of February 1997 successfully completed the factory training for

RMD’s LPA-1 Lead Paint Inspection System

including, but not limited to, the topics of Radiation Safety
and the Proper Use of the Instrument.

vLpt—.

acob Paster, Vice-President of RMI
44 Hunt St., Watertown, Massachusetts



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-O1)

Historic Structure Report
Part B: Historic Documentation Summary

History of the Site

Located at 22 South Williams Street on the west side of Dayton, Ohio, The Wright Cycle Company building was
constructed by two brothers, Abraham and Joseph Nicholas, in 1886. The brothers operated a grocery store on the
first floor of the two-story brick building for two years before selling it to Joseph H. Hohler for $3,500 in 1888.
Hohier had a grocery store, then a feed store on the first floor, and lived with his family on the second floor until
1891. After that he rented the building first as a saloon and boarding house, then to Wilbur and Orville Wright, the
Wright brothers of aviation fame. The Wrights paid $16 a month for the entire building, which they rented from
1895 to 1897.! It was while they were occupying this building that they took their first steps toward the invention
of the airplane.

Before gaining fame as inventors of the airplane, however, the Wright brothers supported themselves with two
businesses: a job-printing business and a bicycle showroom, repair, and manufacturing business. Orville had
become interested in the printing business at a very young age. By the eighth grade he owned his own printing
press and together with fellow classmate, Ed Sines, established a job-printing business. A disagreement about
how to handle a payment from a customer led Orville to buy out Sines, although Sines stayed on as an employee
of Orville’s. A few years later, Orville built himself a bigger press. Ambitious to:

be a really good printer, Orville took employment during two summer vacations with a printing establishment in Dayton,
and worked there sixty hours a week, But he felt that the most fun and satisfaction in connection with printing had been
from building his own press. Along in the spring of 1888, when he was nearly seventeen years old, he started to build
another press.?

When the press was finished, it was big enough and fast enough to print a newspaper. The first documented work
from the company is from 1888 and is credited to the Wright Bros., Job Printers, indicating that at least one of
Orville's brothers was involved. In the spring of 1889, Orville began printing a neighborhood weekly called the
West Side News. The paper quickly became a fairly profitable business. Occasionally, Wilbur, his brother, would
help fill space in the paper by writing humorous essays. After publishing the paper for a few weeks, “[Wilbur’s]
name was added to the paper’s masthead as ‘editor,’ along with Orville’s as publisher.”

Paul Laurence Dunbar, a friend of Orville’s since grade school, was a possible contributor to the West Side News.
Several poems, written in his style but uncredited, appeared in the newspaper. Dunbar himself “was to become
famous before the Wright brothers with his many books of poetry, his plays, words to many songs, and novels that
he wrote.”* In 1890, Dunbar, as editor and publisher, established the Dayton Tattler for African-American read-
ers. Orville Wright printed the newspaper, but the Dayton Tattler ceased publication after three issues. By this
time, Orville and Wilbur had moved to a larger space, renting a second floor suite in the front of a building known
as the Hoover Block, located at 1042 West Third Street. Dunbar is reported to have written a short poetry verse
about Orville and his printing business on one of Orville’s office walls in the Hoover Block:

"Orville Wright is out of sight
In the printing business

No other mind is half as bright
As his'n is.”*

In addition to printing their own newspaper as well as Dunbar’s, the Wrights also did custom printing jobs for a
variety of clients, and, in fact, job-printing appears to have been a major portion of the Wrights’ business. Orders
included the printing of minutes and reports of church conferences, constitutions and bylaws of various church-
related or civic organizations, advertisements, holiday menus, letterheads, calling cards, directories, and annual
reports. A considerable amount of business came from the Wrights’ father, Bishop Milton Wright, who served as
the publishing agent for the Old Constitution of the Church of the United Brethren in Christ, and as publisher for
the Christian Conservator.

Part B: Historic Documentation Summary 7



| 2.5BG 7/2

The Munsell Book of Color

7.5BG 9/2 10BG 8/4

10BG 7/6

7.5B 8/4 5PB 2/4

7.5B 4/6



Date: 1/26/98

ATC Associates Inc. Lead Based Paint Survey Data Record

Client: Quinn Evans Architects Inspector:

Client # 17960.0001
Survey Site: The Wright Cycle Shop

Todd Taylor

Project Name/Location: 22 South Williams Street
RMD; LPA-1- #1224

Initial POSITIVE

Room Type Wall Component Substrate] Condition| Color | K.Shell | NEGATIVE
Calibration NA N/A N/A N/A NIA 2.6 wee
Calibration N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 21 “
Calibration N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2.1 =e
Calibration N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2.4 wee
Calibration N/A NIA NIA NIA NIA 2.2 “_
Basement Cc Support Column Wood Poor White 0.5 N
Basement Cc Wall Concrete Fair Green 0.0 N
Basement C Floor Concrete Poor Green 0.3 N
Basement A Support Column Wood Poor White -0.4 N
Basement Cc Joist Wood Poor White 0.3 N
Basement Stairwell A Wall Plaster Poor Green -0.5 N
Basement Stairwell A Door Jamb Wood Fair Gray -0.3 N
Basement Stairwell A Door Wood Good Gray -0.2 N
Basement Stairwell A Ceiling Plaster Poor Green 0.3 N
Basement Stairwell A Ceiling Wood Fair White -0.2 N
Main Room First Floor A Door Wood Good Gray 0.0 N
Main Room First Floor A Door Casing Wood Good Gray ~0.1 N
Main Room First Floor D Floor Wood Fair Green -0.1 N
Main Room First Floor [e) Floor Wood Poor Yellow 1.8 P
Main Room First Floor’ D Floor Wood Fair Red -0.1 N
Main Room First Floor A Wall Plaster Fair Yellow 29.9 N
Main Room First Floor B Wall Plaster Fair Yellow -0.1 N
Main Room First Floor Cc Wail Plaster Fair Yellow 0.4 N
Main Room First Floor D Wall Plaster Poor Yellow 0.0 N
Main Room First Floor A Ceiling Wood Good Yellow -0.1 N
Main Room First Floor Cc Floor Wood Fair Brown 41.2 P
Main Room First Floor Cc Door Casing Wood Good Gray 0 N
Main Room First Floor Cc Door Jamb Wood Good Gray 70.4 N
Main Room First Floor B Floor Wood Poor White 2.6 P
Main Room First Floor B Door Wood Good Gray 0.0 N
Main Room First Floor D Baseboard Wood Good Gray -0.3 N
Main Room First Floor D Window Sill Wood Good Gray -0.2 N
Main Room First Floor D Window Casing Wood Good Gray -1 N
Main Room First Floor D Window Sash Wood Good Gray ~0.1 N
Main Room First Fioor D Window Well Wood Good Gray _| No Access ae
Main Room First Floor D Wail Divider Wood Good White 0 N
Main Room First Floor D Wail Divider Trim Wood Good Gray ~0.1 N
Main Room First Floor D_| Window From Wall Divider | _ Wood Good White 22 N
First Floor R.R. A Wail Drywall Good Cream 0.0 N
First Floor R.R. D Wall Drywall Good Cream ~0.4 N
First Floor R.R. Cc Wali Drywail Good Cream -0.3 N

Page 1



Inspectors Certifications



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-O1)

Historic Structure Report

Table 1: Basement Column Movements Measured with a Four Foot Mason’s Level

| Movement of the Top of the Column in the

Column | Size East-West Direction | North-South Direction | Notes/Comments

A | 3-1/2" x 3-1/2" 1-3/4" Towards the W i
— T

Reasonably Plumb

Reasonably Plumb
B 3-7/8" x 5-7/8"

3/4" Towards the N

Cc 3-7/8" x 5-7/8" 1" Towards the E ; 1-1/4" Towards the N Beam Joint

D : 3-3/8" x 3-3/8" Reasonably Plumb | 3/4" Towards the N Bowed in the N-S Direction;
| | Bearing on Concrete Block

3-1/2" x 3-1/2" 5/8"

E fowards the W | Plumb Bearing on Concrete Block
F | 3-3/4" x 6-1/4" | 1" Toward the E Reasonably Plumb | Beam Joint
G | 3-3/4"x6" | Reasonably Plumb Reasonably Plumb
Ho. 3+1/2"x3-5/8" | Plumb | 1/2" Toward the N
| : | _ . a
Ji | NA. N.A. No obvious movement
! noticeable
Ko) 312"3-12" | NA. NA. No obvious movement
| | noticeable

This column "movement" may actually not be movement at all. The columns could have been built with this
alignment. As discussed later under the Structural Analysis section of this report, the columns are of adequate size
to support the first floor 15 psf dead load and 100 psflive load. They most likely did not move from heavy loading
of the floor above. Also, the connections of the columns at both the top and the bottom, appear to be sound and
will not permit the extensive movements measured. The columns are supported by the concrete “mound” founda-
tions discussed previously. Floor joists are notched over the beams that the columns support. Although the notches
are not snug to the beams, the gap between is too restricting to allow for the measured "movements". Therefore,
the columns may have been installed leaning, or the leaning state was invoked with the construction and/or demo-
lition of the clay brick partitions that were once built-up around the columns.

This leaning state of the columns is unacceptable. The lean of the column moves the center of gravity of the
column away from the loading point at the top of the column. This creates an eccentric loading on the column
inducing a moment loading the column. These loadings will over stress the columns and could cause a failure if
the floor is heavily loaded.

First Floor:

The first floor is currently used for public interpretative tours. Exhibits are on display of both the Wright brothers’
printing shop and cycle shop. "False" partitions incorporated into the exhibits are in place to aid in dividing the
first floor into sections. The tongue and groove flooring is resting on plywood that bears on the joists exposed in
the basement. Because the flooring system is exposed in the basement, the physical investigation of the first floor
was completed there. With the exception of the western portion of the floor, the joists are rough sawn and use
mortise and tenon connections to frame the stairway. These original joists continuously span from north to south
and are notched over a wood beam spanning east-west the entire length of the building. The wood beam is
. supported by the columns discussed in the Basement section of this report.

46 Part F: Existing Conditions Analysis



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

6 Part B: Historic Documentation Summary


The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

40 Part E: Architectural Analysis



tT, Basement Core Moveowst Mevared with «Fas Foo Naso level
Meemeyar De top
pees
cowl sae | ERNST | ERE | pene ___ | Nnmicorrenn
m [aueasue | ase T Renoray Te Cmawe bom
at | RS
uct
reg err
sent | 2
erat
é THIF Pia tare | Semetigad | paniow
wea | tity | Sees
ene
: > Te
ike
pty
Ce ras a
the Woot ~
F | Saenewe | teed | Rasmany | GeaeeNges, | Pane
cea? | gee | Geese,
Soren
SP exe) Repeat | Rogan | Goemee oud
nae! | ae
BH [saresaare | rm | Ve toad | W Comet
BES
Taree} ae Na | Saenaab | Resa vor
Raa
% [sieve] na TA] Teenctioa | Rosbrea ever
ERs
concrete
wechatiee
C) foutexer
GG The ever nate we potygoecomespands tothe gure aunber
mm Gleaner repre te gozot te poor intone aecton
‘Poenaen th pocoppreascace e poveoncpmbo nt Fcea
tne mproedtelchconenre he patogretoat
+ seutnFountaeonvia a Sate
3 Concrete Su-om Grade i 2 Caummss ¢rFoceareand nd tm Boctaround
fecerar 5 ExstemComectan Bermeenstar reader Jobe ane Wood Pot
an a A
; 6 ote RotecenSovenBeaegs ane Newel sos Hangers
3
! ke ; 3 7 terme ames
eo bose 6 ove he sere 2-736" J 6-05 8 este Endet Free heorkaes

coal

Basement
tweerer

DETAIL A-A: Profile of Coal Bin

Siac, ust = 1.0
Reviseo PREPARED THRE OF SHEET AUTOCAD LE NO ead
i Ie uinn'y UNIEOSIATES. F
CC isa oy MAN bea e] 2 DEPARTMENT OPA RTERIOR Zen
n SORT er |] eee
I Pp ood cu, Basement NATIONAL PARK SERVICE amoaiins 2o1se
Engineering, P.C. ae
oaaa ae oor
sua lan ‘THE WRIGHT CYCLE COMPANY SHOP (15-01)
19-02 H Mais» Ann Aer * S484 z
eee tee an > erecne DAYTON AVIATION HERITAGE NATIONAL HISTORIC PARK EXS- 100
358-769-0920 Fa 30: 769-2015| penne aaencanatot aguas DAYTON. OH
‘sa



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Sanborn Map 1936

Figure 9, The general outline of the Wright building (circled) remains unchanged, and the occupancy type is still
listed as "flats." The only change appears to be in the roofing material: composition shingles have replaced the
wood on the main building and the rear additions.

(SARATOGA

@. CHURCHHILL

ve ep ot + pee na OAM

Figure 9 Sanborn Insurance Map, 1936. (The Sanborn Perris Map Co., Ltd., New York, New York)

Part B: Historic Documentation Summary 19



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Figure 4 View of The Wright Cycle Company building in 1986 with most of the restoration work completed, Photo
courtesy of Aviation Trail, Inc,

Wright Cycle Company Building: 1986

This photo (Figure 4) shows the north and west elevations of 22 South Williams Street, with a chamfered north-
west comer. For the most part, these elevations appear to have been restored to the image in the 1896 close-up
photo (Figure 1), but there are some slight differences in their appearances. These inconsistencies are as follows:

The 1987 Wright Cycle Co. sign has been designed as a plaque with sans serif lettering, and the J.H.
Hohler sign is gone.

The base of the storefront windows in the two outer bays seems to have been constructed with a more
pronounced sill than the original.

The horizontal transom support above the entrance doors is thinner than the original, and did not initially
align with the storefront window mullions.

The porch on the rear addition that extends onto the face of the north wall in the 1987 photo is not
original,

The railings on the balcony are more substantial in the more recent photo, presumably in order to meet
code.

The chimney corbelling detail and the current grade around the building do not appear to match those of
the 1896 photo.

There is a beam of some sort protruding from the second floor doorway that is not evident in the 1896
photo.

The replacement shutters only have two divisions, while the original shutters were divided into three
sections, as evidenced in the 1896 photo.

The small square window on the north elevation at the first floor is not in the same location as the
window in the 1896 photo. Originally, the window was centered between the two second floor windows
above it.

The rear door on the north facade which opens onto the porch is not original.

The board fence visible in the 1896 photograph was not reconstructed.

14

Part B: Historic Documentation Summary


The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Part A: Introduction

General Property Description

The Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park comprises four noncontiguous sites in Dayton, Ohio. The
park was established to “commemorate the legacy of three exceptional men — Wilbur Wright, Orville Wright, and
Paul Laurence Dunbar — and their lives and works in the Miami Valley; recognize the national significance of the
contributions made by the Wright brothers and Paul Laurence Dunbar and the city of Dayton’s role in their
contributions; [and, to] promote preservation and interpretation of resources related to the lives of these three
men and the invention of flight through a management framework based on cooperation among the diverse groups
that share an interest in aviation history and Paul Laurence Dunbar.” One of the four sites is The Wright Cycle
Company building. Located at 22 South Williams Street on the west side of Dayton, The Wright Cycle Company
building is a two-story detached, red brick, commercial structure with a full basement. Built in 1886, the building
has been described as a typical neighborhood grocery store type of the period.

The Wright Cycle Company building’s significance stems from the fact that it was in this building that the Wright’s
printing and bicycle businesses were brought together under the same roof. During their occupancy, the Wright
brothers began manufacturing their own brand of bicycles. It was also in this building that the Wright brothers
began to consider the problems of powered flight. The Wright Cycle Company building is listed in the 1989
National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form as a contributing structure in the West Third Street Historic
District, and was also designated a National Historic Landmark on June 21, 1990.

Project Team Members

Following the objectives of the Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park, the National Park Service, Great
Lakes Systems Office, engaged the professional services of Quinn Evans/Architects, an architectural firm special-
izing in historic preservation, to prepare this Historic Structure Report. Team members providing support to Quinn
Evans/Architects included: Fitzpatrick Structural Engineering, P.C., for structural engineering; SWS Engineer-
ing, Inc. for mechanical and electrical engineering; Seebohm, Ltd. for historic paint analysis; and, ATC Environ-
mental, Inc. for lead based paint inspection services. The project team has gathered information, in addition to
that which had been previously researched and collected, and conducted on-site physical investigations, to formu-
late strategies for the repair, and maintenance of The Wright Cycle Company building. The results of this inves-
tigative research and documentation are contained in this Historic Structure Report, which is arranged in the
following manner:

Part A: Introduction
This section includes a general description of the property and documents the project team members, the scope of
the project, and the investigation methodology.

Part B: Historic Documentation

This section documents and analyzes historic information as it relates to the chronology of the property. It also
includes summarizations and references to historic documentation previously completed by the U.S. Government,
as well as original information gathered by Quinn Evans/Architects. In addition, an architectural analysis of
historic graphic information including photographs, drawings, and maps is included in this section.

Part C: Archeological Analysis

This section summarizes the archeological investigations that have been conducted at the property, as well as any
other pertinent information that has been ascertained as it relates to the historic chronology of the building and
historic outbuildings.

Part A: Introduction

we



Historic Paint Analysis: Sample Locations

|
|
EPISODE 1: 1886-1910 |
| |
|
| |

i fg

| pee |

| I Cottimn "]

Gi seOke FLOOR PLAN

| NA a



8 Pom eee Ne aan.
-m

United States Department of the Interior
National Park Service

National Register of Historic Places
Continuation Sheet

Section number__8 Page __ 5

<< “asene

typhoid fever from a tainted well at the rear of the bicycle shop."
While Orville remained bedridden until early October, Wilbur

learned of another tragedy that would be the impetus in the
brothers’ quest to conquer the air. On August 10, Otto Lilienthal,
the German engineer and aeronautical pioneer who was the first man
in the world to launch himself into the air and fly, died from
injuries received in a glider accident. Lilienthal's death, which
Wilbur learned of through a news service the brothers subscribed
to for their printing firm, provoked the brothers' inquiry into the
problems of human flight. As Wilbur remembered:

My own active interest in aeronautical problems dates
back to the death of Lilienthal in 1896. The brief
notice of his death which appeared in the telegraphic
news at that time aroused a passive interest which had
existed from my childhood . . . and as my brother soon
became equally interested with myself, we soon passed
from the reading to the thinking, and finally to the
working stage. !

From 1896 and on, the Wrights harbored a growing belief that man
could fly, and they began to focus their attention on the problems
of mechanical and human flight.

In 1897, because of the overwhelming success of their line of
bicycles, the Wrights once again saw the need to move their bicycle
and printing operations to larger facilities. The period 1896-

ee
“crouch, Bishop's Boys, p. 157.

“arthur G. Renstrom, Wilbur and Orville Wright: a Chronology
Commemorating the Hundredth Anniversary of the Birth of Orville
Wright August 19, 1871 (Washington, D.c.: Library of Congress,
1975), p. 6.

“3wilbur Wright to the Western Society of Engineers, 128
September 1901, in The Papers of Wilbur and Orville Wright:
Including the Chanute-Wright Letters and Other Papers of. Octave
Chanute, 2 vols., ed. Marvin W. McFarland (New York: McGraw-Hill,
1953) 1:103.



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-O1)

Historic Structure Report

Research Recommendations

69



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Geology and Soils

The geology of the project area, according to the November 1996 Draft General Management Plan/Environmen-
tal Assessment, is the result of “glacial advance, retreat, and deposition followed by the deposition of silt, or loess,
over much of the region. Soils in the project area formed in several kinds of parent materials including glacial drift,
weathered sedimentary bedrock, loess, lacustrine deposits, alluvium, and organic material.”'?

Underlying the core unit is the Crosby-Urban land complex. The natural soil characteristics of this mapping unit
have “been eradicated due to the level of disturbance from earthmoving or fill activities. These soils are nearly
level and typically occur on uplands underlain by glacial till. They are seasonally wet, somewhat poorly drained,
and permeability is slow.”"

1 U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Denver Service Center, Draft General Management Plan/Environ-
mental Assessment: Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park + Ohio (Denver, CO: November 1996), 82.

2 Ibid, 82.
3 Ibid, 82.

4 U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Division of Interpretive Planning, Harpers Ferry, 4 Plan for the
Interpretation of Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park Ohio (Harpers Ferry, West Virginia: October 22, 1996),
49.

5 Ibid, 49.

6 Draft General Management Plan/Environmental Assessment: Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park « Ohio,
86.

7 Ibid., 86.
8 Ibid., 86.
9 Ibid, 85.
10 Ibid, 85
85

24 Part C: Archeological Analysis



cata! 2S 3G 1121 canal Road
Cincinnati, Ohio |
45241

913.771.2112

Fax 513.782.6908
ASSOCIATES INC.

April 1, 1998

Mr. Steven Jones

QUINN EVANS ARCHITECTS
219 1/2 North Main Street
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48104

Re: Wright Cycie Shop & Hoover Building
Lead-Based Paint Testing
ATC Project No. 17960.0001

Dear Mr. Jones:

Paint testing was conducted at the Wright Cycle Shop and the Hoover Building on January 26 and 28,
1998 by ATC Associates Inc. (ATC). The survey was performed at the Wright Cycle Shop located at 22
South Williams Street and at the Hoover Building located at 1060 West Third Street, both sites located
in Dayton, Ohio. The purpose of this inspection was the measuring of lead concentrations in paints in
Preparation for upcoming renovation projects. Mr. Todd Taylor, Ohio Department of Health Certified
Risk Assessor #0H000137 conducted field operations at the site.

The testing for lead-based paint was conducted using a Radiation Monitoring Device; LPA-1 RMD
Spectrum Analyzer, and the "XRF Performance Characteristics Sheet" for the RMD LPA-1 Spectrum
Analyzer.

At the beginning and end of the day, ATC performed three calibration checks using the calibration
standard provided by the manufacturer. The average of the three calibration readings were between 0.6
and 1.6 mg/cm2, within the acceptable range for unit operation.

Fixed, painted and vamished surfaces on the interior, as well as any exterior painted wood surfaces
were randomly sampled using the RMD LPA-1 XRF Spectrum Analyzer (Serial No. 1221). Materials
were Classified to be negative, inconclusive or positive for lead-based paint by each XRF measurement
per component. The XRF Data Summary is presented in Appendix A. The level of 1.0 mg/cm2 for the
XRF, and 0.5% by weight (5,000 ppm) in paint chip samples has been established by the Department
of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) “Guidelines for the Evaluation and Control of Lead-Based
Paint Hazards in Housing" and Ohio Department of Health (ODH) regulations as lead-based paint.

Initial testing of the painted surfaces by the XRF was performed using the "Quick" Mode which has a
varied inconclusive range depending upon the substrate (see below). Occasionally, a change of
substrates will interfere with an XRF screen. In these cases, if the inspector suspects that the screen
could be in error, he may disregard the first screen and collect a second.

'f a material was determined inconclusive, a paint chip sample was collected and analyzed by an Ohio
Department of Health Accredited Laboratory that participates in the Environmental Lead Proficiency
Analytical Testing Program (ELPAT). The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Method SW846-
7420 was utilized for the analysis of the paint chip samples. The results of the analysis was then
compared to the 0.5% by weight (5,000 ppm) HUD Guidelines to determine if the paint was positive
for lead. No paint chip samples were collected at either site.


The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

The 2003 Committee purchased the Hoover Block from Aviation Trail, Inc. for $100,00 in 1994, and a year later
purchased The Wright Cycle Company building for $200,000, donating both buildings to the National Park Ser-
vice. The purchase of both buildings was accomplished by using State of Ohio capital improvement funds. The
2003 Committee, comprised of community leaders and activists in Dayton, was “the godparent to the [Dayton
Aviation Heritage National Historical Park] and diligently nurtured and guided the effort to make the park’s
vision a reality. Having generated the grassroots support and the idea for a national park in Dayton, the 2003
Committee helped prepare the enabling legislation and gained the bipartisan support of political leaders that led
to establishment of the park.”!* The 2003 Committee is spearheading the Century of Flight Program, which is
preparing the celebration of the Centennial of Flight in 2003.

On November 2, 1995, the National Park Service took title of both The Wright Cycle Company building and the
Hoover Block. Both buildings form the core of the National Park Service unit, and are the only properties owned by
the National Park Service in the Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park. The National Park Service has
outlined objectives for both structures which are included in the General Management Plan/Interpretive Plan for
the Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park - Ohio prepared by the National Park Service in Novem-
ber 1997. A main objective is the protection of The Wright Cycle Company building, the Hoover Block, and other
resources of the park for visitor use. To accomplish this objective, the park intends to “restore The Wright Cycle
Company building and the Hoover Block to the mid-1890s (period of the Wright brothers occupation) and use the
interior spaces for adaptive purposes” and “provide universal accessibility to The Wright Cycle Company build-
ing and the Hoover Block.”'*

Photographic Chronology
The Wright Cycle Company Building: 1896

The earliest known photo of The Wright Cycle Company building was taken by Lura Hoover, daughter of Z.T.
Hoover, the owner of the Hoover Block. The photo is a portrait of her young friend, the niece of Charles Webbert,
owner of the nearby Webbert Building, and is part of a private collection. In the background of this 1896 photo is
The Wright Cycle Company building and two smaller buildings separated by Sanford Court. A detail of the 1896
photo is shown in Figure 1. Figure 1 shows the north and west elevations of The Wright Cycle Company building,
with a chamfered northwest corner. This corner chamfer creates one bay, which is repeated twice on the west
elevation, with the center bay serving as the entrance. The entrance is made up of double wood doors which each
have glass lights divided into four, over a solid bottom with two recessed panels. Above these is a transom with
three vertical divisions and a heavily profiled transom bar. Like the southernmost bay of the west elevation, the
corner bay is a large window, glazed to within inches of the second floor level, with a single vertical division and
three horizontal divisions. The upper horizontal division is a transom bar that separates the upper two panes from
the bottom six, and may be operational.

There are four simple, squared columns with modified Doric capitals, flanking and dividing the bays. Above the
west facing bays at the porch frieze is stenciled, “THE WRIGHT CYCLE CO.” in a serif style lettering, and
above the chamfered bay, a little higher on the brick is painted, “J.H. HOHLER.” ina sans serifstyle. In the lower
left hand light of the southernmost bay is stenciled a white bicycle silhouette. A narrow, wooden, uncovered porch
runs along the west side of the building encompassing the chamfered bay. Above each bay, at the second floor, are
two-over-two windows with a single vertical division. Each has a stone header and sill, and flanking trisection
wooden shutters.

On the north elevation, there are two doors, one at each floor, in the center of the elevation. Both doors appear to
have stone headers. The first floor door has two steps that rest on a continuous stone building sill that extends
along the north elevation and presumably continues around the entire building. The upper door is framed by a
balcony. The balcony does not appear to be much wider than the doorway itself, nor much deeper than that same
measurement. It has a railing with posts at each outer corner, and two horizontal rails at both the south and east

10 Part B: Historic Documentation Summary


The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Lead Paint Report

83


The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

The South Williams Street extension of the historic district encompasses The Wright Cycle Company building
and four residential structures that help convey the area's context: providing goods and services to the new com-
muters (Figure 3). The Wright Cycle Company building is located at the bottom of the photo. The two houses to
the south (left) of the building and the two houses directly across South Williams Street are part of the historic
district as well. These four houses provide a representative sample of the domestic architecture found in the
neighborhood during the Wright brothers' occupancy; all were built as part of the suburban development that
followed the streetcar expansion to the West Side.

Architectural Features

The architectural features of The Wright Cycle Company building reflect the dual commercial/residential nature
of the neighborhood. The original two-story building was constructed in 1886 with a dry goods store on the first
floor and a residence for the store's owner above. This resulted in a typical three-bay storefront capped by a
domesticated upper floor and roof. Figure 4 shows the building in 1896.

In general, the storefront fits with the scale and detail of the commercial buildings on Third Street. The storefront
is of exaggerated height, with stone columns and a decorative frieze. A set of entry doors with a transom compose
the central bay. The chamfered northwest bay was an acknowledgment of the corner lot occupied by the building,
and provided a welcoming transition to customers approaching the store from the east-west side alley.

Unlike the Third Street buildings, the commercial features of 22 South Williams Street were not carried over the
entire facade, nor were architectural details limited to the front of the building. There is no upper cornice with a
parapet, the roof is not flat, and the side walls (north and south) are not blank, but rather had several windows.
There was originally a set of side entrances in the north elevation, one door for each floor. This was possible
because the building does not fill the triangular-shaped lot, and shares no common walls with other buildings.

With the exception of the storefront, the remainder of The Wright Cycle Company building was decidedly domes-
tic, relating to the residential architecture to the south rather than the commercial block on West Third Street. The
building was freestanding and small-scaled, designed to be visually compatible with the two-story residences
nearby. The visible wood-shingled roof was hipped and gabled. The upper windows are trimmed with shutters.
Visible roofs and decorative shutters were not common on commercial buildings of the period. Also unlike typical
commercial structures of the period, the front edge of the building is set back from the street, with a grass margin
between street and sidewalk. This continues the facade-to-street relationship of the houses to the immediate south,
However, unlike the those houses, The Wright Cycle Company building has no front lawn.

The 1896 photograph taken by Lura Hoover (Figure 4 is a detail) shows another example of mixed domestic/
commercial architecture directly to the north of The Wright Cycle Company building. A one-and-a-half story, flat
roofed addition in the commercial style has been constructed adjoining a gable-roofed, vernacular residence with
Victorian trimwork. The addition appears to be constructed of brick, and has a large canvas awning that conceals
the top portion of the facade. Although no store name is obvious, there are objects on display in the front win-
dows. Further examination of the original photo or a better reproduction may provide further details.

The National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form for the Wright-Dunbar Historic District (now the West
Third Street Historic District) refers to the Needham building located at 1010-1012 West Third Street as being a
further example of mixed commercial/residential architecture. The nomination form includes an image of the
Needham building: a small-scale, two-story structure with a first-floor storefront, and two upper story bay win-
dows. Again, the building is freestanding, with numerous openings visible on its right side. The building does
feature a commercial cornice and parapet.



aa
am
L

OO} (00

EAST ELEVATION fey WEST ELEVATION aay

SCALE, 1d" Qa] ‘SCALE: 14°51." wa]

ore 4 G 6

ee |

Q N DESIGNED: | SUE SHEET HO. ‘TMLE OF SHEET DRAIANG NO.
E Ss

1
A
7 EAST & WEST ELEVATIONS

UTN
VAN
ann

i,

eg?

Akemi cers | mmm] A202 EXISTING CONDITIONS

219 1/2N. Main Steet
‘Ann Atbee, Michigan 48104 | DATE: WRIGHT CYCLE COMPANY BUILDING

313 663 5888 ownae7 DAYTON AVIATION HERITAGE NATIONAL HISTORIC PARK

—2 —

RE

g

BI

|| 188

g
fy



OO 2 28

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

UNITEO STATES AIR FORCE MUSEUM
WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, OHIO 45433-6516

Mr W Ray Luce, SHPO

Ohio State Preservation Advisory Board
Ohio Historical Society

1985 Velma Ave

Columbus, OH 43211

Dear Mr Luce

I understand the Wright-Dunbar area of West Dayton Ohio has been nominated

as an historic district. This area is one of the stops of the popular Dayton
Aviation Trail, and as a fellow member of the Trail, the United States Air
Force Museum heartily endorses this nomination.

The neighborhood is rich in local history and contains much of what remains
in Dayton from the era of Orvilie and Wilbur Wright and Paul Dunbar. Efforts
of the Aviation Trail Association directed toward the Wright Cycle Shop

and of other historically inclined Daytonians toward the Dunbar House are
keys to bringing the district back to its turn-of-the-century form. This
enthusiastic and vigorious program will be enhanced by this designation

as an historic district and will do much to spur the supporters of the West
Dayton complex to continue their commendable work to restore this portion

of the city to its former configuration.

West Dayton certainly deserves the designation as an historic district and
I earnestly solicite your support to this end.

Ss 1

Director


N 8.75

N 0.75

N 3.5

N 9.25

@ denotes (HS-01)



a
Foo os ean ar ac pemiona ti RIN TR
PN Che Neer Gas WWW
Wright/Dunbar Historic District
Dayton, Montgomery County, Ohio
USGS Quad. Dayton North, Ohio
Scale 1:24,000
A. 16/738990/4404280
B. 16/739000/4404100
C. 16/738720/4404100
D. 16/738680/4404190
JOSH afl ORI Mla
3 g Bh ase
| i Hedlson. Sl elbaat/
| Ams ec} b
P S a J st
hW ' Ml
Wi 2 *Ponimuntty Ss
eager Ey oulke SAM
39 (Bat geATOn 211. 11510000 FEET 237
o Mapped, edited, and published by the Geological Survey
we in cooperation with the Army Map Service
HP Revised in cooperation with State of Ohio agencies
a’ Control by USGS and NOS/NOAA
8

Topography by photogrammetric methods {rom aerial photographs
taken 1964. Field checked 1955, Revised from aerial
photographs taken 1964, Field checked 1965

Polyconic projection. 10,000-foot grid ticks based on Ohio coordinate
system, south zone, 1000-meter Universal Transverse Mercator

grid ticks, zone 46, shown in blue. 1927 North American Datum

To place on the predicted North American Datum 1983 move the
Projection lines @ meters south and 6 meters west as shown by
dashed corner ticks

Red tint indicates areas in which only landmark buildings are shown
Aréa covered by dashed tight-blue pattern is subject to controtied
inundation to 818 feet

Area west of the Great Miami River lies within the Miami River Survey
Area east of the Great Miami River ties within the Between the Miamis
Land fines based on the Great Miami River Base

There may be private inholdings wit
the Natianal ar State cacecuntians ch

1 a f- oi
138 NEW CHICAGO 2.6 Mi 40 25m aye,
CO) Vee RM aN TOR 8 WEST CARROLLTON 6 Mi an
CINCINNATI 50 Mr
ny , SCALE
* i
MN
ow
3h
62 MKS)

UM GRID AND 1981 MAGNETIC NORTH
DECLINATION AT CENTER OF SHEET

Revisions shown in purple and woodland compiled in
Cooperation with State of Ohio agencies from aerial
photographs taken 1979 and other sources This
information not field checked Map ediled 1981
Purple tint indicates extenstan of chan areas

Wea
spipi Va gay a \
I ZN

j

CONTOUR INT
NATIONAL GEODETIC ve

THIS MAP COMPLIES WITH NATIC
FOR SALE BY U.S. GEOLOGICAL
A FOLDER DESCRIBING TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS


The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

sides, the lower of which do not appear to align. There is a faint diagonal “shadow” below the balcony, towards
the west, indicating the presence of a previous steep staircase. This staircase would have provided direct access to
the second floor from the street.

Just to the east of the first floor door is a small square window opening with a stone header and sill, but no
shutters. There are four windows at the second floor of the north elevation, two on either side of the door. The
glazing is not visible in any of the windows on the north elevation. At the west end of the north elevation, at the
level of the storefront cornice, is a rectangle of bright paint directly on the brick. Presumably, this is another
painted advertisement or sign.

One brick chimney stack is clearly visible in this photo, between the two western-most, second floor windows on.
the north elevation. The hipped roof appears to be wood shingle, each face sloping up to the center, with gables
above the northwest chamfered elevation and above the balcony on the north elevation. Just below the cornice,
at the brick, is a continuous wood fascia. There is one downspout visible to the east of the beveled corner. Another
chimney, belonging to a house on the adjacent lot, is visible to the south of this building. Note the placement of the
chimney, the slope of that roof, and a portion of what appears to be a horizontal trim with dentils below it at the
very right-hand edge of the photo.

There is a small one-story addition at the east elevation that projects past the north elevation, with a gable roof.
While the body of the main building is brick masonry construction, the addition appears to have a different

Figure 1 This is a detail, showing
The Wright Cycle Company
building in 1896, from a photo of
Charles Webbert’s niece taken by
Lura Hoover. The original
photograph is in a private
collection. (Wright State University.
Archives and Special Collection)

Part B: Historic Documentation Summary a





RECEIVED SEP 1 § isu7

|
be If

the montgomery County historical society

The Oid Court House
Dayton, Ohio 45402
Phone 513/228-6271

September 14, 1987

Mr. W. Ray Luce, SHPO

Ohio State Preservation Advisory Board
Ohio Historical Society

1985 Velma Ave.

Columbus, Ohio 43211

Dear Mr. Luce:

On behalf of the Society, I wish to support nominating the
Wright-Dunbar area of West Dayton to the National Register of
Historic Places, This neighborhood, the original home of the
Wright Brothers, is a classic street car suburb that has
retained much of the architecture, both residential and
commerical, of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. We feel
that both for its architectural integrity and its historical
association with the Wright Brothers that the Wright-Dunbar area
deserves listng on the National Register as an historic district



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Structural Drawings

79



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Part H: Building Recommendations

Restoration Recommendations

Aside from the recommendations that can be made to protect and prolong the life of The Wright Cycle Company
building, consideration should also be given to the possibility of making the building more historically accurate in
its detailing and configuration. Several inconsistencies are highlighted in the discussion of the historic photos in
Part B of this report. They are based on the comparison of the renovated building to the 1896 historic photo of the
building. The current renovation of the building, especially at its exterior, inaccurately represents the building's
appearance during the Wrights’ occupation:

+ — The 1987 Wright Cycle Co. sign has been designed as a plaque with sans serif lettering, and the J.H.
Hohler sign is gone.

+ The base of the storefront windows in the two outer bays seems to have been constructed with a more
pronounced sill than the original.

+ The horizontal transom support above the entrance doors is thinner than the original, and did not initially
align with the storefront window mullions.

+ The porch on the rear addition that extends onto the face of the north wall in the 1987 photo is not
original.

+ The railings on the balcony are more substantial in the more recent photo, presumably in order to meet
code.

* The chimney corbelling detail and the current grade around the building do not appear to match those of
the 1896 photo.

+ There is a beam of some sort protruding from the second floor doorway that is not evident in the 1896
photo.

* The replacement shutters only have two divisions, while the original shutters were divided into three
sections, as evidenced in the 1896 photo.

+ The small square window on the north elevation at the first floor is not in the same location as the
window in the 1896 photo. Originally, the window was centered between the two second floor windows
above it.

There may have been several very good reasons for these inconsistencies at the time of the renovation, and they
certainly do not affect the maintenance or the longevity of the building itself. Issues affecting these aspects will be
discussed in the following paragraphs.

Exterior and Interior Fabric Recommendations

Renovation efforts by Aviation Trail, Inc. in the mid-1980s have ensured the relatively sound condition of most of
the interior and exterior fabric at The Wright Cycle Company building. Many of the materials are new, and are
well within the range of their expected lifetimes. However, at the time of the initial survey for this report, portions
of the historic fabric along the south exterior wall are failing due to moisture infiltration. The cementitious parg-
ing along the ground level of the south elevation was trapping moisture in the masonry, which was deteriorating
the mortar joints and displacing the brick. The National Park Service has since made repairs to the exterior south
wall and the interior foundation walls.

Another contributor to the moisture gain is the poor drainage condition between the south wall of The Wright
Cycle Company building and the neighboring residence. The poured concrete that exists between these two build-
ings needs to be removed. A french drain should be installed, the length of the building, beneath a porous ground

Part H: Building Recommendations 65



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Part I: Research Recommendations

The opportunity to understand more about the chronology of the development and evolution of The Wright Cycle
Company building exists. This can be further investigated by examining the city directories and continuing ar-
cheological research. The 1996 Interpretive Plan for the Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park identifies
additional studies, plans, and pieces of research needed to complete implementation of the plan, including historic
site archeological assessments. The goal of the archeological assessments is “to recover data, determine the size
and location of missing structural elements and features, and increase the historical base of information for the
park, and document" as these apply to “The Wright Cycle Company Shop [sic] with its adjacent yard.”! Addition-
ally, further artifact research needs to be undertaken in order to more accurately interpret the Wrights’ printing
and cyclery businesses.

1 U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Division of Interpretive Planning, Harpers Ferry, A Plan for the

Interpretation of Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park Ohio (Harpers Ferry, West Virginia: October 22, 1996),
49

Part I; Research Recommendations 71



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Sanborn Map 1897

Figure 6. By 1897, the front extension had been removed. Two additions were constructed at the back of the
building. The text within the body of 22 Williams Street reads "Window Screen Fcty Ist & part of 2nd," indicating
the building was still used for manufacturing. The map includes the two houses to the south of 22 Williams Street,
No. 24 and No. 30, which are also part of the current West Third Street Historic District.

-HARBERT

Figure 6 Sanborn Insurance Map, 1897, (The Sanborn Perris Map Co., Ltd., New York, New York)

Part B: Historic Documentation Summary


Vann —
SITE PLAN p

BORE ete

orz « 0 ca

OUINN pa” cee ‘THLE OF SHEET DRAMNGN. 5
mae [aon SITE PLAN Zser7
anes | sama A000 [a

ARCHITECTS

EXISTING CONDITION we

219:1/2N. Main Steet sw
Ann Aber, Michigan 48104 } DATE WRIGHT CYCLE COMPANY BULDING
313.663 5868 0429/07} DAYTON AVIATION HERITAGE NATIONAL HISTORIC PARK ow Z



RICHARD CLAY DIXON

Mayor

ciryv of DAYTON,

RECEIVED SE;

September 16, 1987

Mr. Ray Luce

Ohio State Preservation
Advisory Board

Ohio Historical Society
1985 Veima Avenue
Columbus, Ohio 43211

Dear Mr. Luce:

I am writing to express the City of Dayton's
interest in supporting the nomination of the Wright-
Dunbar area of West Dayton as a historic district on
the National Register.

As you are aware from the documentation, the Wright-
Dunbar area of Dayton is rich in historic significance.

We support the efforts of those individuals who
believe in preserving an important part of our City's
past. Many of the landmarks remain and we can ap-
preciate the preservation of those structures suitable
as such.

Thank you for your time and consideration in this
matter.

Sincerely,

do

Richard Clay Dixon
Mayor

RCD: smc

OHIC

OFFICE OF THE CITY COMMissior

MUNICIPAL BUILDING + THIRD G LUDLOW STS. + PHONE 449-363

25 jeez



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-O1)

Historic Structure Report

Archeological Analysis

21



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Loading Analysis
The following structural analysis results are based on the following assumptions:
+ Those assumptions described under Existing Conditions in this report including joist spans and future
floor use
+ The mechanical units in the attic space are properly supported
+ Members are properly connected and have adequate bearings
+ Allowable Bending Strength (Fb') of 1400 psi
+ Allowable Horizontal Shear Strength (Fv’) of 110 psi
+ Modulus of Elasticity of 1,200,00 psi (unless stated otherwise)
+ Live Load Deflection Limit of 1/360th the span
+ Total Load deflection Limit of 1/240th the span

For public use of the first and second floors, the Building Officials' and Code Administrators’ 1993 Building
Code (BOCA) requires a safe live load capacity of 100 psf. The following analysis results are all related to this
requirement.

Basement:

Assuming a 15 psf dead load and a 100 psf live load for the first floor, an analysis was performed on the wood
columns in the basement. A floor to ceiling height of 6'-10" was used in the analysis*. The allowable compressive
strengths were taken and determined from the 1991 National Design Specification for Wood Construction (NDS),
Southern Pine, grade No.2. Each reaction was determined via computer models and adjusted to its respective
compressive stress in the member. The actual stresses were then compared to the allowable stresses. All of the
columns are within range of the permitted stress. Column D has both the maximum actual compressive stress of
606 psi and the lowest allowable compressive stress of 707 psi. This is the most critical case of all of the columns,
however, it is still acceptable.

Table 2: Results of Analysis of Basement Columns
col. | Size Reaction | Actual | Allowable [Dittrence Acceptable?
(Ibs) __ Stress (psi) | Stress (psi) | |
A | 3anrx3an 3000 | e750] 502] es
B 3-718" x 5-7/8") 10144 446 367 | al yes
c 3-718"x 5-7/8" | 5374 236 sor | 631 yes |
D 3-3/8" x 3-3/8" 6902 606 m7 101 yes
E 3-12"x3-120" | 6525 «| 533 750 [27 yes
F 3-3/4" x 6-1/4" | 5865 230 20] 827 377 yes |
[G 33/4"x6" | 8646 384 827 443 yes
q 3-1/2" x 3-5/8" 4274 337 | 750 “43 | yes
J 3.1/2" x31" | 817 6750S yes
K 3-1/2" x 3-1/2" 2752 225 750 525 yes

50 Part F: Existing Conditions Analysis



I

WN SHop

P ise



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-O1)

Historic Structure Report

Architectural Analysis



F. Recommendations

Considering the number of physical changes that have taken place at both the exterior and
interior of the Wright Cycle Company Shop as described in the Architectural Analysis
section of this report, and the limited amount of period finished surfaces of the building, it
is recommended that use of the material information listed above be used as a guideline for
interpretation.

Inspection of the photograph listed as Figure 1 in Historic Document Summary of this
report shows the presence of a darker trim color or finish, as can be seen at the eaves and
window casing surfaces. Although visual inspection of such historic black and white
photographs is often confusing, use of the values (dark, light and gradient values between
dark and light) in the photograph do provide a basis from which we can consider a general
range of colors that we have found present in a sample.

With regards to the exterior window molding sampled and analyzed, the first paint film
present matching 10R 4/4 would be an appropriate value match to that observed in the
photograph in Figure 1.

Further inspection of this photograph provides us with a lighter surface at the window
shutters, and on the front doors and door surround.

Where evidence is available, it is recommended that the interior ceiling and wall surfaces be
repapered to match the original paper in pattern and color make up.

Interpretation of the interior trip moldings should be executed based on the final color
choices for the wallpaper.

G. Summary and Conclusion

In summation we can conclude that a limited amount of finishes evidence is available for
interpretation of an accurate finishes campaign, but use of the evidence at hand can help in
providing an historically appropriate campaign.

The most accurate reconstruction of the interior of the structure will be provided by the
architectural and archeological evidence, and not from the limited finishes information.



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Sanborn Map 1911

Figure 7. Changes to the Wright building (circled) indicated on this map include the removal of the north exterior
stair and the addition of a bay window to the same elevation. A porch has been added at the northeast corner. On
the west side of South Williams Street, the houses at 23-25 and 27 South Williams Street are in place. These
houses are also part of the current West Third Street Historic District. The duplex at 23-25 replaced an earlier,
smaller structure shown on the 1897 Sanborn map. The occupancy designation of "D” within the building outline
indicates a dwelling. Generally, the Sanborn Maps use “dwelling” specifically to mean a single-family residence.

ae)
Pras

Ps:

fe

i

Figure 7 Sanborn Insurance Map, 1911. (The Sanborn Perris Map Co., Ltd., New York, New York)

Part B: Historic Documentation Summary 7



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Episode 3: 1985 - 1997 (Existing Conditions)

The construction drawings prepared by Robert C. Gaede Architects, Inc. in 1985 also chronicle the last set of
construction changes to the building, the restoration and renovations made by Aviation Trail in 1985.

At the first floor virtually every partition was demolished, leaving only the central stairs along the south wall in
place. The storefront windows and main entrance were rebuilt to approximate the 1896 photo. The only unprec-
edented interior construction was a utilities enclosure against the south wall. Perhaps this was positioned based
on evidence discovered during construction, but there is no record of this. The first floor portion of the bay
window was also demolished and the former doorway restored there. The doors along the north elevation were
speculatively designed, unlike the window frames which were based on existing original wood profiles. Two
first floor windows at the west end of the north elevation were bricked closed to recreate the appearance of the
1896 photo. A third window, further to the east, was re-sized, again, to match the photo.

On the second floor, major demolition included the removal of the stair at the southwest corner of the building, the
bay window at the north elevation, and the kitchen and shower along the west wall. The linoleum floor covering
at the west end was removed, the original floors patched and sanded, and the bathroom remodeled. Most of the
partitions were left in place for the second floor to be used as a caretaker’s residence. The only restoration efforts
were to reintroduce the small balcony and doorway at their former location at the north elevation.

The addition at the east elevation was remodeled to include a new restroom. The chimney was not rebuilt. There
is no record of whether any original material was discovered or restored. For some reason, the porch at the north
elevation of the main building (the west elevation of the addition) was retained though it was not in place when the
Wrights occupied the building.

The 1985 construction documents indicate that little was to be changed at the basement level. The stair at the
north side of the building was to be removed. A new wall running east-west was to be added at the center of the
building, steel pipe shoring was to be removed along the south wall, and foundations for a new west porch were
to be placed over the historic foundations. There is no documentation as to what the sequence of alterations was
to the basement prior to 1985.

1 Fill York O'Bright, David G. Richardson, and William S. Harlow, U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service,
Midwest Regional Office, Nationat /fistoric Landmark Nomination Form [for The Wright Cycle Company Building}, (Omaha,
NE: 1987-88), section 7, p.1-2.

2 Ibid., section 8, p. 2

Part G: Building Chronology 61



Room/Location
2nd Floor

2nd Floor
Exterior

INTERIOR SAMPLES - Continued
Surface Chromachronology
Door Casing - Continued

Comments: The door casings were originally varnished. At a later
date a brown paint was applied.

Baseboard

Comments: Same stratigraphy as 2nd Floor Door Casing listed
above.

Window Molding 10R 4/4
2.SY 5/4 (varnish?)
NO.5

Comments: The first finish layer is a deep red, followed by a
yellow/orown clear coat. The top-most finish is a gloss black.



3. Major Bibliographical Ru 3s

‘See continuation sheer
Previous documentation on file (NPS): Gd
Cloretiminary determination of inidual tating (98 CER 67) Primary location of additional date:
has been requested . historic preservation office
Previously listed in the National ° Other State agency
Previously dotermined eligible by the National Regisier Federal agency
Gesignated & National Historic Landmark Local goverment
fecordes by Historie American Bulidings University
Other
Creer ”
#. : =. ok
ane on Aviation Trail, inc.
10. Geographics! Dats Dayton; Ohio

Acreage ot propcny less than one acre

UP Bpcn watts

ChLiy bb Lode be

Verbal Boundary Description

Lot 7794, City of Da

yton, Ohio, with the exception of 25 feet taken

by parallel lines off the south side thereof, as described in

Warranty Deed 12235

1 recorded July 27, 1983.
- Cisee continuation sheet

Boundary Justification

The boundary includes the city lot historically associated with the
Property, and is the legal boundary of the property owned by

Aviation Trail, Inc

(see continuation sheet

11. Form Prepared By ti

Nameltitte

KerkOiteight Historian: David c Richardson

Architect

Histeriens and William S Harlow Histarinal
Sieet & hanagittttoned—Park-Servics, Midwest Ropian one January 18, 1990
Street & number —17.09-Jackson Street telephone 402-221-3426

a state NE. zip 402

City or town Omah.


Wright Cycle Gentiny Aig east
Dayton , Ohio

Phot: : Wiliam, Horlw
Moy 1999
Neg: Nesfiona! Pack Service

Midwest Regional Office



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Part D: Comparable Structure Analysis

This section includes an analysis of the historic turn-of-the-century buildings in the neighborhood of The Wright
Cycle Company building.

Part E; Architectural Analysis

This section presents and analyzes historic building chronology information that has been gleaned from the
physical investigation, and addresses variations in construction techniques, technology, materials, and design.

Part F: Existing Conditions Analysis

This section evaluates and documents the existing conditions of the property, It includes an exterior fabric
analysis, interior fabric analysis, structural, mechanical and electrical systems analyses, historic paint analysis,
and an analysis of the existence of lead based paint.

Part G: Building Chronology

This section presents both written and graphic analyses of the building’s chronology based on known historical,
archeological, and physical investigatory information, with an emphasis on building configuration, the location of
door and window openings, and building materials. The section also presents an analysis of each building episode
that the building has undergone.

Part H: Building Recommendations

This section outlines maintenance needs for both the exterior and interior of the building.

Part I: Research Recommendations

This section provides recommendations for further research and investigation of the building that are outside the
scope of this report.

Investigation Methodology

The project team conducted an in-depth study of previously researched documentary materials related to the
property. These materials included: the General Management Plan/Interpretive Plan and the Draft General Man-
agement Plan/Environmental Assessment prepared by the Denver Service Center of the National Park Service;
Ann Deines’ September 1996 draft report entitled, Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park Historic
Resource Study; the Interpretive Plan [for the] Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park prepared by
the Division of Interpretive Planning at Harpers Ferry Center; Mary Ann Johnson’s book entitled, 4 Field Guide
to Flight: On the Aviation Trail in Dayton, Ohio; Fred C. Fisk’s and Marlin W. Todd’s book entitled, The Wright
Brothers from Bicycle to Biplane; Fred C. Kelly’s book entitled, The Wright Brothers: A Biography; National
Register of Historic Places Nomination Forms; National Historic Landmark Nomination Forms; and, historical
photographs, drawings, Sanborn Insurance maps, and newspaper clippings.

This report is based on documentary evidence collected to date, limited physical probing and destructive testing,
and architectural inspection. Of necessity, the reseatch is not concluded with the completion of this report. Rather,
it will be supplemented in the future by further information gathered through archeological investigation, and by
subsequent documents and information as they are discovered.

1 U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Denver Service Center, General Management Plan/Interpretive Plan:
Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park * Ohio (Denvet, CO: November 1997), 2.

4 Part A: Introduction




The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

two first-floor doors at the south half of the east elevation. The north door was a single wood door, with a transom
above, and opened directly onto the first floor. Only a steel lintel remains at the basement level to mark the
southern door, which opened into the enclosed stairwell leading to the second floor, built directly above the
basement stair, along the south wall. The stair could be access from the interior through a door that was located
adjacent and perpendicular to the north door. There is no indication of the number or location of any other
original, interior enclosures or partitions at this floor.

Prior to 1896, a single story wood-frame addition was built at the east wall. The east doors of the main building
connected the two constructions. The addition was slightly wider than the east elevation of the main building,
extending a little further north, and was initially divided into two spaces along the roof ridge. The northern half of
the addition contained one large window at its north elevation, and one door at this west-facing, extended eleva-
tion. The southern half of the addition contained a fireplace in the northeast corner, and a large window and a door
at the southern end of its east elevation. There appears to have been a porch at the east elevation, just outside this
window and door. The interior finishes appear to have been plaster at the walls and ceiling except for a the north
half of the east interior elevation, which was the exposed brick of the main building.

Later renovations, between 191] and 1936, removed the storefront and replaced it with a recessed wood-frame
wall and an enclosed staircase to the second floor. The first floor was converted into a single family residence,
complete with kitchen, bath, closets and divided living spaces. Two windows were added at the south elevation;
one at the new kitchen and a smaller one at the new bathroom. Two more windows were added to the western end
of the north elevation; the doorway was replaced with a bay window at the center of the north elevation; and the
smal! window was replaced with a larger window (just to the east of the bay window) and a new doorway.

At this time, it is believed, a hallway was created along the south wall of the east addition, aligning with the main.
building’s stairwell. The original doorway in the south end of the east wall, at the first floor landing, was used to
connect the stairwell with the hall in the addition. The doorway from the stair to the first floor interior was walled
off. A new entrance was added in the east elevation of the addition to access this hall; the hall did not access any
other portion of the addition in any way. This restored direct access to the second floor from the exterior at the east
end of the building. The east porch was probably removed around the same time.

The final set of renovations, begun in 1985, recreated the large windows, entrance doors and transoms at the west
and northwest elevations. The recessed west facing wall and southwest enclosed stair were removed, as were the
bay window and the two windows at the western end of the north elevation. The window just east of the bay
window was re-sized to a smaller opening, and the doorway was reused. The former door to the east stairwell was
reopened in the southeast corner of the main building. Except for a small utility closet that was built at the south
wall, the entire first floor was completely gutted. The window above the basement stairs was bricked in. A closet
and chimney were removed from the east elevation addition; the doorway between the two main rooms of the
addition was relocated further west on the wall; and a bathroom was added.

Second Floor

Originally, the second floor was lit by numerous windows: one above each bay of the first floor and four more
along the north elevation. There was another window at the south exterior wall at the second floor landing. In the
middle of the four north elevation windows was a doorway leading to a small porch. The design of the door or
doors there is not known. The walls and ceiling were painted plaster and the floor was hardwood. There is no
indication as to the number or location of any original, interior enclosures or partitions at this floor, other than the
stairwell enclosure and what may have been a closet adjacent to it, in the southeast corner.

The entire second floor was later renovated as a single family residence, complete with kitchen, bath, closets and
divided living spaces, with partitions that aligned with those on the first floor. An enclosed staircase leading to an

38 Part E: Architectural Analysis


The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Existing Condition Drawings

85



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Historic Paint Analysis

81


RECEIVED SEP 1 7 1587 University Library

WRIGHT 513/873-2380
STATE

Wright State University
Dayton, Ohio 45435

September 11, 1987

Mr. W. Ray Luce

State Preservation Advisory Board
Ohio Historical Society

1985 Velma Avenue

Columbus, OH 43211

Dear Ray:

I am writing in support of the nomination of the Wright-Dunbar
area of West Dayton as a historic district. 1 have served
for a number of years as Head of Archives at Wright State,
where I have worked especially closely with the Wright
Brothers Collection in our archives. As an historian with
an research interest in local history, I have also studied
the West Side neighborhood which was a home to both Paul
Laurence Dunbar and Wilbur and Orville Wright.

Beneath a sometimes altered surface appearances, much of
that neighborhood and its landmarks remain intact today.
Buildings that housed the Wright Cycle company and Wright
and Wright Printers still stand, as does the home of Paul
Dunbar. Blocks of houses and business buildings familiar
to these men remain to allow the visitor to recreate the
early turn of the century streetscape. The neighborhood
became a good example of the street-car suburb, providing
decent housing and urban services to the working men and
their families who were building Dayton into the "Gem City
of the Miami Valley."

The West Side was not a fancy place. The shops were small
scaled to meet the needs of local residents. The houses
were small as well, and usually very plain. But is largely
remains intact, a sort of 19th century survivor in late
20th century city. In my opinion it would make an ideal
historic district and I strongly support its nominations.

Sincerely, )

\ Mita Bi Ue

Patrick B. Nolan
Head of Archives & Special Collections
Associate Professor

cc: Jerry Sharkey

PBN: bpe



The Wright Cycle Company Building (HS-01)

Historic Structure Report

Existing Conditions Analysis

4)