Yost & Packard
architecture firm based in Columbus, Ohio
Yost & Packard was an architectural firm based in Columbus, Ohio, United States. The firm included partners Joseph W. Yost and Frank Packard. It was founded in 1892 and continued until Yost moved to New York City in 1899, after which Packard took up practice in his own name.
The firm was known for many public buildings, and the prolific use of masonry, especially Berea sandstone, along with tile roofs with flared eaves, polygonal turrets, and intricate ornamentation. Their works resemble elements of Richardsonian Romanesque architecture blended with the creative Victorian works of Frank Furness.
Selected works
Notable works by Yost & Packard include:
In Columbus
Additionally, the Charles Frederick Myers house in Columbus is suspected to be a Yost & Packard work.
Outside Columbus
Additionally, the firm designed the First Presbyterian Church, Urbana High School, the Pennsylvania Railroad Depot, and a barn for Frank Chance at 438 Scioto Street, and the house of Mrs. M.J. Laudenbach (524 Scioto Street), all in Urbana, Ohio. In St. Marys, Ohio, the firm designed the Grand Opera House (105-113 W. Spring St., 1895, extant) and the Gustave Bamberger residence (225 South Wayne Street, built 1895, extant).
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Yost & Packard” is architecture firm based in Columbus, Ohio. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Yost, Packard and architecture, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “architecture firm based in Columbus, Ohio” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
The strongest evidence will usually combine a dated visual record with documents produced by the authority responsible for the place. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jan 17, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q107473573. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1892, 1899 and 1895.
Architectural summaries often privilege surviving fabric and can understate demolished phases, contested use or displaced communities. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Treat names, boundaries and functions as historically changeable. Maps, plans, inventories and administrative records can clarify what the place meant at different dates.
- Historic place names
- Jurisdictional context
- Routes into maps and plans
Contemporary maps, plans, listed-building records, estate papers and the responsible local or national archive.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Yost & Packard”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Yost & Packard primary sources, Yost & Packard archive and Yost research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Yost & Packard”?
- Which authority defined the place, boundary or structure at the relevant date?
- What physical evidence or contemporary plan supports the description?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Yost & Packard” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.