The URL can be used to link to this page

6 - National Preservation ConferencePlace Your Firs[ Class Stacnp Here , ' - , . ~ .. _ _ ~id National Fie`servatiori`Confe~'ence ` National Trust for Historic Preservation ~ ~ iy85 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W. ~ - Washington, DC zoo362uy , . ~ '; ' ~_---~ 4f-r~-,~ - ~ 1 .~ .~k i9nG ' t~1i' lw?m C~ ~~' NATIONAL TRUST ~- HISITJHIC PRESECVATION.. ~785 Massachusetts Avenue, N W Washington,DCZOo36-vp F J,UYINfiS£ GARDL.~' /NAUR:MN ~~~~~~~~m~~t~~~~unC~n~~iu~u~~~~~~nn~~~~~~nn~~~~~u~ ~s*'AUTOr*ALL FOR lU1DC 800 71 I S Pl HOHDY HEDGCOCK LANDiNARK PRESERI'A7iON AD VlSORY SOARD 1739 BROADWAY. FOURTH FLOOR PO BOX 791 BOULDER CO 8030Cr-p7y1 NATIONAL TRUST m Histoacc Pnsseavwnod_ I NONPYOFR ORG US POSfPLPMID WASHINGtON,~C VEBMR NO ~fia6 ~ The National Preservation Conference provides all-important know-how, innovative ideas, and , inspiration for people saving Americas historic places and revitalizing communities. The conference is the premier educational anc{ networking event for communiry leaders, vol~inteers, and staff of the hiscoric preseivation movement. PORIZAND is a naciun.il model Eor a dynamic, livable city chat cumhinca a people-o~iented down[own and wealth of historic neighbuchoods. A cen[e~piece of the Northwest, it Iles at the head oF the rich Willamette Valley replete wit6 vineyards and lo~l Farms. To the east is the stunning Columbia River C;orge and to dic wesc che mag- nificent Oregon coacc Ponland is xhe perfect setting to e~eplore the conterence cheme: SUSTAIN AMERICA - Vistort, ECONOMICS, AND PRESERVATION. _.~~:.: aF..,~ ,'. i~";`~,~..~ e$~ Send me more information on the NATIONAL TRUST National Preservation Conference zoo5 r~ HISTORIC PFESEPVATION.. PRINf OR TYPE LAST NAME FIRST NAME ORGANI2ATION ADDRESS CITY , ~ STATfi ZIP DAYTIMEPHONE ~ I ~ ~ ~ - I l~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ l ~ ~_ ~__ - ~ -- ~- -'-- ` ~ ~.- C ~'i C. +-J \ ~ ~ ii ~ u, V}V k' ~i ip~' +.u.~ ~ }-1 ~t ~ i~+ ~ ~ •rN ~ rwi ~ ~ ~ ~i,: - ~ - ~* ~ .. .~~_ _ . ~;~,,- REOUEST regis#'ratiog information ~ ~ ~ - todayfromtheNafiOtidfTrustfo,i„' ;`~;v1 yistoric Presefvatia~;;;,' _'~ .: - . ' ~ ~;` _ _ ~ - 1 .' k ~ `~, CAISt 8tia g44 6$4I ~' r °~,'~~r~ 2'3~ 2 ~~''~ \`+~-- y :r' ,~i f<.r.~x ~ VI/EB.INiNW f1Y}tOCQ15~2f@f1CE Fif2~_ m . _ . ~=z~3~'.E~~~'- ~e`:i .,. i -:~!~'.. , _ . ' - is (i progrnm of the `L,~ni'ei~foR- ':~;~ ~ `, ~,.~"'" ~ ~ F ~ PretBrVptionCEaders~ q ~~ ~,~„ ~ ~ ~ x- -. .n ,+.P?~+~1# ~3s w~^~-i '`,{~ „'' + ~k3'0._ ~'-._ : .~ _ r . 3..rA...±.~rA_ ..~tr~Y', ~. i {i~ , ~~ 1: , y, TE%T AND PHOTOGRAPHS"BY DAVID ANDREWS' - c ; TO GLASS AND STEEL THE RISING SUN LIGHTS UP THE RAMPART RANGE, IT'S THE IDEAL PLACE FOR AN "AIR-AGE ACROPOLIS," THE HEART OF THE COMPLEX FORGINC A MONUMENT AT T11E UNITED STATES AIR FOR~E ACADEMY ~ Left: The cadet chapel. Effused the New lbrk Herald Tribune on the academy plan4 unveilmg~ ^lust as Wezt Pant, with its medieval fonreu-hke appearance. ~~ ~ ~ .~„ Symbolaes the trad~lions ot land warfare, so does the sharphned and soaring Art Force Academy represent the newest and swiftest mddary xience." ~~~°, .. _ , .. :_~'_. _ , , ~ ,. =--'us+;,~+i~e. _.. -;_ . - , .+f _ ,. ~~"'.~-,,';.rr.".-~~~;,~ir, COMMON GROUNU SPIIANG 2005_, ~31_ ._,- The sweeping horizontals, and the insis[ent pcesence of sky and space, do noi so much suggest flight as evoke it, says Kristen Schaffer in Modernism at Mid-Centuty: The Architeceure of the United States Air Force Academy. "'Ihe eye rushes along the fa~ade .,. fasrer and faster easfwacd antil the pavement fa11s away, while the eye continues, ou[ over the parade ground below and, ultimately, off the end of the mesa and easnvard into the dis[ance ... On sunny days the expanse is exhilarating; on windy, snowy ones, even in the discomfort, there is a sense of triumph:' Yet what the eye beholds depends on the beholdec "Many similar buildings were put up about that time, no[ very good ones," graduate and former superintendent Lieutenant General Bradley Hosmer tells Duane Boyle-the cur- rent chief architect-in Modernism at Mid- Century. "Many people associate this style witlt a cheap mass-produced artifact. [Today] most of that Iousy stuff ... has failen of its own weigh[, and [he quality construdion remains." In the meantime, perceptions continue ro shift, adds co-author RoberF Bruegmann. "While for many visitors [the) marble Iines in the [central plaa] pavement echo beautifully the controlled precision required of an Air Force pilo[ ... for others they suggest the rigid- ity of military bureaucracies:' t;co=~=r Cuior captum the sunY nys; the eye esapes to nature through Intarstitial openings. 3~I. I COMMON GROUND SPRING 2005 The academy-now a national historic landmark, recognized for i[s role in mil- itary history and aviation as well as architecture-may be the zenith of postwar minimalism. Still, the symbolism is baroque, and sometimes open to in[erpreta- tioa To an extent, thaPs probably a product of architects having ro represent a broad constituency, and themselves, in abs[ract form. And everyone, it seemed, wanted in on the action. IT WAS A COMPLEX TIME, AS AN ASCENDANT SUPERPOWER SOUGNT symbols for a technological era. The academy had to stand for both [he nation and a new wing of the military. The institution's visibility, here and abroad, made it a lightning rod for debare. In the vortex was the architecturat firm of Skidmore, Owings & Merriil. "Just who was our client?° ruminates co-founder Nathaniel Owings m his autobiography. "By definition this ai times could and did include every official with any opinion ... There were the Pres~dent of the United States, iz to i4 members of the cabinet, some q6 members of the Senare at the time, 435 mem- bers of the House, the bureaucracy of the armed forces with special emphasis on the secretary of the air force, the undersecretary, and the generals ° Add to that the Iobbying legions-like scorned competiror Frank Lloyd Wright. Pontificating before a congressional mmmittee, he dubbed the design a"factory for birdmen." The firm slogged through, its nature helping naviga[e the chal- lenge. And even {and [he contract. Lesson in air power ~_~•~-;,- ,,~;:~...,_. :3R t~: ~:,, s:.; z„<<r~~;,.~~, Cold War geopolitics, strategic air power, and aviation history come together in an online lesson plan-the (atezt in the Natio~al Park ServiCe Teaching with Historic Places series. The United States Air Force Andemy: Founding a Proud Tredition heips stu- denu understand how fast-developing aviation technology changed military thinking in the quest to contain Communism, accelerated by the found- ing of the Air Force in 1947. The lesson looks at how the academys design and symbolism reflect this context-and how Annapolis and West Point likewise recall the times of their founding. The plan, for grades 5 through 12, includes activi- ties, readings, maps, and photographs that trace the rise of air power since Worid War L Students are encouraged to interview people who remember life in the Cold Wac The series now has over 100 lesson plans. For more information, go to www.cr.nps.gov/nr/twhp. "SOM was so large that a bureaucracy like the Air Force could relare ro them," says Boyle. Of a breed tha[ evolved during World War II, it was a multilayered cocporation that handled siting, design, engineering-the works. ' A partner in one of these 6rms shazed a number of attributes with a top mili- tary officer," Bruegmann says. "Usually highly trained, he roo was aware of belonging to an elite profession, one that, like the military, had a long and impressive hisrory, and one that, again like the military, if not always apprecia[ed or unders[ood, at least commanded considerable pres[igeP Righ2~ The d+apel': skin inflomed oppenarts; supportars wid if udets wsn to fight and die in ~luminum, Mey wuld wonhip fn it tao. WEST POINT AND ANNAPOLIS HAD NOTHING ON THIS PLACE . . . LOOKING OUT OVER LANDFORMS RISING "" ~ AND FALLING TO THE SOUTH-WITH VALLEYS IN BETWEEN- -T-iE SITE > ~ i`JC: :;t THE fG01 O; ii-i~ FftC~ivi RANGE, .a'~iN,aNLi STR~Jt:E ~ ~f GEOLOGY ~lF~~I RL~I~JS D_~Vv~V FROPS CAN"D/~ ~-~'';!~;G'~n;I1/,l 41-'Ai OP ~~._~_ : . . . ..._ ," , Notably, SOM used the one-stop-shop approach ro erect "Atom City"-Oak Ridge, Tennessee-almost overnighc That feat was tough to match. Out of over;oo competitors, the firm took the ring; a Wright-led consortium was runner-up. At firms hke SOM, arehirects were ration- al businessmen, not temperamental artists. At least that was the image. The goal was "anonymous architecture;' not " tlashy `stunP design;' in [he words of emigre Walrer Gropius, an acknowledged leader in the field. Teamwork was in, the individual was out, science was in the driver's seat- an approach Gropiuspioneered atthe Bauhaus as Germany rebuil[ aher World War I. Some believed it deprived personal credit, others that it produced lifeless work, devoid of individual genius. At SOM, anonymous was the house style. "The firm bears its name like a trademark," says the ca[alogue from the company's exhibit at the Museum of Modern Ar[ in r95o. "It is like a brand name identifying its work, which is persistenNy characterized by the idiom of the firm rather than that of any individual within [he firm." The In[ernational Style-glass i[s signa- [ure-suited the corporate landscape of the ~95os. Says Bruegmann, "In SOM's open, [ransparent facades American industrialis[s found a perfect expression of their attempts to preseat a cool, technologically advanced image to the world." 1 I~ „ ~'1 ~. ~~ ~'~ ~ `,~ .-r .:~> -?.',.: ~ ~ V n.; , 3? :Ci. . _ :.i' "-i" ;~~~~y. ~..~';~ ~ . ~ ~.~~ WITN 27 SQUARE MILES, TXE SITE WAS QUITE AN EXPANSIVE CANVAS. Archi[ect Eero Saarinen, another finalist who joined SOM as advisor, found [he future home of the cadets while developing his own proposal. Some wanted the centerpiece down by the highway, a billboard for the academy and the Air Force. Superintendent General Harmon saw i[ less dramatic, tucked between ridges a la ShangrrLa. Chapel architect Walter Netsch recalls that, in the end, "he was convmced that once you had a mountain site, it was foolish to cower down in the valley ...[it] did no[ have, ipso facto, ro be flamboyanC' West Point and Annapolis had nothing on this place. Perched high in the north- west corner, looking out over landforms rising and falling to the south-with valleys in between-the site stood at the foot of the Front Range, a grand stroke of geology that runs down from Canada facing what was once an inland sea. 34 I ~~MM9N GROUNO,,-SPRfNG ;005 ~„ ` _ 2 ' ~9qY_T' . ,~ .,~,~,. ~=*~ - ~~._,e+~~,.-~~; .. . . ''.~i'r'j. . ' _ .n . ~ q ~+~{"~.£. ,~ ~ 4.. £•- . ~ ~ `4.. ~k[y. M1~`I` ~s _ __._.~°'-.~..~._:.._~__ ~YCl~' I~~~~~I~i1dl3, ~~~r~i~i~ nne~.n mm ~~irr; Ah~_ Nature envelops the academy, sky ever-present; clever siting hides the sprawl of Colorado Springz. During the plan~ing. Air Force generals recalled their West Point days in trying to imagine the cadet experience. Lacking firsthand knowledge of architecture and the arts, many may have preferted "a cautious, eclectic approach" of applying modern tou<hes to a classical configuration, say Rabert Bruegmann in Motlernism at Mid-Century. At the same time, an oft-heard nugget was that "West Point has 760 yean of tradition unhampered by progress." This was monumenta[ from the get-go. Here [he Air Force could sl .c thaf it stood for the new. At the same time, the sense of place ~ dd soon sow the seeds of tradition. SOM likely saw a nationaf .: ~,ge to sweep away [he styles of [he past, and post its own ad, too. Namre as counterpoint to archi[ecture, that wu the concep[. The architecu sought the indigenous-the expansiveness of the West, the sense of "no[ being confined or pushed [oge[her in an artificial little community,° says Netsch. They drew matrasts ~ between nature's curves and an emphatic rec[ilinearity, between greenery and glass, marble, aluminum. And they brought the land right into the buildings. From the rentral plaza, the spaces be[ween struaures-and over and under-frarne namre peeking in from outside. A stroll is cine- matic, as frames flicker with changing views of trees, scrub, slope, cloud. The idea was to "con[ain and release and relau within an exhilarated space [that isj an eazth-bound version of the sk}~' ~r~=K=`~ ~~~ ~10 ~_ ...-YL _ ~~~ ti ~.:~_~?; . , ~'~~ , ~t,~.:r 't ~~ :; §??,i :' - ~ L ,..:a~- . - . , ~a~~~",y ~. ~::"'- , , . r~.f r.&~' ~~~a~~~. ~~t~ :~F :~~~. ~~ u~::,-:.~. ~ ~ 'fr ~s ~ ~ x ~ ~ , ~ y~ ~~ ~~ r {~~ Y.,~1#j Y M~ h~ {' { ~~'~15ii.Ih~~ . h i~p$ S'h~~i~<.°.~~'R~d` ' ~ ;~} r E -~, S ( i - _ ~,g ~ T fs~~., -MC - - !"'. ~' '., i X.-' r . i . ' . " ~ ~~ _ ' - . ~ ~~ .'. ._, ~ , } a -_ ~ ~ l --~'-- - ~~ - - ~ . ~ ~~ -~ -~_ "I } ..-1- ~ ~,~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~ I~~~ I ~D~~ _ ~~ ~:r~~ 3. ~ r'~~,;;' .<;~ ' 7~[1Yi~.~11~ ~ ._-----°~,~~'"i~c'~'~..'i,'~i. ~fi~"4_'~, ~ ; x k ~ , 3 ~ Z~.1 ~ Y ~ s~v ~ - ~ f ~ :~~1 t. . ~ ~ f , , v . _ „~AN' _ Dan Kdey, renowned landscape architect, ht up the central plaza with a glow-imthe-dark garden. The complex is an ~comc delicacy, massive and light, over-scale from the outside and human-scale from the inside. The ensemble's bulk, nesded inro the mesa, is concealed from pedestrians on the central plaza, with two floors tucked below. And ganging functions in a few structures delivers mass enough for a monument, yet one that kneels in awe of the backdrop. Only the chapel, with its soaring verticais, converses with the peaks behind. , ' The Air Force wanted a total ernironment, and they got ic The airfield, the stadium, [he salt-and-pepper shakers, even [he cade[s parad- ing in their dress blues, slipped on the Look. The uniforms-sleek with a touch of Roman gravitas-drew cheers from [he cadets, a salute ro Cecil B. DeMille and his costumers. Walter 7'eague Associates designed the furni[ure and equipmen[-enough to cover 8o acres. The place was a commercial for technology, pushing breakthroughs in the building ar4s. With all [he nature afoo[, the dassrooms were enclosed with wall-ro-wall blackboards, fostering eyes-fron[, no splendor to distract Indoors, Ihe academy abounds with small touches, mitigating [he coldness for which mid-cen[ury modern is oken accused. ~,'„ ~'~ . ~„ _. _ -~' ~ -' ~pr; , - ~ Y: a. ~'r"a~ ,c4~x , ty,;.. ~ ~,". . _ r_ ' ''•~~..k, , a ~.' ' _ ;~..' k . ,. ~ ,~ ; ,, m; ~`s' . ~"`~ ~ ~,~ . " r >~~ ~'_ , ~ , ~ ~ ~ = .~ ~~ ,~ :" ~ ", - ~ ~ ' ~ ~a .: ~ - -~_ ~ t~.: ~. ~ ~ ' ' 2 ~ , ~ . _ , THE COMPLEX IS AN ICONIC DELICACY, MASSIVE AND LIGHT, OVER-SCALE FROM THE OUTSIDE AND HUMAN-SCALE FROM THE INSIDE. THE ENSEMBLE'S BULK, NESTLED INTO THE fv1ESA, IS CONCEALED FROIv1 P[DESTRiANS ON THE CENTRAL PLA7A, WITH T1ti'0 FLOORS TUCKED BELOW AND GANGING FUNCTIONS IN A FEW STRUCTURES DELIVERS MASS ENOUGH I-OR A MONUMENT, YET ONE THAT KNEELS IN AWE Of THE 6.4CKDROP. TODAY, TNE PLACE HAS A SENSE OF INEVITABILITY. But in eady ~955~ SOM had a tough sell ahead, contracting the likes of Ansel Adams and top exhibi[ designer Herbert Bayer to help present the plan at the Colorado Springs Fine Arts Center, an ar[istic venue that would help confer validation. Archicects of spectade, the firm knew how to put o~ a show, tappmg forma[ive experiences at [he i933 Cen[ury of Progress Exhibi[ and the ~q;q World's Fair, where, says Rober[ Allen Nauman in On the Wengs of Modernism: The Un~ted Sta[es Air Force Acaderny, [he architec[ure `bfren served as large bill- boards, either directly or through alluswn:' As the A~r Force handed Na[haniel Owings $~oo,ooo for [he exhibi[, they advised him to design "for clarity and s~mplicity, keeping in mind always that cri[icism of the waste of [axpayers' funds for the presentation could easdy stem from an elaborate and expensively execured affaic For example, a simple steno- faxed fact sheet could serve [he same purposes as an expensive- ly printed brochure." Owings suggesced tha[ Bayer design with a "monastic quality [using] clear austere backgrounds of muslin or monk's cloth with exhibits standing out starkly and simply under effective Lghting° The arthitects argued against a hierarchy that bestowed size on a library versus, say, a mess hali ~,~c xt a or a dorm :~-~*~EOn~~. The most avant garde of the modernists decreM that'If a building wem fit for its purpose and struRUrally sound, that was emugh," ssys flobert Bruegmann in Modernism at Mid{e~wry. •Certainly, tha palace, the church, the opera house, the musaum-all of the monumenbl buildings that represented the control of bourgeois authority--needed M be repla<ed by new egalitarian monuments: tl~e afficient fac[ory, the communal houzing block, tNe workers <lub.^ f Bruegmann says that the International Style was tailor-made t For the academy. "Unlike the users of most government build- ; ~ngs, who could dutter up the clean lines of the buildings with ~ mapp~~~~~ate personal eHects, [he military could impose a dis- ~ aplinc :~.n the way the buildings were used. At a more basic ~ level, i; eover, one of the most important tenets of mod- s,~ °misv: ,as a belief that architecture coWd not just influence °~-RS inhabitan[s bu[ could play a major role in molding individu- ~ ~Gs and society. This coincided perfecNy with the idea of the ~ ~' - ` ,. - . - _a,:~: ~' . ~ ~ _ ~:~~=~ ,, , ~,.~P - ~ -t~;::~ y . ~ :,~. .~ ~ . RrgF~t: Chapel rteps leading to a lowervfloor "crypY shared by Catholic and Jewish worshippers, inspired by the two-}loor arrangement of Italy's Basiliw of St. Francis of Assisi. The top floor is for the more populous Protestants: archited Nathaniei Owings joked that they'needed thosa eztro uventeenand-a•half feet for a head start to heaven. In o[her words, project an illusion of economic restraint. Owings wlled the result "greattheater" 1'he exhibit, says Nauman, "crea[ed a vision of an Air Force Academy based on the no[ion of a heroic past progressing toward a utopian and technologically determinate fumre. [This~ allowed the viewer ro engage in a psychological dialogue in which [the] conquest of the West by heroic pioneers could be metaphorically linked to the heroic achievements of a country emerging triumphant from a wodd war" An image recalling the Greek Acropolis-the first in a series of illus[rations-set the rone. Rows of cadets in formation seemingly emerged from the mountain backdrop, marching en masse past the proposed chapel and library. Here, Nauman says, was the wedding of God, nature, and the temple of technology. The other illustrations in the set, ali superbly rendered, continued the theme. Adams chimed in with sanctified images of the Iandscape, God's-eye-view aerials supplied by renowned lensman William Garnett. The models, roo, were &om a heavenly perspective, showing the manmade nesting with nature. SOM wanted a national run for the show, ro garner support. It was not to be. A few years earlier, this kind of fare had played pretty well at the firm's Museum of Modern Art exhibit. Bu[ that was New York City. TNE EXNIBIT TOUN WAS NIXED AS SOM FACED CRITICS IN TME GONGRESSIONA~ hearing room. At first, Congress, well represented a[ the Colorado Springs opening seemed ro go along. No one expected a rubber stamp-not SOM and not the Air Force- but they were not prepared for the fires[orm either. "The implication was that matters of judgment on aestheric issues should be lefr ro[he profession itself;' says Bruegmann. "The connoversies surrounding the design of the academy marked a distinct escaladon in the ability of the public at large ro challenge the architects' usumptions and translate their views into politicai actionP Reviews in the media ran the gamu[. The architecmral press, in the throes of mod- ernism, waxed ecstatic. The negative views, however, found a bullhorn in the heuings. Advocates for a dassical design joined forces with the masonry industry, their key spokesman Represen[a[ive John Fogarty of Rhode Island, former head of a bricklayers' union. "I[ is difficul[ ro find any [race of American heritage in the cold, impersonal, and mechanical appeazance of these buildings; he said. All found an ally in Frank Lloyd Wrigh[, wfio sidestepped [he code of architec[s, which frowns on criticizing others lest it look like trying to commandeer a commission. Wright ran his own plan up the flagpole. , Wright's inspirations-organic forms by way of Emerson and Whitinan-colored his cri6que. The design wu "a viola[ion of nature; he said. "[This]•is not genuine modem ., architecture ... It is a glassified box on stil[s which is prac[iced abroad and has now - ~_ become fanatic with certain of our commercial architects. They are the ones that unfor- «''::,«,~ . - ``tuna[ely succeed in gmernment work. A man like myself would never be thought of in ~.': rnnnection with a govecnment job." ~'' ' ~ •~ . J ~ ~3 ~~` - v`i. , _ 'iw~C3 -z'~ . ~' .+N,'~" , ' ry ~''~e. _ c:~' <v, ~ ~ ~ . „ -, •,•.. •, , , ._ . _ _„_ , . . ~ ,e , n3~, . _ , d.-,i..,,.a.sxi8..~.~i 38sv. -..ff~'T _ x . ,~~;~.; :'~~~ gy A`~°• a}'~ . ~~'f ` ~'~ " y . ~ ~,; A 1 ~ ~ ,. . ;": +~ - ~/ , r: , . / I . .. % . . ,. .. . ,~ , ~~' ' : .. ,~' ~ ' ~ . < • , '~ ~ ~. ~ , 'f~ ' ....~ ,;, . ~. . • ,j ; ~- ' . - . . f . . : ~ ~ , ( . , ~~ . ~ ' . "~F,^ •- ~, ,~+- ;.i r . ,.` '. ~ " . . , , . ~ i , '~~ '. - ~. ' ~~~ . .` •~'.,- . . ~,j, . ' , ^' , . ,,s: , , ~ ~, ' , ~ 1 .. - ~ , 1 + ' , ! ~ ' ' ' ~~5 •~{~.~. ' 711 " ' ~' ~ - ``:~; ~~.' P.. • . ~=,c..'„~ ; , ~ '~ ., , ' ,. _- : . ,.;s; , , ..~ ; .• . , ,..5, ;<-'; ~ _ y ~ `np; <•~ ~` .e~ ~ ~ . i ' i•. ~ ~' ' ~ 'a ~' ~ ,_ ,:!" .i , , ~n __ . ~': . _y•;'a..f~1 '. t :: ~~. ,'~ . :~ ~ ~ ,. ,a<<', ~= ~.'`(~'~.:;~+ `',~f,p L'r...`q • s ~ ~ ~ .r ~ r _ .. ~ ~ _~r; ~ „ ~ ~ - -, ' Y~ .'D . , x ~ - ~ - l' ~ ~ , ,; "s~ . , ~'V,, ~. i 5 t ; e' f- ~ ~. ~ !~)x ~. F~ • .. 1 ~ t( _ ~ t d ~ . .,1_ . . ~+`:~ t ~(a~.Y' WOULU PEOPLE SAWTE A GLASS AND METAL monument? That was the question. The authoritarian visage of Albert Speer's Zeppelinfield-immortalized by Leni Riefenstahl's Tnumph of the Wi!!-signaled that classicism was in trouble. The Soviets, after a brief flirt with mod- ernism, also made i[ house style, threatening ro co- opt [he brand. Monuments were by nature oppressive, said the Bauhaus. "Many modernists argued that all of the great monumen[s of the pas[, from the great pyra- "[THIS] IS NOT GENUINE MODERN ARCHITECTURE ... IT IS A GLASSIFIED BOX ON STILTS WHICH IS PRACTICED ABROAD AND HAS NOW BECOME FANATIC WITH CERTAIN OF OUR COM- MERCIAI ARCHITECTS. TNEY ~RE TH[ ONES THAT UNFORTUNATEII' SUC~EED ;N GOVERNNIENT WORK. A NiA.N LIKE f~4YSF_LF WOULD NEVER BE THOUGH T OF W CONNEC1lON b`dITH A GOVERNtdIENT 10B " -FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT mids to the Capirol in Washington, were symbolic expressions of power and coercion; says Bruegmann. "A [rue modem democratic society should [have] no need to express power and no desire ro crea[e invidious hierarchal distinctions behveen civic strucmres and housing bbcks." Most a¢hiteas likety s[ill felt the need. But how could an evanescent azchitecture-which aimed to ropple tradition-replace palpably heary columns, azches, and beams that recalled a mythic pasU Says Breugmann, "The idea that one could create a genuine monument, which by definition meant a s[nicture that reftected the values of the people, in a style tha[ was avant gude ... must have seemed even to many mod- emists ro be contradictory on [he face of it." SOM had already run into trouble overseas when its design for a new Munich consulate drew local fire o~.:.:. r~... ~`.nh .lh. , . .., F ~ ~~,. ~ , 4 ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ F ~F~~~ $ ~~.,t~~ ~~~ F ~ ' '~'~° A".4.`w'41~` . \'~ ' i. i ;,~'~.s;.k:. " ,' ~'~~~{~ ~~.~..., * ~ ~4 1 '~S 9,;.~ ~, R K~ F~r~ ~r~3. ~._~ ,~ ~ ~-.~~„~. ' ~~ ~ ~ ~ \ 1~ ~~. `~. ~;~ ~; ~ ~ ~ ~~f~~ '~ ~Kr i ~ . An 0.~ '•:>` ~. . ~` 3.Ay ~'.: ~•. for snubbing the hisroric surroundings. That experience was likely still ringmg in the ears of Congress when [he academy plan appeared on the hearing docket. TXANKS TO TXE NEGATIVE TESTIMONY, ON JULY 74, 7955, THE XOUSE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE DENIED allocations pending a revised plan. The next day, Representative Rogers of Colorado demanded an explanation, and was told the design "would appear to be an appropriate edifice for a modern factory." Rogers responded that the architects were busily replacing glass with stone. Colorado Representative Chenowe[h added that the chapel (a prime target of ire) had already been changed. SOM, dodging the flak, tabled the chapel un[il projecPs end, with architect Netsch dispa[ched on a tour of Europe's churches. Pressure building, and with papers like the San Francisro Chronicle and Denver Post decrying the legislators' lack of knowledge in ma[rers architectunl, hearings in [he Senare reconvened July ~8. Nathaniel Owings-the firm's most persuasive partner-took [he mike. He explained [he new emphasis on stone, tying inro the rocky si[e. Md he stressed the bottom line. A~chitecturally we are in a modern age. Modern architecture as such has been dictated by .~COMMOM~-GpOUND SPqtNG 2005 ` nc:~;: ~~ "~4^r o~k'R'a~!;,: ~.y_~ n«..~{~'i:~i ., ` ~.r ~.: :, ~ .~. .~ _ ~ ~' :~ x~,~;~ _ -- Owings put on a repeat performance the next day for the full commi[- ~~ ' ._ -- tee on appropriations. Representative Whitten obsecved, "The pictures '' `:, , . , , ~, - , ~ ~ .; . . . which were presenred to us before, and [he picmres you have [oday- W;_, `~ '_ _ , ~~ ~ ' thete is no substantlal difference in generai appearance?" The character _' ....? -. ,~•x~ ,~ , '.. b' : ; of the buildmgs was the same, he was told. . , ; . . ~ ~~.~ ~w~_;~ ,, ;.. - ~ ' ~ _ ~ ' Other members said the "new" design was a compromise between the _u` ~- ~' .. ' ~ "antiqua[ed pas[ and modern present." Aepresenta[ive Miller asked, "Is ;;r~ ,~ ~. ~ ~ - _ ;'-~,E' there any place for iry?" Owings replied, "Yes; that is one of the nices[ . i ' - [hings you can have around [hese things. [t really warms it upP . _ ~,~,~ ~` . Congress approved funding. ~ . _ ~`:~.~~ , '-`;"-~~ :~ ,~ '~' u WRIGXT CONTINUED TO BWSTER: °TNE DESIGN WAS OF THE SORT , . . ..-4_; :~ ~~,~ u;r =- ~~ { ro be expecred of an efficiency expect selechug efficiency-architects ... ~^~ " ~~ ~ ~ [It] slande~s the strength and beauty of the American spirit. Io abstract .,.o- . but reahstic terms it is the perfect pic[ure of the beauteous mountain- € .:: .~ .,. t . _. maid betrayed by the nry slicker" ~: Maybe Congress had reached an impasse. Should Wright be put in ~ charge, or would his cantankerousness combust with the bureaucracy? ~ Perhaps modermsm lacked expressive range. Was literal the answer? . .~~ ~-~~~+x + - 'Ihe construction went forward, and today the academy survives largely ~ '..` „*~ ~~1 s "-:. , ~~''~`' in[ac[, [hanks to the erseverance of the Air Force. SOM was called in P -- afrer a decades-long hiatus to dnft guidelines for infill baildings; today, even the new Burger King sports the Look. Netsch-excused from the "anonvmous" dictate-came back from the continent tu design the academy's masrerwork, the cadet chapel. An instant icon, its metaliic majesty recalls the gothic spires of rurel Europe. Some see upended fighrer jets. Others see hands heid upward in prayer. Ultimately, the International Style-"as styleless as the most modern guided missile;' Owings said-waned. Even missiles are of their time. And not many years la[er, [he memorials to Vietnam and Wodd War II would bring an eerie replay of the academy deba[e. Another cenmry may see something different in [hese places. It may always depend on who's looking. For more information, contact Duane Boyle, Chief Architect, U.S. Air " Force Academy, Colorado Springs, CO So84o, email Duane.BoyleQ ~ USAFAaEmil, www.usafa.aEmil. ' ~ ~ • ~ +8, economics. If we tried ro reproduce a gothic or '~~ , ~ . ~~ Hbut~e tef4: tolonial architecture, we would have [o ask for ;~~ ~ ,.•'~ Th~ goal was 21mos[ douMe [he a ro nationP PP P ~ '~~ - ~-~ "" 1 e ' to oeate "sn -He brought a rah of visuals along too. Senator , , '~ ; . ~ I earth-bouna Ellender asked f~~r assurance: "If any other design ~;~, ~" " ~ ~ venion of the skg' said the had been a' ' as some of us thought would be '~*, ;_ _~ • rt arehitaets. ~esr ~he case-; ~ , colonial style or something "' , • • ieft: ooon of elsc- the a~.. ,,, w~uld have cost a good deal ;L*;° ~ • th~ chaPel •uypt,- ~ more. K•~~U~d ~; ~~~t;~• ~~bsolutely; Owings replied. '~-i ' ~ ~~ awdamy is one F,1liough the new design evidenced largely cosme[ic ~`~~,' ~ ~~ ' of the most Chan es- ~~ B stone repiacing gfass-the discourse „~ !~,f ` ' • ' ~ • • intaet archim- tunl ~nzemblas med to how far it was ro the toilets vis-a-vis West ~int. The subcommittee i ?' • ~ i:" ~. . ~ ~^ T~__'__'_ m Ks •~+• gave u support. ~' _~ ~ . .:. . ~~ ,: ': T- 3. ~ ~ .•'.' . MON GROUNp $PRING 2005 COM 4i Preservi ng ~"""" T h i s American P I a c e ' LEGISLATIVE BRIEFING D i s c o v e r z-zz-os Celebrate P r o t e c t Historic Preservation Fund Appropriations FY 2006 The Foundation for Funding Core Programs to Discover, Celebrate and Protect America's Historic Resources Status: President Bush's FY 2006 budget proposal would flatline funding for State Historic Preservation O~ces (SHPOs) and Tribes, the fundamental elements of the nation's historic preservation program. It would drastically cut in half ($15 million) Save America's Treasures, a core part of the HPF that is the only major "bricks-and-mortar" preservation program in the natlon today. While it would provide monies for the new Preserve America initiative, Congress must fully fund core HPF programs in addition to and as an essential component of this worthwhile endeavor. Funding History and FY 2006 Request: The historic preservation community's funding request, outlined bebw, sustains the established set of programs of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) as well as new initiatives. The Historic Preservation Fund (HPF) provides the federal contribution which is matched dollar for dollar by states and non-federel wurces. The HPF is authorized to receive $150 million annually in Outer Continental Shelf Oil Lease revenues, however rarely has Congress appropriated more than one-half of that amount, leaving a$2.8 billion unexpended balance. This trend has thwarted the HPF's ability to achieve the nation's historic resource protection objectives. A $104.5 millio~ HPF appropriation in FY 2006 will begin to reverse decades of inequity in funding for historic resources. It will leverage private investrnent, build public-private partnerships, revitalize communities, seed local preservation initiatives, promote heritage tourism, and inspire a new generation of preservation activities for the benefit of all. Request (in millions of dollars): FY01 FY02 FY03 FY 04 FY OS FY06 FY 06 Presiden [ Request SHPOs 46.6 39 33.7 34.5 35.4 35.4 50 Tribes 5.6 3 3 3 3.2 3.2 12 SAT 35 30 30 33 29.5 15 30 HBCU's ** 6.8 3 3.47 Trust Sites *** 2.5 2 .5 ~ Preserve America 12.5 12.5 for more informatlon : vreservation nction Total 94 74.5 68.7 74 71.57 66.1 104.5 1054 315t St, NW # 526 WdShingtOn DC, 20007 "~ a^erica5 Treasures, '• Hlstorttally Bladc Cd kges afM Universltles, t° Natlonal Trust for Hlstorit Preservatlon Mlstork 202-298-6180 ~Fu"~ fax:202-298-6182 ~wvw.pr~va4oriaUion.org , ~ Preservation Action, Na6onal Conference of State Histaic Preservation Officers, NatlaW Trust tor Histaic Preservadon _ Natlonal Association of Tribal Historic Preservation Officers, National Atliance of Preservation Commissions , ',_'~t` ~ , . _ ' ., , . , ,. . - . . , ~ `'.`;~'3 ~ _ ' - - , - ` ~ : ' " - . .=aA ... .. . . _..., . . .. . Preserving T h i s American P I a c e LEGISLATIVE BRIEFING D i s c o v e r z- z z- o s Celebrate P r o t e c t ~~ Historic Preservation Fund Appropriations FY,2006 for State Historic Preservation Offices Restore Funding to America's Heritage Resources Status: On February 7, 2005, President Bush delivered his FY 2006 budget proposal to Congress. The Administratlon requ~t calls for level funding for the State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPOs) - the foundation of the national preservation program. This level represents a decrease of some 24% since FY 2001. At a time when local govemments, atizens and the private sector are inaeasin9ly turning to SHPOs for leadership and assistance, state preservation offices are curtailing the very programs that stimulate historic preservation, revitalize communitles, leverage private investment, and promote heritage tourism. Funding for State Historic Preservation Offices (in millions of dollaro): FY01 FY02 FY03 FY 04 FY OS tY06 FY 06 Admin Request 46.6 39 33.7 34.5 35.4 35.4 50 The Request: An investmeM of $SO million in FY 2006 to the State Historic Preservabon Offices tfirough the Department of Interior Appropriations Bill will be multiplied many tlmes over. Indeed, a recent university sponsored study indicates that just $1 in federal preservation funding retums $64 in private investrnent. The proven catalytic effect of historic preservation makes a funding increase to state preservation offices sound economic sense. eelow is a detailed wmmary of how an increase to the State Historic Preservatlon Offices can leverage significant private investrnent in the rehabilita[ion and reuse of historic buildings, build private-public partnerships to restore and revitalize neighborhoods, facilitate more timely and effective state-level review of federel projects, and enwre the protection of hundreds of historic strudures and sites. The appliotion of;50 million in FY 2006 - What SHPOs will do with increased funding: The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) established a set of incentlves and programs supported by the Historic Preservation Fund to foster laal decision making and redirect private investrnent to existing resourccs. NHPA charged State Historic Preservation Offices with cartying out the nation's historic preservatio~ progiam for federal govemment. F°r example, SHPOs work dosely with the private sector to encourage and support reinves6nent in For more infortnaaon : historic resources through use of the federal Historic Rehabilitadon Tax Gedit. SHPOs provide Preserva[ion Att~on technipl assistance and e ~~~ t° ~ocal offidals and community groups se~eking to restore and 1054 31s[ St, NW # 526 promote tlieir unpue neighborhood assets. SHPOs are the first place a atizen tums when trying to wash~ngton DC, 20007 ~~e a local landmark. Yet, without adequate funding, SHPOs mnnot contribute fully toward 2 0 2- 2 9 8- 6 1 8 0 achieving our naUOn's historic resource protection objecdves. A$50 million appropriadon would f a x: 2 0 2- 2 9 8- 618 2 ensure that SHPOS are able to deliver the programs and services that give ddzens what they need ~,p~,~,o,g to protect our histaic herilage, rebuild America and aeate healthful and attractive communides for themselves and their children. Vreservation AcGon, Natiorwl Conference of State Hiuori[ Preservatlon Oficers, National Trust for Hishoric Preservadan A National Association h' of Tribal Historic Preservation Officers, Natlonal Alliance of Preservation Commissions . - ~ - -,. _ ,~# ' t, ~ . :..,,~, . , _ _ __ _ _ _ _ "_ ''F+?'€& ..~. ~~ ^ - _ ... . zr~g. ,__ , . Preserving ~ T ~1 I S American P I a c e LEGISLATIVE, BRIEFING .,. . ~-~J-OS ~+ s c o v e r C'eietirate : ; ~ * a t e c *. Community Restoration and Revitalization Act H.R. 659 nismrrc Preservatiort Creates t-fousmg anU ReviCalizes Commurrifies Status: The Community Restoration and Revitalization Act was first introduced at the end of the 108'" Congress by Representatives Rob Portman (R-OH) and William ]efferson (D-LA) and it was just reintroduced on February 8th with seven original cosponsors. It would amend the existing Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit to deepen its utility for community revitalization, expand its applicadon to smaller "main street" type projects, and lead W developing more housing in historic buildings- particularly affordable housing. eackground: There is a strong link between historic preservation, wmmunity revitalizaGon, and housing. . Abandoned and underutllized historic buildings are often laated in some of the nation's most disinvested communities. In these cases, there is a great ne@d for incentives to create market- rate housing that stabilizes distressed ne~ghborhoods and to encourage the development of housing-especially affordable housing - in certain urban and rural areas. Additionally; ' nonresidendal historic structures that no longer serve tlieir intended purposes, such as warehouses, factories, mills, xhools, and department stores can be adapted into places to live. The Community Restoratlon and Revitalizatlon Act would enhance the Federal Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit's applicability to housing and community revitalization Summary of Amendments: . aa~s Red~cr~on - Eliminatlng or lessening the rule that lowers tax benefits dollar- for-dollar according to the amount of aedit taken when using the historic rehab vedit. . ['re~ter Subsidyj~ Di~«?!{ Areac- p~pening the historic rehab aedit in Lhe . most difficvl[to deve~op and disirnested areas. . Ma ing th SO rcent redit Available for Housina - Opening up the inventory of "older buildings" for housing -the ten percent mmponent of the historic rehab credit currently prohibits its use for "dwellings." This proposal also indudes changing the definitlon of"older huilding" from "6uilt befnre 1936" ta any propecty "fifty years old or older." ~„p,~ ,,,~;,,~,m, : . ~P ~"~o ~biliN for Small Deals- Enriching the historic rehab credit to 40 percent PreservaUOn AcUOn inprojectsthatare$2millionorlesstotargetthose"mainstreet"typedevelop- 1054 315t St, Nw a szs ments in which rehab credit costs are currently too prohibitive. wasn~nqcon oc, zooo~ • MoreFavorableTaxExemot wRd ~-Easingtherulesgovemingnon-profitdeals~ z o z-~ s a- b i a o so that more mmmunity-oriented projects more forward. , Fax:202-298-618'2 Mvw.pr~coiemm:a9 Preservatlwt hction, Nat~ona! Gmferet~e of State Mstonc~ Resen.•a0on Offieers,~ Mahona!• Tn15t fa HistoeK R~ervahor~ ~. National Assouation of Tnbal His[oric Preservation Officers, NaUOnal Alliance of 7rEServation , Commis5iops~.~.~ ~ °~+~: ~~- , _ . ~ -r:'~;,~" . . , ' ." 'zm~ '$ .;.}~a,7c: . - - - ,' , > _~y,~~ -- , - ' ,fs~. Tn4=3~ ~ , , ,. ., , ;-y . ^f_' ' F. .,;`T~3~- ~3"'a ,_,xta'~.'~~': .,~,~ Preserving T h i s American P I a c e LEGISLATIVE BRIEFING D i s c o v e r z- z z- o s Celebrate P r o t e~ t Historic Preservation Fund Appropriations FY 2006 for Save America's Treasures ~SAT~ Restore Funding to America's Local Bricks-And- ortar reservation Projects Status: On February 7, 2005, President Bush delivered his FY 2006 budget to Congress. The Administration request calls for drastically cutting SAT by half ($15 mitlion) and eliminatlng Congress' role in supporting local preservation projects. At a time when federal funds for preservation are already scarce, these redudions would deal a huge blow to the only major "bricks-and-mortar" preservation program in the nation today, jeopardize scores of preservation projects throughout the muntry, and mean that more of America's heritage will almost certainly be lost. SAT leverages millions of additional dollars from foundatlons, corporations, and individuals, and has literally made the difference in saving hundreds of historic sites around the muntry. Every federal dollar granted must be matched by a non-federal dollar, thus doubling its value. A reduction in SAT funding would send the wrong signal to the private sector - a message that would seriously mmpromise the program's goals and undermine the leveraging value of the govemment's stewardship role in the places and objects that tell Ameriw's story. Funding for Save America's Treasures (in millions of dollars): FY01 FY02 FY03 FY 04 FY OS FY06 FY 06 Admin Request 30 30 30 33 29.6 15 30 The Request: An investment of $30 million in FY 2006 to SAT through the Department of Interior Appropriations Bill will be mul~plied many times over. With broad bi-partisan support in Congress and the leadership of First Ladies in both the GinMn and Bush Administrations, SAT has provided more than $218 million in federal challenge g2nts to 726 historic preservation projects. These funds have brought new life to irreplaceable historic treasures - induding buildings, documents and works of art - in every state. SAT has also provided tremendous benefit to projects at National Park Service sites such as Ellis Island, Valley Forge, Thomas Edison's Inventlon Factory, Mesa Verde, Eleanor Roosevelt's Val-Kill Cottage, and Dr. Martin Luther King's Ebenezer Bapdst Church. More than 19% of SAT's private funding - over $11 million - has been designated for NPS sites in dire need of these additional resources. This complements another $12 million in SAT federat challenge grants to NPS sites. While much has been achieved in the seven years since SAT was established, the need remains great. In just the first five years of the program, 1,648 grant appliotions were received, represent- ing requests for mwe than $773 million in cridcal preservation assistance. SAT funds have made a For more mformaoon : huge difference, but wiUwut maintaining Wst years fundirg levels it will be virtually impossible to Preservation nction stimulate private matching ooMributions of an equal share. 3054 315[ St, NW # 526 washington DC, 20om w~~Ofe, if SAT is not fi~nded at its cUrrent $30 million levef, the potential for productive ~~erships witfl faith-based organizations - partnerships in which the private sedor plays an 2 0 2- 2 9 8- 6 1 8 0 ~Qally viGcal role -'would be extremely fimited. Thus far, almost $3 million in SAT matching grants faz:202-298-6182 have been awarded M 11 nationalty significaM religious sites, induding Boston's Old North Church, "^"`"'•~°f~0"~0f9 Touro Syna9ogue in Rhode Island, and Socorco Mission in Texas. Preservation Actian, National Confererxe of State Histaic Preservatlon Offioers, National Trust for Histaric Preservabon National Assoclatlon af Tribal Historlc Preservation Officers, ~=Nadonal Alllance of Preservation Commissions . ._ : . ,~;>.-- _- ',~ke'.,..;°x. . . _.;.. ~ . . _. ,- _ .... ,~.b~.` - --~;-- --_- -~ , , -. _ ~.~~_~.. ~~~..r~c. "':s -" "_' '_ ' ' _' '_._:~i~`:._ ....ae=~ __ "_ _ Preserving T h;.i _sr ~-. American P I a c e LEGISLATIVE BRIEFING D i s c o v e r z-zz-os Celebrate - P r o t e c t.- Historic Preservation Fund Appropriations FY 2006 for Indian Tribes Line Item Restore Funding to America's Heritage Resources status: On February 7, 2005, President Bush delivered his FY 2006 budget to Congress. The Administratlon request calls for level funding for the Tribal line item which wpports the Tribal Historic Preservation Offices (THPOs), a tribal competitlve grant program, and Nadonal Park Service Administrative wsts. Level represents an actual decrease of 40% or $2.15 million since FY '01 for all tribal programs. This decline is proving catastrophic for all Tribes because it comes at a dme when new Tribes are signing agreementr with the National Park Service to collaborate on meeting the requirements of the Natlonal Historic Preservation Act, per Sec. 101 (d) (2). Without additional funds to support additional tribes, the end result is that each tribe receives smaller and smaller federal wpport. The National Park Service and the National Association of Tribal Historic Preservatlon Offices estimates that there will be at least 60 THPOs seeking funding in FY 2006. Since FY 2001, the average award per THPO has fallen from $154,815 to under $53,000, a decline of 66%! Without an increase in FY 2006, the average award will drop below $48,000. That level is not enough to fund one staff person, let alone a program. Funding for Tribal Line Item (in millions of dollars): FY01 FY02 FY03 FY 04 FY OS FY06 FY06 Admin Request THPOs 4.18 2.25 2.25 Competitive Grants 1.21 .670 .660 To[al 5.4 2.9 2.9 2.9 3.2 3.2 12 The Request: M investment of $12 million in FY 2006 to the Tribal Historic Preservadon Offices through the Departrnent of Interior Appropriations Bill will be multiplied many times over. Already, most Tribes match every federal dollar 3 to 1. The increase will reverse decades of inequiry in funding for tribal historic resources, stabilize funding for all THPOs, and aaommodate new THPOs at a reasonable base level of funding. Fw more informatlon : Preservation nction yyhat THPOs will acoomplish with intteased funding: 3054 315t St, NW # 526 ~ washington OC, ~o00~ ~ Increase average staff for THPOs from one to three persons 2~0 2- 2 9 8- 6 1 8 0 ^' ~~~de mOre tirt121y COmpIiBllce Witlt f¢defdl, SIat2, afld Ulbal hiS~OrIC pf252rvadon WvVS fax:2o2-298-6182 ~ Undertake wllabo2tlve partnerships for saial, edumtlon, and economic development projects ~, ~~ ~ Pro~ride direct finandal assistanoe to spedfic preservation projeQs on triba~ lands ;~~. PreservaUon Action, National Conference of State Historic PreserYadon ~ Offioers, ` NaUOrwl Trust for His[orlc Preservati~on National Associat~on ~ of Tribal Historic Preservation 0(flcers, n' atlonal A~IfaqGe of PreservaGoo Commissions :~r~ a, , ~ . -_ ~~° - --f - ' :.~, ~$~' ~- •;~ ,h? . . ~ ' __ '~~=}t,ia' _ .~4.~ ~1$~ ' .,?~r. .., '. ~=,~_ ~ ..sz.. wY`~m 'a a _~ ~ .3~LA c . „t _'~_', -, . Preserving T h i s American P I a c e LEGISLATIVE BRIEFING D i s c o v e r z-zz-os Celebrate P r o t e c t Historic Barn Preservation Program Appropriations FY 2006 Funding for America's Historic Agricultural Resources Status: The Farm Security Act of 2002 (PI. 107-171), signed into law on May 13, 2002, contained the Historic Barn Preservation Program designed to preserve and restore America's unique and rapidty disappearing landscape of historic agricultural buildings. Although the Ad authorizes "wch sums as may be necessary to carry out this section for fiscal years 2002 through 2007" it has not received any fundmg through annual AgricuRure Appropriadons to date. In FY '03, twenty Senators signed a Ietter to support an initial $5 million appropriation, but it was not induded in tfie passed omnibus plan. For FY '04, the Senate Agriculture Appropriations bill induded $2 million for the program, but funding was eliminated when the House and Senate bills were conferenced. Last year, hventy Senators again signed a letter of suppoR, this time for $10 million for FY'OS, but funding was not induded in the omnibus bill once again. The Need: Thousands of bams and other agricultural buildings have been listed on the National Register of Historic Places and thousands more are eligible. Unfortunately, these landmarks of our rurel heritage are being lost at an alarming rate. Neglect, decJine in the viability of the rwal economy, and maintenance and repair challenges faced by owners, prompt hundreds of requests each year for aid. The Historic Bam Preservation Prog2m was crnated to serve as a catalyst for bam preservatlon and reuse of all kinds whether to stabilize an existing building for condnued agriculture use, restore a structure so that it can be used for another economically productive activ'ity, or the wrvey and documentadon of historic bams so that they pn be incorporated into heritage tourism plans. In all cases, preservation and reuse of bams serves as an economic engine i~ rural areas. The Program: 1. A five year (FY 2002 to FY 2007) authorizatlon to wpport grantr and programs. 2. Eligible bams must be at least 50 years old, retain wffident integrity, and meet criteria for listing on national, state or local registers w inventories. 3. The program will be administered by the Agriculture Departrnent's Undersecretary for Rural Devebpment. States and non-profits on apply for grantr. 4. Funds can be used to survey historic bams or to create educatlonal programs relating to their For more inrwmaaon : history, construction, maintenance, rehabilitation, and contribution to saiety. Preservatlon Action 1054 31s[ St, NW # 526 5. Grants are also available for rehabilitation, repair, fire protection, vandalism prevention, WasMngton DC, 20007 f~rdt arfd Id2fltifiCatiOn. ,202-298-6180 fax:202-298-6182 www.pres~e~aCa~action.org - Preservation -. Adion, Nadonal CuMererKe d State Ffistoric R'eservation Oficers, National Trust for Historic Preservation National Associatlon~`,f„•.Triba{.-~Historlc Preservatlon Officers, National Alhance of Preservation Gommissfons -- --~ ~ _- " ---'x.;~w:~~: -_ ":" ~ - ...~..:.stia. ._ .u . ._,,, ~.x.,c ~ .. Preserving T h i s American P I a c e _ LEGISLATIVE BRIEFING D i s c o v e r - Celebrate P r o t e c t.-:. ~ ~ ' °~' ':,Congressional Historic Preservation Caucus ~ Advancing Preservation Legislation on Capitoi Hili Co-Founded by Congressman Mike Tumer of Ohio and Congressman Brad Mille~ of North Carolina, the Congressional Historic Preservation Caucus brings together Members of Congress who understand the potential of America's historic places. They know that the value of these places is not solely in what they teach us about our history. It is also in What they promise for our future. Heritage tourism, the wmmercial revimlization of forgotten downtowns, the economiplly viable rehabilitation and rruse of historic properties as housing stodc are only a few of the ways that history is coming alive in mmmunities across the rnuntry. Members of the Congressional Historic Preservation Caucusjoin together N support and encourage the preservation and thoughtful development of historic places in their districts, states, and as a matter of national policy. The Caucus will serve as a clearinghouse for Members seeking information and sharing ideas and supporting legislatlve and budget matters as they pertain to national, state, and local issues and opportu~itles in historic preservation, induding: . Rehabilitation of historic buildings and historic districts • Heritage tourism • Preservation of national, state, and local landmarks • Emnomic revitalization of older dow~tnwns, histnric towns, and underused housing • Providing opportunities for students to learn Ameripn history where it happened • Resources and legislation to wpport Federal, state, and local efforts The Caucus will create and examine legislative proposals regarding historic preservatlo~ and history conceived or introduced by Members to determine the need, efiects and potential support. It will also aeate oppatunities for Members and their staffs to intered with preservation professionals and wpporters through visits to historic sites, lectures, and seminars. Caucus Members (BO as of February 1, 2005): Robert Mdrews (D-NJ), Spencer Bachus (R-AL), Richard Baker (R-LA), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), ]. Gresham Barrett (R-SC), Charles Bass (R-NH), Rob Bishop (R-UT), Ear1 Blumenauer (D-OR), Roy Blunt (R- MO), John 8oozman (R-AR), Rick Boucher (D-VA), Jeb Bradley (R-NH), Henry Brown (R-SC), Eric Cantor (R-VA), Michael Capuano (D-MA), Ben Chandler (D-KY), lames qybum (D-SC), Tom Cole (R-OK), lim Coaper (D-TN), Robert "Bud" Cramer Jr. (D-AL), Lincoln Davis (0-TN), ~Iliam De~ahunt (D-MA), Phil English (R-PA), Bob Etfieridge (D-NC) J. Randy Forbes (R-VA), Harold FoM Jr. ~o-rn), Jim Gerlach (R- PA), Virgil Goode (R-VA), Bart Gordon (D-l'N), Kay Granger (R-TX), Katherine Harris (R-FL), ]cel Hefley (R-CO), Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), Rush Holt (DN7), Steve Israel (D-Nl~, Bill lenbns (R-TN), Ray laHood (R-IL), James Langevin (D-RI), Rkk larsen (D-WA), James Leach (R-IA), Barbara Lee (D-CA), ]ohn ~^'~s (D-GA), Ron Lewis (R-KY), Carolyn Mabney (D-NY), Ed Markey (D-MA), Jim Marshali (D-GA), Jim For more informanon : McCrery (R-LA), 7im McDertnott (D-WA), Mike M~3ntyre (D-NC), Martin Meehan (DMA), Brad Miller, Co- preservation act~o~ ~ryair (o-NC), Dennis Moore (D-KS), lim Moran (DVA), Jerrold Nadl~ (D-Nl~, Richard Neal (D-MA), Bob i05a 3i~ St, Nw tt 5z5 Ney (R-0H), John Olver (o-MA), Frank Pallone (DNJ), Donald Payne (D-NJ), Todd Platts (R-PA), Earl wasningron ~C, 20D07 p~py (p-ND), Da~rid Rice (~-NC), Mike Ross (D-AR), Steve Rothman (D-NJ), Jose Serrano (D-Nl~, , 2 0 2- 2 9 9- 6 1 8 0 Louise Slaughter (D-NY), YK Srryder (D-AR), Mark Souder (R-IN), John Spratt (D-SG~, Qiff Steams (R- f a x: 2 0 2- 2 9 8- 618 2 FL) ]ohn Sweeney (R-Nl~, lohn Tiemey (D-MA), Mike Tumer, Co Chair (R-0H), Mark Udall (D{O), Tom ~,,,,~,y~p~,ag , Udall (D-NM), Ch~s Van Holien (D-MD), Zadi Wamp (R-TN), Mel Watt (bNC), ]ce Wilson (R-SC), Lynn WooiseY (~) Preservatiott ~ Acbon, ~ ' Natronal ' CArderence of State Histonc Preservation Offcers, Nanonal 7rust for Wstonc Preservation Na[~onal .A550ddti~l $~ ~~ ^; T~ibaL,~N~Stonc Preservation Officers, NaUonal Alhance oF Preservation Commissions , ~" - ~ - ~-. ~~ 9'E; q~ r ~f~ - - ~. , .. . ~4~~~.. . ~.~ _ 3`~~~~'~.. ._~.T . ~ I t 5 e~ Y~ fi S T h i s American P I a c e C~ ~~ ._ c v e r C r~ I~ i~ r a t e G r O ± F'[ ; ~ ;. . , 4, :, ~ ~ . "rcl .. . . . . _' c~ . . l~ ( ,1,F 111J ji)n ['i~D.~ ~,... . 'ary:lh,.r,d`il ~, LEGISLATIVE BRIEFING z-zz-~s Historic Preservation Fund Extension to 2010 status: The authorization for deposits from off shore oil lease revenues into the Historic Preservation Fund (HPF) expires on September 30, 2005. In the 108"' Congress, Representative Joel Hefley introduced legislation that would extend authorization of the HPF until 2010. Legislation has not yet been introduced in the 109'" Congress. Request: Amend Section 108 of the the National Historic Preservation Act, (16 U. S. C. 470h) by changing the date "2005" to "2010': This change would extend the deposits into the Historic Preservation Fund for five years. The program In 1976 Congress created the Historic Preservation Fund (HPF). Modeled after the Land and Water Conservation Fund, the HPF receives annual deposits of $150,000,000 from off shore oil lease revenues. The rationale is that part of the proceeds from the depletion of a non-renewable natural resource, oil, should be devoted to the enhancement of a non-renewable resource, historic properties. The Historic Preservation Fund provides the federal government revenues to support the Nation's historic preservation program. States and tribes use their HPF . allocation to identify historic places, nominate significant sites to the National Register (12,000 a year), work with federal agencies to minimize adverse impacts from federal projects (over 100,000 annually) on historic properties. States, in addition, work with developers on the rehabilitation (over $2 billion annually) of National Register properties for a 20% federal income tax credit. States also transfer 10% of their allocation to local governments for preservation activity. Both Tribes and States use the products of the HPF investment as the foundation for heritage tourism, an important component of sustainable economic development. Prnc:.~~n5ar, A^. . ,_t.. „ _ . ~. ~ . , ,-. , -rr . , ;-.-' .,. ' i-- .. ~ . -~ i-r +, ;~_ , vr.-. r ~., ` `~(Vl!:'~t'~i; R55C: I,ar.~;,, ,- „ T~. F ' ' " . . , _ ~ . ~...i :. ~ .. A ' ,~ , .. P~-5nr; i. , r ~..i~~,.~o,tc ~~;. ;:s'',-. ., ~ ~'^ . 1`a:~%t3~xR.:.. _,_._:d's ' . Preserving T..~. h~ ~~~. ~s American P I a c e LEGISLATIVE BRIEFING D i s c o v e r C e I e b r a t e P r o t. e c t For more informabon : Preservation Actmn 1054 33st SL NW # 526 Washington DC, 20007 202-298•6180 fax:202-298-6182 wwv~.pre5evaha~acCon.ar9 National Heritage Pa~rtnership Act S. 243 z-u-o5 Establishing a Framework to Promote America's Unique Heritage Status: On February 1, 2005 Senator Craig Thomas (R-WY) introduced the National Heritage Partner- ship Act (S. 243) which establishes a program and criteria for National Heritage Areas. The bill is similar to legislation which passed the Senate in the 108'" Congress. In early February, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee passed the measure by unanimous consent. A companion bill has not yet been introduced in the House for the 109'" Co~gress. The Need: In recent years, interest and enthusiasm for cultural heritage has been growing, with heritage tourism a significant portion of the $600 billion U.S. travel industry. Heritage areas, heritage tourism, and development of heritage resouroes provide economic benefits to local communities and protect the historic resources and character of a region. There are hundreds of heritage areas in the nation, with 27 of these areas designated as National Heritage Areas. Currently, neither a formal process to designate and support National Heritage Areas nor a system to coordinate assistance and provide infortnaUon for ongoing heritage initiatives exists. The Program: 1. The bill establishes a National Heritage Area program which defines standards for designa- tion and requires specific criteria for national significance before an area can be designated. 2. Under the program, the Secretary of Interior shalt mnduct studies to assess the suitability and feasibility of designating the proposed Nadonal Heritage Area. Additionally, the prog2m requires the Iocai coordinating entity to prepare and implement a management plan. 3. The bill calls for a limit on annual funding of $1 million per National Heritage Area with a total appropriation of $15 millio~ each year. 4. Individual feasibility studies are capped at ~250,000 per study up to a total of $750,000 each year. 5. Total funding for each National Heritage Area would be capped at y10 million over 15 years. 6. Grant recipients are required to match funds in an amount equal to the grant. ' PreservaGon Achon, National Conference of ~'~ ~National. ~ASSOCiation of Tribal Historic a,~e~ ~ . ~='°:-:r;~-=;7: ~:s~~~: ~ _ ' ., State Histonc Reservation Officers, Nadonal - Preservation Officers, National Alliance of ,.:}~ :. st for rosronc rreservaaon Preservat~on Commissions . _ , ~ -Lne'.. .., . ~~~_servir,c T h i s American P I a c e LEGISLATIVE BRIEFING Q~ 5~-e v c. z-zz-os ~e~e~b~ace P ~ o' ~ ~~'. _ ~ ;: =~; . _, ~ Historic and Land Conservation Easements !_IIStO."~C cllCj Lcli'C7 r7('SanJBti(~rl Fa~,irt.nt~~~ ,~(° Ud~Ud!~'° i00~5 fz)r p.pha~t~l?~J I-~~}~_',:_'~ H°ri`'~- Status: ~~,.~ . ,., . ,. ~,:s:-, ; Dr, lnu,! ~n, i=+S 6:80 ~.,x ?(f? 2°+i-b16: .,. ,-~x~,n,>hnrarti~~nc~ Prrca~.'~aIO~~ Ar;IG~, '~A;'~Or:,'I A~iIItlc~Ci^^ The Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) has issued a report recommending changes to the tax code that, if adopted, would largely dismantle the federal tax incentive for conservatlon and preservation easements. The JCT proposal would severely weaken, if not effectively end, tax incentives that have been used for more than a quarter of a century to protect historic structures, landscapes, and battlefields, and to conserve farmland, forest ~and, and open space for public benefit. Congress must not eliminate these incentives and look for ways to make the easement programs work better without scrapping them. Easement reform is now an issue before the tax-writing committees of Congress. Preservation and conservation organizations oppose the JCT recommendaUons, but are prepared to work with the tax-writing committees to come up with workable solutions to the problems relating to easeme~t overvaluation. Background: Preservation easementr remain one of the most effective tools for permanently protecting America's historic treasures. They ensure that protected land areas and historic properties are maintained in economically-viable uses in private hands. The JCT recommendations would eliminate any conservation easement on any properry used, in whole or in part, as a personal residence by the donor or a member of the donor's family, or to which the donor has such a right of use. Furthermore, the proposal would slash deductions for any other preservation or conservation easeme~t by two thirds. These changes in the tax law would largely eliminate the economic value of the deduction and would threaten the broad use of conservation easemenLs as a historic preservation and land conservation tool that has been on the books for more than a quarter of a century. Despite the questionable activities of a few organizations and individuals who have been highlighted by the media as exploiting this area, the vast majority of preservation and conserva- tion organizations take their responsibilities seriously and do not over-sell the Wx benefits or eneourage abusive deducdons. PreservaUonists support policy changes that would strengthen aaountability requirements for easement donations and for easement-holding cuganizations a~d are prepared to work with the tax-writing oommittees to come up with workable solutions. ^,at~nnal C:,. ~~ r", ;-,_ ti°.~ , P~.:~ero~~~ O~h~e:° NaSnr~~. 7r;,, ~_ r.~,.:t~: F~as~".~.~^ ~ ~~ ~, .. ~ n - ~I i ~ ~ n,:rr.•. . . Of T.~~~~ u~ _•ir ..~~:.~~'Fin~, Gr(~.~5. A~9bnn, A~h2rn- ..r F;Pb2.:~.,. C,^.r.ilTlicSrt'~q5~ -; .F _ C L~ _ _ _ - - . , : -. - T. :i_[:p'y .. , _ " "'_. _. ,._r.~2~ Preserving T ... h ._ i s ~ Am~rican ~ P 1 a c e I.EGISLATIVE BRIEFING D.i s c o v e r Celebrate.. P~ r o-.~t-~e c;t:.. - " `~ presidential Sites Improvement Act H.R. 927, S.431 Using America's Historic Sites to Teach America's History Status: In the 109'^ Congress, a bill to establish a progrem to award gra~ts to improve and maintain non-federally owned sites honoring Presidents of the United States was re-introduced in the House on February 17, 2005. Representatives Paul Gillmor (R-OH) and Mike Ross (D-AR) introduced the Presidential Sites Improvement Act, H.R. 927, wRh seven original cosponsors. A companion bill, 5.431, was re-introduced in the Senate on the same day by Senators Mike DeWine (R-OH) and Richard Durbin (D-IL). The Need: Hundreds of sites honoring American Presidents are located throughout the U~ited States and include birthplaces, homes, museums, burial sites and tombs. Most are owned, operated and maintained by non-federal entities such as State and local agencies, family foundations, colleges and universities, libraries, historical societies, historic preservation organizations and other non- profits organizations. Although such sites are integral to understanding the history of the United States, many are in desperate need of capital, technological, and interpretive improvements. This bill extends much needed matching funds to assist the stewards of these sites to ensure that they remain viable, attractive and acoessible places for education and commemoration. The Program: 1. Funds will made availabie for repairs and capital improvements, the installation or repair of heating or conditioning systems, security systems or eiectric service, modificatio~s that achieve compliance with the American with Disabilides Act, and interpretive improvements to enhance public understanding and enjoyment of the site. 2. Of the annual funds appropriated,l5% shall be used for emergency projects as determined by the Secretary of the Interior; 65 °k shall be used for Presidential sites with a 3-year average annual operating budget of less than ~700,000; and 20% shall be used for grants to Presidential sites with a 3-year average annual operating budget of more than $700,000. rvr rtwre information : 3. All grants shall be matched 50%. Preservation Action lOSa 31st St, NW # 526 4. The Act creates a Presidential5ites Grant Commission to review applications and recom- wasi,ingt«, oc, zooo~ mend W the Secretary of the Interior projects for which grants should be awarded. The , 2 o z- 2 9 6- 5 1 a o Commission will be made up of the Director of the National Parks Service, four members f a x: z o 2- z 9 e- 6 i a z appointed by the Secretary of the Interior, a State Historic Preservadon Officer, a representative www.presevana~aa~m.org of the National Trust and two representatives from Presidential sites. Preservation Actlon, National Conference d Sbte Histwic Preservatiai ORoeis, ' NaUmal Trust for Histaic Preservatlm - National Assoclatlon of Tribal Historic Preservation Of(icers, Natianal Alliance of Preservatlon Commissions, ..,., ~~„ r 5~{~ $-;.~ -'~ ~y~~~~'. _ ~ ' ... ' . _ e '~' i_ - .:.A~!` ~ _ . HY's2'"' ~`~...~.rA~O~~~.'F~~+. ~pl0redo Preservation Zp05 Enriching Our Future By Preserving Our Past Statewide Historic Preservation Plan February 23, 2005 To Our Partners in Historic Preservation: The time has come to begin updating Co/orado Preservation 2005, the five-year statewide historic preservation plan. The plan established goals to advance historic preservation statewide. An effective statewide plan can be used as a guide for all historic preservation organizations. In order to assure that the plan remains relevant, that it continues to be a commitment to cooperative action, it is necessary that we have feedback from organizations like yours. For the purposes of the enclosed survey, we ask that you answer the questions from the point of view of your institution/ organization. If you feel that there is someone else in your organization better able to answer the questions posed in the survey, please feel free to forward this communication to that person. The results of the survey will be made available to the public. The survey results will be used by the members of the plan advisory committee to update Colorado Preservation 2005. Members of this committee will be drawn from both the private and public sectors and will represent various aspects of the preservation community. Public comments on the draft plan will be solicited in early summer. Please take a few moments to fill out the survey, and remember to answer the questions from your organization's point of view. We have enclosed a postage paid envelope for your convenience and we ask that all surveys be returned to our office by March 31, 2005. If you have any questions please contact me at the phone number or e-mail address provided below. Thank you very much for your time and consideration. Sincerely, ~.~u= /~ZfCKNNOoRi/ Dale Heckendorn Pian Update Coordinator Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation Colwado Historical Society 225 E. 16~h Ave., Suite 950, Denver, CO 80203 <. - dale.heckendorn@chs.state.co.us • 303-866-4681 • www.coloradohistory-oahp org „y , , e, ~: , _ _ , - - ,..- - . _; , _~,; u~~ , . . ,~ ~ -~. ~_.. m... _ , ~ Cp~p~do Preservat~on 2Q05 Enriching Our Future By Preserving Our Past Statewide Historic Preservation Plan UPDATE SURVEY SECTION 1 - PLAN U; 1. Are you familiar with the statewide historic preservation plan, Colorado Preservation 2005? ^ Yes ^ No (If No, skip to Section II) An introduction to Colorado Preservation 2. How important has Colorado Preservation 2005 2005 is enclosed with this mailing. been to your organization's historic preservatio~ planning? (check all that apply) ^ Colorado Preservation 2005 served as the basis for our historic preservation pianning. ^ we used one or more of tne Co/orado Preservation 2005 goals in our plan. ^ we used one or more of the Colorado Preservation 2005 goals in a State Historical Fund grant application. ^ we refere~ced Co/orado Preservation 2005 in our plan. ^ We have not used Colorado Preservation 2005 in our planning activities. ^ Other: __ __ _ __ SECTION II - GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 3. Colorado Preservation 2005 established seven preservation goals to support the plan's vision. Several objectives were developed to accomplish each goal. Should each of these objectives remain in the revised plan? Goal A - Assume Responsibility Local participation, decision-making, and responsibility strengthens the preservation of important places from our past. Should the following objectives continue to be part of the revised plan? Yes No Neutral ^ ^ ^ 1. Promote the sharing of historic preservation information by all Coloradans. ^ ^ ^ 2. Seek and incorporate local comments and concerns related to preservation in all levels of decision making. ^ p ^ 3. Encourage local businesses, organizations, institutions, and all levels of government to actively suppoR preservation goals. Example: Develop suppoR by publicizing how preservation can benefit local economics and community spirit. ^ ^ ^ 4. Improve existing local preservation ordinances and codes and develop new ones. ^ ^ ^ 5. Urge all preservation partners to plan their actions. Example: Encourage local and regional land use planning partnerships. Other suggestions / comments: ~~. _ ~ > :, ~ ~~.: ; ' . - _ ,~' - :-c~~ - - , _. e~.__. ~ _._. _.~ ,._,~ a~.. ~_ ._ ~ s Goal 6- Participate in Preservation Coloradans of various cultural and ethnic groups, ages, and abilities participate in preserving ` important places from ourpast. Should the following objectives continue to be part of the revised plan? Yes No Neutral • ^ ^ ^ 1. Include in preservation efforts the advisory boards, organizations, and councils that represent each of Colorado's cultural and ethnic groups. ^•^ ^ 2. Learn more about Colorado's diverse people and foster mutual respect. Example: Seek information about places deemed important by minority and ethnic groups. ^^^ 3. Reach out to partner with all people who form part of Colorado's heritage. ^ ^ ^ 4. Communicate the benefits of historic preservation to cultural and ethnic groups. *'" ' Examp/e: Meet with minority chambers of commerce, neighbofiood associations, and other groups to find the most cost-eHective manner to reach the largest minority audience. ^^ ^ 5. Survey, designate, and protect resources significant to cuftural and ethnic groups. Other suggestions / comments: Goal C - Educale Peop{e Coloradans understand the necessity of properly preserving important places from our past. Should the following objectives continue to be part of the revised plan? Yes No Neutral ^ ^ ^ 1. Help people to become more aware to better understand, and to effectively support historic preservation. p ^ 0 2. Schools, colleges, and universities teach chifdren and young adults about historic preservation. Example: Produce and use history, archaeology, and historic preservation cunicula in K-12 classes. ^ ^ p 3. The preservation community cultivates support for historic preservation among decision makers, community leaders, and private property owners emphasizing the relationship of preservation to business and economic development. ^ ^ ^ 4. Professional associations, avocational groups, preservation agencies, and educational institutions provide both basic and advanced preservation training and technical information to organizations, communities, and the public. Example: Develop preservation materials, workshops, and classes for professional and grassroots partners. ^ ^ ^ 5. The preservation community encourages and supports historical and archaeological research, documentation, and publication. Example: Help publicize and distribute high-quality research documents and presentations. Other suggestions / comments: ;,;~, ~- ~ - ~~ ~ ~, ~ ; , , I ~ * 3~ , ' ` `t+` ~ ~. -; `~ r~~`z` ; ' _ ~~; ~ ~+ { _ _. ' }~ . _ i.~i~.~ . . ..-:p '3~~L.. La~_~.s -a ,. Goal D - Exchange Information Cultural resource information is regularfy gathered, maintained, and exchanged. Should the fo~lowing objectives continue to be part of the revised plan? Yes No "Neutral ^^ ^ 1. Gather cultural resource information of the highest quality and usefulness. ^^ ^ 2. Maintain accessible cultural resource archives that promote long-term document preservation. Example: Encourage the use of databases to exchange cultural resource information. ^^^ 3. Use new technologies to store, distribute, and preserve cultural resource information. Example: Share information via the Intemet and other digital tormats. ^^ ^ 4. Exchange cultural resource information to promote education, research, and planning. Example: Use a wide variety of inethods, including publications, Web sites, presentations, workshops, and conferences to share cultural resource information. Other suggestions / comments: Goai E- Offer Financial Incentives Expanded grant programs and other financial incentives encourage the preservation of importanf places from our past. Should the foilowing objectives continue to be part of the revised plan? Yes No Neutral ^ ^ ^ 1. Increase the awareness of preservation's benefits among potential funders Example: Pu6licize the stories of successful historic preservation projects. ^ ^ ^ 2. Expand and promote existing preservation grant programs. ^ ^ ^ 3. Offer and promote other financial incentives that encourage preservation and rehabilitation. ^ ^ ^ 4. Inform and assist people with fund raising, grant writing, and grant administration. Example: Develop a grants guide that lists all preservation funding sources. ^ ^ ^ 5. Help businesses, individuals and private organizations market their preservation projects. Other suggestions / comments: Goal F - Preserve Places A more representative collection of important places from ourpast are protected and preserved. Should the following objectives continue to be part of the revised plan? Yes No Neutral ^ ^ ^ 1. Create partnerships that encourage the preservation of Colorado's important places. ^ ^ ^ 2. Designate more propeRies as local landmarks and as listings in the State and National Registers. ^ ^ ^ 3. implement existing preservation laws effectively, increase their scope, and expand them to all parts of Colorado. ^ ^ ^ 4. Curb vandalism of historic and archaeological sites. Example: Support the development of plans by the Anti-Vandalism Task Force. ^ ^ ^ 5. Partner with curators, conservators, archivists, and librarians to care for coliections related to culturally, historically, and archaeologicaily important places. Other suggestions / comments: ;~:;~ , ' : _`.~m:~''`"" . 'Cfl"~.s ;_~..°,A?..: . ~ . . _ .. ?i.- {... ' 4 i~aC , _. aem.._f~'~! . _ " %_~'a. . . Goal G- Use Places Responsibly Responsible heritage tourism offers a means of knowing and preserving important p/aces from our past. Should the following objectives continue to be part of the revised plan? Yes No Neutral , ^ ^ ^ 1. Balance promotion, interpretation, and conservation of important places from our past. Example: Teach people how to use cultural resources responsibly and without littering, vandalizing, or stealing objects or property. ^ ^ ^ 2. Communicate how preserving historic places enhances tourism and economic development. =~ - ^^^ 3. Assist local governments, public agencies, businesses, and individuals in developing heritage tourism in desired areas. ^ ^ ^ 4. Improve interpretation of our important places. ^ ^ ^ 5. Identify and protect cultural sites that are tourist destinations. Other suggestions / comments: Section III - Role of the Office of Archaeolouv and Historic Preservation 4. Co/orado Preservation 2005 sought to represent the vision, goals and objectives of the statewide preservation community. The Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (OAHP) at the Colorado Historical Society strives to be an important partner in statewide preservation activities. OAHP creatively engages Coloradans and their guests in partnerships to discover, preserve, and take pride in our architectural, archaeological, and other historic places by providing statewide leadership and support to our partners in archaeology and historic preservation. On which broad strategic areas should OAHP focus to best assist the larger preservation community? Please use numbers to rank the top three priorities, with #1 being the highest priority. Continue the practice of periodic public review of the goals aRiculated in Colorado Preservation 2005. Educate people about the importance of preserving Colorado's heritage. Emphasize local participation, decision-maki~g, and responsibility in the preservation and protection of the full spectrum of Colorado's cultural heritage, buildings, places, objects, and traditions. Encourage all Colorado's cultural and ethnic groups to participate in preserving Colorado's cultural heritage. Work to increase local, state, and national grant programs and other financial incentives to preservation. Encourage and support responsible heritage tourism as a means of knowing and preserving Coiorado's cultural heritage. Create and explore opportunities to maintain the long-term benefits of the State Historical Fu~d. Protect and preserve Colorado's significant historic and prehistoric resources, including buildings, structures, sites, objects, and districts. Maintain and expand a comprehensive cultural resources inventory and database that is of the highest quality, usefulness, and accessibility. Other suggestions / comments: C' '~y~~ry .... .. ~f' ~yo-~_~~ . .. .:$C~"rY.i , . . . '~~4~: 5Pb"..~:.. ...-i.'twrvw.'p- .. . _ _" . . . „'sk,~.,,,:1.', .';:~- SECTION IV - This section contains some basic questions about you and your organization. This to describe the survey respondents as a group and assists with analysis. 5. What is the zip code of your organization? us 6. Which of the following best describes your organization? Please check the most appropriate option. Public Entities ,. ^ Municipal Government ^ County Government ^ State Govemment ^ Federal Government ^ School or Educational Institution ^ Urban Renewal or Local Development Agency ^ Other: For-Profit Entities ^ Architectural Firm ^ Building Trade Not-For-Profit Entities ^ Chamber of Commerce ^ Business Association ^ Neighborhood Association ^ Arts Organization ^ Archaeological Organization ^ Historical Society / Museum ^ Historic Preservation Organization ^ Other: ^ Cultural Resource Consultant ^ Other: 7. What is the approximate population of the community your organization serves? 8. If your organization is a not-for-profit with membership, how many members do you have? 9. What position do you personally hold with the organization? Please check all that apply. ^ Paid staff ^ Paid consultant ^ Volunteer ~ Other: Please use the remaining space for additional comments, if any, on Colorado Preservation 200: statewide historic preservation planning effoR, or other historic preservation issues and concerns. Thank You! Mail completed questionnaires i~ the enclosed postage-paid envelope to: Colorado Historical Society Colorado Preservation 2005 Survey 225 E. 16'" Ave., Suite 950 Denver, CO 80203-1606 303-866~i681 Fax:303-866-2041 Vision for Coloradds Heritage As the historic preservation community, we ~r ;take a broad view of the state's hcritage. This vie~v ~is Expressed in a sweeping tweuty-five-year vision k_ . ~ thP next 25 years, Coloradans will in- 'singly appreciate, respect, and protect • heritage and rvi[I embrace their role as :~ ~ T '.,;~.. 's vision articulates a concern for preserving onr heritage as a shared, basic value-a way of life ~o~~all Coloradans. Preserving our historical and '~` ` etidowment requires more than programs ati'a laws. It requires that we understand and care for khe;cultural and natural enviro~unent. +~.The environmental movement provides a model oi;cultivating this stewardship. Most citizens are concemed about the quality of our air, water, and land. We accept responsibility for our environment. The vision for Colorado's heritage aims to achieve a similaz corrunitment to stewardship. We hope [~eople will regard preservation of the cultural envi- ronment and conservation of the natural environ- ment as linked responsibilities. Through education and'iuterpretation we can cultivate tl~is awareness. The ststewide historic preservation plan em courages stewardship, partnership, and information shariug. Partners in the historic preservation com- munity are already preserving our state's distinctive historic character. Planning and coordinating these efforts maximizes results from the time and dollars invested. The next twenty-five years will be an exciting and productive period for historic preservation. As more Coloradans recognize the value of our state's :ultural heritage, historic preservation opportunities will grow. Private and publie funding, combined ~rith technical skills and knowledge, will allow us o accomplish our preservation dreams. Information Exchange Achieving our twenty-five-year vision depeuds on parmers working together-planning and acting cooperativcly toward corrunon eoals. Sharing in- formation makes this process possible, aflowing us to learn about each others' preservation plans, proj- ects, and effurts, accessing the accwnulated experi- ence and knowtedge of the entire preservatioi~ community. Information exchange involves com- piling preservation resource materials a~~d sliaring tliose resources efficiently. We must be able to ac- cess information on: • standard preservation techniqucs; • preservation planning tools such as surveys and design guidelines; • funding sources; • presen-ation workshops and seminars; and • artifact and site documentation. A full text version of Colorado Preservation 2005 may be downloaded from the Internct at www.coloradoltistory-oahp.org. The plan niay also be obtained by contacting: Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation Colorado Historical Society 1300 Broadway Denver, CO 80203 303-866-3395 Fax:303-866-2711 E-mail: oahp@chs.state.co.us O ao prese ~ . . C0~0~ ~On Enriching Our Future by Preserving Our Past Introduction to the Statewide Historic Preservation Plan Historic Preservation Goals Goal A - Assume Responsibility Loca! participation, decision-making, and re- sponsibi/ity strengthens the preservation nf important places from our past Goal B- Participate in Preservation Co/nradans of various cultural and ethnic groups, ages, and abilities par[icipate in pre- serving important places from our past. Goat C - Educate People Coldradans irnderstand the neeessiry of prop- erly preserving important places froin our past. Goal D - Exchange Information Cultural resource inforn:ation is regtdar[y gathered, inarntained, and exchange~! `Goal E - Offer Financial Incentives Farpanded grant programs and other financial incentives eneourage the preservation of im- portant places from our past. ~:'-"~'_.;~ . Goal F - Preserve Places '"~1;more representative co[lection of important ~.,, ~ ; p aees from oi~r past are protected and pre- '~'~ ed. ` ¢ ~. ~ ,r ' ,Goal G - Use Places Responsibly RCSponsible heritage tourism offers a means ~'o,~'knowing and preserving i~nportant plaees from ourpast. ~{i; :. , ~ ~, Historic preservation is the stervardship ofthe important p/aces fron- our past, including bidldings, slructures, siles, distrir.ts, and la~:d- scapes. C ommunity identity and a sense of place make Colorado special and meaningful to each of us. Across H~e state, people in the public and private sectors work to retain Colorado's hisroric character. Yet, our distioctive heritage is threatened. In parts of the state ecouomic decline and neglect constitute major tlveats. In other locales the threat is rapid change. Residential and commer- cial growth often consume haditional agricultural land and alter community character. Coloradans are increasiugly aware of community identity and are expressing a commitment to its preservation. Ex- pandiug awareness and commitment is our vision for the future and tlie cornerstone of Colorudo Preservatinn 2005, the five-year s[a[ewide historic preservation plan. Historic Preservation Community In Colorado, historic preservation activi[ies are carried out by [he state's historic preservation community. This broad and informal coalition con- sists of individuals and organizations actively in- volved in the planning and execution of historic preservation projects. Members include the owners of historic properties, academicians and practitio- ners in the fields of archaeology, history, and ar- chitecture, members of historic preservation com- missions and boards, cultural resource management personnel in federal and state agencies, and other interested people. Organizational members include local preservation boards and commissions, histori- cal societies and museums, archaeological societies, municipal and county govemments, regional coun- cils of government, chambcrs of commerce, re- gional, state, and national historic preservation or- ganizations, and federal and state agencies. Effective preservation springs from two criti- cally important principles-stewardship and part- nership. As Coloradans, we all assume responsibil- ity fo~ the state's 11,000-year cultural lieritage. We may best meet this responsibility by acting in con- cert-sharing information, resources, and talents. Colorado's Heritage Historic preservation is part of a larger etToR to preserve the full spectrum of Colorado's heritage, including the interpretation and protection of our physical, intellectual, emotioual, and spirituai con- ^ections to the past. Historic preservation focuses on saving important places from our past. We do this to retain important physical connections to the activities, traditions, and people who once occupied these places. Saving the document, tlie object, or the tradition without tl~e place fails to anchor events and traditions in the Colorado landscape. Similarly, saving the place without its history and traditions is an empty endeavor. Important ptaces provide the best possible vessels for conveying our heritage to present and future generations. Historic Preservation Challenges In the early twenty-first century, we face new and continuing historic preservation challenges: • Rapid growth threatens the eradication of his- toric places as a result of development and sprawl; • Rapid ehange in the economy, technology, and govemment missions may inadvertently threaten historic places; • Altering landscapes lessens are ability to rec- ognize and protect cultural landscapes reflect- ing Coloradds diverse heritage; • Ignor(ng diveryity limits are awareness and undcrstanding of places that are important to die many cultures and peoples of Colorado; and • Ignoring responsibilities wl~ile emphasizing rights may obscure our obligations to preserve and protect important places in Colorado. The Alliance for Historic Landscape Preservation 2005 Annual Meeting May 18`" to May 21" 2005 Boulder, Colorado The 2005 Annual Meeting for the Alliance for Historic Landscape Preservation wili be held at the Boulder Chauta~~qua Park Historic District (www.chautauqua.com), located in the City of Boulder and approxima[ely 45 minutes north of Deuver, Colorado. Established in 1898 as an educational and wltural retreat as part of the nntional 'chautauqua movement,' the Boulder Chautauqua is listed on the Na[ional Regis[er of Historic Places and as a City of Boulder Landmark District. It is one of' aily a handful that remains of the onginal 12,000 chantauquas, and is the only site west of the Mississippi River with its original site and buildings intact. Conference Activities will f'ollow a chautauqua approach with a mix of educational sessions, discussions, tours and walks in a beautiful retreat setting. We will explore the area's rich geographic region where prairie meets foothills and where Colorado's 1859 gold rush set the beginnings of developmen[ with mining, agriculture and then tourism. The area's Native heritage is still visible in sites such as the Valmont Buttes - a significant geologic and Native American site with a diverse minin~ and agricultural heritage. We will explore the conference theme of Authendcity with invited speakers, presentations, field sessions and diswssions. The Call for Papers is open to all practitioners, academicians, students and others. Presentations should explore the ideologieslph~losophies of authenticity as it relates to preserving culturallandscapesincluding those that are evolving. Questions to consider:, Is authenlicity 1he same as integrity? How does die context of a historic lmidscape apply? When is documentatron a va(id approach? What does sustaina6iliry mean to historic landscope preservation and/or conservation? What philosophica! or pracfical basis' exist to evaluate the aulhen[icity of a landscape restoration or rehnbilitation? Cun new muterrals su~ee as appropriate replacements? Submit Abstracts of between 300 and 500 words by April l, 2005 (font 12, Times New Roman, 1" margins, one sided) to Anne Hoover, Professor. Dep[. of Landscape i\rchitecture, College of Architecmrc and Planning AB 205, Ball State University, Muncie IN 47306, fax: 765-285-1983, tel: 765-285-197 t, email ashoovernn,bsu.edu. Inciude author's name(s), postal and e-mail addresses, telephone and fax numbers. Authenticity ;.. ~,; ;,,a:.,:. .. All Conference Sessions for the The Boulder Chautauqua is nestled ' 2005 Annual Meeting for [he Alliance inro the foothills at the westem edge for Historic Landscape Preservation of the City of Boulder, Colorado. The will be held at the Community House most direct ronte to Getting There is ,;.~,4 , at the Boutder Chautauqua Park via the Denver Intemational Airport ''~~ Historie Distri.e[. All field sessions located approximately 35 miles and ~ will depaR from here. 40 minutes to the southeast. IPs easy . to get to Boulder by rental car or . Sleeping Acwmmodations at the through a shuttle service. Rental cars -' Boulder Chautauqua are in individnal are available at the airpoct as are ~^ rooms at the Missions House or in several shuttle services. For shutde ~~'?- . e~ciency or one bedroom cottages. service, contact [he Super Shuttle at ;' *~: Register earty to be assured a true (~^~+~suoarshuttle.com) or 303-227- '°''s;Chautauqua experience as these 000, or the Boulder Express at '"` moms are v~ limited. Set in the (~+~+~boulderexoress.com) or 303-457- ,~, city's open space, a stay at the 4646. q,~,9: Boulder Chautauqua is quite wiqae. , 3F, . . If you are Driving, check with , ;"°%~~ ~~.A discount rate is aiso available at the Mapquest (www.maoauestcom) for the !1'k''Y~.,~,Boulder Oudook Ho[el, just one mile best route. Also check with Boulder ,~awey, There are also many fine hotels Chautauqua (www chau~auaua com). ~ and bed and breakfasts in downtown ~~a~~~~' Bouldeq just minutes from the If you have Questions about AHLP's C.'~; ~~'Boulder Chautau ua. [f ou choose to ~.. , 9 Y 2005 Annual Meeting, please contact ~sac~~`_:stay at the Boulder Outlook Hotel ~ ~' Tina Bishop by email at (www.boulderou[look.com), you must ' :~ tina(almundusbishoo.com ' make your reservations directly bcfore ~ May lst. Call 1-800-542-0304 and ~ Conference Highlights. A behind- reference AHLP for a rate of $89.99. the-scenes tour of Red Rocks Park & '~ :a ~y ~ Most Meals includin a(1 breakfasts Amphitheatre. The HALS for Skyline , . , _ , g park. Valmont Buttes - the first ~ and lunches, the opening recep[ion, Cultural Landscape Management Area and the annual banquet a~~e included in in Colorado. Local Filmmaker Iim your registra[ion fee. Wednesday and Havey's view into Colotado history. .• SaNrday dinners and Sunday The Civilian Conservation Corps in '~ breakfast are on your own. the Colorado Moun[ain Parks systems. Preliminary Schedule Wednesday May 18, 2005 1:30 pm IIoard of Direcrors meeting 6:00 pm Opening Reception 7:00 pm The Five S~ates nj Colorado wi[h filmmaker Jim Havey Thursday May 19, 2005 8~00 am Registration and IIreakCast 9:00 :un The Chuumaqua 4i'av 11:15 am 6Vestern BarGeqtte 12:30 pm Paper Presentations 3:00 pm Yahnont Buttes 5:30 pm Dinner on your own R~00 pm Roundtable Discussion Friduy May 20, 2005 8:00 am Regis[ration and Breakfast 9.00 am Paper Presentntions 12'30 pm A4nuntain Purks Field Session (box lunch) 630 pm Annual Banquet Saturday May 21, 2005 730 am Op[ional Ga~ded NiAe or Trnil Run R:00 am Regis[ration and IIreakfast 10:30 am Sky~linc Pnrk HALS and !he LoDo Historic D'utric! (boxlunch) 530 pm Uinner un your own 7:00 pm Uenver's Jua: Smne wi[h Barnabus Kane, AHLP board member Sunday May 22, 2005 Depanure Regisa~adon Form Confi~mation of your registration will be sent to you. ConFerence materixls wifl be issued upon airival. Retum this fomi and your payment by April 1, 2005 to AHLP c%Nick Weeks, 388 Panen Street, Sonoma, Calitomia 95476. Name: Address: Email: T7ie Full Conference Fee covers four nighLS' accommodations at the Boulder Chautau~i , II e ion including the film, br~ks, r nd IuncBes, opening reception and annual banquet. _ Full Conference Fee @ SG25US/$750CAN The Conference w/o Lodging Fee covers ail sessions including the film, all breakCasts, breaks end lunches, opening reception and annual banquet. _ Conference w/o Lodging Fee ~;a $285US/$340CAN Thursday Daily Rate @ S95 Friday Daily Ratc @ $95 Sah~rday Daily Rate @ $95 AHLP Membership @ $30US required for all attendees $50 Late Fee (after April 1") Payment: _check _money order