About Connections: Love it or hate it, history is a map. Those who hate history think it irrelevant; many who love history think it escapism. In truth, history is the clearest road map to how we got here: America in the 21st century.
Parts I and II dealt with an overview of planning and development. The last part addresses preservation.
The actual agenda item for the January 3 Stockbridge Planning Board meeting was a proposed amendment to the Cottage Era Estate Bylaw. Since it followed closely a presentation to the Selectboard of a development plan for a cottage-era estate (DeSisto), the subject matter comingled and the temperature rose.
Discussing what impact a proposed amendment would have on a specific property was not inappropriate. Moreover this amendment only impacts three properties in town and DeSisto is one. However, what might have been a cool, dry discussion about a planning tool became a hot topic. In the end, there may have been more heat than light.
It was suggested that the entire Cottage Era Estate Bylaw be scrapped. It was suggested that the Berkshire cottage at the center of the property was “a derelict eyesore, of no historic significance.” It was suggested that all property in town be subject to the same zoning restrictions regardless of age. In short, the question was raised: why preserve? Good question.
From the time Catharine Sedgwick said that, after Stockbridge, she did not anticipate Heaven would be much of a transition, to Stephen Field fighting his own trolley car, to the lady telling the tourist to seek the conveniences of the modern world elsewhere, Stockbridge has come as close to pure preservation, maintaining the frozen past, as is possible in the modern world. Was it to attract tourists, to maintain quality of life or preserve a way of life? Why?
Cost/Benefit of Preservation
The University of Massachusetts conducted a 5-year study comparing 18 quality of life indicators for 34 communities with populations of less than 25,000. They found no significant statistical difference between the quality of life in the 17 communities that attracted tourists and 17 nontourist communities. Only one indicator correlated positively with improved quality of life: historic preservation.
The reason was not that preservation attracted tourists and tourist dollars. It was because historic preservation shaped the residents’ sense of place and enhanced its meaning. In short, by knowing its history, a place seemed more important to its residents and, therefore, a better place to live.
The study also found a positive correlation between preservation and tourism: the more the community preserved, the more tourists came. Preservation supported a way of life.
Those who support tourism as an industry describe it as a “clean” industry, meaning that it is environmentally free of industrial waste. They maintain that having an economic base that is clean enhances the health of the residents. That is anecdotal but, for more than four decades, government agencies studied the cost/benefit of preservation.
In the 1970s the National Trust for Historic Preservation sponsored several studies on the benefits of preservation. They found that, while restoration was labor intensive, it was generally less costly per square foot than new construction and had the added benefit of employing more people. Secondly, preservation was shown to strengthen or revitalize existing retail centers and increase municipal revenues. As dilapidated areas were recycled and revitalized, the assessment of land and buildings rose. Both tourism and utilization by residents were shown to increase. Renovation plans sparked private sector investment and the basic materials were seen as superior – for example, hand-cast bricks 4 to 8 inches thick.
Simultaneously, the Energy Resource and Development Administration (ERDA) conducted a study on resource efficiency and found that rehabilitation consumes 23 percent less energy than new construction.
In the ensuing decades, the Department of Energy conducted a study that found that both the costs of materials and labor rose, and the cost of skilled labor necessary for restoration rose higher than the cost of general labor. Another study concluded that contractors preferred new construction because they found it easier to estimate costs. Renovation was less predictable. Contractors “touted” new construction, and it became “common knowledge” that new construction was cheaper and better when in, fact, it was neither – it was simply easier.
While there are factors that remain a challenge, there is one issue greater than the others: waste. The waste is exponentially higher when we do not recycle and reuse. The waste is twofold: tearing down and destroying materials, some of which are irreplaceable, and exhausting extant materials by building new. We consume our future when we destroy our past.
So if there are all these benefits to preservation, what do we save and how?
Criteria for Preservation
The criteria set forth by the National Trust for Historic Preservation fall into two categories. Either the structure is architecturally worthy, aesthetically preeminent, or the value is associational, that is, the person or group of persons who resided there or events that occurred there were of historic significance.
Buildings are the repositories of our memories, of our collective story. If the story is worth telling, the building is worth saving.
Once a building or district is placed on the National Register, the goal is either the scholarly representation of what existed or the sympathetic maintenance of what existed. In the first case, the house is open to the public and the underpinning is research of the lifestyle, people or historic event that took place there. In the second case, the home is a private residence and the goal is protection.
DeSisto, “that derelict eyesore of no historic significance,” was the home of the much-married son of our first political strategist, Mark Hanna. Hanna laid the groundwork for all the political campaigns that followed. DeSisto was the site of the birth of Tanglewood (first called the Berkshire Symphonic Festival). It was the home of the woman who sought to save the Bullfinch Church. For those with a taste for crime, it was the location of one of the greatest swindles in Berkshire history. Each of these stories is worth telling. Furthermore, it was designed and built by an amateur architect who incorporated elements that were cutting edge for the day and are worthy of study. So…to judge history, first know history.
Once it is determined that something is to be preserved, there are degrees of preservation: pure, adaptive and token or facade preservation.
Forms of Preservation
Pure preservation is represented by sites such as Chesterwood that are open to the public and carry a mandate for research and education.
Adaptive preservation seeks to preserve the structure but adapt its use to modern needs. An example would be the Faneuil Hall and Market in Boston.
Token or facade preservation seeks to create an uninterrupted outer view of what was but, because interiors were not noteworthy or because economic realities will not allow, the interiors are modernized. An example would be the McKim Mead and White building on Park Avenue in New York City, behind which multiple-stories of modern glass and chrome rise.
When the buildings are lost, there are still ways to preserve the stories. There are exhibitions, books, articles and photographs.
Conclusion
It is a simple question: What do you want to develop? Jobs, housing, tourist attractions, character or quality of life? Once you know that, ask what is the best way to do that: new construction, renovation or preservation? It may be easier to form the questions than find the solutions. One tool is to pick the consequence.
Beaudelaire said, “All men who act do some good and some evil.” There are no decisions without both advantages and consequences. We tend to get dizzy with the wonderfulness of the advantages. It may be more useful to define the consequences and calmly choose the least harmful.
What will be the impact on the environment, the infrastructure, policing, fire prevention, the business community and quality of life? Find the answers, pick the least harmful, and do that. Most important, what is sacrosanct? What makes one place uniquely and distinctly that place? Save that. Pick wisely: you are shaping the future.
