Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Eli Lehrer

GET UPDATES FROM Eli Lehrer
 

Dear Historic Preservationists: Please Leave Us Alone

Posted: 06/25/2012 10:29 am

As it has every summer since 1988, The National Trust for Historic Preservation, a private group with an official-sounding name, has released a list of America's most endangered historic sites.

While nobody disputes that certain areas do deserve preservation or the Trust has done good work in protecting them them, many places on the 2012 list have little to do with actual history and much to do with a busy-body attitude that seeks to diminish private property rights and waste tax dollars on dubious "preservation" efforts.

In many cases, this attitude ignores real human needs. Take, for example, one entire urban neighborhood on the list: Atlanta's Sweet Auburn. There's no doubt that the neighborhood has historic significance since Martin Luther King was born and ministered to a church there. But King's birthplace has become a museum and the church -- which looks much like it did in his day -- remains an active congregation. So the Trust has turned its attention to a mostly vacant nearby commercial strip where King and his family probably shopped. Even though the neighborhood lacks a drugstore, coffee bar, supermarket, or sit-down restaurant -- all things private business might well build if preservationists didn't get in the way -- the Trust wants to "protect" it from inappropriate efforts that might bring in such amenities.

Bad as it is, the effort to "defend" Sweet Auburn's residents from the ravages of CVS and Starbucks isn't the worst item on the list. That prize has to go to an "endangered" designation placed on the Princeton New Jersey Battlefield. The battlefield is already a state park. But some local busybodies still want to prevent Princeton University from building some housing in any area near the battlefield because they believe, among other things, that soldiers en route to the battle marched across it. Really.

And some sites aren't historic by any commonly understood definition of the word. Many courthouses in rural Texas (another item on the list of "national treasures") are in poor shape but it's not clear why they're of any national significance -- most have hosted nothing beyond workaday civil and criminal trials and few are architecturally distinguished. There's no reason why Texas taxpayers should do what the trust wants and shovel millions more into "protecting" them if their own counties don't see a value in doing so. Likewise, there's no reason why a building that once housed a gym where boxer Joe Frazier trained is of any importance at all: while Frazier himself does have importance to sports history, it's not typical or expected to preserve sports figures' practice sites so tourists can visit them. They just aren't very interesting. The same goes for utterly ordinary corrugated steel warehouses in the Port of Los Angles and an unexceptional small town in Ohio. Nothing truly historic happened in either place.

In at least one case, the Trust seems to oppose the idea that people should be able to experience the history that it claims to want preserved. A ranch that Theodore Roosevelt once owned may well be a place of historic significance but the Trust wants to "protect" it from a road being build nearby that would allow more people to visit.

In fairness to the Trust, a handful of places on the list such as a house where Malcolm X once lived and a hospital that treated many immigrants on Ellis Island do seem like they're both historic and genuinely endangered. But most of the places on the list are neither endangered nor of any historic significance by any commonly used definition of the term. Things change and the mere fact that some buildings have been around for awhile shouldn't make them public property or much less require that taxpayers shell out to "save" them.

 

Follow Eli Lehrer on Twitter: www.twitter.com/elilehrerdc

FOLLOW CULTURE
 
 
  • Comments
  • 21
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
12:09 PM on 06/29/2012
I cordially invite Eli Lehrer to resettle in New Hampshire where economic liberty is valued highest of all, and the historic preservation movement is morbid at best. We just demolished the state's most historic bridge, the Memorial Bridge in Portsmouth, a National Trust Top Eleven Endangered Property. It is very rare the National Trust loses one of its listee, but we did it here!

And another historic steel bridge, the Canterbury-Boscawen bridge is coming down. The Granite State is well on its way to removing all its historic metal truss bridges.

And Mitt Romney was just here too, condemning the stone arch Sawyers bridge in Hillsboro, calling it "The Bridge to Nowhere." $150,000 in TARP money was used to repair it.

So come on down, Eli, the the Granite State where the Tea Party rules! If New Hampshirites want to see heritage, we can always go to.... Vermont!

Hon. Steven W Lindsey
state rep
Keene, NH
02:53 PM on 06/27/2012
I am guessing this guy did not familiarize himself with the National Register of Historic Places Criteria. Or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act as amended, or the implementation of federal and state regulations, that study impacts to historic properties listed, or eligible for listing, in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The State Historic Preservation Officer (the office I work for) is to advise and assist state and federal agencies when identifying historic properties, assessing effects upon them, and considering alternatives to avoid or minimize adverse effects.
The people you are calling busy bodies are historians. They are in the business of preserving the tangible links to our past. I'd say YOU are the busy body in this scenario.
10:41 PM on 06/26/2012
Dear Eli,
The ridiculous amount of misinformation in this article aside, your apparently intentional misunderstanding of the reasons we preserve our heritage is sad and misguided. You do a disservice to everyone by posting this drivel without any research to support your assertions. And that road that would make the "ranch" more accessible to tourists...tell me Mr. Eli, what ranch, that presumably has surrounding land that makes it a "ranch" where cows might chew grass, for example, would you visit that was developed with a road and buildings (that were built because the road was there)? Context is important, or are you so short-sighted that you believe a high-rise constructed adjacent to the MLK, Jr. house is okay because the house was saved?

The only positive note I can glean from this article is that I'm thrilled you aren't interpreting sites for the NRHP. So many other countries preserve their heritage and manage to be economically viable, pedestrian friendly, attractive to ...who?...right, tourists, and offer affordable public transportation. The U.S. has a severe delusion that "progress" can only happen if something old is heavily modified or wiped out. You're part of that problem. Congratulations.

Sincerely,
"The Historic Preservationist"
05:37 PM on 06/26/2012
What this hypocrite seems to forget is that HP is more than saving the places where famous people lived, it also encompasses the stand-out structures that represent their day. He isn't enlightened to the fact that public historians are constantly fighting against the tradition of interpreting the famous people at historic sites--sure, so-and-so was famous and maybe he/she did something worth noting, but what about the woman that washed his/her underwear or cleaned the house!! Wow! We are becoming a country that increasingly embraces the bottom-up history. If he did his research, he could see why places are valued over others...Terminal Island? Sorry Eli, it's not just an "utterly ordinary corrugated steel warehouses in the Port of Los Angles"-- it was the site of a forced removal of over 3,000 Japanese-Americans. Once you raze that location, you lose even more of the history that took place at that site. Millions of children are growing up in our international-heritage-based country. Scores of them have no clue that the country that welcomed their family could have been so callous in the consideration for our Japanese-American citizens. The farther away we get from WWII, the more of its history is lost, until one day we are looking back at it with the same mystery that surrounds Civil War events. You aren't just tearing down a building--you are tearing down the history of people themselves. Shame on you, Eli Lehrer.
04:41 PM on 06/26/2012
Regardless of whether you work in preservation as well or not, I feel more encouraged that there are voices of support for our work other than those of my colleagues and myself. Mr. Lehrer's shortsightedness is the obstacle we deal with everyday. Our culture is what we are and if we choose to forget that and give the physical evidence left from the history of our culture demeaning names as an excuse for our vision of continuing progress we do nothing but stunt said progress in our own generation and those that come after we are long gone. Sullivan, Wright, Mies, Saarinen, Yamasaki and those who came well before and soon after have all professed the need to look to our past and preserve the canvas left behind in order to secure and enrich our communities. Battlefields and the historic settlements around them, courthouses, post offices, and historic downtown districts should all be preserved because they represent who we once were and who we have come to be. If we can't learn to live and grow with that history like France, Italy, and the UK do we will continue to be a laughing stock for the foolish choices we continue to make. We can preserve the past and advance into the future at the same time, we see it happening in small example every day. The National Trust's 11 Most Endangered List is a challenge to do just that, and I'm sorry to see it so discredited.
04:35 PM on 06/26/2012
Ah, I see now, the author professes to be president of "R Street", which is a historic district in Sacramento that they are trying to convert to a new neighborhood (no doubt upperclass). So, what happened buddy, you get turned down for a permit to remodel a historic building? You are exposed as a self-interested hypocrite! On one hand you exploit the status of R Street's historic district status to attract business and recognition for personal gain and the turn around and bite the hands of the people who worked hard to establish that status in the first place!? Well !!!!

http://rstreet.info/

"The R Street of tomorrow will take advantage of multiple modes of transit, a gritty industrial past, and distinct urban form to create a truly unique neighborhood in the City of Sacramento.
03:22 PM on 06/26/2012
The author expresses nothing more than the common, misinformed, uneducated opinion that preservationists combat every day. First, as was mentioned previously, very little tax money goes into preservation. Most of what is encouraged by states come in the form of tax credits (that is the owner/developer fronts the money and they get some of that back as tax credits). Second, preservation offices often agree to "adaptive reuse" which leaves the architectural elements intact but allows modern stores/offices/residences to move into that space. How cool would it be for CVS to move into a historic building that King experienced as a kid! I'd go there. Finally, as another commenter mentioned, HP does enhance economic development in both large cities and small downtown settings across the US. Main Street is a great example. Contractors and craftspeople get hired to do the work, thus creating jobs, the people living there get a sense of community, and other from outside (suburbs or other cities) are encouraged to go there. The only thing prohibiting Starbucks and CVSs from establishing these stores in historic buildings are their own inflexibility in how the internal layouts of the stores should look.
01:46 PM on 06/26/2012
I want to second the point some have made about the Texas Courthouses. They are immensely historical, and many of them are deeply rooted in the events of Reconstruction. My own community razed down a beautiful antebellum courthouse in the 1950s to reroute a thoroughfare, and the lackluster concrete box that replaced it has left us regretting that decision ever since.

They are mostly endangered because the counties don't have the resources to maintain them properly (Marshall, Tx is a great example). Recognition at the national level (through the very program this article criticizes) could provide the critical vetting necessary for these counties to gain access to grant money and donor funds.

I was pretty shocked to see the courthouses included in the list.
01:45 PM on 06/26/2012
Misinformation. What tax dollars are you speaking of? Tax credits, perhaps. Historic preservation creates jobs, revitalizes neighborhoods, and saves places that matter- perhaps not to the whole nation, but to individual communities. Historic preservation is not only about saving places of national significance, it is about maintaining the vitality of communities through leveraging our cultural assets. There are much bigger fish to fry than a non-profit organization dedicated to saving America's architectural heritage.
01:11 PM on 06/26/2012
Though the author brings up some good points, especially on 11 most listings that are in fact repeat listings and therefore odd, please do a little study on the Texas Courthouses. There are over 200 historic courthouses in the state and they are the architectural gems of their small communities from a time when American's cared that their pubic buildings would last and make a statement. Texas has had a historic courthouse program for over ten years supported by the state and the residents.

What seems to be missing in this years list is the excellent writing that the Trust had prior that did a good job of explaining the threat to the sites, as well as regional vetting of the listings. Given that many regional office staff have been eliminated (and it looks like the writers too), you can see the lack of preservation expertise in the descriptions and the choice of listings.

But that doesn't mean these places are not still endangered, and there are so many more out there. Do your research please.... and realize that America cares little for its past, so it is always a fight to save things.
12:18 PM on 06/26/2012
In addition to the already-noted complete lack of research and and unequivocal bias toward the author's own unfounded definitions of terms like "significance" and "historic" that this article boasts (I wonder if the people who know and live in that town in Ohio consider it as "unexceptional" as this author, who has clearly never set foot there, does), even the most basic facts in this piece are incorrect: Princeton University is not proposing to build housing on a portion of Princeton Battlefield- the Institute for Advanced Study, an entirely separate entity, is. If you can't even properly cite the central source about which you are writing, there is no credibility in your work, period. Pitiful.
11:31 AM on 06/26/2012
The Trust is SO much more than saving buildings. The Trust's Main Street program is a proven, extremely successful economic development strategy that has allowed towns and neighborhoods to use their history to drive economic recovery and not become a cookie cutter strip mall that can be found anywhere. do a little more research.
maxfax
Taa - dah!
09:44 PM on 06/25/2012
We have so little respect for our history in this nation, here's proof.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
04:36 PM on 06/25/2012
Some facts from Eli Lehrer's HuffPost bio:

He served as Vice President of the Heartland Institute, best known for working with Philip Morris to convince people that tobacco isn't harmful and for "proving" that climate change isn't happening, but if it is, it's good for us.

He served as a senior editor at the American Enterprise Institute, noted for having crafted George W. Bush's public policy (we see how *that* turned out) and for snapping up Newt Gingrich after he ended his highly entertaining campaign for the Republican presidential nomination.

He worked as a project manager for the Unisys Corporation, notorious after an FBI investigation uncovered major corruption in its business practices. The settlement of the corruption case required all Unisys employees to get ethics training each year, a practice apparently still in force.

He worked as a speechwriter for Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, who was twice named one of the "Most Corrupt Members of Congress" by the government watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and who killed cats while a medical school student because he was "under pressure to succeed".

Lune
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:51 PM on 06/25/2012
Some lies from Eli:

1. The National Trust hasn't received any taxpayer funding since 1996. Its preservation efforts and those of its local partners are entirely funded by membership dues and donations. Eli's just lying when he says that the Trust "waste[s] taxpayer dollars on dubious 'preservation' efforts".

2. Preservation efforts begin at the local level, when people who actually live in an area determine that some part of their area heritage deserves preservation. The Trust then helps these local groups realize their goals. Eli's "busy bodies" live only in his imagination.

3. Sweet Auburn has been a designated historic area since 1976, and it got that designation not because its a strip mall where MLK may have shopped, but because it exemplifies "the flourishing segregated neighborhoods founded by African Americans during the Jim Crow era in the South." The commercial district has lovely old buildings. Nothing in the preservation plans will prevent any particular business from moving into renovated historic structures in the commercial district. In fact, "a drugstore, coffee bar, supermarket, or sit-down restaurant" are just the sorts of businesses that the historic preservation group hopes to attract. Cities all over the US have undertaken efforts to preserve and revitalize their historic commercial districts, with much success. Perhaps Eli doesn't see much value in Sweet Auburn because, after all, it was thrown up by a bunch of blacks.

No room to discuss Eli's other voluminous lies.

Lune