2004-05-13
V-- pix credit | © Mark G. Coppitella | Goodspeed Operahouse at sunset
historic preservation or "don't make changes" ? | For eight years now I have served as chair to my town's historic preservation commission | For Connecticut it's a sparsely populated town | However, the Federally recognized areas include four designated "local" (i.e. state recognized) districts, two additional federal districts and a number of distinct properties | Over time, it's been valuable to conduct a review of those projects that have come before us | It's also valuable to gauge the perspectives of those who seek assistance from the Commission |
As a small town, without any significant commercial or industrial tax base, the majority of the applications are for residential structures | The largest applicants have been religious organizations and the Goodspeed Operahouse Foundation | The bulk of the applications are for additions to existing homes, re-roofing, sign applications, fences, stone wall construction and such |
One component complicating the entire subject is that of personal aesthetics | A point of view interlinked emotionally with people's personal comfort levels | Any while preserving historic structures and areas has an aesthetic component, it is far from the only perspective that must be considered |
There have been times, however, when some people seek to use the historic district concept to prevent change from happening | Part NIMBY, part "don't alter the view from my porch" personal mindset, it represents a challenge to those charged with making decisions about any particular district's future, while simultaneously perserving the historic character of any given designated place | Dealing with the NIMBY attitude is both challenging and, at times, disappointing | For it runs counter to the underlying principles of preserving historic areas | Equally sad are a trio of actions that some folks with the NIMBY perspective can fall into doing: [1] blithely riding roughshod over the shared interests of the larger community; [2] to overlook and/or ignore the realities of the past history of a specific area and [3] failing to consider that they, too, live in times that shall shape the history of an area |
It is possible, even appropriate, to designate some historic locales so important that they need to be living monuments to a time, a place, some social upheaval or major event | But these are places that become parks or museums whose "walls" are psychic, not physical | Historic sites of such import, or with major irreplacable archeological treasures can an ought to be so saved |
But, the view from our porches is not, in and of itself, historic | That view changes with time |Always has, always will | History is, after all, dynamic and alive | Change occurs naturally and as an everyday phenomenon | It isn't static | When we set about to preserve that which represents our collective history we have to also recognize that wherein those historic assets are placed, is also part of a still vibrant and alive community of people, businesses, commerce and ideas |
Admittedly, right now we live in a time that has people by and large uncomfortable with change, especially things that seem dramatic [like the construction of some new grand edifice], but in the course of human events, are but a trickle in the progress of ideas and growth |
Preserve the valued and treasured edifices of the past, certainly | But lets not lose sight that we, too, have potential legacies to present to our heirs | We should not hold them stagnant | ¶ 09:10
historic preservation or "don't make changes" ? | For eight years now I have served as chair to my town's historic preservation commission | For Connecticut it's a sparsely populated town | However, the Federally recognized areas include four designated "local" (i.e. state recognized) districts, two additional federal districts and a number of distinct properties | Over time, it's been valuable to conduct a review of those projects that have come before us | It's also valuable to gauge the perspectives of those who seek assistance from the Commission |
As a small town, without any significant commercial or industrial tax base, the majority of the applications are for residential structures | The largest applicants have been religious organizations and the Goodspeed Operahouse Foundation | The bulk of the applications are for additions to existing homes, re-roofing, sign applications, fences, stone wall construction and such |
One component complicating the entire subject is that of personal aesthetics | A point of view interlinked emotionally with people's personal comfort levels | Any while preserving historic structures and areas has an aesthetic component, it is far from the only perspective that must be considered |
There have been times, however, when some people seek to use the historic district concept to prevent change from happening | Part NIMBY, part "don't alter the view from my porch" personal mindset, it represents a challenge to those charged with making decisions about any particular district's future, while simultaneously perserving the historic character of any given designated place | Dealing with the NIMBY attitude is both challenging and, at times, disappointing | For it runs counter to the underlying principles of preserving historic areas | Equally sad are a trio of actions that some folks with the NIMBY perspective can fall into doing: [1] blithely riding roughshod over the shared interests of the larger community; [2] to overlook and/or ignore the realities of the past history of a specific area and [3] failing to consider that they, too, live in times that shall shape the history of an area |
It is possible, even appropriate, to designate some historic locales so important that they need to be living monuments to a time, a place, some social upheaval or major event | But these are places that become parks or museums whose "walls" are psychic, not physical | Historic sites of such import, or with major irreplacable archeological treasures can an ought to be so saved |
But, the view from our porches is not, in and of itself, historic | That view changes with time |Always has, always will | History is, after all, dynamic and alive | Change occurs naturally and as an everyday phenomenon | It isn't static | When we set about to preserve that which represents our collective history we have to also recognize that wherein those historic assets are placed, is also part of a still vibrant and alive community of people, businesses, commerce and ideas |
Admittedly, right now we live in a time that has people by and large uncomfortable with change, especially things that seem dramatic [like the construction of some new grand edifice], but in the course of human events, are but a trickle in the progress of ideas and growth |
Preserve the valued and treasured edifices of the past, certainly | But lets not lose sight that we, too, have potential legacies to present to our heirs | We should not hold them stagnant | ¶ 09:10
