Saving Our Historic Places From Natural Disaster

http://blog.preservationnation.org/2014/06/26/deep-water-three-ways-save-historic-climate-threats/#.U7BfZMp5v5Z

Moving the Cape Hatteras Lighthouse
Cape Hatteras, North Carolina
pmc-controls.com

Hello Everyone:

Before I get going, I want to send a shout up to Nutmeg in the United Kingdom.  Miss you.

The weather, it's something we all can talk about without getting into a big argument.  However, the weather, frequently intense weather events from flooding in the South and East to persistent drought in the West, pose a real danger to historic resources.  These meteorological events are not something unique to the United States, intense meteorological events occur around the world and impact historic resources everywhere.  In a recent blog post for the PreservationNation Blog,  senior Preservation Green Lab director Mark Huppert looks at "...Three Ways to Save Historic Places from Climate."

Weather satellite image of the American Midwest
post-gazette.com

On May 20, 2014 the Union of Concerned Scientists released a report identifying thirty at risk historic sites around the United States.  (http://www.ucusa.org)  Adam Markham, director of climate impacts and co-author of the report said, "The imminent risk to these sites and the artifacts they contain threaten to pull apart the quilt that tells the story the nation's heritage and history." (Ibid)  The report clearly demonstrates the urgency and scale of the challenges, posing important questions for the preservation profession:

What responsibility do we preservationists have in the face of threats from natural disasters?

If we do hold ourselves responsible for finding solutions, what can we individually do about a challenge that seems so big?

Jamestown settlement
currently under threat from rising seas
en.wikipedia.org

 If you think the answer is yes to the first  question, then you're not alone.  The National  Trust for Historic Preservation has be working  to find answers for the above questions for  nearly a decade.  What they do know is that  persistent climate risks represent some of the  biggest challenges ahead because there might    not be sufficient funding or political incentive    save historic resources.  At the conclusion of  the UCS report, Mr. Markham writes,

In addition, Congress should fund President Obama's proposed Climate Resilience Fund, which could be used to help municipalities and businesses become more resilient to climate change. (Ibid)

Angela Anderson, director of the Climate and Energy Program adds,

The fund could also be used to help protect and preserve the nation's iconic and historical landmarks and irreplaceable archeological treasures that are being destroyed by sea level rise, wildfire and flooding.

You can help make a difference and protect the places in your part of the world that might be lost forever.  Here are the solutions.

Downtown Annapolis, Maryland
under threat of storm surge flooding
ian.umces.edu

Address the worst case scenario head on

Having a solid plan in place is the best way to deal with the worst possible outcome.  For example, in Annapolis, Maryland a small but passionate group of people made a real difference in the way the city will respond to their worst case scenario-storm surge flooding.  A large group of stakeholders, including preservationists, are creating an amendment to Annapolis's previously adopted Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan using FEMA's 'How-To Guide #6 (FEMA 386-6) Integrating Historic Property and Cultural Resource Considerations into Hazard Mitigation Planning. (http://www.fema.gov)

Annapolis and its historic downtown rely on a significant amount of heritage tourism which, undoubtably would be lost or interrupted in the event of a major flood, as in 2003 when it was hit by Hurricane Isabel, this amendment is a way for preservationists to protect historic resources and reinforce economic resiliency in case of natural disaster.  Having a solid natural disaster mitigation plan place is a necessary requirement for cities that hope to qualify for FEMA funds and this amendment process ensures that historic preservation strategies are taken into considerations when protecting or rebuilding a city from a natural disaster.

Statue of Liberty during Hurricane Sandy
Sandy Nadine DeNinno
ibtimes.com

Play Strong Defense

A strong offense is a strong defense.  When it comes to protecting historic resources from natural disasters, you need a very good defense. This was, indeed, quite true in New York City following the devastating Hurricane Sandy.  New York City recently adopted building code intended to protect people, property, and places against the next super storm.

From all the buildings deemed unsafe or uninhabitable by the NYC Building Department in Sandy's aftermath, a staggering 89% were one- and two-story wood frames buildings constructed before 1961.  This demonstrated the vulnerability of historic homes and small commercial buildings to catastrophic weather events.  To strengthen the city and older building's resiliency in the future, the new code requires such things as a flood-resistant first floor construction or raise the first floor above mean flood elevation.  On the surface, the new code may seem at odds with historic preservation, doing nothing is even worse.  To put it bluntly, once a precious historic resource is lost, it's lost forever and putting in place building code that will improve long-term resiliency is a small price to pay.

The Farnsworth House (1951)
Ludwig Mies Van der Rohe
Plano, Illinois
farnsworthhouse.org

When all else fails, get out of harm's way

Duck and cover, generally sane advice in many situations except when it comes to buildings. You can't pick up a historic building or site and move it when there's a severe weather condition on the way.  Relocation or elevation are not the preservationists' preferred method of protecting resource, sometimes it's the best choice for protecting a resource from persistent or imminent damage.  This was the case at the Farnsworth built by Ludwig Mies Van der Rohe in 1951 and located near the Fox River in Plano, Illinois.

This house is one of the most loved Modernist masterpieces, however, due to increased urbanization, storm water runoff, and rising water from the Fox River, the house has been repeatedly inundated since the day it was built, threatening the integrity of the house and its unique character.  In response the NTHP assemble a panel of experts to come up with solutions to this recurring problem. The panel, Farnsworth House Flood Mitigation Project's website (http://www.farnsworthproject.org) outlines three possible remedies for protecting the house: raising it in situ. relocating the house, or hydraulic lifts.  Of the three alternative, using hydraulic lifts proved to be the best possible solution because it preserved the building's connection to the site. Nevertheless, raising or relocating the house still remain viable options.  A final decision is still pending based on technical and cost feasibility.  Either way, the use of hydraulic lifts at the Farnsworth House is aiding NTHP to understand that action has to be taken immediately or risk losing valuable historic documents.

Historic buildings, sites, and artifacts are more than just places and things.  They are documents of who we are as culture at any given moment in history.  People come and go but places and artifacts remain. Whether the loss is through natural or man-made disaster, it is an irretrievable loss.  Only through proper planning can we make sure that our national treasures remain available for future generations.

Like me on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/lenorelowen

Follow me on Twitter http://www.twitter.com/glamavon and on Pinterest http://www.pinterest.com/glamtroy

Linkedin http://www.linkedin.com/pub/dir/Lenore/Lowen

Google+ http://plus.google.com/+LenoreLowen

Instagram- find me at hpblogger