A Community Guide to Saving Older Schools

8/12/2019 A Community Guide to Saving Older Schools

1/35


2/35

A Community Guide to Saving Older Schoolsby Kerri Rubrnirn

J s a new school building alwaysI better than an older one?ISo,n. people seem to think so.Parents who want the best fortheir children are likely ro equare"best" with "newest." Gachersand school administrators, frus-trated by having to meet hhstandards under trying workingconditions, may see a large, newbuilding as a way to solve diverse,and even unrelated, problerns.Their goal is to educate children,not preserve olcler buildings.School boards ancl local gov-ernmerts want to demonstratethat they are meeting theirresponsibilities. A shiny newschool building proclairns thatthey are doing their jobs.School facilities planners relyon national guidelines thar cur.rently suggest that bigger is berrer,and that it rakes a new buildingand a large site to include all thefeatures a "modem" school shouldhave. And so, throughout rheU.S., the policies and practicesof state and local governmentsroutinely encourge and rewardconstruction of new schools,rather than maintenance andrenovation of older ones.When school districts adver-tise for and hire architects, theytend to engage rhose profession.als who know a lot more aboutdesigning new buildings thanrenovating older ones. After all,not all architects have trainingor experience in the subspecialtyof historic rehabilitation. But allhave been taught how to plan anew structure that meets a list ofclient specificarions and appliesstandardized formulas.

The general public, not ftrllyinforrned about the alternatives,may tend to agree with this preerence for building a new schoolrather than fixing up the old one.Tlk of constructing a new build.ing usually generates nore inter-est and excitement than talkabout replacing the rnechanicalsystelns, reconfiguring spaces, anddoing repairs and refurbishing inthe existing one. That's why it'soften easier to pss a bond issuefor new construction than forrenovation. Even parents andcommunity mernbers who reallylike the neighborhood schoolrnay simply feel resigned or pow-erless once the school district hasdecided to close it.Do studenrs benefit fromattending older neighborhoodschools? As the case studies in thislooklet illustrate, the advantagerc children and the surroundingcommunity can be significant.

For students, it can meanspending their days in unusuallywelcorning or beautiful placesthat encourage learning and pos.itive interactions. Older schoolsmay offer cornfortable classroomswith natural light and breezespouring in frorn large windows,ancl with pleasant surprises-likea reading nook, a stage, or a fire.place. Or they may be grandbuildings with finely decoratedentryways, libraries, and audito-riums-all proclaiming to stu.dents and to the community theimportance of whar takes placethere. Attending school in anolder building can provide stu-dents with constant, subtle lessonsabout their place in communityhistory, and about respect for rhepast, appreciation of fine archi-

tecture and craftsrnanship, andwise use of material resources.When students can walk toschool, rather than having to relyon bus rides or lifts, it encouragesthem to participate rnore fully inschool activities and to develop agreater sense of connection totheir own neighborhoods.Closing rhe neighborhoodschool often has an irnpact onother concems faced by commu-niry members: the safety and sta-biliry of neighbothoods; the spreadof sprawl development; rhe break.down of social neworla; wastefulgovernment spending; lack ofsound environrnentaI planning.The time has come to lookrnore critically at the assumprionthat 'llewer is better" when itcomes to school buildings. It isalso time to consider what is beinglost each time ar olclel neighbor.hood school is razecl or retired.Newer Is Better?A Reality CheckAssumption:'Old" means out of date,of even obsolete.Reality:It's not age that undermines anolder school building-it's lack ofcare. Even relatively new schoolsthat do not receive the regularmaintenance they need-frornpainting and patching to periodicupgrading of materials and sys.terns-will age in a hurry. Ofcourse, the longer these tasks havebeen neglected, the rnore costlythe repairs, Poor quality additionsor "irnprovernents" also lead tothe perception that the originalbuilding has unfixable flaws.

Couer: Tbe 1923 Elruy Scbool,ln Brentwood, Pa, bas bemenauated an ept ,n use,tbns to a cattpalgn bIocal actlulsts. See page 15.

- Pboro couret oRon Yhu

PRESERVATION BOOKS


3/35


4/35

According ro architect LarryD. Williarns, a project mangerwith the Denver public schoolsystem, with 25 years of experi-ence in the design and construc-tion of educational facilities:"Everything you do, mechani-cally or electrically, or any otherway in an existing building isgoing to cost you more thn innew construction. Bur the bigadvantage you have with anexisting building is that thebuilding is already there." Heexplains that 20 to 25 percent ofthe cost of new construction isfor the building shell. Bur if anolder building is structurally soundand usable, that's 20 to 25 percentof the construction cost saved.In addirion to rhe known costsfor designing and constructing anew building, there rnay be hid-den costs that don't enter intodiscussions. For exarnple, if thenew school will be built on anundeveloped site, there will beadded costs to purchase anddevelop the land and to btildroads, sewer lines, and otherinfrastructure. It may also costrnore to bus students out to thenew location. h'r Maine, forexample, the nurnber of school-age children fell by 27,000between 1970 and 1995, butstate and local busing costs rosefrorn $8.7 million to $54 rnillionduring that period. That'sbecause more children had to bebussed to new schools in moredistant locations (from "The Costof Sprawl," a report by the MaineState Planning Office, 1997).If the old school is scheduledto come down, there will be coststo demolish it (usually 4 to 5 per-cent of the overall replacementcosts). If the old school will beleft vacant, the school districtwill have to pay for basic stabiliza-tion, maintenance, and security.

On the other hand, there areways to filrd cost savings and ben.efits when doing renovations.Cood planning and project man.agemenr can rnake a big differencein the final cost. For exarnple, proj-ect rnanagers engaged in a rnajorrenovation project of rnore than500 Chicago public schoolsfound that historically ccurarereplacernent materials, o at leastgood substitutes, were not alwaysas costly as they expected. Oneproject rnnager planned toreplace an ornate copper cornicewith aluminum, but receivedbids on both materials. Surpris.ingl the more costly, moredurable copper turned out to becheaper to install.

It's not age tbatundernxines an olderschool buildng-t's lack of care.While the funding policies ofmany states strongly favor con.structing a new building mtherthan maintaining and improvingan older one, rnore and rnorestates are reconsidering andrewriting these policies. In addi.tion, in some states-includingGeorgia, Florida, and Colorado-school buildings that quali7 forstate, local, or national historicdesignations rnay be eligible forpreservatior grants and otherspecial financial help.The federal government cur-rently provides aicl for schoolrepairs and renovations through

Qualified Zone Academy Bonds(QZAB). QZABs were createdin 1997 to assist with school ren-ovations in high poverty areassuch as Ernpowerment Zones/Enterprise Cornmunities orschools with 35 percent of stu.dents eligible for free or reduced-price lunches. Generally, thefederal governmet covers all

the interest or these bonds (byissuing tax creclits, rather thaninterest payments, to the bondholders), so the schools pay backprincipal only. That enablesthern to save up to 50 percent ofthe cost of rnajor repair or reno.vation projects. At least 21 statesare currently using, or in theprocess of applying for, QZABs.This prograrn may be expandedin the future, and orher federalprograms to aid older schoolbuildings are likely to follow. Formore information, see the web.site of the U.S. Department ofEducation:www.ed.gov/inits/construction/qzab.htrn l.Finally, crearive financingarrangernents rnay help. "Perfor-mance contracting" is one inno-vative option. h'r this legallybinding arrangement, a privatecompany agrees to retrofit anolder building with more energy.efficient systems for heating, airconclitioning, lighting, water andsewer systems, or building con.trols. The company then takes itspayment over several years as thebuilding owners realize reduceclenergy costs.And a recent study reportsthat in 1996 the Denver publicschools initiated a sale-lease backprograln: "Under this plan, thedistrict sells certain property itowns to a nonprofit corporationwhich exists solely to facilitarethe district's lease-purchasetransaction. The clistricr thenleases that property back underan annually terminable agree.ment. Money raised frorn the saleis used to improve the leasedproperty, as well as other prop.erty the district owns. Theinvestor gets principal and inter.est payments." (Sor.rrce: "Finance:Making Decisions About Fund,ing School Facilities," EducationCornmission of the States, 2000.On ECS website: www.ecs.org.)

PRESERVATIoN BooKs


5/35

Assumption:Older school buildingsfail to meet nationalguidelines for schoolfacilities.Reality:Standards for school facilities areset by the education agency ofeach state, not by any federalagency. But state agencies willoften rely on national sources,including those frorn the privatesector, to help them developtheir own regulations.The Council of EducationalFacilities Planners, Intemational(CEFPI), a nonprofit membershiporganization in Scottsdale, Ariz.,has emerged as the main nationalsource of inforrnation on schoolplanning. In publications such asits popular Guide for Plnnnngdu.cationol Facilities, the group speci'fies what it considers to be theideal leaming environment for ele-mentry middle, and secondaryschools, regarding enrollmentnumbers, building and lot size,classroom size, and floor plans.CEFPI began compiling infor'matior on school planning inthe 1930s, after its founding inlgZl as the National Council onSchool House Construction. Itsguidelines, derived from researchon space utilization as well as theexperiences of its metnbers, werefirst published in 1953 and havebeen revised seven times sincethen, most recently in 1991.Many state education agenciesnow use these guidelines as thebasis for their own regulations onschool facilities. And localschool districts look to the guide,lines in developing their plans.It must be noted that thedevelopment and increasinglywiclespread use of the CEFPIguidelines coincides with a boomin new school construction, espe'cially in the Southwest whereCEFPI is headquarterecl. Allies of

older schools find that tl"re guide-lines are far better suited for thedesign and construction of newbuildings than for the renovationof older ones. For example,accorcling to CEFPI's guidelines,a high school should have 30acres of land plus one additionalacre for every 100 students. Thatmeans that a school with 1,000students would require 40 acres.But there are tens of thousands ofschools across the country-espe-cially in urban and suburbanareas-that can't possibly meetthese guidelines and yet haveproven track-records of servingstudents' educational needs well.

Standards for scboolfacilities a.re set by tbeeducation agency ofeacb state, not b? anJ)federal a.gency.CEFPI recognizes this prob'lern. According to Tom Kube,the executive director: "Somestates require their school dis.tricts to use the space and landutilization guidelines in ourguide. But in some urban areasthey can't because they can'tmeet the acreage requiretnents.So we're looking at how we canrnodify those for urban areaswhere the acreage isn't available."While it is wise for state agen.

cies to take CEFPI recornmenda'tions into account when draftingstate regulations, they may do adisservice to citizens when theytum these recommendations intorigid requirements. Just as CEFPIis in the process of modifuing itsown guidelines to be more sym'pathetic to schools in ulban set-tings, so state eclucation agenciesand local school districts shouldbe prepared to exercise judgmentand common sense to adapt orrnodifi, their own requirementson a case-by-case basis.

Assumption:Older school buildinghave numefous practdrawbacks that cannbe realistically over-come, such as thoseinvolving...Code compliance: Olderings may not meet current feor state standards for buildinfire safety; seismic safety; remor rnanagement of hazards sasbestos or lead paint; or coance with the AmericansDisabiiities Act (ADA).Changing technology nTo give students acceadvanced technology, tschool buildings must havquate power sources' wirincables, and the "head room"tralized managernent locatisupport computet netwinternet and cable teleaccess, and securiry systems.Changing educationaltices that require moreand flexible spaces than arally found in older builThese include "school-witschool" programsi team.teathat calls for larger classrspecial education classetutorials that call for sones; or more and better slabs, computer centers, andspaces for hands-on or indivized leaming.Desire for features thaimprove energy efficiencease maintenance. Exainclude such items asadvanced heating and airtioning systems, or double.windows with easy-carminum frames.Desire for other enhments and improvementsas a full-service cafeteria, acenter and expanded pfields, or more parking spa

PRESERVATION B


6/35

Reality:Again and again, preservation-savvy architects, building engi.neers, procluct suppliers, andothers have dernonstrated howmany of these practical problernscan be solved through well.planned renovatiols, adclitions,or code variances.Larry D. \illiarns, architectwith the Denver Public Schools,states: " e can replace mechan-ical and electrical systems. ' ecan go into a building and teareverything out ancl put new col't-struction in. \e can repair orupgrade or replace the deterio-rated elements of the buildingand we can upgrade the utilitiesthat are just not up to currentstandards, such as venrilationand electrical services and tech.nology wiring. New systerns canbe applied to existing buildingswithout very much trouble."Architects James A. Beaudinand Jeffrey A. Sells concur intheir article "Hidden Opportuni.ties" (Americn School E Uniq,rcr-sicy, August 1998): "lt is easy topaint walls, fix ceilings, add newlighting-essentially making oldspaces look new. However, it isthe not-so-obvious opportunitiesthat result from strategic deci-sions to preserve, enhance andtransform, which provide rhegreatest benefits of renovation...[R]enovation often can result indramatic, inspiring spaces thatrnight not be economically feasi.ble in new corsffuctior."'When necessary existing spacesabove ceilings, behind walls, orbelow floors can be accessed tomake room to run new wiring,pipes, or ductwork. Some exist,ing materials can be replaced orcovered over by fire-resisriveones to improve fire ratings. Orcode variances can be workedout. For example, the addition ofa building sprinkler systern might

increase the fire rating of thebuilding so that it will complywith current codes.A well-designed addition cannot only expand building capac.ity, and add desired new features,but also correct deficiencies. Forexample, the addition rnighrinclude new stairwells placed arthe end of existing dead.end cor.ridors to meet exiting require-ments, plus entrance ramps,elevators, and toilet rooms thatare ADA cornpliant.And so on.The point is, rnany practicalproblems may also have practicalsolutions. Unfortunately, schooldistricts may not seek out designprofessionals with the experienceand expertise needed to developthese solutions.Additionally, it should be notedthat the advanced technologycited as the enerny of older build-ings can also be a friend.Advanced technology is, almostby definition, technology that willkeep advancing. For example withimprovements in wireless connec-tions for LANs and the intemet,wiring rnay no longer be the con.cem it is right now. In Chicagopublic schools, for example, corn.puter networking, intemet access,and security systems are all man-aged with wireles connections. Inour environment of rapid change,some of today's technical prob.lerns could be solved by nextyear----or even next week.Assumption:A new school will bea source of pride andaffirmation for studentsand teachers.Reality:Students and teachers certainlywill benefit from an improvededucational environment that ismore attractive and functionalthan an inefficient, deteriorating

one. But that is so whether rheimprovements come from con.structior of a new building orrenovation of an older one.But continued use ofan exist.ing building rnay offer sornethingthat a new building cannot-anongoing tradition that connectsstudents and others to the com.munity's past. Students at a newschool start writing that school'sstory frorn scratch. Students inan older building join in a con.tinuing story that can enrichtheir experience in subtle but sig-nificant ways,They're sure ro know whichfamous or influential peopleonce attended "their" school-frorn pro athletes and movie starsto business rnoguls and govern.ment leaders. These "localheroes" may even return to theschool from time to time to show

Asaft of afraetri ,2.5bllllon efort to tmprcue allCbkago publfc scbools, tbeonce abandonedJobn B, DrakeScbool (aboue) u)as renauatedto become an etgbtb-gradeZ,ans-ltion Centen The 1907George S. Pullman Scbool(below), a Natlonal Rqterbutldtng, rccelued a 83.1mt I lott ex terlor res to ratl ontbat tncluded precise color-matcblngof tbe cmtury old,nortAf And festoratlOn Oftbe 336 woodframewlndouts. See page 27.

- I'bolos b Anlbon), Ma),Pb o tograph)', co u r esof Bauer L.,tou Studlo

PRESERVATION BOOKS


7/35

Tuming a Disadvantage into an Advantage(^\chools are in use nine months out of the year. And most con-)rt*"tion projects obviously can't be completed during the threesummer rnonths. Scheduling a school renovation project can betricky. During a school renovation project in Boston for example'cont;actors had to work from 3:00 to 11:00 p'm' and use specialequipment to keep the brick dust down.

Sme schools have come up with other creative solutions to han'dle the disruption. \hen the St. Dominic School in Saskatoon'Saskatchewan, undertook a yearlong renovation/addition projectwhile the K.8 school continued in use, the architect and adminis-trators tumed the disruption into a leaming xperience. studentsand staffwere kept informed of all the details, and took part in sPe-cial events such as a kick-off ceremon pizza lunch with the work-ers, lay-a.brick day, and a wind'up bar-b'q' Ongoing activitiesincluded ,,student foreman of the weeki' supervised tours of work inprogress; creation of a tile mural by students, staff, and others; andp.ou.tio., of a video by the visual ans class' Architect David C'd*".d, recalls: "For many of the staff and students, this would betruly a once in a lifetime opportunity to experience and participatein a major construction project.'.Norrnal construction happenings'such as pouring a floor slab and raising the roof, became specia.u..rr, "rd landmark days...This school existed and came togethein the hearts and minds of those that participated and will continueto exist as a common bond long after everyone has gone their separate ways in the world." (Source: "Tuming a Disadvantage into anAdvantage," David C. Fdwards, CEFPI ErcationolF acilities PlanLrVol. 31, no. l, Jan.-Feb. 1993.)-

Pboto courtesT, o Dautd C. Edwarcls,Edwards Edwards Arcbltts

their appreciation and suPPort.Sometimes the school iselfboasts a proud history. For exam-ple, many of the schools thatserved Afr ican-Americans beforedesegregation played a vital rolein their neighborhoods as Politi-cal and social gathering Pointsand as the training grounds forfuture leaders.

And in many cases, the schoolbuilding itself may be significant,representing a fine architecturalachievement or an aPPealingstyle that would not, or couldnot, be produced todaY.

Assumption:A new school buildingwill be an asset to itscommunity and region.Reality:Existing schools altea sewevaluable functions in their com'munities-and can do so evenbetter if they are regularlY main'tained and improved.The older school often serves asa communiry anchor and land'mark. It is a prorninent social andcivic gathering place-not onlYfor students and school ernployees,but also for parents, neighbors,and other communiry members.For students, it is a Place totake part in interest clubs, athlet'

ics, one-on-one advice swith teachers or other conadults. Sometimes the scthe students'only source fservices such as health cachological counseling, dor regular meals. These ofplus countless daily interwith peers and professhelp give students a sbelonging to a comlnunithe knowledge that peoPresources exist to help thewith problems.And for parents and cniry members, the schoolter for civic life. It is theattend public meetingsvote. [t is the local emshelter. It is where Pare

PRESERVATION


8/35

others join together to organizeand attend PTA activities, blooddrives, community theater perfor.mances, athletic tournarnents,and fund-raising holiday fairs. Kidsof all ages and parents with youngchildren take over playgroundsand athletic fields whenever theyare not in formal use. Other adultshead to the school building onevenings and weekends for inter.est classes in everything fromNature Photography to English asa Second Language to CPR.Of course, living close to theneighborhood school makes allof this easier for children, par.ents, and others. Plus, when chil.dren can walk to school wirhtheir friends, past the homes ofneighbors, it brings them notonly comfort but a measure ofsafety. It's no wonder, then, thatcurrent and porential residentsconsider a "school in walkingdistance," or at least nearb tobe a highly desirable amenity,likely to stabilize and enhancetheir property values.By contrast, when the neigh-borhood school is abandoned fora mega-school built on the out.skirts of town, student involve-ment and community life cansuffer. Constance Beaumont,director of state and local policyat the National Ti"ust and a spe-cialist on issues of sprawl devel-opment, sums up the problems:"The construction of newschools on'sprawl sites'-i.e.,isolated, peripheral sites norwell-inregrated into commu-nities----can make it more dif.

ficult to build a sense ofcommunity. Moreover, such'sprawl locations' often addto transportation costs that,in tum, put heavy financialpressures on farnilies andgovemments alike. Becausethe sprawl sites are generallyinaccessible except by car orbus, time-pressed parents

must act as chauffeurs fortheir children, who can nolonger walk to school. Tensfrom less wealthy farniliesmust often work long hoursafter school to pay for thecars now necessary for theirindependence. This, in tum,takes time away from home.work and physical exercise."These costs and drawbacksshould be taken into account bydecision makers.Students who must race forthe bus each afternoon havefewer opportunities for extracur-ricular activities and infornalinteractions that cernent socialbonds. Parents and others, espe-

cially those without cars, are alsocut offfrom aspects ofschool andcommunity li.In the meantime, if the former"neighborhood" school has beenabandoned, it can become ablight on its community. Avacant and neglected schoolbuilding can quickly become adraw for vandals and trash; ahideout for criminal activities; ora dangerous attraction for curi.ous young explorers. If the schoolis razed, there may be a gapinghole in the fabric of the neigh.borhood for years to come.New Perspectiveson Older SchoolsNot every older school buildingcan, realisticall be kept in con-tinued use-but many can andshould be School officials willnot be able to make decisionswisely until they can look pastassumptions that "old" meansflawed or substandard, and insreadmake informed decisions basedon the merits and condition ofeach building.To summarize, in many casesthe problem with an older schoolbuilding is nor that it is old, butthat it has been inadequarely

rnaintained and is under.appreci-ated. An older building thar hasbeen conscientiously maintained,or appropriately renovated, cancontinue to offer years of use to itscomrnunity. Renovation of anexisting building, rarher than con-struction of a new one, may also becost-effective-and it certainlydemonstrates better stewardship ofa community's existing resources.What's more, older schoolbuildings can offer aesrheric,prctical, and comrnunity bene-fits that outweigh certain draw-backs. Students, teachers, schooladministrators, and communitymembers can be educated toappreciate this and to take pridein having withir rheir neighbor.hood a significant structure anduseful public resource.lhile older buildings rnayhave some pracrical disadvan.tages, there are countless exam.ples of communities across thecountry that have overcome theseobstacles by employing creativeproblem-solving and expert help.Unfortunately, as long as state andlocal funding policies encourageconstruction of new buildingsrather than appropriate mainte-nance and renovation ofolder ones,school disnicts will not be moti-vated to explore these solutions.How Is the DecisionMade to Close or toKeep an Older School?The decision to close a schoolbuilding or keep it open is almostalways made at the local level bythe local school board or educa-tion agency. And so, the deci-sion-making process varies fromplace to place. But certain con-siderations almost always apply.First of all, those who decidethe fate of school buildings arenot usually concerned about pre-serving historic resources. Theirprirnary considerations center on

PRESERVATION BOOKS


9/35

School Location and Urban SPrawlThe follawinginformation, from areurt on school si selec'non in South Carohna, sounds awuningcrl for communitiesthroughout the nation:Ff-here is strong reason to believe that the placement ofI school, contributes to urban sprawl, and there are atleast five explanations for how new schools, regularlylocated at the edge of existing development, trigger thisphenomenon. First, real estate developers who give theland to school districts to help sell houses often selectschool sites. These sites frequently are at distant locations,are undesirable for construction, and are oddly configured.Second, often new schools it'rtroduce infrastructure toa rural or undeveloped area for the first time making iteasy for residential and commercial developrnent projectsto follow. By placing the school there, infrastructure likewater and sewer is provided to a location where it was notneeded nor expected. The result is that otherwise ruralland that would not have developed is transformed andsuddenly desirable for developrneut.Third, new schools attract residents and thus can re-characterize an area; unexpected booms in developmentmay occur in an area where a new school is located.Fourth, a to\.vn can easily annex a school located on itsoutskirts, and this in tum can facilitate development ofan area contiguous to the school that otherwise shouldnot be urbanized. Under South Carolina law, a town canannex a school without much obstruction becauseschools have no assesed property value' Once a townannexes a school, it is then easy for a contiguous lndowner-lissatisfied with restrictions on developmentthat he may encounter from the county-to join thernunicipaliry. Thus, a landowner can attempt to circum'vent rural development restrictions.Finally, the design criteria of schools thetnselves con-tribute to sprawl. These criteria regularly include hugespace requirements that force schools to go to the edge oftown. Thus, schools are usually located in a way that per-peruate the sprawl model....The reason for these troubling trends is the discon'nect berween the school site selection process and landuse planning considerations. School officials and plan'ning agencies work independently of one another' andopportunities for the best school sites are often lost.Fmn "Vait fot tl Bus: Hou Intxarnrry School Si &lec1tn and DestgnDeter \alking School and Conm'bu to Utfun Syawl," A Repott Pte'parcd fo' e SouJr Carolina Csnl Consuaion lqtte; ChrtohcrKouri; 1r Sanfudlnstitute of Publtc Policy, Duke Uniumity; Nouem-br 1999.

whether or not the buildings canrneet students' educational needsand do so in a way that is safe,cost-effective, and in adherencewith state and national standardsand comrnunity expectations.

School officials often rely onstate and local studies for theirlong-term planning. For example,demographic studies forecast ifschool-age populations withinspecific areas will shrink or growover time. School boards will alsouse these studies to see if they'llneed to shift school boundariesor relocate facilities to achieve ormaintain racial balance.School facilities surveys, con-ducted periodically by school dis-tricts, are also used to plan whichbuildings should be retained andupgraded as needed, and whichshould be abandoned. These sur.veys, augmentecl with blueprintsand other docutnents, describethe buildings' age and generalcondition, and rate factors such asspace utilization; variery/qualityof facilities; condition of struc-tural materials such as windows,ceilings, floors, and roofs; andcondition/adequacy of mechani-cal systems. Of course, olderschools that have suffered yearsof neglect are rnore likely tocorne out poorly in these ratings.Standards for building assess.ment surveys and methods forconducting them vary widelyfrom state to state. Daniel Carey,director of the National TiustSouthwest Regional Office notes:"The variety and cornplexity of'report cards'for buildings is bothastounding and disturbing." Sur-veys may be conducted by schoolarchitects and facilities engineerswho are biased against savingolder buildings, or by those withminirnal professional expertise.Survey findings are often subjec.tive. Information may berecorded on complex forms andin unwieldy formats that only

specialists can access and unstand. And so, "[t]he peoplemake decisions (school bofficials, for exarnple) ebecorne so confused or ablindly depenclent on the iers' recornmendations thatdecisions for rnaking repments are often a fait accomState funding policies arecritical. As mentioned bemany states provide signiffunding for new constructionfor renovations, and little or for ongoing maintenance. Mtalks. In these states, it omakes rnore financial sensschool districts to abandoolder building in favor of bing a new one.\7hile all public school bings must comply with festandards for safety and accbility, rnany states add furegulations and restricbeyond the federal ones. Onarily, state education agewill only provide fundinbuild or upgrade schoolsmeet the state standardsexample, some states wilprovide aid for schoolswooden construction, ornulti-story buildings useyounger age groups. Otherregulations are derived fromguidelines proposed byCEFPI (described earlieother national groups. Wstates turn these suggestionstheir own inflexible reqments, that rnay doom otheviable school buildings.How Can CommunityMembers Get InvolvecWhile parents, communityciations, and/or preservationay cone to the defenseschool after the decisioalready been made to clothey are rarely if ever consbeforehand. In fact, schoo

PRESERVATION BO


10/35

tricts clon't usually have a mech.anisrn for seeking such input.Cornrnunity members who wantto have a greater voice in theprocess should get involvedearly-ideally well before a crisiserupts. While it is typical, andeasier, to organize in support ofaspecific school, you may have aneven greater impact by taking adistrictwide approach.Find out which local goven.ment bodies rnake the decisionsabout school closures in your dis.trict, what procedures they follow,and which state and local policiesand guidelines affect their deci.sions. For exarnple, it is irnportantto know if your school district con.clucts regular facilities surveys, andhow those are used in lor-rg.tennplanning. If one or several olderschools have been taggecl as "rec.omrnended for abanclonment,"there rnay still be plenry of time robuild early comrnunity supporrand to counter the decision by sub.rnitting expert testimony frornarchitects, engineers, or othersexperienced in working widr olderbuildings. Even better, cornrnunityrnembers can press school boardsto include preservationists anclother qualified mernbers of thepublic in the initial building toursand evaluation process.Several preservation organiza.tions have hacl success by con.ducting their own surveys ofschool buildings wirhin their clis.tricts, prioritizing those buildingsmost worthy of protection, andadvocating for such protecrionwith local and state agencies.Resources listed on page 30,3 Ican help community groupsgarher rhe kind of informarionthey'll need to have a grearervoice in school closure decisions.And the following "success sto.ries" show what can be done.

Citizens Save TheirNeighborhood SchoolsAtcltson Mtddle S cltool,Atchlson, Ka.ns.Atchison, Kans., a town of about10,0@ on the Missouri River withrnany 19th century hornes, srilloffers srnall-town charrn. But thecharacter of the town is changing.In 1994, the school districtclosed five older neighborhoodelementary schools and beganbussing students to a large, newconsolidated school at rhe edgeof town. A 1970s high schooland a vocational-technicalschool are within a block of thenew elementary school. JoanAdam recalls: "Sorne of usobjected to building a new schoolat the time, but there was a well-rnanagecl carnpaign for it and theproposal was popular, so no realopposition took hold."Then, starting around 1998,the local newspaper began men.tioning the school board's long-terrn plans to abandon theArchison Middle School (AMS)in town (oLiginally built as a highschool in 1908), turn the currenrhigh school into a middle school,ancl build a new high school inthe sarne out-otown area.This time, citizens like JoanAdarn were not going to just sitby and let it happen. Aclarn,chair of the Atchison Preserva.tion Alliance ancl a rnernber ofthe National Tiust Board ofAdvisors, was one of those con.cerned about keeping the town'solder buildings in use and its

downtown vibrant. Others sawthe proposal as too costly,inevitably leading ro higher raxes,and financially irresponsible,especially while the town was srillpaying off its bonds for the ele.mentary scl"rool and for a new jail.

A handftrl of citizens beganmeeting privately. They alsomacle several presentations beforethe school boarcl encouraging itto keep the currenr scl'rools intheir present use. But in October1999, the school board proposeda $27 rnillion bond issue, ro go roa public vore in April, which wasprirnarily devoted to building anew high school and renovaringthe current high school for use asa rniddle school.The core group of citizensformed an organization calledthe 3Rs-Residents for RationalRenovation-to come out pub.licly against the proposal. In itsfirst press release, the groupexplainecl that it hacl presentedalternatives to new collstructionto the school boarcl and nowwanted to make that inforrnationavailable to the public.Mernbers of the group visitedother schools that had been ren.ovated successfully and issuedmore press releases describingthese as useful rnodels for Atchi.son. The group also applied forand received a $3,000 grant fromthe National Tiust's PreservarionServices Fund to hire an architectto study the feasibility ofrenova.tions over new construction.Frorn that point on, rnuch ofthe battle between rhose for andagainst the bond issue took placein the rnedia. Supporrers of the

Ftae nelgbborbood elementaryscbools ln Atcbkot4 IQns.,haae already been rcplacedby a consolldated scbool.Closure of tbe Atcbtson MlddleScbool, a prominent dountownb ullding uou I d fu rt b er burtthe communi\l.

- Pholo courte' ofAtchisOn Dlly Globc

PRESDIVATION BOOKS


11/35

school boarcl "were very wellorganized and seemed to have abottornless pit of money," Adamsays. That faction organized as"Citizens for Kids." Representa-tives from both sides flooded theAtchison Dai Globe with lettersto the editor and wrote opinioncolurnns for its editorial page. Thelocal radio station also hosted anon-air forum on the issue.Adarn adds: "We were fortu-nate that the newspaper handledthe issue fairly. I would advise[others engaged in a sinilar con-flict] to go to their local editorsearly on to talk about the issue,tell their side, and attelnpt to getthe rneclia's support, or at least apromise of fairness."The 3Rs took every opportu-nity to challenge public state-rnents by the opposition ar"rd totake advantage of its rnistakes.For example, literature by Citi-zens for Kicls claimed that thebond issue was rnodest, addingan average of less than $10 perlnonth to property taxes. The3Rs answered with data showinghow this amount would burdensenior citizens and others onfixed incomes, in a town where43 percents of residents hadannual household incomes ofunder $30,000.Other exarnples: Supporters ofthe bond issue encouraged vot-ers to approve it by telling thernthat the state would subsidizeabout one-third of the cost ofnew school construction. It wasup to the 3Rs to point out that asimilar state subsidy was avail-able for renovations.In addition, the newspaperhad asked both groups to providelists of their contributors and theamounts given. The 3Rs-whichhad mainly received clonations ofabout $25 to $100 from local cit-izens-submitted this informa-tion right away. \7hen Citizensfor Kids balked, the 3Rs wrote a

newspaper colurnn questioningwhy. Could ir be that the groupwas funded by people with afinancial interest in the new con-stfuction, including people whodid not pay taxes in Atchison?The school boarcl had regu-larly cited a previous study thatclairned Atchison Middle Schooldid not meet current fire safetyand ADA standards, and thatneeded renovations would cost$8.454 million. But the newstudy the 3Rs commissionedfound: "These issues can beresolved at liftle cost. Improve-ments woulcl include a new ele-vator, enclosing the existing

stairways with fire rated construc-tion and creating areas ofevacua-tion assistance." That reportestimated that reuovation ofAMS and the high school wouldcost a total of $12.435 million($6.635 rnillion and $5.8 millionrespectively). The resulting news-pper article announced, "AMSrehab would save millions."The 3Rs also reminded votersthat the school boarcl had rnadeno plans for the future use ofAMS, and that it had a poortrack record of looking after itssurplus buildings. Three of thefive elementary schools aban-doned for the new elementaryschool rernained ernpty. \henone of these was demolished dur-ing the campaign for the bondissue, it unleashed an emotionalresponse from those who did notwant to see another of the town'sgrand old school builclings razedor left to deteriorate.

In the final days before theelection, yard signs sprung uparound town for both sides.Unlike their opponents', theyard signs of the 3Rs were home-made, reinforcing the point thatthey were ordinary citizens fight,ing against a well-funded, well-organized block backed by theschool systern. Adarn adds: "By

this time we realized pwanted to be 'for' somerather than against, so weon our signs and in our letteslogan: 'For a better soluvote no."tOn Tuesclay, April 4,sorne 3,500 people-53 peof registered voters-showeat the polls-a remarturnout considering thabond issue was the only itethe ballot. The bond issudefeated by an 85 perceut vThe school board is now encouraged to fonn a newmittee to make plans to renthe two schools, followinwishes of the electorate. A

sees this as a chance to mfundamental change in thethe school board does bus"This tirne, we want tocommunity-wide meetingfocus groups, so that thesions will be made frorgrouncl up, not frorn thdown as they were before.""So it's far from over," sheclucles, "but at least we wgood round."George'Wtts ElernenScbool, Durbam, N.CThe follwng is adaPd froaracle " Rmottating o Hrnricfor Continued School Use nC ar oltna A C onnnnity Chaby Jeff Caiola, which aPeaNorth Caolina Preservatio108, Stmtmer 1998), a Wblof P res uaaon N ar rh C ar oliwOpened in 1919, the GWatts Elernentary Schoololdest school building in DuN.C., still serving its originapose. The school, now possits best condition ever, rprovides a place of educatlnore thn 500 students andtinues to serve as an attrand significant resource fcommunity. The rescue andbilitation of the George

PRESEIVATION I}O


12/35

School frorn almost certain demo.lition are an inspiration to allcommunities faced with losing acommunity school.\Uhen North Carolina'sDepartment of Public Instruction(DPI) revealed its intention toclose the school, the local corn.rnunit which valued the build,ing as a local landrnark, organizedto save it. To preserve the school,community rnembers had to edu-cate themselves on the policiesand guidelines required in reno-vating/building a school, organizetheir resources and manpower,and demand that their view beheard. Throughout the process,the Watts School comrnuniryhad to continually offer innova-tive ideas and solutions tocounter DPI's persistent dernandsthat any renovations and newconstruction be done accordingto North Carolina Public SchoolsFacility Standards.In a 1989 report to theDurham City Board of Educa.tion, DPI's opposition to reno-vating older urban schools wasrnade very clear. The report con-cluded that there should be "dis-continued use of this site for anelernentary school" because irfailed to meet the following statefacility standards: Minimum enrolhnent for anelementary school is to be 450students to offer the mosr efi.cient use of space and person.nel at a reasonable cost perstudent. (At the rime Wartsenrolled 360 children.) Minimum size for elementaryschools should be 10 acres plusI acre for every 100 children.(At the latts School, with aminimum ol 450 stuclents, aminimum of 14.5 acres wouldbe requirecl. The existingschool is on 3.99 acles.)

The minirnurn recornmendedbuilding area for an elemen-tary school is 145 gross squarefeet persrudent. (Watts School,with a rninirnurn of 450 stu-dents, would need a minimumo( 65,250 gross square feet.Before the renovation, \Wattshad 35,130 gross square feet.)o The Floor of Exit DischargeIssue concerns where in abuilding certain grade levels(and the extracurricular spacesthey use most frequently)should be located so that chil,dren may be evacuatecl from adangerous situation as effi-ciently and quickly as possible.For example, kindergartens andfirst grades should have class-rooms and most extracurricularspaces on the first floor. (At rheWatts School, the rnedia cen-ter and colnputer room werelocated on the second floors;preferably they should havebeen on a first floor.). Handicapped access requiresramps and elevators in build-ings two stories or taller. (Atthe \atts School, there wereas nany as four floors and noelevator or access ramp.)

o The size of a classroom and thefacilities available within roornsare specified. (For exarnple, sug-gested classroom size for L3grades is 1,000-1,200 squarefeet; rninirnum ceiling heightsare 1010"; and a wet instruc-tional area is required. \attsSchool's classrooms werc all toosrnall, and many lacked addi-tional features like a wet area.)o The building must meet firesafety codes. (At the WattsSchool, most stairwells did notmeet code, nor did most win-dows, doors, walls, or ceilings.) A sufficient number of parkingspaces is required: one space perclassroom and one space peradministative office. (lf reno-vated, the latts School wouldneed additional parking.)o Kindergartens should have aseparate play area, preferablyfencecl in. (At the WatrsSchool the kindergartens didnot have a separate play area.)Local scl'rool boarcls cornrnonlynaintain that they are cornpelledto replace olcler urban schoolsthat clo not meet DPI smndards.These guidelines make it nearly

Acompable addffiomdesfgd bt Durbam arcbltectG. Mutard Bel, brcughtneeded lmproaements to tbe19 19 Georye wa t ts ElementarySchool.

- Pboto corile, of c-Ed.oln B|LIRD ,dThe Roberts Grcup

PIESEIVATION BOOKS


13/35

irnpossible for any urban schoolto cornply. However, local corn-munities and even local schoolboarcls often overlook the factthat the guidelines are just that-guidelines that are not bindingon local boards. The recognitionby the \atts School communitythat ultirnate power rested withDurham City Board of Educationbecame a key factor in the schoolbeing saved and renovated.With a strong sense of pur-pose, the communitY organized agame plan to persuade the schoolboard to save the school. Thecommunity led the campaign topass a school bond referendum in1991, which would earmark $2.9million for the enovation of theGeorge Watts School. After itpassed, the board began a feasi-bility study on ways to keep theschool building iu use.In Aptil 1992, the school boardapproved a proposal from parents,teachers, and neighborhood repre-sentatives to establish a commit'tee to review school renovatiouoptions. In less than a month, thecommittee utilized the expertisewithin their local community(architects, engineers, writers, andothers) to develop new figures andplans for the school.The school board's feasibilirystudy was completed just twoweeks prior to the committeefindings, and it estirnated the costar $4.3 nillion to renovate theschool for 300 students. The com'mittee findings projected the ren'ovation to cost $3.6 million for anexpanded school accommodating400 students. The cornmittee'sestimated cost of $65 per squarefoot was less than the $99 persquare foot proposed by schoolboard's consultant or the $120 persquare foot that the state had pro'posed to build a new school.In the end, the Durham CityBoard of Education received andaccepted a bid of $4 million to

renovate and expand the existingbuilding to accommodate 450students. Under the gr.ridance of aconsulting architect hired for hisexpertise and exPerience inworking with historic buildings,the architects developed innova.tive renovations and an architec-turally attractive and functionaladdition to bring the school inline with state guidelines.The new addition increasedthe gross square footage to 66,130(above the required minimum:65,250) to accommodate a totalof 450 students-DPl's minimumenrolhnent for an elernentaryschool. The addition included arnedia center and computerrooms. A new handicapped rarnpwas located in front of the addition to provide first-floor exit dis.charge-lespite the fact that theramp was attached to the "secondstory." An elevator was installedin the new addition that hadaccess to all floors. (This plan wasaccepted by DPI's Division onSchool Planniru.) Because of thecreative design of the addition,the playground area, which wasalready smaller than DPI's regula'tions, was only rninirnally reducecl.More parking was addecl outsicle.In the existing building, class'room size was enlarged by shrink'ing the hallways and consolidatingexisting classrooms to rnakelarger rooms. Existing walls werestripped down to the brick towaterproof and fireproof. Newwindows, doors, and ceilings, allin compliance with current firesafety regulations, were installed.Bathrooms, wet areas, andteacher roorns were added toclassrooms to meet facility stan'dards. The exits on the rear ofthe school were lowered by half afloor to give the school first floorexit discharge in the rear.With the demolition of aboiler roorn in the rear of theoriginal building (replaced by a

new boiler room in the addthe original undersizeequippecl cafeteria couexpanded in the rear and aing dock added. A fencseparate play area was alsostructed for kindergartners inewly opened area.The building containedsmall amount of asbestos, scost of removal was only $1(Of course, proper asremoval would have beensary even ifthe building haddemolished.)And so, through perseveingenuity, at'td comtnunitYeffort, the George \atts Eltary School was saved' Dskepticism frorn DPI, all thewas cornpleted at a price elent to or cheaper than builcomparable new schoo\7atts School project nowprecedent for other commthat need to challenge stateities stanclards in order totheir neighborhoocl school.Citywide Effort UsesStudents as AdvocateDenaer Publtc SchoHlstortc PreseratloProJectTl fo\odng an obbreviason of the Presentnton giSaralr McCtlq at theNauonl Preser v aaon C onfu\Xlashingra'n, D. C. McCardryos resuuadon cortsuhmtt foorado Prcsereation, Inc., mdo/ ir AIJ Schools Coloraa PrI am here to tell you thaorado preservationists areing that saving public schschools can make sense: aically, educationall aunornically.In 1991, the citizens of Dpassed a bond package fovations and additions to eschools. But in the fimonths, four schools were

PRESERVATION [J


14/35

for demolition that the schoolboard, conveniently, had nevermentioned in its propaganda.The neighbors around thoseschools came to preservationorganizations and said, "Can youhelp? We don'r wanr ro losethese beautiful, old schools."The preservation communityapproached the school disnictand said, "You own a number ofvery wonderful schools-archi-tecturally and historically signifi.cant buildings-and we wouldlike to work with you ro preservesorne of your most significantbuildings. \ould you be willingto work with us?" And to our sur-prise and extreme pleasure, theysaid, "Yes, we would love yourinput. le don't know which ofour buildings are significant andwe don't have the money tofocus or save every school."And so began our process alongrwo paths. One was rhe crisis modefor the four schools rhar wereslated for demolition. [Ultimatelyrwo were demolished but rwo oth-ers were saved. One building con-tinued to be used as a publicschool, and the other, after receiv-ing historic desation, was soldand converted to condominiums.]At the same time, we developedan ongoing process to protectDenver's older school buildings.le asked: How are we going tosave as many schools as possible?How are we going to involve thestuden6? How are we going toestablish an ongoing relationshipbenreen the preservation commu-nity and the school district?The firsr thing that was donewas to form a task force of stake.holders. The task force includedmembers of neighborhood orga-nizations, the school board, thePTA, the city's planning office,the mayor's office, the city coun.cil, the landmark commission,and the American Institute ofArchitects, as well as representa-

Recommendations from "Al1 Schools Colorado"1. Bring to the table the largest and broad.est group of stakeholders that you can

identifu. Don't forget the people in thebuildings and grounds crews and theoffice secreraries within the school dis.trict, neighborhood asociations, localpreservationists and activists, as well ascity ofcials. Having a depth of commu.nity involvement shows the schoolboard that rhe communiry really caresabout its buildings. It also dilutes the dis.trict's power within the stakeholdergroup and helps to reminds school off-cials that they are the stewards of thesebuildings on behalf of the public.2. Raise awareness of the archictural sig:nificance and fine craftsmanship of olderschool buildings. This increases the prideof students, facu administrators, andthe public at large in their schools. It tellsstudents that their education is importantand that they are important.3. Approach the project on a districtridebasis. r(/hen school disnicts have to fghtover one building at a time, they seem towin more often. By approaching this as a

broader issue, on a districtwide bis, youcan demonsnate factually what makessome buildings especially significant:architecturally, historicall or culturally.4. Take the issue out of crisis mode. Focuson the facts. This reduces the emotionalinvolvement. k also gives time for com-munity will to surface. That, in the long-term, reduces the conflict benveen theschool district and the communiry.5. beat the board members as the poliri.cians they are. Most school board mem.

bers in this country are elected offcials.They want to get re.elected. The waythey get re-elected is to get good press.Here is a way you can give them goodpreas-by giving them the chance toshow support for a popular issue.

6. Focus on the most significant buildings.This scares some preservationists, and itmay be a legitimate concem if it gives aschool disnict the sense that whateverisn't on the list of sificant buildingscan be demolished. Focusing arrenrionand resources raises the level of trustbetween the school district and thepreservation community. It shows thatyou're not trying to save everything. Andif you don't focus on the most signifcanrbuildings, the definition of what is signiicant becomes diluted.

7. Agree not to fight to save every school.And agree not to fight to save everyschool as a school. Ar All Schools Col-orado, we want to save the schools asschools, but are willing to give up thefght if preserving the school proves notto be viable. This too serves ro diminishthat myth that preservationists want tosave everyrhing.

8. Involve the kids9.lnvolve the kids

10. lnvolved the kidsThey are eloquent lobbyists. There'shardly a public oficial who can say "no"to a child, regardless of whether it's atthe local level, at the state legislature, orCongress. And what child forgets thathe or she made a public presenationbefore elected officials? This also helpsto raise little preservationists. \henthey see their school building in a newway, their eyes have been opened to seeother buildings in new ways, such asnoticing windows and arches and gablesand even cantilevered roofs.

PRESERvATIoN BooKs


15/35

$tidan of:dl48es madcpresentattons Wore tbe schoolboard landmars nanlssloqand ctty councll to defend tbenonlnatlon of tbelr scbool asa local landnark. The ProJectWvlded lessons in arcbltecturc,bistory, rcsearcb and urltinS,public sPeablng, and cTulcinuoluement.- I'bot6 b' of Rlflla tullc Cbmutetcoure, oI ll scb(ls Cokrrao

tives from the National ftust,Colorado Historical Societ andHistoric Denver (which eventu-ally facilitated these rneetings).The district facility manager wason the task force, and so weresome school district employeesincluding groundskeeping staff,maintenance stafl and officepersonnel. The League of rr)VomenVoters came to the table to mecli'ate because, at that time, therewas so little trust between thecommunity and the school dis-trict. The Modern ArchitecturePreservation League took Part,and raised the whole comnu'

nity's awareness of modern archi'tecture and its significance.This task force set the goals andobjectives for the project. One ofim first decisions was to pursuelocal designation of the architec'turally or historically significantschools. Denver's local ordinanceprovides a one-year moratoriumon dernolitions of designatedbuildings. The task force wantedthat one year to provide time toraise communiry awareness of abuilding's significance and to findout if the comtnunity reallY diclwant to preserve it.

Many meetings weredeciding which buildingsbe on the original list of scant schools. There wascliscussion becattse no twover schools were designecuntil 1953, and that rnacle ornuch harcler. Eight schoolselected to serve as pilot prThese eight were distrthroughout the city andamong eletnentary schoolsdle schools, and high schooAt the instigation of theboard members on the taskit was also clecided to invostudents ancl to use the schteaching tools. Stuclentsstudy the history of theirand its architectural sryletually, a multidisciplinarriculum was establishkindergartners up througschoolers-with suggestedplans in math, sciencestudies, histor civics, sinterviewing, and writing sThe students were asprepare a three-to-fivepresentation defending thination of their school aslandmark. These presenwere made several times,the school board to obtamission to nominate theas a landmark. The secosentatiol was made to thlandrnark commission'stuclents made a third prtions at a public hearingthe city council, becausnew locally designated brequires a new ordinancehave been as manygraders making public prtions to the city councilschoolers. More than 50ver students have participthis project, and the "lothat developed betwecouncil and the studebeen wonderful to watch.Each nornination of areceived a unanimous vo

PRSERVATION


16/35

so we didn'r srop frer ar theeight schools, but kept on norni.nating schools. When we startedthe project only one school wasclesigr-ratecl as a local lanchnark.Now two clozen schools havebeen clesignatecl. Twenty of thernwere lroposecl and defendecl bytheir own students.' here are we now? ColoradoPresewation, Inc., has taken thisconcept statewide through its newprogram known as "All SchoolsColorado." The plan is to test thevalidiry of the "Denver model" infour large and rnediurn-size schooldistricts throughout rhe srare.School districts in Coloradorange in size from 90,000 studentsto just 45 students in one county,For those srnall rural or fronriercounty school clistricts, CPI iscleveloping a technical assistanceunit. A preservation architectand other consultants will go tothe school district to identifywhich of its buildings are archi-tecturally or historically signifi.cant and which of those would beviable for reuse or continued use.'We're also creating templates,which can be used in all schooldistricts, that describe the factorsa school district rnust consider

when deterrnining the viability ofcontinued use or leuse of aschool, and that also clescribe thebarriers to reuse and l'row toresolve them. \e have iclentifieda nurnber of benefirs for Coloradoschool clistricts. For exarnple, inColorado, we are lucky-andlucky is the appropriate word-tohave State Historical Funds thatcome frorn a percentage of garn.bling revenues and that are clis.tributed by a state agency. Morethan a rnillion-ar-rd.a.half dollarsof State Historical Funds havealready gone to public schools,ancl we hope that number willincrease over tilne.Local Crises Lead toState Policy ReformPenngilantaOne of the rnost significanr vic-tories to date for Arnerica's olderschools started with a local fightin Brentwood, Pa., a subutb ofPittsburgh.In 1994, the Brentwoodschool board made plans to closetwo neighborhood elementaryschools-the 1914 Moore Schooland the 1923 Ekoy School-andreplace thern with an elementary

school wing aclcled to the town'scornbinecl rnicldle school.highschool. Tl're project, which wasbased on a consultant's recom.rnenclation, rvas estirnatecl to cost$18.2 rnillion."The people of the boroughwere up in arms about the iclea ofclosing neighborhood schoolsancl disrupting the fabric of theircornrnur-rity," reports Ronald C.Yochurn, Jr., a local residenr. Oth-ers also worried about increasecltraffic at the consolidatecl schoolsite, the addecl stresses or dangersthat elernetrtary school childrenmight face by being on the sarnelarge campus wirh older students,ancl the tax increase that would

be needed to pay for the project.A group of residents forrned"Concerned Citizens of Brent-wood Borough" to speak outagainst the proposal.Yochurn continres: "l gotinvolved because I went to one ofthe schools and I knew it was inexcellent condition for its age."At the tirne, he was assistant forpublic policy for tl"re PittsburghHistory and Landrnarks Founda.tion ("Landmarks") ancl he's nowits chief informarion officer.

ttll

WItb belp from PresentatlonhnsJthnnla and tbe PttbarybHtory and I^andmars utt-datlon, res'ldents of Brentwood,Pa., cballenge tbe state's scboolaclltttes standards to saue twonelgb b o rb o o d e Iem en taryscbools-the 1914 Moore Scbool,sboun here, and the 1923 ElrolSchool, on couex

- Pboto couilesy of Roil Yocbun

PRESERVATION BOOKS


17/35

Efforts infn the rnid-1990s, the Pittsburgh History and Land-lnarks Founclation ("Lardrnarks") gor word of a l0-year plan by the city's Board c'f Education (BOE) toclose at least nine neighborhood schools, demolishingsome. Lanchnarks sprang to actior. In April 1998,Landmarks informecl the superintendent of the Pitts-burgh Public Schools of its intention to nominatecertain schools as City Historic Structures.In October 1998, the group uorninated 38 of thecity's 90 public school builclings for local historic cles-ignation, as well as several fonner schools nou' iu pri-vate hands. Most of these buildings were alreadylisred in the National Register. While this is a testa-ment to their architectural value, it does not prohibitdemolition or exterior alterations. Local designation,by contrast, rvould provide sone real protections.Any exterior changes rvould have to be approvecl bythe city's Historic Review Cornmission or its staff.Landmarks' action-and the sheer nurnber ofbuildings nominatecl-took BOE (as well as the His-toric Review Comrnission that had to process tleapplications) by surprise. According to Elisa J. Cava-lier, general counsel for Landnarks: "School officialsweren't happy initially. They feared clelays andincreased costs for capital irnprovement projects. Butthe school board also realized the nominatiors werean honor." John Walluck, director of facilities, toldtlre Pdtsburglr Post Gazet, "The reason that thesebuildings are considered landrnarks is because thelschool] board has taken care ofthem over the years."

Through l-ris work, Yochurn wasaware of nurncrous renovatiottprojects, most involving build-ings in fal worse condition thanthe two elernentaly schools."When they saicl these buildingsweren't salvageable, I said, thisleally cloesn't souncl right [o me."Yochurn belicves that theschool board rncrnlers had beenheavily infh,rencecl by a firrn ofconsultants ancl architects wholobbied for the project: "ln oursclrool clistrict, we got wl'rat wecalled the 'dog and pony show.'The architects toured the builcl-

PittsburghSchool officials hirecl a forurer city rlanner to helpthem review ancl responcl to each nourination. Afterrveeks of study, the BOE agreed to ccept local his-toric designation for 12, but contestecl or reservedjudgurent on the others. The city's Historic ReviewCommittee recornrnendecl that l4 norniuatious goforu'arcl to tle city council for a vote.At this point, the Pittsburgh Department of CityPlanning, tl're BOE, and Lanclnarks tried to negotiatea comprornise to present to the city council. Ulti-matel they decicled that 20 schools rvoulcl be recorrr-rnended for designation, l2 would be held to designguidelines, Lrndrnarks rvoulcl place a rreservirtiotteasement containing a right of first refusal on four,and trvo schools woulcl be unencumberecl.But preservationists canre in for their ou'n surise:

The city council wanted all 38 nonrinations preseuteclfor a vote. Cavalier continues: "C-ouncil clid not acloptour proposed negotiatecl settlemelt. In fact sorne coun-cil rnernben were offendecl when schools in their clis-tricts had been cut frorn the list of norninations, andwere to be only under guidelines." On Decernber 8,1999,22 school buildings were approved for local his-toric designation, including two privately orvnecl formerschools. The other 18 rvill be corniug up for a vote soon.And in the rneantime, Cavalier reports that theBOE has begun to show an even higher regard for itsimpressive stock of historic builclings. For example,school officials willingly accepted advice frorn Land-marks and the Historic Review Commission, thenredesigned two renovation projects to make thechanges more architecturally appropriate.

ings and took picttues, then carneback wih the pictures all pastedur on boards showing crackeclconcretc, corrosion on pipes,paint flaking off. They'cl say,'Look at this. This is tenible. Thisall has to be guttecl. Wouldn't itbe better jtrst to build somethingnew?' I founcl it sort of comicalbecause I knew rnost of what theywere showing was just cosletic."LIc continues: "Then you adclpolitics into the rnix. Mostschool boarcls are nrn by peoplewho are local and tl'rey wat'rt tobe lcsponsive to coutrnunity

neecls. They don't want tlabeled as 'not spencling enon childrer-r's ec'lucation."'Members of Concerneclzens of Brentwood Boroughfiecl against the project rcpeaat school board rnectings.also hircd thcir own architecle terrninc if the elerneschools coulcl indeed be renovancl kept in use. "Every incliwas pointing to the fact thatbuilclings coulcl be restoreclstill the school board woulisten," Yochum says.

P R Ls IRvA'r- t ()N R()


18/35

"lt came down to the wire, so wesaid if you can't beat thern this way,beat them at the polls." Yochurnancl four others opposed to theplan for a consolidated school ranfor the school board as a slare.They won by 70 percent \7irhthis rnandate frorn the voters, theygot to work plaruring lenovationsof the wo elernentary schools.That's when they came uponthe next hurdle-the srareDepartrnent of Flucation's schoolconstruction reimbursement cri.teria (called the "Basic EducarionCircular'"). While the Depart-rnent of Education would reirn.burse about one.rhird of the costof new construction, its guidelinesrnade it virtually impossible forBrentwood to get any reimburse-ment for renovating its existingschools. There were two specificproblems: First, rhe state wor.rldnot reimburse a renovation proj.ect that would cost more than 60percent of the cost of new con-struction. Second, the state wouldnot reimburse the cost of renovat-ing any rnulti-story school wirhwood frarning.The Brentwood school boardwas able to get a variance for thefirst rule, but nor the second.Board mernbers saw that theyneeded to rake rheir fighr roanother level.Yochurn shared these concernswith his bos, Arthur Ziegler, pres.ident of Pitsburgh History andLandmarks Foundation. Recogniz-ing that these same rules wereaffecting the fate of older schoolsthroughout the srare, he alsoalerted Preservation Pennsylvania.Together, Landmarks andPreservation Pennsylvania beganto address the state's school con.struction reimbursement criteria.A study cornmissioned by the twogroups found rhar the educationclepartrnent's guidelines went Farbeyond local, state, and nationalbuilding codes. For exarnple, if

the Brentwood elernentary schoolwith wood frarning were ro betumed over to arother use, suchas senior housing, rhe builclingwould just need a sprinkler systemto meet fire-safety codes-burthat solution was nor allowecl bythe eclucation department. Thestudy also founcl no correlationbetween injuries sustained inschool fires and the buildings'constnlction rype.Preservation Pennsylvaniaturned its attenrion to affectingstate policy. Caroline Boyce,then the groupt executive direc-tor, described Preservation Penn-sylvania's successful srrategyduring a presentation she gave atthe 1998 National PreservationConference in Savannah.The group was already workingon a closely related concern-curbing sprawl. Boyce recalls: "lnfact, we had been dealing withphone calls over the years fromcommunities around the state[concemed] about schools beingabandoned or demolished; newschools being built on the our-skirts of town in sort of \al-Martstyle...fu rther encouraging peopleto move out to the fringes ofcommunities and abandon ourcities and towns."First Preservation Pennsylvaniaconvened a meeting of i regionaladvocacy coordinators (a fonnalnetwork of people working inorganizations with related intereststhroughout the state) to briefthernon the problem. Then it organizeda core committee to work on theissue in depth. The commirreeincluded Ziegler and Yochum, rwoarchitects with experience inschool renovation projects, a jour-nalist who advised on rnedia strat-egy, a representative frorn the statehistoric preservation office whoprovided information on endan.gered schools throughout the state,and later also an advisor frorn theNational Titst.

The cornrnittee arranged torneet with represenrarives of theGovernor's office ancl theDepartrnent of Education. "Wehad a friendly exchange, inwhich rhe Governor's office andthe Departrnent of Educationseemecl to show a genuine inter.est in our concerns," Boyce says.Yet rnany months of meetingsfailed to bring results.In rnid.June 1998, PreservationPennsylvania released its annuallist of endangered places, calledPennsylvania At Risk. This tirnethe list was devoted entirely roschools. A special reporr gave anoverview of the problem, rhendescribed or listed dozens ofschools under threat as well as afew success stories. The reportalso proposed changes ro rheDepartrnent of Education's schoolconstruction reimbursement pol.icy. Readers were urged to write rothe Department of Education insupport of those changes.Preservation Pennsylvania con.sidered taking its concerns ro rhestate legislature. Fortunately, ithad a strong ally there-DavidArgall, a state representative whochaired the Joint House and Sen.ate Conservation Committee.He, too, recognized the relation-ship between sprawl clevelopmentand loss ofneighborhood schools.Argall organized a public hear.ing to take place on June 29,1998-just about a week afterthe release of the Pennsylvaniaat Risk list. Participants includedmembers of the House and theSenate Education Committees,Preservation Pennsylvania's corecommittee, and a representativefrom the State Association ofSchool Boards, among orhers.The hearing was broadcast liveon a statewide cable network,then replayed several rimes."lt made a big difference,"Boyce says. "The newspaper cov-erage of this whole issue just

PRESERVATION BOOKS


19/35

wenr sky high. \le had editorialsin rnajor papers. There was sup-posecl to have been a secondpublic hearing but the Depart-ment of Education pulled a haltto everything, changed their rules,and they never had to go throughthe second public hearing."On July l, 1998, the Depart-rnent of Education isued a lnemoto "clarifu existing policies govem.ing requests for school construc.tion reimbursement." It stated:"School districts should take allreasonable efforts to preserve andprotect school buildings that areon or eligible for local or Nationalhistoric registers." In addidon, ifcontinued use as a school was notposible, then "school districts areencouraged to develop an adaptivereuse plan for the building thatincorporates an historic easementor covenant to avoid the building'sabandonment or demolition."Then on September 8, 1998,the Department of Education helda press conference to announcerevisions to its school construc-tion guidelines. The Secretary ofthe Department of Education, theSecretary of the Department ofEnvironmental Protection, andrepresentatives from PreservationPennsylvania and the NationalTiust all shared the spotlight.The rule against reirnbursingrenovations that would cost morethan 60 percent of new construc-tion was gone. So was the prohi-bition against reimbursement forbuildings with wood framing. "lnthe end the new language wasalmost exactly what we recotn-mended," Boyce adds.This is not an unqualified vic-tory. These changes do notensure the continued use andprotection of all historic schoolbuildings in the state. But whencommunities want to keep theirolder schools in use, they will nolonger be hindered by inflexiblestate regulations.

Back in Brentwood, Pa., theMoore School and the ElroySchool had both been renovatedcluring 1997, at a final cost of$5.8 million. In each building,some spaces were reorganized tosuit educational programs, anelevator was added, windowswere replaced, rnechanical andelectrical systems were updated,and classrooms were wired forcomputer technology.Unfortunately, because theDepartment of Education stillrequired this at the time, thewood floors in one of the schoolshad to be completely rebuilt withconcrete and steel. Yochum esti-mates that this rnay have addednearly $1 million dollars over thelife of the bond.But overall, the Concemed Cit,izens of Brentwood Borough arepleased with the outcome of theirbattle. After all, Yochum rflects,"How often does a small group ofpeople and a little school districtget to affect change on this scalel'MassaclusettsLincoln Elementary School, builtin the early 1900s as a highschool, is a centerpiece of thetown of \Tinchester, Mass., nearBoston. Its architect was a gradu-ate of the Ecole des Beaux Arts,and illustrations of the buildingwere published internationallywhen it was completed. ArchitectJamie Devol, whose childrenattended the school, knows andadmires the building and its site:"lt's really quite handsome, sitedon a knoll overlooking the towncenter. It offers amenities such aswide corridors, high ceilings, largewindows that let in an abundanceof light, natural woodwork, andcomer classrooms. In the 1930s avery nice auditorium was added aswell as a gymnasium. Both areused by community perlorrningarts and sports groups' servingchildren throughout the town."

Sited to overlook a pondthe town center, the scholinked by oper' space withtown hall and town librarating a civic center. Devol no"Retail business in 'llinchesCenter is strengthened bycenter location of several cbuildings. The Lincoln Schdraws 400 children and rnparents into the Center eschool d"y. These residepatronize local businesses sucrhe book, toy, and clothstores, and the food and coshops. Tking this high-school away frorn the town cter would have a negairnpact. Also, the location mait easy for stuclents to rnakeuse of the town's resourincluding a museuln of photophy, a ternple, churches, a dastudio, the public library, andrniddle school playing field."During the 1950s, the buildreceived some inappropriate ations and renovations. Sthen, it has suffered from a of maintenance.The town's Educational Faties Planning and Building Cmittee, an appointed body,been considering options forovating the Lincoln Schoolothers. But about a month beits final report was due,group concluded that it wbe cheaper and easier to vaLincoln Elementary, demoanother school about aaway, then build a new elemtary school on that site. Theschool would be smaller andamenities such as the sepaauditorium.The decision dismayed min the comrnunity. Residraised numerous objectionsing public hearings in the spof 1996-but the Building Cmittee would not budge. Tmay have been several ageat work.

PRESERVATION BOO


20/35

First, the Lincoln Schoolproperty was a prirne candidatefor recleveloprnert. Three otherforrner schools in town had beenconverted into conclorniniurns,and Lincoln's site was superior.The 9OO-squate-foot classroornswith comrnancling views of theponcl and torvn center woulclrnake splendicl condorniniurns.Sorne believed that the builclingitself would fare better in thehands of a private developer."Others assume that new isalways better," Devol colltirues."They rnaintainecl that to bestserve our children we needecl anew school. However, I believethat a greater gift to future gener-ations is to pteserve irreplaceabletreasures, both rnanrnade anclnatural. Dernolishing a school inorder to build a srnaller schoolwith fewer arnenities on asma[er site, with no plans for thefuture of the vacated historicschool, is culturally and environ-rnentally shortsighted."But the main argumentsagainst renovating the LincolnSchool were financial. Earlier theBuilding Cornrnittee had hiredan architect to produce renova-tion plans for Lincoln. "Thearchitectural firm's initial renova-tion plans that were used to com.pare the cost of renovatingLincoh'r to building a new schoolrelied on a large and costly adcli-tion to solve some ADA prob-lems," Devol says. "ln addition,the design gutted rnucl'r of thebuilding, including commocliousfire stairs with ornate railings ateither encl of the builcling. Costestimates for the renovationcarne in significantly higher thanthose for the new school."Even more daunting, theBuilcling Comnittee had beentold by a represertative of thestate's departrnent of educationthat state reirnbursernent wouldbe provided to builcl a nevr'

scl-lool but not to [elovate tlecurrent one. Ordinarily, thestate's school builcling assistance(SBA) program provides ac leasthalf of the funds for school con.stnrctiol projects. The arnountavailable to \flinchester, baseclon a state forrnula, would be 63percert. While there is no writ-ten policy against funcling reno-vations, SBA staffers hacl tencleclto prolnote new constructionrather than renovations.inchestert Building Corn-mittee was told by an SBA stafferthat the Lincoln School wouldnot qualifi, for state reimburse-ment because it has interiorwood frarning-even thoughthere is nothing in the stateguidelines against this.To fund constructiot of a newschool, voters would have toappro\e a tax ovenide, allowing

the town to increase real estatetaxes. A group of resiclents formed"Citizens for a Better Plan" to carn-paign against the proposal toreplace Lincoln with a new school.Firsr, they publicly questionedwhy state reirnbursement wouldnot be providecl for renovatior-r of

"Pbotograpbs of Lltc,oln Elementary School tahenfrue ormore decades ago deplct a louely, uell-malntalnedstracture bullt utttb clulc prlde," reflects lVlncbeste4 Mass., arcbltectJamle Dewl. But since thn, the scboolhas sufferedfrom unsultable alteratlons and tglect. (Hlsto/tcal pboto aboue.)

t'\f.

PIIESEIIVATION BOOKS- Pbolos courle,of the lvlncbester lrchlval Certq andJohrt C. Cletson


21/35

State Legislarion UpdateMalneThe state legislature created a new Revolving RenovationFund ro improve rhe condition of .*irtirrg r.lioos in 199g.Previously, state rnoney rvas available or.,i ,o finance newschoolconsrrucrion, *t,i.l, ,ont ft; iliu.ii, ir our-lying areas. The Maine Stare plannin; o,i:; and rheMaine Department of Educatior t,,,u""pubtirh.cl a rewbrochure, "The ABC,s of School Si," S..;;,,, rvhichencourages school districts to avoid school sprawl and toconsider renovating and/or expan.li,.,g "*irri,.,g schoolswhenever possible. . also encour.r", ,i" ,.i,,.. districtsto pick sites that allow children to walk o, Uit " io school.Maryl.andStare.guidelines say that school construction projects"should nor encourage sprawl develop,rr..,iiorJ,rou* U.consistent with the local government,s plans,, for growth,community revitalization, and preservarion. On August21, 1999, Maryland Gou.r.,o, parris N. Cnd",.,ingrestated earlier commitments ro curb urban sprawlthrough the state's funding forrnula for r.,oor."^'

VertnontThe state board of education adopted a policy in Augrrst1997 staring, among other thingr, ,ho, ,,.onrirru. ur" ofhistoric schools is consistent with Vermont,s efforts tofocus public and private investment in community cen.ters." The policy said rhar ,,renovario.rr, in"luJing ,n"o.repairs, and additions to existing school building, ihrll b.given preference over new school developnreit takinginto consideration the educational needs ofstudents andthat the costs of rehabilitation do nor unon"Ulyexceed the costs of such new development.

builclings, ar.rd rhe group laa rcsearch and advocacyaround the issue. First vocarefully reviewed the regfor rhe school building asprograrn to be certain thawas nothing in rhc law ortions that prevented rhfrom 6.rncling school renovThc grour hirecl an iltrcscarch all fr.urded schooecrs frorn fiscal yearsthrough 1992 ancl discothat rhere had been a signnurnber of renovation ancvationdclition projects incornrnunities, including rerions of olcler and historic scFinally the group reviewec

clippings and nores of townings and cornrnittee lneetittry to pur rogether a paperThis verified what they hacpected: "Dcpartrnent of Etion stafl without any batheir own regularions or Mchuserrs law, were basicallying adclitional rules."Historic Massachusettsbecorne "the place to call ifhad a problern wirh your sch\/hen sorne comrnunities cplained thar SBA staff memhacl refused to allow stare rlursement for renovations,toric Massachrsetts was able tothem in contact with other crnunities-sornetimes only a sclistance away-that had cpleted succcssfrrl renovations wstate fi.urding. I-listoric Masacsetts produced a technical repon the issue rhat was inserred innewsletrer and widely distribuarornd the state.Dyson continues: ,,J[ss wcertainly rirnes wher.r I thougwe woulcl levcr, rever get anthing changed. But whcn we weabour two years into the projcwe got into a casual convcrsatioabout school buildings atNatiorral Tiust regional mecrilin New Haven. We found o

the Lincoln School. Ultirnately Historic Massachusetts hadthe group appealed ro rhe srret been hearing frorn cornrnunitielCommissioner of Education, throughout h. ,rur. ,,u,;--r-h;who overrurned the SBA staffer's ,.r. ll i,",g ,ir. same rhing,,,decision and allowed the reirn- Margaret Dyron, th. group,s cur-burse.ment- But by then, the rentlresident, recalls. ,, 7e wertown's Building Committee and told that communities were beingothers hacl become convincecl forced to ,r.ut. ,,.i, olcler; his-that new consrrucrion woulcl still .ri. r.,ooitruilclings because thebe a better financial deal. Deparrmenr of Education wotlclCitizens for a Better. plan also ,.,ot ,"i,r,burr" for renovations.,,contacrecl Historic Massachu- In 1997, Historic Massachu-setts for help. setts's Endangerecl HistoricResources list focused on schoolI)I ESEIV,\TION BOOK


22/35

that a lot of states in the northeasrregion were having this problern."Historic Massachusetrs especiallydrew information and inspirationfrom the extensive research andadvocacy work that had beendone in Pennsylvania.A turning point came in 1999.Representatives of Historic Mass.achusetts had been making pre.sentations before the statelegislature on a regular basis,appearing whenever there was anupcoming vote on transferringpublic land or protected farmlandfor use as a new school site.Because of that, the group carneto the attention of the state'sOffice of Administration andFinance, which requesred a meet-ing. Representatives of HisroricMassachusetts have met withmembers of that office severaltimes, and also pur rhem in touchwith local groups, architects, andpreservation professionals.At their frst meeting, represen-tatives from Historic Massachwsetts had their argumenrs ready.One was that construction of newschools was taking away ineplace-able parkland and farmland.Because state regulations forbidusing state money to acquire sitesfor school construcrion, localitieswere using public parklandinstead. That raised the concem ofenvironmentalists in govemmentand throughout the srate, notablythe state's Secretary of Environ.mental Affairs, Roberr Durand.The Office of Administrationand Finance was especially con-cerned about containing thecosts ofschool construction proj-ects. Historic Massachusettsbrought in architects with reno.vation experience to describe thepotential cost savings in doingrenovations rather than newcons t ru c t ion-sorne t i mesdirectly contradicting what stafffrom the Department of Educa-tion had said. Dyson also cited

data on the economic benefim ofpreservation, explaining thateven if the renovation projectscost as much as new construc.tion, more of that rnoney stays inthe local economy, with rnoregoing to labor than to marerials."That was a very interestingafgument to them," she says.And now the dde is turning forolder schools in Massachusetrs.In July 1999, the State Com-missioner of Education issued amemo clairning he had "beenasked by several superintendents,legislators, and municipal offi.cials to explain rhe policies ofthe Departrnent's schooI buildingassistance (SBA) program regard-ing reuse and renovation ofexist-ing buildings." The memo sraresthat "our preference is to reuseand renovate existing buildingswhenever it is cost efficient andcan lneet the educational needsof the district"; and also that"renovation projects qualify forthe same reimbursements, andare subject to the same cost lim.its, as new construction." Inaddition, the memo notes thatstate guidelines on site size "arerecornmended but not required."This is significant because rownshad been told that they had toabandon older schools becausethe sites were too small to meerstate guidelines.The governor has now pro.posed revamping the schoolbuilding assistance program, lnov-ing it out of the Department ofEducation and into the state'sFacilities Managernent Division,

which includes specialists in con.struction and in environmentalplanning. Dyson reports thar"we're also hearing, just infor,mally, that the current Depart-ment of Education staff hasbecome much more flexible" inits reimbursement clecisions,Back in 'l7inchester, Mass.,the tax override needed ro fund

the new elernentary school wasdefeated in November 1996,indicating thar rhe rnajority ofvoters preferred renovating theexisting school. Following thatvote, the Building Cornmirteewas re-formed in January. Threenew members were appointedwho favored renovations of theLincoln Elementary Schoolrather than new construction.But the subcommirtee work.ing on the Lincoln School wasnot given any money to developnew, scaled-back plans for reno.vating it. They were told to usethe renovation plans that hadbeen rejected as being roo cosrly.\Torking on a pro bono basis,local architect Jamie Devol pro-duced floorplans showing severaloptions for renovating theschool. "We solved major prob-lems, notably ADA compliance,by reestablishing the originalcenrral entrance which had beenremoved in the 1950s. le savedthe stairs and the ornamentalrailings with some simple adjust-ments, and looked at creariveways to use the interior spacesmore efficiently, With theseplans, it was hard to deny thatthe building could be renovatedfor continued use as a school.Finally the town allocatedmoney to hire an architect to doformal plans and cost esrimates.This time, the cost of renovatingthe Lincoln School was esti-mated to be about rhe same asbuilding the smaller new school.Town officials decided to allo.cate $12 million to renovre theLincoln School. Again, vorershad to approve a tax ovemide tofund the project. This time, inspring 1998, it passed. Consrruc.tion is scheduled to begin inAugust 2000.Similar battles to save olderschool buildings have been wonin other Massachusetts commu-nities-including Falmouth,

PRESERVATION BOOKS


23/35

Botb peseuatlonls anmembers of tbe educatloncomrnunl A p ar lclpa ted lntb firs t s t a tewlde conferenceon bktorlc scbool bulldlngs.Tbe meetlngprculded "acbance to start a dlalogue."

Great Barrington, Mat.tapoisett, and Woburn."So we didn't have abig announcement bythe governo like theydid in Pennsylvania,"Dyson concludes, "Butthis shows what get-ting a little informa-tion in the hands ofpeople can really do."A CoordinatedStatewideResponseAlbmaBrandon Brazil,executive directorof the AlabarnaPreservationAlliance (APA),recalls how his group firstgot involved in protecting historicschool buildings in August 1998:"We got a call from the AlabarnaHistorical Cornrnission (AHC),the state historic preservationoffice, looking for help to save theSkyline Elementary School. Thiswas Friday and the school wascorning down Monday."The Skyline School had beenbuilt in 1936 as part of a NewDeal resettlernent comrnunity.Skyline was one of two such proj-ects in the state, and it was thelast rernaining one. Now theJackson County school boardplanned to raze it to build a newschool on the same site.With dernolition of the Sky.line School certain and just days

away, an area resident had calledRobert Garnble at the AlabarnaHistorical Commission for help.Garnble, who nrns the state'sendangered properties program,recornrnendecl gettilg an opposi-tion force together. But to stopthe clernolition he turnecl toBrandon Brazil, tl"re new clirectorof the Alabarna PreservationAlliance. Unlike the state

agency, the APA, a nonprofitorganization, could bring aninjunction to halt the denoli-tion and buy sorne time.Imrnediately, the APAretained local counsel (who larerbecame a board rnember). ByMonday morning, the APAfound a sympathetic judge who

Date post:	03-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	hamilton-reporter
View:	220 times
Download:	0 times

A Community Guide to Saving Older Schools

Documents