Upload
frieda
View
25
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Cultural Resources Protection a Pro-active Approach George R. Frantz, AICP Presented to American Planning Association Chicago, IL, November 23, 2010. Image Source: www.nysgis.state.ny.us. The Issue. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Cultural Resources Cultural Resources ProtectionProtection
aa
Pro-active Approach Pro-active Approach George R. Frantz, AICPGeorge R. Frantz, AICP
Presented to American Planning AssociationPresented to American Planning AssociationChicago, IL, November 23, 2010Chicago, IL, November 23, 2010
1
Image Source: www.nysgis.state.ny.us
The Issue
Native American historical and cultural sites Native American historical and cultural sites have fared poorly at the hand of the design have fared poorly at the hand of the design professions.professions.
““Shovel and shut-up” approach Shovel and shut-up” approach unfortunately still exists in too many places.unfortunately still exists in too many places.
2
The Issue Archaeological sites
unknown quantity; Federal & state laws
limited effectiveness; Generally only apply
where public $$$ involved;
New York: State Environmental Quality Review – public & private projects.
Cartoon: Dolores Hayden, Grand Domestic Revolution. 1980
3
The IssueTangible Resources vs. Intangible Resources
4
Project GenesisDesire to locate and
protect the site of Coreorgonel, an Iroquoian town of +/- 2,000 destroyed by American forces in Revolutionary War.
Image Source: www.nysgis.state.ny.us
5
Project Genesis
Desire to avoid the conflict that many times erupts when developers’ plans are pitted against protection of cultural resources.
Image Source: www.nysgis.state.ny.us
6
The Challenge Accommodating growth
and development.
while Protecting an important
cultural resource and sensitive Native American site, and doing so in a unique, cost effective and non-adversarial manner.
Image Source: Microsoft Bing
7
Project Objectives Short-circuit potential controversy using pre-
emptive cultural resources survey to identify areas of archaeological importance in the valley.
Develop a model for collaboration between academic institutions, local governments and landowners to identify & protect cultural resources.
8
Project Objectives Permit the design and
approval of two future residential developments in the area while protecting critical historic and cultural resources.
Create a constituency within the community for the protection of cultural resources.
9
Methodology
• Phase I-a literature search & report;
• Phase I-b shovel test pits on 125 acres;
10
Methodology• Parkland dedications
ID’ed in collaboration with developers;
• Development phasing determined
• Phase II excavations on 5 features identified in Phase I-b.
11
Evolution A catalyst for a multi-
year research, design and public education initiative.
A place redefined: the Inlet Valley from highway corridor to an area rich in history.
12
“We’re Not Dead Yet” A rediscovery of a rich
native American heritage in the occupation of the Inlet valley by the Tutelo/Saponi peoples.
A new public park that includes a space set aside for contemplation and commemoration of Native American heritage.
13
Participants Department of City & Regional Planning, Department
of Landscape Architecture, Cornell University.
Town of Ithaca Planning Department.
Developers : Eddydale Homes & E. Tomlinson, III
Cayuga Nation of Indians
Tutelo and Saponi nations
14
Lessons Learned Communities can and
should pro-actively embark on cultural resources surveys wherever the historic record shows the potential presence of archaeological site.
15
Lessons Learned Planners can and
should work with landowners and the community to determine presence of archaeological sites before design begins.
16
Lessons Learned The Native American
community can and should be brought to the table early on as an active partner and valuable informant.
17
Lessons LearnedColleges and
universities have an important role:critical expertise in
archaeology;resources to conduct
excavations.
18
Lessons Learned A proactive, cooperative approach to
identifying cultural resources is both practical and cost effective.
Controversy over historic and cultural resources can be short-circuited.
The development review and approval process does not have to be delayed.
19
Lessons Learned The authority
municipalities possess in many states to require park and open space dedications of developers can be a tool for protecting cultural resources.
20
Present & Future A new constituency for the protection of
the Coreorgonel townsite is established.
21
Present & Future Town of Ithaca in
September 1999 named one of two park sites acquired as a result of the IVAS “Tutelo Park.”
Dedicated the park to preserving the heritage of the native American presence in the Inlet Valley.
22
Present & Future In September 2006 the
commemoration was expanded into the “Homecoming Festival of Native American Culture,” a one-day event featuring music, dance, food, presentations and exhibits at Tutelo Park.
23
IVAS Part IIMarch 2010 Local micro-brewery
acquires site to build new brewery/restaurant/beer garden;
Presents sketch plan to Town of Ithaca Planning Board;
Proposed development outside IVAS test area.
24
IVAS Part IIUnder NY State Environmental Quality Review Act, Town of Ithaca must consider potential impacts on historic and cultural resources prior to approving project.
25
IVAS Part II
26
• Developer hires archaeologist to complete Phase I-a, Phase I-b studies;
• Development site is “clean;”
• Report incorporated in Town’s environmental review
27
Questions?George R. Frantz, AICPGeorge R. Frantz, AICP
Department of City & Regional PlanningDepartment of City & Regional PlanningCornell University, Ithaca, NYCornell University, Ithaca, NY
[email protected]@cornell.edu