Archive

ShareThis Page
Savannah’s prized landmark district threatened by growth | TribLIVE.com
Travel

Savannah’s prized landmark district threatened by growth

The Associated Press
| Saturday, September 1, 2018 10:48 a.m
18914018914089aa1dc9e21544c18ff668e8380dba0e
In This Aug. 31, 2018 photo, people stroll through Monterey Square in the historic landmark district of Savannah, GA. Savannah's historic district was named a National Historic Landmark in 1966 and it remains one of the largest in the U.S. The National Park Service recently announced it has downgraded the Savannah landmark district's condition from 'satisfactory' to 'threatened.' The agency said decades of new development and modernization have eroded the unique town plan devised for Savannah by British Gen. James Edward Oglethorpe, who founded Georgia in 1733. (AP Photo/ Russ Bynum)

SAVANNAH, Ga. — With its time-capsule collection of Victorian mansions and antebellum churches overlooking oak-shaded squares, Savannah has long taken great pride — and built a nearly $3 billion tourism economy — from its standing as a National Historic Landmark, a designation awarded to America’s most prized treasures preserved from the past.

And while nearly 2,000 historic homes and buildings survive in Savannah’s downtown landmark district, the National Park Service has found that decades of growth and modernization have steadily eroded the framework that ties them all together.

Savannah’s unique town plan of homes and buildings grouped around public squares, all connected by a grid of streets and lanes, was devised by Gen. James Edward Oglethorpe when he founded Georgia in 1733. It was the last of England’s 13 North American colonies.

After months of study, the Park Service announced Tuesday that Savannah’s historic integrity has been damaged by decades of new developments, including large hotels and government buildings, that don’t fit within Oglethorpe’s original framework. The agency downgraded the condition of the landmark district from “satisfactory” to “threatened.”

The agency emphasized there’s no risk of Savannah losing its landmark status. Still, it’s an embarrassing development for a Southern city where historic charm lures Hollywood movie productions and more than 14 million visitors a year.

“It’s a sobering reminder of the fragility of the district, the importance of the district and our responsibility for taking care of it,” said Daniel Carey, director of the Historic Savannah Foundation. “We’ve gotten a little careless and we’ve gotten a little complacent.”

Savannah’s downtown area won its designation as a national landmark in 1966, one month after the National Historic Preservation Act became law and created the landmark program. More than five decades later, the Savannah landmark remains one of the largest out of roughly 2,500 total nationwide.

The Park Service has declared Savannah’s landmark to be “threatened” twice before: in 1996 when demolitions were planned in a historically African-American neighborhood, and in 2002 when city officials planned a large bus terminal that others deemed incompatible with the historic district. Both projects were amended to avoid damage to the district.

This time the threat isn’t about losing any particular historic building or a specific new development. The federal agency’s first in-depth assessment of the Savannah district in 16 years focused on a long-term accumulation of changes that have slowly chipped away at Oglethorpe’s town plan.

In the 1930s, three of Savannah’s 24 squares got demolished as part of a highway project. Construction of the city’s Civic Center in the 1960s paved over streets and lots on two sides of Orleans Square to make room for a parking lot. The Hyatt Hotel built in 1980 took up an entire city block overlooking the riverfront, making it far larger than neighboring buildings.

“The cumulative effect, that’s what makes Savannah’s case particularly difficult to wrap your mind around,” said Cynthia Walton, who manages the National Historic Landmarks Program for the Park Service’s Southeast region. “It’s easy to sort of dismiss projects on an individual basis. But when they start adding up, that’s when it becomes problematic.”

Making growth conform to Savannah’s historic town plan continues to be a fight. Plans for a new federal courthouse annex released in December showed the building spanning a street. The federal government doesn’t have to follow Savannah’s rules governing construction in the historic district. But the General Services Administration has agreed to reconsider its design.

Meanwhile, a new cultural arts center under construction will cover, rather than restore, a lane lost to a prior development. Several recent hotel projects have been granted exceptions to local limits on building heights. The rule is meant to prevent large new developments from overwhelming neighboring historic buildings.

“There’s tremendous pressure on the city from developers of hotels,” said Robin Williams, chairman of the Architectural History Department at the Savannah College of Art and Design. “The city council gets developers who bristle at some of these limitations — they don’t want to be capped at a certain number of stories.”

The Park Service’s 11-page memo outlining threats to Savannah’s landmark also gives City Hall credit for taking steps to improve the district.

In 2010, the city restored Ellis Square after demolishing a parking garage built atop it 55 years earlier. Recently the city adopted a new ordinance making areas of the landmark district off-limits to hotel development. And it’s working toward new policies to protect archaeological relics at construction sites and historic paving on city streets.

Mayor Eddie DeLoach told reporters he would like the Park Service to assess the status of Savannah’s landmark every two years.

“We realized that we had to update things, but we didn’t realize to what degree we needed to improve our overall plan,” DeLoach said. “We now know that we need to be aggressive in moving forward.”

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.