Dan has discussed some of the background and concerns about the project on his blog, while Dr. Yood has endorsed it as “a most worthy project.” Those who support it are asked to attend the agenda-fixing session at 7:30 p.m. Monday in City Hall Library.
There is a comprehensive assessment of the property in the council packet, too detailed even to summarize here. The resolution that will be up for a council vote at the regular meeting on Aug. 15 states the city’s goal to acquire and stabilize the Lampkin House and barn and to link it to the Cushing Road retention basin. The proposal envisions a “historic museum/nature center with access to a nature trail through the Basin area which to date has been inaccessible to city residents.”
In all fairness, the financial aspects of this proposal need to be made clear at the outset. A letter urging support made no mention of costs or funding. As with proposals to acquire the Armory and other buildings, there is no projection of long-term maintenance or operating costs of a new city facility. In Plaintalker's view, the worthiness of trying to save the historic site is not in doubt, just the ability of the city to take it on.
Among thoughts that came to mind after looking through the packet:
- How much has Plainfield contributed since its 2000 inception to the Union County Open Space, Recreation & Historic Preservation Trust Fund and how much has come back to the city for projects?
- A nature trail in the Retention Basin was proposed many years ago by a city resident who is a naturalist and former director of Trailside Museum. What issues came up then regarding public use of this land?
- Was this proposal included in the current CIP? The city has deferred several capital projects in recent years. How does this project fit in?
No doubt attention is overdue to Lampkin House. A private plan to restore it did not work out and every day must bring new urgency to do something to save it. The great dilemma is how to do it comprehensively and not at the expense of other even more pressing needs.
--Bernice
I too agree that it's a worthwhile project and is definitely something that pulls at my preservationist heart...but, this is Plainfield. This city can't even take care of it's basic infrastructure and that must seriously be looked at when considering something of this magnitude. Something like this can't be something that's pushed through, completed, ribbon cutting and then begin it's slow decent back to where it was...sometimes it's best to admit you don't have the ability ( in this case,resources )and move on.
ReplyDeleteThis is definitely a worthwhile project but where does it fit in the pecking order? Is it ahead of refurbishing some of our run down recreational facilities that have been neglected for far too long? Our kids use those facilities but they deserve better.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I believe the last time we received money from the trust fund to preserve open space was a few years back when the City purchased the old farm on Cushing Ave. Since the City of Plainfield does not have much "open space" to preserve, the fund should provide us the dollars to rehabilitate our existing parks and fields like Somerset County has done with towns like Bound Brook and North Plainfield.
Bernice: in answer to your specific question, yes, the Planning Board did include the City's match in the CIP. The crucial thing is to get the property into public hands so that we mcan create a non-profit and do some fund-raising from private sources. No foundation will consider this as long as it's tied up in an estate and foreclosure. This is not a new idea. We have been working on it for almost three years, and documentation goes back further. The state listed it as worthy two years ago. But until it belongs to a public or non-profit entity, it's off-limits.
ReplyDeleteBernice,
ReplyDeleteWhen I served as the Educational Program Coordinator for the Historical Society of Plainfield several years ago (from 2002-2003), there were conversations about making the Lampkin House a satellite of the HSP at the East End of the city (as a sister, so to speak, of the Drake House at the West End). Virginia Terrell was still alive then. As far as I remember, when speaking to her representative, there was a suggestion for the county or state to help restore the home, which Mrs. Terrell said was possibly a stop on the Underground Railroad (I was unable to find any verifiable proof of this, and given the UR trails in our state, it didn't seem consistent). I like the idea of the county being a part of this discussion. Al Faiella, the new county manager, is "big" on history, so it makes sense to approach the county about funding this preservation effort. Also in close proximity are several other historic sites (like Frazee House), which would also be a draw for tourists, students, and those who are interested in preserving our history.
Rebecca
While I certainly am in favor of historic preservation, the costs in todays economy do not make it a favorable option. I have not been inside of the house so do not know of its structural integrity, but to spend over a million dollars on restoring just 1 house is a rather expensive proposition. You can take the house apart and rebuild it using as many of the original materials as possible with modern technologies inside and do it for a lot cheaper and much faster than it would take to restore it. It could be moved to safe distance off the road and be used for a museum as has been suggested by others. Just a thought. A builder just did this in Hunterdon County with a dilapidated house and it is truly stunning! We also have our own shining example of this process here in Plainfield on Prospect Ave. It can be done and done very well.
ReplyDelete