[MassHistPres] industrial type smokestacks

[Tristram Metcalfe 3]

The structural issue is not small on smoke stacks.
Adams has two old stacks that are scary to look at inside with their  
non stop freeze thaw eroding structural tiles.

If no repair is done on a stack, I'd suggest at minimum capping with  
a vented non visible cover to keep water out but with some minimal  
air able to move, thus stabilizing the structure's environment.

At an historic mill preservation in Turners Falls we suggested using  
the stack as an accessible base to a small wind turbine [Horizontal  
or vertical cantilever shaft]. The spiral stair inside to reach it  
would ALSO  be the structural reinforcement to preserve it 'Safely'  
for centuries while it helps pay for itself as a direct part of  
civilization's combustion era to electron era evolution ;-)

On safety,, Historic dams get flamed with a standard very bogus "high  
hazard" which often leads to tear downs and yet it appears chimney  
stacks stand empty with much less standard government assassination  
orders.
It's the fishermen I suspect who are in with the hit men on historic  
dams even though they are simple enough to reinforce on the back  
[deep water] side with very large rock fill berms eliminating an  
excessive flow hazard if a break begins in those 1000:1 odds. A fish  
ladder should appease the fishing men, but misplaced overly retentive  
liability fear may be that bigger problem and I suspect chimney  
stacks will not be far behind.;-(

Tris Metcalfe
Northampton


On Dec 17, 2009, at 11:49 AM, Dennis De Witt wrote:

> The immediate question is less about the money (altho obviously  
> that matters a lot) but rather trying to understand best  
> preservation practice for an extremely tall 110 year old  
> utilitarian masonry structure that was intended to be kept warm all  
> winter and is now subject to internal and external freezing  
> combined with asymmetrical solar heating etc, etc.
>
> The cell antenna idea has also come up.  There are obviously  
> philosophical
> questions associated with that -- altho a brick smokestack is  
> significantly different than a church steeple.  Given the extremely  
> high cost of upkeep of the object itself, that idea cannot be  
> dismissed out of hand without careful consideration.  After half a  
> century of demolitions, with no new examples being built, tall  
> smokestacks are becoming quite rare and need to be preserved.
>
> Dennis
>
>
> On Dec 17, 2009, at 11:16 AM, Tucker, Jonathan wrote:
>
>> I don't know about publications, but the usual approach to  
>> preserving a
>> functionally vestigial structure is to give it a new purpose that has
>> social or economic viability.
>>
>> Make it into a community landmark through public art that  
>> highlights its
>> history and the community's identity.  Make it a feature for all
>> celebrations.  Light it up for the holidays (topped with a lighted
>> tree).  Run the lights up to the top at midnight for New Year's Eve.
>> Use it as a launching stage for Fourth of July fireworks.  Rent it  
>> out
>> for cell tower use.
>>
>> Amend your charter to require that, before they can be sworn in,  
>> every
>> mayor or member of the select board must to climb up to the top using
>> the rusting steel rings, write their name on a surface provided  
>> for the
>> purpose, and then bungee down to the bottom, where their robes  
>> would be
>> donned and they would promptly be sworn in by the Clerk, amid
>> appropriate fanfare (a pipe band is always good).
>>
>> I jest (a wee bit), but once the tower has a viable use and a  
>> place in
>> the life of the community, the money for its restoration and
>> preservation will follow.
>>
>> Jonathan Tucker
>> Planning Director
>> Amherst Planning Department
>> 4 Boltwood Avenue, Town Hall
>> Amherst, MA  01002
>> (413) 259-3040
>> tuckerj at amherstma.gov
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu
>> [mailto:masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu] On Behalf Of Marcia Starkey
>> Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 10:13 AM
>> To: Dennis De Witt; MHC MHC listserve
>> Subject: Re: [MassHistPres] industrial type smokestacks
>>
>> This would also be welcome information in Greenfield.
>> Marcia Starkey
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Dennis De Witt" <djd184 at verizon.net>
>> To: "MHC MHC listserve" <masshistpres at cs.umb.edu>
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 8:19 PM
>> Subject: [MassHistPres] industrial type smokestacks
>>
>>
>>> Does anyone know of any publication or guidelines having to do with
>> the
>>> preservation of major industrial type smokestacks no longer in use?
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Dennis J De Witt, President
>>> Metropolitan WaterWorks Museum, Inc.
>>> Chestnut Hill, Boston, Massachusetts
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ******************************
>>> For administrative questions regarding this list, please contact
>>> Christopher.Skelly at state.ma.us directly.  PLEASE DO NOT "REPLY"  
>>> TO THE
>>
>>> WHOLE LIST.
>>> MassHistPres mailing list
>>> MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu
>>> http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/mailman/listinfo/masshistpres
>>> ********************************
>>>
>>
>> ******************************
>> For administrative questions regarding this list, please contact
>> Christopher.Skelly at state.ma.us directly.  PLEASE DO NOT "REPLY" TO  
>> THE
>> WHOLE LIST.
>> MassHistPres mailing list
>> MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu
>> http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/mailman/listinfo/masshistpres
>> ********************************
>
> ******************************
> For administrative questions regarding this list, please contact  
> Christopher.Skelly at state.ma.us directly.  PLEASE DO NOT "REPLY" TO  
> THE WHOLE LIST.
> MassHistPres mailing list
> MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu
> http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/mailman/listinfo/masshistpres
> ********************************