[MassHistPres] Olmsted-ricahedson non-contiguous thematic LHD passed

[Dennis De Witt]

PS — I should have said the LHD did pass by 196 yes, 29 no, 7 abstain.

And, four of its five sites are "non-contiguous" not "non-contagious” — altho they may be that too.

> On Dec 3, 2021, at 4:53 PM, Dennis De Witt <abtdewitt at rcn.com> wrote:
> 
> Last spring a proposed extension of a Brookline LHD was unexpectedly defeated in Town Meeting by one vote less than the needed ⅔.  The negative votes came from two overlapping factions.  One felt the site should be available for development.  Although zoned for a version of single family allowing only limited multi-unit development, it was argued that such a site near a Green Line station and the Longwood Medical Area should be developed.  There was also an overlapping general racial equity argument  based, in part, on the fact that part of the area had once been red lined — something that might affect many existing and prospective LHDs, given how widespread that Federal practice was at one time.
> 
> With the above as background for a general sense of trepidation in approaching another LHD . . . 
> 
> This fall the Commission came back to Brookline Town Meeting with an LHD attempting to save from demolition the 1803 Perkins-Hooper-Richardson House, the home and office of Henry Hobson Richardson from 1873 to his death in 1886, and the adjacent Mansard “Cliffside," the second Brookline home of John Charles Olmsted (FLO’s nephew and adopted son and partner).  
> 
> As they are in the Brookline’s "estate area," there was no possibility of creating a contiguous, neighborhood based LHD, given the 80% owner support usually expected for a neighborhood LHD by Brookline's Town Meeting.  
> 
> Thus, there evolved a proposal to create a non-contagious, thematic Olmsted-Richardson LHD that would also include, in addition to the two threatened houses, Fredric Law Olmsted’s nearby “Fairsted” home and office, a National Historic Landmark and NPS museum, as well as the first John Charles Olmsted home, further down the same street, and Richardson’s grave marker in Brookline’s Walnut Hill cemetery.  These latter three locations were all included with the owners’ support.  (See study report attached below.) The Olmsted-Richardson theme was based on their long friendship, frequent collaborations, and the fact that Olmsted came to Brookline because of Richardson and there emulated Richardson’s conjoined home and office.
> 
> The proposed LHD did not include a lot adjacent to the Richardson lot, owned by the same developer who also applied to demolish its nice 1970s Deck House.  Even though the lot had once been a part of the Richardson lot, it was felt that the 1970s house would confuse the thematic issue in Town Meeting. 
> 
> The major discussion in Town Meeting and before was the connections with slavery of both the first owner, Samuel G. Perkins, who had previously traded goods in Haiti, and Richardson’s family, which had a sugar planation, and the need to have a sign at the street in front of the Richardson house explaining that — in addition to Richardson and Olmsted information.  All have agreed that will happen.
> 
> The attached study report addresses all of the above — as well as the connection of the columned Perkins-Hooper-Richardson house to Mount Vernon as a Federalist political statement.  But no one in town meeting cared about that.
> 
> Dennis De Witt
> Brookline
> <Olmsted-HHR SR final 8.14.21.compressed2.pdf>_______________________________________________
> MassHistPres mailing list
> MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu
> https://mailman.cs.umb.edu/listinfo/masshistpres