Masters Theses

Date of Award

8-1996

Degree Type

Thesis

Degree Name

Master of Science

Major

Planning

Major Professor

David A. Johnson

Committee Members

John D. Peine, James A. Spencer

Abstract

Heritage corridors have become popular for their potential to preserve a wider range of historic resources than the traditional tools. The heritage area concept also unites historic preservationists with environmentalists, recreation proponents, and economic developers towards a common goal of effective regional management. This aspect fosters cooperative planning and focuses development efforts and funds on exceptional regions. The heritage area concept also facilitates efficient use of limited resources and minimizing redundant services. With the advantages of breadth and political feasibility, heritage corridors seem an ideal technique for historic preservation. However, the heritage area concept should be critically examined before preservationists embrace it whole-heartedly. This thesis addresses the issue by examining the Illinois and Michigan Canal National Heritage Corridor, the first heritage area in the United States, and therefore a model for subsequent heritage areas. The study is framed by three research questions:

  1. What are the criteria for success in historic preservation?
  2. Based on these criteria, has the Illinois and Michigan Canal National Heritage Corridor succeeded as a historic preservation planning tool?
  3. How did the success or failure occur?
The case study was compiled through a literature review and interviews conducted in person and on the telephone. The study led to the conclusion that although several preservation goals have not yet been reached, the Corridor is immature still, and sho-ws definite signs of progress. The projects which have been successful indicate potential success for the entire Corridor region. Although many factors in the case of the Illinois and Michigan Canal National Heritage Corridor are site-specific, there are lessons to be learned about the general nature of heritage areas. The conclusions which would apply broadly for heritage areas are outlined below.
  • Heritage areas cannot be implemented "top-down". The partnership concept requires voluntary participation. A popular movement for a heritage area program is therefore the only way to ensure enduring support for the management system. However, a federal or state sanction of the heritage area will aid preservationists in marketing, mediation, and fund-raising.
  • The planning process can make or break a heritage area. The planning process for heritage areas should accomplish three objectives. First, the process should strengthen the grass-roots movements which already exist in the area, while building new coalitions in support of the heritage area idea. Second, the plan must reflect the goals of local activists and regional stakeholders if they are to continue supporting the plan in the future. The planning process should incorporate their desires and existing political structures. Third, the final plan should be definitive, outlining the management structures for the heritage area. However, the vision described in the plan should be broad enough to allow flexibility when determining which projects to tackle.
  • Heritage areas take time to develop. Designation as a heritage area is not a quick fix for a regions' problems. The designation does not in and of itself do much more than give the area a label. The management system, networks, mediation, and "snowball" effect take time to develop. The Illinois and Michigan Canal National Heritage Corridor has been going strong for almost twelve years, yet local leaders feel that they have really only been gaining ground for about the past four or five years. The early time was spent reorganizing, adjusting, and laying foundations for the successful results which are now becoming visible. Heritage area leaders must therefore be patient and not expect their regions to turn around overnight.
  • Heritage areas broaden preservationists' resources. When heritage areas incorporate historic preservation goals into a comprehensive package with environmental conservation, economic development, and recreational development, new opportunities open up. Preservationists are able to draw on the resources these interrelated groups offer. This is especially true in the case of fundraising. Preservation projects may qualify for transportation, tourism, and environmental grants if they include developments which fulfill the grant requirements.
In general, the study indicates that heritage areas do further the goals of historic preservation by encouraging cooperation on projects and partnering preservation goals with economic development, environmental, and recreational goals. However, the validity of these conclusions should be tested by future research.

Download
Files over 3MB may be slow to open. For best results, right-click and select "save as..."

Share

COinS