Preserving Clevelandâ•Žs African American Heritage

Cleveland State University EngagedScholarship@CSU

Urban Publications Maxine Goodman Levin College of Urban Affairs

2017 Beyond Rust and Rockefeller: Preserving Cleveland’s African American Heritage Stephanie Ryberg Webster Cleveland State University, [email protected]

How does access to this work benefit oy u? Let us know! Follow this and additional works at: https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/urban_facpub Part of the Urban Studies and Planning Commons

Repository Citation Ryberg Webster, Stephanie, "Beyond Rust and Rockefeller: Preserving Cleveland’s African American Heritage" (2017). Urban Publications. 0 1 2 3 1510. https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/urban_facpub/1510

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Maxine Goodman Levin College of Urban Affairs at EngagedScholarship@CSU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Urban Publications by an authorized administrator of EngagedScholarship@CSU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Preservation Education & Research Volume 9 | 2017 &

PER is published annually as a single volume. Copyright © 2017 Preservation Education & Research. All rights reserved. Articles, essays, reports and reviews appearing in this journal may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, except for classroom and noncommercial use, including illustrations, in any form (beyond copying permitted by sections 107 and 108 of the U.S. Copyright Law), without written permission. ISSN 1946-5904 Cover photograph credit: Amalia Leifeste PRESERVATION EDUCATION & RESEARCH Preservation Education & Research (PER) disseminates international peer-reviewed scholarship relevant to VOLUME 9 EDITORS historic environment education from felds such as historic preservation, heritage conservation, heritage studies, building Gregory Donofrio, University of Minnesota and landscape conservation, urban conservation, and cultural ([email protected]) patrimony. Te National Council for Preservation Education Chad Randl, Cornell University (NCPE) launched PER in 2007 as part of its mission to ([email protected]) exchange and disseminate information and ideas concerning historic environment education, current developments and innovations in conservation, and the improvement of historic ADVISORY EDITORIAL BOARD environment education programs and endeavors in the United States and abroad. Steven Hofman, Southeast Missouri State University Editorial correspondence, including manuscripts for Carter L. Hudgins, Clemson University/College of Charleston submission, should be emailed to Gregory Donofrio Paul Hardin Kapp, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign [email protected] and Chad Randl at [email protected]. Electronic submissions are encouraged, but physical materials Ted J. Ligibel, Eastern Michigan University can be mailed to Gregory Donofrio, School of Architecture, University of Minnesota, 145 Rapson Hall, 89 Church Street Vincent L. Michael, San Antonio Conservation Society S.E., Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA. Articles should be in the Andréa Livi Smith, University of Mary Washington range of 4,500 to 6,000 words and not be under consideration for publication or previously published elsewhere. Refer to the Michael A. Tomlan, Cornell University back of this volume for manuscript guidelines. Robert Young, University of Utah Books for review, and book reviews, should be sent to Gregory Donofrio, School of Architecture, University of Minnesota, 145 Rapson Hall, 89 Church Street S.E., NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR PRESERVATION Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA. E-mail [email protected]. EDUCATION EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Subscriptions are US$60.00 per year. Payments can be Paul Hardin Kapp, Chair, made online at the NCPE Store (http://www.ncpe.us/ University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign storemembership) or send a check with name and mailing Amalia Leifeste, Vice Chair and Memberships, address to PER, c/o NCPE, Box 291, Ithaca, NY 14851, USA. Clemson University Andréa Livi Smith, Vice Chair and Web Site Editor, University of Mary Washington Steven Hofman, Secretary, Southeast Missouri State University Douglas Appler, Treasurer, University of Kentucky Cari Goetcheus, Internships, University of Georgia Michael Tomlan, Special Projects, Cornell University Lauren Weiss Bricker, Chair Emerita, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona Robert Young, Chair Emeritus, University of Utah P eer- reviewed Articles

Beyond Rust and Rockefeller: Preserving Cleveland’s African American Heritage

STEPHANIE RYBERG-WEBSTER

ABSTRACT — Te preservation of African American heritage sites holds a tenuous place in the historic preservation feld. On one hand, preservationists recognize that under-designation is rampant and work to engage communities of color. On the other hand, the feld has high standards of architectural merit and integrity for local or national designation, which disadvantages many African American sites that sufer from years of deterioration and neglect—particularly in urban areas. Tis research uses a qualitative case study the Cleveland Restoration Society’s Landmarks of Cleveland’s African American Experience project to question how contemporary preservationists address African American heritage and the tensions and opportunities in preserving African American communities. Additionally, the article draws conclusions for future preservation eforts in African American (or other underrepresented) communities. Te article adds to a growing body of scholarship about preservation in minority neighborhoods and fnds a pressing need to question the applicability and usefulness of long-standing preservation tools when working in communities that lack high architectural value and material integrity but have a rich cultural heritage and historic signifcance.

INTRODUCTION

reserving African American and other underrep- with African American heritage, while seeking ways resented groups’ heritages is a central focus for to engage communities of color. Scholars have noted contemporary preservationists (Dubrow 1998; that only a small fraction of all properties listed in the PHodder 1999; Dwyer 2000; Foley and Lauria 2000; Lee National Register of Historic Places are afliated with 2003; Harris 2004; Kaufman 2004; Nieves and Alexander African American communities and that there is sig- 2008; Kaufman 2009; Lee 2012; Leggs, Rubman, and nifcant work needed to make the profession diverse and Wood 2012). Te National Park Service (NPS), National inclusive (Lee 2003; Kaufman 2004; Kaufman 2009; Lee Trust for Historic Preservation (NTHP), and others have 2012). Among the barriers to engaging African American identifed, documented, and designated places associated communities are perceptions that the practice is costly

Volume 9 | 2017 • Preservation Education & Research 7 P eer- reviewed Articles and elitist, that high-style architecture is valued more heritage discourses in former industrial cities, such as than everyday landscapes, and that material integrity Cleveland, where nostalgia for the wealth of the industrial trumps social or cultural signifcance. era (i.e., the age of Rockefeller in Cleveland), narratives Historic preservation in urban, African American of immigrant success, and fascination with the rusted communities is particularly tenuous due to the complex ruins of industry overshadow the complex history of urban history in these neighborhoods. Although African marginalized groups including African Americans. American history is still an emerging feld (Kusmer Additionally, the article draws conclusions for future 1995; Lewis 1995; Troltter 1995; Goings and Mohl 1996; preservation eforts in African American (or other Nieves 2008; Kusmer and Trotter 2009), scholars have underrepresented) communities. Beginning in 2012, documented the early twentieth-century migration of the Cleveland Restoration Society (CRS)—a nationally African Americans to northern industrial cities and recognized nonproft preservation organization—spear- subsequent housing, economic, and social conditions headed the Landmarks of Cleveland’s African American for African Americans, including intense discrimina- Experience project. Analyzing this ongoing efort via tion, segregation, and the formation of contemporary participant observation, key participant interviews, and ghettos (Hirsch 1983; Sugrue 1996; Hillier 2003; Boger document analysis reveals that, while preservationists 2009). In the post-WWII era, urban renewal and highway have made great strides towards inclusiveness, preserva- building devastated African American neighborhoods, tion tools and techniques lack applicability and usefulness resulting in the indiscriminate demolition of large swaths for communities without high architectural value and of African American communities, the social upheaval material integrity but with rich cultural heritage and of forced displacement, and grassroots protest (Tomas historic signifcance. Te research is especially timely and Ritzdorf 1997; Tomas 2004; Teaford 2000; Fullilove as cities strategize about the future of African American 2001; Bradley 2008; Avila and Rose 2009; Spiers 2009; neighborhoods plagued by high levels of vacancy and Hanlon 2011; Michney 2011). In the 1960s, the struggle for abandonment resulting from years of disinvestment and civil rights brought popular attention to the conditions of escalated by the recent foreclosure crisis. With demoli- African American communities, while protests and civil tion as a leading strategy, the threat of losing signifcant unrest in cities across the nation, including Cleveland (in historic resources is imminent and the physical heritage 1966 and 1968), further exacerbated property destruc- of entire urban communities hangs in the balance. tion, vacancy, and urban abandonment (Adams 1972; Te article frst reviews scholarly and professional lit- Upton 1985; Michney 2006; Collins and Smith 2007). erature addressing the intersection of race and historic By the turn of the twenty-frst century, many cities preservation. Afer reviewing the research approach, had a landscape rich in African American heritage but data sources, and past eforts to preserve Cleveland’s facing extreme poverty, vacancy, abandonment, and African American heritage, the article provides an physical deterioration (Katz 2012). For preservationists, in-depth description and analysis of CRS’s African this presents a tenuous situation. On one hand, the feld American heritage project. Finally, the article summa- recognizes that under-designation in African American rizes lessons learned from the CRS project, including communities is rampant and it is working to recognize the need to remove architectural bias, reduce structural these historic resources and engaging communities of barriers, value quality over quantity, meaningfully color. On the other hand, preservationists hold high engage communities, and balance revitalization and standards of architectural merit and material integrity for preservation goals. local or national designation, which disadvantages many African American sites that have sufered from years of PRESERVING AFRICAN AMERICAN HERITAGE deterioration and neglect. Tis research adds to the growing body of scholarship Preservation scholars and practitioners have paid par- about preserving African American communities. Using ticular interest to African American heritage, especially a qualitative case study of a project in Cleveland, Ohio, over the past two decades (Dwyer 2000; Kaufman 2004; the article questions how contemporary preservationists Nieves and Alexander 2008; Kaufman 2009; Lee 2012; address African American heritage and the tensions in Leggs, Rubman, and Wood 2012). Te feld recognizes and opportunities for preserving African American com- that African American heritage sites are profoundly munities. Te article adds complexity to the dominant underrepresented. As Kaufman (2004, 1) notes, “out of

8 P reservation Education & Research • Volume 9 | 2017 P eer- reviewed Articles over 76,000 properties currently listed on the National Orleans launched their Ethnic Heritage Preservation Register of Historic Places, a computer search turns up initiative in 1997 with the goal of preserving the city’s approximately 823 associated with African American African American heritage “through education, com- heritage . . .”—this translates into just about 1 percent munity awareness and advocacy” (PRC 2015, n.p.). More of all National Register listings. By the early 1990s, Lee recently, Preservation Durham (North Carolina) com- (2012, 33) and others noted that preservationists were pleted the Durham Documentation of African American building partnerships with ethnographers, planners, and Historic Sites project, identifying approximately sixty others to reach out to ethnic communities, “to discern sites grouped into one of four tiers: high-priority, how historic preservation tools can work for” them, and medium-priority, low-priority, and potentially signifcant to update preservation practices when needed. Despite in the future (Johnson 2009). Additionally, local preser- this positive portrayal of the profession’s movement vation initiatives began to incorporate African American towards inclusion, preservationists continue to struggle heritage into broader eforts. Los Angeles’ SurveyLA proj- to recognize minority heritage sites and engage commu- ect, which exemplifes this approach, outlined a number nities of color. of themes including “Civil Unrest, 1939–1965” (SurveyLA Existing research on preserving African American 2013, 17) and “African-American Civil Rights Movement, heritage focuses on high-profle events or sites such as 1955–1968” (SurveyLA 2013, 18), among others. State the civil rights movement (Dwyer 2000; Dwyer 2008; historic preservation ofces also launched programs Dwyer and Alderman 2008), the Underground Railroad focused on African American heritage, including the (Wellman 2002), Rosenwald Schools (Hofschwelle 2003; Maryland Historical Trust’s African American Heritage Hofschwelle 2008), and New York City’s African Burial Preservation program, which ofers grants (MHT 2015), Ground (LaRoche and Blakey 1997; Blakey 1998; Frohne and Indiana Landmarks’ African American Landmarks 2008), to name a few. Other studies focus on market- Committee, which provides survey, technical assistance, ing African American heritage for tourism purposes outreach, and grants for African American heritage (Greenbaum 1990; Hofman 2003). While these studies sites (Indiana Landmarks 2015). Preservation Virginia, add valuable narratives and a deeper understanding of a statewide nonproft organization, has partnered on African American historic places, they do not address a number of projects with the goal of “honoring and typical African American neighborhoods, or what Upton protecting African American heritage” (Preservation (1986) refers to as experiential landscapes. A few studies Virginia 2015). Additionally, a few African American– and reports do venture into this territory, highlighting specifc preservation organizations formed, including past eforts to preserve urban African American commu- the Florida African American Heritage Preservation nities, including Brooklyn’s Weeksville Society (Lee 2003; Network and the Rhode Island Black Heritage Society Kaufman 2004), Pittsburgh’s Manchester neighborhood (FAAHPN 2016; RIBHS 2015). (Ryberg 2011), Cincinnati’s Mt. Auburn community While these state, local, and nonproft initiatives are (Ryberg 2011), Atlanta’s Auburn Avenue (Newman 2001), an important step forward, preservationists recognize and Richmond’s Jackson Ward (Harris 2004). Tese nar- that minority participation in preservation still needs ratives tell of a preservation history in these communities to be improved through connections with residents, that began in the late 1960s or early 1970s, ofen led by community developers, and other neighborhood activ- African Americans and tied to the era’s growing com- ists. One of the key challenges of inclusivity, at times, munity development movement. As Kaufman (2004, 9) is that cultural groups vary in how they defne heritage states, “preserving Pittsburgh’s African American heri- and in their prioritization of such pillars of preservation tage was inseparable from the eforts of the city’s African as material integrity and architectural merit (Hayden Americans to secure decent homes and neighborhoods.” 1995; Green 1998; Mason 2003; Mason 2006; Lee 2012). In the 1990s and 2000s, preservation continued to Federal policy and National Register criteria create a very become a more inclusive profession and build stronger top-down, expert-oriented profession wherein making ties to residents, neighborhood groups, and community decisions based on multiple voices requires signifcant development eforts (Hayden 1995). At the state and structural change to the profession (Mason 2003). Tere local level, nonproft organizations launched eforts to is an inherent assertion of power in preservation deci- document and preserve African American communities. sion-making (Reichl 1997; Schneider 2001; Hoelscher For instance, the Preservation Resource Center of New and Alderman 2004; Jenks 2008; Zhang 2011), wherein

Volume 9 | 2017 • Preservation Education & Research 9 P eer- reviewed Articles

“individuals and groups recall the past not for its own decades of decline, neglect, and disinvestment resulting sake, but as a tool to bolster diferent aims and agendas” in material changes to the historic fabric. Even a simple (Hoelscher and Alderman 2004, 349). In other words, process such as the windshield survey, a common frst preservation outcomes depend on who gets to determine step for preservationists (Lee 2012), is problematic as it what is signifcant and how to preserve tangible elements relies on expert eyes, with little to no community input. of the past. Additionally, perceptions about elitism and In summary, the preservation profession recognizes gentrifcation are a barrier to preservation in African a need to better address African American (and other American communities (Listokin et al. 1998; Smith 1998; minority) heritage sites and include community members Foley and Lauria 2000; Bures 2001; Boyd 2005), as pres- and others in preservation decision making. Professional ervation is ofen “portrayed as causing expulsion of poor and scholarly writing acknowledges that standard pres- and minority people” (Foley and Lauria 2000, 3). Te per- ervation tools inadequately respond to the history and ceived causal relationship with gentrifcation creates an contemporary challenges of many African American uphill battle for preservationists who may have the best neighborhoods, yet new tools are not widely developed of intentions but insufcient tools to address the needs of or implemented. Local, state, and federal organizations minority communities. continue to experiment with historic preservation strat- Te NPS and NTHP have both recognized a need to egies in African American communities. Ofen guided better address African American historic sites (Harris by the best of intentions, these eforts have mixed results 2004; Kaufman 2004; Leggs, Rubman, and Wood 2012). and merit continued analysis by preservation scholars Te NTHP called for a “concerted efort to go out into and refexive practitioners. the feld to identify African American historic sites and determine their signifcance” (Harris 2004, 8). In METHODOLOGY a simple yet profound conclusion, the NPS found that much progress in the area of African American historic Tis research is a qualitative case study of the CRS’s preservation has been made, but even more work remains Landmarks of Cleveland’s African American Experience (Kaufman 2004). Te authors of a more recent NTHP project, which began in the fall of 2012. CRS estab- publication concluded that “the preservation of African lished a goal to “identify historic resources associated American sites ofen happens on an informal basis” with [African American] history for listing in the Ohio (Leggs, Rubman, and Wood 2012, 1) and called for more Historic Inventory” (Crowther 2013, 2). Te case provides structured and broad initiatives. Te NTHP also argues a contemporary example of preservationists’ eforts to that the work of preserving African American heritage is address African American heritage, building knowledge imperative as it “empowers black youth” and conveys sto- about how preservationists are doing so, related tensions ries that “might otherwise be lost because urban renewal and opportunities, and lessons for future eforts. and the out-migration of blacks destroyed or led to the Te qualitative case study relied on participant obser- abandonment of many African American communities” vation over the course of nearly two years (from fall (Leggs, Rubman, and Wood 2012, 2). 2012 through the time of this writing), document analy- Existing studies fnd that preservation processes and sis, and informal interviews with key participants. Te tools are insufcient when focusing on African American majority of the paper focuses on the project’s frst year heritage sites (Van West 1998; Harris 2004; Lee 2012). For (from fall 2012 to summer 2013) and the completion of instance, Lee (2012, 28) argues that “‘cultural layering,’ a survey report and a series of Ohio Historic Inventory which results when cultural diversity and demographic (OHI) forms. mobility are combined, presents particular dilemmas in At the start of the project, CRS convened a task force interpretation and rehabilitation.” In other words, many comprised of local historians, interested preservation- urban African American neighborhoods were not built ists, and African American community leaders. CRS by African Americans and thus have complex and lay- staf leading the project also presented information at ered histories. Te NTHP found that “some of the current various stages to the community and at organizational standards that are required for designation do not allow meetings. On average, there was a meeting every other a sufcient number of African American historic sites to month throughout the project, and in total, the research receive designation” (Harris 2004, 8), recognizing that involved observing seven meetings. Key documents also many African American neighborhoods have sufered provided insight into the African American Experience

10 P reservation Education & Research • Volume 9 | 2017 P eer- reviewed Articles

Table 1. Race and Poverty in Select Neighborhoods

Neighborhood African American population (%) Poverty rate (%) Central 94 70 Fairfax 95 38 Hough 96 40 Glenville 97 35 City of Cleveland 53 31

Source: City of Cleveland Planning Commission project, including the 2012–2013 survey report that CRS north during the Great Migration. In 1900, the city had prepared for the Ohio Historic Preservation Ofce (the 5,988 African American residents—1.6 percent of the State Historic Preservation Ofce, or SHPO); 150 corre- total population. By 1920, this number had grown to sponding OHI forms; articles published in CRS’s member 34,451 (4.3 percent), and over the next three decades, the newsletter, Façade; six online articles in CRS’s Know our African American population grew by more than four Heritage series; and various meeting minutes, handouts, times, totaling 147,847 in 1950 (16.2 percent) (Gibson and and project summaries. Jung 2005). According to the 2010 US Census, 53.3 percent of the city’s residents are African American. PAST EFFORTS TO PRESERVE CLEVELAND’S Newly arriving African Americans in Cleveland settled AFRICAN AMERICAN HERITAGE in the Central neighborhood, just southeast of downtown. Troughout the twentieth century, many of the city’s Cleveland is the epitome of a shrinking, postindus- east-side neighborhoods became strong majority African trial city, with an urban landscape refecting entrenched American communities, including Central, Fairfax, economic and physical decline, racially segregated neigh- Hough, and Glenville (Table 1). Tese communities have borhoods, poverty, and urban redevelopment. Te city a rich historical legacy, but have sufered from popula- has sufered from decades of population decline, decen- tion decline, destructive urban renewal practices, massive tralization, manufacturing losses, and overall economic disinvestment in the built environment, and increasing distress. More recently, the city and region were hit by vacancies and abandonment. For instance, from the the foreclosure crisis, resulting in heightened pressure 1930s through the 1960s, the Central neighborhood was for widespread demolition. Today, the city includes a the locus of intense urban renewal activity, resulting in an resurging downtown and revitalized neighborhoods, almost entire erasure of the city’s oldest African American as well as communities in severe distress where vacancy neighborhood. Furthermore, the recent foreclosure crisis and abandonment run rampant. Te city’s African has hit the city’s traditionally African American neigh- American heritage is not well documented, while heritage borhoods particularly hard, making the issues of vacancy, associated with industrialization, epitomized by grand abandonment, and demolition particularly pressing in mansions and downtown commercial buildings that many of these already-distressed communities. boomed during the era of Rockefeller, oil production, and Te City of Cleveland established its Landmarks eventually the steel and auto industries, is prioritized. Te Commission in 1971, and the nonproft CRS has worked current, ofen decaying state of the city’s industrial fabric on behalf of preservation interests since 1972, but there has garnered popular attention, although the heritage of has been relatively little recognition of the city’s signif- job loss, economic decline, and painful contraction are cant African American heritage.1 One exception is the not ofen highlighted in the “rust” aesthetic. “Black History Tematic Resource,” listed in the National Te history of African Americans in Cleveland follows Register of Historic Places in 1982 (Johannesen 1981).2 a common pattern in northern and midwestern cities. Te designation included eight properties (two are now In the nineteenth century, there were small numbers of demolished), with six in the Central neighborhood.3 African American residents. Tis population surged in While certainly not comprehensive, the 1982 nomina- the early twentieth century as southern blacks migrated tion illustrated the varied nature of Cleveland’s African

Volume 9 | 2017 • Preservation Education & Research 11 P eer- reviewed Articles

Fig. 1. Distribution of legacy project survey sites within Cleve- land, Ohio. (Author, 2013.)

American historic sites by recognizing black churches, Originally, CRS sought to survey ffy sites (CRS 2012), business enterprises and businessmen, and social and but the Ohio Historic Preservation Ofce, which provided cultural institutions. funding and an AmeriCorps staf person, required the completion of 150 OHI forms during the frst year of the project THE “LANDMARKS OF CLEVELAND’S (fall 2012–summer 2013).6 Subsequently, CRS has continued AFRICAN AMERICAN EXPERIENCE” the project through a public education series and by exploring the purchase and installation of Ohio Historical Markers To honor its fortieth anniversary in 2012, the CRS initi- at key sites (CRS staf, pers. comm.). ated a “legacy project” entitled Landmarks of Cleveland’s CRS frst generated a list of potential African American African American Experience.4 Te main purpose was historic sites using three methods. First, they identifed “to identify, record and recommend for landmark des- famous African American Clevelanders and associated ignation historic buildings and sites associated with buildings. Second, they reviewed four secondary sources Cleveland’s African American community” (CRS 2012, and archival resources for references to potentially sig- n.p.). To oversee the project CRS convened a task force, nifcant sites.7 Finally, the AmeriCorps staf person which set four project goals:5 conducted a windshield survey of the city’s African 1. Identify properties and sites signifcant to the American neighborhoods to locate sites identifed via the city’s African American heritage that did not prior two methods and to note architecturally interesting already have historic designation; properties (McDonough n.d.). Te primary target neigh- 2. Promote National Register and/or local borhoods for the windshield survey included Hough, designation; Glenville, Central, Fairfax, Mt. Pleasant, Kinsman, University Circle, Buckeye, a cluster of southeast neigh- 3. Communicate fndings as a way to stabilize borhoods (Lee-Miles, Miles-Seville, Union-Miles, Park/ neighborhoods and attract residents; and Corlett, Lee-Harvard), and the Ludlow neighborhood in 4. Commemorate history with plaques or markers. Shaker Heights (Figure 1) (Crowther 2013; McDonough (CRS 2013, n.p.) 2013d; McDonough n.d.).8 Te team established fve

12 P reservation Education & Research • Volume 9 | 2017 P eer- reviewed Articles organizing themes: arts and culture, government and Table 2. African American Heritage Sites by Type community, business and industry, civil rights, and the church (McDonough 2013a). Property / building use Number included in survey Te result was the identifcation of 150 historic sites afliated with Cleveland’s African American community, Houses 73 although two sites were removed from the fnal report “due Religious institutions 46 to a lack of architectural integrity or historical signifcance” Businesses 12 (McDonough 2013d, 23). Te sites are concentrated in four key neighborhoods: Central, Fairfax, Hough, and Glenville Apartment buildings 7 (Figure 1). Te majority of the properties are houses, fol- Community buildings 6 lowed by religious institutions, with the team identifying Schools 3 a few businesses, schools, and other community institutions (Table 2). Despite the explicit goal of identifying Cemeteries 1 properties without preexisting designation (McDonough Parks 1 n.d.), 59 of the 148 OHI forms (about 40 percent) are for homes in the Ludlow neighborhood, a part of the Shaker Source: Author, 2013, based on data in McDonough (2013) Village National Register historic district. Te justifcation for their inclusion was that the preexisting designation did not focus on the neighborhood’s association with integra- undesignated African American historic resources and tion and the civil rights movement (McDonough 2013d).9 that existing preservation strategies, namely survey work, Afer reviewing the 148 OHI forms, CRS staf and task can generate knowledge and awareness of important force members recommended that seventy-eight sites (just African American sites. For example, the team identifed over 50 percent) be considered for future National Register and recommended for future designation two historically nominations. Discounting the ffy-nine Ludlow proper- signifcant churches in the Central neighborhood: Lane ties, the result was nineteen sites with National Register Metropolitan CME (c. 1901, originally the First Church potential (Table 3). of Christ Scientist) (Figure 2) and St. Andrews Episcopal Te frst year of the Landmarks of Cleveland’s African Church (c. 1916). Tey determined that both buildings American Experience project demonstrated many of the retained architectural integrity, despite widespread complexities involved with identifying, documenting, demolition in the surrounding community (McDonough and preserving African American historic sites. Tis anal- 2012l; McDonough 2013b). Te support for the designa- ysis found that there were clear success stories, in which tion of these buildings centers on common preservation the team found properties with strong ties to Cleveland’s arguments—they are among the oldest African American African American heritage and recommended those sites congregations in Cleveland and they have strong ties to for future research and possible designation. Tere were important national history, namely the civil rights move- also properties with questionable connections, which the ment (McDonough 2013d). Also located in Central is the team recommended for National Register designation, Jean Murell-Capers House (c. 1914) (Figure 3). Here, the but these connections to Cleveland’s African American team recognized strong ties to African American busi- heritage were secondary at best. Finally, there were a ness and political history. In 1949, Jean Murell-Capers large number of properties that, despite interesting con- was Cleveland’s frst African American councilwoman, nections to Cleveland’s African American community, and her father, Edward Murell, who originally purchased lacked integrity and provenance and were not given con- the house, was the original owner of the Call and Post, sideration for future designation. Cleveland’s only African American–owned newspaper (McDonough 2012f; McDonough 2013d). SUCCESS STORIES In other neighborhoods, CRS identifed the Boddie Of the nineteen non-Ludlow properties recommended Recording Studio (c. 1920) and the Madison and Madison for National Register designation, twelve have strong con- Professional Building (c. 1962) (Figure 4). Te former is nections to Cleveland’s African American heritage. Tese a house in the Mt. Pleasant neighborhood where Tomas success stories demonstrate that there are signifcant, Boddie established “Cleveland’s version of Motown, with

Volume 9 | 2017 • Preservation Education & Research 13 P eer- reviewed Articles

Fig. 2. Lane Metropolitan CME, 2131 E. 46th Street, Cleveland, Ohio (ca. 1901). (Author, 2013.)

Fig. 4. Madison and Madison Professional Building, 1464 E. 105th Street, Cleveland, Ohio (ca. 1962). (Author, 2013.)

Fig. 3. Judge Jean Murell-Capers House, 2380 E. 40th Street, Cleveland, Ohio (ca. 1914). (Author, 2013.)

14 P reservation Education & Research • Volume 9 | 2017 P eer- reviewed Articles

Table 3. Summary of OHI Forms and National Register Recommendations, by Neighborhood

Neighborhood # of OHI forms # Recommended for the National Register

Fairfax 23 3

Central 14 5

Glenville 12 3

Hough 11 2

Southeastern neighborhoods 9 1

Mt. Pleasant 8 1

University Circle / Little Italy 4 2

Cleveland Heights / Shaker Heights 3 1

Kinsman 2 0

Downtown 1 0

Ohio City 1 1

Slavic Village 1 1

Ludlow 59 59

Total (excluding Ludlow) 89 19

Total (including Ludlow) 148 78

Source: Author, 2013, based on data in McDonough (2013) the frst Motown recordings coming out of the studio connection to Cleveland’s African American heritage is in 1959” (McDonough 2013d, 35; also see McDonough peripheral at best. Tese properties illustrate difculties 2012a).10 Te Madison and Madison building, located in in African American preservation eforts, including the University Circle alongside the city’s prominent arts, cul- layering of heritage in dynamic urban neighborhoods and tural, educational, and medical institutions, was African the profession’s continued prioritization of architectural American architect Robert P. Madison’s Cleveland ofce. merit. For instance, the recommendations included the Madison opened his frm in 1954 and moved into this Outhwaite Homes Estates and Lakeview Terrace public building upon its completion in 1962 (McDonough housing complexes, constructed in 1937 (McDonough 2013c). According to the survey report, the building is 2012g; McDonough 2012j).11 Outhwaite Homes, in the signifcant because Madison’s “frm was the frst to be historically African American Central neighborhood, established by an African American in Ohio and the was originally open to African Americans, but Lakeview tenth frm to be opened in the United States,” and it “has Terrace, in the Ohio City neighborhood, was originally a connection to the civil rights movement because it for white residents. Conspicuously absent from the survey was constructed to house African American profession- report or OHI form for Lakeview Terrace is any mention als who were prevented from having ofces elsewhere” of its original segregation, the process of integrating it, (McDonough 2013d, 37). or any direct connection to African American heritage (McDonough 2012g). In fact, there is little justifcation for QUESTIONABLE CONNECTIONS its inclusion in the survey at all, aside from the fact that Despite the explicit focus on African American his- today most of its residents are African American. toric resources, the team recommended seven properties Te Rainey Institute (c. 1904) and the Morison Avenue for possible National Register designation for which the Missionary Baptist Church (c. 1925) are properties

Volume 9 | 2017 • Preservation Education & Research 15 P eer- reviewed Articles

Fig. 5. Rainey Institute, 1523 E. 55th Street, Cleveland, Ohio (ca. 1904). (Author, 2013.)

deemed worthy of future designation but whose signifcance comes from afliations that predate the transition of their respective neighborhoods (Hough and Glenville) to African American communities. Te Rainey Institute was built as a social service organization serving the Hungarian and Slovenian community and the recommendation for designation was based on its “importance to the early Hough community” and a pressing threat of demolition (McDonough 2013d, 24; also see McDonough 2012b) (Figure 5).12 Te project team emphasized the Morison Avenue Missionary Baptist Church’s connection to the city’s Jewish heritage, as “it originally housed the Jewish Association Bath House of Glenville and served as a Jewish Mickveh” (McDonough 2013d, 26; also see McDonough 2012i), and the property’s material integrity amid a severely deteriorated neighborhood (Figure 6). Te report recognizes that the property “symbolizes the transition of Cleveland’s African American neighborhoods from Jewish enclaves” (McDonough 2013d, 26) but Fig. 6. Morison Avenue Missionary Baptist Church, 1606 does not elaborate on this point. Morison Avenue, Cleveland, Ohio (ca. 1925). (Author, Finally, there were four properties that derive their 2013.) signifcance entirely from their architectural merit. Tese buildings were included in this project on African American heritage simply because they exist in what

16 P reservation Education & Research • Volume 9 | 2017 P eer- reviewed Articles

are now predominantly African American communities, despite the survey report or OHI forms providing no information on how or why they are important to the city’s African American heritage. For example, the Pentecostal Determine Church of God (c. 1872) (Figure 7) exemplifes this complete disconnect from the goal of identifying African American heritage sites. Te building, located in what is now a predominantly African American neighborhood and used by the surrounding community since the late 1970s, was recommended for potential designation because of “its architecture, which consists of a mixture of Gothic Revival and Romanesque elements” (McDonough 2013d, 39; also see McDonough 2012k).13

INTEGRITY AND PROVENANCE

Finally, seventy of the properties included in the project were not recommended for future investigation or National Register designation.14 While these properties warranted the preparation of an OHI form, the fnal project report simply states that they lack “integrity or provenance” (McDonough 2013d). Tese properties ofen possess interesting ties to African American heritage and Fig. 7. Pentecostal Determine Church of God, 9105 Miles provide insight into the ongoing challenges of preserv- Avenue, Cleveland, Ohio (ca. 1872). (Author, 2013.) ing urban African American heritage. For instance, the Icabod Flewellen Home (c. 1912) has “cultural signifcance as the original site of the African American Cultural and Fig. 8. Icabod Flewellen Home, 8716 Harkness Road, Cleveland, Ohio (ca. 1912). (Author, 2013.)

Volume 9 | 2017 • Preservation Education & Research 17 P eer- reviewed Articles

Fig. 9. Mayor Arthur Johnston House, 4585 E. 147th Street, Cleveland, Ohio. (Author, 2013.)

Historical Society” (McDonough 2013d, 25) (Figure 8).15 Te team identifed the home as “the oldest African American Historic Museum in the Hough area and in America” (McDonough 2012c, n.p.). While highlighting the current threat of neglect, the team determined that it lacked sufcient material integrity. In other words, the same neglect that threatens the future of the property prevents it from being worthy of National Register listing. Another case was the Mayor Arthur R. Johnston House, once the home of the frst African American mayor in Cuyahoga County and the state of Ohio (Figure 9). Around 1919, Johnston moved to the house, which at the time was located in the village of Miles Heights, one of the few areas where African Americans could own homes in the region. Once elected, Johnston remained mayor of Miles Heights until the City of Cleveland annexed the area (McDonough 2012h). Te survey report recognizes the property’s signifcance in African American politics, but simply states that it lacks “integrity or prov- Fig. 10. Jesse Owens House, 2212 E. 90th Street, Cleveland, enance” and therefore does not suggest any future action Ohio (ca. 1900). (Author, 2013.) (McDonough 2013d). Finally, two homes, both built around 1900, illustrate issues of integrity, provenance, and the politics of preserving African American heritage. Jesse Owens, world-renowned African American track athlete from the early twentieth century, lived in at least two extant homes in Cleveland’s Fairfax neighborhood. Owens lived in one of the houses from 1927 to 1930 (Figure 10) and the other during 1935 (McDonough 2012d;

18 P reservation Education & Research • Volume 9 | 2017 P eer- reviewed Articles

McDonough 2012e). From the outset, the project team signifcant properties, engaging local communities, and identifed these as ideal properties for local and/or valuing heritage that runs deeper than material fabric. national designation (CRS staf, pers. comm.). As the Tese issues are especially highlighted when working project proceeded, though, the potential nomination of to preserve African American (or other minority) heri- these buildings raised community tensions, which ulti- tage in urban, and ofen disinvested and impoverished, mately resulted in a recommendation for no immediate neighborhoods where decades of bricks-and-mortar future action. Both of the homes are in close proximity deterioration have reduced and sometimes eliminated to the Cleveland Clinic, which has “plans to erect 14 new material integrity. buildings in the Fairfax area over the next several years” Overall, CRS’s African American heritage project (McDonough 2013d, 15). Te local community develop- reveals fve key lessons for the preservation profession: ers have a delicate relationship with the Cleveland Clinic (1) the feld relies excessively on architecture, (2) there are and have developed neighborhood plans that beneft structural barriers to designation, (3) funding is impera- residents while accommodating projected Clinic expan- tive, but the strings attached can be counterproductive, sion. When neighborhood leaders realized that CRS was (4) meaningful community engagement is difcult, but eyeing the properties for potential designation, tensions imperative, and (5) connections to larger goals of urban emerged, with critiques that CRS had not reached out to revitalization must be clear and should not prevent rec- community members and was disregarding other (non- ognition of a complex and tenuous history. preservation) concerns in this disinvested neighborhood. Preservationists must continue to move beyond the Community leaders also raised questions about the feld’s architectural bias. CRS over-relied on the wind- homes’ signifcance, arguing that Owens lived in many shield survey, which emphasized the materiality of houses in Cleveland and they could not all be historic buildings. Rather, the identifcation of African American sites (CRS staf, pers. comm.). Embedded within this heritage sites called for more community-based engage- argument is a core struggle in African American pres- ment and historical research (Tomas 2004). In this ervation eforts, namely how to handle the high mobility context, identifying signifcant properties by archi- and impermanence of African American residents, busi- tectural features is severely fawed given the history of ness operations, and other activities. In other words, African American settlement and migration. Te result African Americans living in Cleveland and other cities was a survey with numerous architecturally signifcant in the early twentieth century were highly mobile result- buildings that had only recent or very peripheral connec- ing from restrictions on property ownership and limited tions to the city’s African American community. Preservation policy and practice are rife with struc- fnancial resources. Tese two houses, thus, are signif- tural barriers that result in bias against urban, African cant for their ties to Owens and as a tangible artifact of American communities. A lack of “integrity and prove- early twentieth-century African American settlement nance” was CRS’s primary reason for not recommending and mobility patterns. Tis signifcance, though, also the majority of identifed sites for future action. Te pre- undermines arguments for historic designation as they condition of high material integrity, given the history are two among many of Owens’s residences. of disinvestment and poverty, creates a system in which IMPLICATIONS FOR PRESERVING there is little chance to honor, via National Register AFRICAN AMERICAN HERITAGE or local designation, many urban African American historic sites. Te focus on material integrity further Te CRS’s Landmarks of Cleveland’s African entrenches perceptions of preservation as an expensive, American Experience project reveals that, while elitist practice that is in confict with the interest of many preservationists have made great strides toward inclu- low-income residents and community advocates. Te siveness, long-standing preservation tools and practices issue of provenance, cited frequently in the CRS survey can lack applicability and usefulness when working report, indicates the team’s difculty in tracing the his- in communities without high architectural styles and tory of properties, including their ownership over time. material integrity but with a rich cultural heritage and Given the historic barriers to African American prop- historic signifcance. If the preservation profession is to erty ownership, it is not surprising that it is difcult to truly embrace the nation’s multicultural heritage, it is trace where individuals resided over an extended period imperative to have a range of techniques for identifying of time. CRS completed the entire survey and 148 OHI

Volume 9 | 2017 • Preservation Education & Research 19 P eer- reviewed Articles forms in approximately eight months, and dismissing programs (Tomas 2004). CRS could have better engaged properties, at this early stage, due to a lack of provenance the community by focusing on a smaller geographic area, is extremely premature. negotiating more fexibility in project outcomes with the In general, a lack of sufcient funding is a major imped- funding agency, or giving up less productive methods iment to thoroughly surveying and documenting many such as the windshield survey. Meaningful engagement historic sites. When grants are available, funding agencies is not just a nicety, it is imperative to future successes in may impose counterproductive constraints. For CRS’s preserving African American (or other underrepresented African American heritage project, a state preservation groups’) heritage. Not embracing true community par- grant provided much-needed funding and refects the ticipation will perpetuate perceptions of preservation as preservation profession’s recognition of the importance an elitist, non-inclusive endeavor and will likely result in of such work. Te grant, though, required the comple- backlash from community leaders and residents. tion of 150 OHI forms, causing the team to focus more Focusing on a range of heritage sites, including those on meeting that quota than on thoroughly researching with negative connotations or associated with dif- and identifying African American heritage sites. Te cult moments in the nation’s past, remains an uphill numbers-driven funding resulted in the inclusion of ffy- battle. From the outset, CRS envisioned the project as nine individual OHI forms for the Ludlow neighborhood, a community development vehicle (CRS 2012), which which is (a) already included in a National Register historic resulted in a survey that neglects sites of confict or dis- district and (b) should clearly be one district listing. Te tress in Cleveland’s African American neighborhoods. grant requirements also indirectly encouraged a focus on Reminding people about the history of segregation, dis- landmarks over potential districts, which by virtue of size crimination, violence, demolition via urban renewal, and and complexity can be more cumbersome and time con- poverty is difcult when an underlying goal is to change suming to research and document. Te term “landmark,” perceptions about what it means to live and work in the also included in the project’s ofcial name (Landmarks inner city. For instance, civil rights sites were a prominent of Cleveland’s African American Experience), connotes theme in CRS’s project, but the heritage of civil unrest—as an elevated status and architectural importance. When evident in the landscape of the city’s Hough neighbor- preservationists are working in underserved communi- hood, where scars of the 1966 riots remain—was ignored. ties it is imperative to carefully select language and tools Furthermore, if a project such as this is to truly help stabi- that facilitate better partnerships. For example, a project lize impoverished neighborhoods, preservationists need focused on recognizing community heritage would have to be more explicit about community benefts and com- potentially provided a stronger grassroots framework and municate those benefts to city and community leaders built initial bridges to overcome critiques that preserva- and the general public. In other words, is there tourism tion is an elitist concern of outsiders. potential? Te ability to secure federal and/or state tax Preservationists must become equipped to carry out credits? Designated loan pools or funding for rehabilita- meaningful community engagement. For CRS, this was tion? Preservationists also need to constantly be refexive a signifcant missed opportunity to embrace diversity (of practitioners, making a concerted efort to answer these both race and class) and to build bridges to communi- questions themselves on a case-by-case basis. In other ties not historically engaged in preservation. According words, it is unproductive to make blanket statements that to the fnal survey report, public outreach was achieved communities will beneft from historic sites without frst through the creation of the task force (McDonough understanding (ideally from the community’s perspec- 2013d), which was comprised of about a dozen members tive) what benefts are needed and then determining if including a handful of prominent African American and how preservation can contribute. leaders. Te project included no process for simply talk- CONCLUSION ing to community members about the places that have historic meaning within their community, which could Te Cleveland Restoration Society’s Landmarks of have occurred in any number of ways—through surveys, Cleveland’s African American Experience project pro- online forums, or community meetings. Oral histories, vides an ideal case study of contemporary eforts to while time-intensive, would have served as a way to gather identify, survey, and document urban African American information from neighborhood residents who are ofen heritage sites. Te project was an important step in pre- disenfranchised in top-down preservation or planning serving the complex heritage of Cleveland’s African

20 P reservation Education & Research • Volume 9 | 2017 P eer- reviewed Articles

American community. CRS spent the frst year of the Boger, Gretchen. 2009. “Te Meaning of Neighborhood in the Modern City.” Journal of Urban History, 35 (2): 236–58. project convening a task force, establishing project goals, Boyd, Michelle. 2005. “Te Downside of Racial Uplif: Meaning of Gentrifcation in an completing 148 Ohio Historic Inventory forms, and African American Neighborhood.” City & Society, 17 (2): 265–88. writing a summary survey report. Afer encountering Bradley, Stefan. 2008. “Gym Crow Must Go: Te 1960s Struggle between Columbia challenges to the initial intent of securing national or University and Its New York City Neighbors.” In “We Shall Independent Be”: African American Place Making and the Struggle to Claim Space in the United States, edited local designations, CRS shifed its emphasis to heritage by Angel David Nieves and Leslie M. Alexander, 325–48. Boulder: University Press of education. Te organization is exploring the purchase Colorado. and installation of Ohio Historical Markers for select Bures, Regina M. 2001. “Historic Preservation, Gentrifcation, and Tourism: Te Transformation of Charleston, South Carolina.” Research in Urban Sociology, 6: 195–209. sites and launched a public education campaign entitled Collins, William J., and Fred H. Smith. 2007. “A Neighborhood-Level View of Riots, Know our Heritage. To date, CRS has published six online Property Values, and Population Loss: Cleveland 1950–1980.” Explorations in Economic articles (also disseminated through their mailing list) History, 44 (3): 365–86. about the Great Migration, the black church, the Jewish– Crowther, Kathleen H. 2013. “Annual Report.” Façade: A Publication of the Cleveland Restoration Society, no. 91: 1–7. African American connection, community leaders, arts CRS (Cleveland Restoration Society). 2012. “Cleveland Restoration Society’s African and culture, and the civil rights movement (CRS 2014). American History Initiative.” Unpublished project summary. Cleveland: Cleveland In Cleveland, as in other cities, the confuence of race, Restoration Society. class, poverty, and urban decline makes preserving —. 2013. “40th Anniversary Legacy Project: Landmarks of Cleveland’s African American Experience.” Unpublished project summary dated March 19, 2013. Cleveland: Cleveland urban African American heritage a pressing concern. Restoration Society.

CRS found that redevelopment, neglect, or demolition —. 2014. Know Our Heritage. Retrieved July 2, 2014 from http://www. threatened a majority of surveyed properties. Te twenty- clevelandrestoration.org/preserving_landmarks/advocacy/african_american.php. frst-century foreclosure crisis has exacerbated the legacy Dubrow, Gail Lee. 1998. “Feminist and Multicultural Perspectives on Preservation Planning.” In Making the Invisible Visible: A Multicultural Planning History, edited by of twentieth-century urban decline. Today, widespread Leonie Sandercock, 57–77. Berkeley: University of California Press. demolition is not only probable, it is happening, and the Dwyer, Owen J. 2000. “Interpreting the Civil Rights Movement: Place, Memory, and opportunity to preserve the signifcant, tangible heritage Confict.” Professional Geographer, 52 (4): 660–71. of the city’s African American community may soon be —. 2008. “Putting the Movement in Its Place: Te Politics of Public Spaces Dedicated to the Civil Rights Movement.” In “We Shall Independent Be”: African American Place gone. It is thus imperative for preservationists to refect Making and the Struggle to Claim Space in the United States, edited by Angel David Nieves upon their practices, engage local communities, and and Leslie M. Alexander, 415–38. Boulder: University Press of Colorado. make sound arguments for the preservation of these Dwyer, Owen J., and Derek H. Alderman. 2008. Civil Rights Memorials and the Geography of Memory. Athens: University of Georgia Press. under-recognized and threatened historic resources. FAAHPN (Florida African American Heritage Preservation Network). 2016. Retrieved April 20, 2015 from http://faahpn.com/.

STEPHANIE RYBERG-WEBSTER Foley, John, and Mickey Lauria. 2000. “Historic Preservation, Urban Revitalization Cleveland State University and Value Controversies in New Orleans’ French Quarter.” College of Urban and Public Afairs (CUPA) Working Papers, 1991–2000. Paper 14. Retrieved August 2013 from http:// Cleveland, OH (USA) scholarworks.uno.edu/cupa_wp/14.

Frohne, Andrea E. 2008. “Reclaiming Space: Te African Burial Ground in New York Stephanie Ryberg-Webster is an assistant professor of urban City.” In “We Shall Independent Be”: African American Place Making and the Struggle to studies in the Levin College of Urban Afairs at Cleveland State Claim Space in the United States, edited by Angel David Nieves and Leslie M. Alexander, 489–510. Boulder: University Press of Colorado. University. Her research focuses on the intersection of historic preservation and urban development. Her current work addresses the Fullilove, Mindy Tompson. 2001. “Root Shock: Te Consequences of African American use and efects of federal historic rehabilitation tax credits, the role Dispossession.” Journal of Urban Health, 78 (1): 72–80. of preservation in shaping the future of legacy cities, the history of Gibson, Campbell, and Kay Jung. 2005. Historical Census Statistics on Population Totals historic preservation, and the integration of preservation in citywide by Race, 1790 to 1990, and by Hispanic Origin, 1970 to 1990, for Large Cities and Other comprehensive planning. Urban Places in the United States. Retrieved July 2, 2014 from http://www.census.gov/ population/www/documentation/twps0076/twps0076.html.

Goings, Kenneth. W., and Mohl, Raymond A., eds. 1996. Te New African American Urban History. Tousand Oaks, CA: Sage. REFERENCES Green, Howard L. 1998. “Te Social Construction of Historical Signifcance.” In Preservation of What, for Whom? A Critical Look at Historical Signifcance, edited by Michael A. Tomlan, 85–96. Ithaca, NY: National Council for Preservation Education. Adams, John S. 1972. “Te Geography of Riots and Civil Disorders in the 1960s.” Economic Geography, 48 (1): 24–42. Greenbaum, Susan D. 1990. “Marketing Ybor City: Race, Ethnicity, and Historic Preservation in the Sunbelt.” City & Society, 4 (1): 58–76. Avila, Eric, and Mark H. Rose. 2009. “Race, Culture, Politics, and Urban Renewal.” Hanlon, James. 2011. “Unsightly Urban Menaces and the Rescaling of Residential Journal of Urban History, 35 (3): 335–47. Segregation in the United States.” Journal of Urban History, 37 (5): 732–56.

Blakey, Michael L. 1998. “Te New York African Burial Ground Project: An Examination Harris, Jefrey A. 2004. “African American Historic Places Initiative.” State of Afairs of Enslaved Lives, A Construction of Ancestral Ties.” Transforming Anthropology, 7 (1): Paper for the National Trust for Historic Preservation. Washington, DC: National Trust for 53–58. Historic Preservation.

Volume 9 | 2017 • Preservation Education & Research 21 P eer- reviewed Articles

Hayden, Dolores. 1995. Te Power of Place: Urban Landscapes as Public History. McDonough, Alexa. 2012a. “Boddie Recording Studio.” Ohio Historic Inventory Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. #CUY0990010. Columbus, OH: Ohio Historic Preservation Ofce.

Hillier, Amy E. 2003. “Who Received Loans? Home Owners’ Loan Corporation Lending —. 2012b. “Eleanor B. Rainey Memorial Institute.” Ohio Historic Inventory #CUY0988405. and Discrimination in Philadelphia in the 1930s.” Journal of Planning History, 2 (1): 3–24. Columbus, OH: Ohio Historic Preservation Ofce.

Hirsch, Arnold R. 1983. Making the Second Ghetto: Race and Housing in Chicago, 1940– —. 2012c. “Icabod Flewellen Home.” Ohio Historic Inventory #CUY0988105. Columbus, 1960. New York: Cambridge University Press. OH: Ohio Historic Preservation Ofce.

Hodder, Robert. 1999. “Redefning a Southern City’s Heritage: Historic Preservation —. 2012d. “Jesse Owens House (2178 E. 100th St.).” Ohio Historic Inventory #CUY0989706. Planning, Public Art, and Race in Richmond, Virginia.” Journal of Urban Afairs, 21 (4): Columbus, OH: Ohio Historic Preservation Ofce. 437–53. —. 2012e. “Jesse Owens House (2212 E. 90th St.).” Ohio Historic Inventory #CUY0989606. Hoelscher, Steven, and Derek H. Alderman. 2004. “Memory and Place: Geographies of a Columbus, OH: Ohio Historic Preservation Ofce. Critical Relationship.” Social & Cultural Geography, 5 (3): 347–55. —. 2012f. “Judge Capers House.” Ohio Historic Inventory #CUY0989206. Columbus, OH: Hofman, Lilly M. 2003. “Te Marketing of Diversity in the Inner City: Tourism and Ohio Historic Preservation Ofce. Regulation in Harlem.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 27 (2): —. 2012g. “Lakeview Terrace.” Ohio Historic Inventory #CUY0990503. Columbus, OH: 286–99. Ohio Historic Preservation Ofce. Hofschwelle, Mary S. 2003. Preserving Rosenwald Schools. Washington, DC: National —. 2012h. “Mayor Arthur R. Johnston House.” Ohio Historic Inventory #CUY0990110. Trust for Historic Preservation. Columbus, OH: Ohio Historic Preservation Ofce. —. 2008. “Rosenwald Schools in the Southern Landscape.” In “We Shall Independent Be”: —. 2012i. “Morison Avenue Missionary Baptist Church.” Ohio Historic Inventory # African American Place Making and the Struggle to Claim Space in the United States, edited CUY0990311. Columbus, OH: Ohio Historic Preservation Ofce. by Angel David Nieves and Leslie M. Alexander, 275–304. Boulder: University Press of Colorado. —. 2012j. “Outhwaite Homes Estates.” Ohio Historic Inventory #CUY0989106. Columbus, OH: Ohio Historic Preservation Ofce. Indiana Landmarks. 2015. “African American Landmarks.” Retrieved April 20, 2015 from: http://www.indianalandmarks.org/AboutUs/Initiatives/Pages/AALC.aspx. —. 2012k. “Pentecostal Determine Church of God.” Ohio Historic Inventory #CUY0989910. Columbus, OH: Ohio Historic Preservation Ofce. Jenks, Hillary. 2008. “Te Politics of Preservation: Power, Memory, and Identity in Los Angeles’ Little Tokyo.” In Cultural Landscapes: Balancing Nature and Heritage in —. 2012l. “St. Andrews Episcopal Church.” Ohio Historic Inventory #CUY0989406. Preservation Practice, edited Columbus, OH: Ohio Historic Preservation Ofce. by Richard Longstreth, 35–54. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. —. 2013a. “African American Task Force Community Survey Project.” Presentation given Johannesen, Eric. 1981. “Black History Tematic Resource.” National Register of Historic to Cleveland Restoration Society Board of Trustees meeting, January 24, 2013. Cleveland: Places Inventory/Nomination Form. Washington, DC: United States Department of the Cleveland Restoration Society. Interior, Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service. —. 2013b. “Lane Metropolitan CME Church.” Ohio Historic Inventory # CUY0037805. Johnson, April M. 2009. Durham Documentation of African American Historic Sites: Columbus, OH: Ohio Historic Preservation Ofce. Inventory and Preservation Plan. Durham, NC: Preservation Durham/National Trust for —. 2013c. “Madison and Madison Professional Building.” Ohio Historic Inventory Historic Preservation. #CUY1005811. Columbus, OH: Ohio Historic Preservation Ofce. Katz, Michael B. 2012. Why Don’t American Cities Burn? Philadelphia: University of —. 2013d. “Te Architectural Evidence of Cleveland’s African American Experience: Pennsylvania Press. 2012–2013 Survey Report.” Columbus, OH: Ohio Historic Preservation Ofce. Kaufman, Ned. 2004. “Draf Cultural Heritage Needs Assessment: Phase I.” Report —. n.d. “African American Task Force Historic Building Survey.” Unpublished project prepared for the National Park Service. Washington, DC: National Park Service. https:// summary. Cleveland: Cleveland Restoration Society. www.nps.gov/subjects/tellingallamericansstories/upload/PhaseIReport.pdf. MHT (Maryland Historical Trust). 2015. “African American Heritage Preservation —. 2009. Race, Place, and Story: Essays on the Past and Future of Historic Preservation. New Program Grants for Capital Projects.” Retrieved April 20, 2015 from http://mht.maryland. York: Routledge. gov/grants_africanamerican.shtml. Kusmer, Kenneth L. 1995. “African Americans in the City Since World War II.” Journal of Michney, Todd M. 2006. “Race, Violence, and Urban Territoriality: Cleveland’s Little Italy Urban History, 21 (4): 458–504. and the 1966 Hough Uprising.” Journal of Urban History, 32 (3): 404–28. Kusmer, Kenneth L., and Joe W. Trotter, eds. 2009. African American Urban History Since —. 2011. “White Civic Visions versus Black Suburban Aspirations: Cleveland’s Garden World War II. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Valley Urban Renewal Project.” Journal of Planning History, 10 (4): 282–309.

LaRoche, Cheryl J., and Michael L. Blakey. 1997. “Seizing Intellectual Power: Te Dialogue Newman, Harvey K. 2001. “Historic Preservation and Regime Politics in Atlanta.” Journal at the New York African Burial Ground.” Historical Archaeology, 31: 84–106. of Urban Afairs, 23 (1): 71–86.

Lee, Antoinette J. 2003. “Te Social and Ethnic Dimensions of Historic Preservation.” In Nieves, Angel David. 2008. “Cultural Landscapes of Resistance and Self-Defnition for A Richer Heritage: Historic Preservation in the Twenty-First Century, edited by Robert E. the Race: Interdisciplinary Approaches to a Socio-Spatial Race History.” In “We Shall Stipe, 385–404. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. Independent Be”: African American Place Making and the Struggle to Claim Space in the United States, edited by Angel David Nieves and Leslie M. Alexander, 1–20. Boulder: Lee, Toni. 2012. “Cultural Diversity in Historic Preservation: Where We Have Been, Where University Press of Colorado. We Are Going.” Forum Journal, Fall: 20–34.Leggs, Brent, Kerri Rubman, and Byrd Wood. 2012. Preserving African American Historic Places. Washington, DC: National Trust for Nieves, Angel David, and Leslie M. Alexander, eds. 2008. “We Shall Independent Be”: Historic Preservation. African American Place Making and the Struggle to Claim Space in the United States. Boulder: University Press of Colorado. Lewis, Earl. 1995. “Connecting Memory, Self, and the Power of Place in African American Urban History.” Journal of Urban History, 21 (3): 347–71. PRC (Preservation Resource Center). 2015. “Ethnic Heritage.” Retrieved April 20, 2015 from http://www.prcno.org/programs/ethnicheritage.php. Listokin, David, Barbara Listokin, and Michael Lahr. 1998. “Te Contributions of Historic Preservation to Housing and Community Development.” Housing Policy Debate, 9 (3): Preservation Virginia. 2015. “Partners in the Field: Projects/African-American Heritage.” 431–78. Retrieved April 20, 2015 from http://preservationvirginia.org.

Mason, Randall. 2003. “Fixing Historic Preservation: A Constructive Critique of Reichl, Alexander J. 1997. “Historic Preservation and Progrowth Politics in U.S. Cities.” ‘Signifcance.’” Places, 16 (1): 64–71. Urban Afairs Review, 32 (4): 513–35.

—. 2006. “Teoretical and Practical Arguments for Values-Centered Preservation.” CRM, RIBHS (Rhode Island Black Heritage Society). 2015. “Our Mission.” Retrieved April 20, 3 (2): 21. 2015 from http://www.ribhs.org/about.

22 P reservation Education & Research • Volume 9 | 2017 P eer- reviewed Articles

Ryberg, Stephanie. 2011. “Preservation at the Grassroots: Pittsburgh’s Manchester and 5 Te task force included prominent African American leaders in Cincinnati’s Mt. Auburn Neighborhoods.” Journal of Planning History, 10 (2): 139-163. Cleveland, including Councilman Jefrey Johnson (representing Schneider, Todd. 2001. “From Monuments to Urban Renewal: How Diferent Philosophies the Glenville neighborhood), Jennifer Coleman (the chairwoman of Historic Preservation Impact the Poor.” Georgetown Journal on Poverty Law & Policy, 8 of the City’s Landmarks Commission), Shelley Stokes-Hammond (1): 257–81. (daughter of former US Congressman Louis Stokes), scholars, Smith, Neil. 1998. “Comment on David Listokin, Barbara Listokin, and Michael Lahr’s ‘Te community leaders, ministers, and others. Te task force was Contribution of Historic Preservation to Housing and Economic Development’: Historic chaired by Bracy Lewis, a long-time leader in Cleveland’s African Preservation in a Neoliberal Age.” Housing Policy Debate, 9 (2): 479–85. American community and an Honorary Life Trustee of the Spiers, John H. 2009. “‘Planning with People’: Urban Renewal in Boston’s Washington Cleveland Restoration Society. Park, 1950–1970.” Journal of Planning History, 8 (3): 221–47.

Sugrue, Tomas J. 1996. Te Origins of the Urban Crisis: Race and Inequality in Postwar 6 OHI forms include basic property information and require at least Detroit. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. brief paragraphs describing a property’s architectural features and historic signifcance. Te forms do not constitute ofcial designation SurveyLA. 2013. SurveyLA Historic Context Statement Outline. Los Angeles: Department of City Planning, Ofce of Historic Resources. at any level, but can serve as the basis for future National Register nominations. Teaford, Jon C. 2000. “Urban Renewal and Its Afermath.” Housing Policy Debate, 11 (2): 443–65. 7 Te four secondary sources were Cleveland, Ohio by Regennia Tomas, June Manning. 2004. “Neighborhood Planning: Uses of Oral History.” Journal of Williams, A Ghetto Takes Shape: Black Cleveland, 1870–1930 by Planning History, 3 (1): 50–70. Kenneth Kusmer, Te Warmth of Other Suns: Te Epic Story of the

Tomas, June Manning, and Marsha Ritzdorf. 1997. Urban Planning and the African- Great Migration by Isabel Wilkerson, and Recognizing Ludlow—A American Community: In the Shadows. Tousand Oaks, CA: Sage. National Treasure: A Community that Stood Firm for Equality by Shelley Stokes-Hammond. Troltter, Joe W. 1995. “African Americans in the City.” Journal of Urban History, 21 (4): 438–57. 8 All of the surveyed neighborhoods are within the city of Upton, Dell, ed. 1986. America’s Architectural Roots: Ethnic Groups that Built America. Cleveland, except for Ludlow, which includes areas in both Washington, DC: Preservation Press. Cleveland and Shaker Heights, an inner-ring suburb. Tere Upton, James N. 1985. “Te Politics of Urban Violence: Critiques and Proposals.” Journal were three sites identifed via historical research that are in of Black Studies, 15 (3): 243–58. neighborhoods that were not surveyed (Slavic Village, Downtown, Van West, Carroll. 1998. “Assessing Signifcance and Integrity in the National Register and Ohio City). Process: Questions of Race, Class and Gender.” In Preservation of What, for Whom? A Critical Look at Historical Signifcance, edited by Michael A. Tomlan, 109–16. Ithaca, NY: 9 In reaction to the increasingly fast-paced racial turnover in National Council for Preservation Education. Cleveland’s east-side neighborhoods and the start of such transition

Wellman, Judith. 2002. “Te Underground Railroad and the National Register of Historic in adjacent inner-ring suburbs such as Shaker Heights, the Ludlow Places: Historical Importance vs. Architectural Integrity.” Public Historian, 24 (1): 11–29. Community Association (est. 1957) formed to intentionally and peacefully integrate the neighborhood (McDonough, 2013d). Zhang, Yue. 2011. Boundaries of Power: Politics of Urban Preservation in Two Chicago Neighborhoods. Urban Afairs Review, 47 (4): 511–40. 10 Boddie built his own radio and speaker systems, a record pressing plant in an outbuilding behind the house, and a mobile recording studio that was used by Carl Stokes’s successful mayoral ENDNOTES campaign in the late 1960s (McDonough, 2012a).

1 Te City of Cleveland Landmarks Commission oversees local 11 Te developments were among the frst housing complexes designation and changes to such properties. Te Cleveland completed by the Great Depression–era Public Works Restoration Society, the city’s primary nonproft preservation Administration, and the Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing Authority organization, is a nationally recognized leader in the feld. CRS (est. 1933) was the frst ofcial public housing authority in the nation advocates on behalf of preservation interests, ofers technical (McDonough 2012g; McDonough 2012j). support to owners of historic properties, manages an innovative 12 Te Rainey Institute eventually served African American fnancing program (Heritage Home), and conducts survey, residents as the neighborhood experienced racial turnover. designation, and other preservation work on a contract basis. 13 Other examples include the Zion Pentecostal Church in the 2 Similar to today’s multiple property nominations, the thematic resource designation identifed scattered sites afliated with the Corlett neighborhood (Gothic Revival), the Second New Hope city’s African American heritage. Baptist Church in Buckeye-Shaker (Beaux Arts), and the Lee Road Baptist Church in Lee-Miles (Modern). 3 Since the 1982 nomination, two of the eight properties have been demolished: the Jacob Goldsmith House and the Garrett Morgan 14 Te survey report ofen comments on these properties’ House. Te six extant properties included Cleveland Home for importance to local history and implies that local designation may Aged Colored People, House of Wills, Karamu House, Shiloh be possible, but does not ofer concrete recommendations as such. Baptist Church, St. John’s AME Church, and the Phillis Wheatley 15 When Flewellen was thirteen years old, he began a collection Association (Johannesen 1981). of African American artifacts, including articles, clippings, and 4 CRS provided organizational and staf support, while the other material culture. During his life, he amassed a collection of Ohio Historic Preservation Ofce provided grant support and an about 200,000 items and opened the African American Cultural and AmeriCorps volunteer, who was primarily tasked with research and Historical Society Museum. Te museum operated out of his house documentation of identifed sites. from 1953 to 1968 (McDonough 2012c, n.p.).

Volume 9 | 2017 • Preservation Education & Research 23