A bigger, better planning body inherits a big job

March 19, 2007

A new chapter is opening in preparations for Fort Monroe's conversion to civilian life. The governor is expected to sign off on legislation making significant changes in the group planning that conversion. Overall, it's a positive step, bringing the state to the table, where it should have been from the beginning. Because most of the base, including almost all the historic properties and developable area, will revert to the state upon the Army's departure, scheduled for 2011.

The legislation expands the panel (called the Federal Area Development Authority) beyond the original seven Hampton residents chosen by the City Council. The new seats are set aside for four state legislators, five ranking state officials and two experts in historic preservation and tourism.

The expansion is a good thing, but other aspects of the bill cause concern, if for no other reason than that their effects are uncertain. For example, the bill limits the city's ability to control what takes shape on Monroe, by specifying that it can't apply the usual tools like zoning to land the FADA owns. That could prove problematic, as the city will end up servicing whatever is built.[[Not if the entire post becomes a national park.]]

There is, too, a troubling provision giving the governor authority to hand over to the FADA the land the state claims. That would clear the way -- intentionally, it seems -- for the state to get out from under the responsibility it should continue to bear for preserving Monroe's historic assets and sharing them with the public.

As the improved FADA sets about its important work, here are just some of the things that should be high on its agenda:

Work with the city [[With the city? This sentence presents a nice idea, but that opening simply presumes that Fort Monroe becomes part of Hampton.]] to open up the beach and natural areas of Fort Monroe as soon as possible after the Army leaves. Of all the work that lies ahead, this part would seem to be relatively simple and would be a tangible -- and no doubt deeply appreciated -- demonstration of one of the benefits of reuse.

Continue to assemble the information required to develop really good plans for the base's future. One area to begin with: the base's many historic structures. Before informed decisions can be made about what should become of them, a detailed inventory, prepared by national experts, is needed. It should result in an assessment, for each structure, of the historic and aesthetic significance, condition, preservation needs, costs and potential reuse. Triage ought to be done to determine which structures warrant preservation and which will only suck up money and complicate redevelopment to an extent not justified by their historical importance

Put together a scholarly advisory panel. This is a standard practice in such undertakings; for example, in developing the USS Monitor Center, The Mariners' Museum assembled a panel of advisers from across the nation and beyond. The history of Fort Monroe is too important not to make sure that the best advice, the full range of expertise and perspectives, is informing decisions. Virginia War Museum Director John Quarstein's commitment to Monroe and his appreciation of the value of the post, grounded in his knowledge of local history, is a benefit. But a panel that is national in scope and eminent in stature will add to the quality and credibility of the reuse plan.

Tackle the issue that has not been given adequate attention: How to compensate for the economic hit Hampton will take when the Army decamps. This -- economic recovery -- is actually what the Department of Defense emphasizes in working with communities affected by base closures. According to estimates by the Hampton Roads Planning District Commission, Hampton will lose 5,300 jobs and $200 million in personal income. [[In fact that study deliberately looked only at the glass as half full, so the editors are quoting misleading statistics.]] It will recover only with savvy planning and an unrelenting focus on how too offset the loss of the Army's jobs, personnel and money.

Determine who should own the historic core of Monroe, with particular attention to the area within the moat. [[Again, the editors are presuming tha the bulk of Fort Monroe simply becomes part of Hampton. Why?]] The FADA must find and negotiate with a steward that has the necessary resources: money, expertise, experience. It will be hard pressed to find a custodian as well suited to the job as the state, and it is difficult to conceive of circumstances under which the FADA itself should accept this land, even if the state pushes to turn it over. The FADA will be light on resources, and historic Monroe will lose its claim to state support. The law specifically says the FADA isn't a state agency, and non-state agencies are last in the money line -- if they're in line at all.

The FADA has a huge assignment, and how well it discharges that job will make a tremendous difference in the prosperity of Hampton and in what becomes of irreplaceable historic and natural resources that are owned, in effect, by all Virginians. [[Then why simply presume that Hampton must own it?]]