OP-ED
Opinion Editorials state the views solely of the author and do not reflect the views of the Community Journal.
By Patricia Grabow
The fight to save Montana’s authentic character has been an uphill battle for decades, though to Livingston’s credit, we’ve managed to safeguard a lot of it. Not all, and it’s always been a struggle, but a lot, most of the downtown included. And now we face fresh assaults.
For exhibit A, drive with me for a minute out to Springdale, which most of you knows is a basically pleasant Montana town. However, few know it and the Hunter’s Hot Springs site have apparently been more or less acquired (like you might buy a historic souvenir postcard from Ebay) by yet another non-native with absolutely more money than God, who’s apparently decided to turn it into the facade of a gated community but without the gated community actual purpose. This small, rural town now has a series of new expensive high brick walls, obscuring Montana views while basically adding no security, and placed as erratically as dropped Legos.
You almost have to see it. If you're going to Californicate a Montana town, at least do it credibly, this is not even half convincing. And I guarantee you those gigabucks were made somewhere very far from Springdale.
It almost drips contempt for anything native or authentic or respectful of the Treasure State’s naturally evolved beauty, simplicity, cost-effectiveness, and roots in agriculture, ranching, or tourism, which stretch back to the days when Hunter’s was still a stop along the Northern Pacific mainline.
It’s been hits and misses back here in town, and our Historic Preservation Commission has mostly done its job. But it seems that there is a behind the scenes effort to undermine 46 years of work to keep Livingston from being the historic icon it, in fact, is. Which brings us to Exhibit B.
There actually exist people who think bulbouts all throughout our historic downtown are a good idea. Anyone remember seeing these oddities in old photos over at the Gateway Museum ever? Me neither.
And let’s add quickly, they are incredibly unintelligent. They steal so much space that delivery trucks, which pump the downtown’s lifeblood, can’t get around them. When we put millions into our streets and sidewalks in 2012, the then Public Works director wanted permanent bulbouts, which is how the one at the library happened. But we chose not to do them, not just for historic preservation, but because the permanent versions are much harder to keep snow-free in winter and just imagine snowplows having to deal with them. But even as just a “temporary” summer thing they are just as hard on local businesses.
Bulbouts are a literal direct assault on your freedom to drive where you need. People who don’t have to earn real livelihoods could only ever have designed them. Arguments like the Crescendo firm made that “Oh, but everyone else is doing them!” are foolish.
So for an idea as bad as this, do you announce it so people can find out, or do you sneak it in the back door? Well, ideally the back door - but you must first claim it was only a “trial.” But if the idea was dumb and destructive in the first place, why else would you trial it at all?
And I am skeptical that the current commission and staff really place respecting our authentic character high on their priorities list. Remember people always got rid of our most beautiful historic buildings (possibly by questionable means), like the Canyon Hotel in Yellowstone, or, according to my late historian friend Warren McGee, the magnificent Grand and Albemarle hotels here in Livingston, for, in addition to being where someone wanted parking lots, not being faddish and “modern” enough. Sometimes you have to tell peer pressure to go fly a kite.
I have been following comments given on Facebook and almost universally, the citizens of Livingston are against them and want them taken down yesterday.
Why would we destroy our authentic character when we could even, as I have argued before, possibly qualify as a “UNESCO World Heritage Site” as the original rail entrance to the first national park in the world, just south of here, which you may perhaps have heard of. (For you wannabe modernizers out there, a hint: it starts with a Y.)
We have stood against many planning idiocies from elsewhere before (remember their one-way streets schemes?), and we can do so again. Common sense is rarely that common.
The reality is, a small elitist group, with a well-oiled political machine behind it, feels entitled to dominate those whom they dismissively call “locals,” in disrespect to the fact the rest of us are fully entitled citizens. It’s gotten where I’m even suspicious now of that sign saying “Enjoy Livingston like the locals!” Is that urban saviourism trying to creep in somewhere?
But we seriously do have to keep watch. I’ve seen condescensions out of people at city meetings that would sink their campaigns if many voters besides yours truly had been actively watching. I am all for common ground—but slipping things in on the sly lest the “local yokels” take notice is the exact opposite of how to seek that.
Livingston has what Architectural Digest called “One of the Most Beautiful Main Streets in America” by evolution and preservation, not by the Music Man. It has taken 46 years of work to preserve what was always beautiful to begin with. One milestone along the way was the Herculean effort called the “Historic Resources of Livingston” approved in June of 1979, when the architecture firm of Kommers, McLaughlin & Leavengood, put over 400 sites in Livingston on the National Register of Historic Places collectively. With the help of the local HPC supposed to uphold that, the National Historic Preservation Commission, Livingston has made sure that what you see today stays true to the authentic character that dates to the turn of the century (you know which one I mean). Why cave now?
So, while poor Dillon, Montana, was allowing things like mansard roofs on storefronts, for the last 46 years our members of our Historic Preservation Commission managed to mostly say “No.”
I could tell you many stories about “rules for thee but not for me.” Reportedly the Legislature’s action against the Montana Historic Preservation Commission’s local officers grew out of a disgruntled Missoula woman’s offense at actual restrictions. What an unbelievable price to pay to the selfish. It echoes the familiar assaults on the Growth Policy (have I ever mentioned that?)
Of course, the City Commission can reinstate the roots of our local Historic Preservation Commission and give it the power it deserves. But the real question is, are they trying to sneak in their pet anti-historic projects in first to end-run real process? You watch—they will first try to claim the non-concrete temporary version was “uncontroversial.” As the saying runs, nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program.
This line must be held, or I guarantee more will follow. It is not just the bulbouts that alarm meeting-attending policy wonks like me. If you read the entire Livingston Master Plan created by this city commission with the Crescendo consulting firm, the insults threatened against our beloved authenticity in this beautiful, historic Montana town are legion.
It’s on the city website and worth reading to learn all they are really planning on the sly. Not only have they not said how the Livingston “Master Plan” will be implemented, but as if bulbouts weren’t delusional enough, they’ve even suggested cordoning off Main Street and making it—I am not making this up—a walking area. What literal planet are these clowns (sorry about that, to the actual clowns out there) from? Does nobody there actually have to earn a real-life living?
You can bet the M.O. will once again be a stealthy, unannounced rubberstamped approval. For evidence, look to the bulbouts.
If you want to stay less fake than a snake oil salesman in $50,000 crocodile cowboy boots, it may be time yet again to get out of the saddle and stamp your foot down hard. Because when the few feel entitled to sidestep public opinion, it usually takes nothing less.