|USFDC Home | USF Electronic Theses and Dissertations||| RSS|
This item is only available as the following downloads:
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8 standalone no
record xmlns http:www.loc.govMARC21slim xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.loc.govstandardsmarcxmlschemaMARC21slim.xsd
leader nam Ka
controlfield tag 001 001966668
007 cr mnu|||uuuuu
008 081023s2007 flu sbm 000 0 eng d
datafield ind1 8 ind2 024
subfield code a E14-SFE0002243
Spillane, Courtney Ross.
Reconstructing the past :
b heritage research and preservation activities in Tampa Bay communities
h [electronic resource] /
by Courtney Ross Spillane.
[Tampa, Fla.] :
University of South Florida,
ABSTRACT: There are numerous ways in which cultural heritage can be preserved, such as: physical museums, virtual museums, tours of historic homes, and community meetings. For this project, I participated in and observed heritage preservation activities in two very different communities--- Sulphur Springs and Seminole Heights in Tampa, Florida. My internship appointment was with OSHNA (Old Seminole Heights Neighborhood Association) under the direction of Dr. Steve Gluckman. My primary focus was assisting heritage preservation committee members in each of the two communities with heritage preservation projects specific to their community needs and interests. One project is the development of a heritage center (physical and/or virtual) that will be used to exhibit the community's cultural and material artifacts. The goal of the heritage center is to educate residents (especially the younger generation and newcomers) about current cultural traditions, achievements, and struggles of residents over time while instilling a sense of identity and belonging in residents by incorporating a diversity of perspectives in the preservation and presentation of the community's history. I was specifically involved in oral history collection; archival data collection and analysis (such as census data and city directory data); and National historic landmark designation analysis and preparation. The internship began in May 2007 and ended in August 2007.
Thesis (M.A.)--University of South Florida, 2007.
Includes bibliographical references.
Text (Electronic thesis) in PDF format.
System requirements: World Wide Web browser and PDF reader.
Mode of access: World Wide Web.
Title from PDF of title page.
Document formatted into pages; contains 102 pages.
Adviser: Antoinette Jackson, Ph.D.
Old Seminole Heights.
x Applied Anthropology
t USF Electronic Theses and Dissertations.
Reconstructing the Past: Heritage Research and Preservation Activities in Tampa Bay Communities by Courtney Ross Spillane A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Department of Anthropology College of Arts and Sciences University of South Florida Major Professor: Antoin ette Jackson, Ph.D. Karla Davis-Salazar, Ph.D. Susan Greenbaum, Ph.D. Date of Approval: November 16, 2007 Keywords: cultural heritage, hi storic preservation, sulphur springs, old seminole heights, hampton terrace Copyright 2007 Courtney Ross Spillane
i Table of Contents List of Tables iii List of Figures iv Abstract v Chapter 1: Introduction 1 The Anthropological Issue 3 Applied Anthropology and Her itage Preservation 4 Project Background 6 Research Settings and Background Data 7 Sulphur Springs 7 Old Seminole Heights 12 Internship Setting 14 Community Heritage Preservation Groups and Activities 14 Old Seminole Heights Preservation Committee 14 Sulphur Springs Museum Board 18 Conclusion 20 Chapter 2: Literature Review 22 What is Heritage? 22 Heritage and Culture: What is the relationship? 27 Heritage Preservation 28 The Rise of Herita ge Preservation 29 Reasons for Heritage Preservation 30 Heritage Applications 31 Belonging and Group Cohesiveness 32 Identity Conferring 33 Community Empowerment 34 Preservation Groups 35 Lack of Anthropological Literature 36 Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs 37 Conclusion 39 Chapter 3: Research Design and Methodology 41 Population, Sampling, and Informed Consent 41 Limitations 43
ii Research Question and Hypotheses 44 Methods 44 Participant Observation 45 Meetings 47 Community Heritage Events 48 Semi-Structured Interviews 53 Archival research 55 Data Analysis 56 Qualitative Data 56 Archival Research 57 Conclusion 57 Chapter 4: Results and Discussion 59 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE 1: To compare Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs for differences in their history, development, and current demographics 59 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE 2: To understand how Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs define heritage. 63 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE 3: To understand why the residents of Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs wish to preserve the heritage of their community 65 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE 4: To understand the preservation approaches employed by Old Se minole Heights and Sulphur Springs 70 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE 5: To understand the impacts that heritage preservation activities have on Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs 74 Discussion of Results 82 Chapter 5: Conclusions and Recommendations 84 Recommendations 87 Suggestions for Future Research 90 Bibliography 92 Appendices 98
iii List of Tables Table 1: Summary of Meetings I Attended 47 Table 2: Summary of Events I Attended 49 Table 3: Summary of Informants Characteristics 53 Table 4: Summary of Informants Group Affiliation 55 Table 5: Federal Census Data for Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs 63
iv List of Figures Figure 1: Map of Sulphur Springs 8 Figure 2: Sulphur Springs Arcade 10 Figure 3: Sulphur Springs Water Tower 10 Figure 4: Map of Old Seminole Heights 12 Figure 5: OSHNA Logo 15 Figure 6: Map of Hampton Terrace inset in Old Seminole Heights 16 Figure 7: A Bungalow in Old Seminole Heights 27
v Reconstructing The Past: Heritage Research And Preservation Activities In Tampa Bay Communities Courtney Spillane ABSTRACT There are numerous ways in which cultura l heritage can be preserved, such as: physical museums, virtual museums, tours of historic homes, and community meetings. For this project, I participated in and observe d heritage preservation activities in two very different communities Sulphur Springs and Seminole Heights in Tampa, Florida. My internship appointment was with OSHNA (Old Seminole Heights Neighborhood Association) under the direction of Dr. Stev e Gluckman. My primary focus was assisting heritage preservation committee members in each of the two communities with heritage preservation projects specific to their community needs and interests. One project is the development of a heritage center (physical and/or virtual) that will be used to exhibit the communitys cultural and material artifacts. The goal of the heritage center is to educate residents (especially the younger generation and newcomers) about current cultural traditions, achievements, and struggles of residents over time while instilling a sense of identity and belonging in residents by incorporating a divers ity of perspectives in the preservation and presentation of the commun itys history. I was sp ecifically involved in oral history collection; archival data collecti on and analysis (such as census data and city directory data); and National historic landmark designation analysis and preparation. The internship began in May 2007 and ended in August 2007.
1 Chapter 1: Introduction I sat in my grandmothers recliner on Christmas Day holding the oversized Mason jar in my lap and curiously ey eing its brilliant contents-Mothe r of Pearl, Tortoise Shell, glass, bamboo, leather, wood, and shell. I was amazed that I was holding hundreds of buttons collected by my great-grandmother, a seamstress, over one hundred years ago. I never knew her; she passed away shortly af ter I was born. Over the years I have seen pictures and heard a few storie s but not having any intimate memories of her or anything personal of hers to remember her by always saddened me. As I ran my fingers through the myriad of beads I repeated to myself, She touched these. She touched all of these. Although we never met, at that moment I felt a connection with her, a connection that transcended time and which old photographs and stories failed to ever generate. That day, the buttons were given to my mother by my grandmother w ho no longer wished to keep the silly things, as she called them. Not keep them?, I gasped to myself, Butbut, why not?. It seemed so clear to me that something with such historic and familial value one would want to retain forever. Nonethel ess, the one hundred year old button collection changed hands that day and now sits in a draw er in my mothers antique sewing machine. Seemingly inconsequential at the time, th is story now serves to illustrate some important points about heritage, that how people define heri tage and why they preserve (or discard) it changes over time and betw een recipients. Whether it be something as outwardly mundane as a button collection, or be it an historic home or an untold story, heritage is defined differently by indivi duals and groups. How he ritage is defined
2 influences the motivating factors for preserving it, both of which affect the successive actions that follow in the process of heri tage preservation, including the approach to preservation and the resulting impact s of preservation activities. Why do communities preserve their heritage? How do they define heritage? How do they approach heritage preservation? How do heritage preservation activities impact a community? How do the answers to thes e questions differ across and between communities? These are exactly the types of questions my research seeks to explore. This research is about heritage and heritage preservation activities in two very different communities, Sulphur Springs and Old Seminol e Heights, located within the city of Tampa, Florida. Understanding that heritage means different things to residents of diverse communities is essential to implementing a successful heritage preservation program and to managing heritage resources. Learning from residents what they believe encompasses heritage is an important first step. Is it historic architecture, st ories of the community elders, old photographs, all of the above, or none of the above? The value that residents place on their communitys heritage must also be understood. For example, some residents are willing to live with the restri ctions on property rights that come with nominating their community to an historic dist rict; others value their property rights over preserving the communitys heritage th rough historic home preservation and will vehemently oppose such a nomination. There are also various approach es to preserving heritage and there is value in communities exploring a range of options. Such approaches include the creation of physical and virtual museums, tours of historic homes, video documentaries, designation of historic di stricts, and commun ity presentations.
3 This thesis addresses four research questions: 1) How do different communiti es define heritage? 2) Why are they motivated to preserve their heritage? 3) How do they approach heritage preservation? 4) How do heritage preservation activities impact different communities? To answer my research questions I devel oped five research objectives that were achieved using participant observation, unstr uctured-exploratory interviews, semistructured interviews, and archival research. The objectives are: 1) To compare Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs for similarities and differences in their history, development, and current demographics 2) To understand how Old Seminole Heights a nd Sulphur Springs define heritage 3) To understand why the residents of Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs wish to preserve the heri tage of their community 4) To understand the preservation approach es employed by Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs 5) To understand the impacts that heritage preservation activ ities have on Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs The Anthropological Issue Preserving a communitys cultural herita ge is essential for establishing and maintaining a collective identity a nd generating commun ity cohesiveness. Anthropologists define culture as traditions, cu stoms, and values that are learned through
4 the use of symbols such as customs, beliefs, works of art, language, and photographs. Culture is used to enact both individual and group identity and unifies members of a particular group by providing them with a co mmon experience (Kottak 2003). Culture also shapes identity and provides a sense of belonging to members of society thereby satisfying psychological needs and helping to resolve problems of alienation or anomie (Haviland 1996). Culture is constructed, ar ticulated, learned, shared, and transmitted. This project seeks to understand the role that preserving cultura l heritage plays in communities, including how different communiti es define cultural heritage and heritage preservation, and how these communities negot iate preserving their cultural heritage. Applied Anthropology and Heritage Preservation Heritage would benefit from a four-field an thropological analysis since heritage is itself archaeological, cultural, biological, and linguistic in nature. The perspective that applied anthropology brings to th e field of heritage preservati on is that an individuals cultural values are important and should therefore be a decision-making factor in designing and implementing her itage preservation programs and policy. As an applied anthropologist I bring an emic approach to heritage preservation. The emic approach is a way of looking at things from the inside rs perspective or th rough the values of participants (Ervin 2005). A successful heritage preservation program depends on first identifying an individuals or groups value of heritage. Communities have distinct histories; the meaning and value that residents attach to heritage depends on th eir history and their enculturation to their community. The unique heritage of each community has importance
5 for different individuals in di fferent contexts; for long time residents, for those who once lived there, for those who once visited the community, a nd for those individuals and groups whose heritage is misrepresented or ignored (Baber and Rodriguez 2002). The meaning of heritage and who should be included in ones heritage can also differ within communities. Ones perception of the heritage of a community may not be inclusive of other ethnic groups who reside within its bounda ries. Such issues can have reverberating effects on the community and its he ritage project (Greenbaum 1990). Applied anthropologists have a better unders tanding of the attitudes and values of the stakeholders in preservation projects a nd can illuminate the constraints and suggest opportunities for solutions. Anthropologists are also adept at explaining the various views of the stakeholders involved. Anthropologists can reveal how the decisions of heritage managers are based on their cultural biases, that they feel their decisions are appropriate because of their values and are not nece ssarily the best solution to a problem. Analyzing the cultural biases of the managers of heritage preservation programs is a unique contribution to be made by the anthropologi st is unique contribution to be made by anthropologists because of their training in cultural relativism, the idea that one must suspend judgment on other peoples practices in order to understand them in their own cultural terms (Haviland 1996). Overall, understanding how different people and communities value heritage can aid in the development of heritage management policy and can help heritage practitioners to understand the ways in which heritage can contribute to the functioning of cities.
6 Project Background This research project is an extension of a project I first became involved with in September 2006 when I was enrolled in Dr. Anto inette Jacksons gra duate course, Issues in Heritage Tourism, in the Department of Anthropology at the University of South Florida. As a class project we participated in a newly launched heritage preservation program in a local Tampa community, Sul phur Springs. I compiled an ethnohistoric profile and an historic timeline of the comm unity in response to one of the initiatives proposed by the Sulphur Springs Museum Bo ard. Over the course of the semester I consulted historic documents including ne wspapers, photographs, postcards, tourist brochures, and Federal and State Census data. I continued to collaborate with Dr. Jackson and the Anthropology Departments Heritage Research and Resource Management Lab on the Sulphur Springs Heritage Project dur ing the 2007 Spring semester. During that same period the president of the Old Seminole Heights Preservation Committee expressed interest to Dr. Jackson in havi ng his committee members work with students from the Anthropology department. Shortly ther eafter, I decided to attend the monthly meetings of the Old Seminole Heights Ne ighborhood Association (OSHNA) and the Old Seminole Heights Preservation Committee to learn more about the community and its preservation efforts. I became interested in the preservation activities taking place within Old Seminole Heights as well and decided to intern for their Preservation Committee and broaden my research to include two comm unities and their approach to heritage. Although the official time period of my internship with OSHNAs Preservation Committee was May 2007 through August 2007, arch ival data collec tion, participant observation, and informal interviews for this research project began in September 2006
7 and continued for one year, until August 2007. The data collected in both Sulphur Springs and Old Seminole Heights during this yearlong period forms the basis for this thesis. It is important for the reader to understand that when I designed this research project I did not commence by identifying two different communities with the intent of illuminating the differences between them and th eir heritage preservation process. One of the underlying assumptions of this project is that the differences in two communitys history, development, and current socio-econo mic characteristics will influence how they define heritage, why they are motivated to pres erve their heritage, how they differ in their approach to heritage preservation, and the imp acts that heritage preservation can have in each community. Studying Old Seminole Heights together with Sulphur Springs enabled me to understand how heritage and herita ge preservation operate in different communities. Heritage is not static and the process of heritage preservation varies, they change over time and between and across co mmunities. Understand ing this fact is essential to the management of heritage resources in distinct communities. Research Settings and Background Data Sulphur Springs Located in the city of Tampa, Florida, the one square mile community of Sulphur Springs, although small, has a rich and vibran t history and is one of Tampas oldest residential neighborhoods (Figure 1). The bubbling spring was once the centerpiece of the community, drawing resident s from all parts of the United States to bathe in the healing waters. Yet, like many places it ch anged; residents came and went, long time
businesses closed and were replaced by a less stable kind. Over the last few decades Sulphur Springs has developed a negative public image as it declined in popularity. It has experienced an increase in crime, an influx in transient residents, and lost its tightly knit community atmosphere. Negative images of the communitys declining years weigh heavy in the minds of many residents who recall only the trouble brought on by dispirited residents. Figure 1. Map of Sulphur Springs In the late 1890s John Mills purchased what would later become Sulphur Springs from J.H. Krause, a real estate developer, and developed a small park around the natural bubbling spring with the intended visitors being respectable white people (The Tampa Daily Times, 1922). Mills developed his park into a small resort community and it opened in 1900 boasting bathhouses, a fishpond, and a pool. At the time of its opening Sulphur Springs could only be reached by horse and buggy, bike, or by foot over a narrow winding road and a one way bridge that crossed the Hillsborough River. Yet 8
9 shortly after opening for business steam sh ips traveled along the Hillsborough River filled with urbanites seeking recreation at the springs. In 1906 Josiah Richardson purchased 100 acres between Florida and Nebraska from Hillsborough River to Waters Avenue from Mills. The town was a rustic swimming pool with a few wooden bathhouses when Richardson bought it and he tr ansformed it into a winter mecca and spa for northerners. He laid walks, erected elab orate bathhouses, created an alligator farm, built a restaurant, dock, and toboggan slide. Ri chardson also built tourist cottages which were later converted to year-round homes as tourists made the community their permanent residence. A vibrant commerci al area grew up around the Springs and commercial development also flourished along Nebraska Avenue. It is extremely important to note that although Sulphur Springs was a popular recreation spot for tourists, the facilities, including the pool, Arcade, th eater and tourist club, were explicitly off limits to African Americans. There were so me instances were African-American were employed at these facilities. By 1908 the popularity of the once small resort community increased so drastically that a trolley lin e was built to Sulphur Springs by the Tampa and Sulphur Springs Traction Company. Visitors flocked to the spring for its healing waters; a 1911 Tampa tourist brochure touted Sulphur Springs as possessing water which is especially beneficial in cases of chroni c constipation, intestinal auto -intoxication and most kidney diseases where there is need of a cathartic a nd diuretic in combinations (Tampa Board of Trade, 1911). In 1925 Richardson began construction of the Arcade, a source of pride and convenience for the community for fifty years (Tampa Tribune July 26, 1970) (Figure 3).
Richardson saw the springs as a mecca for vacationers of modest means, but refused to sacrifice quality in the development of its attractions. He contracted an artist from Europe to decorate the interior of the Arcade, and for the sidewalk he pioneered terrazzo, marble chips laid over concrete that were buffed to a luminous sheen. When it was completed in 1927 the Arcade boasted an hotel, apartments, post office, barbershop, sheriffs office, jail, and bank. It was recognized in Ripleys Believe it or Not as an entire city under one roof and the first mini-mall in the United States. Completion of the Arcade spelled out the need for water to service it so Richardson mortgaged all of his assets, including the 100 acres of Sulphur Springs and the Arcade to build an $180,000 water tower overseen by architect Grover Pool. The Sulphur Springs Water Tower is located on 13 acres of grassland on the banks of the Hillsborough River at the intersection of East Bird Street and North Florida Avenue in the community of Sulphur Springs (Figure 3). The expansion of the community into a bustling tourist destination and real estate market would not have been possible without the creation of the water tower to bring the necessary water to its businesses, patrons, and residents. Figure 2. Sulphur Springs Arcade Figure 3. Sulphur Springs Water Tower 10
11 Intense rainfall associated with the tropical hurr icane of September 4, 1933, which passed across central Florida northwesterly from the Atlantic Ocean, caused severe damage in Sulphur Springs and the failure of the Tampa Electric Company dam on the Hillsborough River. Sudden release of the stor ed waters washed out bridges, overflowed banks in the lower river reaches, and sent wa ter surging through to wn. Shortly after the flood the effects of the Great Depression re ached Sulphur Springs. Both events caused the merchants and residents of the Arcade to default on their rent payments, leaving Richardson without funds to pay the mortgage on the Arcade. Richardson was forced to sell his Sulphur Springs holdings to J.T. Hendrick Estates but remained in Tampa until his death in 1956. The spring continued to be po pular with tourists and residents alike and remained a central part of the community where people came to swim, picnic, and shop at the Arcade. In 1974 the owner of the Arcade, J.T. Hendrick Estates, sold it to Tampa Greyhound Track to develop into a parking lot. News of the plan to demolish the Arcade spread quickly through the community and it s members banded together to save their Arcade. Helen Porth, Vice President of the Society for the Preservation of Sulphur Springs said, We tried to continue our m eetings but all people would say was not to fight anymore (Tampa Neighbor December 11, 1975). Despite a spirited effort by nostalgic Tampans to save the building, it was torn down to make way for a parking lot. By 1975 the Arcade was deserted and was demo lished in 1976. Local residents believe that the fall of the Arcade was a turn ing point downhill for the community.
Old Seminole Heights Aging oaks and historic bungalows characterize the suburb of Old Seminole Heights (Figure 4). It is one of three neighborhoods that make up Seminole Heights, another one of Tampas oldest residential neighborhoods. The popularity and growth of Sulphur Springs was instrumental in the development of Seminole Heights. The establishment of the trolley line that ran north along Central Avenue connecting downtown Tampa with Sulphur Springs made living in the suburbs north of the City possible. Seminole Heights flourished until the pressures of World War II and until the disruptive effects of Interstate 275 created changes in the community. Today, Seminole Heights is in the process of revitalization after experiencing several decades of decline and crime problems. Figure 4. Map of Old Seminole Heights 12
13 Seminole Heights began to develop in J une of 1911 when Realtor/developer T. Roy Young acquired forty acres of land thre e miles north of downtown Tampa. The development of Seminole Heights was geared toward the middle class. The majority of homes constructed were Craf tsman style Bungalows which were popular with the middle class for their ability to blend beauty w ith economic feasibility. The Bungalows in Seminole Heights were required to have an eas t/west orientation and were characterized by a front porch, simple ornamentation, a low pi tched roof, and stone pillars. The average price of a Seminole Heights Bungalow was $5,000. As World War II cast an ominous sha dow over the country in the 1940s, it weakened the once stable Seminole Height s neighborhood. Many reside nts also felt the effects of the Depression and soon home ow nership decreased. Seminole Heights became a transient neighborhood with many of its families becoming renters. In the 1960s the construction of Interstate 275 destroyed the harmony in the neighborhood and split it into three smaller communities within its boundaries : Old Seminole Heights, South Seminole Heights, and South East Seminole Heights (Mormino and Pizzo 1983). In recent years Old Seminole Heights has seen rising property values and a decrease in crime. This is due in part to the founding of the Old Seminole Heights Neighborhood Association in the last 1980s Old Seminole Heights is popular among young professionals, couples and families s eeking an alternative to cookie cutter subdivisions. The community continues to attr act new residents with diverse backgrounds all coming together in the name of preservation. Old Seminole Heights was designated a National Historic District as was Hampton Terrace, an area within Old Seminole Heights.
14 Internship Setting The Old Seminole Heights Preservation Committee does not occupy a permanent space so my internship research activities took place in a variety of locations. These locations included the Old Seminole Height s Garden Center, homes of Preservation Committee members, the Seminole Heights branch library, Old Seminole Heights churches, and the Downtown Tampa librar y. My internship supervisor, also an anthropologist, was flexible in allowing me to choose my tasks. His only request was that I donate the raw data to the Preservation Co mmittee at the conclusion of the internship (while respecting confidentiality ). Initially I only had one goal, to collect archival data on the community that would late r be used to establish a virtual museum. Approximately one month into the internship I realized the need for a second task, which would provide me with a different perspectiv e with which to address my re search questions. This second task was to interview the opponents of the Lo cal Historic District nomination that was currently underway in a small neighborhood within Old Seminole Heights called Hampton Terrace. My objective was to unde rstand why they opposed the nomination and to develop ways to address their opposition. Community Heritage Preservat ion Groups and Activities Old Seminole Heights Preservation Committee My internship was conducted with the Old Seminole Heights Preservation Committee in the community of Old Seminole Heights. The Preservation Committee is a standing (permanent) committee within the Old Seminole Heights Neighborhood
Association, or OSHNA (Figure 5). OSHNA is the largest neighborhood association within the City of Tampa. It currently has over 400 members (OSHNA 2007). OSHNA has seven standing Figure 5. OSHNA Logo Committees, one of which is the Preservation Committee. The other committees include Code Enforcement, Neighborhood Involvement, Communications, Special Events/Community Service, Highways And Byways, and Neighborhood Crime Awareness. Figure 6. Map of Hampton Terrace inset in Old Seminole Heights The Preservation Committee was created in 1988 with the purpose of protecting Old Seminole Heights as an area of historic significance; seeking recognition from federal, state, and local authorities as an historic district; and identifying and promoting the preservation, maintenance, and enhancement of the historic neighborhood properties, sites, and environment within Old Seminole Heights (OSHNA 2007). The committee 15
16 meets once per month at the homes of committee members. The committee organizes several yearly events. Previous events in cluded a presentation by the publisher of American Bungalow, John Brinkmann; two pr esentations by Jane Po well, a restoration consultant and preservation author; and a pres entation of the histor ic Burgert Brothers photograph collection. It has a membership of approximately 25 people with an average of nine people attending the monthly meetings. The Preservation Committees most prom inent project is the designation of Hampton Terrace, a neighborhood within Old Se minole Heights (Figure 6), to a Local Historic District. Hampton Terrace was designated a Nati onal Historic District on January 29, 1999 and shortly thereafter a group of residents expressed interest in nominating it to a Local Hist oric District. The difference between the two types of designations, local and national, is in the degree of pr otection extended. A national historic designation provides protection only when a federal or state funded project could potentially impact the district. A local hist oric designation is a way to maintain the historic look and feel of the community by adopting local design guidelines that limit alterations, demolition, and new construc tion (National Park Service 2007). On October 12, 2004, a Hampton Terrace resident organized a neighborhood meeting to gauge residents interest in nominating Hampton Terrace to a Local Historic District. Approximately 40 people attended the meeting, including two representatives from the City of Tampas Historic Preser vation Department. With, what was deemed by the City as, positive interest gathered from that meeting, the Department of Historic Preservation moved forward with their surv ey of the neighborhood and OSHNA voted to explore this option via committee. The survey was initiated in order to determine if the
17 historic fabric was consis tent and strong enough for the neighborhood to move from a National Historic District de signation to a Local Historic District designation. The outcome of the survey by the Historic Pres ervation Department was to pursue the local nomination. As a result of the survey, the Hampton Terrace Nomination Committee held a public meeting on September 12, 2006. The objectiv es of the meeting were to present information about the proposed district and c onduct a vote, by the raise of hands, on who was in favor of the nomination, who was agai nst it, and who required more information. Sixty-four people, out of approximately 550 Hampton Terrace homeowners, were in attendance. Based on this September meeti ng the committee decided to move forward with the process for designating the neighborhoo d as a Local Historic District. Formal, monthly committee meetings began on February 13 2007. The purpose of the monthly meetings is to discuss the goals and intenti ons of the local district and to create design guidelines. The Hampton Terrace Nomi nation Committee Names and Contact Information List contains 57 people. Within the Hampton Terrace Nomination Committee is a small, yet active and vocal, group of opponents. At the onset of my research I was not interested in interviewing this population because my initia l goal was to understand what aspects of heritage should be preserved and why heritage should be preserved and these individuals fell out of this realm of inquiry. After a few months of attending the Hampton Terrace Nomination Committee meetings I realized th at understanding the o ther side of the argument would help me understand how herita ge and heritage preservation operates in communities. It would also be useful in increasing the efficacy of the Hampton Terrace
18 preservation project and in designing herita ge preservation projects in other communities who are also experiencing oppositi on to a preservation project. A second project is the collec tion of archival data for use in the development of a virtual museum and to bolster the Local Historic District nom ination for Hampton Terrace. The committee arranges group rese arch trips to the Tampa-Hillsborough County Library approximately every six to eight weeks. At these research trips residents collect archival data from City Directories, Fe deral and State Census records, historic photographs and historic newspapers on microfiche. One of th e objectives of the research trips is to construct a chai n of occupancy for all the contributing structures in the proposed Hampton Terrace historic district. Another objective is simply to consult the above-mentioned resources to collect as mu ch information as possible on Old Seminole Heights. Sulphur Springs Museum Board The Sulphur Springs Museum Board form ed in the Summer of 2006 with the mission to celebrate and preserve the hi story of Sulphur Springs, a neighborhood community that helped shape Tampa, Flor ida (Sulphur Springs Museum Board 2006). The Sulphur Springs Museum and Heritage Center are giving special attention to including the role that the adjacent Spring Hill community played in the history of Sulphur Springs, the history of which has largely gone undocumented in the historic record. As mentioned previously, the Museum Board partnered with Dr. Antoinette Jacksons Issues in Heritage Tourism gradua te class to develop the museums exhibits
19 and strategic business plan. The initiatives proposed by the Board were an Oral History Archive, Ethnohistory Project, and research grant opportunities. Although the Sulphur Springs Museum Bo ard is young in comparison to the Old Seminole Heights Preservation Committee, heritage preservation in Sulphur Springs is not a new endeavor. The Sulphur Spri ngs Action League, a neighborhood civic organization, was founded in the 1980s in part to preserve the memories and the historic significance of the community. An instrumental contributor to these ea rly preservation efforts is Bea, one of my informants. She ne ver lived there but spen t her youth recreating in Sulphur Springs, she still works in the community running the Sulphur Springs Penny Saver, and actively works to preserve its heritage by researching the community, collecting historic artifacts and photographs, and organizing the bia nnual Sulphur Springs School Reunion. More recent preservations efforts, in cluding the Sulphur Springs Museum and Heritage Center, are lead by Raymond and Jean ette, ten year reside nts of the community. They believe that capitalizing on the history of Sulphur Springs would help stem decline and engage youth. One of the reasons for collec ting the historic info rmation is in hopes that the youth will become interested in thei r community. They would like to educate the youth about the historic signifi cance of Sulphur Springs, the current issues affecting the community, engage them as researchers and en courage them to participate in the process of heritage preservation. The goal of the pres ervation activities is not simply to collect information for preservation reasons but also to positively affect the communitys youth. During the 1980s, Spring Hill, a small African-American community within Sulphur Springs, also organized heritage preservation ac tivities. The mission of The
20 Spring Hill Community Associ ation was to rekindle love, unity, and fellowship, keeping alive the ideas of our fathers. They achieve d this by holding meetings on the fourth Saturday of every month and organizing a yearly community reunion. At the Fifth Annual reunion the associat ion compiled the Memory Book which discussed the history of Spring Hill, the founders of th e community, and included family trees of longtime residents. Conclusion The goal of this research is to unders tand how different communities define heritage, why they are motivated to preserve their heritage, how they differ in their approach to heritage preservation, and the imp acts that heritage preservation can have in the two different communities of Old Seminol e Heights and Sulphur Springs in Tampa, Florida. During a one-year period between September 2006 and August 2007 I performed qualitative research in both communities. Th is included a four-month internship with the Old Seminole Heights Preservation Committee which was conducted during the Summer of 2007. This research is important for two main reasons. First, heritage preservation and research will help situate both Old Seminol e Heights and Sulphur Springs in the public heritage of Tampa and illuminate the contributions of those communities and of their residents to the development of the city. The reputation of both communities has declined over the years but in response to the preserva tion efforts of dedicated residents, Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs are in the process of reclaiming their rightful place in history.
21 Second, understanding that heritage means di fferent things to residents of diverse communities is essential to managing a successf ul heritage preservation program. As an applied anthropologist I bring a unique perspective to the fiel d of heritage preservation. Anthropologists have a better understanding of various worldviews and ideologies and are able to explain the diffe rent viewpoints of stakeholders. They can also point out decisions that are based on cultural biases.
22 Chapter 2: Literature Review This chapter will discuss the relevant literature within the field of heritage preservation. The review is presented by theme which is followed by a brief discussion of prominent heritage theorists view on that theme and how it rela tes to the communities under study. The headings and sub-headings in this chapter were chosen because they were the most salient topics in the reviewed heritage and preservation literature and are therefore essential to a discussion of the topic (Howard 2006, Chambers 2007, Hewison 1989, Lowenthal 1996, Samuel 1994). I will begin the chapter with defining heritage and discussing all that it encompasses. Then I will discuss the history and recent rise in the popularity of heritage preservation, which will be followed by a discus sion of the applications of heritage. I will conclude with an overview of the literature available on Sulphur Springs and Old Seminole Heights. What is Heritage? The definition of heritage is broad. It has different meanings and significance depending on whom you ask and when. Once tho ught of as an activity reserved only for elites or the wealthy (Howard 2006), recent years have witnessed the term heritage being increasingly employed to describe virtually anything that anyone can use to create a link, fact or fiction, with the past (Johnson and Thomas 1995). Similarly, according to Howard (2006:1), heritage is an ything that people want to save, collect, or conserve. In
23 this case, my familys tradition of belting out Happy Birthday painfully off key to the unfortunate birthday person is as much part of my familys heritage as my Nanas wedding ring. While a definition of heritage that in cludes a familys silly traditions may appear far-reaching, Howard argues that people usually feel more strongly about things they do rather than things they own and thus a more broad and encompassing concept of heritage should be used, one that expands beyond the built or na tural environment to include intangible and tangible pe rsonal heritage (Howard 2006). There is a strong movement in Old Semi nole Heights to preserve the historic Bungalow homes. Yet there is increasing inte rest in collecting or al histories from community elders about what daily life was like when they were growing up in the community. Their stories, in large part, ma ke up the heritage of the community; they supplement the histories of the old structures and any other physical artifact, for that matter. The movement to collect these stories arose from residents who wanted to be able to pass them down to thei r children, grandchildren, a nd other young residents. The definition of heritage as defined by the 1983 National Heritage Conference exemplifies this broader notion of heritage: that whic h a past generation has preserved and handed on to the present and which a significant group of population wishes to hand on to the future (Hewison, 1989:6). In this definition, as with the definition of heritage in Old Seminole Heights, and my own heritage, ther e is no partiality toward tangible or intangible heritage, or between grou p or personal heritage; heritage is anything that is given to the present and that a group, or individual, deems significant and worthy of preservation for future generations.
24 So, given the above definitions, that heri tage can basically be anything you want it to be, what exactly is heritage? Heritage can encompass the built and natural environment, and socio-cultural elements. Heri tage within the built environment includes architecture and archaeological sites. Preservationists argue that the American Bungalow homes in Old Seminole Heights and the Wa ter Tower in Sulphur Springs are an important part of the citys he ritage, just as the Statue of Liberty is part of our national heritage. Natural heritage includes National Parks, like Mount Rushmore and Yosemite or State Parks like Niagara Falls or the Ca lifornia Redwood Forest. Our cultural heritage encompasses national, state, regional, comm unity, and familial heritage including, but not limited to, oral histories, food, s ongs, dance, dress, and music. There are two categories of heritage, pe rsonal heritage and public heritage (Chambers 2007). Personal heritage begins with both tangible and intangible items that individuals inherit and later pass down to their children or grandchildren. This may include memories, old photographs, grandmot hers old quilt, an old wedding dress, family recipes, church hymns, a lullaby, or even my great-grandmothers button collection It also includes the legacy of teachin gs, precepts, and habits drummed into or emulated by us since infancy (Lowenthal 1996:32). This might include the Sunday school teachers instruction that we treat others how we wish to be treated or that we exchange wrapped gifts on December 25 th Personal heritage is more cultural than historical, its existence as heritage depends on the ability of its recipient to control it and ensure its transmission to others (Chambers 2007) If the heritage item or concept ceases transmission from person to person, from generation to generation, from present to future, that aspect of an individual or groups heritage ceases to exist. Heritage, in this
25 sense, is that part of the past realized in practices and values, that is recognized as being necessary to cultural pres ervation and well-being. While initially private, our heritage s oon becomes collective, or public, as it is passed down through the ages to friends, family, and communities (Lowenthal 1996). Public heritage serves primarily to introduce us to things that we did not directly experience, such as the stories I discovered about Sulphur Springs heyday at the beginning of the 20 th century. These stories were interviews with residents that were published in newspaper articles within the previous 20 years. The interviews took place with long time residents or children of d eceased long time resident s. The interviewees passed on their private heritage, their storie s about growing up in Sulphur Springs, to residents through out Tampa Bay turning their once private heritage, public. According to Chambers (2007), this public heritage is based in history and is usually beyond our control. For example, in the l iterature on Sulphur Sp rings zenith there is no discussion of the segregation and racism that occurred at the popular Sulphur Springs Pool, that unattractive element of history was omitted. Nor is there mention of the role that AfricanAmerican, or other underrepresented non-white s, played in devel oping the town. This history of Sulphur Springs appears to have been glossed over and through time this exclusion of this community from histor y has been accepted as fact, as the whole history of the town. Heritage is constantly changing; it is alwa ys being shaped and molded into something new and the significance of certain aspects of heritage can change over short periods of time. The significance of heritage is measured by current influence (Lowenthal 1996); it reflects the ruling aes thetics of the day (Samue l 1994:211). Some of what is
26 currently considered heritag e was once the mundane elements of everyday life. Today, heritage includes environments and artifacts, such as uns poiled countryside, wildlife reserves and industrial machinery, which in the past would never have come close to falling into the realm of history, either becau se such artifacts were too young to attract scholarly interest, or because they were t oo inconsequential or ordinary (Samuel 1994). Historic architecture, an impor tant topic in this study, is an excellent example of this dynamic quality of heritage. The Bungalow homes in Old Seminole Heights were once dilapidated and invaluable. Today, there is a great deal of social capital attached to owning a Bungalow, not hard to imagine when they can sell for as much as $450,000 and only ten years ago a Bungalow cost a mere $50,000. Some were even showcased in a recent issue of American Bungalow Magazine, p ublished in the interest of preserving and restoring the Bungalow. The Bungalows have al so transformed into a matter of scholarly interest with the Univers ity of South Floridas Anth ropology Department conducting research on them and their residents. The experience of heritage preservation in Old Seminole is congruent with the Rubbish Theory or Circuit of Culture which states that artifacts become obsolete and are categorized as useless or invaluable, until they become revalued and take their part in heritage development (Bennet 1981). The Bungalow homes in Old Seminole Heights, once prevalent among working class families at the turn of the century for f unctionality and cost efficiency, dwindled in popularity in the middle of the century (See Figure 7). The Bungalow originated among the artistic community in Southern Californi a in the 1890s and bega n spreading eastward in the 1920s becoming nationally signifi cant (Faragher 2001). The detached, singlefamily home was popular with young families and first-time homebuyers for its ease of
construction, low cost, and simple, yet beautiful, ornamentation. Some Bungalows once cost as little as $900 and came with all the newest technologies (American Bungalow 2002). Owning a Bungalow meant more than simply owning a home, to its owner it symbolized owning a piece of the American dream. Old Seminole Heights has witnessed a renewed interest in the Bungalow, with individuals and families renovating the Bungalows and fighting to preserve them as part of the heritage of their community. Figure 7. A Bungalow Home in Old Seminole Heights Heritage and Culture: What is the relationship? Being that anthropology is concerned with all aspects of human culture, and heritage is those tangible and intangible remnants of human culture, the field of heritage preservation seems a natural interest for anthropologists. Heritage, in its many forms, serves as documentation of life throughout the ages. It is a complex system that reflects 27
28 an important set of cultural, linguistic, and biological a ttributes that has developed through historical processes and which have so cial meanings. The concept also includes the primary principles of unity and diversity in that all people sh are a common heritage, but also recognizes diverse et hnic and cultura l backgrounds. The existence as heritage depends on the ab ility of its recipient to control it and ensure its transmission to others (Chambers 2007). Culture, just like he ritage, is inherited and both guide so much of our everyday liv es and are expressed through daily routines and actions. If heritage ceases transmission and is not taught from one generation to the next, then heritage ceases to exist and cultural loss is experienced. This definition encompasses the anthropological characterist ic of culture as that which can be transmitted, or taught, to others. Si nce heritage is transmittable, it is culture and is essential to cultural preservation and well-be ing culture, not history, is the glue of human memory, connecting place and value to peoples recollections in ways that make the past not only meaningful but also practically useful to its specific heirs (Chambers 2007: 37). Heritage Preservation The purpose of this next sect ion is to provide the reader with a brief introduction to the history of heritage preservation. It will also cover the reasons for its increasing popularity over the last several decades and changes in the way heritage has been conceptualized over time. Finally, it will di scuss the various reasons that people are motivated to preserve heritage.
29 The Rise of Heritage Preservation The movement for heritage preservation is often attributed to the nineteenth century and the ways of appr eciating the past that de veloped in Renaissance and Enlightenment Europe (Lowenthal 1996, Ho ward 2006). France and Russia wanted to conserve, not destroy, the palaces of the old regimes and adapt the buildings to serve a new purpose. This was seen as a way to legitimate their right to govern and to acquire control. For example, the new republican government in France after the Revolution wanted to conserve certain buildings and c onvert them into museums open to the public, in order both to demonstrate the legitimacy of their position a nd to emphasize their difference from the previous regime. There wa s also motivation to transform the natural landscape to represent a particular cultural heri tage. Lastly, the need for continuity leads to the version of history that has been labeled inevitable progress (42) As you can see, heritage preservation did not originate out of sentimental reasons that spur its recent popularity, as seen below. To what can the increase in popularity of heritage preservation over the last few decades be attributed? According to Lowentha l (1996), the rise in heritage preservation reflects the shock of loss and change and fears of an ominous and uncertain future. In this respect, as a way to endure the trauma of so cietal changes we cling to the familiar and definite heritage of our past. Kammen da tes the current nostalgia phenomenon to the decades following World War II, and suggests th at it was roused by fears about national security, freedom, rapid social change, and a profound sense of discontinuity among Americans (Cameron and Gatewood 2000:109). Apprehension about the future and nostalgia for a simpler time trigger the publ ics tendency to look into the past. Sadness
30 at change stokes the fiery demand for herita ge; beleaguered by loss and change, we keep our bearings only by clinging to remnants of stability (Lowenthal 1996:6). Many of my informants mentioned becoming interested in heritage preservation because, whether or not they actually experienced it first hand, they like the way of life back then. The last few decades have seen a significant change in the way heritage is being conceptualized and applied (More on this in greater detail below). Previously, heritage was employed to create a national identity through the creation of mainstream national histories. Recent uses of heritage lean toward gr anting recognition to those groups or events that have been excluded from main stream history, or have gone unacknowledged in an effort to emphasize common purpose experience, such as does a national heritage (Chambers 2007). Reasons for Heritage Preservation There are as many motivations for preservi ng heritage as there are definitions for it. Turnbridge and Ashworth categorized these many motivations into three broad categories, cultural-aesthetic, political, and economic motivations (1996). Some wish to preserve heritage for cultural reasons, such as carrying on a familial, communal, or national legacy. There are also aesthetic motivations for preserving heritage. For example, blocks of restored historic ho mes are aesthetically pleasing and beautify a community. Others preserve he ritage for economic reasons such as protecting and getting a return on an investment of a home in a hist oric neighborhood or to be able to capitalize on it at a later date, like selli ng grandmas tea service to pa y for your childrens college tuition. Others believe that heritage items simply possess an inherent right to be
31 preserved. Ultimately, heritage products are a response to the specific needs of the users and are created for the requirements of specific groups (Turnbridge and Ashworth 1996). Each community and each resident has their own reasons for wanting to preserve the heritage of their neighborhood, as will be seen in Chapter Four, Results and Discussion. Heritage Applications Preserving heritage serves many functions in our society. The past few decades have seen significant changes in the way herita ge is being applied. Th e trend of the past two decades or so has reevaluated what aspe ct of heritage is significant. New emphasis on heritage recognition within the United States have focused particularly on memorializing the pasts of ethnic minorities, working class populations, and of women and representing such groups within contexts of social class disc rimination, racism, and economic exploitation (Chambers 2007:17-18). While earlier notions of heritage often served the interests of national identity through the creati on of mainstream histories, recent notions of heritage lean toward recognizi ng those groups that were either excluded from these mainstream histories or went unr ecognized, in an effort to emphasize common purpose and broadly shared experience (C hambers 2007:17). An example of this is visible in Sulphur Springs, where one of the goals of the mu seum project is to include a diverse range of stories and diverse experiences of heritage in to the mainstream profile of the community.
32 Belonging and Group Cohesiveness Heritage preservation can impact an individuals sense of belonging and a groups cohesiveness, both positively and nega tively. Belonging to a group that shares similar values, beliefs, and customs satisfi es psychological needs and helps to resolve problems of alienation or anomie (Haviland 1996). Therefore, heritage preservation projects are a vehicle through which residents can forge new relationships with others who share their same values and interests. To share a common heritage is to belong to a family, a community, a race, a nation; what e ach inherits is in some measure unique, but common commitments bind us to others within our group (Lowenthal 1996:2). However, heritage preservation activities can be defined differently by various groups within a community resulting in tensions. Unfo rtunately, with every action in the name of heritage some people will feel excluded or ignored. A groups heritage project includes some individuals and creates strong group cohesiveness amongst them while at the same time excluding and angering others, making th e excluded feel ignored and unimportant. According to Turnbridge and Ashworth, confli ct over heritage proba bly occurred rather early in human history: if ev eryones heritage is in detail different, the potential for heritage dissonance appeared with the second human bei ng. (1996:71) In this case, conflict in heritage preservation is inevitable. Even groups focused on heritage preservation can become fractionalized. Heritage becomes a problem when different people att ach different meanings to it, which is a common occurrence since different groups and i ndividuals attach various meaning to the same heritage (Urry 1996). If all heritage is about people, with almost everyone involved in some aspect, and it is conserved or coll ected for somebody by somebody, then heritage
33 preservation groups, are themselves rarely a cohesive group. One of the most common characteristics of heritage preservation groups is a tensi on between a purist group who often form the core of activis ts, and whose agenda is sign ificantly different from the cannon fodder of the bulk of the memb ership (Howard 2006:39). This point was exemplified at every Hampton Terrace Nomination Committee meeting I attended. The proponents of the nomination disagreed on how to structure the Local Historic District Design Guidelines that would be instituted if the community was designated a Local Historic District. The majority insisted that all construction use hi storically accurate materials at the expense of hi gh cost, while the other side argued that so long as the construction looks historic it was ir relevant what material be used. Identity Conferring In both tangible and intangible forms, heri tage ultimately represents the identity of people. The past is a fundamental element of ones identity; the ability to recall and identify with our past provides us with m eaning, purpose, and value (Lowenthal 1985). A key goal of heritage preservation efforts is to share or define identity to a family, nation, community, or region. Cultural heritage pres ervation projects help to establish a collective identity, the sharing of which is analogous to belonging to a family or a community. Individual, or self, identity is integral as well but a common identity binds individuals to others within a group (Lowenthal 1996). Heritage preservation projects are a vehicle through which communities can develop a collective identity. The way that people engage with herita ge, how they modify it, adopt it and contest it are part of the way individual and group identiti es are created and disputed
34 (Harvey 2000). Heritage preser vation can be employed as a method to alter or manipulate a communitys identity. By pr eserving and interpreting our he ritage we tell ourselves who we are, where we came from, and to what group we identify (Lowenthal 1986). Although previous literature addresses loca l identity there are few studies which go beyond a study of building materials and vern acular architecture, except for projects promoted by Common Ground, a British charity th at encourages the conservation of the diversity of local places (Howard 2006) and some notable academic exceptions also deal with issues of local, non-national identity formation through heritage preservation (see MacDonald and Fyfe 1996, Graham et al 2000, Karp et al 1992). One of the goals of this research is to contribute to the discussi on of how community heritage preservation projects confer upon the resident participants a common identity. Community Empowerment Heritage preservation has been shown to have a positive impact on community empowerment and neighborhood building (s ee Phillips 1994, Kreamer 1992, Fuller 1992, Baber and Rodriguez 2002). Frequently, residents focus on the problems that are occurring in their neighborhoods such as c ode enforcement violations, crowded schools, and high crime which can have a negative imp act on the ways a community is perceived and talked about by both residents and outsi ders. Heritage preser vation projects often arise out of response to such discontents about how ones neighbor hood is perceived or from the destruction or potential or actualized destruction of treasured cultural resources (Greenbaum 1990). This empowers residents se ek out ways to bring recognition to their neighborhood and to teach the public about their unique co mmunities (Greenbaum 1998).
35 In Old Seminole Heights, heritage pres ervation achieved such a goal; it provided community members with It also gives them something universally positive to work on together while offering a variet y of ways for residents to get involved in their community in a meaningful and affirmative way. Preservation Groups People join preservation groups because of the emotional satisfaction they get from the pursuit of common goals and experiences. Such associations provide important sites through which new kinds of identity can be experimented with. Such groups may empower people, they provide relatively safe sites for identity-testing, and they can provide a context for the learning of ne w skills. (Urry 1996:59) Preservation groups possess several characteristics: there is a lot of volunteer work involved which is usually accomplished in peoples leisure time; the members work for each other through a complex system of mutual aid; they are self -organized and are particularly resentful of outside experts telling them how to organize; they pr oduce a large array of outputs many of which are consumed by the membership itself; their activity is not passive and individualistic but i nvolves communication and emotional satisfaction; th ere is strong resistance to commodification; and much emphasis is placed upon acquiring arcane forms and knowledge and skills (Urry 1996: 59). The OSHNA Preservation Committee exemplifies this. The committee is a group of individuals who volunteer their time planning heritage preservation events. Each committee member has talents and strengths that the committee can draw upon. Occupations within the committee include, real estate agents, archaeologists, filmmaker, histor ian, lawyer, land developer, environmental
36 engineer, and computer technician. The rese arch products they produce, which includes archival data and oral histories, are consumer solely within the committee. The members are in constant communication, mostly through an email chain. Within preservation groups there is a co re group and a periphery group. The core group is made up of highly active members and is more concerned with accomplishing preservation tasks, such as pr eserving a historic structure or planning events, than it is with recruiting new members. The periphery group is members of the organization partly for self-serving reasons and what their partic ipation in the group can do for them. They are generally interested in he ritage, enjoy gazing at histor ic homes from afar but do not dedicate a considerable amount of time, energy, or financial resources to preserving them (Howard 2006). Lack of Anthropological Literature Most of the literature written by anth ropologists on heritage and heritage preservation is found in multidisciplinary journals, such as the International Journal of Heritage Studies and Cultur al Heritage Studies. The ma jority of searches in anthropological journals returned results that were archaeological, or material, in nature, as opposed to being inclusive of living cultura l heritage, or oral hi stories, music, and dance. This reveals a lot about how our discipli ne defines heritage, it is that which falls under the archaeologists jurisdiction because it is hundreds, or thousands, of years old. As mentioned earlier, the definition and scope of heritage is constantly changing and that fact is exemplified here and throughout this study. Previousl y, heritage was solely under archaeologys purview, but as time progresse s cultural anthropologist s have realized the
37 significance of, and importance of preserving, relatively recent elements of heritage. My research will help build the cultural anthropol ogy side of the discussion on heritage and heritage preservation. Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs Part of the rationale for undertaking this research project is to fill a gap in the literature. There is not a single piece of literatu re that is devoted solely to telling the history of either Sulphur Spri ngs or Old Seminole Heights. Telling the history of these two communities is important because they co ntributed so much to the development of Tampa and they deserve r ecognition for their role. There are numerous works that retell Tampas history and also include brief morsels of information on the two comm unities of interest (Dunn 1972, Pizzo and Mormino 1983, Kerstein 2001). The Sunland Tribune and Tampa Bay History journal also periodically publish articles that speak of small pieces of Sulphur Springs and Seminole Heights history. Academic litera ture on Sulphur Springs was produced by three anthropology graduate students from the University of South Florida who situated their Masters thesis research within the context of Sulphur Springs (see Brown 2002, Hathaway 2005, Snelling 1983). Although Browns ma nuscript is an analysis of the pros and cons of doing ethnographic a nd oral history resear ch with elders in Sulphur Springs it also contains historic social and cultural information about the community (2002). Snellings thesis is an evaluation of the Neighborhood Strategy Area Program proposed by the City of Tampa for Sulphur Springs but it also contains an eight-page community profile including data on ethnic composition, housing, inco me, and employment. Another
38 related publication was a result of a class project for an Interdisciplinary Social Science course at the University of South Florida (Jones and Hathaway 2002). The purpose of this project was for undergraduate st udents to interview a wide age range of Sulphur Springs residents, from adolescent to senior citizens, to unders tand their perspective of the community in which they live. These four ma nuscripts provide a brief history of Sulphur Springs as well as a delineation of the communitys current issues. Technical reports from various Ci ty of Tampa and Hillsborough County organizations also provide a small amount of information on Sulphur Springs, although it appears that their information could have been gathered from the same source as it is, for the most part, redundant (see Southwest Florida Water Management District n.d., Hillsborough County Planning Commission 2005 ). The Florida Center for Community Design and Research compiled the Sulphur Springs Community Mapping project which contains several dozen maps detailing resour ces within the community along with Census data maps and demographic maps (2002). Most of my archival research time was spent sifting through large amounts of information on either the city of Tamp a or on Hillsborough County and scanning until I located text on Sulphur Springs. However, since Sulphur Springs was unincorporated from Tampa until the middle of the twentieth cen tury there is little information in these resources solely on Sulphur Springs. The majority of my findings were derived from clippings from The Tama Tribune, St. Peters burg Times, old postcards donated by the recipient to an archive, old tourist brochures, Chamber of Commerce booklets, magazines, business brochures, maps, photographs and Tampa historical journals, all of which were located at the University of South Florida Library Special Collections.
39 Literature on Old Seminole Heights in cludes Seminole Heights survey and registration grant final survey report, a survey of histor ic resources which contain a concise seven-page history of the community followed by an exhaustive list of all historically significant buildings within its borders (Historic Tampa/Hillsborough County Preservation Board 1992). A community analysis project for the University of South Florida course, Seminar in Public Libraries, produced a report containing a one-page community history and profile (Wetmore and Moore 1994). Conclusion Heritage is whatever a group or indivi duals deems worthy enough of preservation and transmission to the future. It does not have to be something that is felt with the hand, such as tangible artifacts, it can be felt w ith the heart. So in addition to encompassing historic architecture or sites it also include s oral histories, songs, dance, and music. Today, heritage is broadly defi ned so that historic homes and the stories of what occurred within those homes and within the community in which it is located, can all be deemed heritage. However, what is deemed he ritage is always changing. What was once considered useless rubbish 40 years ago is todays heritage. While it originated in Renaissance and Enlightenment Europe, herita ge theorists attribute the increase in popularity of heritage preservation to our longing for the past. Whatever the reasons for its recent surge, there are seemingly unlimite d motivations for preserving ones heritage including cultural-aesthetic, political, and economic. Every individual and each community as a whole differs in their motivations for preservation. Current heritage preservation always serves particular purpos es, and when new purposes are needed then
40 new heritages are sought out or manufactur ed. Heritage preservation can have many effects on the nature of the community in cluding impacts on comm unity cohesiveness, identity, and community empowerment. On a smaller scale, heritage preservation groups have their own impacts on the group itself wh en members attach various meaning to the same heritage. Anthropological literature is lacking on heritage preservation research, especially at the community level. This res earch will contribute to the anthropological discussion of heritage preservation on a co mmunity level using my research findings on Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs.
41 Chapter 3: Research Design and Methodology This chapter discusses the methods by wh ich the data were collected during the internship. The chapter begins with a di scussion of the population of interest, the sampling pool, sampling methods, the issue of Informed Consent, and study limitations. In the next section I restate my research questions and objectives, introduce the methodology of the project, discuss the reason each method was selected, and how they helped answer the research questions. The ch apter concludes with a brief discussion of how the data were analyzed. Population, Sampling and Informed Consent The population of interest is the Old Seminole Heights Preservation Committee, the Hampton Terrace Nomination Committee, and the Sulphur Springs Museum Board. I chose this population because I wanted to ga ther the perspectives of individuals who participate in preservation ac tivities in Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs, two very different communities in Tampa Bay with varying degrees of pr eservation activities. The Old Seminole Heights Preservation co mmittee contains 20-25 members (Prieur personal communication March 20, 2007), th e Hampton Terrace Nomination Committee Names and Contact Information List cont ains 57 people, and the Sulphur Springs Museum Board has five members. From this population of committee members I identified a smaller group of individuals to interview who shar ed the larger groups characteristics. I utilized a criterion-based selection proce ss to choose participants from
42 each committee who possessed characteristics closely related to the studys central questions (Schensul et al 1999). I solicited inte rviews from the individuals who attended at least three committee meetings and who partic ipated in the organiza tion of at least one community preservation event. Since I was in terested in the perspectives of only those individuals who are active participants in heritage preservation activities I did not solicit interviews from each committee member simply because their name was on the roster because they attended one or two meetings so metime in the, often times distant, past. For example, the Hampton Terrace Nomination Co mmittee Names and Contact Information List contains 57 people, however the larges t number of attendees at a single meeting was 18, with the average being 10. My initial sampling technique was that of convenience sampling. I utilized this technique at the first meetings I attended by asking whoever I obser ved at a minimum of three meetings to participate in my resear ch by granting me an interview. Bernard so eloquently defines convenience sampling as, grabbing whoever will stand still long enough to answer your questions (2002:184) a nd my informants were gracious enough to do just that. I late r utilized snowball sampling. At the conclusion of the interview with the initial informants I asked them to reco mmend another individual whom they thought might be interested in speaking with me. Sin ce my research dealt with a relatively small population of committee members who were in constant contact with one another snowball sampling was the choice method that enabled me to build a large sampling frame quickly (Bernard 2002). Each individual who granted me an interview was asked to sign a Consent Form illustrating his or her willingness to participate in the research pr oject (see Appendix A).
43 The University of South Floridas Institutional Review Board (IRB) requires this form whenever a researcher conducts a study invol ving human subjects. The purpose of the Consent Form is to ensure that each particip ant is aware of the purpose of the research and its potential benefits and risks. It also informs them that they have the option to withdraw from the research at anytime. Limitations It is important for resear chers to acknowledge and addr ess any limitations in their study. The major limitation in this study is in the methods and the difference in sample size between the two communities. I conducted a total of 40 interviews: 25 unstructuredexploratory interviews and 15 semi-structured interviews. While this quantity of interviews is itself sufficient, it is import ant to note that the sample sizes between Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs is qui te different. In total, I interviewed 12 informants from two different preservation groups in Old Seminole Heights and three board members from the Sulphur Springs Mu seum Board. The reason the numbers vary to this degree is because the membership of the preservation groups in Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs also varies. As mentioned above, the Old Seminole Heights Preservation Committee has 20-25 member s, the Hampton Terrace Nomination Committee has 57, and the Sulphur Springs Museum Board has five members. This limitation restricted the coverage of the process of heritage preservation in Sulphur Springs. Fortunately, th e research activities in Sul phur Springs by Dr. Jacksons Heritage Research and Resource Management Lab is growing each semester as are the
44 efforts of the Sulphur Springs Museum Board. My research project should be viewed as the first of many future projec ts that will study heritage preservation in Sulphur Springs. Research Questions and Objectives The research questions that this thesis address are: 1) How do different communiti es define heritage? 2) Why are they motivated to preserve their heritage? 3) How do they approach heritage preservation? 4) How do heritage preservation activities impact different communities? To answer these research questi ons five objectives are proposed: 1) To compare Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs for similarities and differences in their history, development, and current demographics 2) To understand how Old Seminole Heights a nd Sulphur Springs define heritage 3) To understand why the residents of Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs wish to preserve the heri tage of their community 4) To understand the preservation approach es employed by Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs 5) To understand the impacts that heritage preservation activ ities have on Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs To achieve the above mentioned research objec tives this research project utilized the following methods and techniques:
45 participant observation; unstructured, exploratory interviews; semi-structured interviews; archival research; Participant observation was utilized as a tool to help build rapport with community members, identify pertinent preser vation issues affecti ng the community, to aid in the development of interview que stions, and to understand each communitys approach to heritage preservation. Both dur ing and following partic ipant observation I performed 25 unstructured, exploratory intervie ws with key informants. These interviews provided me with a better understanding of the preservation issues important to the residents, how they conceptualized heritage, and also helped me generate questions for the semi-structured interviews. I conducted 15 semi-structured interviews with members of both communitys preservation groups. The semi-structured interviews provided me with a deeper understanding of how each resi dent thought about heritage, why they are motivated to preserve the heritage of th eir community, and what impacts preservation activities create in their communities. Arch ival research elucidated the historic, developmental, and socio-economic similarities and differences between Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs. It was also a way for me to understand the impacts of heritage preservation activities. Participant observation For anthropologists, participant obser vation is a method that involves the researcher taking part in the daily activities, rituals, intera ctions, and events of a group
46 of people as one of the means of learning the explicit and tacit aspects of their life routines and their culture (DeWalt and De Walt 2002:1). Data collection for this project began with participant observ ation and it continued to dir ect and inform my research throughout the entire research period. I forged new relati onships by participating in community heritage preservation activi ties and attending neighborhood civic and preservation committee meetings. This allo wed me to build rapport with community members, establish myself as a researcher in both communities, identify salient issues relevant to the research and aided in the generation of inte rview questions (Bernard 2002, Schensul et all 1999). This technique was an essential part of my data collection process because it enabled me to understand how each community differed, how each community defined heritage, witness how communities approach heritage preservation (via community events, preservation committee mee tings, independent research, museums, or documentaries), and how participating in preservation activities impacted the communities. To achieve my research objective of understanding how each community defines heritage and approaches heritage preser vation my participant observation included attending heritage preservation committee meetings and planning and volunteering at community heritage events. The meetings a nd events were instrumental in achieving another research objective of understanding th e impacts that preserva tion activities can create. I observed the pr eservation meetings and events fo r signs of tension or peace. I wanted to observe if the discussions at th e meetings and events created hostility or cohesion. I chose both to attend preservati on meetings and help plan heritage preservation events in order to be both a part icipant and an observer, rather than just one
or the other (Bernard 2002). In addition to these preservation committee meetings I attended general neighborhood association meetings in order to understand the current events and issues affecting each community (See Table 1 and Table 2). I also conducted windshield observations while driving through the community in order to illuminate their differences and similarities. Participating and observing in this way helped guide my work by identifying important domains and questions that should be addressed in greater detail in the interviews. Meetings Table 1. Summary of Meetings I Attended Organization Name A ttendance DatesOSHNA Board2007: 3/19, 4/16, 5/21, 6/18OSHNA Preservation Committee2007: 1/15, 3/20, 4/12, 5/17, 7/12, 8/16Hampton Terrace Nomination2007: 6/5, 7/17, 8/7Sulphur Springs Action League2007: 1/25, 6/28 The OSHNA Board held meetings on the third Tuesday of every month at the Seminole Heights Garden Center, an historic community building. The purpose of the meetings is for the nine board members and chairs of the committees to congregate and discuss the performance of each committee. The meetings are also open to all residents. Attending the OSHNA Board meetings enabled me to understand what non-preservation issues were affecting the community, what priority the other Board Members placed on preservation issues, and how the Board responded to the Preservation Committee chairs discussions of the heritage preservation projects taking place in the community. The OSHNA Preservation Committee meets once per month, usually on Thursday evening, at the home of committee members. The objectives of the meetings are to 47
48 organize community preservation events, to discuss preservation issues affecting the community and organize an action plan to address those issues, and to devise new projects for the committee to do. The Hampton Terrace Nomination Committ ee meets on the first Tuesday of each month at the Old Seminole Heights Branch Li brary. The purpose of these meetings is for residents to participate in the development of Design Guidelines which will be instituted should Hampton Terrace be designated a Local Historic District. However, the meetings do not always achieve this goal. The Hampt on Terrace residents that are opposed to the nomination also attend the meetings to voice their opposition to the district. The Sulphur Springs Action League meets bimonthly at the George Bartholomew Recreation Center in Sulphur Springs. The Ac tion League was create d in the early 1980s. At the time of its inception, the Sulphur Springs Museum Board was meeting bimonthly. The board members gather to discuss the progress of the museums development, including legal issues, nonprofit status, grants, acquiri ng a building to house the museum, and status of research. The meetings have been put on hold for the last several months because the Vice Presidents health concerns however, research for the museum is ongoing. Community Heritage Events Attending these community events was a way for me to understand the different methods each community utilized to preserve its heritage and what they thought were the most significant elements of their heritage (Table 2). Another goal of attending the community events was to meet residents a nd speak with them about their communitys
preservation goals and activities. Attending the events was also a way to gauge community interest in heritage preservation based on the events turnout. What follows is a brief description of each event. Table 2. Summary of Events I Attended Event NameEvent DateA Look at Days Gone By: A Burgert Brothers PresentationNovember 14, 2006OSHNA Preservation Committee Research TripJanuary 20, 2007Sulphur Springs/Spring Hill History and Heritage DayFebruary 4, 2007Sulphur Springs School Reunion at the Golden Corral A pril 5, 2007American Bungalow EventApril 19, 2007Hampton Terrace Summer Research EventJune 20, 2007Solving A History Mystery A ugust 12, 2007 A Look at Days Gone By: A Burgert Brothers Presentation On November 14, 2006 OSHNA Preservation Committee presented photographs of the neighborhood's history via Power Point presentation and also had them displayed on the walls of the Seminole Height Garden Center. The chair of the Preservation Committee delivered the presentation and frequently solicited the crowd, made up mostly of local residents, for help in identifying the structures. The talk also included oral histories of the towns elders where they reminisced about their life in Old Seminole Heights. Approximately 150 people were in attendance. American Bungalow Magazine Presentation On April 19, 2007 OSHNA Preservation Committee invited the prestigious national architectural magazine, American Bungalow, to the community to deliver a presentation at the Seminole Heights United Methodist Church. The magazine's publisher, John Brinkmann, narrated a two hour-long presentation of photos of 49
50 bungalows from all over the United States. Hi s presentation traced the beginning of the bungalow from British Colonial India, to its popularity among working class families in the post-War years, its decline and its even tual revival. There were approximately 200 attendees. Hampton Terrace Summer Research Event and Sulphur Springs Student Presentations This summer four undergraduate student anthropologists from the University of South Florida collaborated with the Old Seminole Heights Neighborhood Associations Preservation Committee to learn how to conduc t community-based heritage preservation research. For six weeks, between May 14 and June 22, the students participated in the Heritage Research Experience for Unde rgraduates (REU) Field School under the direction of Dr. Antoinette J ackson and graduate student me ntors of the USF Department of Anthropology. Students conducted research to aid in the nomination of the Hampton Terrace neighborhood to a local historic district. Each student was assigned one block along Henry Avenue in Hampton Terrace and partic ipated in data collection activities as dictated by the Preservation Committee. They consulted Tampa City Directories, Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps, Federal Census record s, and historic news papers and photographs. They collected data on such items as who occupied the home and for how long, the homeowners occupation and age, date of construction, size of lot and design of the home. The students also conducte d oral history interviews with community elders and formal interviews with OSHNA Board memb ers and Preservation Committee members.
51 The six weeks of hard work culminated in two student presentations: the Hampton Terrace Heritage Research and Preservation Event on June 20, 2007 and the Sulphur Springs Student Presentations on June 21, 2007. Th e USF student researchers presented an analysis of the community, both pa st and present, based on the historical and archival data they collected. They were also given the opportunity to discuss an additional aspect of Hampton Terrace of interest to each individual student; topics included historic architecture, businesse s, religion, and community activism. The presentations attracted a crowd of approxi mately 75 people, incl uding journalists and photographers from the Tampa Tribune and The St. Petersburg Times. Sulphur Springs School Reunion On April 5, 2007 the Sulphur Springs School Reunion was held at the Golden Corral Restaurant in Temple Terrace, a suburb of Tampa located adjacent to the University of South Florida. The biannual Sulphur Springs Reunion is planned and organized by the community elders and is held on the first Thursdays of April and October at the Golden Corral Restaurant. The purpose of the event is to reconnect and maintain relationships with old friends. I sat in on conversations and engaged in informal interviews with attendees w ho consisted of White alumni from the Sulphur Springs School. I conducted approximately eight in formal, exploratory interviews. I was interested in discovering what the all white event attendees knew about Spring Hill, an African-American community whose history has been lost over time. Interestingly, none of my informants, who all atte nded school in Sulphur Spring s, had ever heard of Spring Hill.
52 Sulphur Springs and Spring Hill History and Heritage Day On February 24, 2007, the Heritage Research and Resource Management Lab team held the first of a series of Sulphur Springs and Spring Hill History and Heritage Day roundtable events. The goal of the even t was to bring together elders from the community to share their knowledge about th e history of the neighborhood for current and future generations. At the event we di splayed historic phot ographs and maps and encouraged attendees to talk to other l ong time residents and community experts to facilitate the exchange of information. We al so requested they bring pictures and family keepsakes to show other attend ees and for our research team to record in order to help document the history of the community. Solving A History Mystery: Seminole Heights Garden Center Remote Sensing The Seminole Heights Garden Center was rumored to have once possessed a sunken rock garden behind the building. Jim St ancil, a Tampa historian who lived in the neighborhood for fifty years, described it as a big round hole, a bout the size of a swimming pool, and about 10 feet deep, with stone steps going down into itall kinds of plants around the edge of the garden a nd kind of a wall, maybe of stone, around it and it may have had a small pond in the center w ith tadpoles and perhaps goldfish" (OSHNA Personal Communication August 9, 2007). On August 12, 2007 the OSHNA Preservation Committee, in collaboration with GeoView, Inc. and Malcom Pirnie, Inc, began a search for the sunken rock garden using ground penetrating radar equipment to perform subsurface remote sensing which a llows a view underground without disturbing
the surface. Gene Howes of Cigar City Pictures filmed the sensing procedure for the planned five part documentary that the Committee is making on the neighborhood. Approximately 25 people attended the remote sensing including a journalist and photographer from the Tampa Tribune. Semi-Structured Interviews Utilizing the insight gained from participant observation, interactions with community members, and informal interviews I developed a list of questions to be included in semi-structured interviews with preservation committee members and opponents of the Hampton Terrace Local Historic District nomination. Conducting interviews with this population allowed me to understand the differences between both communities, understand how each community defines heritage, understand their motivations for preserving the heritage of their community, understand how each community approaches heritage preservation, understand the impacts of heritage preservation activities. Lives InLength of Time in CommunityAgeGenderOriginally From L oo ki ng for Historic House?Looking for a Bungalow?Bought a Bungalow?Home StyleYear BuiltDougOSH (HT)230MNew YorkYesYesNoArt Moderne1939BertOSH3160'sMFloridaNoNoYesBungalow1918PamOSH145FVirginiaYesYesNoMini-Traditional1927AlbertOSH (HT)1040MFloridaNoNoYesColonial Revival Bungalo w 1925CarolynOSH269FFloridaYesNoYesBungalow1939JoyceOSH350FArizonaYesNoYesBungalow1925PhilippeOSH (HT)140MGeorgiaYesNoYesBungalow1925MonicaOSH6.532FTampaYesNoYesBungalow1941DianeOSH (HT)1040FFloridaNoNoNoRanch1950'sTonyOSH (HT)865MTampaNoNoNoHe does not know1951JudyOSH (HT)2253FFloridaNoNoYesBungalow1920'sChrisOSH (HT)1355MCaliforniaYesYesYesBungalow1929BeaSS071FTampaNoNoNonanaJeanetteSS1058FNew YorkNoNoNoRanch1940'sRaymondSS1059MNew YorkNoNoNoRanch1940'sOSH: Old Seminole HeightsHT: Hampton TerraceSS: Sulphur Springs Table 3. Summary of Informants Characteristics 53
54 I chose to conduct semi-str uctured interviews because, although I had several issues I wanted to address, I also wanted the individuals to have freedom to discuss anything they felt is applicable to the topics (Bernard 2002). Formal-s tructured interviews do not allow for flexibility in the interview s direction and informal interviews, while useful at beginning stages of research, are unc ontrolled and do not al low for the use of an interview guide. For these reasons, semi-structured interviews were the best choice to enable me to answer my research questions. Initially, I used unstructured interviews to focus on general issues of heritage preserva tion in each community. As the issues that were most relevant to each group emerged I created a semi-structured interview guide to better understand the issues that are most pe rtinent to preservati on in the communities (Appendix B and C). I conducted a total of 15 semi-structure d interviews with members of OSHNA Preservation Committee, Hampton Terrace Nomination Committee, and the Sulphur Springs Museum Board (Table 3). Member ship in the OSHNA Preservation Committee and Hampton Terrace Local Committee is not mu tually exclusive, five of my informants were members of both committees and during our interviews I was able to gather perspectives on both committees and their preservation objectives. A breakdown of the interviewees and their group affiliation is illustrated in Table 4. The interviews took between 30 and 120 minutes and were recorded digitally. The 15 participants in the project ranged from 28 to 71 years of age and length of residency in the communities ranged from 0 to 31. The mean length of resi dency is 7.5 years and median is 2.5 years. During the interviews I asked questions that would illuminate how each resident defined the heritage of their community, why they are motivated to preserve that heritage, their
communitys approach to heritage preservation, and the perceived impacts of those activities on their community. Table 4. Summary of Informants Group Affiliation InformantGroup AffiliationDougOSHNA Preservation Committee, Hampton Terrace Nomination CommitteeBertOSHNA Preservation Committee, Hampton Terrace Nomination CommitteePamOSHNA Preservation Committee, Hampton Terrace Nomination CommitteeAlbertOSHNA Preservation Committee, Hampton Terrace Nomination CommitteeCarolynOSHNA Preservation Committee, Hampton Terrace Nomination CommitteeJoyceOSHNA Preservation CommitteeMonicaOSHNA Preservation CommitteePhilippeHampton Terrace Nomination CommitteeDianeHampton Terrace Nomination CommitteeTonyHampton Terrace Nomination CommitteeJudyHampton Terrace Nomination CommitteeChrisHampton Terrace Nomination CommitteeBeaSulphur Springs Museum BoardJeanetteSulphur Springs Museum BoardRaymondSulphur Springs Museum Board Archival research Archival research enabled me to achieve the research objective of comparing Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs for similarities and differences in their history, development, and current demographics. It also allowed me to realize the research objectives of understanding the impacts of heritage preservation activities on each community. A major component of the data collection for this section of the project included archival data, materials originally collected for bureaucratic or administrative purposes that are transformed into data for research purposes (Rodriguez and Baber 2007:64). I 55
56 consulted the Mission Statements of the Old Seminole Heights Preservation Committee, Hampton Terrace Nomination Committee, and Sulphur Springs Museum Board to understand why each groups preser vation programs were enacted. I also consulted online community forums (www.hamptonterrace.org and www.oldseminoleheights.com) and observed the tones of voice used in the discussi ons of heritage preservation activities to determine how preservati on activities impacted community cohesiveness. Federal and State census da ta, old newspapers, municipal records, and historic photographs were used as secondary, supplem entary data to reconstruct the socioeconomic history of the communities. The archival research focused on the period between 1920 through 2000 and the socio-econo mic characteristics of each community including age, ethnic composition, income, rental and homeowner information, length of residence, and occupation. I began the archiv al research in 1920 because that was the time period were Sulphur Springs became a popular tourist destination and the development of Old Seminole Heights came on the heels of Sulphur Springs heyday. Data Analysis Qualitative Data Interview transcripts, meeting and even t notes, as well as field notes from participant observation, were entered into FieldWorks Data Notebook, a program for categorizing, analyzing, and summarizing conc lusions about qualitati ve data. I utilized the grounded-theory approach to isolate themes in the text by coding the text for the presence or absence of those themes (Ber nard 2002). I performed inductive coding on field note and interview transcripts to discove r recurrent themes, and the similarities and
57 differences in the way community member s discuss and participate in heritage preservation activities. Due to constraints on time and resources the interview tapes were not transcribed verbatim, instead I took detailed field notes while listening to each interview and then thematic ally coded the notes. Howeve r, if a direct quote was necessary I transcribed it. Archival Research Data from newspaper articles, Federal a nd State census data, municipal records, and tape and video recordings of the memo ries of longtime community members were analyzed to reconstruct the histories and cu ltural heritage of bot h Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs. These data will provide va luable information as will interviews and participant observation. Conclusion Although my internship was conducted so lely with the OSHNA Preservation Committee from May 2007 through August 2007, this thesis is about heritage research and preservation activities in two communities, Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs. Research in Sulphur Springs bega n September 2006 as the result of a class project. Data collection in Old Seminole Heights commenced in January 2007. As data collection in both communities continued I realized the opportunity to combine the research in both communities and design a re search project about which I would compose my thesis. Throughout the yearlong data co llection process the methodology remained consistent with participant observation, info rmal and semi-structured interviews, and
58 archival research. The following chapter discusses the results of the data collection in the context of the research objectives th at were presented in this chapter.
59 Chapter 4: Results and Discussion In this chapter I present and discu ss my research findings. The results are organized by research objective and are follo wed by a discussion of the major themes and findings derived from each method that was used to achieve the objective. The chapter will conclude with a discussion of my findings for each research objective. As discussed in the previous chapter, my research methodology included participant observation, unstructured-exploratory interviews, semi-str uctured interviews, a nd archival research. The majority of my study results were ba sed on interviews and information gathered from an informant pool consisting of adults ranging in ages from 28 to 71. The majority of the people I interviewed we re white with an average length of residence in the community of seven and a half years. In addi tion to interviews, I also interacted with these informants at civic meetings, Pres ervation Committee meetings, and community preservation events. RESEARCH OBJECTIVE 1: To compare Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs for differences in their history, development, and current demographics. To compare and contrast the differenc es between Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs I utilized observations, unstructured-exploratory interviews, semistructured interviews, and archival researc h. On three occasions, on both weekdays and weekends, and various times of the day I drove through Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs and recorded what I obs erved. In Sulphur Springs I observed the
60 following: African-American young children a nd teenagers riding their bicycles and walking along the street in groups of five or more; African-American adults in groups of three or more sitting on their porch or in the front yard; mattresses laying outside in different parts of the community; bars on some of the windows. In Old Seminole Heights I observed for sale signs, homes with fresh coats of paint, manicured lawns and hedges, luxury cars such as BMWs and Porsches, a White woman pulling a young boy in a wagon, a White young woman jogging, a White man potting plants with a young boy, a White man sw eeping his sidewalk, five White people walking dogs, a White man riding a bicycl e with a young boy in the back. I did not observe any children outside unless they were with adults, nor did I observe any garbage dumping. Based on my observations, Sulphur Springs and Old Seminole Heights appear different from a curbside view. Archival research illuminated the differences in the history and development of each community. I consulted historic docum ents including newspapers, photographs, postcards, and tourist brochures. Sulphur Spri ngs was developed foremost as a tourist resort, catering to day-trippers, weekende rs, and snowbirds. The dwellings in the neighborhood were small tourist cabins and were not intended for year-round occupation. Much of the current housing st ock reflects this trend-the hom es are smaller, sit on less land, and are plain. The development of Old Seminole Heights was geared toward the middle class who commuted via the streetcar to their jobs in downtown Tampa. The homes built in Old Seminole Heights, although not large, were intended for year-round occupation.
61 In unstructured-exploratory interviews I was interested in understanding how community members from Old Seminole Hei ghts perceived both their own community and Sulphur Springs, and also the way Sulphur Springs residents perceived both Sulphur Springs and Old Seminole Heights. The ma jor themes that emerged about Sulphur Springs from the interviews with Old Seminol e Heights residents is that Sulphur Springs has more crime, its residents are poor, they have more elderly re sidents (than does Old Seminole Heights) who grew up in the commun ity but the majority of the residents are transient. Residents from Sulphur Springs st ated that Old Seminole Heights did not have as many elderly residents who grew up ther e, the residents are young professionals or young families who have more money, the residents intend on residing in the community long-term, and there is less crime. Semi-structured interviews provided me with more in-depth data about the way residents perceive their own, and the other, community. In semi-structured interviews with residents from Old Seminole Heights they described their community in the following terms: friendly, middle class, old, historic homes, diverse population, activist community, strong interest in historic preservation, so cial, Bungalow community, in Renaissance, used to be dangerous, and stil l experiences crime. Re sidents from Sulphur Springs described Old Seminole heights as hist oric, active, beautiful, and a great place to live. The informants from Old Seminole Height s described Sulphur Springs as crime ridden, historic, important to Tampas history, deteriorati ng infrastructure, homes, and social fabric, in need of work, has potential, poor population, lo w housing and rental prices, unsafe, not a good place, left behind, in the same s ituation Old Seminole Heights
62 was in 10-15 years ago. From the outside, Su lphur Springs is troubled by serious social, economic and physical problems, yet the reside nts from Sulphur Spri ngs have a different opinion of their own community. They descri bed it as centrally located to downtown Tampa, possessing abundant trees, wildlife and different specimens of plants and birds, friendly, diverse, kids playi ng in the streets because they have nowhere else to go, transient, crime, and a blue collar neighbor hood where third and fourth generation family live. I then compared residents perceptions ga thered from interviews with historic Federal Census data. Originally I intended to collect data from each decennial census beginning in 1920 and ending with the last census in 2000. I chose this starting date because the 1920s were when Sulphur Springs became a popular tourist destination and the population began to grow. Unfortunate ly, the 1920 through 1950 censuses did not possess the same degree of detail as subseque nt decades and therefore does not allow me to make an adequate longitudinal comparis on across those 80 years. The information from the 1960 census also posed a problem. The census tracts from Sulphur Springs consisted of the entirety of tract 8 and only pa rt of tract 4. Therefore, I needed to collect the data from a block level, 57 of which co mprised the Sulphur Springs portion of tract 4. Unfortunately, the information available at the block level is much less detailed than that available for the census tract level and conse quently was only able to include a couple of elements from the 1960 census for Sulphur Sp rings in the analysis. The table below (Table 5) summarizes my findings of cen sus data beginning with the 1960 census and ending with the 2000 census.
Table 5. Federal Census Data for Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs 2000 % 1990 % 1980 % 1970 % 1960 % PopulationOSH Total16,09416,27616,35818,09521,473White11,45771.18%13,48382.82%14,57389.09%17,93899.13%21,45199.90%Black3,24920.18%2,25213.84%1,4789.04%1120.62%80.04%SS Total6,3086,2234,8934,766NANAWhite1,88529.88%3,38554.39%4,23486.53%4,32290.68%NANABlack3,76459.67%2,62442.17%57811.81%4228.85%NAN A AgeOSH 36.15 (Med)na35.5 (Med)38.4 (Med)SS 24.9 (Med)na29.9 (Med)NAMedian Household IncomeOSH $35,247$23,812$12,115$7,655$4,164SS $21,700$16,369$9,211$5,216NAPersons Below Poverty OSH Total2,57716.01%290517.85%NANA342518.93%NANAWhite1,21510.60%166012.31%NANANANABlack1,09833.80%110248.93%NANANANASS Total2,72143.14%212934.21%NANA123225.85%NANAWhite63733.79%86425.52%NANANANABlack1,81548.22%121146.15%N A NA15937.68%NAN A Housing UnitsOSH Total7,3017,513730473567,986Vacant6709.18%7369.80%4836.61%3654.96%4866.09%Occupied6,63190.82%677790.20%682193.39%699195.04%750093.91%Owner Occ4,78272.12%467869.03%4,96372.76%515573.74%5,61870.35%Renter Occ1,85928.03%209930.97%185827.24%183626.26%1,88223.57%SS Total2,3542,71022542073NAVacant 28211.98%48117.75%2028.96%21310.27%NANAOccupied2,07288.02%222982.25%205291.04%186089.73%NANAOwner Occ90243.53%96143.11%1,21859.36%132471.18%NANARenter Occ1,17056.47%126856.89%83440.64%53628.82%NAN A Median Rent AskedOSH $470$385$153$96$56SS $398$407$160$77NAMedian Home ValueOSH $73,100$50,600$25,650$10,100$9,500SS $49,600$35,500$17,100$6,000NA Y ear BuiltOSH1949 (Med)1943 (Med)NASS 1967 (Med)1968 (Med)N A NA: Data not available RESEARCH OBJECTIVE 2: To understand how Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs define heritage. In order to understand how each community defines heritage I conducted unstructured-exploratory interviews and semi-structured interviews with preservation committee members and preservation activity opponents and compared and contrasted their responses. As a result of the semi-structured interviews I discovered that the meaning of heritage varies, not only between different communities, as I hypothesized, 63
64 but also within the same community. Twelve informants out of 15, all from Old Seminole Heights, defined heritage primarily in terms of the built environment, more specifically historic architecture. Additionally, of the 12 that defined heritage in regards to the built environment, seven had an interest in historical archival research (Federal Census, City Directories, historic newspape rs and photographs), oral hist ories, and filming historic documentaries. The three informants from Sulphur Springs discussed heritage primarily as stories and artifacts, not as historic ar chitecture. One informant from Sulphur Springs stated, they [the residents of Sulphur Spri ngs] still have that feeling of preserving the atmosphere, the nature of Sulphur Springsthat s just as real to them as if there were built. Based on my informants, heritage consists of more than tangible objects; it is also stories and even the sense of place. In addition to the meaning of heritage, the interviews also provided me with information on the nature of heritage as s een by the different community members. One Old Seminole Heights resident mentioned the changing nature of he ritage. The heritage you wish to transmit depends on what the current residents find signifi cant. He said of course that [the heritage of Old Seminole Heights] is proba bly something that continues to evolve cuz, you know, the pe ople here establish a different heritage then the people who will live here nextso I would say the her itage of Old Seminole Heights is probably changing. This statement echoes the issue rais ed in readings on the subject (Lowenthal 1996, Samuel 1994, Bennet 1981), that heritage is dynamic; it is constantly changing and is subject to current trends, expectations and associations with the community.
65 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE 3: To understand why the residents of Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs wish to pres erve the heritage of their community. To accomplish this research objective I c onducted semi-structure d interviews with members of the preservation groups and opponent s of the heritage preservation programs in Old Seminole Heights. The acknowledgeme nt of past wrongs and of previously unrecognized contributions motivat e people to preserve the he ritage of their community. Raymond, an informant from Sulphur Springs, st ated that people need to know that his community experienced racism and segrega tion and was a popular vacation spot in the earlier part of the 20 th century, a fact that many people ar e unaware of, and from it grew a lot of other communities, including Old Seminole Heights. He said, It has a lot of history, black and whit e history. These things happened [racism and segregation], its not lik e these things didnt happe n, these things happened and they need to be made aware they were, it was a combination of people involved in making it what it is, even though theyre left out, it took more than those who thought they had it all going. It just needs to be put out there, you need to publicize, market. It is one of the co mmunities that helped make Tampa what it is. Tampa could not be what it is wi thout Sulphur Springs.Sulphur Springs should not be forgotte n, or left out. In the archival research I found no information on the contribution that ethnic minorities made in the development of Sulphur Springs as a thriving tourist de stination, an element of history that Raymond feels is important to uncover. Herita ge preservation projects are a vehicle through which communities can elucid ate, renew, and recreate lost histories (Baber and Rodriguez 2002). Jeanette labeled the history of Sulphur Springs, The Good, Bad, and the Ugly. For example African-Americans and Cubans were not allowed in Sulphur Springs and she feels it is important that this element of history be revealed. Educating and transmitting information about the past to future generations is another motivator for preservation. According to Jeanette, one of the main reasons she
66 wishes to start the Sulphur Springs Museum is to educate the newcomers, who do not know about the history of their new communit y, and the children about the history of Sulphur Springs and how it got started, its popularity, and its importance to Tampas development. She insisted, You have to pass on your history. Doug also felt that heritage preservation is an education forum. He said, It is a good way of informing people a bout what is unique about something and keeping what we have for other people later on. If you replace something or dont preserve it then the whole community lose s, you lose what is distinct about the building. Its not just about the aesthetic qualities of preserva tion its the whole thing, being honest about what the place is, keeping it there for future generations. Educating children also appeared to be a common motivator for preservation. Pam said that preserving the Bungalow homes gives younger people knowledge of how life was. Monica said that children can learn a lot of lessons about what things use to be like; what people used to do for a living, how people used to live; it teaches them to not be so short sighted, gives them a perspec tive of where there are in this world. Financial reasons also generate interest in preservation. Albert lives in an old house and has spent a lot of time and money rest oring it. There is some self-interest in that he wants to protect hi s investment in time, effort, and money. He said that neighborhoods are not preserved automatica lly so he has been involved with the Hampton Terrace Nomination Committee in hopes of getting a Local Historic District to protect his investment as well as the qualities and way of life that has brought a lot of new people into the community, which is th e old houses and the opportunity to buy one at a reasonable price and restore it. Historic districts also have a reputation for increasing and preserving property values. Bert said, Because historic dist ricts are more stable they
67 increase, and retain, in value more quick ly than surrounding communities. Joyce is a real estate agent in Old Se minole Heights and in her expe rience with selling historic homes she said, People that are more educated and affluent want or iginal features and you cant get top dollar for a house if it doesnt have original windows, etc. When Albert was looking at his current home the real estate agent to ld him that the local district was in the works and coming very soon. Because, according to him, historic districts have a reputation of preserving and increasing prope rty values it gave him confidence to buy a house there and be willing to spend mone y on it without really knowing Old Seminole Heights. A strong association with the past and di sappointment in modern lifestyles is a motivator for heritage preser vation. Lowenthal (1996) argues th at our desire for heritage preservation stems from our di scontent with modern life and our yearning for the past. The dean at Alberts college told him Each generation wanted to live in their grandparents house. He said that statement holds true for him because he grew up in an old concrete block suburban house and his gran dparents lived in the same quaint, two story wood frame house in the same small town hi s entire life. He thinks that association is why he became interested in historic preservation in the first place. Joyce showed strong disenfranchisement toward the modern lifestyle and expressed admiration for past lifestyles that she views as more social, intellectual, and skillful. She bemoaned, The way life used to bewas betterwh en I do the oral histories these people were all involved in the community. It was what you did. You helped your neighbors, you went to church and partic ipated in church ac tivities and people came and visited on one anothers porches. They walked up and down the streets and they would stop and visit on each ot hers porches. These fireplaces were builtbecause the family would gather in front of themand read to each otherI like that life, I think its richer I think it has more value, I think its happier than the life that we lead now where you walk into a living room and
68 instead of a bookcase for books and a firepl ace for people to ga ther theres a big screen TV, and the house has been built to accommodate a big screen TV. The architecture, to me, is generally more t houghtful. Even in the plainest house that was built in the Twenties to me theres t hought, theres aesthetics, theres beauty of craftsmanship and materialsthe pe ople tended to be more talented, the women sewed, they often painted, they em broidered, they wrote, they played a musical instrument, they lived life instead of watching other people live lifeI advocate people participating in life and not just watc hing it on a big screen. Another salient theme about the motivati on for preservation is that there is something inherently good about heritage, it is therefore worthy of preservation, and doing so is the right thing According to Bert, There is something basically good about it [heritage] and people respond to it in a manner that its worth savingsaving it is such a good thing that you really shouldnt question it ve ry much. At one of the Hampton Terrace Nomination Committee meetings he said, If you live in an historic district preserving your home is something you ought to do. At the same meeting Doug said that the whole discussion about nominating Hampt on Terrace to a Local Historic District comes down to cost and if it were not about cost then everyone would do the right thing. In talking about the age of he r home Carolyn stated, Its in the 50 year mark for being historic and th erefore worthy of efforts to pr eserve. Albert agreed, he said: There is a valu e to society to know about the pa st and where things came from; for neighborhoods it becomes a focus for people to preserve what is good about where they live. Monica told me that we have to do th e right thing for the people that are coming after us and we cant have our community covered with brand new condos and cement. Similarly Doug stated, All of us want our stor ies to be preserved in one way or another. To not save them would be both ignorant a nd would be doing a disservice to those who lived here before.
69 Reasons for not Preserving Heritage This was an unanticipated theme, one that has come to actually give a critical and valuable perspective to this research. An i ssue arose that I had not anticipated which was opposition to heritage preservation in the form of a Local Historic District in Hampton Terrace. Just as important as understanding th e motivating factors that drive people to preserve is understanding the rationale for opposition to heritage preservation activities or programs. The most frequently documented comp laints of the Local Historic District in Hampton Terrace were (1) property rights will be affected and (2) many of the residents (including the four opposing informants) were not made aware of the nomination proceedings. Diane explained that she is opposed to the nomination, if for no other reason than the fact that they didnt inform me The way they started the process was wrongif theyre trying to hide something from me I dont want any part of it! According to the four opposed informants they were alienated and offended from the beginning of the process. The opponents of the Local Historic District feel that they are being excluded from the process. They argue that they were not invited to the initia l meetings and at the current meetings their voices are not heard. I overheard a conversa tion in which a group of individuals who support the nomination were engaged. They disc ussed how sometimes they meet privately, outside of the monthly Hampton Terrace Nomination meetings, just so they can get stuff done because, according to one individual, there is too much vocal opposition to the nomination occurring at the mee tings that it interferes with the goal of the meetings, which is to create Design Guidelines.
70 Diane fears her property rights will be affected and will therefore be harder for her to sell her home. She also does not believ e that historic distri cts increase property values, which is a common argument put forth by the proponents. She said she knows people who live in Hyde Park (a Local Historic District within Tampa) and other people who own historic homes in histor ic districts and has talked to real estate agents who said, Watch out, its going to be very hard to sell your home. People dont want to buy into that because of all th e rules. Judy also fears having to live with the rules. She is a proponent of property rights and feels that people should not be told what you they can and cannot do with their own property. Tony shares the same viewpoint as Judy and thinks people should be able to do what th ey want with their property, whether that means not mowing the grass or not putting in windows that are hist orically accurate in terms of design and construction material. Two other common opinions about preser vation among the opposition have to do with the age of a structure and the degree to which it is aesthetically pleasing. Diane said, I dont believe I live in an historical district. I do nt see it very historical here.50 years old is not historicalt he homes are so diversehow can you make this an historical district? This is not an historical district, it doesnt remotely come close to it as far as Im concernedPeople in Europe would laugh at us here in the United States!. At a Hampton Terrace Nomi nation Committee meeting Judy argued that the 50 year mark is not historic and facetiously procla imed, Hey, Im over 50! Am I historic? When Tony heard about the proposed dist rict he thought, Why would they make an area with houses that are so small, hi storic? Now I understand if you have a 100 foot lot by 60, and you got a two story house built in the Twenties and its got some beautiful workto protect that house I can understa nd it. But to protect a two bedroom, one
71 bathroom house thats built out of wood from 1926 that has nothing elegant about itthat to me is crazy. Diane agrees, I think that if somebo dy wants to preserve something so that it can-because it was made beautiful in the beginning and-can become historical and be recognized in the future as something, then preserve it. If you want to preserve it, preserve it. Sh e said that the homes in Hyde Park from the turn of the century are historical an d are worth preserving, but these little things, although they were built sometime around 50 years ago, it doesnt mean that theyre worth pres erving as far as Im concerned.when you preserve something its because it had some inherent value to the community or is beautiful. But youre preserving homes that were basic, core, very basic, low-end homes I dont think theyre worth pr eserving. If youre going to preserve something I think it should be something of worthwhile value to preserve. If every house on this street was built in the Tw enties and was beautiful and big and beautiful in their time then it should be preserved. In response to this viewpoint that 50 years is young, Bert acknowledges that historic preservation in the United States has shortcomings not faced in other countries such as England, because (1) the history of our country is so short and (2) people have been brought up to believe that history refers to a certain distance in the past and the remains of that distance and it is difficult to get people to think of a more recent history and its value. Doug also said It is contrary to the way we think about houses in general in the US. We dont have the same older hous ing stock that you find in Europe. In our society it is more acceptable to tear down and rebuild something. If its old its looked upon as not being as good as someth ing that is new. It is also an uphill battle because it is hard to overcome that misconception. It is important to note that none of th e informants I interviewed oppose heritage preservation in general; they simply oppose the nomination of their neighborhood, Hampton Terrace, to a Local Historic District. The four opposed informants see the
72 benefit of preservation and them selves enjoy traveling to hist oric sites and learning about history from their elderly family members and neighbors. They just do not see any benefit to making their neighborhood a Local Historic District. Judy explained, Who could not say that theyre not for that [pre servation]? I enjoy looki ng at a beautiful old home and I think it is wonderful of people that do that but I dont feel its right for people to be forced to do that. Diane agreed, Im a ll for historical preserva tion but in the right contextwhen it is warrantedI go visit hist oric sites She said she likes historic structures because there are stories to be told about that time of history. RESEARCH OBJECTIVE 4: To understand the preservation approaches employed by Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs. To achieve this objective I conducted participant observation at community preservation events and pres ervation meetings and conducte d semi-structure d interviews with preservation committee members and comp ared and contrasted their responses. I initially hypothesized that the variation between Old Se minole Heights and Sulphur Springs would cause the two communities to approach heritage preservation differently. My findings suggest that the two communities approach to preserving their heritage has indeed taken different courses. This refl ects both the individual history of each community as well as the preservation goals and current socio-economic characteristics of current residents. According to interviews with resident s, Old Seminole Heights is primarily interested in preserving the communitys hist oric architecture, mainly Bungalows from the early 1900s. They achieve this goal through in dividual home restorations, a Home
73 Tour, listing on the National Register of Hi storic Places, and through national and local historic district designation. Both Old Seminole Heights and Hampton Terrace, a neighborhood in Old Seminole Heights, are National Historic District s. A small group of interested residents has also initiated the pr ocess to nominate Hampton Terrace to a Local Historic District. There are a number of homes within the community that are listed on the National Register of Hist oric Places and that have been presented with the Preservation Award Banner by Tampa Preservation, Inc. Another approach that Old Seminole Heights has taken to preserve its heritage is by collecting oral histories from community elders. They are interested in collecting information on a wide range of topics that will portray what life was like in the past. Just recently, in June 2007, the Preservati on Committee began working on a video documentary through which to present the oral histories and transmit the heritage of their community. The preservation committee has be en collecting history on the community for years. Joyce, a very active member of the committee, had a vision to create a documentary with the oral histories. Wh en a filmmaker and his wife joined the Preservation Committee they collaborated on the documentary making process. Sulphur Springs Museum Board also approaches heritage preservation by collecting oral histories fr om community elders. Beginni ng in 2006 they have been collecting historic photographs and other historic artifacts to display in their museum. They are not, however, interested in designati ng their community as a ny type of historic district (more on this below). In response to question about a Local Hi storic District in Sulphur Springs three board members stated they did not want one because they felt the other residents would not abide by the rules that come with desi gnating the neighborhood
74 historic. When asked in an interview if th ey would like to have a National Historic District two of the Board member s replied that they did not have the historic fabric for it. During the 1980s, Spring Hill, a small African-American community within Sulphur Springs, organized heri tage preservation activitie s. The mission of The Spring Hill Community Association is to rekindle l ove, unity, and fellowship, keeping alive the ideas of our fathers. They achieved this by holding meetings on the fourth Saturday of every month and organizing a yearly commun ity reunion. At the Fifth Annual reunion the association compiled the Memory Book which discussed the history of Spring Hill, the founders of the community, and included family trees of longtime residents. RESEARCH OBJECTIVE 5: To understand th e impacts that heritage preservation activities have on Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs. Impacts on Community Cohesiveness. Before I set out to conduct research for this project I hypothesized that heritage preservation activities would make the comm unity more cohesive by providing residents with a common purpose and a positive task on wh ich to engage together. However, after about three weeks of pa rticipant observations and interviewing I soon realized that there are two sides to this argument. Heritage pres ervation activities can create cohesion within the group(s) that support the pa rticular preservation activity, but can also be a source of contention for the residents who oppose the same activity. Heritage preservation activities can include some people thereby creating co hesion, yet exclude others, thereby creating conflict and alienation.
75 At my very first intervie w, Doug, a resident of Old Seminole Heights, told me that heritage preservation does not necessarily bring people t ogether. He was referring to the proposed Local Historic Di strict in Hampton Terrace. At the time I was unaware of the intensity of the opposition to the Local Hi storic District but further participant observation and interviews with both sides pr ovided me with deep er understanding of contentious this issue. Resident opponents to the pr oposed district feel that the nomination process has fragmented their once seemingly united comm unity. Judy, a resident of Hampton Terrace and opponent of the district lamented, There is a line drawn in the sand now. Before this whole thing everything was fine. But now the neighborhood is fract ured. I never had a problem with those people [Hampton Terrace Nomination Committee members] before. Interestingly enough she also did not know th e other four main opponents to the local historic district before this issue arose but is now great friends with them and they do social things on the side that do not have anything to do with the committee. Another resident of Seminole Heights and opponent of the Local Historic District, Chris, cautioned the committee saying they are going to fractionalize Hampton Terrace. He does not attend the Porch Parties anymore and said that the local district has something to do with it and that bothers him a great deal. Both the Old Seminole Heights website (www.oldseminoleheights.com) and the Hampton Terrace community website (www.ha mptonterrace.org) co ntain forums where residents may voice their opinions about the proposed historic district. Sometimes the dialog can become heated as evidenced by th e quotes below taken from the forums:
76 "Nice Dig Shawn, was that really necessary? You preach; can't we neighbors get along? Yet you post digs lik e that, real neighborly you are. (:-) (smiley face to you too) The vote was a SHAM and everyone there knows it. Now someone has an opposing view and WHAMMO.....they are dam near condemned because of their opposing view, Dennis is called a liar, and everything is once again fractured in our once peaceful hamlet! At the meeting YOU even told me to "BE QUIET"....trust me..that wont happen again my friend! Doug..for the last time.....now listen up as we have talked about this ad nauseum..are you here or are you not here?! The nomination process has divided the comm unity into two sides-those who want the Local Historic District and those who do not an d has created friction be tween residents. It has created an unforeseen effect on the residents who oppose the Hampton Terrace Nomination Committee because they feel angered and ignored. Some residents, however, believe heritage preservation creates cohesive communities. For example, Bert, from Old Seminole Heights, told me that heritage preservation is a positive thing for residents to engage in to gether. It provides a unifying theme, a common goal or focus, thereby making the community more cohesive. He said that usually when you become active in a ne ighborhood association the majority of what you deal with is not positive, you are always as king officials not to do things, so it is nice to be able to do something that has few, if any, deficits. Bea feels that the Sulphur Springs museum would bring a centeringsee we dont have many things that hold us together, like the arcade. But if there was a museumit would hold the community together. According to some of my informants, historic preservation and the historic character of the neighbor hood can be good focal points fo r keeping people focused on
77 participation with each other a nd participation in things that also have improvement for the neighborhood. Bert argued that older ne ighborhoods in general, like Old Seminole Heights, allow for and provide a setting for neighborliness because they possess amenities like structures, grid systems, alley systems, front porches that are not found in newer neighborhoods. These things do not neces sarily cause people to be neighborly, he said, but they provide a setting where it is easier to be neighb orly. Albert, another informant from Old Seminole Heights, echoed Berts sentiments. He said, If I didnt feel like there was a framew ork of other people doing the same thing, as much as I might love the house, it can also be economically foolishThe historic preservation, once people start appreciating th e old houses and the way the streets are laid out, the tress and everything, it has really given a unifying theme for people to latch onto andits ac tually having causes that bring people together. I think if everything was perfect people would have less incentive to make contact with other people in the ne ighborhood. Sothose sort of things that you have in common with people are again sort of the mundane things in daily life that help bring people together. Carolyn feels this same way about Seminole Heights now. She said, There are lots of the same kind of conn ections with all the people who are into historic houses. Here you will find carpenters, plumbers, etc, but everyone can have the same conversation because everyone has an old home, is fixing one up, has fixed one up, or is getting ready to fix one up, and that really makes a bond in the neighborhood. Joyce agrees. At a meeting for the REU Field School put on by the Department of Anthropologys Heritage Research Lab, she sa id, historic districts tend to be more cohesive, stronger neighborhoods. It builds a stronger community. People that want to live in a place where there are historic ordi nances know that they have a part in the common good even if it costs them something in terms of time, effort, money; they understand that they will benefit from having a stronger community.
78 Impacts on Community Identity When I embarked on researching the effects of heritage preservation on community identity my initial assumption was that heritage preser vation creates a strong community identity. I was wanted to confir m that residents participation in their communitys heritage preserva tion activities made them identify and feel more rooted with their neighborhood. However, none of my informants specifically stated that the heritage preservation activities occurring in their communities pr ovided them with a common identity, nor did they refer to either community in terms of being rooted there. One of the reasons my informants did not gain a common identity from the activities could be because none of them are original ly from Old Seminole Heights or Sulphur Springs. Only two of the informants were born in raised in Tampa, five are from other regions of Florida, and seven are from outside the state. Ultimately, I feel that this study did not produce sufficient evidence to substantiate my initial claim, that heritage preservation activities create a common community identity. A very important issue did arise during my research in regards to representation and identity. What I realized is that he ritage preservation is one way communities represent their identity. The way identity is represented through the process of preservation became in important issue, while common identity, my initial research interest, became secondary. During my research I discovered that heritage preservation creates and projects a specific identity whic h shapes external perspectives. Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs both struggle with the issue of identity and how nonresidents perceive them. Herita ge preservation is a way to maintain, change, and create identity within a community. In my intervie ws with residents from Old Seminole Heights
79 a recurring theme in the discussion of her itage preservation in their community was revitalization, or Renaissance. World War II, the Depression, and construction of Interstate 275 shook the stability of the neighborhood and in subsequent years experienced an increase in transient residents, increase in crime, and overall decline. The last twenty years has seen, what residents deem as, positive changes in the community, including a decrease in crime, increase in housing prices, and increa se in homeownership. When asked what attributed to the positive change in Old Seminole Heights Carolyn said that gradually people began to acknowledge the value of the housing stock; much of the change is due to the people th at moved into Old Semi nole Heights, invested their time and energy, transformed their homes and made an enormous effort to ensure that the negative reputation of the nei ghborhood ceased. She argues that Old Seminole Heights would not have been able to turn around if it was not for the valuable architecture. Judy, a resident of Hampton Terrace and opponent of the Local Historic District, supported the designatio n of Hampton Terrace to a Na tional Historic District. She thought at the time that the designation would be a shot in the arm. At our interview she reflected on the effects of the designa tion and stated, it gave the neighborhood recognition and a little lift, we really were needing it! Heritage preservation can be employed as a tool to manage a communitys image. For example, in Old Seminole Heights, as re search has continued they have discovered certain historic aspects of their community to be incorrect. From a built environment perspective, there was once an entrance gate to Old Seminole Height s but today there is not, the entrance gate that was erected in Hampton Terrace two years ago by an Eagle
80 Scout is, although beautiful and elaborate, not historically accurate The original opening was akin to a pile of sticks, whereas today it is landscaped median with a lighted sign. Also, historic photos show that the porches were in fact screened in, the homes had window flower boxes and chain link fences ye t today the design guide lines prevent such accessories. My interview with Doug exemplifies this, he said as time has gone on, and in some cases th e research gets a li ttle bit better, that there have been deviations in the way we think about the neighborhood or the way we thought the neighborhood was in the pa st that we found out arent true anymore. These are all things that as a community we dont really acceptwe have accepted these things to not be th e character of the neighborhood and kind of frown on those sorts of things and we found out that thats exactly what this place looked like.people have decided that th is is what the neighborhood should look likeand that is not always the way it wasI know that th ere are people who like it stay the way they have it in their mind Heritage preservation can be used to pres ent a selective heritage in order to suit present day needs. In response to some residents desire to install, what they believed to be but actually were not, historic streetlights Carolyn said, dont bring back something that is phony. You have to look at the value of something-old street lights did not light up the street lights like modern street lights do so if we have to have modern street lights because they illuminate things then we ha ve to go with those kinds of things. Historic districts also provide residents with control. Be rt argued that, They [historic districts] give you contro l over your property and your neighborhood; you can control what occurs; a very positive thing for the neighborhoodhistoric dist ricts are better able to protect their boundaries for example, by preventing Wal-Mart from building a store in Old Seminole Heights.
81 Historic homes and historic districts are also aestheti cally pleasing, which project a certain image. Judy said, Im for historic preservation. I love to see the old homes. I think its wonderful when people come in and fix them up and they look nice. Cuz I live there too and I want it to look nice and I can appreciate that, I can. Chris agreed, he said there is a visual benefit to the older homes. Therefore, Old Seminole Heights as an hi storic district brin gs with it certain expectations. For example, Sulphur Springs resident Raymond said that the name Old Seminole Heights itself lends to, yes, thats where I want to live.there a few changes that theyre going through now that theyre making now and the way theyre doing their homes and the all the historic districts, the way theyre making the changes now leads to people wanting to be there and to come in and do the same thing. And once you have that, where people want to come in and do what this other person has, you have a population that is just about r eady to really go the top. D oug said that some of our expectations about how the neighborhood is versus what the reality of what the neighborhood was, I guess theres some difference in expectati on there. At least, I hope we can preserve the elements that we think are still valuable. Albert said that if someone tells him he lives in Old Semi nole Heights he has expectatio ns of what their house should look like and he can be disa ppointed if their home does not meet those expectations. Heritage preservation is a means by which resi dents can create, maintain, and change the identity of their community. Whether it is used to end negative reputation or barring aesthetically distasteful chain link fences fr om the neighborhood, herita ge preservation is used by Old Seminole Heights to project a certain image which shapes external perspectives.
82 Discussion of Results Understanding the differences between Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs prior to attempting other steps in th is research project was critical because differences in community history, deve lopment, and current socio-economic characteristics will influence how each community defines heritage. How they define heritage will subsequently influence their mo tivations for preserving their heritage and their approach to preservati on, which in turn will shape the impacts the preservation activities will create on their community. U nderstanding the history, development, and socio-economic characteristics of any community is therefore essential to properly managing their heritage resources. There exist infinite definitions of herita ge. Realizing that different communities, and especially residents within the same community, define heritage in their own unique ways is important in minimizing conflict in heritage preservati on. Imposing the same heritage values on all reside nts can anger residents and de rail a preservation program, as was seen in Hampton Terrace. Gathering inpu t from all potentially affected residents on how to define the heritage of their commun ity and then utilizing a neutral party who can help negotiate between those definitions, while tedious, is a better approach to community heritage preservation. Understanding why communities are motivat ed to preserve their heritage is important because it will influence their ap proach to preservation. Many members of the Hampton Terrace Nomination Committee define he ritage in terms of historic homes and are motivated to preserve them for financial reasons. Their method of heritage preservation then involves nominating Hampt on Terrace to a Local Hi storic District in
83 order to preserve the histor ic character of the neighborhood which is seen by many as a guaranteed method to preserve or increase prope rty values. In contrast, one of the main reasons the Sulphur Springs Museum Board is motivated to preserve the heritage of its community is to engage youth. Each community must tailor their heritage preservation method to the motivating factors behind wanting to preserve in order for the heritage preservation program to have the desired outc ome, whether it be fi nancial or educational reasons. Realizing how communities approach heritage preservation is important because the chosen method will always generate imp acts, both intended and unforeseen, positive and negative, on the community. Anticipating these impacts during program development and mitigating impacts during the implementation pha se is vital. It is critical to recognize that heritage preservation activities can produce both intended positive and unforeseen negative impacts in communities. Identifying th e potential impacts can help the planners of preservation activities decide how the activ ities can be modified to mitigate negative impacts.
84 Chapter 5: Conclusion This study exposes future researchers to the preservation concerns raised on a community level. This model and the findings are unique to these two communities, however, it provides a template for addre ssing heritage preservation issues on a community level. This research is not meant to be a generalization of the response to heritage preservation nationwide or even st atewide since all communities are different. Rather, it is a snapshot of what is occu rring in two Tampa Bay communities. However, it is possible for the results of this study to be carefully modified and applied to other communities facing similar issues. This study was designed to answer the following four research questions: 1) How do different communiti es define heritage? 2) Why are they motivated to preserve their heritage? 3) How do they approach heritage preservation? 4) How do heritage preservation activities impact different communities? Through the combination of participant obser vation, unstructured-expl oratory interviews, semi-structured interviews, and archival research I achieved five major research objectives about heritage and the process of heritage preservation in distinct communities. First, I compared and contrasted the historic, developmental, and socio-economic characteristics of Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs. To achieve this objective I utilized observations, unstructured-explorator y interviews, semi-structured interviews,
85 and archival research. My findings indicat ed that the two communities under study are considerably different in thei r history, development, and socio-economic characteristics such as ethnic makeup, household inco me, and length of residence vary. I then explored how each community defines heritage and approaches heritage preservation. I accomplished these objectives by conducting observati ons at preservation committee meetings and events, and conducting unstructured-exploratory interviews and semi-structured interviews with preser vation committee members and comparing and contrasting their responses. I initially hypothesized that diverse communities define heritage differently and approach preserving their communitys heritage in various ways and my research collected sufficient data to confirm this. Members of the Old Seminole Heights Preservation Committee view heritage as primarily encompassing historic architecture, however they are also interested in more personal aspects of heritage such as oral histories and historic photographs. The opponents of the Hampton Terrace Local Historic District believe that the heritage is architecture that is much older than fifty years (the current minimum age for designating structures and district as historic), is large and elaborate, and is uniform across the entire community. In represen ting the heritage of their community, the Sulphur Springs Museum Board is centered around socio-cultural issues of segregation and exclusion that are glossed over in current representation of the community. Their approach to heritage is mu ch different than Old Seminole Heights in that they are going to open a museum and he ritage center while concurrently empowering the communitys youth. Depending on the hist oric development of each community and the current members, communities define heritage differently and approach its preservation in their own unique ways.
86 I conducted semi-structured interviews with members of the preservation groups and analyzed the Mission Statements of each preservation group in order to achieve the research objective of understa nding why residents of Old Seminole Heights and Sulphur Springs are motivated to preserve the heritage of their communities. My research findings revealed that the reasons for initiating co mmunity-based preserva tion activities differ between communities. In addition to differi ng between communities, the reasons that individuals join in community-based preserva tion activities,activities also differ within the same community. My final research objective was to understand how herita ge preservation activities impact Old Seminole Heights and Su lphur Springs. To achieve this objective I conducted semi-structured interviews with the proponents and opponents of heritage preservation in both communities. I also observed meetings and events for signs of tension or stress. Finally, I conducted arch ival research on co mmunity forums and observed the tones of voice. Before I began collecting data for this research I hypothesi zed that heritage preservation activities created more cohesi ve communities by providing residents with a positive task in which to participate. What I di scovered is that preservation activities can both include and exclude reside nts thereby fractionalizing a community into two sides, supporters and dissenters. (It can be argued that there is another side, the undecided, however in my research this group did not e xperience the discord that did the other two groups). Where a community enjoyed seem ing peace and relative cohesion, heritage preservation activities can in troduce conflict and stress be tween groups of proponents and opponents. Yet, within each group there is cohesion. For example, the proponents of the
87 Hampton Terrace local historic district bond together by working towards a common goal they value. They meet every six to eight w eeks at the Tampa Library to collect archival data to bolster the nomination. Although veheme ntly opposed to the district, the group of dissenters has also bonded together to work towards a goal they value, preventing the nomination. They have even formed new frie ndships; the five of them even went out together, with their spouses, to celebrate the birthday of one of the dissenters husbands. Keep in mind that these individuals did not previously know one another. In the end, I conclude that having a common interest and goal, such as heritage preservation, or opposing heritage preservati on, can bring community memb ers closer together. I initially hypothesized that participa tion in heritage preservation activities provides residents with a common identity and makes them feel more rooted to their community. However, data collection did not yield findings to support this initial claim. After careful review of the data I realized a new issue relati ng to heritage preservation identity. Heritage preservation is one way that communities can create, shape, and maintain their identity. This newly created iden tity also influences how outsiders perceive the community. Recommendations Heritage is always in disputeA basic princi ple of heritage management is to seek the disinherited. With every heri tage action some people will feel excluded or ignored. They need to be found (Howard 2007:212) Based on my research, including interviews with supporters and opponents of various heritage preservation activi ties, I propose the followi ng recommendations for managing heritage preservation activities.
88 1. Communication Institute reliable forms of communication that do not discriminate against the nontech-savvy or non-members of preservation committees or neighborhood associations. All community members, not just the proponents, must be carefully notified of an initial information meeting and all subsequent mee tings. Not all people have an email account or even use the internet so advertis ing the proposed activity or program on a neighborhood associations websit e or a community forum is inadequate. Even those who are internet capable choose not to access such websites for various reasons and should not be discriminated against for doing so. The best way to notify all residents, in addition to other channels of communicati on, is via certified mail. 2. Provide Background Information and Conduct Value Analysis An initial meeting should be held to provide the community with information about the proposed preservation activity. Th e meeting should explain, in detail, the proposed activity and discuss the potential positive and negative impacts of the activity on the community. Solicit opinions on how the program should be initiated. For example, how should the committee be formed (nomina tion or vote), and what can the community agree as fair that will allow all voices to be heard in all phases of the program? The floor should then be opened for questions, es pecially to address any fears opponents of the activity may have. One of the ways an applied anthropologi st can contribute to community-based heritage preservation projects is to understand the values of the stakeholders. In order to
89 begin negotiation, identify the critical elem ents that each side cannot live with, or without, and be willing to compromise on everything else. Collect ethnographic information on values and what values residents attach to a common goal of heritage preservation versus a personal ri ght, such as property rights. 3. Gauge Interest of all Residents After residents have been provided with detailed informati on about the activity, have had their questions answered, fears a ddressed, opinions heard, and have developed an informed opinion of the activity, hold a third meeting to vote on the issue/gauge interest. The majority of residents must be in support of the activity in order for the process to proceed. Ultimately, the proposed acti vity must be compatible with the values of the residents. 4. Value a Diversity of Perspectives If the majority of residents support the activity there must be continuous monitoring of the opinions of all potentially affected pe ople. Establish a common goal and agree to work towards it by listening and adjusting. The above recommendations are futile if both parties do not listen carefully and learn to accept the other sides opinions. I watched in countless meetings the valuable opinions of the opponents be shot down or ignored by the other side, and vice versa. Each side wants to feel th at their opinions and feelings matter to the other side.
90 Suggestions for Future Research With the constraints on time and resources that Masters thesis research imposes on data collection and anal ysis I feel that the methods I ut ilized to achieve my goals were adequate. However, if I had more time I would employ cognitive mapping, focus groups, free listing, and pile sorting. During the re search I discovered inconsistencies in community boundaries for Old Seminole Height s and Hampton Terrace Some residents felt that Hampton Terrace was not part of Old Seminole Heights while city and county maps indicated it was part of Old Seminole He ights. There were also inconsistencies in the way Hampton Terrace residents define d their boundaries versus the way Old Seminole Heights residents a nd city and county maps defi ned the boundaries. Cognitive mapping would give community members the opportunity to define the boundaries of their community they way they see them, not the way they are imposed by non-residents. Focus groups are appropriate when a resear cher is looking for a range of ideas and feelings about something. Heritage pres ervation projects bring forth strong, often conflicting, ideas and feelings and focus groups would be ideal in eliciting them. They are also a good method when trying to see di fferences between groups and categories differences which were present in this res earch. Lastly, focus groups can be used to uncover factors that influence peoples opini ons about a specific preservation project including why oppose or support it. (Bernard 20 05) All this data can be collected from focus groups could be used to design a mutually agreeable preservation project. Free listing and pile sorting are two methods that can be used as a technique to draw relationships between words associated wi th heritage within the interviews and the different cognitive relationships between these terms by different community members.
91 The results can then be analyzed for pattern s or new perspectives that might provide insight into potential appro aches for finding solutions to conflict within preservation activities.
92 References Cited American Bungalow Magazine 2002 What is a Bungalow? Electronic document, http://www.ambungalow.com accessed October 1, 2007. Bennet, Tony, ed. 1981 Culture, Ideology and Social Proces s: A Reader. London: Batsford. Bernard, H. Russel 2002 Research Methods in Anthropology: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Third ed. Walnut Creek: AltaMira Press. Brown, Connie J. 2004 Mapping a Generation: Oral History Rese arch in Sulphur Springs, Florida. Chambers, Erve 2006 Heritage Matters: Her itage, Culture, History, and Chesapeake Bay. College Park: Maryland Sea Grant College. City of Tampa 2007 Neighborhood and Community Rela tions. Electronic document, www.tampagov.net/neighborhoods accessed July 12, 2007 City of Tampa 2007 Old Seminole Heights Neighborhood Information. Electronic document, http://www.tampagov.net/appl_neighborhoods/default.aspx?id=68 accessed July 12, 2007 City of Tampa 2007 Old Seminole Heights-Demographics. Electronic document, http://www.tampagov.net/appl_neighborhoods /default.aspx?section=demographic&i d=68 accessed July 12, 2007. City of Tampa 2007 Sulphur Springs Neighborhood Info rmation. Electronic document, http://www.tampagov.net/appl_neighborhoods/default.aspx?id=82 accessed December 1, 2006.
93 City of Tampa 2007 Sulphur Springs-Demographics. Electronic document, http://www.tampagov.net/appl_neighborhoods /default.aspx?section=demographic&i d=82 accessed July 12, 2007. DeWalt, Kathleen M. and Billie R. DeWalt 2002 Participant Observation: A Guide for Fieldworkers. Walnut Creek: AltaMira Press. Dunn, Hampton 1992 Hampton Dunn's History of Tampa Bay. VHS. Ervin, Alexander M. 2005 Applied Anthropology: Tools and Pers pectives for Contemporary Practice. Second ed. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc. Faragher, John Mack 2001 Bungalow and Ranch House: The Archit ectural Backwash of California. The Western Historical Quarterly 32(2):149-173. Florida Center for Community Design a nd Research, School of Architecture and Community Design at the Univ ersity of South Florida 2002 Sulphur Springs Community Mapping. Fuller, Nancy J. 1992 The Museum as a Vehicle for Community Empowerment: The Ak-Chin Indian Community Ecomuseum Project. In Museums and Communities: The Politics of Public Culture. Ivan Karp, Christine Mulll en Kreamer, and Steven D. Lavine, ed. Washington D.C: Smithsonian Institute Press. Graham, Brian G. J. Ashworth, J. E. Tunbridge 2000 A Geography of Heritage: Power, Culture and Economy. London: Arnold Press. Greenbaum, Susan 1990 Marketing Ybor City: Race, Ethnicity, a nd Historic Preserva tion in the Sunbelt City and Society ?(?):58-76. Greenbaum, Susan and Cheryl Rodriguez 1998 Central Avenue Legacies: African-Ame rican Heritage in Tampa, Florida. Practicing Anthropology 20(1):2-5. Harvey, David C. 2001 Heritage Pasts and Heritage Presents : Temporality, Meaning and the Scope of Heritage Studies. International Jour nal of Heritage Studies 7(4):319-338.
94 Hathaway, Wendy 2005 Ethnographizing Se rvice-Learning: Creating Politically Engaged Anthropology MA Thesis. Haviland, William A. 1999 Cultural Anthropology. Ninth ed. Fo rt Worth: Harcourt Brace College Publishers. Herbert, David 1993 Conclusion. In Heritage, Tourism and Societ y. David Herbert, ed. Pp. 212. London: Mansell Publishing. Hicks, Shawn 2005 Hampton Terrace dot Org. Electronic document, www.hamptonterrace.org accessed July 17, 2007. Historic Tampa/Hillsborough County Preservation Board 1992 Seminole Heights Survey and Regist ration Grant Final Survey Report. Howard, Peter 2003 Heritage: Management, Interpretation, Identity. London: Continuum. Jones, Janna and Wendy Hathaway 2002 Springs Community Folio: A Compilati on of Community Perspectives. Karp, Ivan, Christine Mulllen Kreamer, and Steven D. Lavine 1992 Museums and Communities: The Politics of Public Culture. Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institute Press. Kerstein, Robert 2001 Politics and Growth in Twentieth-Cen tury Tampa. Gainesville, Florida: University Press of Florida. Kottak, Conrad P. 2003 Mirror for Humanity: A Concise Introdu ction to Cultural Anthropology. Third ed. New York: McGraw Hill. Kreamer, Christine Mullen 1992 Defining Communities through Exhibiting and Collecting. In Museums and Communities: The Politics of Public Cultu re. Ivan Karp, Christine Mulllen Kreamer, and Steven D. Lavine, ed. Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institute Press. Lancaster, Clay 1958 The American Bungalow. The Art Bulletin 40(3):239-253. LeCompte, Margaret D. and Jean J. Schensul 1999 Analyzing and Interpreting Ethnographic Data. Walnut Creek: AltaMira Press.
95 LeCompte, Margaret D. and Jean J. Schensul 1999 Designing and Conducting Ethnographic Research. Walnut Creek: AltaMira Press. Lowenthal, David 1996 Possessed by the Past: The Heritage Crusade and the Spoils of History. New York: The Free Press. Lowenthal, David 1985 The Past is a Foreign Country. Camb ridge: Cambridge University Press. MacDonald, Sharon and Gordon Fyfe 1998 Theorizing Museums: Representing Id entity and Diversity in a Changing World. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Limited. McKercher, Bob and Hilary du Cros 2002 Cultural Tourism: The Partnership be tween Tourism and Cultural Heritage Management. Binghamton: The Haworth Press. Mormino, Gary R. and Anthony P. Pizzo 1983 Tampa: The Treasure City. Sharon R. Mason, ed. Tulsa: Continental Heritage Press, Inc. National Park Service 2007 Working on the Past in Local Historic Districts. Electronic document, http://www.nps.gov/history/hps/workingonthepast/ accessed April 12, 2007. Old Seminole Heights Neighborhood Association 2007 Old Seminole Heights Neighborhood Association. Electronic document, http://www.oldseminoleheights.com/ accessed January 30, 2007. Phillips, Evelyn 1994 An Ethnohistorical Analysis of th e Political Economy of Ethnicity among African Americans in St. Petersburg, Florida. Rodriguez, Cheryl and Yvette Baber 2002 Reconstructing a Community through Archival Research. In Doing Cultural Anthropology: Projects for Ethnographic Data Collection. Michael V. Angrosino, ed. Pp. 63-70. Prospect Height s: Waveland Press, Inc. Samuel, Raphael 1994 Theatres of Memory: Past and Pres ent in Contemporary Culture. Vol. 1. London: Verso.
96 Schensul, Stephen L., Jean J. Schensul and Margaret D. LeCompte 1999 Essential Ethnographic Me thods: Observations, Interviews, and Questions. Walnut Creek: AltaMira Press. Snelling, Thom R. P. 1983 An Evaluation Proposal for the Su lphur Springs Neighborhood Strategy Area Program. Southwest Florida Water Management District n.d. Determination of Minimum Flows for Sulphur Springs, Tampa, FL. Spradley, James P. 1980 Participant Observation. U.S.A.: Thomson Learning, Inc. Sulphur Springs Action League 2007 Neighborhood Association Newsletter. Sulphur Springs Museum Board 2006 Mission Statement and Goals Pamphlet. The Hillsborough County City-County Planning Commission June 2005 Seminole Heights Strategic Business Plan. The Hillsborough County City-County Planning Commission June 2004 Sulphur Springs Recommended Strategy: Our Pathway to a Better Tomorrow. U.S. Bureau of the Census May 4, 2006 Census of Population and Housing: 1970. Electronic document, http://www2.census.gov/prod2/decennial/documents/39204513p21ch7.pdf accessed July 21, 2007. U.S. Bureau of the Census June 12, 2007 Census of Population a nd Housing: 1980. Electronic document, http://www.census.gov/prod/www/abs/decennial/1980.htm accessed July 11, 2007, 2007. U.S. Bureau of the Census 2006 Census of Population and Housing: 1960. Electronic document, http://www2.census.gov/prod2/decennial/documents/41953654v11ch01.pdf accessed July 11, 2007, 2007. U.S. Bureau of the Census 1983 Census of Population and Housi ng: 1980. Final Report PHC80-2-349 TampaSt. Petersburg, Fla. Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area.
97 U.S. Bureau of the Census 1983 Census of Population and Housing: 1980 Census Tracts Maps. (Tampa-St. Petersburg, Fla. Standard Me tropolitan Statistical Area). U.S. Bureau of the Census 1972 Census of Population and Housing: 1970 Census Tracts. Final Report PHC(1)212 Tampa-St. Petersburg, Fla. Standa rd Metropolitan Statistical Area. University of Virginia Library 2006 Geospacial and Statistical Da ta Center. Electronic document, http://fisher. lib.virginia.edu/ Urry, John 1996 How Societies Remember the Past. In Theorizing Museums: Representing Identity and Diversity in a Changing World. MacDonald, Sharon and Gordon Fyfe, ed. Pp. 45-68. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers.
Appendix A: Informed Consent Heritage Research and Preservation Activities in Tampa Bay Communities Consent Form You are invited to participate in an ethnographic study as part of a research project to study the preservation of the heritage of Tampa Bay communities. The following information is being presented to help you decide whether or not you want to take part in a minimal risk research study. Please read this carefully. If you do not understand anything, please ask the project director or representative of the study. General Information about the Project: This project, which includes University of South Florida (USF) student and faculty participation, represents a partnership between USF and the Tampa Bay communities to develop heritage resources aimed both at stimulating tourism and at enhancing general public knowledge about the rich and diverse history of Tampa Bay. Purpose of the Research: The purpose of this research is to document the perspectives of Tampa Bay residents on the history of their community and about their involvement in heritage preservation activities. Potential Risks: We foresee no potential risks to the participants/subjects. Best practices of the American Anthropological Association will be followed throughout the project. Potential Benefits: There are no known direct benefits, however the potential benefits to participants in the project are the opportunity to participate in the development of heritage preservation projects, and to influence future generations about the history and heritage of Tampa Bay. Contacting the Project Director: Dr. Antoinette Jackson may be contacted at (813)974-6882 or by e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org If you have any questions about research you may contact: University of South Florida Institutional Review Board 12901 Bruce B. Downs Blvd. MDC035, Tampa FL 33612-4799 (813) 974-5638, Fax (813) 974-5618 99
100 Your participation is entirely volunta ry, and you may withdraw consent and terminate participation at an y time without consequence. You may also request that someone can act as a representative for you, aut horizing them to sign this consent form to help protect you. Protection of Confidentiality : If desired, participants will be given pseudonyms to protect their identity a nd privacy. (Check one): ______ You may use my name ______ You may not use my name _______________________________________ Participants Name (Print) I have been fully informed of the above-descr ibed procedure with its possible benefits and risks and I consent to ( choose one) ______ Participate in the project by havi ng my interview(s) audio recorded. ______ Participate in the project by having my interview(s) recorded by written notes. ___________________________ _______________________ ____________ Signature of Participant or Representative Printed name of signor Date If you are not the participant, please indi cate your relationship to the participant: ________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________ ___________________ Signature of Participant if a Representative signs Date Investigator Statement: I certify that participants have been provided with an informed consent form that has been approved by the University of South Fl oridas Institutional Re view Board and that explains the nature, demands, risk s, and benefits involved in pa rticipating in this study. I have carefully explained to the subject the nature of the above research study. I hereby certify that to the best of my knowledge the subject signing this consent form understands the nature, demands, risks, and benefits involved in participating in this study. _________________________ _____________________ ______________ Signature of Investigator Printed Name of Investigator Date or Authorized Research Investigator
101 \ Appendix B: Sulphur Springs and Old Seminol e Heights Interview Questions 1. Where are you from? 2. How long have you lived in the community? 3. Do you own or rent? 4. When was your home built? 5. What architectural style is your home? 6. How is the year of construction or ar chitectural style significant to you? 7. Why did you move here? What attrac ted you to this particular area? 8. How would you describe your community? 9. How have you heard other people describe your community? 10. How would you like your community to be represented? 11. What does community mean to you? 12. Residents from Sulphur Springs: Describe Seminole Heights. 13. How do you see the preservation efforts of Seminole Heights? 14. How did you first become involved or in terested in heritage preservation? 15. What aspect of heritage preservation ar e you interested in? (e x. Oral histories, collecting old photographs, architectural preservation?) 16. Tell me about your heritage preservation project. 17. Why did you start it? 18. What do you wish to accomplish through your participation in the communitys heritage preservation project? 19. What are some things that you would like others to know about the heritage of your community? 20. Is there anything about your communitys heritage that should not be preserved? 21. What does the historic architecture say/reveal about your community? 22. What are the benefits of heritage preservation? 23. What are the negative effects that heritage preservation can have on a community?
102 Appendix C: Hampton Terrace Interview Questions 1. Where are you from? 2. How long have you lived in the community? 3. Do you own or rent? 4. When was your home built? 5. What architectural style is your home? 6. Is the year of construction or ar chitectural style significant to you? 7. Why did you move here? What attrac ted you to this particular area? 8. Describe your community. 9. Describe how it has changed. 10. Do you like or dislike how your community is represented? 11. How would you like your community to be represented? 12. How have you heard other people describe your community? 13. What does community mean to you? 14. Residents from Seminole Heights: Describe Sulphur Springs. 15. What are your views on the propos ed local historic district? 16. How did you get involved with the Ha mpton Terrace Nomination Committee? 17. What do you wish to accomplish through your participation in the Hampton Terrace Nomination Committee? 18. What are the proposed guidelines based on? 19. Should old homes be pres erved? If so, on what basis? If no, why not? 20. Who should decide when and what to preserve? 21. Are there other elements of the histor y/heritage of your community that you would like to see preserved? 22. How would structure a herita ge preservation program? 23. What does the historic architecture say/reveal about your community? 24. What are the benefits of history/heritage preservation? In other communities? 25. What are the negative effects that historic/heritage preservation can have on a community?