William Howard Taft An Administrative History

In 1970, the land turned over to the National Park Service from the Memorial Association constituted just over a half-acre. The house faced onto Auburn Avenue, a major north-south thoroughfare through Mt. Auburn. To its south and east stood the sprawling Hamilton County Detention Center. To the north was the five story apartment house owned by the Cross Construction Company. North of the Cross property at the corner of Auburn and Southern Avenues stood an apartment house of recent vintage. Along Southern Avenue east to Young Street were two apartment houses. At the corner of Southern Avenue and Young Street was an empty lot, later proposed for a bus staging area or parking area.

The original lot as it existed during the period when William Howard Taft occupied the house covered 1.8 acres. The original plot stretched eastward beyond Young Street (which lies parallel and to the east of Auburn Avenue). During the succession of owners from the late nineteenth century to 1967, the land holdings were chopped away. A major portion of the land to the east was sold in 1951 by Bellinger to Hamilton County for the Youth Detention Center, thereby cutting off access to the house from Young Street.

The grounds immediately surrounding the house present obstacles to making the Taft home accessible. The house stands on a slope that drops precipitously to the east and north. A narrow driveway to the north is connected to the driveway on the south, forming a "U," and provides access to a limited number of parking spaces at the rear of the house. However, this parking area is insufficient for visitor use. In addition, development of the immediate grounds to accommodate visitors would adversely affect the setting for the house and cause unnecessary vibrations to the fragile resource.

Site plans for the Taft National Historic Site were guided by two major considerations. In the early years, Charles P. Taft and the National Park Service were intent on providing what they considered an appropriate setting for the house. This effort was pursued with the hope that the historic setting for the house during William Howard Taft's occupancy could be recreated. The other consideration was that of providing visitor access and services. This factor entailed studies of parking facilities, both on and off street, and a possible visitors' reception center. The latter facility would be similar to such centers located at other National Park Service sites.

The first issue, that of a historically plausible setting for the site, was one that was severely hampered by the changes to the site since the departure of the Tafts in the 1890s and the development of the land included within the historical boundaries by the Hamilton County Detention Center. The ability to restore the original setting was effectively blocked by the urbanization and development of the block. The vision of an authentic site was also spurred by remembrances of National Park Service properties located in splendid isolation. A historic site situated in an urban setting with buildings dating from several periods was not yet a concept which had seeped into general historic park planning. The desire to achieve an authentic setting was also a driving force behind the several landscape and archeological studies that were important to the interpretation of the site.

The authenticity and visitor access issues arose almost as soon as the National Park Service began to study the property. It is unclear as to whether some of the early proposed solutions can be ascribed to the bureau's staff or to Charles Taft. In late 1967, in a letter to members of his family, Charles Taft reported on the visit by National Park Service staff to the property in June of that year. Taft wrote, "The Interior people may well recommend that we purchase the two apartment houses to the north and expand the grounds." [1]

In the 1968 report, "A Study of Alternatives," the National Park Service offered three development alternatives that addressed the setting of the Taft home. Alternative Plan I provided for visitor parking on the grounds of Hamilton County Detention Center through an agreement with the county. Even though one wing of the Detention Center stretched out into the land that was once attached to the Taft home, the report stated that this alternative had "the advantage of permitting restoration of the grounds around the Taft Home, thereby providing an effective setting for the house." [2] Alternative Plan II called for visitor parking and access provided only on the half-acre Taft property, made accessible by the driveway on the north, which at that time terminated behind the house on a ungraded and unsurfaced area. This alternative required that some visitors seek on- street parking. Alternative Plan III provided for parking on the Cross property just to the north of the Taft site, if it could be acquired by the National Park Service. This plan would keep parking off the Taft property, leaving the entire historic site free for preservation and restoration. [3]

In the 1970 master plan, the section devoted to "Factors Affecting Resources and Use," the 1968 Alternative Plan III emerged as the plan for development of the site. The 1970 master plan called for the acquisition by donation of the 0.28 acre (later determined to be 0.32 acre) lot to the north of the Taft property. The plan cited potential access to the property through the Hamilton County Detention Center as a future possibility, as well as the restoration of the southern view should the facility be removed to another location. The plan also noted that the lot to the north of the Taft property dropped some 25 feet below Auburn Avenue. "While this could present a problem in providing a connection to the Taft grounds, it would help set the parking on a lower level and thus makes it easier to screen. It is a challenging situation for an imaginative designer." [4]

During 1971, final arrangements were made toward the acquisition of the Cross property and the demolition of the building on the site. The path to this objective was a rocky one, but in the end, the mission was accomplished.

One of the stumbling blocks to demolition of the Cross building was the potential cost of relocating the families residing in the apartment house. On July 9, 1971, Charles R. Rinaldi of the National Park Service's Office of Land Acquisition and Water Resources informed Charles Taft that under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Land Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (passed on January 2, 1971), the cost of relocation would be $4,000 per family or $64,000 for the remaining 16 families. The Federal Government would be required to bear the cost if it needed to condemn the property. Therefore, Rinaldi recommended that Taft purchase the property from the owners, the Gerbus brothers, and donate the land to the National Park Service. Alternatively, the Federal Government could proceed with condemnation should Taft be unable to cover the expenses incurred by such a process. [5]

Taft initially balked at a direct purchase of the Cross property because of the high price he expected the Gerbus brothers to ask. Although the appraised value of the house was $35,000 to $37,000, Taft eventually purchased the property for $50,000 because the Gerbus brothers had a mortgage on the property at the higher price. [6]

While Taft was making final arrangements for the purchase of the Cross property, new objections to the plan were heard from another section of the National Park Service. During a visit in late 1971, two professional staff from the bureau's Washington Office, Historical Architect Hugh Miller and Historian Edwin Bearss, observed the site and were dismayed at the impending demolition of the apartment house. Miller, noting that the building dated from about 1885, thought that it was a typical building of its period and "thus is an important background building. It forms a buffer between the Taft house and a less distinguished modern building whose uninspired side elevation would be exposed to general view when the Cross property is removed." Miller cited the

present rhythm of building facades that establishes the residential scale of Auburn Avenue. The removal of the Cross building by the National Park Service would also create an unfortunate precedent at the time the community is attempting to create a historic district to preserve the historic quality of the neighborhood near the Historic Site.

Because the 1970 master plan gave no indication of the appearance or vintage of the house proposed for demolition, Miller suggested that as a matter of bureau policy, "photographs of buildings proposed to be removed and their environs should be submitted when master plans are reviewed." Miller further suggested that the Cross building, if adaptively refurbished, serve visitor, community and park support functions. [7]

Miller's views were confirmed by those of Historian Bearss, who voiced the opinion that if the Cross property was demolished, the National Park Service's position as "a champion of historic preservation will be compromised locally." [8] The Director of the Office of Archeology and Historic Preservation, Ernest Allen Connally, urged that the Cross building be studied for adaptive use before any request to demolish was submitted. [9]

In conveying the reports of Miller and Bearss to Park Manager Lissimore, Superintendent Birdsell suggested that Charles Taft not be shown the report. Birdsell recommended that Lissimore cover only the key points.

Despite the pleas of Miller and Bearss, the plans for the Cross building had progressed too far to be turned back. As Chester L. Brooks, Regional Director of the Northeast Regional Office, wrote to Connally, "The situation re the Cross Building is almost beyond recall because of arrangements previously worked out between the Director and Mr. Taft in accordance with master plan determination that the Cross building must be demolished." [10] In addition, Charles Taft arranged with the Mt. Auburn Good Housing Foundation and the City Redevelopment Department to find new residences for the tenants.

The National Park Service washed its hands of the affair. As Park Manager Lissimore stated to Charles Taft, "The acquisition and removal of the building under discussion is not an action of the Department of the Interior or its bureau, the National Park Service. " According to Lissimore, the "hands-off" role would continue to be its position until the Cross property had actually been "deeded over to the federal government for the completion of improvements necessary to properly interpret the birthplace." [11]

Coincident with the Cross property developments, the National Park Service contracted with the Ohio Historical Society to study the grounds and to conduct archeological investigations of the Taft property. In the summer of 1971, the Ohio Historical Society dispatched 29-year-old Major Charles Ross McCollough, Ph.D. to perform this work.

The first report, "William Howard Taft National Historic Site: Historic Grounds Report," was completed in October 1971. It traced through historical documents, Taft family correspondence, and knowledgeable individuals the historic features and activities associated with the grounds of the Taft property. McCollough's report recounted the general appearance of the Mt. Auburn neighborhood at the time of Taft's residency, the rear addition to the house undertaken by Alphonso Taft, and the location of cisterns, wells, outbuildings, utility mains, gardens, orchards, and carriage way. McCollough also investigated the use of the land to the east of the National Park Service property lines, which had once been attached to the house. [12]

The following year, in June 1972, McCollough produced "William Howard Taft National Historic Site: Archeological Investigations of Grounds." This report covered a surface survey of the historic rear portion of the Taft property. This area had been sold by Bellinger to Hamilton County for construction of the Detention Center. Because it had been filled, graded, macadamized, or built over, virtually all historic features and structures had been obliterated or covered over. As the intruding Detention Center wing and parking lot were not likely to be removed, McCollough suggested that the eastern boundary of the National Park Service property be screened with a high fence or floral screen.

McCollough observed that the only historic features worthy of excavation were two cisterns located within the ground floor of the 1851 rear extension. In addition, McCollough investigated the south porch area, the iron fence along the south property line, a privy walk, an exterior cistern, and "buried historic humus." Finally, a series of test trenches were dug in a section behind the house in order to establish the area's historic contours and to determine if any structures or features stood in that area, and their location. [13]

Additional archeological investigations were conducted by the Denver Service Center staff in tandem with the architectural analyses of the 1970s. In 1975, staff archeologist Deborah K. Bauxar undertook several test excavations along the walls of the 1851 addition to determine the condition of the foundation. Bauxar located the well and cisterns that had been previously studied by McCollough. She also measured the depths of the foundation on all sides of the addition and determined that variation in depth and width was due to a desire to protect the well and cisterns. The cisterns were built prior to the addition by a matter of days. Bauxar's report concluded that the cisterns would need to be demolished to provide for a sturdy foundation to support the south wall. However, time should be allotted to permit a thorough archeological investigation of the cisterns. [14]

In the following year, the Denver Service Center contracted with Southside Historical Sites, Inc. of Williamsburg, Virginia, to identify and analyze the 492 artifacts recovered by Bauxar beneath the concrete sidewalk and two brick walks along the east and south walls of the 1851 addition. Prepared by Jan H. House of the firm, the report covered the major types of artifacts, including glass and metal fragments, none of which dated from the period 1851 to 1877. House surmised that the artifacts dated from occupants of the house after 1877 and most were categorized as hardware and building materials. Few conclusions could be drawn from the artifacts "due to the scattered nature of excavation and the lack of adequate field records." In addition, the McCollough excavations disturbed the original provenance of some of the artifacts. [15]

In 1982, in response to the construction program to stabilize the rear addition of the Taft house, the Midwest Archeological Center at Lincoln, Nebraska, dispatched Archeologist Leslie Perry to conduct excavations of the front yard, the north yard, the ground around the foundations of the east wing, and the carriage drive. Two weeks of fieldwork at the site resulted in the collection of over 3,000 artifacts, which included more than 2,000 structural materials. In addition, domestic, subsistence, personal, and miscellaneous materials were also recovered.

When Architect Renzo Riddo of the Denver Service Center removed matrix from the cellar, he noticed additional artifacts. A few weeks later, another archeologist from the Midwest Archeological Center, Jeffrey Richner, visited the site to collect artifacts from the cellar. Whereas the exterior excavation related to the structural makeup of the house, Richner's fieldwork yielded artifacts related to the domestic life of the house. Several thousand artifacts were recovered, some of which belonged to the Taft family. The Taft artifacts included a silver fork bearing the initials of L.M.T., presumably Louise Taft, mother of William Howard Taft, as well as fragments of china and bottles and toys.

The nature of the Taft era artifacts confirmed the affluence of the family. However, their location revealed a surprising pattern of disposal of household refuse, including food remains. Many animal bones and an assortment of household debris were purposefully discarded within the basement. This pattern of refuse disposal was not expected, given the affluence of the Taft family.

In the interest of providing visitor access and accommodations for the Taft National Historic Site, various planning documents looked beyond the half-acre of land attached to the Taft home. The 1968 study of alternatives suggested using the land attached to the Detention Center for visitor parking and a common National Park Service-County entrance drive. It also considered the Cross property and a portion of the parking lot attached to the Sanning apartment house as a means to provide visitor parking. By the time the 1970 master plan was written, the Taft home site and Cross property were considered a unit. The report stated the expectation that Hamilton County would donate an easement permitting National Park Service use of a narrow strip of property to the south for a landscaped buffer between the Taft home and the west wing of the Detention Center.

As the master plan revision proceeded after 1974, it became evident that the Cross property land was insufficient for visitor parking. Development of the property required additional land to screen the house and accommodate visitors. Several parcels of land on the block bounded by Auburn Avenue on the west, Southern Avenue on the north, Young Street on the east, and Bodmann Avenue on the south emerged as possible additions to the site. The first of these was tract 01-103, the 16' by 220' strip along the southern border of the Taft home site owned by Hamilton County. Another parcel was the 0.30 acre parking lot, tract 01-104, attached to the Sanning apartment house which provided access to the Taft site from Southern Avenue. The apartment house and parking lot were owned by the Mt. Auburn Good Housing Foundation. The third parcel of land consisted of 0.79 acre of land, tract 01-105, at the southwest corner of Southern and Young. It was acquired by Hamilton County in 1973. Finally, the planning team looked at the possibility that the 1.06-acre stretch of land, tract 01-106, which represented much of the original land attached to the house during William Howard Taft's occupancy, might someday be conveyed to the National Park Service by Hamilton County.

Because of existing uses and various owners, the acquisition of some parcels was easier than others. Superintendent Licari, an active member of the master plan team, began negotiations with the owners of the four parcels of land to determine the feasibility of National Park Service acquisition. In January 1977, the Board of County Commissioners of Hamilton County adopted three resolutions. The first resolution stated that the 16' by 220' strip of land, subject to a perpetual easement from the County since December 24, 1969, would be conveyed to the National Park Service if the County Prosecuting Attorney determined that it was legally possible to do so. The second resolution pertained to tract 01-105 at the corner of Southern and Young Streets. The Board of County Commissioners referred to the draft master plan for the Taft National Historic Site and expressed its willingness to negotiate the transfer of the property to the National Park Service. On the matter of tract 01-106, the Board stated its willingness to give the National Park Service the right of first refusal if the County at some future time determined the property to be no longer needed for County use. On this matter, County Administrator R. A. Anderegg wrote to Superintendent Licari, "The board also directed me to inform you that they cannot foresee the property being abandoned at any time in the future." [16]

On September 5, 1979, Hamilton County conveyed the 16' x 220' strip, tract 01-103, to the National Park Service. Conveyance of the Southern and Young lot, tract 01-105, was delayed because of errors in the description of the property when it was acquired by the County in 1973. When the description was clarified, the lot was conveyed to the National Park Service on October 9, 1985.

In his negotiations with the Mt. Auburn Good Housing Foundation, Superintendent Licari received a proposal from the organization's president, Carl B. Westmoreland, offering the National Park Service clear title to the Sanning apartment house's access drive and parking lot for $1.00 in exchange for a list of agreements from the bureau. These agreements included a 99- year lease to the Foundation, a guarantee of twenty-five parking spaces plus one for each on-street parking space lost due to parking restrictions on Southern Avenue, the maintenance of the parking lot and drive by the National Park Service, the construction and maintenance of three retaining walls, and the provision of temporary parking at the Southern and Young lot for the Sanning residents during the period that the lot was being improved. [17] Upon review of the Foundation's proposal, the National Park Service determined that it was "unacceptable from a legal standpoint" and "an unacceptable burden from a management standpoint." [18]

With the County's intentions for the parcels under its ownership clarified and with negotiations continuing with the Mt. Auburn Good Housing Foundation over the Sanning apartment house parking lot, the National Parks and Recreation Act of 1978 expanded the boundaries of the William Howard Taft National Historic Site to include all four parcels of land. The law authorized the acquisition of the parcels should they become available.

Although final transfer of the Southern and Young lot and the Sanning apartment house lot had not been completed by the time the 1981 master plan was issued, they were incorporated into the discussion of the site's development. For the Southern and Young lot, the plan located a bus staging area and an overflow lot for automobile parking. (In 1984, Superintendent Boyd envisioned the parking lot as a community park and picnic area with limited parking in curb cuts on Young Street.) The Sanning apartment house lot was intended for automobile parking only.

In April 1982, the Interior Department issued a policy statement on the use of the Land and Water Conservation Fund. All agencies that used the fund were directed to identify lands needed to achieve their public objectives, to make use of alternatives to direct Federal purchase of land, to cooperate with other governmental entities and the private sector in the management of lands, and to prepare plans for land acquisition. In response to this policy, the National Park Service directed that all agency areas prepare a land protection plan.

Superintendent Maxine Boyd prepared the draft land protection plan in April 1983. The plan outlined the land holdings incorporated in or proposed for addition to the Taft National Historic Site. In this plan, Boyd stated her priority for acquiring a donation of the Sanning apartment parking lot. She also proposed to investigate ways to develop a 10-foot trail linking the Southern and Young lot to the Taft home through an easement or a fee. simple title. The trail could be located along Hamilton County's property or the property belonging to Mrs. A. G. Hauck who owned the property to the west of the Southern and Young lot. (The Hauck property was later sold to Christ Hospital.)

The evolution of the land holdings attached to the Taft home began with modest boundaries for the site consisting of two parcels. Together, they measured less than an acre. The parcel on the north, the Cross property, turned out to be unusable for parking purposes because of its sharp drop from the street level. During the master planning process of the 1970s, it emerged as the location of the visitor contact station. Additional parcels were considered, but their locations were less than ideal. The Sanning apartment house parking lot was suitable for car parking but not for buses because of its location below grade. In addition, separating the parking lot from the apartment house would bring considerable inconvenience to the Sanning residents and lower the value of the structure. The acquisition of the Sanning apartment house and its parking lot may emerge at some time in the future. The topography of the Southern and Young lot makes it suitable for bus and car parking. However, the lot is not adjacent to the Taft home.

The resulting patch-work quilt of lands was a factor of the underestimation by National Park Service staff members in the 1960s of the size of the site that would be necessary to support development and public visitation of the Taft home. In the 1970s, it became evident that the heavily urbanized block offered only a limited number of options for enlarging the site. Because the available land parcels are not contiguous, the eventual development of the site likely will not result in a slice of country life in the inner-city. Although the Cross property building was lost, the Taft home remains a mid-nineteenth century forerunner of the complex urban tapestry of modern Mt. Auburn.