Urban Renewal and the Fitz Henry Lane House

As the nationwide Urban Renewal program swept the United States in the 1950s, Gloucester's participation in this federally funded project shifted away from an original plan of revitalizing the more heavily populated inland neighborhoods to restoring portions of its coast. More eloquently dubbed "The Waterfront Project," the City began efforts to remove dilapidated buildings on the water side of Rogers Street. Despite being primarily a commercial zone, 30 families called this neighborhood home and were re-located. The original goal of the project was not to build luxury apartments or parks as many communities planned, but rather to combat unemployment and blight and restore a commercial fishing district.

The 1950s & 60s also saw renewed interest in the maritime artist, Fitz Henry Lane. The house at the top of Duncan's Point, which the artist built in 1849/50 and lived in until his death in 1865, happened to be in the middle of the proposed demolition zone and became the center of a city-wide debate. Civic leaders questioned whether the house should be preserved, how it should be used, and by whom.

As early as 1958, it was clear that the Lane House was in the path of bulldozers and concerned community members began a campaign to save at least this one building on the waterfront. The initial committee, The Civic Art Committee, was comprised of local leaders like Alfred Mansfield Brooks and Walker Hancock, who would continue to champion the House for the next decade.

While a small group of citizens continued plans for the Lane House, for the remainder of 1961 and 1962 the City's focus shifted back to the broader $3 million project, administered by the Gloucester Housing Authority, of acquiring all land and buildings within the renewal area.

One of the first disputes regarding the use of the surviving Lane House occurred between two business owners, George McKinnon and Peter Cahill, who had purchased the House before the Urban Renewal plan went into effect and the title reverted back to the City's ownership. In 1965, the Gloucester Daily Times was the conduit for this public discussion on whether the men should be given back the title and if they could in turn be allowed to go forward with their original plan for the House: a restaurant and tavern.

Upon returning to Gloucester in 1965, poet Charles Olson, through frequent letters to the Times' editor, became a vocal opponent of Urban Renewal, calling it "renewing without reviewing." The Housing Authority's 1963 plan dedicated over a dozen pages to relocation services for individuals and businesses that experienced displacement due to the project. While this plan did allocate money for assisting in services and moving fees, any differences in expenses accrued were left to individuals. As one resident stated, "Where we live now is where we can afford."

In late 1965, less than half a year after the surrounding buildings had been razed, the question of an occupant for the house continued. Due to the concern raised in this public letter, the Cape Ann Museum, then the Cape Ann Historical Association (CAHA), withdrew its proposal to purchase, occupy, and be caretaker of the Lane House.

CAHA's withdrawal of their offer to purchase the house did not mean that the society, as well as many other local historical based institutions, were not deeply invested in what would become of the house. One month after the previous letter was written, these meeting notes read as a brainstorming session of local cultural institutions searching for the most civically beneficial solution for a historical landmark.

In May 1966, two years after Paul Kenyon wrote his editorial asking what could be done with the Lane House, he wrote that the House, now alone on the hill, "looks like a miniature castle, with its granite block wall, five-gabled roof and prominent situation overlooking Gloucester Harbor." He goes on to share the work of the recently established Committee for Preservation, whose goal it was to assure the House's public use for the community.

Recalling Olson's "renewing without reviewing," this document shows the Committee for Preserving the Lane House pivoting from its recent success of saving the house from the first round of demolition to preserving the remaining physical structure and placing a tenant inside. Despite this progress, the fear remained that if funds were not secured to execute the preservation, the Lane House might still face destruction.

Correspondence from this time period show members of the Committee reaching out to Massachusetts congressmen in an attempt to better understand the funding that is granted to the city for such work. At the time a trustee of CAHA, Robert Brown undoubtedly had knowledge of historic houses and the work needed to preserve them.

On April 4, 1968, the fight to protect the Fitz Henry Lane House from demolition was officially and legally over. Addressed to the administrator of the Urban Renewal Project, John W. Sheedy of the Gloucester Housing Authority, the city writes: "The City Council at its regular meeting held on April 4, 1968, voted unanimously to adopt the following motion: That the Gloucester Housing Authority be requested to proceed with the restoration of the Fitz Hugh Lane House in conjunction with the City of Gloucester Historical Commission who will be the ultimate conservator for the City of Gloucester."

The years following the City's resolution to save the House were filled with conflicting narratives and plans. This letter to the editor from Hyde Cox, then president of Cape Ann Historical Association, corrects an article in Yankee Magazine stating that CAHA would be using the House as a "depository" for Lane's works. Instead, Cox reiterates the excitement around a soon to be completed new wing of the Museum. For the next few years, the two main story lines were: who would own and care for the House and who would rent and occupy the House if the owner had no use for all three floors, which was the expectation.

The next step for the Housing Authority and Historical Commission was to secure federal funding to preserve the House. The easiest path toward that outcome was to apply to the recently pass law, P.L. 89-655 (The Preservation Act of 1966). This undated letter (most likely sent very late in 1968 or very early in 1969) to Dorn McGrath of the History and Urban Development Department in D.C. outlines the City's progress on the House to that point and their request for funding. After a relatively quick turnaround, the Fitz Henry Lane House was added to the National Register of Historic Places on July 1, 1970.

This letter and the following architecture plan shows that all involved parties were eager to begin work on restoring the Fitz Henry Lane House to its former glory. An architect was chosen, John Radford Abbott, based on his recent work at Sturbridge Village, who quickly drafted a plan for restoring the structure and exterior of the House.

Despite the exterior architecture plans being quickly approved, work on the interior was continually delayed as the Commission had hoped a future tenant would have a say in its design and execution. For the next three years, the leading candidate was the Chamber of Commerce, but due to leadership turnover and other priorities, they were unable at the time to commit to occupying the House.

Letters such as this perfectly illustrate the status of the Lane House during the 1970s. By 1976, a search for a permanent tenant was a decade old, and no one seemed able to secure the rights. This proposal by the Gloucester Art Museum and Gallery was one of the more convincing and well thought out proposals. Others from this time period came from: a security company, artist studios, a photography committee, Charles Olson's library, the Conservation Commission, the City's Health Department, and many more.

This undated letter by sculptor Walker Hancock of the Historical Commission, seemingly in response to the previous proposal by the Gloucester Art Museum and Gallery, shows why, despite his natural desire to see the building used by artist, he, and the rest of the Committee, had reservations, "I do not feel that this building, which is public property should be turned over to any private group on a permanent basis."

Today, the Fitz Henry Lane House still sits alone on the top of the hill but is now accompanied by a sculpture of Lane looking out to sea. This memorial sculpture is the work of Alfred Duca and was installed on Duncan's Point on August 30, 1997.