Thursday, December 2, 2010

2010 Elizabeth Lyon Fellowship Project Update

Clarkesville Mill

Clarkesville, GA

On November 11th, I surveyed Clarkesville Mill located in Clarkesville, GA. The mill, built between 1950 and 1951, used rayon to produce fabric for curtains. The mill closed in 2001 and has since been converted into a mixed-use building called the Old Clarkesville Mill, housing a number of commercial ventures.



Above: Undated photograph of Clarkesville Mill from Genealogy Room at Clarkesville-Habersham County Library, Photograph probably made soon after the mill was completed in 1951, as there are no additions to the mill.


When Clarkesville mill was first constructed, it looked entirely unlike mills built a half century before. For example, compare the above picture of the original unaltered Clarkesville Mill, with a photograph of Sachem Mills in Winder, GA (Pictured Below). The mill in Winder, built in the late 1890s-early 1900s, looks like a typical Georgia cotton mill. Sachem Mills is multi storied, has detached warehouses, a detached weave shed, a boiler house denoted by its tall smokestack, direct railroad frontage, and so on. Clarkesville Mill when it was first constructed had few of these characteristic.



Above: Photograph Courtesy of Vanishing Georgia, Sachem Mills, Winder, Barrow County, Georgia, 1948,


The most startling difference between Clarkesville Mill and earlier mills is that Clarkesville Mill is one story. Although there were one story mills built prior to WWII, one story mill construction was the proscribed method of mill construction following WWII. One chief reason was the ease of alteration. Clarkesville Mill currently has a number of additions added on to the original structure, which clearly illustrate this point. Clarkesville Mill is built with steel support columns and steel roof beams, as well as non load-bearing concrete walls. The concrete block walls could be removed as needed to allow for greater uninterrupted spaces. The expansion process is understandably more complex with a multi storied mill.

A single story mill could also reduce cost. When Fulton Bag and Cotton Mills, located in Atlanta and constructed like a typical multi story mill with a sprawling complex, was celebrating its 100th anniversary in 1968, Textile Industries carried a brief history of the mill. The magazine related that “one of Fulton’s young industrial engineers” was heard telling a visitor: “Just imagine what you could do with this if it was all on one level.”1 The magazine also reported that “Management readily admits that the physical layout of the plant raises materials handling costs and causes more than a few production headaches.”2 Although multi storied mills which stretch on for hundreds of feet may be impressive, this may also be that mills biggest weakness. Additionally, it is not just the external physical appearances that differ between older and newer textile mills. One figure that illustrates the difference between newer and older mill is that in the mid 1960s, to make an older mill suitable for new machinery, it could cost as much as 80 to 85 percent the cost of a brand new building.3 This also helps explain why mills chose to add additions with newer construction, as they allowed for greater future flexibility.

I would like to thank Mr. Otter for allowing me to survey the building, as well as Gail and Ms. Wineland for providing me with a tour, photos, and information about the site.

I would also like to thank Mr. D’entremont who used to work at Clarkesville Mill, and offered over an hour of his time explaining the production process at the mill.


1“Part 2: Fulton’s Management and Marketing Concepts Today” from “100th Anniversary: Fulton Cotton Mills.” Textile Industries, Vol. 38, No. 12. (December 1968), 67.

2Ibid., 67.

3Simpson, William Hays. Some Aspects of America’s Textile Industry, With Special Reference to Cotton. Columbia, SC: Division of General Studies, University of South Carolina, 1966, 63



Steven Eubanks is a graduate student at West Georgia University and recipient of the 2010 Elizabeth Lyon Fellowship. The Elizabeth Lyon Fellowship provides financial assistance for projects that acquaint undergraduate and graduate students, and young professionals with preservation programs and practices.


Friday, November 19, 2010

2010 Elizabeth Lyon Fellowship Project Update


Martha Mills

Thomaston, GA


Above: Aerial view of Martha Mills complex from Google Earth/ View is aligned with north being the top of the picture

On Thursday November the 11th I surveyed Martha Mills in Thomaston, GA. I want to thank Matthew Molenkamp for showing me around and allowing me to document this amazing (and vast) site.



Above: Photographer facing west, Photograph of main mill’s east fa├žade, Added during 1929 main mill expansion/ Photograph in possession of author, taken 11/11/10

Martha Mills was constructed in 1926 to make cotton tire cord for the B. F. Goodrich Company. In 1929 B. F. Goodrich officially bought the mill, which had been operated by the owners of Thomaston Mill and in that same year the mill grew in length, with the original three story mill receiving wings on the west side and east side . The mill continued to receive various additions prior to WWII on the north side of mill, which formed an L, with some of the L completed in the late 1960s. The L portion is no longer extant, but was three stories in height, like the main mill. These additions were easily integrated into the mill because raw product could enter on the west east side of the mill, pass through the appropriate processes and exit on west side. A series of covered walkways and breezeways allowed for the movement of products between the appropriate areas. When Martha Mills chose to expand in the late 1960s, they built a one story weave mill, and warehouse to the south. This addition is not directly connected to the main mill, but it does have a series of passageways, some of which could be sealed if needed. This addition is built with a steel frame, whereas the majority of Martha Mills has cast iron columns, with wood columns only receiving minimal use. The west portion of the addition was designated as a weave mill, which added loom capacity to the mill, and the east wing was designated as a warehouse, with both the weave mill and warehouse under one continuous roof. This addition may have somewhat altered the product flow, because on the east side of the warehouse, there was an all-steel building (no longer extant) built in the 1969, and housed a process which was made the product last longer. There was also a warehouse built in the 1970s just south of the all-steel building, which was used to store finished goods. Did all the products now leave the southeast corner of the mill, instead of on the west side, where a concrete loading dock was located? It is conceivable that some, and not all synthetic products had to be treated before the production process was complete, whereas cotton products required no such process. Martha Mills did start producing a variety of synthetic materials, as it attempted to remain competitive.


Above: Photographer facing north, Photograph of weave mill and warehouse exterior with main mill rising behind the one story utilitarian building, Weave Mill and warehouse constructed in 1969/ Photograph in possession of author taken 11/11/10

Above: Photographer facing west, Photograph of weave mill interior, Weave Mill constructed in 1969/ Photograph in possession of author taken 11/11/10

Although the weave mill and warehouse additions bring new questions to light, they do illustrate some key points about what was becoming standard in post WWII construction. Steel columns and steel framed buildings were the norm as steel offered greater strength and increased resistance to fire. The concrete block interior walls with brick veneer were also becoming common. Most additions, or new mills, were one story and windowless due to the increased potential to expand a one story mill and the ease of product flow. Mills could be windowless because of artificial lighting and the increased availability of air conditioning which increased human comfort and the production capability of the machines. These are just a few, of the many points about post WWII textile mill construction demonstrated by Martha Mills.


Steven Eubanks is a graduate student at West Georgia University and recipient of the 2010 Elizabeth Lyon Fellowship. The Elizabeth Lyon Fellowship provides financial assistance for projects that acquaint undergraduate and graduate students, and young professionals with preservation programs and practices.

Thursday, November 4, 2010

2010 Elizabeth Lyon Fellowship Project Update

The Quest for Open Space

The ability for textile mills to maximize and use all available floor space was a key concern as textile mills expanded following World War II. Improved technology allowed for the construction of large open areas.








Photograph 1: Second floor interior, Building #5(1955 Addition) at Puritan Cordage Mills, Clarke County, Georgia, Photograph taken 6/25/1995 on file at Georgia Historic Preservation Division









Photograph 2: Exterior,Building #5 (1955 Addition) at Puritan Cordage Mills, Clarke County, Georgia, Photograph taken 6/25/1995 on file at Georgia Historic Preservation Division










Photograph 3: Interior, Building #4 (1922 Addition) at Puritan Cordage Mills, Clarke County, Georgia, Photograph taken 6/25/1995 on file at Georgia Historic Preservation Division










Photograph 4: Exterior, Building #4 (1922 Addition) at Puritan Cordage Mills, Clarke County, Georgia, Photograph taken 6/25/1995 on file at Georgia Historic Preservation Division



Even though the 1955 addition (Photographs 1 and 2 seen above) at Puritan Cordage Mills near Athens, GA is two stories with an arched roof, the possibilities provided by one story open space textile mills were immense. The absence of supporting columns allowed for greater internal flexibility. An industry trade journal in 1948 believed that the increasing size of textile machinery would make columns a great hindrance and that in any progressive mill it would be “…almost impossible to predict in advance what column space will fit the machinery of the future.”1 Portions of Puritan Cordage Mills constructed in the early 1920s (Photographs 3 and 4 above) relied on long rows of wooden columns as part of a post and beam roof system. When compared to the completely open spaces of the 1955 addition, the obstruction caused by long rows of internal supports is clearly displayed. In the late 1940s the textile industry generally believed that there was little to impede its growth and that future growth and modernization needed open space construction. This does not mean that all mill additions built after World War II utilized construction techniques allowing for large unbroken space and the industry would continue to find innovative ways to create open spaces, some of which were quite radical.

Jefferson Mills located in Jackson County, Georgia after having already added typical additions on a cotton mill built in 1899, decided to construct a completely new building (Seen below). This building, completed in 1966, utilized an exterior system of tension cables, like those on a suspension bridge, to hold the weight of the roof and negate the use of interior columns. Even though architecturally very different from the 1955 addition at Puritan Cordage Mills, it is all part of the attempt to open up work space and increase the flexibility and adaptability of Georgia’s textile mills.








Image from John Linley’s The Georgia Catalog: Historic American Buildings Survey: A Guide to the Architecture of the State, 233.

In my next posting I will have an update from an upcoming site visit to Martha Mills in Thomaston, Ga.

1Ewell, David. “One-Story Mill Trend Backed By Sound Reasons” Textile World Vol. 98 No. 11, 105.


Steven Eubanks is a graduate student at West Georgia University and recipient of the 2010 Elizabeth Lyon Fellowship. The Elizabeth Lyon Fellowship provides financial assistance for projects that acquaint undergraduate and graduate students, and young professionals with preservation programs and practices.


Thursday, October 21, 2010

2010 Elizabeth Lyon Fellowship Project Update

Georgia’s Textile Industry in a Global Context

Are closed textile mills in Georgia, like the shuttered Goodyear Clearwater Mills in ATCO, shown below, a sign of progress? [Photographer Unknown]


Countries and regions have consistently turned to the textile industry to spark growth and modernize an economy, but time and time again the industry falls into decline. Britain’s textile industry lead the way during industrial revolution in the late 18th and 19th century, and textiles became one of Britain’s chief exports, making a world superpower even more powerful. As late as the early 20th century Britain was responsible for as much as 70% of the total world textile trade, but currently its employment and output remain in a decade long decline. The New England states turned to the textile industry to help it move away from agricultural and farming, thus sparking industrial growth in the early 19th century. In an attempt to lower labor cost, the northern textile industry began shifting south in the late 1880s, and by the mid 1920s the South surpassed the North in number of operating spindles, and the United States as a whole was becoming ever important on the worldwide textile market. (Operating spindles are the most consistent measure of strength and size of the textile industry) By the mid 1930s; however, Japan, which had turned to the textile industry in an effort to modernize, was the leading exporter of textile products in the world. Following World War II it appeared that the United States, with its textile industry strongest in the South would take prominence on the world textile stage, even helping Japan rebuild its war torn textile industry, but the US’s predominance would not last. Although the decline has been gradual, the United States (and for the purpose of this project the South and Georgia), lost most of its competitive advantage in the textile and apparel industry in the decades following World War II to developing countries in Asia and Eastern Europe, who have themselves turned to the textile industry to drive improvements and modernization, just as Britain, the northern and southern states, and then Japan had previously done.

Even though there has been decline, there is, however, still a textile industry in Georgia. The 2002 Economic Census reported that 75,753 individuals worked in the textile industry, equaling about 16.7% of manufacturing employment (These numbers may be lower today with textile interests continuing to shutter). This however is a shadow of the 103,325 people employed in the textile industry in 1950, which accounted for 35.4% of manufacturing employment. Why the decline when the economy through this same time period generally improved? The textile industry is such that with advances and success in the industry and economy comes improved machinery and processes which improve manufacturing capabilities and thus decrease the amount of labor needed. Thus textile mills must be ever cognizant of improvements in technology, and if improvements are too costly as they often are, then closing may be the only solution.

For this project, the additions and alterations I will examine are generally part of modernization or diversification meant to improve a mill’s competitiveness or increase efficiency, and thus placing Georgia’s mills in a global context is essential.





Steven Eubanks is
a graduate student at West Georgia University and recipient of the 2010 Elizabeth Lyon Fellowship. The Elizabeth Lyon Fellowship provides financial assistance for projects that acquaint undergraduate and graduate students, and young professionals with preservation programs and practices.

Wednesday, October 20, 2010

Member Spotlight


In this week’s Member Spotlight we are thrilled to highlight Merribel McKeever, Research Intern for The Georgia Trust. A true preservationist in training, Merribel is currently perusing her graduate degree in Heritage Preservation at Georgia State University. Merribel is working on gathering information for The Georgia Trust and Southface Institute for the purpose of starting a new green renovation program geared toward historic structures, as well as creating criteria for cemeteries to be used by the Atlanta Regional Commission.

Merribel serves as Treasurer for Georgia State University’s Heritage Preservation Society. Somehow, in her limited spare time, she likes to express her artistic abilities through, writing, drawing, and playing music. Merribel also bakes delicious cupcakes, which have been used to fuel the Georgia Trust staff. Thanks Merribel!

Merribel’s preservation tip:

Educate! In general people have greater appreciation for things they understand and are knowledgeable about. To the average person a structure built in 1900 might seem like just another old building, but if they knew that someone extremely influential grew up there, or that is was an important gathering place for the community or that a famous architect used a design that would later become the basis for modern architecture, they’re more likely to want to protect that resource and share the story with others.

The Trust is grateful to have exceptional members, volunteers and interns such as Merribel, whose diligent work stresses the importance of historic preservation.


Thursday, October 7, 2010

2010 Elizabeth Lyon Fellowship Project

Although a great deal is known about pre-World War II textile industry structures in Georgia, little is known about the industry and the structures which were built and modified in Georgia after the War. In conjunction with the Georgia Historic Preservation Division and The Georgia Trust, I am working to develop a historical context for these post war structures. To keep those who may be interested in the topic updated, I will post an update twice a month on my progress. The project will last until May of 2010. Also if anyone has any information on the topic, it would be greatly appreciated. Since this is my first blog posting it will be a little lengthy, and I apologize for this.

--

In many Georgia towns, small and large, you will find nondescript industrial buildings which were once part of Georgia’s vibrant textile industry. Although some of these structures may be in use today producing textile products or in an adaptive use such as apartment housing, many sit dormant or unused. The little that is known about the post World War II textile industry focuses on the decline of this industry. This decline was not precipitous and immediate, but slow and gradual. As a result of this drawn out decline, construction and alternations continued to occur within the textile industry, and many of these structures or changes remain in Georgia today.


An example of post war expansion in Georgia is seen fifty miles to the west of Atlanta in the small town of Bremen. Although Bremen does not look like an economic powerhouse, Bremen in the 1950s and 1960s was known as the “Clothing Capital of the South” due to an incredible concentration of apparel makers, in and around the town. One structure, just to the east of downtown Bremen, displays some key points (and questions) which this project will address. The structure (shown above) was constructed by Hubbard Pants Company in the mid 1960s, with an official dedication occurring in December of 1965. Hubbard built this International style structure to keep up with an increasing demand for the pants and slacks that it produced. The structure was initially built as a stock room and warehouse. Some limited production did initially occur in this structure, such as cutting and waistband manufacture, but after Hubbard was bought out in the early 1990s, most of the companies’ production moved from another building to this three story structure. The production process began on the top floor and proceeded downward via chutes. The building would not get air conditioning until the 1990s, and was vacated after Hubbard went out of business in 2002. This structure raises many important questions. Is this post World War II industrial textile structure like others in Georgia? Is this structure different because it produced apparel, as opposed to working with cotton or hosiery? How do post WWII additions compare to buildings constructed from the ground up? These are a few questions that will hopefully be answered by looking at and studying the Hubbard buildings and others like it.

My next blog posting will discuss the international context of Georgia’s textile industry

Steven Eubanks

jeubank4@my.westga.edu

--

Steven Eubanks is a graduate student at West Georgia University and recipient of the 2010 Elizabeth Lyon Fellowship. The Elizabeth Lyon Fellowship provides financial assistance for projects that acquaint undergraduate and graduate students, and young professionals with preservation programs and practices.

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

GaPA Update


On July 30th, preservationists cheered as the CLEAR Act passed the House and moved to the Senate. The Consolidated Land, Energy, and Aquatic Resources (CLEAR) Act includes important language for full and permanent funding of the Historic Preservation Fund, as well as the Land and Water Conservation Fund. This would make $150 million available to fund historic preservation each year!

Earlier this month, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar, in an address to the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, reinforced his support of historic preservation and highlighted the important role preservation plays in our nation’s past and future.


Read Secretary Salazar's inspiring Remarks to the ACHP


Support the Coalition for Full Funding

Tuesday, August 31, 2010

Georgia Theatre Update

Thanks in part to many generous donations, the rehabilitation of the Georgia Theatre is underway!
Check out theater owner Wilmot Greene's interview on CNN:


Click HERE for the full story and more great pictures.

The Georgia Theatre's rehabilitation still needs your support. To learn more about the Georgia Theatre and how to contribute to the Georgia Theatre Rehabilitation Fund, Click HERE!

Monday, August 16, 2010

Member Spotlight


In this week's member spotlight, we proud are to recognize Boone Smith IV, of Macon.

Boone is in his second year as a Board Member of Hay House, and this fall he will be chairing the Seasons of the Vineyard Wine Tasting Auction. Boone is an attorney at the law firm of Smith, Hawkins, Hollingsworth & Reeves, LLP. He specializes in the areas of taxation, estate planning and transactional law. He is a lifelong Maconite, who currently resides in the Historic Ingleside neighborhood with his wife Amanda and their dog Sammy.

The Georgia Trust is deeply grateful to Boone for
his commitment to historic preservation.


Tuesday, August 3, 2010

UPDATE


The CLEAR Act passed the House on Friday evening!!

Please take a moment to thank to members of Congress who voted yes. To see whether your Congress(wo)man voted in support of the CLEAR Act, you can find the results of the roll call vote here: http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2010/roll513.xml. Let them know how their support of the Historic Preservation Fund will help your community and your organization (Contact Information).

Check On the Hill for more information and stay tuned for updates as the CLEAR Act goes to the Senate.

Thursday, July 29, 2010

Full Funding


Earlier this year, GaPA voted to support national efforts to fully fund the Historic Preservation Fund. Encouraging progress has been made to provide full funding, but your support is still needed.

The CLEAR Act is a bill that addresses offshore oil and gas reforms and contains a provision to fully fund the Historic Preservation Fund at $150 million. The Historic Preservation Fund is funded by receipts from federal offshore oil and gas leases. The fund is authorized at $150 million annually, but Congress typically only appropriates 1/3 of the amount each year since its creation in 1976. The CLEAR Act would allow the Secretary of the Interior to use the fund without further federal action. This means more money for preservation! .

TAKE ACTION!!

The House of Representatives will vote on this bill very soon. The National Trust for Historic Preservation has made it very easy for you to contact your Representative and ask them to support fully funding historic preservation by voting yes for CLEAR Act.

Read more about the CLEAR Act at On The Hill

Monday, July 19, 2010

Preservation Weekly

Heritage Tourism

Taken from the National Trust for Preservation website cultural heritage tourism is defined as traveling to experience the places, artifacts and activities that authentically represent the stories and people of the past and present. It includes cultural, historic and natural resources. Heritage tourism is also a great way for the lay person to understand the importance of preservation and those strongest connections are made through experience. And what’s great about heritage tourism, it’s a powerful economic tool that it creates jobs and it helps strengthen local economies just by using the resources that are already there.
There are five principles the National Trust has come up with to help ensure the success of heritage tourism programs; first is to collaborate. It is necessary to build partnerships because successful tourism is dependent on the involvement of the entire community from business owners, to political figures, to the residents themselves. Second, it’s important to find the right fit. There are lots of things to consider when creating a tourism program in other areas. Local priorities may be different depending on the resources that exist and how willing the community is ready to accept an influx of visitors by sharing those resources. Third is making sites and programs come alive. Most of what people remember are the experiences that they’ve had and the things they have done and not just seeing, hearing, or reading what is in front of them. Fourth is to focus on quality and authenticity. I believe this to be the most important step. Knowing the true story and sharing it with others is what makes a place unique. Visitors want the real story so that they can share their experiences with others. It’s a disservice to past generations to make changes to history in order to gain visitors. And finally it is import to preserve and protect those cultural, historic, and natural resources and not just with a quick fix. There are even stories to tell in the way a building was put together not to mention these places are the bread and butter for the community.
Creating a heritage tourism program seems obvious especially in these economically difficult times and it can be truly successful if given the chance and if the above steps are followed. However, it won’t work without cultural resources to experience and therein lies the ever present importance of preservation. Not only do we work with what we already have and find ways to build a bridge from to the past to the present in the process we end up protecting our heritage and we also develop a sense of pride in doing so which makes us want to share it all the more.

Thursday, July 8, 2010

Member Spotlight


It is with much enthusiasm that we highlight Grace Quinn, of Atlanta, in this week’s member spotlight.

Grace is a long time member of Friends of Rhodes Hall, and also volunteers at the annual 5k Rhodes Race. Grace also serves as an officer for the Sherwood Forest Garden Club. The Sherwood Forest Garden Club and its members have been a tremendous support to The Trust, providing services to assist and revitalize Rhodes Hall. Each year the garden club decorates the castle during the holiday season for the annual Old World Santa event. The garden club also provide the lovely rose bushes that accent the front of the property. Grace can be seen tending to the roses and the hydrangea bushes that flank Rhodes Hall.

Grace works as a bookkeeper, and has such notable clients as Mary Kate Andrews, author of such books as Savannah Breeze and The Fixer Upper. Grace and her husband Bill live in Sherwood Forest.

The Georgia Trust is deeply grateful for the dedication of its committed members like Grace Quinn.

Wednesday, July 7, 2010

Preservation Weekly

Shaping the 20th Century

Mies Van Der Rohe defined modern architecture in the mid 20th century. His philosophy towards design is reflected in many of our skyscrapers across the U.S. The Seagram Building, which is often considered the pinnacle of high rise architecture, was the typical “Miesian Box” with clean lines and little to no ornamentation. Mies believed in a “skin and bones” architecture. Steel beams represented the bones and glass curtain walls that ran over them, the skin. This kind of minimalism became known as the International Style which transcended beyond skyscrapers into the American culture. Clean lines dictated style and can be seen from the construction of homes to furniture. We also think of this style when we see educational buildings and other institutional structures.

Mies emigrated from Germany in 1937 and accepted a position at the Illinois Institute of Technology. There he introduced a new education and attitude towards architecture. He set out to change the architectural language so as to better represent the advancements in production and technology. Drawing on the philosophies of Le Corbusier, Mies encouraged forecourt spaces for the public to enjoy by extending buildings skyward in order to keep the same density or even increase density. In the coming years so many “Miesian Boxes” dotted the landscape they started to lose their innovation. Architects looked for new ways to express individual character. Yet even today they still build with a skin and bones attitude all thanks Mies.

The Seagram building is just one example. It has become an icon of the American corporation. Now we are starting to get comfortable in the 21st century and we often forget that our Miesan skyscrapers were only built 50 years ago verging on historic designation. Yet it is hard to imagine an urban landscape without them. They stand as symbols of business and prosperity as well as rational sensibility.

Wednesday, June 30, 2010

Preservation Weekly

Fox Theatre: Atlanta’s Preservation Gem

The “Fabulous” Fox Theatre is a preservation success story that acts a beacon of hope for other preservation endeavors in the city of Atlanta. Originally built for the Shriners of Atlanta, it was turned into a theatre by William Fox and offered a respite for Atlantans during the Great Depression and continued as a successful theater on into the 1960s. However, in the 1970s, it was threatened by demolition. In response, Atlanta Landmarks Inc. was created and the theatre was nominated it to the National Register of Historic Places in 1974. A “Save the Fox” grass roots campaign formed championed by local high school students demonstrating the local and cultural importance of the theatre. It was not just the interestingly unique architecture that sparked this impassioned crusade but the memories and experiences the people of Atlanta shared through this cultural landmark. The Fox has faced bankruptcy and suburban sprawl as well as TV and managed to survive and flourish. The theatre leaves an indelible mark to anyone who sees it.

Today, the Fox theatre is still operational as a theatre and also as a museum. It still houses its original furniture and light fixtures and is home to the second largest theater organ in the world, a Moller organ affectionately known as "Mighty Mo." This week The Fox is hosting a Seminar, “‘It Ain’t Easy Being Green’, Creating a Sustainable Future for Your Historic Structure.” The event will be hosted at The Fox Theatre in the Grand Salon on Tuesday, June 29, 2010 from 10 am to 4 pm. I will be attending. I am shamed to say in the thirteen years that I have lived in Georgia I have never been inside the Fox. Very uncharacteristic of my background, but after learning so much about the theatre’s history, walking through the doors will be twice as exciting because I know what this place means to so many. One thing is sure Atlanta loves the Fox.
The Georgia Trust 2010 Fall Ramble will be in Atlanta September 11-12. The Fox Theatre will be a Ramble site. For more information check out our website.