Elkmont Historic District
The Elkmont Historic District is located in the heart of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park (GSMNP). Tucked within the undulations of a mountain cove, Elkmont encompasses approximately 60 acres and contains seventy-four early-20th century modestly-scaled, wood-frame dwellings. Significant for its architecture and for the role its inhabitants played in the founding of the Park, Elkmont was listed in the National Register of Historic Places in 1994 at the request of NPS' Southeast Office. The enclave is represented by four distinct, yet intertwined component parts: The Appalachian
Cabin on Millionaire's Row at Elkmont.
Club, Society Hill, Millionaire's Row, and the Wonderland Hotel. The Wonderland Hotel, erected in 1912 and expanded c. 1928, was the district's largest building. Designed in a vernacular style common to the early twentieth century, the hotel served as the social heart of the Elkmont community. The Appalachian Clubhouse, Elkmont's second largest facility, was constructed in 1934.
Elkmont's buildings reflect simplicity of form and function, conveying an impression of rustic shelter and comfort. Natural materials, including cobblestone, flagstone, and hewn log, were used as frequently in building material as they were in landscape design. This community is unique to the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, with no similar collection of cabins or hotels remaining in the Appalachian Mountains of East Tennessee. As the Park's General Management Plan called for demolition of all standing structures located within Elkmont, GSMNP's superintendent publically objected to National Register designation.
At the time of the Park's creation in 1937, building tradition within the Smokies consisted primarily of early twentieth century timber camps, tourist communities, and rural family farmsteads. With the Park's formation, the National Park Service intended to acquire all property within the Park's boundaries, and to terminate all commercial, residential, and agricultural use. NPS was successful in implementing this strategy, but only to a point. Due to the political influence brought to bear by individuals within the Elkmont community, several of Elkmont's residents were awarded long-term leases, and permitted sole use of their property through expiration of those leases in 2002. The retention of Elkmont for use as a privately held vacation destination while thousands of other residents had been removed was understandably viewed as a painful double-standard. And this is where the complexities surrounding Elkmont begin.
The designation of the Elkmont Historic District in 1994 placed a full range of competing expectations in motion – the Tennessee State Historic Preservation Office's desire to protect National Register-listed resources, and NPS' intent to remove the built environment from this portion of the national park. GSMNP senior staff perceived Elkmont's National Register listing as an impediment to protecting the Park's natural environment. Their intent to removing all vestige of Elkmont was made clear with the 1982 publication of GSMNP's General Management Plan. This determination was informed by a desire to restore sensitive biological resources, including habitat for the rare synchronous firefly, and to protect the Park's Montane Alluvial Forest, river bottom woodland which had been recognized as "globally imperiled" by the Nature Conservancy.
Following Elkmont's listing on the National Register, National Park staff initiated the Section 106 compliance process with the TN-SHPO. Frustrated with the Park's decision to retain only three of Elkmont's properties and concerned with the advancing state of deterioration marking the enclave's cabins, the TN-SHPO terminated the mitigation process in the mid-1990s.
For its part, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation was aware of the tensions surrounding Elkmont. In November 1999 the Council organized a site visit for council members and staff. Conducted at Park headquarters, ACHP held the meeting to promote awareness of the site and the consequences of the Park Service's inattention to building maintenance (the Wonderland Hotel was still standing but beginning to collapse).
NPS subsequently approached the Advisory Council with a new proposal for Elkmont – one which recommended a more balanced approach to the community's natural and cultural resources. Led by a new superintendent, NPS suggested removing 57 of Elkmont's properties, retaining 17 for static display. Advisory Council staff interpreted the proposal as "new action" and informed NPS that compliance review was required. To reopen the Section 106 process, NPS not only invited the TN-SHPO to return to the table, but sought a broad base of consulting parties as well. The National Trust, long familiar with Elkmont and its complexities, was formally asked to participate.
The Wonderland Hotel before it collapsed in 2006.
Though the National Trust's role was formalized in 1999, the organization had become involved with Elkmont in the early 1990s, consulting with both NPS and the TN-SHPO. One of the National Trust's early initiatives involved providing grant funds for stabilization of the Wonderland Hotel and securing a million-dollar commitment from a member of the Friends of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park for rehabilitation of the Wonderland Hotel for overnight accommodations. Unfortunately, the Park Service was unwilling to accept the gift and the continued use of the structure, allowing deterioration of Elkmont's cabins as well as the Wonderland Hotel (the hotel collapsed in 2006 and has since been razed). In 2004, in an attempt to bolster public support for Elkmont's preservation, the National Trust included Elkmont in the 11 Most Endangered Historic Places program.
Concerned for policy implications regarding the federal stewardship of historic properties and the need to balance the needs of natural and cultural resources on public lands, the National Trust approached the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP). ACHP's resulting policy statement calling for increased stewardship of historic resources on public lands was developed in part to address the conflicts then present at Elkmont.
With the reopening of the Section 106 process in 2000, the TN-SHPO as well as the Consulting Parties, pursued negotiations with NPS staff. Compliance review became complicated as NPS understood any change at Elkmont would require an amendment to the Park's General Management Plan. They also correctly determined it would be necessary to integrate National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements into the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) process. Park staff estimated review would be completed in late 2001. The process was slowed, though not halted, by two subsequent changes in superintendent, two changes in assistant superintendent, two changes of consultant, and two changes in upper-level park administrative staff.
The process was finally completed with the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), signed in May 2009. The final plan, brokered over many months, clearly presented a compromise. In the end, NPS recommended removing more than 60 percent of the historic properties in the Elkmont Historic District. The park service determined 19 buildings would remain with the remaining properties demolished or moved outside the boundaries of the Park. A cluster of 16 cabins in Daisy Town adjoining the Appalachian Clubhouse will be rehabilitated for static display. The Chapman Cabin, located on Society
The Appalachian Clubhouse in the Elkmont Historic District.
Row and Spence Lodge, situated in Millionaire's Row, would also be retained. Both Spence Lodge and the Appalachian Clubhouse will be made available for day-use rental. Though not a primary signatory, the National Trust did sign the document as a concurring party.
Throughout the process, the National Trust encouraged NPS to retain three additional cabins on Millionaire's Row – a suggestion strongly opposed by both the Sierra Club and the National Park Conservation Association (NPCA). Fearing that "static display" would become financially unsustainable, the National Trust worked to persuade the Park Service that day-use, seasonal rental could make the community available to low-impact, public use while providing the income stream necessary to underwriting operational expense. NPS countered by proposing it would retain two additional cabins if the National Trust would provide 100 percent of the funding for their stabilization, restoration, and interpretation. The National Trust declined the offer, although NPS ultimately withdrew the invitation in response to objections voiced by NPCA and concerns that such an action would require a reopening of Section 106.
Over the years, the TN-SHPO and ACHP have proven relentless advocates for retention of the historic character of Elkmont. Their tenacity in the face of tough negotiation and stalemate helped the National Trust to maintain a high level of involvement. Recognizing the best possible arrangement had been brokered, both the SHPO and ACHP endorsed this compromise, bringing a contentious and complex issue to a constructive close.
