Why not just knock it down? That’s what first-term Vermont Representative Shawn Sweeney said was his first thought after hearing the staggering $40 million estimated price tag on the state’s proposal for restoring the Bennington Battle Monument.
But, then he thought there must be other cheaper, creative and more sustainable ways to address the challenges facing the monument. Taking inspiration from another monument to liberty, a giant patina green copper one in New York Harbor, he tinkered with a miniature model of the battle monument and brought his new idea to a meeting of the House Committee on Corrections and Institutions last week.
The Bennington Battle Monument is composed of limestone, which is currently saturated by an estimated 66,000 gallons of water. The steep cost of its repair has sparked debate over whether the state should consider other innovative, even potentially holographic solutions for the memorial to the historic Battle of Bennington.
Sweeney, D-Shelburne, who sits on the House Committee on Corrections and Institutions, proposed enclosing the monument in a ventilated copper sheath, using heat pumps to initially dry the monument out and maintain a year-round air-conditioning system. The committee continued the discussion of the restoration of the monument and the possibility of Sweeney’s proposal and other alternatives Thursday morning.
Sweeney estimates that his proposed plan would cost $5 million to $15 million, he said in an interview. The project would not only cost significantly less than the funds necessary for restoration, but also would prevent the limestone monument from becoming waterlogged again in the future and continually needing repair.
“There will be such a high level of maintenance with the limestone over the years. I just don’t know if that’s doable,” Sweeney said. “Sometimes I feel spending a lot of money on something doesn’t necessarily fix the problem, and I think that sometimes the best solutions come when you don’t have as much money.”
As the owner of a building design company and a builder in Vermont for 25 years, Sweeney said he is familiar with solving unique design struggles. His concept is inspired by the Statue of Liberty’s copper covering. He believes that a copper-enclosed version of the Bennington Battle Monument could be transformed into a symbol of “good old Vermont ingenuity.”
Laura Trieschmann, the state’s historic preservation officer, said during an interview that the state is still focused and dedicated to preservation of the monument in its current form. But the division would review all alternative ideas, including Sweeney’s proposal, assessing costs and how the copper plating would impact the structural integrity of the obelisk, she said.
“Our mission and goal is to restore it, but we recognize there’s a lot of pieces here and a lot of elements we need to study and understand and price being one of those and what Vermonters want, so we have to look at all alternatives,” Trieschmann said.
Trieschmann told the House committee meeting on Thursday that the Division for Historic Preservation has received $500,000 of congressionally directed funding to start the drying out process and begin reviewing more detailed restoration plans. She warned that modifications to the monument could put federal funding at risk.
“This is a nationally significant monument. It’s recognized by the National Park Service for its national significance to the Revolutionary War,” Trieschmann said at the committee meeting. “If we start changing it, we could possibly jeopardize that designation, which would mean we would be giving up all federal dollars, all support from the National Park Service. It could affect our visitation and tourism.”
The state’s immediate goals are to start constructing scaffolding, designing a dehumidifying system for the monument, and to study the structural integrity of the stone, a process that would total between $7.5 million and $12.5 million, Trieschmann said at the committee meeting.
Those steps must come before the Division for Historic Preservation can understand the impact and cost of various options for the future of the monument, she said. But, Trieschmann did not ultimately rule out Sweeney’s proposal or other alternative solutions for the monument.
“When we see how the stone is reacting and we figure out the design for the air moisture system that goes into it, we need to figure out what the alternatives would be,” Trieschmann said at the meeting. “That’s where enclosing it in copper or any other material — taking it down halfway, taking it down entirely — that comes into play. That’s where we start examining what are the true alternatives for this.”
Trieschmann said that the division does not anticipate most of the funding for repairs and restoration would come from the state, and that the division will be engaging fundraising campaigns and applying to grants to undertake the first phases of the project.
The chair of the House committee, Rep. Alice Emmons, D-Springfield, noted at the meeting that the committee has already appropriated $525,000 in the state’s capital bill to allow the Division for Historic Preservation to go forward with a request for proposals to create a plan to dry out the monument.
Sweeney said in an interview that the House committee is “taking a breath,” and will likely revisit the question of restoration or alternative solutions like a copper enclosure for the battle monument next session, once more data on the monument is collected to determine the path forward.
“What has been helpful is that the idea sparked conversation, and so people are talking about it, and I think that that’s really healthy,” Sweeney said. “We’re talking about it in a way that’s more open.”
