Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
151-23 RESOLUTION
113 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 (479) 575-8323 Resolution: 151-23 File Number: 2023-833 FAYETTEVILLE HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN: A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE FAYETTEVILLE HERITAGE AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN WHEREAS, one of the near -term benchmarks in City Plan 2040 is to "seek funding to complete a citywide Community Preservation Plan to identify resources for future historic survey and registration, assess current preservation efforts, and plan for new initiatives"; and WHEREAS, after being awarded a $50,000.00 Arkansas Historic Preservation Program grant, the City hired Stantec Consulting Services as the project consultant for the City of Fayetteville's first historic preservation plan; and WHEREAS, the draft plan includes significant public input and has been approved by the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves and adopts the Fayetteville Heritage and Historic Preservation Plan. PASSED and APPROVED on July 6, 2023 Approved: Page 1 Attest: K FAYETTEVILI.i. • • Y '_ANS..�.�..� CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ARKANSAS MEETING OF JULY 6, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MEMO TO: Mayor Jordan and City Council THRU: Susan Norton, Chief of Staff Jonathan Curth, Development Services Director FROM: Britin Bostick, Long Range Planning/Special Projects Manager DATE: SUBJECT: Fayetteville Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan RECOMMENDATION: 2023-833 City staff, the Historic District Commission and the Black Heritage Preservation Commission recommend approval of the citywide Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan. BACKGROUND: One of the near -term benchmarks in City Plan 2040 is, "Seek funding to complete a citywide Community Preservation Plan to identify resources for future historic survey and registration, assess current preservation efforts, and plan for new initiatives." This will be the city's first historic preservation plan, and it is being completed in partnership with the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program (AHPP). AHPP awarded the city a $50,000 matching grant in March 2022 with the City Council approving a $20,000 match. Stantec Consulting Services was hired as the project consultant in August 2022 and public engagement began in September 2022 with the first public meeting on the plan held at the Fayetteville Public Library. A survey followed the meeting to capture the community's goals and concerns regarding historic preservation in Fayetteville. More than 600 people responded to the survey and showed strong support for historic preservation goals, ranked historic preservation approaches and tools, and provided open-ended responses identifying important areas and properties to preserve. This input was used to develop the five organizing goals and more than fifty action items in the plan. A draft of the plan was presented at a second public meeting in April 2023 with the draft document posted online. A second online survey captured community input on the plan's action items and the same survey was presented in person at the Fayetteville Farmer's Market all four Saturdays in May with city staff and Historic District Commission members assisting the community with the survey and speaking to the community about the plan draft. Community comments have been incorporated into the final document, which was approved by AHPP on May 30, 2023. DISCUSSION: The Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan is organized by five goals that seek to strengthen the existing program as well as promote and explore the inclusion of Fayetteville's rich cultural heritage. Based on community input, current best practices in historic preservation, and a thorough assessment of the current program, the five main goals for historic preservation in Fayetteville are: Mailing address: 113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov Fayetteville, AR 72701 1. Strengthen the preservation program through efficient adjustments to the program's administration. 2. Encourage compatible development that prioritizes historic preservation. 3. Identify and protect historic properties by utilizing historic resources surveys and designations to identify and protect historic resources for future generations. 4. Provide learning opportunities for the community about historic preservation and Fayetteville's unique history. 5. Promote diversity, equity, and inclusion and protect cultural heritage. The fifty-two action items organized by the five goals represent a plan of work for the next five to ten years that seeks to build partnerships, improve digital resources, support the protection of historic buildings and places, secure important grant funding, and tell the story of Fayetteville's rich cultural heritage. The Historic District Commission and Black Heritage Preservation Commission have been key to this planning process and have discussed the plan and received regular updates from staff throughout the process. Both commissions are already underway on implementing the plan and are in discussion or nearing completion on several action items as of June 2023, some of which will be forwarded to the City Council in the coming months. At their June 8, 2023 meeting, the Historic District Commission voted 4-0-0 in favor of recommending adoption of the plan to the City Council. No public comment was received. At their June 15, 2023 meeting, the Black Heritage Preservation Commission voted 4-0-0 in favor of recommending adoption of the plan to the City Council. No public comment was received. BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT: N/A ATTACHMENTS: SRF Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan, Fayetteville Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan, Item C.1 Approvals Signatures Mailing address: 113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov Fayetteville, AR 72701 _= City of Fayetteville, Arkansas 113 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 (479)575-8323 - Legislation Text File #: 2023-833 Fayetteville Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE FAYETTEVILLE HERITAGE AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN WHEREAS, one of the near -term benchmarks in City Plan 2040 is to "seek funding to complete a citywide Community Preservation Plan to identify resources for future historic survey and registration, assess current preservation efforts, and plan for new initiatives"; and WHEREAS, after being awarded a $50,000.00 Arkansas Historic Preservation Program grant, the City hired Stantec Consulting Services as the project consultant for the City of Fayetteville's first historic preservation plan; and WHEREAS, the draft plan includes significant public input and has been approved by the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves and adopts the Fayetteville Heritage and Historic Preservation Plan. Page 1 Britin Bostick Submitted By City of Fayetteville Staff Review Form 2023-833 Item ID 7/6/2023 City Council Meeting Date - Agenda Item Only N/A for Non -Agenda Item 6/16/2023 LONG RANGE PLANNING (634) Submitted Date Division / Department Action Recommendation: City staff, the Historic District Commission, and the Black Heritage Preservation Commission recommend approval of the citywide Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan. Budget Impact: 1010.090.6600-5314.00 1010 - General Fund Account Number Fund 32011 Historic Preservation Master Plan (CLG) Project Number Budgeted Item? Yes Does item have a direct cost? No Is a Budget Adjustment attached? No Purchase Order Number: Change Order Number: Original Contract Number: Comments: Total Amended Budget Expenses (Actual+Encum) Available Budget Item Cost Budget Adjustment Remaining Budget Project Title $ 70,000.00 $ 69,774.63 225.37 225.37 V20221130 Previous Ordinance or Resolution # 169-22, 58-22 Approval Date: 8/2/2022, 3/1/2022 Fayetteville Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan CITY OF 19 FAYETTEVILLE JULY 2023 ARKANSAS Project Team Stantec Consulting Services ® StanteC of Austin, Texas Emily Reed, Project Manager Mitch Ford, Lead Architectural Historian Brandy Black, Architectural Historian Jennifer Brosz, Senior Architectural Historian Jenya Green, Architectural Historian Marcus Huerta, Architectural Historian Laura Kviklys, Senior Architectural Historian Izabella Nuckels, Historic Preservation Specialist Sandy Shannon, Deputy Project Manager Kory Van Hemert, Architectural Historian Sara Laurence, GIS Manager Tracie Quinn, Technical Editor M D o Cl X McDoux Preservation LLC PRESERVATION LLC of Houston, Texas Steph McDougal, Principal Jenn Beggs, Associate July 2023 © City of Fayetteville Attribution Note CITY OF Unless otherwise noted, photographs, maps, data, and charts were produced FAY E TT E V I L L E by the authors listed above or are courtesy of the City of Fayetteville. ARKANSAS Funding Note Partially funded by the Historic Preservation Fund managed by the �s=� Arkansas Historic Preservation Program 1100 North Street % �+ Little Rock, Arkansas (AR) 72201 - (501) 324-9880 ARKANSAS HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAM This material was produced with assistance from the Historic Preservation Fund, administered by the National Park Service, Department of the Interior (DOI) and the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program, an agency of the NATIONAL Division of Arkansas Heritage. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or PARK SERVICE recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of the Interior or the Division of Arkansas Heritage. This program receives federal financial assistance for identification and protection of historic properties. Under Title A of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the Age Discrimination Cover Image; Clockwise from top left Act of 1975, as amended, the DOI prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, The Fayetteville skyline facing color, national origin, disability, or age in its federally assisted programs. If southwest from Mount Sequoyah you believe you have been discriminated against in any program, activity, or (East Mountain) in circa (ca.) 1905, ca. facility as described above or you desire further information, please write to; 1880, and in the spring of 2023. Office for Equal Opportunity Images are courtesy of Charlie Alison National Park Service (ca,1880 and ca.1905 photographs) and Britin Bostock (2023 photograph), 1849 C Street, Northwest (NW) Washington, District of Columbia (D.C.) 20240 United States (U.S.) :rW HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN IOW" k Acknowledgements E CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE RESIDENTS w MAYOR Lioneld Jordan CITY COUNCIL Sonia Harvey, Ward 1 D'Andre Jones, Ward 1 Sarah Moore, Ward 2 Mike Wiederkehr, Ward 2 CA Scott Berna, Ward 3 - Sarah Bunch, Ward 3 Teresa Turk, Ward 4 _ Holly Hertzberg, Ward 4 PLANNING COMMISSION Sarah Sparkman, Chair Andrew Brink, Vice Chair Mary McGetrick, Secretary - Jimm Garlock Fred Gulley Joseph Holcomb .,• Mary Madden Brad Payne ® - Porter Winston : a L-d ; HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION Christine Myres, Chair Meredith Mahan, Vice Chair Mark Harper Joann Goodley '� ' - •3 -r '-° 1 Tommie Flowers Davis Alexandra C. Lee r ;� •.�:/ ��• {�, �t' Julie Preddy 1 BLACK HERITAGE • 1\& - PRESERVATION COMMISSION D'Andre Jones, Council Member '•�; �►�r ;�;;� fi 'kt g JL Jennings, Chair -�� 7J �, �j!* t•.,. Lois Bryant, Vice Chair Kaleb Turner Joetta "Shawn" Walker Wendell Huggins a1, {r' Y •� _� . Veronica Huff ':.�'-� �`?�=�` +,�1< •' �S '' -�;''. CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE STAFF ''' ;• � ' � �' is '� ,•=Y � Table of Contents Name Page 1. Executive Summary.............................................................................9 2. About Historic Preservation.............................................................12 2.1 Federal, State, and Local Levels of Preservation.......................................12 2J.1 Federal Level.................................................................................................................15 2J.2 State Level......................................................................................................................17 2J.3 Local Level.....................................................................................................................19 2.2 Tax Credits.......................................................................................................................20 2.3 Benefits of Historic Preservation.......................................................................21 2.3.1 Economic Benefits...................................................................................................21 2.3.2 Environmental Benefits......................................................................................22 2.3.3 Social Benefits..........................................................................................................23 2.4 Introduction to Historic Resources Surveys..............................................24 3. Fayetteville Background Information...........................................26 3.1 Introduction.....................................................................................................................26 3.1.1 Brief History..................................................................................................................30 312 Architectural Character and Legacy............................................................33 3.2 Preservation Program..............................................................................................36 3.2.1 Overview........................................................................................................................36 3.2.2 Historic Preservation Ordinance....................................................................41 3.3 Certified Local Government.................................................................................44 3.4 Black Heritage Preservation Commission...................................................45 3.5 Preserve America Community............................................................................45 3.6 Completed Historic Resources Surveys.......................................................46 3.7 Existing Historic Designations............................................................................49 3.71 Local, ARHP, and NRHP Listings.......................................................................49 3.72 National Historic Trails..........................................................................................53 3.73 Historical Markers...................................................................................................53 3.74 Easements....................................................................................................................55 3.8 Evaluation........................................................................................................................56 3,8,1 Successes and Challenges................................................................................56 3.8,2 Ordinance Evaluation............................................................................................57 3.83 Planning Context and Alignment..................................................................59 3.8A Data Management and Availability...............................................................61 3.85 Use of Preservation Incentives.......................................................................62 3.8,6 Program Benchmark.............................................................................................63 4. Stakeholder & Community Engagement.....................................65 43 Stakeholder Engagement.......................................................................................66 4.2 Community Meetings...............................................................................................66 4.3 Community Opinion Survey.................................................................................67 4.33 Survey Results...........................................................................................................67 5. Strategic Plan......................................................................................70 5,1 Goals.....................................................................................................................................71 52 Implementation Matrices......................................................................................80 Goal 1. Strengthen the Preservation Program...................................................80 Goal 2. Encourage Compatible Development.....................................................81 Goal 3. Identify and Protect Historic Properties..............................................82 Goal 4. Provide Learning Opportunities for the Community....................83 Goal 5. Promote Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.............................................84 5.3 Conclusion & Plan Maintenance.......................................................................85 TABLE OF CONTENTS Name Page Appendices...............................................................................................91 AppendixA: Acronyms....................................................................................................92 AppendixB: Glossary.......................................................................................................93 Appendix C: Partnership Opportunities................................................................96 Appendix D: Funding Opportunities........................................................................98 Appendix E: SOI Standards for Rehabilitation.................................................100 Appendix F: SOI Professional Qualifications.....................................................101 Appendix G: Historical Markers Guidance.........................................................102 Appendix H: Historic District Properties..............................................................104 Appendix I: Historic Resources Survey Plan....................................................323 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Trail of Tears..........................................................................................................ui Figure 2. Lewis Brothers Building..............................................................................iv Figure3. Center Street........................................................................................................v Figure 4. House at 348 Washington Avenue........................................................ vi Figure 5. Butterfly House by Fay Jones(1961). .................................................. vii Figure 6. Public Art in Gregory Par.......................................................................wii Figure 7 Plan Organization..............................................................................................ix Figure8. Skyline.....................................................................................................................9 Figure 9. Planning Process and Timeline.............................................................10 Figure10. Goals......................................................................................................................11 Figure11. Planning Period................................................................................................11 Figure12. Old Main..............................................................................................................12 Figure 13. Key Terms and Concepts..........................................................................13 Figure 14. Dickson Street During the Fall..............................................................13 Figure 15. Overview of Historic Designations.....................................................14 Figure 16. David and Mary Margaret Durst House...........................................15 Figure 17 Hathcock House..............................................................................................16 Figure 18. Sixteenth Street Baptist Church..........................................................16 Figure 19. Fayetteville Police Department............................................................17 Figure 20. Fayetteville Fire Department.................................................................17 Figure 21. White Hangar Local Historic District.................................................18 Figure 22. Heffelfinger-Freund House.....................................................................18 Figure 23. Downtown Fayetteville.............................................................................19 Figure 24. Interior of White Hangar...........................................................................19 Figure 25. Historic Tax Credits.....................................................................................20 Figure 26. Scenes from Downtown and South Fayetteville ......................22 Figure 27 Fayetteville Farmers Market . ................................................................. 23 Figure28. Surveying.........................................................................................................25 Figure 29. Fayetteville Square.....................................................................................26 Figure 30. Map of Fayetteville......................................................................................27 Figure31. Demographics................................................................................................29 Figure 32. Racial Composition....................................................................................29 Figure33. Building Age...................................................................................................29 Figure 34. Overlooking Fayetteville.........................................................................30 Figure 35. Fayetteville Frisco Depot........................................................................30 Figure 36. First Day of Integration in 1954............................................................31 Figure 37. Urban Renewal Plan(1968).....................................................................31 Figure 38. Guisinger Building......................................................................................33 Figure 39. Guisinger Building(ca.1905)...............................................................33 Figure 40. Work by lames Lambeth........................................................................34 Figure 5. Butterfl LIST OF FIGURES Name Page Figure41. Root School ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,35 Figure 42. Fine Arts Building at the LI of A..........................................................35 Figure43. Waxhaws Hall ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,36 Figure 44, In the Way of Progress.............................................................................36 Figure 45, Archibald Yell's Law Office......................................................................37 Figure 46. Steeple Replacement................................................................................37 Figure 47 Vernon & Moore-Mcllroy Produce Warehouse/ John Porter Produce Building ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,39 Figure 48. Rendering of the Woolsey Farmstead post restoration . ..... 39 Figure 49. Lights of the Ozarks ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,40 Figure 50. Center Street facing the courthouse...............................................41 Figure 51. Parade on College Avenue.....................................................................42 Figure 52, Parade on Block Street............................................................................43 Figure 53, East Side of Square(ca,1910)..............................................................44 Figure 54, Downtown Mural ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,45 Figure 55. Johnson Plumbing,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,46 Figure 56. Surveys in central Fayetteville ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,48 Figure 57 House in Mount Nord NRHP Historic District..............................49 Figure 58. House Meadow Spring NRHP Historic District ..........................49 Figure 59. VA Medical Center,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,49 Figure 60, Designation Tally ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,50 Figure 61. White Hangar Local Historic District.................................................51 Figure 62. Properties in the NRHP and ARHP. ................................................... 52 Figure 63. Butterfield Overland Mail Route.........................................................53 Figure 64, Trail of Tears Sign ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,53 Figure 65. Community Remembrance Project................................................53 Figure 66, National Historic Trails ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,54 Figure 67. Woolsey Homestead pre-restoration...............................................55 Figure68, City Hall ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,56 Figure 69, You are Beautiful Building ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,57 Figure 70, Trent's Pond with Old Main in the Background .......................58 Figure 71. Public Artwork in Gregory Park............................................................61 Figure 72. Merchants Club in 1912,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,62 Figure 73. House at 828 Skyline Drive by Fay Jones (1960)......................63 Figure 74. Comparable Cities ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,64 Figure 75. September 2022 Community Meeting...........................................65 Figure 76. Planning and Engagement Process................................................65 Figure 77 Priority Results from the Workshop..................................................67 Figure 78. Priority results from the Community Opinion Survey ........... 68 Figure 79, Downtown Fayetteville Branding.......................................................70 Figure80, The Ramble ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,71 Figure 81, SWEPCO Building by Warren Segraves(1968)............................73 Figure 82, Fulbright Peace Fountain........................................................................74 Figure 83. Thomas -Tharp House(1854).................................................................75 Figure 84. Sanborn Map(1886),,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,75 Figure 85, Preservation Event ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,76 Figure 86. Historic Core Connections and Gateways....................................77 Figure87 Diversity ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,78 Figure 88. Fayetteville Pride ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,78 Figure 89. Fayettville Public Schools Yearbook in 1954 .............................79 Figure90.112 Drive In,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,85 Figure 91. Tightrope Walker Above the Square in 1919..................................91 Figure 92, NIPS informational panels ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,103 Figure93, Story Map ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,103 LIST OF TABLES Name Page Table 1; City Plan 2040 Benchmarks........................................................................10 Table 2, Types of Historic Resources Surveys...................................................24 Table 3, History Timeline ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,32 Table 4, Historic Preservation Timeline.................................................................38 Table 5, Historic Preservation Program Budget 2021-2025.......................39 Table 6, Historic Resources Surveys.......................................................................47 Table 7. NRHP Historic Districts in Fayetteville, Arkansas ..........................50 Table 8, Historical Markers............................................................................................55 Table9, Easements...........................................................................................................55 Table 10. Historic Preservation Successes and Challenges .....................56 Table 11. HDC Ordinance Evaluation.........................................................................57 Table 12. Plan Alignment ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,59 Table 13. Preservation Incentives in Arkansas.................................................63 Table 14. Goal 1 Challenges and Solutions...........................................................72 Table 15. Goal 2 Challenges and Solutions...........................................................73 Table 16. Goal 3 Challenges and Solutions...........................................................74 Table 17. Goal 4 Challenges and Solutions...........................................................76 Table 18. Goal 5 Challenges and Solutions..........................................................79 iiA �y I.� Plan Organization • Plan Overview and Organization • Summary of Plan Goals • Definition of Historic Preservation • Federal, State, and Local Levels of Preservation • Historic Preservation Tax Credits • Benefits of Historic Preservation • Historic Resources Surveys • Community Overview • Brief History of Fayetteville • Architectural Character and Legacy • Overview of Historic Preservation Program • Historic Districts and Properties • Evaluation of Historic Preservation Efforts Stakeholder and Stakeholder Engagement Efforts CommunityCommunity Workshops and Meetings Community Opinion Survey Engagement Survey and Workshop Results • Summary of Goals • Goal Challenges and Solutions • Action Items • Implementation Matrices • Plan Maintenance • Acronyms (Appendix A) • Glossary of Terms (B) • Partnership Opportunities (C) • Funding Opportunities (D) • Secretary of the Interior Resources (E-F) • Historical Marker Guidance (G) • Index of Historic District Properties (H) • Historic Resources Survey Plan (1) Figure 7 Plan Organization. :� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CHAPTER 1 1 ix Founded in 1828, Fayetteville is presently the second largest city in Arkansas. It is a college town and economic center, as well as a destination for art, culture, and natural scenery, As Fayetteville prepares for its bicentennial in 2028, the city looks forward to its next chapter of growth. Historic preservation is the practice of managing historic resources through protection, reuse, conservation, education, and other means, It encourages responsible growth and development while considering and maintaining places important to the past. Historic places make communities unique and tell the story of each place. They help us celebrate, understand, and learn from our shared history and help make a community attractive to residents, visitors, and businesses. Historic places are also valuable for economic development, tourism, and civic pride. A well -crafted historic preservation plan provides the framework for successful long-term management of a community's historic resources. The government of the City of Fayetteville (hereafter, City) began its commitment to historic preservation more than 40 years ago with the creation of its local historic preservation ordinance and municipal preservation program. In 2020, the City adopted two short-term (2019-2025) historic preservation -related benchmarks in City Plan 2040: 1) the development of a historic preservation plan and 2) preservation of historic neighborhoods (Table 1). This Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan (hereafter, plan) fulfills the first benchmark and provides objectives and actions for historic preservation work for the next ten years (2023-2033). The planning process for this project began with a review and assessment of the City's existing historic preservation program, administrative organization, tools for preservation, partnerships, and economic factors. City programs, policies, documents, and procedures related to historic preservation were reviewed and analyzed. Figure 8, Skyline, Source; Denis Tagney Jr.,, :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CHAPTER 1 1 9 Existing planning documents, the Code of Fayetteville (hereafter, City Code), and recommendations from the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program (AHPP) were studied to assess the extent to which the city had accomplished prior preservation -related goals. Previous historic resources surveys were analyzed for their historic contexts and geographical and historical coverage. A list of local and National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) properties and districts was developed. Lastly, an interactive map was created using geographic information systems (GIS) to plot historical survey activities, demolition activities, designated historic properties and districts, property improvement data from the Washington County Assessor (WCA), proposed transportation projects, and areas prioritized for infill development. Project personnel also conducted a limited windshield survey of Fayetteville to understand the city's broad patterns of development and built environment. Summer 2022 August 2022 Figure 9. Planning Process and Timeline. Fall 2022 Winter 2022-2023 Spring 2023 Summer 2023 The background review provided a solid understanding of Fayetteville, its history, and the City's historic preservation efforts to date and informed topics for discussion with the community. Community engagement efforts for this plan included stakeholder interviews, a survey questionnaire, and public meetings. Members of the community expressed strong support for historic preservation, prioritized historic preservation activities for the City to undertake, and identified areas or properties that they believe are important to protect, among other topics discussed. Table 1; City Plan 2040 Benchmarks City Plan 2040 Benchmarks Result Seek funding to complete a citywide Community Preservation Plan This plan fulfills this to identify resources for future historic survey and registration, assess benchmark. current preservation efforts, and plan for new initiatives, Work to preserve the historic character and integrity of neighborhoods This plan has specific goals with multiple approaches including but not limited to creating one or and action items to achieve more Local Regulated District(s) in neighborhoods listed on the National this benchmark. Register of Historic Places; and utilize other preservation tools such as overlay districts with the main goal of preserving historic character, As a result of the background review and community engagement, five historic preservation goals were identified (Figure 10). Over 50 action items are provided to address each goal. Goals focus on developing a stronger historic preservation program, using survey and designation tools to document and protect historic resources, promoting sustainable development that is compatible with and respectful of the city's historic character, providing learning opportunities to the community, and uplifting diverse and underrepresented histories, These goals are not categorized by importance, but it is important to note that the action items listed for Goal 5 (Promote diversity, equity, and inclusion and protect cultural heritage) are focused on addressing the exclusionary nature of past policies and identifying the need for systemic change to celebrate and recognize Fayetteville's full heritage. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CHAPTER 1 1 10 Figure 10. Goals, The purpose of this plan is not necessarily a direct path forward but is instead the identification of a planned approach for the next ten years. This plan should be revisited annually to ensure goals and actions are being implemented, and to identify upcoming priorities, At the planning period midpoint, the City should hold a meeting to discuss progress and remaining objectives with the public. The plan should be updated every ten years, with the next planning effort commencing in 2033 (Figure 11). As the first historic preservation plan for Fayetteville, this plan affirms the City's commitment to its history and historic built environment and will help the community achieve its preservation goals. 2023 2028 2033 Plan period Plan period Commence begins midpoint plan update 1 2023-2025 1 Short -Term (Less than 2 years) Address critical dependencies 1 2023-2027 Mid -Term (2 to 4 years) 2023+ Ongoing & Long -Term (Over 4 years) Figure 11. Planning Period. :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CHAPTER 1 11 2.1 Federal, State, and Local Levels of Preservation Historic preservation is a broad term to describe the practice of identifying what is important about our history and how we can manage that history. It involves the evaluation, documentation, acquisition, protection, rehabilitation, restoration, interpretation, and conservation of historic places, education about history, and other activities. In the United States, historic preservation is managed at the federal, state, and local levels through laws, processes, and agencies that work together. The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 ushered in the current landscape of historic preservation in the United States. The NHPA created the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP); the national list of propertiesplaces deemed worthy of preservation for their historical significance, and the Section 106 review process. Section 106 of the NHPA requires the evaluation of effects on historic - age (typically 45-50 years old) resources associated with a federal and federally -supported project (i.e., construction of a highway with federal funds). The Section 106 process provides an opportunity for the public to provide input into projects affecting historic properties. Figure 13 defines key terms used in this section, and Figure 15 details the differences between local, state, and federal levels of historic property designations. Figure 12. Old Main. One of the first buildings listed in the NRHP in 1970. Source; Brandon Rush 2.1 Federal, State, and Local Levels of Preservation ...................................12 Contents211 Federal Level ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,15 2.1.2 State Level ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,17 2.1.3 Local Level ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,19 2.2 Tax Credits ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,20 2.3 Benefits of Historic Preservation ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,21 2.3.1 Economic Benefits ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,21 2.3.2 Environmental Benefits ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,22 I 2.3.3 Social Benefits ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,23 2.4 Introduction to Historic Resources Surveys............................................24 This chapter describes how historic preservation is managed at the three levels of government, explains the benefits of historic preservation, and describes the role of historic resources surveys in preservation planning and how they work. :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHAPTER 2 1 12 Key Terms and Concepts Resource A building, structure, object, site, or district, Historic vs. Historical The word "historic" is used to describe something important in history. The word "historical" describes anything from the past, important or not. In a regulatory context, "historic" means eligible for the NRHP. Historic -age vs. Nonhistoric-age Historic -age resources are at least 45 to 50 years old, and nonhistoric-age resources are less than 45 years old. Surveyed Resources vs. Designated Resources Surveys typically document resources of a certain age —usually forty-five or fifty years old or older. Inclusion in a historic resources survey does not mean a resource is historic (i.e., eligible for designation or significant), Historic resources surveys make recommendations about eligibility for potential future designations, but designation is a separate process, For example, a survey could document one hundred historical properties, and of those, three might meet the criteria for NRHP designation and would be deemed "historic;' Designated resources have gone through an application process to be formally recognized as historic resources by a government agency. In Fayetteville, historic resources can be part of a local historic district or listed in the Arkansas Register of Historic Places (ARHP) or NRHP, individually or as part of a historic district. Eligible vs. Designated Resources recommended eligible for historic designation as part of a survey do not automatically become designated historic properties at the local, state, or national level. The historic designation process is typically initiated by property owners. Figure 13. Key Terms and Concepts. Figure 14. Dickson Street During the Fall, .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHAPTER 2 1 13 Description: Contiguous or noncontiguous areas having special historic community or architectural value. Regulated: Yes Number Designated: One local historic district (Drake Field White Hangar) Designation process: • Historic District Commission (HDC) confers designation • No defined public designation process to date Figure 15. Overview of Historic Designations. Description: Individual properties or areas having association with events or people of state or local historical significance; a type, style, or period of architecture; or important elements of Arkansas's history or prehistory. Less stringent requirements than NRHP designation. Regulated: No, honorary Description: Individual properties or areas significant for their association with events or broad patterns of history; persons significant in our past; architectural, engineering, artistic, or construction characteristics; or archaeological value. Must retain sufficient integrity to convey historic associations. Number Designated: All 69 Regulated: No, honorary for NRHP properties + 11 NRHP private property owners. districts + 3 ARHP Regulated for federal properties not listed in the properties. NRHP Number Designated: 69 Designation process: properties, 11 NRHP historic • Same application/ districts nomination process as NRHP Designation process: • AHPP confers NRHP nomination form designation HDC, AHPP, and NPS • Several months to review one-year process Approximately one-year • NRHP properties are process automatically listed in the ARHP :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHAPTER 2 1 14 2.1.1 Federal Level The National Park Service (NIPS) is the primary federal agency responsible for oversight of historic preservation in the United States. The agency works with tribes, states, local governments, nonprofit organizations, and other stewards of our shared heritage. It provides historic preservation guidance, technical support, funding, and management for programs and sites. One of the functions of the NPS is management of the NRHP, the federal government's official list of historically significant places. NRHP designation is honorary for non-federal resources and does not protect resources from demolition unless the property is involved in a project that would receive federal funding, licensing, or permitting? However, it can make a property eligible for financial incentives. For example, rehabilitation projects on properties listed in or eligible for the NRHP may qualify for federal historic preservation tax credits (Section 2.1,4). Historic properties must retain significance under at least one of the following criteria outlined below to become eligible for listing in the NRHP, either individually or as a contributing resource to a historic district: Criterion A. Properties associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; Criterion B. Properties associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; Criterion C. Properties that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction, and/or; Criterion D. Properties that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history,' Additionally, for a property to qualify for the NRHP, it must retain enough physical and historical integrity to convey its significance. Seven aspects of integrity are considered: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. All seven aspects of integrity do not need to be present for a property to be eligible for the NRHP. In general, a historic property should retain enough integrity to be recognizable from the time period during which is achieved its significance, known as the period of significance (POS). Figure 16. David and Mary Margaret Durst House. This Mid -Twentieth Century Modern style house was designed by architect John G, Williams in 1952 and is listed in the NRHP. Source: Wikimedia.F NRHP Data Points: • Resource Number • Criterion: C • Significance Area; • Significance Level • POS:1950-1956 11�1:•• Architecture State .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHAPTER 2 1 15 Figure 17 Hathcock House. The house is a contributing resource in the Washington -Willow NRHP Historic District, Jl, Figure 18, Sixteenth Street Baptist Church The church is one of numerous resources that contribute to the Civil Rights MPS in Birmingham, Alabama, Source; John Morse, Buildings, structures, objects, and sites can be listed in the NRHP individually or as part of a historic district. A historic district is a significant concentration, linkage, or continuity of sites, buildings, structures, or objects with a shared history or aesthetic. Each building, structure, site, and object in a historic district is categorized as either contributing or noncontributing to the district, based on its historic significance and integrity. Multiple properties may also be listed in the NRHP in a Multiple Property Submission (MPS) to the NPS, These discontiguous properties are typically linked through a shared history, architectural commonality, or historical trend. To learn more about the NRHP, visit the NPS program website, What is Multiple Property Documentation? Multiple property documentation is a designation approach that identifies a collection of related significant properties. As the name suggests, multiple property documentation includes two or more properties that are connected based on themes, trends, and patterns of history. This method eliminates the geographic contiguity needed in a historic district. These properties may be connected through an organized historic context or are similar property types. Multiple properties may be submitted to the NPS for NRHP nomination via a multiple property submission (MPS). Examples of MPS documentation received by the NPS include; the Civil Rights Movement in Birmingham 1933-1979 (Figure 18), Historic Residential Subdivisions in Metropolitan Denver 1940-1965, and Sculpture by Dionicio Rodriguez in Texas. For more information on Multiple Property Documentation, view; National Register Bulletin 16B, :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHAPTER 2 1 16 2.1.2 State Level State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPOs) play a pivotal role in the management of historic resources by administering the national historic preservation program at the state level. They cooperate with the NIPS and other federal agencies, local governments, and private organizations to promote stewardship of historic resources. In Arkansas, the SHPO is the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program. Among its many programs, the AHPP reviews NRHP nominations, documents and registers Arkansas's cultural resources, administers historic preservation - related grants and easements, consults with federal agencies, and supports Certified Local Governments (CLGs) (Section 3,3), among other activities. 2.1.2.1 State Law Governing Local Historic Districts In Arkansas, state legislation allows municipalities to establish local historic districts managed by historic district commissions (State Act 484, amended in 1965 by State Act 170, §14-172-207). According to the law, before a local historic district can be created, either the district must already be listed in the NRHP or a majority of property owners must demonstrate support of the measure. Therefore, it is possible for an existing NRHP district to become regulated as a local historic district without the explicit consent of current property owners. Although listing in the NRHP also requires owner consent, the two designations are different, and property ownership may have changed since the time of NRHP listing, The law does not allow for the designation of individual properties as local historic landmarks, although it lists as its purpose the "preservation and protection of buildings, sites, places, and districts of historic interest through the maintenance of such as landmarks" (emphasis added),3 It also allows for discontiguous historic districts by stating, "any single historic district may embrace noncontiguous lands. Figure 19. Fayetteville Police Department. Photograph of police vehicle (ca. 1915), Figure 20. Fayetteville Fire Department. Photograph of fire truck (ca. 1920). .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHAPTER 2 1 17 DRAKE MUNICIPAL ETTEVILLE Figure 21. White Hangar Local Historic District. The White Hangar at Drake Field was determined eligible for the ARHP, but it has not been determined eligible or listed in the NRHP. Figure 22. Heffelfinger-Freund House, The house was determined eligible for the ARHP in 2018. Source: AHPP." 2.1.2.2 The Arkansas Register of Historic Places The Arkansas Register of Historic Places (ARHP) is the state equivalent of the NRHP. Properties are eligible for the ARHP if they are at least fifty years old and possess significance in any of the areas listed below. • Association with events of state or local historical significance • Association with the lives of persons of significance in the history of the state or locality • Represent a type, style, or period of architecture • Association with important elements of Arkansas's history or prehistory ARHP designation criteria are less stringent than NRHP criteria. For example, ARHP properties do not have to be in their original location, may have compromised integrity, and can be commemorative.' All Arkansas places listed in or nominated to the NRHP are automatically placed in the Arkansas Register.6 Listing in the ARHP constitutes a recognition of a property's historic significance and in no way restricts or abridges an owner's right to use, modify, or dispose of their property. The AHPP provides grant funds for properties listed in the ARHP through the Historic Preservation Restoration Grant (HPRG) program. Properties that have been listed in the ARHP and/or are a noncontributing resource in an NRHP historic district are eligible to participate in the HPRG program. Participants are eligible to receive a grant of up to $10,000 to fund restoration activities that will make the property eligible for the NRHP. Appendix D: Funding Opportunities provides more information on the HPRG program and other funding opportunities. 2.1.2.3 State Marker Programs In addition to the ARHP, the State of Arkansas has two marker programs, one commemorating sites associated with the Civil War and the second being the Arkansas Historical Marker Program, created in 2017 to honor historically significant people, places, and events that have shaped the state.' To be eligible for a historical marker, the significance of a person, place, or event must have occurred at least fifty years ago, but there are exceptions for extraordinary significance. An application and consultation with the SHPO are required to determine marker eligibility. TVA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHAPTER 2 1 18 2.7.2.4 Main Street Arkansas and Arkansas Downtown Network The AHPP manages Main Street Arkansas, an affiliate of the national Main Street America program sponsored by the National Trust for Historic Preservation (NTHP). The program can help transform historical downtowns into vibrant places through economic vitality, design, community organization, and promotion strategies." Communities accepted into the program are provided with technical assistance, resources, and ongoing education in exchange for a commitment to investing in buildings, infrastructure, and community improvements that celebrate historic character. The program provides grants for fagade renovation, building rehabilitation, new construction, and other projects that stimulate economic growth and revitalization. The AHPP's Arkansas Downtown Network program is like the Arkansas Main Street program in its use of historic preservation to promote economic development, but it has less stringent requirements. Downtown Network communities do not have to form nonprofit organizations to administer the program or have full-time staff, and budgetary requirements are lower. As of 2021, Arkansas has nineteen Main Street and twenty Downtown Network communities. 2.1.3 Local Level In the U.S., preservation laws have the most enforcement power at the local level, Local governments can create ordinances to establish a historic preservation program, designate properties or districts as local landmarks or local historic districts and manage historic resources. For example, a building listed in the NRHP can be demolished without any review by the public or local, state, or federal agencies; however, if that building were locally designated, the City ordinance could require a review process to take place and potentially stop the demolition. Figure 23. Downtown Fayetteville, The city center is home to numerous festivals and events. Figure 24. Interior of White Hangar. The White Hangar is the only local historic district in Fayetteville. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHAPTER 2 1 19 �����`I�: �s ��,,lBlll l_IIIIIIIIiIII Figure 25. Historic Tax Credits, This rehabilitation project in Little Rock received historic tax credits after following the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation. The top image shows the Judson Millard House before rehabilitation and the bottom image shows the end result. The once - vacant historic house is now several apartments, Source; AHPR1 2.2 Tax Credits Historic tax credits (HTCs) are a valuable opportunity to harness historic preservation as an economic tool. The federal historic tax credit program was established in the 1970s and is administered through the NIPS and the Internal Revenue Service. In the 1980s, states also began to offer tax credit programs to incentivize the rehabilitation of historic buildings. The federal and state HTC programs can be used together, maximizing the return value of a project. The HTC program provides a credit for eligible rehabilitation expenses on federal income taxes at the federal level and credits that vary at the state level, ranging from credits on state income tax to franchise tax credits. The federal historic preservation tax credit returns 20 percent of eligible rehabilitation expenses, and the Arkansas historic preservation tax credit returns 25 percent of approved rehabilitation expenses. To be eligible for historic tax credits, a building must be individually listed in the NRHP, a contributing resource to a historic district, or determined eligible for listing by the end of the rehabilitation project. At the federal level, eligible properties must be income producing, and at the Arkansas state level, private property owners and owners of income -producing properties are eligible. Property owners are not required to apply for both federal and state tax credits, but these credits can be layered for eligible properties. The proposed work must be substantial and follow the SOI Standards for Rehabilitation (Appendix E) to retain the historic character of the building. The State of Arkansas tax credit also applies to properties that are individually listed in the NRHP, a contributing resource to a historic district, or determined eligible for listing by the end of the rehabilitation project. The credit requires adherence to the SOI Standards for Rehabilitation,' Projects must also contribute to new business creation, existing business expansion, tourism, business revitalization, and/or neighborhood revitalization. Unlike the federal program, Arkansas HTCs are available for income -producing and residential properties. Whereas the federal program has no funding limit, the state tax credit has an $8 million cap in awards per year. Tax benefits like a federal income tax deduction may also be available for historic property owners who donate an easemenVO Additional information on economic opportunities can be found in Appendix D. :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHAPTER 2 1 20 2.3 Benefits of Historic Preservation A city and its residents benefit from historic preservation in myriad ways. Historic preservation has been proven to provide economic benefits to individuals and the community at large" Investment in historic areas can bolster the local economy and increase property values. This investment in the existing built environment is a sustainable development practice that takes advantage of standing buildings, reduces landfill waste, and limits the use of new construction materials. Cultivating a successful historic preservation program promotes a strong community identity and can foster civic pride. This identity supports an engaged population, and can attract others to live, work, and play in a community. 2.3.1 Economic Benefits Historic preservation contributes to job creation, development, and income generation, directly and indirectly. Historic preservation projects are generally more economically impactful than new construction projects because they are more labor-intensive, and materials are more likely to be purchased locally. Neighborhoods and communities benefit from historic tax credit projects because they attract private investors who may not have otherwise undertaken a rehabilitation project. As historic buildings are often located in downtowns and areas where infrastructure is already in place, preservation projects conserve municipal resources and combat sprawl. Finally, historic preservation projects increase property values and often encourage other renovation and investment projects. Much of the role of historic preservation in economic development is tied to the incentives available, including grants. Since 1971, the AHPP has awarded approximately 2,400 grants in 170 cities, totaling more than $55 million dollars 2 Main Street communities in Arkansas have invested over $377 million in their Main Street districts since 1984, 78 percent of which was from the private sector?3 Each year since the state HTC program was established in Arkansas, over 175 direct jobs and 133 indirect jobs were created, and a direct income value of more than $7 million dollars and indirect value of more than $4.7 million dollars was generated14 Benefits • Civic pride • Supports local trades and other industries • Cultural and community identity • Supports small businesses • Connection to heritage Natural resource conservation • Charm and character • Maintains affordable housing • Creates jobs • Heritage tourism • Economic growth • Increases property values • Educates population • Reduces waste Since 1971, the AHPP has awarded more than $55 million dollars through grants. Main Street Arkansas has seen more than $377 million dollars in investment since 1984. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHAPTER 2 1 21 t 07Q Figure 26. Scenes from Downtown and South Fayetteville, Downtown Fayetteville has already created a dynamic community that takes advantage of its historic buildings and streets, which contribute to the economy. Approximately 20 percent of landfill is from construction and demolition activities in Fayetteville" Historic preservation provides economic opportunities related to heritage tourism, Heritage tourism is the activity of "traveling to experience the places, artifacts and activities that authentically represent the stories and people of the past," which can be framed by cultural, historic, and/ or natural resources and environments15 Heritage tourism relies on historic preservation to maintain the historical appearance of environments, as well as the preservation of stories and traditions linked to a community. Museums and cultural institutions play a central role, but the local government ensures an overall commitment to heritage tourism activities. Heritage tourism bolsters the local economy by attracting visitors and residents. Small businesses benefit from historic preservation. The preservation and rehabilitation of historical buildings, especially smaller, older buildings, stimulates small business incubatioW6 A small historic building provides the opportunity to secure an affordable space with character that would be otherwise unavailable for a small business owner. Communities with smaller, older buildings provide opportunities for entrepreneurs of all backgrounds. Creative industries also thrive in these areas, providing a supportive environment for artists and artisans. A higher density of buildings encourages walking and bicycling, in contrast to suburban sprawl -style development, The range of small businesses attracts many, especially younger, people to live, work, and play in these areas. Furthermore, these areas create an active nightlife and music scene which can encourage visitors and heritage tourists to spend the night rather than return home the same day. 2.3.2 Environmental Benefits Historic preservation is a sustainable approach to development and waste reduction. The rehabilitation of existing buildings promotes the adaptive reuse of a space, rather than demolishing and replacing with new construction, Existing walls and building materials can often be reused at an affordable cost. This environmentally friendly strategy works to prevent the purchase of new construction materials and reduce landfill waste that is harmful to the environment. :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHAPTER 2 1 22 Oftentimes, buildings suitable for rehabilitation are in downtown communities that already present a livable environment due to a compact street network, sidewalks, and proximity to resources. Mixed -use projects contribute to this livable community, in that upper stories may be used for residential use and street -level spaces may be occupied by commercial or professional entities. Overall, this approach works to reduce the reliance on automobiles to attain services and encourage healthy, walkable communities. Historic preservation reduces a city's carbon footprint and encourages resilience in the face of climate change. Federal HTCs have been notable for production of affordable housing units in Arkansas, with 38% of housing units created through HTC projects being designated for low-income residents'$ 2.3.3 Social Benefits Historic preservation fosters civic pride and identity, Beautification through the maintenance and investment in the historic character of a place contributes to a greater sense of place and enjoyment of surroundings, The establishment of one's sense of place contributes to the memory landscape and orientation of their environment. Historic preservation activities work to preserve and maintain sense of place, which contributes to a collective memory and shared identity. Historic preservation attracts newcomers and retains current residents. The college -town environment of Fayetteville's historic core attracts prospective students to the University of Arkansas (U of A). Residents enjoy a walkable downtown enhanced by festivals and events, like the downtown farmers' market, which has been active since 1973. Rehabilitated buildings also provide opportunities for the creation of affordable housing. Historic preservation encourages interest in local history. Heritage tourism activities provide the opportunity to explore local history and untold stories and grow awareness around a physical place for both visitors and residents. Investment in historic buildings and interpretation can spark interest in learning more about the past and can generate support for historic preservation activities. Figure 27 Fayetteville Farmers Market. Since 1973, the Fayetteville Farmers Market has operated in the Downtown Square. Events like the farmers market stimulate activity in walkable downtown centers. Source: Art Meripol (1974),' :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHAPTER 2 1 23 2.4 Introduction to Historic Resources Surveys The systematic documentation of historical resources is central to successful historic preservation planning. This section describes historic resources surveys, why they are completed, and different levels of documentation. Fayetteville's survey activities to date are detailed in Section 3.6 and Appendix I; Historic Resources Survey Plan, Historic resources surveys are the principal tool for identifying and documenting buildings, structures, sites, objects, and districts, and evaluating them for historic significance?g They can be conducted as part of a community's historic preservation initiatives, or they may be completed for regulatory reasons. Background data review, such as historical and current map analysis and historic context development, are important tasks conducted prior to fieldwork. A historic context documents the major historical trends, events, people, and architecture in the survey area and provides the framework for identifying and evaluating historic resources. Historic contexts are intended to be a guide rather than a comprehensive narrative of history. Historic preservation practitioners historically wrote chronological contexts, but today, contexts organized thematically to analyze architectural, social, ethnic, and cultural topics are the industry standard. Historic context statements are not just useful tools for survey work; they can also serve as the foundation for public education activities, historic designations, and other historic preservation initiatives. There are three main types of historic resources surveys; windshield, reconnaissance, and intensive surveys (Table 2). The type of survey appropriate for a project depends on existing documentation, the needs and goals of a community, and available funding. Table 2, Types of Historic Resources Surveys Survey Type Definition A windshield -level survey consists of methodologically driving a large area to Windshield understand the composition and makeup and to note those properties or areas with Survey the most potential to have historic significance. No survey forms are completed. This type of survey is often completed before a reconnaissance survey to inform which properties or areas should be later documented with a survey form. Representative photographs and notes may be taken. A reconnaissance -level survey involves documentation of properties on a survey form Reconnaissance and an evaluation of historic significance using readily available sources. Fieldworkers Survey photograph each resource and document key information, such as the architectural style, exterior materials, and changes that have occurred over time. Survey forms also typically include property information and an assessment of integrity. Surveyors conduct analyses to identify those resources that represent a significant part of history identified in the historic context and maintain sufficient integrity to convey those historic associations. Certain properties require a close examination to answer complex research questions, Intensive understand their history, and evaluate historic significance. Intensive -level surveys Survey involve detailed documentation; comprehensive research like oral history interviews and the review of deeds, census data, and other primary sources; and robust analysis of integrity and significance. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHAPTER 2 1 24 Figure 28. Surveying. Architectural historians completing a reconnaissance survey in Fort Smith, AR Depending on the survey and where it is completed, a resource documented at the reconnaissance or intensive level may be evaluated for eligibility for NRHP, state, and/or local historic designations. Surveys in Arkansas are frequently conducted in coordination with the SHPO, reviewed by SHPO staff, and entered into the SHPO database of surveyed properties. These projects require documentation using the AHPP's Arkansas Architectural Resources Survey Form and Ancillary Structures Form, detailed drawn site plans, a comparison of prior survey data, and printed reports and survey forms. Municipalities can also conduct surveys independently. The advantage of an independent project is that the city can customize the data they collect and eliminate unnecessary, costly, and time-consuming tasks. The disadvantage is the lack of formal evaluation by the SHPO, some potential funding limitations, and city responsibility for maintaining all records and data, Once completed, a historic resources survey serves as the foundation for future preservation planning initiatives, such as the designation of individual properties and historic districts and Certificate of Appropriateness reviews. Historic resources surveys are typically conducted every ten years to ensure the survey provides an accurate record of a community's historic resources and is a useful tool for planners. For more information on historic resources surveys, view National Register Bulletin 24, :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHAPTER 2 1 25 • 3.1 Introduction Fayetteville is the largest city in Northwest Arkansas (NWA), a growing metropolitan area in the Boston Mountains encompassing Benton, Madison, and Washington Counties (Figure 30). The city is the southern anchor of the NWA metropolitan area; the cities of Springdale, Rogers, and Bentonville lie to the north. The smaller communities of Farmington, Greenland, and Elkins are to the southwest, south, and southeast of the city, respectively. Fayetteville sits in a valley between several mountains that drain into the White and Illinois Rivers. It is home to the flagship campus of the University of Arkansas (U of A) System, which is also the city's largest employer. Museums and attractions include the Arkansas Air and Military Museum, the Botanical Garden of the Ozarks, the Clinton House Museum, the U of A Museum, the Walton Arts Center, the Wilson Art Museum, and the Washington County Historical Society Museum at the Headquarters House. Fayetteville has more than 70 public parks. Numerous festivals and events are held throughout the year. Contents This section describes the community context, background information, and existing conditions analysis relevant to the development of the historic preservation plan. It includes a brief history of Fayetteville and its architecture, a description of the City's historic preservation program and preservation -related initiatives to date, and an evaluation of the program and planning context. 3.1 Introduction..................................................................................26 311 Brief History...............................................................................30 312 Architectural Character and Legacy...................33 3.2 Preservation Program........................................................36 3.2.1 Overview.....................................................................................36 3.2.2 Historic Preservation Ordinance ............................41 3.3 Certified Local Government...........................................44 3.4 Black Heritage Preservation Commission,,,,,,,,,45 3.5 Preserve America Community....................................45 3.6 Completed Historic Resources Surveys..............46 3.7 Existing Historic Designations.....................................49 3.71 Local, ARHP, and NRHP Listings...............................49 3.72 National Historic Trails....................................................53 3.73 Historical Markers...............................................................53 3.74 Easements................................................................................55 3.8 Evaluation.....................................................................................56 3.8.1 Successes and Challenges.........................................56 3.8.2 Ordinance Evaluation......................................................57 3.8.3 Planning Context and Alignment ..........................59 3.8.4 Data Management and Availability ......................61 3.8.5 Use of Preservation Incentives...............................62 3.8.6 Program Benchmark.......................................................63 Figure 29. Fayetteville Square. Downtown in present day (top) and in 1935 (bottom). Sources; Brandon Rush (top).' City of Fayetteville (bottom)."' �W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 26 31 Gtee* Major roads in Fayetteville include the John Paul Hammerschmidt Highway-Ful bright Expressway (Interstate 49), Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard (U.S. Route 62), Nelson Hackett Boulevard -College Avenue (U.S. Route 71B), Wedington Drive-15th Street -Huntsville Road (State Route 16), North Street (State Route 116), and S. Razorback Road (State Route 265). The city has one municipal airport, Drake Field, The Arkansas & Missouri (A&M) Railroad runs north -south through Fayetteville, Ozark Regional Transit and Razorback Transit provides bus service to Fayetteville, Fayetteville had a population of 93,949 in 2020 and an estimated population of 95,230 in 2021.20 The city has a population density of 1,735 persons per square mile, which is higher than Little Rock at 1,688. Most residents (76.8%) are white (Figure 32). Fayetteville has a smaller percentage of Black residents than the rest of the state (5,9 percent compared to 15.7 percent).21 Harmon Arbor Acres Rd z c Wheeler t� 1 Johnson ' ayettevilie Mud Creek Trail Corridor __""'"•'A1e Sonora" F w4 GUY Teri Rd i O M Habberton \on Hamestring '� a Creek Trail v Corridor —° u 2 White ock W Wedington Dr z n Fayetteville 62 � McNair Farmington Fayette Junction er V Mountain Har r is Appleby ional Walnut Grove 1 Q Fayetteville City Limits N 0 2 Miles Figure 30. Map of Fayetteville. MONEZZMMM= A- F61 :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 27 Fayetteville at a glance... 93,949 Population 1,735A People per Square Mile Population Density $52j111 Median Household Income 21.2% Poverty Pate 941% High School Education or Higher 37.9% Owner Occupied Housing Rate Figure 31. Demographics. Source: 2020 Census, US Census Bureau, Two or More 77% Latins Asian 2.80, American Indian 0.7% Black 5.9% 2020 Census *0.2% Native Hawaiian or Paci Figure 32. Racial Composition. Source: US Census Bureau. r,7 DATA PRESENT 75% Only 75% of parcels in Fayetteville have building age data. Of those parcels, more than 60% of buildings were constructed in 1990 or later. Building Age Washington County Assesor White 76.8% 1840-19091% 1910-191 % � 1920-291% II ' 190-9 2% 1940-49 3% 1980-89 1990 or Later 9% 61 °% Figure 33. Building Age. Source: Washington County Assessor's Office." Fayetteville has higher educational attainment than the state average; 94.7 percent of Fayetteville residents have high school or equivalent proficiency, and more than 50 percent have a bachelor's degree, compared to the state rates of 877 percent and 24.3 percent, respectively. Fayetteville has a higher poverty rate at 21.2 percent, compared to the state at 16.3 percent, but the median household income (2020) of $52,111 is on par with the state level of $52,123. Washington County Assessor (WCA) building data reveals that most properties in Fayetteville were built after 1960, with the largest percentage (60,7 percent of parcels with data; 45 percent of all parcels) built in 1990 or later (Figure 33).13 According to available WCA data, only 12,7 percent of this subset (approximately 9.5 percent of all parcels in the city) were built prior to 1960. 15% :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 29 3.1.1 Brief History Located in the Ozark Mountains, the area of present- day Fayetteville and NWA was originally inhabited by the Osage Nation. European explorers arrived in the Mississippi River Valley in 1541, which was subsequently claimed by France and named Louisiana in 1682. In 1803, the United States finalized the Louisiana Purchase from France, and in 1817 took land from the Osage Nation that was given in part to the Cherokee Nation when they were removed from their ancestral homelands in the southeastern U,S,24 In 1828, George MCGarrah moved his household to the area, settling in what would later become Fayetteville's Masonic Addition. The town was founded as Washington Courthouse in 1828, but its name was changed a year later to Fayetteville to avoid confusion with the community of Washington, Arkansas. Fayetteville's extents were officially recognized via a 160-acre patent issued on February 27, 1835, by President Andrew Jackson. The land was bound by what is now College Avenue on the east, Gregg Avenue on the west, Dickson Street on the north, and South Street on the south.21 By the late 1830s, all land plots for the town had been purchased and the town square complete. In 1841, the town of Fayetteville incorporated with a population of 425.26 Fayetteville prospered as a center for education during the nineteenth century with several notable schools. The Fayetteville Female Seminary opened in 1839, providing education for both white and Cherokee students. Arkansas College was founded in 1852, becoming the first degree -granting college in the state, though it was destroyed during the Civil War. After the war, Henderson School opened for Black students in 1866. In 1872, the Arkansas Industrial University was founded in Fayetteville, ultimately becoming the U of A in 1899. Fayetteville experienced economic growth in the late nineteenth century fueled by the arrival of the railroad. The St. Louis & San Francisco Railway reached Fayetteville in 1881, and the first passenger train arrived at Dickson Street Station in 1882. By 1886, construction began on the Fayetteville and Little Rock Railway, Fayetteville's location at the junction of multiple railroad lines provided access to other states, including Figure 34. Overlooking Fayetteville, A photograph of individuals looking towards the courthouse around 1920, Source; MC1427, WSC Collection, Special Collections, University of Arkansas Libraries, Fayetteville, Figure 35. Fayetteville Frisco Depot The Fayetteville Frisco Depot pictured ca. 1910. Source; Encyclopedia of Arkansas," :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 30 Figure 36. First Day of Integration in 1954. Source; Fayetteville History.,' AYETTV E ARKA1\SAS PROGRAM FOR COMMUNITY RENEWAL •rFir NEFI) ECONW01C BASIS — GOALS RESOURCES SCII EWILE JAMES A. VIZZIER- CONSULTING PLANNER E0 Figure 37 Urban Renewal Plan (1968). Source; James A. Vizzier.P Oklahoma and Missouri, allowing the city to serve as an economic center for the surrounding agricultural area." As a result, the county's fruit production, mostly apples, increased during the 1890s,28 Continued railway development fostered the growth of a new lumber industry, By the turn of the century, the timber trade grew into an important enterprise with mills and factories providing economic growth and stability for Fayetteville residents as the population grew to more than 4,000.21 The University of Arkansas expanded with the creation of a college of agriculture in 1905, followed by colleges of engineering, education, and arts and science. During the 1920s, Fayetteville saw additional industrial and manufacturing growth. Due to its diverse economy, Fayetteville did not suffer as much as other parts of Arkansas during the Great Depression.30 By 1940, the population had almost doubled to about 8,200, and by 1950, the population reached more than 17,000. Economically, Fayetteville experienced the growth of a number of industries during the 1940s, including processing plants for Armour, Swift, and Campbell's Soup." During this period, the U of A became the first public state college south of the Mason Dixon Line to integrate, in 1948. In 1954, Fayetteville became the second school district in the southern United States to implement integration following the Brown v, Board of Education Supreme Court ruling. Fayetteville continued to become home to a diverse community, with the Jewish population increasing during the 1940s and 1950s and a Latino surge beginning in the 1990S.33 By the mid -twentieth century, a new county hospital opened in Fayetteville, which later became the Washington Regional Medical Center. The U of A added a college of business and school of architecture. Although passenger train service in Fayetteville ended by 1965, the city continued to develop through the introduction of diverse industries like agriculture (including poultry), automotive, business, and banking.34 The city reached more than 30,000 residents by the 1970s. Like many American cities, the downtown of Fayetteville experienced some decline due to the rise of shopping centers and malls outside the historical core. Portions of historic downtown were also lost to the City's urban renewal efforts.31 Throughout the remainder of the twentieth century, Fayetteville continued to grow and expand as a university town and commercial center in NWA. See Table 3. for a timeline of historical events. :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 31 Table 3. History Timeline Year Event 1541 Prior to 1541, the land that would be known as Fayetteville was inhabited by the Osage Nation. Europeans began their exploration of the land at this time. 1682 France claims the land that would become Fayetteville as part of Louisiana. 1803 The U.S. acquires the land that would become Fayetteville with the Louisiana Purchase. 1819 Arkansas Territory is established out of Missouri Territory. 1828 Fayetteville is founded as Washington Courthouse. 1829 Washington Courthouse is renamed Fayetteville after the Tennessee hometown of two of the town's commissioners, John Woody and James Buchanan. 1833 The first general store is opened by Mr. Nye and Mr. Sevier in what is now Fayetteville Square. 1835 Fayetteville is officially recognized with a land patent of 160 acres issued by President Jackson. 1836 Arkansas becomes a state. 1839 Fayetteville Female Seminary opened by Sofia Sawyer, with both White and Cherokee students. 1841 Fayetteville becomes incorporated. 1852 Arkansas College chartered as the first degree -granting college in the State. The college buildings were burned during the Civil War. 1858 The Butterfield Overland Mail Company begins postal operations between St. Louis and San Francisco. Fayetteville is one of the postal stops along the route. The Fayetteville Female Institute is established at College Avenue and Dickson Street. 1863 Battle of Fayetteville takes place, resulting in a Union victory. The Headquarters House, which was used as a base for Union operations, sustains minor damage from the attacks. 1865 Civil War ends and enslaved people are emancipated. 1866 The first public school for Black students (and first public school district in the state) opens. A brick building was built between 1868-1870 and later named for E. E. Henderson. 1872 Arkansas Industrial University opens, later renamed the University of Arkansas (U of A) in 1899. 1882 Passenger and freight rail service begins. 1916 Fayetteville Public Library opens in the Washington County Courthouse basement. 1918 The first streets are paved in Fayetteville. 1922 Construction begins atop Mount Sequoyah for a Methodist summer campground. Over 30 cottages and other recreational buildings remain in the complex. 1937 Construction begins on Drake Field Airport, which is later used for training during World War II during the early 1940s. The 1943 White Hangar building is now an aviation museum. 1948 U of A becomes the first university south of the Mason Dixon Line to integrate with Silas Hunt's enrollment in the U of A School of Law. 1954 Integration of Fayetteville High School begins. Elementary school integration would take place in the early 1960s. 1965 Passenger rail service ends. 1968 Urban renewal planning activities take place, demolishing portions of downtown. 1973 Fayetteville Farmers Market is established in Fayetteville Square, 1975 Future -president Bill Clinton and future Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton purchase their first home in Fayetteville. 1992 Voters approve a measure to return the Fayetteville city government to a City Council, Between 1965 and 1992, the city government was administered by a board, Al!—" Q HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 32 3.1.2 Architectural Character and Legacy Fayetteville's early architecture reflects national trends of the late nineteenth to mid -twentieth centuries. Examples from the Victorian, Revival, and Early Modern eras of architecture are common. The city's historical downtown has rows of one- and two-part commercial block buildings, such as the 1899 Romanesque Revival -style and the 1908 Queen Anne -style Bank of Fayetteville Building and the 1886 Italianate-style Guisinger Building. Some properties were architect - designed, but more often, they are vernacular examples constructed by local builders. The Neoclassical -style 1911 post office sited prominently in the town square, the Romanesque Revival -style 1897 Washington County Jail, and 1905 Washington County Courthouse are landmark civic buildings anchoring downtown. The U of A campus near downtown has a distinctive collection of early Fayetteville architecture. Among its many notable buildings are Colonial Revival, Collegiate Gothic, Classical Revival, and Art Deco style examples, popular styles during the school's early years of development. Historical residential neighborhoods expand outward from downtown and the campus. These areas are characterized by Victorian -era architecture, like the popular Folk Victorian and Queen Anne styles; Revival -era architecture, such as the Colonial Revival, Classical Revival, Tudor Revival styles; and Early Modernist -era architecture, most commonly the Craftsman -style bungalow. Like the city's commercial buildings, most residences were constructed by builders rather than architects. Further from Fayetteville's historical core are automobile - oriented commercial corridors and post -World War II housing developments comprising mostly Minimal Traditional and Ranch -style houses. The city is best known for its collection of mid - twentieth century Modernistic architecture. When the U of A began offering architecture courses in 1946, it brought architects to the city who taught forward - thinking and innovative design principles, created a pipeline of talent in the community, and designed properties in Fayetteville for themselves and private clients. Often this work, which rejected ornament and embraced minimalism, was influenced by and responded to the region's picturesque landscape. Figure 38. Guisinger Building. Figure 39. Guisinger Building (ca. 1905), :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 33 Figure 40. Work (top and bottom) by James Lambeth. Source; Sundancing by James Lambeth (1992).Q Architect and landscape architect John Gilbert Williams (1915-2008) was a founding member of the U of A architecture program and served as its chair for 20 yea rs.36 He was known as a progressive thinker and champion of the modern movement in design who introduced his students to leading architects of the era through guest critics and lecturers. In addition to his academic responsibilities, he had a private practice and designed his own Organic -style home following the ideas of renowned architect Frank Lloyd Wright (1867-1959).31 Williams's most widely known and celebrated student was Euine (E.) Fay Jones (1921-2004), who received the AIA Gold Medal, the highest honor awarded by the American Institute of Architects.38 Jones was Fayetteville's most prolific Modernistic architect and designed residential, educational, commercial, and religious buildings, among others. He apprenticed under Frank Lloyd Wright, and many of his buildings reflect principles he shared with Wright of geometry, organic architecture, native materials, craftsmanship, and integration of building and site.31 In addition to his private practice, Jones also taught architecture at U of A for 35 years. Another of Williams's first students and Jones's classmates was Warren Dennis Segraves (1924- 1978),40 In contrast to the Organic architecture favored by Williams and Jones, Segraves's buildings were structurally simple and glassy designs influenced by the International Style and the work of California architect Craig Ellwood.41 The 1962 Fayetteville Public Library, U of A Wesley Chapel, and the Fayetteville Federal Building are prominent examples of his work. Like Williams and Jones, architects Cyrus Arden Sutherland (1920-2008) and James Lambeth (1942-2003) were also long-term U of A professors of architecture who had private practices. Sutherland designed residences, churches, and libraries in Northwest Arkansas and was an early leader in the historic preservation movement in the state. Lambeth designed Contemporary and Shed -style single and multifamily residences, educational facilities, and churches. He is best known for his innovations in solar design; buildings designed to optimize the heating effects of the sun when warmth is needed and provide shade and natural ventilation when cooling is needed.44 .A HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 34 G-------------- /7 /6 Thayer (T) Ewing Shelton (1899-1982) contributed to the local architectural legacy of Fayetteville and designed buildings across the state." Among his Fayetteville works are Root Elementary School, Woodland Jr. High School, Fire Stations #1 and #3, the Lynn Shelton American Legion Post No. 27 on College Avenue, and a remodel of the Rieff House (Moore's Chapel) on W, Center Street. In 1956, Shelton patented his design that was used for the Root School; a partial - hexagonal school plant with pentagonal classrooms (Figure 41),46 Famed architect Edward Durell Stone (1902-1978) designed buildings in his hometown of Fayetteville after becoming a major figure in American architecture. He worked internationally and was a leading architect of the New Formalist style. Among his limited work in Fayetteville is the 1951 International -style Fine Arts Center and the Wrightian-influenced Sigma Nu Fraternity house at the U of A campus, World -class and innovative architecture is uncommon in smaller cities in the central U.S., and even less common are communities with examples by multiple architects practicing with different styles, materials, and property types. Fayetteville's collection of mid - twentieth -century architecture is a unique asset that should be protected as an important aspect of the city's history. Because of the influence of U of Ns architecture program, there are likely undiscovered architect -designed buildings in Fayetteville worthy of historic preservation, such as those by lesser -known architects and works from more recent eras, like the 1970s, Figure 41. Root School, Plan in the 1956 patent by T Ewing Shelton (left) and 1956 aerial image (bottom) by Shelton Fayetteville's Newest School' Figure 42. Fine Arts Building at the U of A. The building was designed by world-renowned architect Edward Durell Stone. IVA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 35 3.2 Preservation Program 3.2.1 Overview Following the demolition of numerous high -profile historically significant buildings during the mid - twentieth century, historic preservation became a growing concern for Americans. In 1963, the General Assembly of the State of Arkansas authorized local governments to create historic preservation commissions, establish local historic districts, and manage those districts through certificates of appropriateness (State Act 484, amended in 1965 by State Act 170) (see Section 2.1.2). In 1966, the N H PA [16 U.S. Code (USC) 470 et seq.] was passed, providing a regulatory framework for historic preservation efforts across the country. Preservation activities began in Fayetteville in the 1970s with the city's first NRHP listings and the fight to save the 1911 post office from demolition.47 At the end of the decade, the Washington County Historical Society urged the Fayetteville Board of Directors to adopt an ordinance creating a historic district commission and establish via ordinance the Big Spring Historical District. In March of 1979, the City adopted Ordinance No. 2509 that established a five -member Historic District Commission (HDC) and gave the commission the powers delegated to such a commission by State Act 484, as amended. The proposed Big Spring local historical district was never established, though the area later become part of the 1980 Washington -Willow NRHP Historic District. In 1994, Ordinance No. 3836 expanded the commission to seven members. After failed attempts to establish a local historic district, the HDC disbanded in 2003.48 In 2008, the City Council enacted Ordinance 5177, which re-established the HDC and created the city's first local ordinance historic district, or local historic district, comprising a single building, White Hangar, at Drake Field, It remains the only local historic district in Fayetteville. In the same year, the City became a CLG and gained access to NPS and SHPO support and funding for its historic preservation initiatives (Section 3.3). Figure 43. The ca. 1835 Waxhaws Hall (demolished) was built by second Governor of Arkansas, Archibald Yell, Source: University of Arkansas.s IN THE WAY OF PROGRESS .. eq 00 m Aame eppmn doomed at poNlWe upo.M#. (TIME50holo by Feq Coal) Figure 44. In the Way of Progress. Caption reading "Antebellum home appears doomed as post office expands" in 1970. Source: Ken Good (1970), Northwest Arkansas Times :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 36 Figure 45, Archibald Yell's Law Office. Relocation of the law office to the Headquarters House in 1992. Source; University of Arkansas Collections, Figure 46. Steeple Replacement, Replacement of the Washington County Courthouse Steeple in 1974. Source; Washington County, Arkansas," Since becoming a CLG, the City has undertaken numerous historic preservation projects, including eight historic resources surveys and six NRHP historic district designations. In 2009, Fayetteville became a Preserve America community, joining a federal program that encourages and supports community efforts to preserve and enjoy cultural and natural heritage (Section 3,5), Beginning in 2011, the city established a Preservation Awards program to recognize outstanding commitment, practice, and leadership in preservation. In 2015, the city began a restoration project at the 1842 Woolsey farmstead; once complete, the farmhouse will be used for educational purposes and the property will be a wet prairie nature sanctuary. In 2019, Fayetteville established design guidelines for the Washington - Willow NRHP Historic District, In 2021, the city created a Black Heritage Preservation Commission (BHPC) (Ordinance 6472, amended in 2022 by Ordinance 6543) to recognize historical resources and create historical markers associated with Black heritage (Section 3,4), Fayetteville's Long Range Planning Division of the Development Services Department is responsible for the City's historic preservation program. Currently, two employees support the program part-time; the Long-Range/Special Projects Manager and Long Range & Preservation Planner (Planner), The program's planner serves as the administrative support to the HDC, and the Long-Range/Special Projects Manager provides program oversight and direction. The historic preservation program has a dedicated section of the City's website. Content includes a statement about the city's commitment to historic preservation and a description of its historic program and initiatives. More in-depth content about the City's Historic Preservation Awards, NRHP districts, the Woolsey Farmstead and Wet Prairie project, and the Washington -Willow District Design Standards is provided, along with a link to a dynamic StoryMap of more than 350 historical sites. An HDC page includes commission information, commissioner contacts, attendance requirements, upcoming meeting information, and video recordings of past meetings. The website also provides accessibility functions to assist individuals in their viewing experience. :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 37 Table 4, Historic Preservation Timeline Year Event 1963 Arkansas State Act 484 is passed, authorizing municipalities to establish local historic districts. 1966 The National Historic Preservation Act is established, creating a framework for historic preservation in the U.S. 1970 Several individual properties listed in the NRHP in Fayetteville. 1974 Fayetteville's first historic resources survey is completed of Big Spring. Community protests save the 1911 post office from demolition. 1979 Fayetteville ordinance 2509 passed on March 1, 1979, providing the City a mechanism to safeguard and manage historic resources and establish an HDC. 1980 Washington -Willow and Fayetteville Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital become the city's first two NRHP historic districts. 1982 Mount Nord NRHP Historic District is listed. 1983-84 Historic resources surveys of West Dickson Street and Lafayette Gregg are completed. 1988 Pratt Place Farm is surveyed. 1991-92 Historic resources surveys of Washington -Willow, Mount Nord, and Wilson Park are completed. 1994 Historic resource documentation takes place in Root School and Ridgeway View. 1995 Wilson Park NRHP Historic District is listed. 2000-01 Several individual NRHP designations for architect -designed mid -twentieth century houses around Lake Lucille, including the Fay Jones House. 2003 HDC disbanded. 2007 West Dickson Street Commercial NRHP Historic District is listed. 2008 HDC re-established. Fayetteville becomes a Certified Local Government. White Hangar becomes the city's first local historic district. Historic resources surveys at U of A, Washington County Fairgrounds, and the Butterfield Overland Mail Route are completed. 2009 University of Arkansas Campus NRHP Historic District is listed. Butterfield Overland Mail Route is listed in the NRHP. Fayetteville becomes a Preserve America community. 2010-12 Historic resources surveys of Mount Sequoyah Cottages and the VA Hospital are completed. 2012 Mount Sequoyah Cottages NRHP Historic District is listed. 2015 Woolsey Farmstead Restoration Project begins. 2016 University Heights is surveyed. South Fayetteville is considered for survey, but AHPP rejects attempt. 2017 Meadow Spring is surveyed. 2019 Washington -Willow NRHP Historic District Design Guidelines are created. Meadow Springs NRHP Historic District is listed. The Benjamin Franklin Johnson II homestead becomes the city's first agricultural NRHP district. 2020 City purchases and plans to preserve the Porter Produce Building/Apple Warehouse. 2021 BHPC is created. Community Remembrance Project erects marker describing racial terrorism in the county. North Garvin Drive, the city's first post -World War II NRHP historic district is created. 2022 Aviation -related buildings at Drake Field are surveyed. City completes grant to restore the Woolsey Family Cemetery. City receives grant for its first heritage and historic preservation plan. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 38 The City has organized a historical walking tour of Fayetteville Square; participated in National Historic Preservation Month in May; and used social media to communicate historic preservation news and progress. During National Historic Preservation Month, the City took part in the National Trust for Historic Preservation (NTHP) This Place Matters program (now discontinued). In recent years, branding was incorporated at sites of local importance, using the This Place Matters guidance from the NTHP, Social media platforms like Facebook have been used to disseminate information about the historic preservation program and publish information about historical sites during National Historic Preservation Month. Recent preservation - related events in Fayetteville include historic walking tours hosted by the Fayetteville Public Library and events by the Washington County Historical Society. The historic preservation program does not receive appropriated funds besides the funding of two employees in the Long -Range Planning Program who spend a small percentage of their time on preservation work (Table 5: Budget),49Grant funds are the primary mechanism for accomplishing historic preservation initiatives. Since 2015, the City has completed cost sharing for the restoration of the ca, 1842 Woolsey Farm and Homestead. In 2020, the City appropriated funds to stabilize the ca. 1906 Vernon & Moore-Mcllroy Produce Warehouse/John Porter Produce Building (NR 2020) at 200 North West Avenue."' Additional grants include funding from the AHPP for restoration of the ca. 1845 Woolsey Family Cemetery (NR 2020) and the creation of this plan. Although the historic preservation program does not receive direct funds, departmental funding has increased since 2021, and the City has shown interest in protecting historical resources through capital improvements and grant funding. Figure 47 Vernon & Moore-Mcllroy Produce Warehouse/John Porter Produce Building. Source: Google Street View.w Figure 48. Rendering of the Woolsey Farmstead post restoration. Source: Revival Architecture, Inc. Watercolor by Vladislav Yeliselivx Table 5. City of Fayetteville Historic Preservation Program Budget 2021-2025 Budget Item 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Long -Range Planning $185,236 $191,511 $203,223* - - Woolsey Homestead Historic Preservation $141,000 $150,000 $250,000* $200,000* $200,000* Woolsey Family Cemetery - $13,725 (G) - - - Porter Building Stabilization - - $280,000* $85,000* $80,000* Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan I - 1$70,000 (G) I - I- - *Projected/Estimated, (G) Grant funds :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 39 3.2.7.7 Preservation Partners Cities often perform historic preservation activities in partnership with local organizations, Potential preservation partners for the City include the Downtown Fayetteville Coalition, Chamber Fayetteville, and Experience Fayetteville, These organizations are key to connecting with the city's business community and downtown property owners, as well as the community at large and visitors, Additional partnerships are listed in Appendix C; Partnership Opportunities. Downtown Fayetteville Coalition (DFC) is an association of small businesses in downtown Fayetteville. DFC provides a centralized marketing platform for downtown merchants and supportive services, including dedicated staff at the A&P Commission, The merchant association is also a major stakeholder for planning projects, including the ongoing Cultural Arts Corridor project, also known as the Ramble, which will link cultural and natural attractions downtown. Chamber Fayetteville is the city's Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber provides support to business owners throughout the city and sponsors events and programs contributing to Fayetteville's economy, Their activities include; • Business planning tools and employment services; • Committees specializing on diplomacy, diversity, equity and inclusion, economic development, workforce and transportation, education, government affairs, health, leadership, and teenager leadership for Washington County; • Events including the business network meetings, ribbon cuttings, the Construction & Developers Awards, and the Northwest Arkansas Hispanic Heritage Festival, and; • Greenway, a certification and recognition program for businesses that follow sustainable business practices. Experience Fayetteville is the convention and visitor's bureau for the City, The bureau markets the city to visitors and operates a visitor center at 21 South Block Avenue in Fayetteville Square. Initiatives sponsored by the organization include; Annual events such as the Joe Martin Stage Race, First Thursday, Artosphere, NWA Pride, Fayetteville Roots Festival, Fayetteville Film Festival, and the Lights of the Ozarks; Calendar of events and activities at local businesses and points of interest; Conventions and activities for tourism and promotion, including the Walmart UCI Cyclo-cross World Championship held in 2022, and; Operation of the Fayetteville Town Center and historic Walker -Stone House. Figure 49. Lights of the Ozarks. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 40 3.2.2 Historic Preservation Ordinance Fayetteville's 1979 historic preservation ordinance (2509, as revised) was established to safeguard and manage the City's historic resources (City of Fayetteville Code 33,226). Specifically, the purpose of the ordinance is to; Effect and accomplish the protection, enhancement, and perpetuation of districts that reflect the City's cultural, social, economic, political, and architectural history; Safeguard the City's historic, aesthetic, and cultural heritage as embodied and reflected in such areas; Stabilize and improve property values in such districts; Foster civic pride in the beauty and accomplishments of the past; Protect and enhance the City's attractions to tourists and visitors as well as residents; Strengthen the economy of the City; and Promote the use of historic districts and landmarks for the education, pleasure, and welfare of the people of the City, The ordinance established the City's ability to form an HDC to administer the goals and purpose of the law. It also grants the City the ability to designate historic districts via a local ordinance and oversee alterations and demolitions to properties within locally designated districts. Aside from indicating that local historic districts should have "special historic community or architectural value;' there is no designation criteria, nor is there an application process by which a member of the public or a group of individuals could seek designation. The ordinance uses language related to "historic landmarks;' but following state law, it does not provide for the designation of individual properties, just historic districts. The ordinance does not apply to properties designated at the state or federal levels, unless also designated at the local level, 32.2.1 Historic District Commission The 1979 historic preservation ordinance (2509; 986-503) outlines the composition and duties of the HDC,51 The HDC is a seven -member body tasked with safeguarding the heritage of Fayetteville and promoting the education, health, and welfare of the public through these preservation activities. Specific duties include undertaking historic resources surveys, keeping a register of designated historic properties, nominating resources to the NRHP, providing suggestions to the City Council on potential local historic districts, adopting design guidelines for local historic districts, assessing the appropriateness of proposed exterior alterations and demolitions to properties in local historic districts, providing advice to historic property homeowners, and communicating with the AHPP or other historical associations, 1_4 t It �A Figure 50. Center Street faci the�ourthouse. 1 .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 41 rkip The HDC may also provide comments and advice on general City planning matters pertaining to historic preservation and historic preservation plans and ordinances. Those who serve on the Commission are appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the City Council (City Code 33,227), All members must be electors of the city, not employed by the City or elected to municipal office. Members serve three-year terms, Additionally, the HDC has adopted bylaws to provide a structure and operating procedures for HDC meetings and other activities. The most recent set of bylaws were adopted in February of 2023, which increased meeting intervals from every other month to the second Thursday of every month. Per Arkansas CLG Procedures ClA and C,1,13 (issued in 1985, revised in 2001), at least five commissioners should possess expertise in historic preservation -related fields including archaeology, architecture, history, landscape architecture, planning, or other related fields." If a community lacks professionals or individuals with relevant expertise, the _ City must demonstrate that the government make a reasonable effort to fill the vacancy with a preservation - related professiona1.13 To assist with training and professional development of the commission, the City may actively explore training options offered by various organizations, especially remote options that reduce travel and funding expenditures, If a matter is being reviewed that requires expert assistance, the HDC must consult with a professional. For archaeology matters, an archaeologist may be contacted from the Arkansas Archaeology Survey. Otherwise, a private consultant or pro bono professional who meets appropriate qualifications may also be contacted, Information on appropriate qualifications can be viewed in Appendix F; Secretary of the Interior Professional Qualifications, Commissioners receive training at the outset of their appointment and during their term, Written materials like the bylaws, historic preservation ordinance, Arkansas CLG requirements, and other resources are provided to new commissioners. Annually, HDC members are invited to attend training administered by the AHPP CLG program. In 2023, the City plans to complete the Commission Assistance and Mentoring Program (CAMP) offered by the National Alliance of Preservation Commissions (NAPC), NAPC is an independent organization dedicated to supporting local preservation programs throughout the United States. One of many NAPC programs, CAMP provides municipalities with the ability to customize training to focus on specific topics or areas of interest. Trainers at CAMP include attorneys, commissioners, government employees, and commission partners,54 .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 42 The 1979 ordinance (2509) allows for the establishment of local historic districts; the exteriors of historic resources in a district are regulated by the HDC. Fayetteville has established one local historic district; the White Hangar Local Historic District at Drake Field airport at the south end of the Fayetteville city limits. 3.2.2.3 Certificates of Appropriateness Owners of properties in Fayetteville local historic districts who wish to make exterior alterations must apply for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA), A COA is a design approval issued by the City allowing a property owner to perform work on the exterior of any building in a local historic district. The COA process requires the review of applicable design standards and the submission of an application and plans for review by the HDC or staff. A qualifying resource in a local historic district must be granted a COA before any building permit or other permit will be granted. A COA is required for a qualifying resource even in cases where a building permit is not required. Resources may be buildings, walls, fences, light fixtures, steps, paving, or other elements specified in the local historic district design guidelines, The COA process ensures that the special character of the historic district is preserved by meeting adopted design standards based on the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation (Appendix E; Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation), Ordinary maintenance and repairs, work required for public safety, or work not visible from the public right-of-way does not require a COA, After the filing of a COA, a public hearing is held to review the application. A COA may be approved or denied based on HDC analysis. Failure to comply with the COA process may result in a stop work order and a fine. A COA is also required for the demolition, relocation, or restoration of any building in a local historic district. Figure 52. Parade on Block Street, 41 ON- Al2 FURNITU .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 43 �.4 •� �v✓ �t It 3.2.2.3.1 Design Guidelines White Hangar Local Historic District The City adopted design guidelines for the White Hangar Local Historic District based on the SOI Standards for Rehabilitation. These guidelines are general and are not customized to the hangar building, Washington -Willow NRHP Historic District In 2019, the City commissioned design guidelines for the Washington -Willow NRHP Historic District. However, since the i district is not designated locally, these guidelines are not currently used for regulatory design review. The document, however, provides a strong example for the development of historic design guidelines for future local historic districts, ft 'Aft 3.3 Certified Local Government As a CLG, the City has entered into a partnership with the AHPP and the NPS to preserve local community resources according to national historic preservation standards, It has committed to the following; - Establishing a qualified historic preservation commission that provides an advisory role to officials and City departments regarding historic preservation; • Enforcing appropriate state or local legislation for the designation and protection of historic properties, typically through a local historic preservation ordinance; • Maintaining a system for the survey and inventory of local historic resources; • Facilitating public participation in local preservation, including review of NRHP nominations; and • Following additional requirements allowed in the State's CLG procedures and holding meetings in accordance with the Open Public Meeting Law of Arkansas (State Code §25-19-106), The Arkansas SHPO monitors the state's 21 CLGs and evaluates their performance every four years to ensure that each local government is fulfilling the requirements for certification.51 Fayetteville has been in good standing with the program since joining, The SHPO will issue their next evaluation of Fayetteville in early 2023 with recommendations for future work. Figure 53. East Side of Square (ca. 1910). .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 44 3.4 Black Heritage Preservation Commission Established in 2021, the Black Heritage Preservation Commission (BHPC) is a seven -member body created to recognize, acknowledge, protect, and preserve historical resources and cemeteries associated with Black heritage, with special regard for Fayetteville's early Black families and =1�` individuals and the churches and other cultural resources they built. The BHPC is also tasked to create Black Historical •. Markers that recognize the struggles and achievements of Fayetteville's Black citizens to promote diversity and equality. The BHPC may work with the HDC to coordinate their r,#, preservation goals. They may also recommend protection measures for historical Black resources to the City Council and the HDC. Commissioners are appointed by the Mayor and include a Council Member, a member familiar with the y historical Black churches of Fayetteville, and five members at large (City Code 33.442). BHPC commission members typically serve three-year terms. The BHPC meets monthly. -- 3.5 Preserve America Community Fayetteville is one of 26 Preserve America communities in Arkansas and one of more than 900 in the U,S,66 Administered by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), the designation recognizes communities that protect and celebrate their local heritage, use historic resources for economic development and community revitalization, and encourage individuals to experience historic resources through education and heritage tourism. The program historically provided grants to Preserve America communities but has not issued awards since 2009. Funds may be appropriated in the future. The City of Fayetteville uses Preserve America branding on its website. Figure 54. Downtown Mural, :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 45 Figure 55, Johnson Plumbing, The Opening of Johnson Plumbing Presently known as the High Roller Cyclery located in the Meadow Spring NRHP Historic District, 3.6 Completed Historic Resources Surveys Nineteen historic resources surveys have been conducted in Fayetteville since 1971 (Table 6).57 In total, 1,032 resources have been documented, Most are residential and commercial resources, except for the U of A campus and the VA Hospital. The reconnaissance -level of documentation was typically used, but a few projects, including Butterfield Overland Mail Route, Pratt Place Farm, and Drake Field, were intensive -level evaluations. Most did not have a historic context to provide a framework for identifying and evaluating historic resources and those that did were not organized thematically, the current industry standard. Until recently, surveys conducted in coordination with the AHPP only required the completion of survey forms, not survey reports. Therefore, there is little or no documentation about the survey area selection, methodology, analysis, and findings. In addition to municipally sponsored historic resources surveys, some surveys are conducted for regulatory reasons, such as the 2012 survey of the VA Hospital, which was sponsored by the United States Department of Veterans Affairs in compliance with the NHPA. Regulatory studies may have resulted in determinations of eligibility for the NRHP, and the results can guide preservation planning efforts; however, such studies conducted in Fayetteville were not available for this project. Many Fayetteville surveys, both past and recent, have resulted in historic designations (Section 2,2),58 For instance, after the 1971-1974 Big Spring survey, the Washington -Willow NRHP Historic District was designated in 1980. In 1991-1992, that historic district was resurveyed, which led to the expansion of the district's boundaries in 1995. Since 2006, the City has conducted eight historic resources surveys, seven of which led to the creation of NRHP historic districts. This demonstrates a strong existing commitment to documentation followed by NRHP designation. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 46 Table 6, Historic Resources Surveys59 Date Survey Area Documented Resources Primary Time Period of Outcome Documented Resources 1971-74 Big Spring 72 buildings in the Mid-19th to early-20th 1980 Washington - Washington -Willow century Willow NRHP neighborhood Historic District 1983-84 West Dickson Commercial buildings along Early-20th century Documented Street West Dickson Street individual properties 1984 Lafayette Gregg Residences northwest of Early-20th century Documented downtown near the university individual properties 1991-92 Washington- Resurveyed residential Mid-19th to early-20th Updated Willow NRHP properties in the 1980 century Washington - Historic District Washington -Willow NRHP Willow NRHP resurvey Historic District Historic District 1992 Mount Nord Resurveyed five houses in Early-20th century Updated Mount NRHP Historic the 1982 Mount Nord NRHP Nord NRHP District resurvey Historic District Historic District 1992 Wilson Park Craftsman bungalow Early- to Mid-20th 1995 Wilson Park neighborhood south of Wilson century Historic District Park 1993-94 Downtown Select commercial buildings Early-20th century Several Square around the Downtown Square individual NRHP designations 1994-96 Root School- Mid-20th-century residential Mid-20th century Several Ridgeway View buildings in the Root School- individual NRHP Ridgeway View area northeast designations of downtown 1998 Pratt Place Farm Intensive -level survey of an Early-20th century No resources agricultural complex determined eligible for the NRHP or ARHP 2000-01 Lake Lucille Architect -designed houses Mid-20th century Several around Lake Lucille individual NRHP designations 2006 West Dickson Properties along West Dickson Early-20th century 2007 West Street Street in downtown Dickson Street Commercial NRHP Historic District 2008 University of Historical campus core Early- to Mid-20th 2009 University of Arkansas century Arkansas Campus NRHP Historic District �W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 47 Historic Resources Surveys (continued) Date Survey Area Documented Resources Primary Time Period of Outcome Documented Resources 2008 Washington Approximately 20 Early- to Mid-20th century No resources County resources determined eligible for Fairgrounds the NRHP or ARHP 2008 Butterfield A historic stagecoach Mid-19th century 2009 Butterfield Overland Mail route in Lake Fayetteville Overland Mail Route Route Park Fayetteville Segments NRHP Historic District 2010 Mount Sequoyah Approximately 50 Mid-20th century 2012 Mount Sequoyah Cottages resources of mixed use Cottages NRHP Historic District comprising two cottages 2012 VA Hospital Approximately 30 Mid-20th century 2012 Veterans resources Administration Hospital NRHP Historic District 2017 Meadow Spring Residential neighborhood Early-20th century 2019 Meadow Springs south of West Dickson NRHP Historic District Street 2020 University Mid-20th century Mid-20th century 2021 North Garvin Heights residences Drive NRHP Historic District 2022 Drake Field Recorded aviation -related Mid-20th century Determined several resources not previously airport buildings documented eligible for the NRHP - W_clevelan!} St _ 17 ;l o ! l� 2,000 N[- __L O Feet I —II 1�� (r�`_ �` • �— • P f �t - N •� _- W•_Maple Sts - = �r — 1 , • • - 1 — • � • �• W Di'cksontSl��.' • • • • �i li 11 �� �� pM Air Fayetteville •"•1 Ili �i �+ --. - -- W-Stone sl - - • • ,. W Mitchell St-- AL • Unknown Figure 56. Surveys in central Fayetteville. • R Qu,, • R40UNT 7 SLOU0YAH ••• � 1719 R :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 48 3.7 Existing Historic Designations 3.7.1 Local, ARHP, and NRHP Listings Historic properties are designated at the local, state, and federal levels in Fayetteville.60 Though local designations provide historic resources with the greatest protections, the City only has one local historic district comprising a single building (Figure 60). Fayetteville has more than ten NRHP historic districts and numerous NRHP properties (Table 7, Figure 61). The city has several ARHP-designated properties, in addition to the NRHP properties which are automatically listed in the ARHP. However, the NRHP and ARHP designations are largely honorary and exempt from regulatory review unless the property is involved in a project that receives federal funding or requires federal licensing or permitting. Therefore, local historic districts are the best designation option for preserving historic resources. Over sixty Fayetteville properties are individually listed in the NRHP. Most are designated for their architectural significance. Others illustrate important events, trends, or people associated with the city's commercial, educational, exploration and settlement, health and medicine, military, politics and government, transportation, religious, and social history, among other topics. None of the properties nominated so far appear to be designated for their association with historically underrepresented people. Appendix H includes a list of property addresses in NRHP and local historic districts, as well as individual NRHP properties within the city limits. Figure 59. VA Medical Center. Photo by U.S, Army in May 1937`' Figure 57 House in Mount Nord NRHP Historic District. Figure 58, House Meadow Spring NRHP Historic District, 1 .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 49 Table 7 National Register of Historic Places Historic Districts in Fayetteville, Arkansas Name Year Listed Criteria Area(s) of Significance Level of Significance Washington -Willow 1980 A, C Architecture Local Historic District Community Planning Economics Education Law Veterans Administration 1980 A, C Architecture State Hospital District Health/Medicine Politics/Government Mount Nord 1982 A, C Architecture Local Historic District Commerce Politics/Government Wilson Park 1995 C Architecture Local Historic District West Dickson Street Commercial 2007 A, C Architecture Local Historic District Commerce University of Arkansas Campus 2009 A, C Architecture State Historic District Education Butterfield Overland Mail Route 2009 A Transportation State Fayetteville Segments Historic District Mount Sequoyah Cottages 2012 A Religion State Historic District Meadow Springs 2019 A, C Architecture Local Historic District Community Planning Benjamin Franklin Johnson II 2019 A, C Architecture Local Homestead District Agriculture North Garvin Drive 2021 C Architecture Local Historic District National Register of Historic Places 11 Historic Districts City of Fayetteville 1 Local Historic District Over 60 Individual Property Listings Figure 60. Designation Tally, :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 50 W Bailey Dr cu U) (n --,WjShort St- 4, w. Roadrunner Dixon St- RMIF L I A > W. T14-50 > W Wilson St 8- z CL m W Horn St z • \N Cir'cle Dr' —S-N' �ji. -P, co �AFrisc. S McCollum AvEl via p I \,Nilsov) \�O\\Ovj Rc C- D Figure 62, Properties in the NRHP and ARHP. dtk 28 ft Steele Rn I Lake a9 Johnson Fayetteville z 9� \,,, �i E Zion Rd m. ; m E Joys o 71 w PBi o v �d 2 z x weir Rd D a W Weir Rd ° Fayetteville s 71 ° City Limits —`e W Mt=Comfort=Rd > n -W Deane -St fr m d e Rock Zn9t ozW on -Dr _z ® • v�o ��' �=W North St Z- z / 2 1691 a / W Cleveland St 1 ersmmon St O o �i "'•�; MQCINT 'n • O _-SEQUO•YAH ' • ® • • - tteV111P, ��• �i :® ° < • , a�i r ,�, ��\��• - — __ - - - = y41ntsville.Rd- 0 In 62 McNair FaFaetferm�•��;ton Y Junction - -� o Wolfdab: E 0 SOU MOON: Appleby 18 r Mi c,U1f Sunrise Ln I UNTA z o NRHP Property I • ARHP Listed Property Gr enla O NRHP District n s' 0 2 Miles A �� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION FINCH CA l� CHAPTER 3 1 52 3.7.2 National Historic Trails Administered by the NPS, the National Historic Trails (NHT) program documents, programs, and preserves over 25,000 miles of linear trail networks. Two of the program's trails are in Fayetteville and surrounding areas. The 1838-1839 Native American Trail of Tears was designated an NHT in 1987. The Butterfield Overland Route, a southwestern stagecoach route in service from 1858 to 1861, was designated an NHT in 2023 (S. 3519) (Figure 66).61 Although NHTs are administered by the NPS, the entirety of the trail route is not automatically eligible for the NRHP, Each trail may have NRHP-eligible sites and segments that provide opportunity to interpret its historic significance. For example, two segments of the Butterfield Overland Mail Route in Lake Fayetteville Park were listed in the NRHP in 2008. 3.7.3 Historical Markers Fayetteville has two Arkansas Civil War markers, one Arkansas Historic Marker for a cemetery, and one Community Remembrance Project marker (Table 8). The Equal Justice Initiative, a national nonprofit organization that works to challenge racial and economic injustice, created the Community Remembrance Project historical marker program to document diverse histories. The Fayetteville marker acknowledges historical racial terrorism in Washington County. The newly formed Fayetteville BHPC has the authority to create Black Historical Markers; the first being installed in 2023 honoring Nelson Hackett, an enslaved person from Fayetteville who escaped to Canada in 1841 helping to establish extradition protections for formerly enslaved Americans seeking refuge north of the border.12 See Appendix G for more information on historical marker guidance and program development. See an inventory of historical markers by l.B. Hogan on the City's website. Figure 63. Butterfield Overland Mail Route. Source; Fayetteville Historyz Figure 64, Trail of Tears Sign. Source; The Arkansas Democrat -Gazette AA Figure 65. Community Remembrance Project. Source; Equal Justice Initiative AB .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 53 Figure 66. National Historic Trails. 71' Elm Springs 601 S61 Oak Grove atz Tontitown c � 41 w o Harmon s t G o A z ■ i Spring dales r A I r r r 1428 Jt C n e � Johnson Fayettevi; e ti 31 893 Park, ti OA, . Wheeler • ' Mud Greek Trail �. Corridor ' 7t ' TKamestrin9 s• • Creek Trail c S f • Corridor ° U y'• Wlr e Rock 2 i ' ' z •. ' ' 9 ti • Faysl eville ��• ,. Farm , • .. � p Kessler .' i N Mountain a A lab oval P, - PP y .;' Walnut Grove Miller ,a' q Mountain f I I Stevenson Mountain • '32 1668 ft i [2] Sonora Fayetteville City Limits 7 � GUY Terry Rd 113SS1 Habberton 8�� d Pare Black Oak Harris c 1577 Butterfield Overland Route National Historic Trail 7r ... _ Trail of Tears National Historic Trail N BlD 2 Mountain in Miles Ell .A HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 54 Table 8, Historical Markers Type Name Date Location Arkansas Civil War 150 Markers David Walker 2013 East Rock Street and South Walker Road Arkansas Civil War 150 Markers Mount Comfort in the Civil War 2014 North Rupple Road and Starry Night View Arkansas Historic Marker Evergreen Cemetery, Fayetteville 2018 724 West Center Street Community Remembrance Project Racial Terrorism in Washington County 2021 Oaks Cemetery 3.7.4 Easements Conservation easements administered by the AHPP or by a nonprofit organization are present in Fayetteville, The AHPP has four conservation easements in Fayetteville and the NWA Land Trust holds 18 easements in Washington County (Table 9). AHPP easements prioritize protection of historic properties, whereas easements owned and managed by NWA Land Trust focus on land preservation. Table 9. Easements Figure 67 Woolsey Homestead pre -restoration, West Side Prairie, adjacent to the Woolsey Farm is protected by easement. Type Name Description AHPP 206 West Dickson Street ca. 1906 Queen Anne -style house in downtown AHPP Evergreen Cemetery ca. 1838 cemetery (NR 1997) NWA Historic Johnson Farm 168-acre ca, 1908 Johnson Farm NWA Kessler Mountain Reserve 386 acres around Kessler Mountain NWA Leflar Family 50 acres in south Fayetteville protecting the scenic viewshed along Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard NWA Lukens -Bachmann 128 acres along the West Fork of White River NWA Sutherland Fayetteville 10 acres of Markham Hill NWA Town Branch Preserve 0,77-acre pocket park along Town Branch AHPP Walker -Stone House 1845 brick house built by Judge David Walker (NR 1970) AHPP Washington County Courthouse 1905 Richardsonian Romanesque -style building (NR 1972) NWA West Side Prairie 38 acres adjacent to the Woolsey Farmstead NWA Wilson Springs Preserve 121 acres of the Clabber Creek headwaters :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 55 3.8 Evaluation Evaluating the City's historic preservation program and progress is an important step in planning for the future. This section describes the City's preservation -related successes and challenges, evaluates the existing historic preservation ordinance, reviews other City plans and studies for historic preservation components, analyzes how the City manages data and uses preservation - related incentives, and compares historic preservation in Fayetteville with other cities. 3.8.1 Successes and Challenges The City has achieved many successes since establishing its preservation program; however, it has also had historic preservation -related challenges (Table 10). This plan seeks to build on its successes and address key concerns. Table 10. Historic Preservation Successes and Challenges Successes Challenges Many NRHP properties and Minimal survey districts documentation outside central Numerous historic resources Fayetteville and of resources surveys associated with diverse CLG program participant histories Engaging programs and Only one local historic district projects like the historic home comprising one resource tours, preservation awards, Lack of public understanding and participation in National about historic preservation Historic Preservation Month and how it works Preservation projects at the Lack of public support for Woolsey Farm Homestead, local historic districts Lafayette Street Bridge, and No local historic district the Porter Building/Apple designation criteria or public Warehouse process to pursue designation BHPC established No economic incentives for Preservation -related website preservation content No demolition review for Design guidelines historical properties Frequent historic preservation Lack of professional historic grant recipient preservation expertise on Presence of local knowledge HDC on HDC Increasing demands on staff Historic Sites Map time to manage preservation program Development pressures in old and historic neighborhoods No allocated preservation program funding Lack of use of HTCs .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 56 you are beautiful 3.8.2 Ordinance Evaluation Fayetteville's historic preservation ordinance provides the legal framework for the City's historic preservation program. It is ultimately the City's responsibility to ensure that the ordinance is followed; however, much of the work is carried out by the HDC through the nine powers and duties assigned to them by the ordinance. As shown below, each of the powers or duties was evaluated to ascertain if the HDC and City has fulfilled their historic preservation responsibilities (Table 11). All powers and duties have been addressed to some degree, but work remains to continue effective ordinance administration. Table 11. HDC Ordinance Evaluation HDC Powers and Duties Status Adopt design review Addressed. Guidelines have been guidelines to be used when established for White Hangar Local considering Certificate of Historic District; however, the Appropriateness applications. guidelines have not been customized These guidelines will be based to the hangar property, Guidelines upon the Secretary of Interior's have also been created for the Standards for Rehabilitation Washington -Willow neighborhood, and adapted specifically to but they are not in use because the Fayetteville's local ordinance area is not a local historic district. historic districts. Conduct surveys and studies Partially addressed. The City has a of neighborhoods, areas, long history of conducting historic places, structures, objects, and resources surveys; however, improvements within the City documentation efforts have of Fayetteville for the purpose focused on reconnaissance -level of determining those of documentation of the city's oldest distinctive historic, community, areas. Many areas have not been architectural, or archaeological assessed and contextual history is interest or value limited. Nominate buildings, structures, Partially addressed. Although many objects, and historic districts to properties are listed in the NRHP the NRHP in Fayetteville, the HDC could take a more active role in the process of identifying properties for nomination and assisting with nomination development (beyond reviewing nominations prepared by others). Figure 69, You are Beautiful Building Artwork by Matthew Hoffman (2021), .W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 57 HDC Ordinance Evaluation Continued HDC Powers and Duties I status Keep a register of all properties and structures that have been designated as historically significant including all information required for each designation Obtain the services of qualified persons to direct, advise and assist the Historic District Commission Advise and assist owners of historic properties within historic districts on physical and financial aspects of preservation, renovation, rehabilitation, and reuse, and on procedures for inclusion on the NRHP Hold public hearings to review applications for Certificates of Appropriateness Cooperate with the AHPP, historical associations, and other agencies and organizations devoted to the history of this city and state Partially addressed. The Historic Sites story map depicts NRHP properties and districts, properties designed by E. Fay Jones, and non -registered sites. NRHP designation information, like links to nomination files, is limited. The map data does not clearly convey the designation status of properties/districts. The list of non -registered sites includes properties that do not appear to have historic significance and/or are not historic age, which could be confusing to members of the public, Addressed. Two City staff members perform this task. The City also retains SOI-qualified professionals to complete special projects. Partially addressed. The HDC provides review for NRHP nominations and general assistance to property owners, but programs/information are not in place that address all aspects of this item. Addressed. One COA application has been received for the White Hangar Local District. Otherwise, application review is not a regular activity of the commission, due to a scarcity of regulated resources. Partially addressed. The City collaborates with the AHPP as a CLG. Work remains to connect the City with other local organizations to accomplish historic preservation goals. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 58 3.8.3 Planning Context and Alignment The City has adopted numerous existing long-range plans to guide the growth and management of properties in the community. Each plan was assessed to identify existing historic preservation components and ways in which the plan may impact historic preservation. (Table 14). planning efforts. Table 12, Plan Alignment Plan Relation to Historic Preservation Topics to Consider Active Transportation Improves connectivity Improving access in historic areas Plan (2020) Reduces car dependency Compatible infrastructure (e.g., granite curbs, etc.) Bond 2019 Provides funding for projects in downtown Compatibility with historic character of downtown City Plan 2040 (2019) Encourages adaptive reuse, rehab, and Targeted growth centers' impact deconstruction to historic properties and Promotes preservation of community resources character 71B Corridor (2020) Encourages preservation of historic Opportunities for designation and character and mid- twentieth century historic interpretation resources Cultural Arts Corridor Improves connectivity and tourism in Compatibility with historic (2021) downtown character of downtown Digital Inclusion Plan Improves Internet access for preservation Compatibility with historic (2019) activities (e,g„ tours, events, meetings, character etc.) Small Cell Installation (2017) Downtown Master Plan Encourages use of AHPP grants for Infill development and its (2004) revitalization efforts compatibility with historic character of downtown Drainage Improvement Addresses the threat of flooding Readying historic buildings for Plan (2018) future flood events Economic Development Encourages adaptive reuse and Adherence to Secretary of Plan (2016) redevelopment of historic buildings the Interior Standards of downtown Rehabilitation for historic buildings Possible restoration project at the 1911 post office Economic Recovery and Ensures a strong local economy with Utilize historic preservation as a Vitality Plan (2021) an emphasis on small business and resource to the local economy workforce development IVA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 59 Plan Alignment Continued Plan Relation to Historic Preservation Topics to Consider Energy Action Plan (2017) Highlights benefit of historic preservation Ability to integrate sustainable over new construction energy with historic preservation Reduction of construction waste Fayetteville Mobility Plan Improves connectivity and equitable Compatibility with historic (2018) transit access character Master Street Plan (2020) Improves connectivity to historic areas Compatibility with historic character Landscape changes Neighborhood Plans Features historic resources that are being The redesign of Walker Park and Walker Park (2008) preserved its preservation of the design and resources A more complete history of the park land and surrounding lands Wedington Corridor (2012) Improves connectivity and infill Compatibility with historic development opportunities, relieving character pressure from downtown Landscape changes Fayetteville Junction (2009) Improves connectivity and infill Compatibility with historic development opportunities, relieving character pressure from downtown Landscape changes Parks Master Plan (2023) Sets preservation plan for historic Adherence to SOI Standards resources in city parks Rehabilitation for historic resources Parking Master Plan (2016) Improves parking areas for downtown Landscape changes Recycling & Trash Master Improves waste management services Deconstruction and salvaging of Plan (2017) historic materials Sewer Master Plan (2014) Improves water/sewer planning and Updating infrastructure in older management areas/for older buildings Water Master Plan (2017) Washington County Identifies natural hazards Preparing historic buildings for Hazard Mitigation Plan future hazards and post -storm (2015) repairs63 Welcoming Fayetteville Strives for inclusion and integration of Celebration of untold histories Plan (2018) new Americans Improve diversity of resources and HDC membership Provide multilingual resources �W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 60 3.8.4 Data Management and Availability Historic preservation programs require management of large amounts of information and data accessible to staff, commissioners, and members of the public. Described next are the types of information the City must manage and how it is currently managed. Designations and Departmental Coordination; NRHP nominations have been made available via the HDC homepage for relevant meetings (prior to review by the State Review Board). However, these documents are not available in a central location. Although regular review of historic preservation in other City projects is not required, it would be helpful for the City to make this documentation available to residents on the City's website. Demolitions; Demolition permits are currently tracked by the City using the Energov program. Digital demolition data from 2014 to present was available for this plan analysis, although limited information was captured or transcribed into digital format until 2020. As of 2022, the associated addresses for demolition permits are readily apparent, but the online interface is difficult to navigate and does not appear to allow easy differentiation between the complete razing of an entire building versus partial demolition or removal of interior walls. Survey Work; City staff do not have access to all prior survey documentation and the lack of GIS-spatial data is a barrier to historic preservation planning for Fayetteville. Former surveys, whether regulatory or elective, should be included on the City's website or at least be cataloged for internal departmental use. Public Meetings; The HDC and BHPC have done well to document and archive public meetings. The meetings, which are held in the evening at City Hall, are easy to access and appropriately timed and noticed. Spanish translation assistance services are available, upon request. The commissions have access to the city attorney, upon request. The meeting agenda, minutes, and staff reports are published online. Prior meetings are video -recorded and stored for the public. 2 .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 61 i r � nFRc CLt Social Media; The City has improved its social media presence in recent years, but continued work is needed to include historic preservation news and updates in the newsfeed. Facebook remains the main City's primary social media platform, which may limit interaction and engagement with younger audiences who are more likely to use Instagram, Snapchat or TikTok, I Website; The City's website contains seven web pages dedicated to historic preservation; the program webpage (https;//www,fayetteville-ar. gov/776/Historic-Preservation) and webpages for the HDC and BHPC. Within the homepage, separate pages are present for the Washington - Willow Design Standards, the Woolsey Farmstead and Wet Prairie project, and the Fayetteville Historic Preservation Awards. A story map developed on ArcGIS Online provides the public with an interactive mapping platform showing NRHP properties and districts, as well as properties with no historic designation. A review of the website identified the following areas for improvement; The website does not provide information describing the difference between local and NRHP historic districts; how to nominate a local historic district; preservation -related funding opportunities, and other topics Maps accessed through the Quick Links do not clearly indicate the NRHP designation or contributing/noncontributing status of buildings The brochure present under Fayetteville's Historic and Significant Architecture is outdated and includes broken links The Historic Sites StoryMap does not differentiate between NRHP, ARHP, and locally listed properties; does not provide links to designation files; and includes nonhistoric properties There is no link from the "Historic Preservation" page to the BHPC page There is no information about the White Hangar Local Historic District 3.8.5 Use of Preservation Incentives Fayetteville has received 42 historic preservation grants since 1971. Since 1993, the City has made 25 grant requests and was awarded 17 of those with a total value of $159,123. This number is relatively low for a city of Fayetteville's size; smaller cities in Arkansas received more than twice this amount during the same period. Cities like Conway and El Dorado have received more than $267,000 and $1.1 million dollars, respectively, in AHPP Grant Awards since 1979. The Main Street Arkansas program also offers historic preservation funding opportunities to members. Fayetteville was a member of the Downtown Network of the Main Street program in 2014 but left the program after a few years. Fayetteville has also leveraged fewer HTCs and other incentives than other Arkansas cities (Table 13). Only four Fayetteville projects used state HTCs since the program's creation in 2009 despite numerous downtown buildings being suitable for state and federal HTC projects.66 Figure 72. Merchants Club in 1912. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 62 Table 13. Preservation Incentives in Arkansas City Pop (2020)61 AHPP Grants Total HTC Projects State HTC State+Federal HTC* MSA Membership Little Rock 202.5K $4.61VI 196 ($109M) 131 ($31.7M) 65 ($777M) 2006 Fayetteville 93.9K $159.1K 7 ($1.7M) 4 ($100K) 2 ($471K)1 ($1.1M)** N/A*** Fort Smith 89.1K $967K 18 ($15.5M) 3 ($469K) 15 ($15M) 2020 N. Little Rock 64.5K $911K 25 ($77M) 1 10 ($1.9M) 15 ($5.7M) 1994 Conway 64.1K $267K 11 ($2.9M) 15 ($403K) 1 6 ($2.5M) 1987 Hot Springs 379K $967K 16 ($15.5K) 19 ($3.5M) 1 7 ($11.1M) 1986 El Dorado 177K $1.1M 7 ($33.9M) 4 ($2.1M) 3 ($31.8M) 1988 Batesville 11.1K $1.3M 6 ($1.2M) 3 ($336K) 3 ($905K) 1984 Helena 19.5K $3.61VI 5 ($951K) 2 ($331K) 3 ($620K) 1984 *Represents the combined state and federal HTC amount, **Federal HTC only, ***Active in 201468 3.8.6 Program Benchmark This section analyzes Fayetteville's preservation program compared to communities of similar size, economy, and natural landscape, including the CLG communities of Asheville and Chapel Hill, North Carolina; Boulder and Fort Collins, Colorado; and Lawrence, Kansas (Figure 74). Like Fayetteville, these cities have made a commitment to historic preservation and are attractive destinations for visitors, businesses, and new residents. In comparison to these cities, Fayetteville has made progress with NRHP designations, but it lacks local historic designations, historic resource regulation, and incentives for local designations, Fayetteville has recently taken steps to initiate historic preservation related to Black heritage, but other cities have gone farther, through work like a thematic survey of Black properties and a Civil Rights historic context. Other cities also have developed more web content, including informational videos, The number of properties subject to active regulations are the most notable contrast to between Fayetteville and the other cities, all of which have multiple local historic districts and local landmarks regulated by the COA process, Some also have adopted additional regulations, like demolition review of all buildings over 50 years old and or an environs buffer around historic districts to prevent encroaching development from affecting the historic setting. While Fayetteville lacks dedicated funding, other cities have appropriated funds to expand their historic preservation impact. Fayetteville has dedicated planning staff, but the program administration is shared with other areas of work, limiting the amount of time available for historic preservation. Figure 73. House at 828 Skyline Drive by Fay Jones (1960). .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 63 Fort Collins, CO POPULATION 169,810 Local Designations: Four local historic districts, 230landmarks Attractions: Universities, scenic landscape, and proximityto other populations centers Program: -Historic preservation incentives like rehabilitation loans, design assistance grants, and otherfunding options -Focus on reducing construction waste -Currently developing a series of seven historic contexts focusing on the i iLBights Movement -Numerous infdr ional videos ty's website -Has dedicated program fundinjar d has completed _ more than seventy grant projects ' -City has a Historic-Nservation Department with multiple full-time staff and an Historic Preservation Officer Boulder, CO POPULATION 104,175 Local Designations: Ten local historic districts, 200 landmarks Attractions: Scenic landscape, universities, and proximity to other population centers Program: -Demolition reviews for buildings more than fifty years old. -For contributing buildings in local historic districts, city sales tax waiver on construction materials if at least 30 percent of the work is exterior -Zoning variance and exemption options for historic properties -In addition to local landmarks, the city's Structures of Merit program provides an honorary designation but no requirement for design review by the city -No dedicated program funding -Two planners support program; Historic Preservation Planner serves as program manager -Sixteen surveys have been completed since 1977 -Fourteen documents, including historic contexts on the city's B lack and Swedish populations, have been created since 1988 Figure 74, Comparable Cities."' Lawrence, KS POPULATION 94,934 Local Designations: Two local historic districts Attractions: University and proximity to other population centers Asheville, NC POPULATION 94,589 Local Designations: Four local historic districts, 50 landmarks Attractions: Scenic landscape, universities, and Biltmore Estate NHL property Program: -Recently completed an African American Heritage Resource Survey and has completed various neighborhood surveys -Has landscape design guidelines in addition to traditional historic district design guidelines -Buncombe County landmarks are eligible for a 50 percent tax deferral, in addition to state and federal tax credit programs -Program is funded -Historic Preservation Planner serves as the program manager Fayetteville POPULATION 93,582 Local Designations: One local historic district comprising a single property Attractions: University, scenic landscape, and high concentration of Modernistic architecture Program: -Strong recent survey and NRHP designation efforts -Has taken steps to address racial inequity in historic preservation through the BHPC -No process for citizens to nominate local historic districts -No local financial incentives for historic preservation -No local landmarks (due to barriers in State law) -No direct funding -Designated staff, but less than 10 percent of staff time is dedicated to historic preservation Chapel Hill, NC POPULATION 61,960 Local Designations: Three local historic districts Attractions: Universities and proximity to other population centers Program: -Recently updated design guidelines for its historic districts at the citywide level that include specifications for landscape design and outdoor lighting -No local financial incentives -No dedicated program funding -Senior Planner serves as program manager -Has not completed surveys or developed historic contexts in recent years �W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3 1 64 4. Stakeholder & Community Engagement Contents Public input is crucial to any municipal planning process. This chapter summarizes the stakeholder and community engagement efforts that informed the development of this plan. 4, Stakeholder & Community Engagement...............65 4.1 Stakeholder Engagement.................................................66 4.2 Community Meetings ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,66 4.3 Community Opinion Survey...........................................67 4.3.1 Survey Results ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,67 Figure 75. September 2022 Community Meeting, A community involvement plan was developed at the onset of this project to define the community engagement approach, develop a comprehensive communication strategy, increase outreach accessibility, and provide opportunities for feedback and community conversation.71 Following a series of stakeholder engagement meetings and community meetings, a community opinion survey was released to the public. Press releases and social media were used to inform the public about the opportunities to participate in the meetings and survey. The Fayetteville Public Library and City staff provided support to individuals with Internet connectivity issues as well as those with impairments and disabilities in completing the survey. A Spanish -language version of the survey was made available at the City's Historic Preservation Office. All activities were productive with high attendance and feedback. Overall, community members overwhelmingly indicated that they support historic preservation in Fayetteville. Participants prioritized historic preservation initiatives for the next ten years and identified general areas, properties, and types of buildings that they believe are worthy of preservation. Analysis Stakeholders —> Community —> Plan Existing Conditions Analysis Stakeholder Engagement Community Meeting Evaluation Community Involvement Plan City of Fayetteville Staff Community Opinion Survey Strategic Plan Figure 76, Planning and Engagement Process. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STAKEHOLDER & COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT CHAPTER 4 1 65 4.1 Stakeholder Engagement The City selected seven stakeholders — property owners in historic neighborhoods, local historians, former members of the Historic District Commission, and others — who were interviewed in September 2022.16 They shared opinions about historic preservation and the state of development activities in Fayetteville. Several major takeaways emerged from the interviews: • The concern most often stated was about the City's rapid growth and the demolitions and redevelopment in established neighborhoods. Speculative development, rapidly increasing density, and the University's contribution to that through growth in the student body and workforce were frequently mentioned. A few people also brought up the effects of rapid development on infrastructure, including stormwater drainage, throughout the city. • Stakeholders largely do not really understand how historic preservation works, including the difference between National Register -listed and locally -designated historic districts, historic tax credits, the City's historic preservation ordinance and design guidelines, etc. • Stakeholders are not focused on anything in particular when it comes to historic preservation. They have many interests and would probably benefit from some form of organizational structure that would help to direct volunteer activity and advocacy, • The City needs to establish a vision for historic preservation and then see it through. The community seems to be open to and desirous of leadership from the City. Once stakeholder interviews were complete, a list of topics for the community meeting and questions for the community opinion survey were created, with input from the City. 4.2 Community Meetings Community meetings took place in September 2022 and April 2023, During the first meeting, attendees gave feedback regarding how to prioritize future historic preservation efforts, Each person received four stickers numbered from 1 to 4 and placed the stickers on signs corresponding to options for preservation initiatives, with 1 being the highest priority and 4 being the lowest. The scores were tallied and ranked as follows: 1. Educate people about Fayetteville history and historic preservation 2. Document and protect historic properties 3. Regulate demolitions and redevelopment in established neighborhoods 4. Promote historic tourism The prioritization of these topics informed action items in this plan, Additional meetings provided the public with the opportunity to provide feedback on the draft historic preservation plan, as well as ask questions about the project. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STAKEHOLDER & COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT CHAPTER 4 1 66 �>>5 lj �j1v■-jj all - � �.1 III � � � y■� �, . PIBCe Stick0i5 Horo • r i � I Figure 77. Priority Results from the Workshop. Piece 9110kers Here 0 • ' ' r ' • ' - wm r • • • . , r • Pkfoe Slicker Here • , • , ' • • . 0 • 0,01 r • • r • •••• • 4.3 Community Opinion Survey The qualitative feedback data collected through the stakeholder interviews and the first community meeting was used to develop a community opinion survey. The purpose of the survey was to test the extent to which the anecdotal opinions and ideas provided by the small group of stakeholders and meeting attendees represented the larger community. In October 2022, the online survey was released to the public." In total, 619 respondents completed the survey, exceeding the original target of 383 to reach a 95 percent confidence level with 4 percent margin of error, based on the population of Fayetteville. The survey comprised two demographic items, a set of questions about historic preservation priorities, an assessment of support for historic preservation, questions to identify places that should be preserved, and an open-ended item to collect additional thoughts. The survey responses, as summarized in the following sections, reflect an overwhelming support for historic preservation in Fayetteville.78 4.3.1 Survey Results Respondents The 619 respondents fairly evenly represented the four wards in Fayetteville. Twelve percent of respondents did not live in Fayetteville, and 4 percent did not answer the question about where they lived. Other than the youngest group (age nineteen and younger) and people who did not provide their age, the various age groups were represented fairly equally in the survey. Historic Preservation Priorities Respondents were asked to rate a list of six historic preservation activities on a five -point Likert scale from Very Important to Not at All Important. "No Opinion" was also an option. The activities are outlined on the following page. :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STAKEHOLDER & COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT CHAPTER 4 1 67 Historic Preservation Support In the next set of questions, respondents reported the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with a series of statements, using a Likert scale with the options Strongly Agree, Agree, Somewhat Agree, Neither Agree nor Disagree, Somewhat Disagree, Disagree, and Strongly Disagree. The statements included; I care about preserving our community's history, including historic buildings, I need more information about what City historic preservation programs can do and how they work. Property owners in Fayetteville who make their building a historic landmark should be able to trust that the next owner will not be able to tear it down without getting permission from the City. Property owners who join with their neighbors to create a historic district should be able to trust that no one will be able to tear down historic houses without getting permission from the City. Property owners who receive financial incentives for fixing up historic buildings should be willing to follow clearly written rules about what they can do to those buildings. Respondents overwhelmingly indicated their agreement with all these statements, as shown below (Figure 78). Trio ritics Percentage of Importance Rankings Identifying more historic properties 95% Formally designating more historic 94% properties and historic districts ca 0 a Improving economic incentives for 94% E property owners of historic buildings o Developing history -related educational content 91% c co L- Q Getting young people excited about (� 1 O/0 E Fayetteville history and historic preservation J to N N J Increasing awareness of financial incentives 88% available for historic buildings Figure 78. Priority results from the Community Opinion Survey. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STAKEHOLDER & COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT CHAPTER 4 1 68 Areas/Properties to Preserve Most respondents indicated that there are specific buildings or places in Fayetteville that they would like to see preserved for future generations. The areas, buildings, or sites most often identified by respondents as important to preserve are shown below, in order from highest number of responses to lowest. Downtown (36 responses, or 5.8 percent): including Fayetteville Square, old post office, and other downtown buildings. 2. Dickson Street (31, or 5 percent): also known as the West Dickson Street Commercial Historic District, listed in the NRHP in 2007 and the main throughfare connecting downtown to the U of A campus. 3. Jefferson Elementary School (26, or 4.2 percent): Public school opened on February 19,1931, and integrated in 1965. Located at 612 S. College Avenue. 4. Depot buildings (22, or 3,5 percent): Frisco Depot at 550 Dickson Street and Fayetteville Depot at 528 W. Dickson Street. 5. Historic and older buildings, sites, or neighborhoods, generally (19, or 3 percent). 6. Cemeteries (15, or 2.4 percent), 7. Churches (15, or 2.4 percent). 8. Old Courthouse (15, or 2.4 percent): Listed in the NRHP in 1972, 9. Markham Hill (11, or 1.8 percent): 144 acres of woodlands and natural habitat currently facing development pressure. 10. Block Street (9, or 1.5 percent): Commercial area in downtown Fayetteville. 11. South Fayetteville (9, or 1.5 percent): A historically working-class neighborhood south of downtown. 12. Rock/"giraffe" houses (8, or 1.3 percent): Buildings clad in multicolored stone masonry that have a giraffe -like appearance; found in Wilson Park and other neighborhoods. 13. University Heights (8, or 13 percent): A neighborhood with a collection of Modernistic buildings by Architect Fay Jones. Many other buildings and sites were mentioned multiple times by respondents, including Willow Heights, a historical Black neighborhood; the 112 Drive -In; and motels along College Avenue, among others. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STAKEHOLDER & COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT CHAPTER 4 1 69 • Based on research results, community outreach, and anticipated historic preservation program staffing and budget levels, five main goals for historic preservation in Fayetteville have been identified; 1. Strengthen the preservation program through efficient adjustments to the program's administration. 2. Encourage compatible development that prioritizes historic preservation. 3. Identify and protect historic properties by utilizing historic resources surveys and designations to identify and protect historic resources for future generations. 4. Provide learning opportunities for the community about historic preservation and Fayetteville's unique history. 5. Promote diversity, equity, and inclusion and protect cultural heritage. This strategic plan provides a ten-year framework and over 50 action items for achieving these goals. The goals are described in more detail in the next section of this plan, followed by an implementation matrix for each goal. Each row in each matrix is an action item with priority and timeline recommendations, the personnel and partners and required changes needed to execute the action, and anticipated funding needs and level of effort. It is important to note that although the broader goals are not listed in terms of priority, the action items are prioritized as shown below. Action items prioritized as critical should be completed as soon as is practicable. In some cases, action items will be ongoing activities. Those categorized as short-term should be addressed within the next two years (by 2025). Some short- term action items may also be critical to accomplishing other goals or rectifying current challenges, like the presence of historic preservation expertise on the HDC. Mid-term action items are those that should be completed in the next two to four years (by 2027). Long-term action items should be completed by the end of the plan cycle in 2033. Figure 79. Downtown Fayetteville Branding. Contents This chapter outlines the strategic plan and action items for the Fayetteville Heritage and Historic Preservation Plan, 5, Strategic Plan ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,70 5.1 Goals ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,71 5.2 Implementation Matrices................................................80 GoalI . ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 80 Goal2,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 81 Goal3,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 82 Goal4,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 83 Goal5,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 84 53 Conclusion & Plan Maintenance...............................85 .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAPTER 5 1 70 5.1 Goals Goal 1. Strengthening the Preservation Program Fayetteville can update and expand existing processes and platforms to strengthen its preservation program. The City should ensure preservation planning is integrated with other City planning and development processes. A central strategy to strengthening the preservation program is to create an ordinance that details eligibility criteria for local historic designation, including a provision for contributing and noncontributing resources within a district. This ordinance should be based on NRHP criteria and NPS standards but may be less stringent compared to the national program." Discouraging demolitions to decrease landfill waste and encouraging deconstruction to salvage materials can also be addressed via City policies that require a historic preservation review, demolition delays, and/or mandate salvaging and deconstruction of the building,80 Demolition delays are a key tool for working with the property owner to preserve a threatened historical building. The City should explore the following process for broader demolition reviews through a new or revised ordinance and subsequent workflow processes: 1. Staff review of the proposed demolition to determine potential for historic significance and discussion with applicant to ensure they are aware of benefits of preservation and alternatives to demolition, and prior survey documentation. 2. Demolition delay issued by the HDC to allow for an extended review, public comment, discussion of alternatives with the property owner, and a site visit, if needed. 3. Denial of a COA within a local historic district. :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAPTER 5 1 71 The establishment of a citywide historic context and comprehensive survey plan (Appendix 1) would provide a strong foundation for determining the significance of a historic resource proposed for demolition. Expediting action items in Goal 3, Identify and Protect Historic Properties would strengthen demolition review procedures by the City and protection of vulnerable historical resources that the community values. For any property that will be demolished and that the City or HDC deems worthy of documentation, policies could also require a documentation package before a demolition permit is issued. Such documentation could include photographs of the building and notes on property history. The collected documentation packages could be stored and maintained digitally on the City's website or physically at the library or with a partner organization. The recordation of demolition data should be a top priority to help City staff and officials, the HDC, and members of the community understand trends affecting the historic fabric of the city. For example, addresses and year -built information, if included alongside demolition permit data, would provide a strong foundation for future analysis and evaluation of potential intervention measures. Additional measures like establishing dedicated funding for the historic preservation program will provide new opportunities for program expansion, including but not limited to the required dedicated funding for a Main Street program. Publishing online resources that provide information on preservation -related reviews, processes for property owners interested in seeking local historical designation, and a clear, centralized database detailing Fayetteville's historic resources will facilitate public participation in preservation processes. Examples of problems and solutions within this goal are listed in Table 14. Table 14. Goal 1 Challenges and Solutions Challenge Solution/s Sufficient planning staff capacity to handle Thoughtful and proactive planning for staff capacity preservation activities (i.e., hiring plan considering the need for additional City staff positions and/or consultants, reallocating duties) Accessibility of prior preservation studies and Retroactive digitization of records and more robust demolition data tracking future data collection Unclear guidelines for local designations Create an ordinance that establishes designation criteria and an application form with guidance Degree of allocated funding Earmarked funds for program activities Demolition goes unchecked Require demolition reviews for resources that are forty-five years or older Demolitions contributing to landfill Avoiding demolition and requiring deconstruction and salvage Navigation of and access to City historic Refine website to include key information for access preservation information online can be improved and transparency IV HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAPTER 5 1 72 Goal 2. Encourage Development that is Compatible with Historic Preservation Goal 2 focuses on encouraging development that is sensitive to the city's historic fabric through regulation and planning methods. The city's historic character contributes to its identity and its appeal to visitors; future development should be planned with this in mind. This goal promotes development that is both environmentally sustainable and historically sensitive so that present and future generations can benefit from Fayetteville's historic character. Development pressures could be addressed through planning guidance, the establishment of character overlay zones, and planned unit developments. Developers and institutions should work with the City staff in promoting sustainable development that works with existing building stock, rather than demolishes or ignores the historical context of the community. Funding opportunities, which often require professional historical rehabilitation, should also be considered to spark other investment and maintain the city's historic fabric. Demolition activity is an ongoing threat to historic properties in Fayetteville. A thorough review of historic -age building stock proposed for demolition should be completed by City staff and the City should encourage alternatives like adaptive reuse. Examples of challenges and solutions related to this goal are listed in Table 15. Table 15, Goal 2 Challenges and Solutions Challenge Solution/s Lack of regulatory authority Changes to code and processes regarding demolitions Preventing demolitions Exploring easements and independent property acquisition Loss of historic Create new local historic districts character through new ordinances and community engagement Degree of allocated funding Earmarked funds for program activities Insensitive development Character overlay zoning and planned unit developments with guidance from the City Absence of historic tax Facilitate investment and development credit usage and missed using historic tax credits and consider opportunities for funding joining Main Street Arkansas Institutional development Work with institutions in fostering encouraging gentrification community -centered development that and over -development protects historical resources Figure 81, SWEPCO Building by Warren Segraves (1968). .0 HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAPTER 5 1 73 Goal 3. Identify and Protect Historic Properties Building upon Goal 2, the City must prioritize the surveying and designation of historic properties at the local level. Protection of historic properties begins with the systematic and comprehensive survey of historical resources. Future survey work should consider properties within the boundaries of prior surveys that have reached forty-five years of age or older since the time of original documentation. Future surveys should be customized for the needs of the City rather than limited to the use of AHPP survey forms, which are time-consuming to complete and collect more information than is necessary for local evaluation and designation. Developing historic contexts for appropriate themes will facilitate survey and designation efforts. Examples of challenges and solutions within this goal are listed in Table 16. The survey plan in Appendix I details the steps recommended to achieve this goal. Table 16, Goal 3 Challenges and Solutions Challenge Solution/s Fifty years of surveying Resurveying activities and activity with inconsistent surveying primarily for local eligibility recommendations designation rather than AHPP standards Resources reaching Funding new surveys that historic -age (45 years target important architects like or older) are significant Fay Jones and others in Fayetteville due to its mid -twentieth century architectural legacy Lack of citywide historic Funding a citywide historic context context that can guide future survey efforts Lack of context for diverse Inclusion of diverse histories histories and preservation and places in future survey of these resources efforts Protecting historic Exploring local historic districts, properties easements, and property acquisition Maintaining historic Utilizing grant funds for properties restoration and rehabilitation projects and educating the public on historic property maintenance Figure 82. Fulbright Peace Fc Designed by Fay Jones in 19� front of the 1935 Vol Walker L (NR 1992) on the U of A caml :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAPTER 5 1 74 13 r` Y �tc�Kawr' � PrJBL /c U,""eess,,��55 O C ELM- 1 �.. CID sQ�HRE s,;W Local designation efforts should be a top priority for Fayetteville. Given that state law requires a proposed local district either have the support of a majority of owners or be currently listed in the NRHP, Fayetteville has an opportunity to expediently designate the 11 existing NRHP districts in the City as local districts, Although the NRHP listing status could allow the City to entirely bypass an owner petition, it is best practice to allow an avenue for owner input. The City could, however, place the burden on opponents of a district, by moving forward with local designation for current NRHP districts so long as a majority of owners (>_51%) do not object. The NPS takes this approach at the federal level for listing districts in the NRHP; listing will move forward as long as a majority of residents who own property do not object. L As noted in Section 2, the state law's explicit allowance for embracing "noncontiguous lands" in a local historic district could allow for a thematic or multiple property -type local designation strategy, as employed for NRHP nominations. Fayetteville should explore establishing a discontiguous local historic district for Modernistic -style architecture co Q including works by Fay Jones and others. Multiple property W documentation through an MPS or local measure is an efficient method to address discontiguous resources (see Section 2.1.1 for more information on MPS). Figure 83. Thomas -Tharp House (1854). This house was placed on the Arkansas's Most Endangered Places list in 2018. Figure 84. Sanborn Map (1886) (at left), Numerous years of Sanborn maps of the city are available to the public for research. 41 Source; Sanborn Map Company,AC .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAPTER 5 1 75 Goal 4. Provide Learning Opportunities for the Community The public engagement process for this plan revealed that residents of Fayetteville believe historic preservation is important, but they lack knowledge about how historic preservation works. Residents are also proud of their city and have desire to know more about the city's history. Strengthening partnerships between the City, local and regional institutions, and community groups can increase opportunities for community members to learn about preservation and Fayetteville's history, share their preservation priorities and local historical knowledge, and become empowered and active preservation partners. Collaboration with new and existing partners to provide tours, events, and hands-on trainings for the public allows diverse local stakeholders to contribute to crafting a shared sense of community identity rooted in the preservation of the city's historic resources. The City can empower residents to take preservation into their own hands by providing information on Fayetteville's historic resources and preservation processes, economic incentives, and by marketing available preservation tools and events to diverse Fayetteville communities. Appendix C. Partnership Opportunities and D. Funding Opportunities outline various existing and potential partnerships available to the City. Examples of challenges and solutions within this goal are listed in Table 17. Table 17. Goal 4 Challenges and Solutions Challenge Solution/s Lack of awareness and Creation of historic education on historic preservation workshops and preservation information for the public Confusion on the difference Clearly inform the public on between historic designations the difference between these designations Desire to learn about Redesign the City's website Fayetteville's history but many to provide educational tools are unable to access this and work with institutions information on increasing accessibility to information Lack of interpretive signage Erect informational panels throughout the city to inform the public Lack of connection between Develop wayfinding and historical places and points of historical corridors (Figure 86) interest Figure 85. Preservation Event. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAPTER 5 1 76 1 r .{ m �� 4( i I w Trenion B , o son o Wil ' I I Park- 3 W Louise St WILSON•PARK Q I - °• ...r a a • • ip i_iE W Maple St z rt n MT NORD r E Maple St _.�4 low _T own v Mt. Nord St I z ¢' W '-. _ o > yf, •,w i, _ _ TJG ! o) a ..~r W Lafayette St J , n o F WAS-IINGTON WILLOW •� West I 'I TV •a 1 Dickson - _ �r DePal DI SIN C�iC�AL :�a r� HD — O - oy up i Area ' House � E Dickson�t r T JJJ��f"`��� I • 1 I'wana �. r � if��',i` : . '„'�!'°''�!"'r_• pr„ College/ Center Dickson, F All I a, p' I DOWOOW�j r: > 1 i • saea� E Spring St _ - CommunityE DO eete Tr a SPRING �- � ® �1 e — I �- a- > Evergreen ¢' T K > 3 Cemetery ¢ WM Meadow st' %r- - -o ¢ ° CUUNRAL — J ARTS �;� o — I ►s jk .,, a( .•0 1 CORRIDOR"` _ -♦ z Ridge W Center St O House_se.u.es West Church Center a - Neste -� Imo' �,Rj Square Courthouse ' �,. m W Moun ,st • Q [ ¢ Fryryettevllle Milli At - Public - - 1 i J I to c� co I i � ; W Rpck St . fir` E Rock Sty � 4'004TNAM ' � ' • %" tones a' r ADDITtOgJ. Woods = a - I • _ The TOVYIMOUNTAIN JOUT x r Ramblel •'•dew cke �. .,,,M or • �` 1= " 1� South Entran , JENM S• a 1�FFERSON/ AL ER 4. r _ _ 1 i J Historic Core Gateway Opportunity Downtown Zones Walkable Corridors Connections • Gateways �istorical Viewshed Links HistoricNRHP DistrictPoints oflnterest Goal 5. Promote Diversity, Equity, Inclusion.. and Protect Cultural Heritage Fayetteville residents expressed an interest in knowing more about the city's diverse histories, Along with telling this history, it is important to ensure all community members are included in the City's historic preservation program. This goal encompasses action items that seek to uplift diverse histories, expand whose voices are heard and whose interests are represented at preservation decision -making tables, and to provide accessible avenues for community participation in preservation processes. Combatting erasure, or the removal of history of a particular group, is a key method to this objective. In Fayetteville, particular focus should be given to the Black community for its notable history since the city's establishment. However, other historically underrepresented groups, including Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC), women, the disabled, and those who identity as lesbian, bisexual, gay, transgendered, and other queer identities (LGBT+) should be included as well. Explicit efforts to explore diverse histories, broaden the scope of local survey programs, and expand protections for cultural heritage can help shepherd the city's diverse historic resources into the future. Examples of challenges and solutions within this goal are listed in Table 18. Figure 87 Diversity. Diverse histories are key to understanding a complete history of Fayetteville. Figure 88. Fayetteville Pride. Fayetteville is a center of LGBT+ history, culture, and pride in NWA, AML :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAPTER 5 1 78 Table 18, Goal 5 Challenges and Solutions Challenge Solution/s Lack of awareness of diversity Celebrate diversity and cultural heritage through education and and cultural heritage protection of historical resources Erasure of Black history Partner with local Black and other non -white institutions to explore how and other historically this history can be protected and celebrated underrepresented groups Lack of inclusion of diverse Document and designate historic properties that are associated with histories at designated diverse histories properties Lack of representation in Develop historic contexts specific to African American and other historic context documents underrepresented groups, and/or address within other thematic contexts Lack of diverse representation Include diverse individuals on the HDC and continue to invest in the in the government BHPC The City of Fayetteville's historic preservation planning should also consider the 2022 recommendations of the Black Heritage Resources Task Force.$' This group is a collaborative effort of the Society for Black Archaeologists, the American Cultural Resources Association, the Society of Historical Archaeology, and the Society of American Archaeology, Between 2020- 2022, the group conducted surveys and research to evaluate the practices of SHPOs with a goal of addressing diversity and racial inclusion in archaeology and historic preservation. Key recommendations applicable to preservation planning in Fayetteville include: • Focus on identification of cultural/ethnic affiliations for documented resources, including consulting the community. Ensure that data collection fields are established to facilitate searches for such affiliations. Review and update existing records to retroactively add ethnic/ cultural affiliation. • Be proactive in outreach to BIPOC communities to determine their historic preservation needs and interests. Inquire about the properties considered significant to them and consult with Black experts when evaluating properties. Make sure BIPOC communities are aware of preservation resources and benefits. • Increase the number of BIPOC properties honored with preservation designations. gael ..I �fj Figure 89. Fayettville Public Schools Yearbook in 1954. Fayetteville began integration in 1954 following the Brown v. Board of Education ruling. Source: Fayetteville H istory.AD :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAPTER 5 1 79 5.2 Implementation Matrices Goal 1. Strengthen the Preservation Program No. Title Action Item Priority/ Responsible Requires Cost Effort Timeline Party Level 1.1 Local Historic Modify ordinance to include eligibility criteria Critical/ Planning, Ordinance N/A Medium District and a process for establishing local historic Short- HDC, districts. Term City Council 1.2 Commission Ensure HDC ordinance meets CLG criteria Critical/ Planning, Appointments, N/A Medium Qualifications for expertise in architecture, urban planning/ Short- HDC, Coordination, design, or history to the extent possible, Hire Term City Council Ordinance, consultants or pro bono professionals to Resolution assist the HDC on an as -needed basis. 1.3 Training Hold annual trainings with the HDC and City Short- AHPP, Budget Medium Medium staff. Term Consultant 1.4 Funding Allocate City budget to the historic Short- Budget Office, Budget Medium Medium preservation program that can be used for Term City Council surveys, educational programs, events, and other initiatives. 1.5 Data Improve digital data collection to assist with Short- Long Range Website, N/A High Management program analysis. Include digitized survey, Term Planning, Workflow designation information, demolition data, and GIS other relevant data. Demolition data should include year -built dates, demolition types, and historic designations, 1.6 Commission Encourage more collaboration between the Ongoing/ Planning, Management N/A Low Collaboration HDC and BHPC through additional meetings, Short- HDC, committees, and tasks. Term BHPC 1.7 Internship Offer a seasonal internship to students Mid -Term Long Range Staffing Low High interested in historic preservation, Planning architecture, history, or cultural studies to contribute to the program's initiatives. Consider a collaboration with the U of A. 13 Historic Sites Update the Historic Sites map, Clearly Mid -Term Long Range Workflow N/A Medium Map distinguish between NRHP properties, NRHP Planning, districts, ARHP properties, local historic GIS, districts, and other properties of interest, such Consultant as those that reflect cultural heritage but that are not designated. Attach the nomination application to each NRHP property/district, Depict historic district boundaries. Exclude resources less than forty-five years old. 1.9 Plan Review Include historic preservation staff in review of Mid -Term Planning, Workflow N/A Medium proposed major projects and zoning changes Engineering, to determine impacts to historic resources. Public Works 1.10 Demolition Pass an ordinance to allow for the review of Long- Planning, Processes, N/A Medium Ordinance proposed demolitions for resources forty-five Term HDC, Ordinance years or older. Staff to evaluate each property City Council for significance. Work with the property owner to discourage demolition. Reviews should be taken up by the HDC as needed. .W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAPTER 5 1 80 Goal 2. Encourage Compatible Development that Prioritizes Historic Preservation No. Title Action Item Priority/ Responsible Requires Cost Effort Timeline Party Level 2.1 Historic Highlight historical corridors and areas. Short- Long Range May need High Medium Corridors Examples include signage, gateways, and Term/ Planning, Grants or Other wayfinding to guide individuals to a historic Mid -Term HDC, Funding property or district or make them aware of the BHPC, historic property or area. Arts Council, Consultant 2.2 Downtown Develop guidelines for downtown that Mid -Term Planning, Document Medium Medium encourage new development that is Consultant Adoption compatible but differentiated from historical buildings. 2.3 Develop Establish an incentive program for property Mid -Term Planning, Budget Medium High Incentives owners in local historic districts to encourage HDC, designations. Consider faqade improvement City Council grants, design assistance, or local tax breaks. 2.4 Coordinate Collaborate with U of A to encourage new Long- Planning, No Change N/A High with development that thoughtfully considers Term Institutions Needed Institutions surrounding neighborhoods and protects historic properties on and off campus, 2.5 Zoning Explore overlay zoning as an alternative Long- Planning, Zoning Medium High to local historic districts to protect historic Term Consultant character. 2.6 Sustainability Encourage developers to utilize state and Ongoing/ Planning, Planning N/A High federal historic tax credits for redevelopment Short- Development Practices and rehabilitation in line with SOI. (City Plan Term Services 2040 Goal 1) 2.7 Design Though not currently enforceable, utilize the Ongoing/ Long Range Website, N/A Medium Guidelines Washington -Willow Design Guidelines as Short- Planning, Documents a tool for educating residents in the district Term HDC about historically sensitive alterations, Use the document as a base for developing guidelines for newly created local historic districts. 2.8 Sustainability Pass deconstruction ordinance requiring Long- Long Range Ordinance N/A High the salvaging and repurposing of historical Term Planning, materials in local and NRHP historic districts. HDC, City Council 2.9 Main Street Join Main Street Arkansas. The next workshop Short- City Council Application Low Medium Arkansas period begins in fall 2024 with application in Term 2025. �VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAPTER 5 1 81 Goal 3. Identify and Protect Historic Properties No. Title Action Item Priority/ Responsible Requires Cost Effort Timeline I Party Level 3.1 Restoration Continue historic preservation work on Ongoing Planning, Website, Medium Medium Projects city -owned properties, like the Woolsey Consultants Social Media Farmstead and Apple Warehouse. Publish progress on the projects to demonstrate the city's commitment to historic preservation. 3.2 Historic Develop a citywide and thematic historic Short- Consultant N/A Grants High Contexts; context. Term Citywide Context 3.3 Historically Black Identify and survey historical Black Short- Consultant N/A Grants Medium Neighborhoods neighborhoods and resources, especially Term and Resources the neighborhood east of downtown, that can be used for educational development. 3.4 Windshield Prepare for and conduct a comprehensive Short- Consultant N/A Grants, High Survey citywide windshield survey. Term Medium 3.5 Reconnaissance Based on windshield survey results, Mid -Term Consultant N/A Grants High Surveys conduct reconnaissance -level documentation. 3.6 Historic District Conduct outreach with property owners in Critical/ HDC, Management N/A Medium Outreach NRHP historic districts to instill community Short- Planning Marketing pride, educate them about the difference Term between NRHP and local historic districts, and encourage the creation of local historic districts. 3.7 Local Historic Poll NRHP historic district property owners Short- Planning Management N/A High District to gauge interest in becoming a local Term Designation historic district. Based on poll results, prioritize facilitation of local historic district designation. 3.8 Multiple Property Create noncontiguous local historic Mid -Term Planning, Survey Grants High Designation districts based on a multiple property Consultant, designation approach. Explore themes like Community modern architecture, Black history, and other topics. 3.9 Easements Encourage organizations and historic Long- Planning, Website N/A Medium property owners to use easements as Term Organizations a historic preservation tool. Consider donating AHPP easements for City properties. �W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAPTER 5 1 82 Goal 4. Provide Learning Opportunities for the Community No. Title Action Item Priority/ Responsible Requires Cost Effort Timeline Party Level 4.1 Community Improve the public's understanding of historic Short- Long Range Website Low Medium Engagement: preservation and Fayetteville's preservation Term Planning, Improve program by updating the city's website. Communications, Information Include information comparing NRHP, ARHP, GIS Channels and local historic designations; explaining the COA process and design guidelines; how to apply for a local historic district; details about initiatives; the updated Historic Sites map (1.10); preservation -related grants and funding opportunities; survey and historic context reports; etc. 4.2 History Install interpretive signage panels and Short- Planning, No Change Grants, Medium Sharing historical markers at historic places or utilize Term Consultant, Needed Medium other physical or visual ways (e.g., murals) to Commissions, share community history. Parks 4.3 Preservation Continue to award exceptional examples of Ongoing Planning, No Change Low Low Awards preservation through the Preservation Awards Commissions Needed program. 4.4 Program Promote the City's historic preservation Ongoing Planning, Website, N/A High Promotion initiatives and history through press, social Communications Social Media media, website content, and other means. 4.5 Learning Continue to host historic preservation tours Ongoing Planning, Training Grants High Opportunities: and events. Consider HDC and BHPC Commissions Tours members leading tours and events. 4.6 Learning Partner with the U of A in supporting history Short- Planning, Coordination N/A High Opportunities: coursework, programming, and cultural Term Commissions U of A resource management activities. 4.7 Learning Develop and hold historic preservation Short- Planning, Management Grants High Opportunities: workshops. Consider workshops related to Term Partners Workshops local historic district and NRHP designation, historic building, and stone wall maintenance, wood and metal window, door repair, and natural disaster preparedness for buildings. 4.8 Community Market to the community the importance of Ongoing/ Planning, Website, Medium High Engagement: local historic districts, especially as a tool for Short- Commissions Marketing Finding maintaining historic character. Find advocates Term Partners for local historic districts and partner with them to establish support. 4.9 Community Publish information about historic preservation Mid -Term Planning Website N/A Medium Engagement: reviews and demolitions of historic properties Transparency to increase transparency, 4.10 Catalog Work with the Fayetteville Public Library to Long- Planning, Processes Grants Low Contexts catalog historic contexts, oral histories, and Term Library other forms of documentation to provide the community with a central repository for historic preservation and local history. 4.11 National Explore funding opportunities and Mid -Term Planning, Website Grants Medium Historic Trails interpretation options for the Butterfield Consultant, Overland Route and Trail of Tears NHTs. Partners 4.12 Engage Young Consider projects and events to engage young Mid -Term Organizations, Social Media, Medium Medium Residents adults with Fayetteville's history and topics Schools Website of interest to them, such as histories of social justice, diverse histories, and preservation sustainability. .A HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAPTER 5 1 83 Goal 5. Promote Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion and Protect Cultural Heritage No. Title Action Item Priority/ Responsible Requires Cost Effort Timeline Party Level 5.1 Increase HDC Encourage diversity on the HDC, Consider a Ongoing City Council Appointments, N/A Medium Diversity merger of the HDC and BHPC to consolidate Ordinance efforts, empower Black preservation initiatives, and save funds. 5.2 Protect Black Work with the BHPC and community to Ongoing/ Planning, Community N/A Low Sites: Develop develop a list of threatened historical sites Short- Commissions, Engagement List of Sites associated with Black heritage and identify Term Partners ways to support their preservation, including Black ownership. 5.3 Share Black Support the designation of Black Historical Short- BHPC, N/A Grants, Medium History Markers. Term City Council Low 5.4 Increase BIPOC Add Black and Indigenous Historical Short- Planning, Community Low Low Representation: markers to the City's Historic Sites Map. Term GIS Engagement Add Markers 5.5 Historic Ensure that Fayetteville's diverse histories, Short- Planning, Community Grants Medium Contexts: particularly Black, Latino, Jewish, women, and Term Commissions, Engagement Diverse LGBT+ histories, are documented in historic Partners Histories context development. 5.6 Outreach Explore methods of outreach to diverse Short- Planning, Community Grants Medium to Diverse communities through events, commission Term Commissions, Engagement Communities meetings, and crowdsourcing platforms. (see Partners Appendix G: Historical Markers Guidance) 5.7 Increase BIPOC Review properties and districts currently Ongoing BHPC, Community Medium Medium Representation: listed in the NRHP in Fayetteville for HDC, Engagement Retroactive overlooked associations with BIPOC history. Volunteers Review Develop supplemental documentation and update official records81 5.8 Protect Support NWA Black Heritage in securing Mid -Term Planning, Coordination N/A Medium Black Sites: historical Black sites. Consider assisting BHPC, Organization the organization with historic preservation HDC, Support activities and NRHP designation, if desired. City Council 5.9 Identify BIPOC Establish a directory of individuals and Ongoing BHPC Community N/A Low Preservation organizations that should be consulted when Engagement Stakeholders evaluating BIPOC heritage resources as subject matter experts," 5.10 Empower Conduct targeted outreach to BIPOC Ongoing Planning, Community NA Low BIPOC communities about the economic benefits of BHPC Engagement Preservationists historic preservation (e.g, tax breaks), 5.11 Increase BIPOC Work with BHPC to identify potential projects Long- Planning, Grant N/A Medium Representation: that could be funded through grants like the Term BHPC Application, Access to NPS' African American Civil Rights grants BHPC Funds and Underrepresented Community grants Coordination and apply for the grants. 5.12 Combat Research historic preservation -related Mid -Term Planning, Public N/A High Gentrification gentrification solutions in other cities to Economic Engagement, prepare Fayetteville for future threats. For Vitality, Policy, Council example, legacy business program, adaptive BHPC, Action reuse of historical buildings for affordable HDC housing, etc. :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAPTER 5 1 84 5.3 Conclusion & Plan Maintenance The rich historic character that defines Fayetteville is essential to its identity and success as the second-largest city in Arkansas. To ensure successful and effective historic preservation, the plan's action items should be achieved according to their priority as well as financial and timing constraints. Although the City is primarily responsible for the expansion of the Fayetteville Historic Preservation Program, residents, institutions, and organizations also play a critical role in shaping the outcome of a community that receives the many benefits from historic preservation. Fayetteville has had a long history of preservation advocacy, surveying historic resources, and, more recently, attaining funding and community support for historic preservation. The City should continue to use grant funding for special initiatives but should also support the preservation program through regular funding within its annual budget process. Building the network of stakeholders and organizations that work collaboratively to support the City's efforts will be an important effort. The City and HDC should follow this plan between 2023 and 2033. The HDC should meet annually to establish implementation priorities for the next year, and quarterly meetings should be used to discuss the status of plan action items to ensure plan maintenance. Unforeseen events or new initiatives that were not included in this document may require the City and/or HDC to develop an addendum, internal policy, or guideline prior to the next update cycle. A public meeting on the status of this plan should be held approximately five years after implementation (2028). The next plan update should take place no later than 2033. Let's get to work, Fayetteville! Figure 90.112 Drive In. CIE) EN THURS FRI UP 2•D PG IN STENEO rN,O AT S SUN HANNAH MONT AIA THE MOVIE G 92.7E CHECKS OR CREDIT CARDS ADM.SII PER CA r A lk'a C .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAPTER 5 I 85 References Cited Endnotes 1. The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) requires that each federal agency identify and assess the effects its actions may have on historic properties. For more, see: https://www.ach -gov//protecting-historic-properties/section- 106-process/introduction-section-106. 2. National Park Service, National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation, National Park Service (Washington, DC, 1997). Accessed 2022. 3. Arkansas Code § 14-172-202 (2020) - Purpose: 2020 Arkansas Code: US Codes and Statutes: US Law: Justia. Accessed 2022. 4. Arkansas Code § 14-172-207 (2020) - Establishment of historic districts: 2020 Arkansas Code: US Codes and Statutes: US Law: Justia. Accessed 2022. 5. "Arkansas Register of Historic Places," Arkansas Heritage, (Little Rock, Arkansas 2022), https://www. arkansasheritage.com/arkansas-preservation/properties/arkansas-register. Accessed 2022. 6. "Arkansas Register of Historic Places," Central Arkansas Library System, (Little Rock, Arkansas 2021), https:// encyclopediaofarkansas.net/entries/arkansas-register-of-historic-places-8433/#:-:text=The%2OArkansas%20 Reg ister%20of%20Historic, the%20properties'%20rehab iIitation%20through %20grant; "Arkansas Register of Historic Places," Arkansas Historic Preservation Program, Accessed 2023., https://www.arkansasheritage.com/arkansas- preservation/properties/arkansas-register. 7. "Historical Marker Program," Arkansas Heritage, (Little Rock, Arkansas 2022), Accessed 2022. https:Hwww. arkansasheritage.com/arkansas-preservation/programs/historic-marker-program. 8. For more information on Main Street America, visit https://www.mainstreet.org/home. 9. "Tax Credits," Arkansas Heritage, (Little Rock, Arkansas 2022), Accessed 2023. https://www.arkansasheritage.com/ arkansas-preservation/about/rehabilitation-tax-incentives. 10. For more information on federal tax incentives, visit https://www.nps.gov/subjects/taxincentives/about.htm. 11. Donovan Rypkema and Caroline Cheong, Measuring Economic Impacts of Historic Preservation: A Report to the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, (Washington, DC: University of Pennsylvania, 2011). Accessed 2023. 12. PlaceEconomics, The Impacts of Historic Preservation in Arkansas (Little Rock, AR: State of Arkansas, 2020). Accessed 2023. 13. PlaceEconomics, The Impacts of Historic Preservation in Arkansas. Accessed 2023. 14. PlaceEconomics, The Impacts of Historic Preservation in Arkansas. Accessed 2023. 15. "Heritage Tourism," National Trust for Historic Preservation, (Washington, DC 2014), Accessed 2023. http://www. preservation nation.org/information-center/economics-of-revital ization/heritage-tourism/#. Uz7tU 1 flvq E. 16. National Trust for Historic Preservation. Older, Smaller, Better. Measuring how the character of buildings and blocks influence urban vitality, Preservation Green Lab (Washington, DC, 2014), Accessed 2023. https://forum.savingplaces. org/connect/community-home/librarydocuments/viewdocument?DocumentKey=83ebde9b-8a23-458c-a70f- c66b46b6f714. 17. Kessler Consulting, Inc., Solid Waste Reduction Division and Recycling Master Plan, (Fayetteville, Arkansas 2016), City of Fayetteville, Accessed 2023. https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/DocumentCenter/View/10583/Fayetteville-Master- Plan-Final?bidld=. 18. PlaceEconomics, The Impacts of Historic Preservation in Arkansas; Arkansas Historic Preservation Program, "Tax Credits." Accessed 2023. 19. H. Ward Jandl Anne Derry, Carol D. Shull, Jan Thorman, National Register Bulletin 24: Guidelines for Local Surveys A Basis for Preservation Planning, National Park Service (Washington, DC 1984), Accessed 2023. https://www.nps.gov/ subjects/nationalregister/upload/NRB24-Complete_Partl t.pdf. 20. "QuickFacts," U.S. Census Bureau, (Washington, DC 2022), Accessed 2022. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/ tab le/littlerockcityarkansas,AR,fayetteviIlecityarkansas/POP010220. 21. U.S. Census Bureau, "QuickFacts." Accessed 2022. .� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN 86 References Cited 22. "Assesor," Washington County, Arkansas, (Fayetteville, Arkansas 2023), Accessed 2023.https://www. washingtoncountyar.gov/government/departments-a-e/assessor. 23. Chart categorizes properties by their earliest Washington County Assessor construction date. Properties without a construction date may be developed, but missing improvement data. 24. "Fayetteville History," (Fayetteville, Arkansas 2022), Accessed 2023. https://www.fayettevillehistory.org/. 25. FayettevilleHistory.com, "Fayetteville History." Accessed 2023. 26. FayettevilleHistory.com, "Fayetteville History." Accessed 2023. 27. Stephen Herman Dew, "The New Deal and Fayetteville, 1933-1941" (MA University of Arkansas, 1987). Accessed 2023. 28. "Fayetteville: Washington County," Encyclopedia of Arkansas, Central Arkansas Library System, (Little Rock, Arkansas 2022), Accessed 2023. www.encyclopediaofarkansas.net/entries/Fayetteville. 29. Denele Campbell, Glimpses of Fayetteville's Past (Glimpses of Our Past) (Scotts Valley, CA: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform 2014). Accessed 2023. 30. Dew, "The New Deal and Fayetteville, 1933-1941." Accessed 2023. 31. LLC Valenzuela Preservation Studio, Historic Resources Survey for the Meadow Springs Historic District (Fayetteville, AR, 2017). Accessed 2023. 32. "Before Little Rock: Successful Arkansas School Integration," (University of Arkansas, 2007), Accessed 2022. https:// news.uark.edu/articles/9136/before-little-rock-successful-arkansas-school-integration. 33. Fayetteville Historic District Commission, Historic District Commission December 2022 Meeting (Fayetteville, Arkansas: City of Fayetteville, 2022); "Fayetteville, Arkansas," 2006. Accessed 2023. 34. Stewart, "Fayetteville: Washington County." Accessed 2023. 35. Anthony J. Wappel with J.B. Hogan, The Square Book: An Illustrated History of the Fayetteville Square (Salt Lake, UT: Signature Books, 2017, 2017); James A. Vizzier, Fayetteville Program for Community Renewal, (Fayetteville, Arkansas: City of Fayetteville, 1968). Accessed 2023. 36. Kendall Curlee, "John G. Williams, Founder of School of Architecture, Dies at 92," (University of Arkansas, 2008), Accessed 2023. https://news.uark.edu/articles/10272/John-g-williams-founder-of-school-of-architecture-dies-at-92. 37. "John Gilbert Williams (1915-2008)," Central Arkansas Library System, (Little Rock, Arkansas 2022), Accessed 2023. https://encyclopediaofarkansas.net/entries/John-gilbert-williams-7598/. 38. Ellen Compton, "Fay Jones (1921-2004)," Central Arkansas Library System, (Little Rock, Arkansas 2022), Accessed 2023. https://encyclopediaofarkansas.net/entries/fay-jones-447/. 39. Ellen Compton, "Fay Jones (1921-2004)." Accessed 2023. 40. Gregory Herman, "Warren Dennis Segraves (1924-1978)," Central Arkansas Library System, (Little Rock, Arkansas 2021), Accessed 2023. https://encyclopediaofarkansas.neVentries/warren-dennis-segraves-6745/. 41. Toms, Mason J., "Arkansas Listings in the National Register of Historic Places," The Arkansas Historical Quarterly 77, no. 2 (2008), Arkansas Historical Association, Accessed 2023. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26494892; Herman, "Warren Dennis Segraves (1924-1978)." 42. Compton, "Fay Jones (1921-2004)."; Curlee, "John G. Williams, Founder of School of Architecture, Dies at 92."; "Cyrus Sutherland," University of Arkansas, 2015, Accessed 2023, https://digitalcollections.uark.edu/digital/collection/ Cyrus; Wallack, "John Gilbert Williams (1915-2008)."; "Edward Durell Stone (1902-1978)," Central Arkansas Library System, 2022, Accessed 2023, https://encyclopediaofarkansas.neVentries/edward-durell-stone-l776/; Herman, "Warren Dennis Segraves (1924-1978)." 43. Collections, "Cyrus Sutherland." Accessed 2023. 44. "Architect Profile: James Lambeth (1942-2003)," Mid Century Modern SGF, 2022, Accessed 2023. https://www. midcenturymodernsgf.com/blog/2019/3/31 /architect-profile-james-lambeth. 45. "Thayer Ewing Shelton Memorial ID 28053161," Find A Grave, 2008, Accessed 2023. https://www.findagrave.com/ memorial/28053161 /thayer-ewi ng-shelton. .A HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN 87 References Cited 46. Thayer Ewing Shelton. School Building. Patent filed July 31, 1956. Accessed 2023. https://newspaperarchive.com/ fayetteville-northwest-arkansas-times-aug-26-1955-p-9/. 47. Pat Donat, "Fayetteville Enters New Preservation Era," Northwest Arkansas Times (Fayetteville, AR), March 28, 1975, Accessed 2023. https://www.newspapers.com/image/9298607/?terms=%22preserve%22%2B%22post%20 office%22&match=1. 48. Communication with the City of Fayetteville Department of Development Services, Historic Preservation Office, Accessed 2022. 49. Arkansas City of Fayetteville, 2022 Adopted Annual Budget & Work Program, (Fayetteville, Arkansas: City of Fayetteville, 2022); Arkansas City of Fayetteville, 2023 Adopted Annual Budget & Work Program, (Fayetteville, Arkansas: City of Fayetteville, 2023). 50. "Vernon & Moore-Mcllroy Produce Warehouse," Encyclopedia of Arkansas, Central Arkansas Library System, (Little Rock, Arkansas 2021), Accessed 2023. https://encyclopediaofarkansas.neVentries/vernon-and-moore-mcilroy- produce-warehouse-15541 /. 51. The Historic Preservation Commission, Title III, Chapter 33, Article X of the Fayetteville City Code of Ordinances, is available here: https://library.municode.com/ar/Fayetteville/codes/code_of ordinances?nodeld=CD_ORD_TITIIIAD_ CH33DEBOCOAU ARTXHIDICO. 52. Arkansas Historic Preservation Program, Arkansas Certified Local Government Procedures, Arkansas Division of Heritage (Little Rock, AR: Arkansas Historic Preservation Program, 2001). Accessed 2023. 53. Arkansas CLG Procedure C.1.13: All members of the commission should be preservation -related professions, to the extent available in the community. If this requirement is not met the local government must demonstrate that it has made a reasonable effort to fill these positions with a preservation -related professional. When the commission is reviewing a matter in a discipline not represented on the commission, they shall consult with a professional who has expertise in that discipline. 54. For more information about NAPC training, visit https://www.napcommissions.ora . 55. The AHPP was unable to provide SHPO reports for the Fayetteville CLG. Self -assessment reporting completed by the City was used for analysis. The AHPP confirmed the City was in good standing with the CLG program in December 2022. Self -reporting CLG evaluations were only available for the years 2014, 2018, and 2022. 56. "Preserve America Communities." Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), Accessed 2023. https://www. achp.gov/preserve-america/community/fayetteville-arkansas. 57. Arkansas Historic Preservation Program, "Arkansas Historic Preservation Program," (State of Arkansas, 2022 2022). Accessed 2023. https://www. arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer. html?webmap=e904O629adab4l62bd21 b7dde5a5702d&extent=-95.8187,32.8399,-87.7053,36.6173. 58. Arkansas Historic Preservation Program. 2022. Arkansas Historic Preservation Program. State of Arkansas. Accessed 2023. 59. Arkansas Historic Preservation Program. 2022. Arkansas Historic Preservation Program. State of Arkansas. Accessed 2023. 60. See Section 2.1 for a comparison of local, state, and federal historic designations. 61. "S.3519 - Butterfield Overland National Historic Trail Designation Act," U.S. Congress, 2023, Accessed 2023. https:// www.congress.gov/bill/l 17th-congress/senate-bill/3519/titles. 62. "Nelson Hackett's Journey," The Nelson Hackett Project, University of Arkansas, 2023, Accessed 2023. https:// nelsonhackettproject.uark.edu/nelson-hacketts-journey/. 63. According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) National Risk Analysis, Washington County scored relatively high for winter weather, tornadoes, and heat waves. Social vulnerability and community resilience may also be reviewed on the index website available here: Map I National Risk Index (fema.gov). 64. PlaceEconomics, The Impacts of Historic Preservation in Arkansas. Accessed 2023. 65. Joel Walsh, "Fayetteville Joins Arkansas Downtown Network," Northwest Arkansas Democrat Gazette (Fayetteville, Arkansas), June 14, 2014, Accessed 2023. https://www.nwaonline.com/news/2014/jun/16/fayetteville-joins-arkansas- downtown-ne/; Walsh, "Fayetteville Joins Arkansas Downtown Network."; Greg Phillips. .� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN 88 References Cited 66. PlaceEconomics, The Impacts of Historic Preservation in Arkansas. Accessed 2023. 67. U.S. Census Bureau, "QuickFacts." Accessed 2023. 68. Personal communication with the Division of Arkansas Heritage, Accessed January 2023. 69. "QuickFacts: Asheville city, North Carolina; Lawrence city, Kansas; Fort Collins city, Colorado; Chapel Hill town, North Carolina; Boulder city, Colorado," U.S. Census Bureau (Washington, DC 2022), Accessed 2022, https://www.census. gov/quickfacts/fact/table/. 70. "Planning and Urban Design," City of Asheville. (Asheville, North Carolina 2022), Accessed 2023. https://www. ashevillenc.gov/departmenVplanning-urban-design/historic-resources/. 71. U.S. Census Bureau, "QuickFacts: Asheville city, North Carolina; Lawrence city, Kansas; Fort Collins city, Colorado; Chapel Hill town, North Carolina; Boulder city, Colorado." Accessed 2023. 72. "Planning," Town of Chapel Hill, (Chapel Hill, North Carolina 2022), Accessed 2023. https://www.townofchapelhill.org/ government/departments-services/planning. 73. "Historic Preservation," City of Fort Collins, (Fort Collins, Colorado 2022), Accessed 2023. https://www.fcgov.com/ historicpreservation/fort-colIins-land marks. php. 74. "Historic Resources," City of Lawrence, (Lawrence, Kansas 2022), Accessed 2023. https://Iawrenceks.org/pds/ historic resources/. 75. McDoux Preservation LLC, City of Fayetteville Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan: Community Involvement Plan (Fayetteville, AR: Arkansas City of Fayetteville, 2022). Accessed 2023. 76. McDoux Preservation LLC, City of Fayetteville Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan: Stakeholder Interview Results (Fayetteville, AR: Arkansas City of Fayetteville, 2022). Accessed 2023. 77. McDoux Preservation LLC, City of Fayetteville Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan: Community Survey Report (Fayetteville, AR: Arkansas City of Fayetteville, 2022). Accessed 2023. 78. The Fayetteville Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan: Community Survey Report is available to view here: https:// www.fayetteville-ar.gov/4231 /Heritage -and -Historic -Preservation -Plan. 79. NRHP criteria and NPS standards are outlined in National Register Bulletin 15 available here: https://www.nps.aov/ subjects/nationalregister/upload/N RB-15_web508.pdf. 80. The City of San Antonio, Texas, has outlined steps for deconstruction of buildings built before 1945 outside of local historic districts and buildings built before 1960 inside local historic districts. Program materials are available here: https://www.sareuse.com/. 81. Maria Franklin et al., "Documenting U.S. State and Territorial Approaches to Black Heritage, Diversity, and Inclusion in Preservation Practices 2022," The Digital Archaeology Record (2022), Accessed 2023. https:Hdoi.org/l0.48512/ XCV8470407, https://core.tdar.org/document/470407/documenting-us-state-and-territorial-approaches-to-black- heritage-diversity-and-inclusion-in-preservation-practices-2022. 82. Maria Franklin et al., "Documenting U.S. State and Territorial Approaches to Black Heritage, Diversity, and Inclusion in Preservation Practices 2022." Accessed 2023. 83. Maria Franklin et al., "Documenting U.S. State and Territorial Approaches to Black Heritage, Diversity, and Inclusion in Preservation Practices 2022." Accessed 2023. 84. Todd Gill, "New state law bans cities from releasing HMR tax info," Fayetteville Flyer (Fayetteville, AR), August 18, 2015, Accessed 2023. https://www.fayettevilleflyer.com/2015/08/18/new-state-law-bans-cities-from-releasing-hmr-tax- i nfo/. N Ot2 Special thanks to the City of Fayetteville, the Fayetteville Historic District Commission, the Fayetteville Black Historic Preservation Commission, community partners, and residents for their assistance in providing feedback, information, and sourcing historical photographs. .A HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN 89 References Cited images A. Village Creek State Park. 2021. "Trail of Tears." Arkansas State Parks. Accessed 2023. B. Rush, Brandon. 2020. "Poppies and old buildings on the square in Fayetteville, Arkansas." Wikipedia. Accessed 2023. C. Rush, Brandon. 2013. "348 Washington Avenue, Washington -Willow Historic District, Fayetteville, Arkansas." Wikipedia. Accessed 2023. D. Jr, Denis Tangney. 2018. "Fayetteville, Arkansas stock photo." istock. Accessed 2023. E. Wikipedia. 2007. "Old Main UofA." Wikipedia. Accessed 2023. F. Wikipedia user: Valis55. 2015. "David and Mary Margaret Durst House.: Wikipedia. Accessed 2023. G. Morse, John. 2005. "16th Street Baptist Church." Wikipedia. Accessed 2023. H. Arkansas Historic Preservation Program. 2019. "Heffelfinger-Freund House." Arkansas Heritage. Accessed 2023. I. Arkansas Historic Preservation Program. "Rehabilitation Tax Credits." Arkansas Heritage. Accessed 2023. J. Meripol, Art. 1974. "Fayetteville Farmers Market." Fayetteville Flyer. https://www.fayettevilleflyer.com/2015/06/26/ photographer-unearths-1974-photos-of-fayetteville-farmers-market/. Accessed 2023. K. City of Fort Smith. 2021. "Untitled." Facebook, December 2, 2021. City of Fort Smith, Arkansas. Accessed 2023. L. Rush, Brandon. 2020. "Poppies and old buildings on the square in Fayetteville, Arkansas." Wikipedia. Accessed 2023. M. Rothstein, Arthur. 1935. "Untitled." Library of Congress. Accessed 2023. N. Unknown. 1910. "Fayetteville Frisco Depot."Encyclopedia of Arkansas. Accessed 2023. O. Press, Associated. 1954. "A Tradition Dies." Fayetteville History. Accessed 2023. R Vizzier, James A. 1968. Fayetteville, Arkansas Program for Community Renewal. City of Fayetteville. Accessed 2023. Q. Lambeth, James. 1992. Sundancing: The Art and Architecture of James Lambeth. Accessed 2023. R. Shelton, Thayer Ewing. School Building. Patent filed July 31, 1956. Accessed 2023. Shelton, Thayer Ewing. "Fayettville's New School." Northwest Arkansas Times. August 24, 1956. Accessed 2023. S. Yell, Archibald. n.d. "Waxhaws Hall." Northwest Arkansas Democrat Gazette. Accessed 2023. T. Good, Ken. 1970. In the Way of Progress. Fayetteville, Arkansas: Northwest Arkansas Times. Accessed 2023. U. Sutherland, Cyrus. 1992. "Archibald Yell's Law Office on the Road." Fayetteville, Arkansas: University of Arkansas. Accessed 2023. V. Washington County, Arkansas. 1974. "Courthouse Steeple Replacement." Fayetteville, Arkansas: Washington County, Arkansas. Accessed 2023. W. Google Street View. 2023. Google Street View. Fayetteville, Arkansas: Google. Accessed 2023. X. Yeliseliv, Vladislay. 2015. "Woolsey Homestead." Revival Architecture, Inc. Accessed 2023. Y. U.S. Army. 1937. "Veterans Administration Medical Center." U.S. Army. Accessed 2023. Z. Unknown. Butterfield Route. Fayetteville History. Accessed 2023. AA. Raache, Hicham. 2017. "Trail of Tears to be marked with historic signs." Northwest Arkansas Democrat Gazette, 2017. Accessed 2023. https://www.nwaonline.com/news/2017/jun/05/trail-of-tears-to-be-marked-with-histor/. AB. Initiative, Equal Justice. 2021. "Historical Marker Recognizing Lynchings Dedicated in Washington County, Arkansas." Equal Justice Initiative Accessed 2023. https://eji.org/news/historical-marker-recognizing-lynchings-dedicated-in- washington-county-arkansas/. AC. Sanborn Map Company. 1886. Fayetteville, Arkansas. Library of Congress. Accessed 2023. AD. Fayetteville Public Schools. 1954. Yearbook. Fayetteville History. Accessed 2023. AE. National Park Service. Wayside Exhibits: A Guide to Developing Outdoor Interpretive Exhibits. First Edition. Harpers Ferry Center. October 2009. Accessed 2023. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/hfc/upload/Wayside-Guide-First-Edition.pdf AF. City of Cambridge, Massachusetts. "Story Maps." 2023. Accessed 2023. https://www.cambridgema.gov/GIS/ interactivemaps/Storymaps. AG."Alexander Residence (Raheen) Swimming Pool." 1978. Accessed 2023. Fay Jones Collection, Special Collections, University of Arkansas Libraries. .V HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN 90 0 Sol I Appendices Name Page AppendixA: Acronyms.............................................................................................92 AppendixB: Glossary................................................................................................93 Appendix C: Partnership Opportunities.........................................................96 Appendix D: Funding Opportunities.................................................................98 Appendix E: S01 Standards for Rehabilitation............................................100 Appendix F: S01 Professional Qualifications...............................................101 Appendix G: Historical Markers Guidance....................................................102 Appendix H: Historic District Properties.........................................................104 Appendix I; Historic Resources Survey Plan................................................123 Figure 91. Tightrope Walker Above the Square in 1919. Appendix A: Acronyms A&M Arkansas and Missouri Railroad A&P Advertising and Promotion Commission ACHP Advisory Council on Historic Preservation AHPP Arkansas Historic Preservation Program ARHP Arkansas Register of Historic Places BHPC Black Heritage Preservation Commission BIPOC Black, Indigenous, and People of Color CAMP Commission Assistance and Mentoring Program CLG Certified Local Government COA Certificate of Appropriateness CFR Code of Federal Regulations DFC Downtown Fayetteville Coalition DOE Determination of Eligibility DOI Department of the Interior FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency GIS Geographic Information Systems HDC Historic District Commission HMR Hotel, Motel, Restaurant Tax HPF Historic Preservation Fund HPRG Historic Preservation Restoration Grant HTC Historic Tax Credit LGBT+ Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Asexual, Intersex, Queer, Questioning, etc. MPS Multiple Property Submission MSA Main Street America/Arkansas NAPC National Alliance of Preservation Commissions NHPA National Historic Preservation Act NHT National Historic Trail NPS National Park Service NRHP National Register of Historic Places NTH National Trust for Historic Preservation NWA Northwest Arkansas POS Period of Significance QRE Qualifying Rehabilitative Expenditure SRB State Review Board SHPO State Historic Preservation Office (AHPP) SOI Secretary of the Interior THPO Tribal Historic Preservation Office U of A University of Arkansas USC United States Code VA Veterans Affairs WCA Washington County Assessor .A HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 1 92 Appendix B: Glossary Arkansas Historic Preservation Program (AHPP) is the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) for Arkansas, The AHPP State Review Board is responsible for reviewing nominations to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and the Arkansas Register of Historic Places (ARHP). The AHPP also provides oversight and disbursement of funds for various grant programs. Arkansas Register of Historic Places (ARHP) is the state equivalent of the NRHP. The state register is less stringent than the NRHP, providing an alternative designation for historic properties. The AHPP manages the ARHP and determines eligibility for inclusion. Black Heritage Preservation Commission (BHPC) is a seven -member body created to recognize, acknowledge, protect, and preserve historical resources and cemeteries associated with Black ethnic heritage, with special regard for Fayetteville's early Black families and individuals and the churches and other cultural resources they built. The BHPC is responsible for erecting historical markers for places of Black history and heritage. Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) is a legal permit petitioned by a property owner in a local historic district to complete alterations to a contributing resource in said district. The COA process is administered by the City's Historic District Commission (HDC) and typically requires the review of applicable design guidelines and submission of documents/plans for approval. Certified Local Government (CLG) is a government certified through national standards to manage local historic preservation initiatives. The CLG program was established in 1980 by Congress and is administered by the National Park Service (NPS) and the corresponding SHPO. City of Fayetteville, or City, is the local government of the municipality of Fayetteville, Arkansas. The use of the term City (uppercase) is differentiated from city (lowercase) which refers to the city's history, landscape, and geography. Contributing Resource is a historic resource that adds to the historic value of a district. The opposite of a contributing resource is a Noncontributing Resource which does not add value because of a lack of historic significance, alterations, or nonhistoric-age. Deconstruction is the act of removing building materials intact during demolition. This process aims to reuse and repurpose salvaged materials rather than discarding them for landfill. Designation is the official recognition status of a property or district's historic significance, These designations may be mostly honorary (federal and state) or have special protections (local ordinance historic district). Design Guidelines are specific design principles and recommendations one should follow when making changes or completing construction in a local historic district, The guidelines ensure that proposed changes are appropriate in the context of the local historic district. Easement is a legal protection for properties where covenants restrict certain property rights. The AHPP Conservation Easement program protects buildings from demolition through this legal restriction. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 1 93 Historic pertains to resources that have an official local, state, and/or federal designation(s). Historic -age are resources that are at least 45 to 50 years old. The opposite of historic -age is nonhistoric-age, which includes resources that are less than 45 years old. Historical pertains to resources that do not have an official local, state, or federal designation but are significant to the culture. It may also be used to describe "historical" maps or imagery, or an older house that does not have a historic designation. Historic Preservation is the identification, evaluation, recordation, documentation, curation, acquisition, protection, management, rehabilitation, restoration, stabilization, maintenance, research, interpretation, and conservation of historic properties, or education and training regarding the foregoing activities. Historic District Commission (HDC) is the legal body responsible for administering the COA process in Fayetteville, administering nominations for local historic districts and the NRHP, and providing comment and direction on the City's historic preservation program. Historic Preservation Fund (HPF) is a program funded by oil and gas lease revenues per the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, as amended, to assist in matching grants-in-aid for various historic preservation programs and projects. Historic Preservation Officer or Planner is the staff role of managing a historic preservation program and the executive secretary of the HDC. This program manager role is currently being filled by the Long Range & Preservation Planner with oversight from the Long -Range Planning & Special Projects Manager. Historic Integrity is a concept used to evaluate the significance of a historical resource. The resource must retain integrity of seven aspects; materials, workmanship, design, feeling, location, setting, and association. Ideally, the resource must retain some if not all of these aspects to be considered eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Historic Resources Survey, or Architectural Survey, is a planned process of identifying, evaluating, and documenting historical resources within a specific survey area. Local Ordinance District or Local Historic District is a historic district created by a municipality by the enactment of an ordinance for a specific area. Local historic districts include more than one contributing resource and often encompass neighborhoods. In Fayetteville, local historic districts are regulated by the City and HDC; in contrast, NRHP historic districts are largely honorary and only regulated when federal funds are used. Main Street Arkansas is a state -level program of the Main Street America program, sponsored by the National Trust for Historic Preservation. Main Street communities receive funding and support opportunities from the AHPR .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX I 94 National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) is the legislation that created the National Register of Historic Places and expanded federal review to include the survey, identification, and documentation of historic properties of projects funded by the federal government. Section 106 of the NHPA requires federal agencies to identify and assess the effects its actions may have on historic properties. National Historic Trail (NHT) is a National Park Service program that documents, programs, and preserves more than 25,000 miles of linear trail networks. National Park Service (NPS) is the federal agency within the Department of the Interior (DOI) that administers the NRHP, in addition to administering the nation's national parks and other sites. National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) is a federally -maintained list of districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture. NRHP Historic District is composed of districts sites, buildings, structures, and objects significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture. Property Type are groupings of properties defined by common physical and associative attributes. Public Private Partnerships (PPP) seek to complete projects or tasks using time and expenses approach to reduce expenses and improve project outcomes based on private expertise, Secretary of the Interior (SOI) is the executive official appointed by the President of the United States to administer the Department of the Interior (DOI, which includes the NPS). The SOI Standards for Rehabilitation are official guidelines for professional qualifications and for the categorization and methodology of preservation, rehabilitation, restoration, and reconstruction of historic buildings. SOI Professional Qualifications are federal standards published in Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 36 CFR Part 61 to provide a standard baseline of professional requirements for professions in the cultural resource management field. Section 106 is stipulated in the NHPA as the federal review process for historic resources. This legislation requires federal agencies to consider the effects of their actions on historic properties and is generally triggered by a federal action such as federal agency's finding, licensing, permit, or approval, State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) is the state historic preservation program. Each SHPO has a State Historic Preservation Officer. In Arkansas, the AHPP fulfills the role as SHPO, .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 1 95 Appendix C: Partnership Opportunities Name Type of Organization Potential Areas of Expertise Potential Partnerships Arkansas Air and Military Museum Aviation, Military History Programming Museum Arkansas Historical Organization Historic Preservation Networking Association Local History Arkansas Historic Agency Historic Preservation Programming, Preservation Program Arkansas/National Registers Designations Arkansas Municipal League League Grants, Local Government Grants The Art Gallery at NWA Mall Museum Exhibit Curation Programming Black Historic Preservation Commission Black History Education, Designation, Commission Programming Black Action Collective Organization Black History Education, Designation, Programming Botanical Garden of the Museum Landscape Design, Plants Programming Ozarks Clinton House Museum Museum Political History Programming Crystal Bridges Museum of Museum Art History/Conservation, Art Conservation, American Art Exhibit Curation Regional Programming Dickson Street Merchants Organization Economic Development Main Street Arkansas Events, Tourism Programming Experience Fayetteville City Department Economic Development, Main Street Arkansas Tourism Programming Fayetteville Chamber Nonprofit Economic Development Main Street Arkansas Programming Fayetteville History Blog Local History Education, Programming Fayetteville Farmers Market Community Events Events Organization Fayetteville Forward Historic Community Local History Community Activism and Heritage Resource Action Organization Group Fayetteville Natural Heritage Nonprofit I Land Preservation, Education, Programming Association Historic Sites Mapping Fayetteville Public Library Agency Archives, Local History Education, Programming Fayetteville Public Schools Agency Community Engagement Education Fayetteville Senior Activity & Agency Community Engagement Community Activism, Wellness Center Local History Education, Programming Friends of the East Mountain Community Black History, Cemetery Education, Programming Cemetery Organization Preservation Habitat for Humanity ReStore Charity Salvaging Materials Donations of Washington County Headquarters House Museum Museum Local History Education, Programming Historic District Commission Commission Designations, Local History Community Activism Designation KUAF Public Radio Media Community Engagement Education The Nature Conservancy, Nonprofit Easements, Land :9:1 Easements Fayetteville Conservation :rW HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 1 96 Name Type of Organization Potential Areas of Expertise Potential Partnerships Neighborhood Associations Community Designations, Local History Community Activism (in Fayetteville) Organization Northwest Arkansas Nonprofit Black History, Education Programming African American Heritage F Association, Inc. I Northwest Arkansas Heritage Nonprofit Historic Trails, Local History, Programming Trail Partners Designations Northwest Arkansas Land Nonprofit Easements, Land Preservation Networking Trust Prairie Grove Heritage Museum Local History Programming, Museum Designations Shiloh Museum of Ozark Museum Exploration/Settlement Grants History History Washington County Historical Preservation Community Engagement, Programming Society Historic Preservation The Wilson Art Museum Museum Art History/Conservation Education, Designation, Programming Trail of Tears Association Organization History Education, Designation, Programming University of Arkansas University Community Engagement Programming U of A Fay Jones School of University College Architecture, Community & Education, Programming Architecture and Design Regional Planning, Design U of A Fulbright College of University College Archaeology, History Education, Programming Arts & Sciences U of A Community Design University Architecture, Design Design Assistance Center U of A Museum Museum University History Programming VA Medical Center - Agency Military/Medical History Education Fayetteville Washington County Fair County Fair Agriculture History, Events, Programming Fairgrounds History :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 1 97 Appendix D: Funding Opportunities Funding opportunities are categorized below based on federal, state, and local/regional sources. Most of these grants are recurring annually, but it is possible for grants to change over time, become decommissioned, or institute new requirements, Therefore, it is recommended the City conduct research on each grant opportunity to determine the best path forward for funding projects, Federal Incentives Federal Historic Preservation Tax Incentives Program NPS oversight; tax credit of 20 percent of qualified expenditures; applies to income - producing properties only (https://www.nps,gov/tps/tax-incentives,htm) Federal Grants African American Civil Rights Grants* Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)* Disaster Recovery Grants Emergency Supplemental HPF History of Equal Rights Grant Opportunity* Save America's Treasures Tribal Historic Preservation Office Grant* Underrepresented Community Grants* Additional NPS Grants geared towards specific properties/projects State Grants AHPP County Courthouse Restoration Grant AHPP Historic Marker Program Grants AHPP CLG Grants (Funded by the NPS HPF)* AHPP Downtown Revitalization Grants Available to Downtown Network, Main Street Arkansas cities AHPP Historic Preservation Restoration Grant Option 1; Grants up to $10,000 to fund renovation and restoration projects that make properties eligible for nomination to the NRHP. 1) These grants are available to non-profit, local government, and private property owners. 2) Eligible properties must be listed on the ARHP or identified as noncontributing structures in an NRHP historic district. 3) The project must restore architectural features that will make the property eligible for the NRHP, 4) Grant recipients may apply for Option 2 funding in subsequent years. Requires a 2:1 match from the grantee. Option 2; Grants of $10,000 or more are available to fund approved restoration projects for properties currently listed on the National Register of Historic Places, 1) These grants are available to nonprofit and local government. Private property owners are not eligible for Option 2 grant funding. 2) Any owner receiving Option 2 grant funds must sign and file an easement agreement before grant funds are released (see page 12). 3) Option 2 recipients may also re -apply for additional funding in subsequent years, These grants require an easement to be donated to AHPP, Requires a 2:1 match from the grantee. Option 3; Grants of $5,000 to $9,999 for approved restoration projects for cemeteries listed on the NRHP. Recipients must provide a 20 percent match, 50 percent of which may be in -kind materials, services, and/or labor. This is a 4 to 1 match with AHPP, Arkansas Arts Council Grants Curtis H, Sykes Memorial Grant Program* :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 1 98 State and Local Incentives Arkansas Rehabilitation State tax credit of 25 percent of eligible expenditures; costs must have a minimum Tax Credits; Owner- investment of $5,000. There is a maximum cap of credit value of $25,000. Properties may be Occupied individually listed, contributing to an existing historic district, and deemed eligible for listing following the rehabilitation to be eligible for the state historic tax credit. The projects must follow the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. Arkansas Rehabilitation State tax credit of up to 25 percent of eligible expenditures; costs have a minimum Tax Credits; Income- investment of $25,000. There is a maximum cap of credit value of $400,000. Properties may Producing be individually listed, contributing to an existing historic district, and deemed eligible for listing following the rehabilitation to be eligible for the state historic tax credit. The projects must follow the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. Nonprofit Funding Sources National Funding African American Cultural Heritage Action Fund (NTHP)* Sources Clinton Foundation* Cynthia Woods Mitchell Fund for Historic Interiors (NTHP)** National Trust Emergency/Intervention Funding (NTHP) Hart Family Fund for Small Towns (NTHP) Johanna Favrot Fund for Historic Preservation (NTHP)** National Trust Preservation Funds* Shell Oil Company Foundation* Local and Regional Arkansas Black Hall of Fame Foundation* Funding Sources Arkansas Municipal League Benefit Programs Carpet One Floor & Home Greening of Arkansas Grants Program J.B. Hunt Company Giving* Northwest Arkansas Community Foundation* Preserve Arkansas Services Sunderland Foundation Grants* Tyson Foods Corporate Sponsorships* Union Pacific Foundation* Walmart Northwest Arkansas Giving Program* Willard & Pat Walker Charitable Foundation *Potential for funding historic resources surveys and/or historic context development. There is the possibility an agreement could be made with certain local sources for funding surveys and development of historic contexts. **Requires work to be completed on an NHL. Hotel, Motel, Restaurant Tax Since 1977, revenue from the Hotel, Motel, Restaurant (HMR) Tax (Arkansas Code §26-75-606) has been a tool for Fayetteville84 HMR taxes (2 percent sales) are split evenly between the Fayetteville Parks and Recreation Department and Advertising and Promotion (A&P) Commission. One percent of the HMR tax is used for the following tasks; • Advertising and promotion purposes; • Convention center construction and upkeep; • Operation of a visitor center or for other tourist promotion facilities; • Funding staffing for the A&P Commission; • Funding the arts; • Operation of tourist -oriented facilities, and; • Construction and maintenance activities for public recreation facilities and bond payment. The City may appropriate the sales revenue to the aforementioned activities, but they are not permitted to use these funds for capital improvements that differ from the ones mentioned above, operational costs, and/or for civic groups and the chamber of commerce. :rW HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 1 99 Appendix E: Secretary of the Interior (SOI) Standards for Rehabilitation The Secretary of the Interior (SOI) Standards for Rehabilitation, commonly referred to as the SOI Standards, are official guidelines for professional qualifications and on the categorization and methodology of preservation. Note the SOI Standards for Rehabilitation provide a basis for rehabilitation efforts. The White Hangar Local Historic District includes specifications for certain materials and features in addition to these standards. 1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships, 2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. 3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken. 4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved. 6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. 7 Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used. 8. Archaeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken. 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 1 100 Appendix F: SOI Professional Qualifications The following are the Secretary of the Interior Professional Qualifications (36 CFR Part 61). History The minimum professional qualifications in history are a graduate degree in history or closely related field; or a bachelor's degree in history or closely related field plus one of the following: At least two years of full-time experience in research, writing, teaching, interpretation, or other demonstrable professional activity with an academic institution, historic organization or agency, museum, or other professional institution; or • Substantial contribution through research and publication to the body of scholarly knowledge in the field of history. Architectural History The minimum professional qualifications in architectural history are a graduate degree in architectural history, art history, historic preservation, or closely related field, with coursework in American architectural history, or a bachelor's degree in architectural history, art history, historic preservation, or closely related field plus one of the following: At least two years of full-time experience in research, writing, or teaching in American architectural history or restoration architecture with an academic institution, historical organization or agency, museum, or other professional institution; or • Substantial contribution through research and publication to the body of scholarly knowledge in the field of American architectural history. Historic Architecture The minimum professional qualifications in historic architecture are a professional degree in architecture or a state license to practice architecture, plus one of the following: At least one year of graduate study in architectural preservation, American architectural history, preservation planning, or closely related field, or At least one year of full-time professional experience on historic preservation projects, Architecture The minimum professional qualifications in architecture are a professional degree in Architecture plus at least two years of full-time experience in architecture; or a state license to practice architecture. Archaeology The minimum professional qualifications in archaeology are a graduate degree in archaeology, anthropology, or closely related field plus: At least one year of full-time professional experience or equivalent specialized training in archaeological research, administration, or management; At least four months of supervised field and analytic experience in general North American archaeology, and Demonstrated ability to carry research to completion, In addition to these minimum qualifications, a professional in prehistoric archaeology shall have at least one year of full-time professional experience at a supervisory level in the study of archaeological resources of the prehistoric period. A professional in historic archaeology shall have at least one year of full-time professional experience at a supervisory level in the study of archaeological resources of the historic period. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 1 101 Appendix G: Historical Markers Guidance Historical markers are an effective method of providing orientation to a significant historical resource, Markers can be related to a particular historical event, an important individual, sacred site, or notable building, structure, or object. In addition to state historical markers which are administered by the AHPP, the City is developing another program for local markers celebrating and recognizing history in Fayetteville, Both BHPC and HDC have a role in establishing historical markers. Historical Markers The process for approving historical markers can be organized by the following steps: eligibility, application, approval (or denial), and erection of the marker itself. Baseline steps for the historical marker process is outlined below. Eligibility Criteria The marker must fulfill at least one of the following parameters: 1. A historical event that happened at least 50 years ago. 2. A significant person who has passed away at least 50 years ago or has contributed to the community at least 50 years ago. (i.e., Jane Smith died in 1973 or Jane Smith was the first Black woman to be mayor in or before 1973). 3, A historical place (site, building, object, structure) that is at least 50 years old. Application Process 1, Complete an application form detailing the purpose and need for the historical marker, and ensuring the proposed marker meets eligibility criteria. 2. Draft a statement of significance for the historical marker topic. The statement should include referenced data and information in bibliographic format (Chicago citation style). 3. Submit the application with a fee for approval, Approval Process 1, The applicable historic commission or both historic commissions will review the application at their commission meeting. The applicant should be present for the meeting to present their case for the historical marker. 2. If denied, the staff and the commissions may work with the applicant in correcting their application or refining their proposed topic. 3. If approved, the commission(s) would request a formal draft text for the historical marker. The applicant will be allotted 90 days to draft the marker text. The marker draft should be approximately 200 to 300 words and should include a title for the marker. 4. Once resubmitted, the HDC and/or BHPC and Historic Preservation staff will review the draft and work with the applicant to develop a final draft. Erection of the Marker 1, Once approved, staff will order the marker to be manufactured. 2. The City may work to facilitate the siting of the maker if it is placed on public property. Implementation .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 1 102 Alternative Methods There are many ways to express and share history in the built environment, as well as virtually. Formal historical markers are expensive and require more time for approval, therefore other methods of recognizing history should also be explored by the BHPC, HDC, and the City. Below is a list of additional options that may be explored in addition to formal historical marker programs: Informational Panels Informational panels that include imagery and text. Panels often accompany historical sites and complexes that require additional orientation of public history through detailed text and images. National Park Service informational panel design is used frequently in national parks and other NPS sites as a way to clearly convey history and the environment. Online Tools Online map portal for crowdsourced story submissions. Examples include: There's A Story Here developed by the City of San Antonio. This website provides users the opportunity to share their own personal stories that celebrate their upbringing and cultural heritage in San Antonio. Texas Freedom Colonies Atlas developed by Dr. Andrea Roberts. This crowdsourced interactive map fact -checks user -submissions about freedom colonies and other significant Black communities in Texas. Virtual walking tour with map and points of interest. Virtual walking tours can be explored virtually or in -person, and are equipped with an interactive map, images, and/or audio media. A traditional map with interactive points (Wake Forest, North Carolina). A story map platform with a short narrative and data points (Hart Island, New York City). Audio storytelling with imagery (Longmont, Colorado). This example provides virtual tours for downtown, Latino, and Women's history. Various story maps depicting legacy businesses and Black, LGBT+, and women histories (Cambridge, Massachusetts). Video recordings of walking tour stops (Baltimore National Heritage Area). Y v aN y Y 36 x 48 uDnght; tiRis Zion National Park Figure 92. NPS informational panels. Source: National Park Service lr< Maria Baldwin (32 Sacramento St)-� ru L,iur IYIAM'in v:u �n. hr,ame�rrr of,hr A;.su, tremmnr xnow �n t,mhr;agr. mr rm, i_,� arno. nm.n<,nronma..rn. C \ romptr,.a c.mnr;aR�.m,rn.r mne p.otnmmfeRi hm n.. � ;y`s� xnmh. m f eez, nm,.r...r..hr rrannim eppomunm�m,r•rn„ f Figure 93. Story Map. Source: City of Cambridge, Massachusetts :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 1 103 Appendix H: Historic District Properties The following tables include a list of property addresses in NRHP and local historic districts in Fayetteville as of 2023. Historic Districts Local Historic District Name Year Listed Significance White Hangar 2008 Local NRHP Historic Districts Name Year Listed Criteria Area of Significance Level of Significance Washington -Willow Historic District 1980 A, C Architecture Local Community Planning Economics Education Law Fayetteville Veterans Administration 1980 A, C Architecture State Hospital District Health/Medicine Politics/Government Mount Nord Historic District 1982 A, C Architecture Local Commerce Politics/Government Wilson Park Historic District 1995 C Architecture Local West Dickson Street Commercial 2007 A, C Architecture Local Historic District Commerce University of Arkansas Campus 2009 A, C Architecture State Historic District Education Butterfield Overland Mail Route 2009 A Transportation State Fayetteville Segments Historic District Mount Sequoyah Cottages Historic 2012 A Religion State District Meadow Springs Historic District 2019 A, C Architecture Local Community Planning Benjamin Franklin Johnson II 2019 A, C Architecture Local Homestead District Agriculture North Garvin Drive Historic District 2021 C Architecture Local :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 1 104 Historic District Properties Local Historic District White Hangar Local Historic District SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0792 White Hangar White Hangar at Drake Field 4290 S, School Ave I No style NRHP Historic District Benjamin Franklin Johnson II Homestead District NRHP Historic District SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0345 Ben Johnson Barn Johnson Barn 3150 W Pear Lane Craftsman WA1691 Benjamin Johnson II House Johnson House 3150 W Pear Lane Craftsman N/A Chicken House N/A 3150 W Pear Lane No style N/A Spring House N/A 3150 W Pear Lane No style N/A Dam N/A 3150 W Pear Lane N/A N/A Rock walls N/A 3150 W Pear Lane No style N/A Cistern N/A 3150 W Pear Lane No style N/A Pergola N/A 3150 W Pear Lane No style N/A Workhouse foundation Site of the former Workhouse 3150 W Pear Lane N/A N/A Orchard Site of the Orchard 3150 W Pear Lane N/A Butterfield Overland Route, Fayetteville Segment NRHP Historic District SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0975 Butterfield Overland Mail Route Butterfield Route Segment 1 West of Old Missouri Road N/A WA0976 Butterfield Overland Mail Route Butterfield Route Segment 2 West of Old Missouri Road N/A Fayetteville Veterans Affairs Hospital NRHP Historic District SHPO Site ID Name Address Style WA1207 Main Hospital Building 1100 N College Ave Colonial Revival WA1208 Dining Hall and Attendants' Quarters 1100 N College Ave Colonial Revival WA1209 I Recreation Building 1100 N College Ave Colonial Revival WA1205 I Nurses' Quarters 1100 N College Ave Colonial Revival WA1210 Director's Residence 1100 N College Ave Colonial Revival WA1211 Duplex Quarters 1100 N College Ave Colonial Revival WA1212 Duplex Quarters 1100 N College Ave Colonial Revival WA1202 Storehouse and Garage Building 1100 N College Ave Colonial Revival WA1201 Laundry Building 1100 N College Ave Colonial Revival WA1200 Boiler Plant 1100 N College Ave No Style WA1199 I Seamstress Building 1100 N College Ave No Style N/A I Flag pole 1100 N College Ave N/A WA1204 I Garage 1100 N College Ave No Style WA1206 Gatehouse 1100 N College Ave Colonial Revival WA1193 Connecting Corridor (Res 1 to 3) 1100 N College Ave N/A N/A Front Gateposts 1100 N College Ave N/A WA1059 Elliptical Lawn and Main Drive 1100 N College Ave N/A :rW HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 1 105 Meadow Spring NRHP Historic District SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0195 Vest, John S House N/A 21 N West Ave Gothic Revival/ Carpenter WA0122 Thomsen, Fred, House N/A 202 N Locust Ave Plain/Traditional WA0137 Hanks, Otto B., House N/A 314 W Spring St Craftsman WA1260 Hillcrest Towers N/A 1 N School Ave Brutalist WA1547 Apartment Complex At Mullis Apartment 201 N Locust St Contemporary 201 N. Locust WA1555 Building At 203 W. Spring NWA Center For Equality 203 W Spring St Contemporary Street WA1556 Doctor's Building Mid -South Training 241 W Spring St Century Standard Academy/W-R Hair Salon/ Commercial Shin Dig Papiere WA1558 Brown, Oliver, House N/A 309 W Spring St Folk Victorian WA1559 Shook, Earl, House Therapy Tree 311 W Spring St Craftsman WA1567 Hansard, John C., House N/A 103 N School Ave Plain/Traditional WA1568 Feathers, John, House Apartments At 109 N. 109 N School Ave Folk Victorian School Avenue WA1570 House At 116 N. School N/A 116 N School Ave Folk Victorian Avenue WA1571 Apartments At 110 N. N/A 110 N School Ave Contemporary School Avenue WA1573 House At 322 W. Meadow Vacant Lot 322 W Meadow St N/A Street WA1574 House At 320 W. Meadow N/A 320 W Meadow St Craftsman Street WA1575 Workshop At Shipley Tanner McGinty Workshop 101-B N Locust Ave Plain/Traditional Alley WA1576 House At 304 W. Meadow Bill D. Stiles House 304 W Meadow St Queen Anne/ Street Eastlake WA1577 Farmer, Elizabeth, House Tanner Mcginty House 101 N Locust Ave Craftsman WA1579 Harris Dental Clinic Ross Dental Clinic 106 N Locust Ave Century Standard Commercial WA1582 Head, James A., House Apartments At 202 W. 202 W Meadow St Contemporary Meadow Street WA1595 Apartments At 309-311 W. N/A 309-311 W Meadow St Contemporary Meadow Street WA1596 House At 327 W. Meadow N/A 327 W Meadow St Contemporary Street WA1601 Mitchell, Owen C., House Austin, Brenda H., House 413 W Center St Folk Victorian WA1602 House At 415 W. Center N/A 415 W Center St Other Street WA1605 Briggans, Williams, House Satkarm & Teresa Pictor 16 S West Ave Craftsman House, The Mystic Melon WA1607 Andy's Drive -In Lynn & Joel Carver Center 9 S School Ave Contemporary Restaurant For Public Radio (Kuaf) WA1613 Apartment Complex At Feather's Cottage 109 N School Ave Contemporary 109 N. School Avenue Apartments :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 1 106 Meadow Spring NRHP Historic District continued SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA1614 House At 224 W. Meadow Parking Lot 224 W Meadow St N/A Street WA1620 House At 10 N. School N/A 10 N School Ave Other Avenue WA1621 House At 314 W. Center N/A 314 W Center St Other Street WA1622 House At 320 W. Center N/A 320 W Center St Other Street WA1623 House At 5 S. School N/A 5 S School Ave Other Avenue WA1624 House At 402 W. Parking Lot 400 W Mountain St N/A Mountain Street WA0054 Tharp, Moses B., House Besom, Robert B., 15 N West Ave Queen Anne/Eastlake House WA0055 House At 11 N. West Tolley & Brooks Law 11 N West Ave Queen Anne/Eastlake Avenue Firm WA0056 Simpson, William W„ N/A 5 N West Ave Queen Anne/Eastlake House WA0123 Alvin Jones House N/A 206 N Locust Ave Plain/Traditional WA0124 House At 210 N, Locust N/A 210 N Locust Ave Craftsman Avenue WA0125 House At 212 N. Locust N/A 212 N Locust Ave Plain/Traditional Avenue WA0126 House At 216 N. Locust N/A 216 N Locust Ave Plain/Traditional Avenue WA0127 House At 224 N. Locust N/A 224 N Locust Ave Plain/Traditional Avenue WA0135 Cook, Jacob M., House N/A 207 N Locust Ave Bungalow WA0136 Bell, John P., House N/A 201 N Locust Dy Craftsman WA0138 Clarence Marshall House N/A 318 W Spring St Craftsman WA0167 Marshall's Grocery The High Roller 322 W Spring St 20th Century Standard Cyclery Commercial WA1237 House At 315 West N/A 315 W Center St Folk Victorian Center Street WA1238 House At 321 West N/A 321 W Center St American Foursquare Center Street WA1242 House At 50 South N/A 50 S School Ave Queen Anne/Eastlake School Street WA1243 Roberts, John C„ House N/A 320 W Mountain St Queen Anne/Eastlake WA1554 Warbritton, Othel, House Boyd Law Firm 121 W Spring St Plain/Traditional WA1557 House At 301 W. Spring N/A 301 W Spring St Craftsman Street WA1560 Jeffries, Paul, House Apartments At 313 313 W Spring St Craftsman W. Spring Street WA1561 Bond, Samford H., House Aspire Solutions 323 W Spring St Prairie Style WA1562 Alburty, Ada, House Doss Law Firm 121 N East Ave Queen Anne/Eastlake WA1564 House At 418 W. Meadow Lushbaugh Law 418 W Meadow St Folk Victorian Street Firm :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 1 107 Meadow Spring NRHP Historic District continued SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address I Style WA1565 House At 416 W. Meadow Street N/A 416 W Meadow St Craftsman WA1566 House At 414 W. Meadow Street Steven Flemming Tax Service 414 W Meadow St Plain/Traditional WA1572 House At 102 N. School Avenue N/A 102 N School Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA1578 Couch, Fred T, House The Bungalow Salon 115 N Locust Ave Plain/Traditional WA1580 House At 230 W. Meadow Street Juli Dorrough House 230 W Meadow St Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA1581 Hays House Meadow Street Suites 204 W Meadow St Plain/Traditional WA1583 Putman, W. B., House Lisa Lashley Higgins, CPA - Lashley Building 111 N Church Ave Spanish/Mission Revival WA1584 Faller, John W., House N/A 117 N Church Ave Craftsman WA1585 Smiley, Frank, House N/A 114 N Church Ave Craftsman WA1586 Mintun, Arthur R., House N/A 110 N Church Ave Minimal Traditional WA1587 Dr. David C. Roberts House N/A 124 W Meadow St Colonial Revival WA1588 Read Apartments N/A 110 W Meadow St Art Moderne WA1589 Whiddon, William T, House N/A 215 W Meadow St Shingle Style WA1590 Chandler, James, House N/A 217 W Meadow St Praire Style WA1591 Meadow Apartments N/A 219 W Meadow St Art Moderne WA1592 House At 24 N. Locust Avenue N/A 24 N Locust Ave Folk Victorian WA1593 House At 20 N. Locust Avenue I N/A 20 N Locust Ave I Folk Victorian WA1594 Peel, Frank W., House N/A 21 N Locust Ave I Craftsman WA1597 House At 14 N. School Avenue Klinger, Timothy C., House 14 N School Ave Craftsman WA1598 Harris, Sarah H., House N/A 21 N West Ave Italianate/Italianate Villa WA1599 Walkers Cleaners N/A 20 N School Ave Century Standard Commercial WA1600 Rushing Plumbing & Heating N/A 16 N School Ave Century Standard Commercial WA1603 House At 419 W. Center Street Gary Fast & Michael Hill House 419 W Center St Craftsman WA1606 Busey, Ethel L., House Joetta Harriman House 414 W Mountain St Craftsman WA1608 Fayetteville Floor Co. Gary's Hairbenders 7 S School Ave 20th Century Standard Commercial WA1612 Apartment Complex At 164 N. Shipley Alley Phelan Apartments 164 N Shipley Alley Contemporary WA1551 Weber, Nora, House N/A 226 N Locust Ave I English Revival WA1569 House At 115 N. School Avenue I N/A 115 N School Ave Plain/Traditional WA1604 Keller, Frank M., House I N/A 12 S West Ave Craftsman WA0196 Stapleton, Orin, House N/A 216 W Spring St Plain/Traditional :rrW HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 1 108 Mount Nord NRHP Historic District SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0404 Pritchard House Triangle House 1 W Mt Nord St Neoclassical WA0406 Bohart-Huntington House Huntington House 2 W Mt Nord St Queen Anne/Eastlake WA0407 Gulley House Harrison House 3 W Mt Nord St Queen Anne/Eastlake WA0408 Lawsen House Block House 4 W Mt Nord St Colonial Revival WA0405 Mock-Fulbright House Hall House 5 W Mt Nord St Neoclassical Mount Nord NRHP Historic District SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA1131 N/A Cottage #1 1810 E Skyline Dr No style WA1132 N/A Cottage #2 808 E Skyline Dr No style North Gavin NRHP Historic District SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name I Address Style Unknown N/A House at 15 N Gavin Dr 15 N Gavin Dr Contemporary Unknown Preston Magruder House #1 House at 37 N Gavin Dr 37 N Gavin Dr Contemporary Unknown Cole House House at 49 N Gavin Dr 49 N Gavin Dr Contemporary Unknown Cole House Carport Carport at 49 N Gavin Dr 49 N Gavin Dr Contemporary University of Arkansas Campus NRHP Historic District SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0001 Old Main, U of A University Hall 459 N Campus Walk Second Empire WA0031 Vol Walker Hall University Library 459 N Campus Walk Classical Revival WA0038 Geology Building (razed ca. 2011) Old Geology Building; Ordark Building 902 W Dickson St Art Deco WA0058 Carnall, Ella Hall Inn at Carnall Hall 465 Arkansas Ave Colonial Revival WA0059 Agri Hall; Home EC. Building; Univ Infirmary Agri Engineering Agricultural Annex 935 W Maple St Colonial Revival WA0081 Engineering Hall John White Jr. Hall 770 W Dickson St Collegiate Gothic WA0084 Agriculture Building I N/A 475 N Campus Walk Collegiate Gothic WA0086 Peabody Hall N/A 763 W Maple St Plain/Traditional WA0087 Army ROTC Building Women's Gymnasium 775 W Maple St Classical Revival WA0117 Home Economics Building Human Environmental Sciences Building 987 W Maple St Collegiate Gothic WA0141 Student Union Memorial Hall; Futrell Hall 480 N Campus Walk Collegiate Gothic WA0347 Ozark Hall; Classroom Building Business Admin Bldg, Gearhart Hall; Graduate School 340 N Campus Dr Other WA0348 Chi Omega Greek Theatre Greek Theatre 980 W Dickson St Classical Revival WA0349 Chemistry Building Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry 345 N Campus Dr Collegiate Gothic WA0350 Men's Gymnasium; Field House Jim & Joyce Faulkner Performing Arts Center 453 Garland Ave Collegiate Gothic WA0930 Fine Arts Building Fine Arts Center 340 Garland Ave International :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 1 109 University of Arkansas Campus NRHP Historic District continued SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0931 Sigma Nu Fraternity House Phoenix House 348 Arkansas Ave International WA0984 Chemistry Building; Psychology & Geography Building Academic Support Building 470 N Campus Walk Italianate WA0985 Razorback Hall Gibson Hall 1050 W Dickson St Collegiate Gothic WA0986 Razorback Annex Gibson Annex 300 N Mcllroy Ave Collegiate Gothic WA0987 Delta Gamma Sorority House University House; Phi Mu Sorority House 1002 W Maple St Other WA0988 Davis Hall Law Center Annex; Phi Mu Sorority House 1030 W Maple St Colonial Revival WA0989 Gregson Hall CLASS+ 301 Garland Ave Collegiate Gothic WA0990 Holcombe Hall Holcombe Hall Dormitory 550 Garland Ave Colonial Revival WA0991 Pi Kappa Alpha Fraternity House Pike House 320 N Arkansas Ave Century Modern WA0992 Science Engineering Auditorium -Hillside Auditorium 902 W Dickson St Other WA0993 Science Building Science D Building; Discovery Hall 435 Garland Ave New Formalism WA0994 Graduate Education Building College of Education and Health Professions 751 W Maple St Mid-20th Century Modern WA0995 Mullins Library David W. Mullins Library 365 N Mcllroy Ave Other WA1169 Arkansas Union (East Half Of Building) Union Building 435 Garland Ave Other WA1170 George & Boyce Billingsly Music Building Billingsly Building 377 N Mcllroy Ave Other WA1172 Daniel E. Ferritor Hall Ferritor Hall 319 N Campus Walk Other WA1173 Science Engineering Building Science and Engineering Hall 850 W Dickson St Other WA1174 Bell Engineering Center Bell Center 800 W Dickson St Brutalism WA1175 Plant Science Building Plant Sciences 475 N Campus Walk Brutalism WA1176 Rosen, Harry R., Alternative Pest Control Center Rosen Center 979 W Maple St Other WA1177 Watermann Hall Leflar Law Center 1045 W Maple St International/ Other �W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 1 110 Washington -Willow NRHP Historic District SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0468 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Edmiston House 309-311 N Washington Ave Plain/Traditional WA0467 Harris House Koeppe House 305 N Washington Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0469 Connor -Hight House Thompson House 315 N Washington Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0470 Cravens -Lewis House Lewis House 327 N Washington Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0471 Stringfellow -Read House Long House 329 N Washington Ave Colonial Revival WA0472 Bozarth House McNair House 339 N Washington Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0473 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Hiemenez House 347 N Washington Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0474 Harding House Newbern House 357 N Washington Ave I Greek Revival WA0475 Harding House Newbern House 403 N Washington Ave I Other WA0476 Albright -Conner- Winchester House Hoffman House 409 N Washington Ave Plain/Traditional WA0477 Earle-Wiggans-Wilkinson House Owings House 415 N Washington Ave Plain/Traditional WA0480 McChesney House Jones House 429 N Washington Ave Plain/Traditional WA0490 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Suttle House 504 N Washington Ave Plain/Traditional WA0492 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Hunt House 432 N Washington Ave Plain/Traditional WA0495 Sherman -Hook -Douglas House Daniel House 416 N Washington Ave Bungalow WA0478 McConnell House Owings House 419 N Washington Ave I Craftsman WA0479 Pierce House Bunch House 427 N Washington Ave I Bungalow WA0481 Mayes -Lewis House Bumpass House 435 N Washington Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0482 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Jenkins House 503 N Washington Ave I Plain/Traditional WA0483 Simmons House Stanberry House 505 N Washington Ave Bungalow WA0484 Lang House Lunsford House 513 N Washington Ave Other WA0485 Davies House Shea House 523 N Washington Ave Craftsman WA0486 Cravens -Pearson House Thomas House 525 N Washington Ave Craftsman WA0487 Mayes -Carlisle House Rhodes House 531 N Washington Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0488 Perry -Davidson House Reis House 530 N Washington Ave Craftsman WA0489 Finch -Stone House Hunnicutt House 520 N Washington Ave Italianate Villa WA0491 Norman House Herriman House 502 N Washington Ave I Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0493 Perkins House Newbern House 428 N Washington Ave Bungalow WA0494 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Murray House 422 N Washington Ave Greek Revival WA0498 Frost House Lesh House 356 N Washington Ave Greek Revival :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 111 Washington -Willow NRHP Historic District continued SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0502 Collier House Smith House 326 N Washington Ave Craftsman WA0507 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Harrington House 315 N Willow Ave Bungalow WA0510 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Patrick House 309-311 N Washington Ave Plain/Traditional WA0512 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Alexander House 409 N Willow Ave Other WA0496 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Newbern House 410 N Washington Ave Craftsman WA0499 Williams House Mathias House 348 N Washington Ave Greek Revival WA0501 Mcllroy House Patrick House 322 N Washington Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0503 Williams House Nickell House 310 N Washington Ave I Other WA0504 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Banks House 308 N Washington Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0505 Wood House Banks House 306 N Washington Ave Greek Revival WA0506 Greer House Greer House 309 N Willow Ave Bungalow WA0508 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Kost House 325 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0509 Davies House McNair House 341 N Willow Ave Craftsman WA0511 Walker House Adams House 347 N Willow Ave Greek Revival WA0513 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Trumbo House 413 N Willow Ave Plain/Traditional WA0514 Rollins House Phillips House 421 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0515 Cravens House Stone House 427 N Willow Ave I Greek Revival WA0516 Nix House Skillern House 433 N Willow Ave I Craftsman WA0517 White -Shultz House Hall House 503 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0518 Trahin House Phillips House 511 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0497 Hathcock House Havers House 400 N Washington Ave English Revival WA0531 Mitchell House Morrison House 432 N Willow Ave Plain/Traditional WA0534 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Blair House 420 N Willow Ave Other WA0519 England -White House Maxfield House # 1 523 N Willow Ave Other WA0520 Baker -Bush House Maxfield House # 2 533 N Willow Ave I Craftsman WA0521 Goforth -Tucker House Lighten House 603 N Willow Ave I Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0522 McRoy House McRoy House 613 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0523 Walker House Phillip House 610 N Willow Ave Bungalow WA0524 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Benner House 608 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0525 Parker House Lewis House 534 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake �W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 1 112 Washington -Willow NRHP Historic District continued SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0526 Rosser House Harrison House 528 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0527 Hansard House Kennedy House 520 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0528 Lewis House Foster House 514 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0529 Hill House Hill House 506 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0530 Milburn House Lewis House 504 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0532 Polk House Connors House 428 N Willow Ave Bungalow WA0533 Askew House Alter House 424 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0536 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Parker House 346 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0537 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Baxter House 312 N Willow Ave Bungalow WA0535 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Fletcher House 354 N Willow Ave English Revival WA0543 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Clock House 228 E Dickson St Other WA0546 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Stapleton House 218 E Dickson St Plain/Traditional WA0547 Ripley House Logue House 210 E Dickson St Plain/Traditional WA0552 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Gosnell House 220 E Sutton St Plain/Traditional WA0553 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Fletcher House 304 E Sutton St Bungalow WA0555 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Bowman House 217 E Lafayette St Bungalow WA0558 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Morgan House 225 E Lafayette St Plain/Traditional WA0564 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Walker House 220 E Maple St Plain/Traditional WA0565 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Kirby House 224 E Maple St Other WA0566 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Serebreni House 223 E Maple St Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0394 Headquarters House Washington County Historical Society 118 E Dickson St Greek Revival WA0538 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Lea House 310 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0539 Williams House Harding House 308 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0540 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Charlton House 306 N Willow Ave Bungalow WA0541 Osborn House Gayer House 304 N Willow Ave Bungalow WA0542 Lemke House 0 Cormack House 231 E Dickson St Craftsman WA0544 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Allred House 222 E Dickson St Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0545 McConnell House Yates House 220 E Dickson St Plain/Traditional WA0548 Wade House Phillips House 216 E Sutton St Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0549 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Thompson House 218 E Sutton St Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0550 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Zisner House 217 E Sutton St Colonial Revival :rW HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 1 113 Washington -Willow NRHP Historic District continued SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0551 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Reif House 219 E Sutton St Bungalow WA0554 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Lockhart House 303 E Sutton St Plain/Traditional WA0556 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Hine House 221 E Lafayette St Plain/Traditional WA0557 Lotspeich House Woodley & Wilson House 223 E Lafayette St Plain/Traditional WA0560 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Hannold House 220 E Lafayette St Plain/Traditional WA0561 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Guisinger House 214 E Lafayette St Bungalow WA0567 Bossmeyer House Fonte House 219 E Maple St Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0569 Davidson House Roe House 128 E Davidson St Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0559 Stone House Stone -Hilton House 306 E Lafayette St Greek Revival WA0562 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Gammil House 118 E Lafayette St Craftsman WA0568 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Hickson House 117 E Davidson St Craftsman WA0563 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington January House 116 E Maple St Craftsman WA0570 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Walker House 218 E Maple St Plain/Traditional WA0638 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Guadalajara House 312 Lafayette St Bungalow WA0639 Simco House Gessler House 318 Lafayette St Colonial Revival WA0640 Guisinger House Mace House 322 Lafayette St Greek Revival WA0641 Reed House Dana House 404 Lafayette St Colonial Revival WA0642 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Trumbo House 408 Lafayette St Craftsman WA0644 Harlan House Haj House 416 Lafayette St Plain/Traditional WA0647 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Crouch House 426 Lafayette St Craftsman WA0655 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Ewen House 425 Lafayette St Craftsman WA0656 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Briggs House 423 Lafayette St Colonial Revival WA0657 Howell House Scism House 417 Lafayette St Colonial Revival WA0659 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington January House 407 Lafayette St Craftsman WA0660 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington McCartney House 403 E Lafayette St Craftsman WA0665 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Gibson House 314 Sutton St Craftsman WA0667 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Hammond House 345 Walnut Ave Craftsman WA0669 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Rothrock House 307 Sutton St Plain/Traditional WA0673 Mcllroy House Dalton House 319 Sutton St Bungalow WA0690 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Jenkins House 415 Spring St Craftsman WA0395 Wilson -Pittman -Campbell- Gregory House Meldrum House 405 E Dickson St Other WA0683 Both meyer- Fraser House Brewer House 318 E Dickson St Craftsman WA0684 Campbell House Heerwagen House 401 E Dickson St Plain/Traditional WA0685 Ramsay -Faust House Faust House 402 Spring St Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0689 Conner-Lesh House Bryan House 423 Spring St Plain/Traditional WA0691 Sanders -Crouch -Dailey House Cully House 307 Spring St Plain/Traditional WA0694 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Jones House 429 N Walnut Ave Other WA0695 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Galbraith House 327 E Maple St Craftsman :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 1 114 Washington -Willow NRHP Historic District continued SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0696 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Schumacher House 501 N Walnut Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0697 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Schirmer House 400 E Maple St Craftsman WA0706 Johnson House Galbraith House 321 E Maple St Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0708 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington McAllister House #1 202 E Davidson St Plain/Traditional WA0709 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington McAllister House #2 204 E Davidson St Plain/Traditional WA0710 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Boyd House 206 E Davidson St Craftsman WA0714 Ramay House Sutton House 618 N Willow Ave Craftsman WA0719 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Block House 631 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0724 Renner House Chase House 731 N Willow Ave Colonial Revival WA0726 Lewis House Hilker House 311 Prospect St Plain/Traditional West Dickson NRHP Historic District SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0004 The Ice House Building Building At 339 N West 339 N West Ave 20th Century Standard Avenue Commercial WA0005 The Ice House Building Berqueist's & On The 329 N West Ave 20th Century Standard Rocks Commercial WA0006 House At 354 N West N/A 354 N West Ave Queen Anne/Eastlake Avenue WA0033 Citizen's Cleaners Tony C's Building 326 N West Ave 20th Century Standard Commercial WA0034 Waters -Pierce Oil 327 N West Avenue 327 N West Ave 20th Century Standard Company Building Site Parking Lot Commercial WA0035 Apartment Building Hog Haus Brewery 430A W Dickson St Italianate/Italianate Villa WA0036 Randall, JW Grocery Common Grounds 412 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Commercial WA0037 House At 301 Dickson Sexton Law Firm 301 W Dickson St Queen Anne/Eastlake WA0092 Dairy Bottling Plant Magnolia Company 359 N West Ave 20th Century Standard Building Commercial WA0094 Oberman Shirt Factory West Avenue Annex 346 N West Ave 19th Century Standard Commercial WA0095 Dever Cash Grocery Building At 352 N West 352 N West Ave 20th Century Standard Avenue Commercial WA0128 Fayetteville Business Emelia's Mediterranean 309 A-B W Dickson St 20th Century Standard College Kitchen Commercial WA0140 Vickers Laundry Dickson Street 323 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Bookshop Commercial WA0143 Bates Brothers Grocery Building at 430B W 430B W Dickson St Italia nate/Italianate Villa Dickson St WA0148 George's Majestic Building At 519 W 519 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Building Dickson Commercial WA0163 Sherwood, Bill Property Building at 205 W 205 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Dickson St Commercial �W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 1 115 West Dickson NRHP Historic District continued SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name I Address Style WA0170 Shipley Holsum Baking Building At 313 W Dickson 313 W Dickson St 20th Century Company Street Standard Commercial WA0171 Shipley Holsum Baking Building At 311 W Dickson 311 W Dickson St 20th Century Company Standard Commercial WA0172 Keeton's Conoco Station Bill's Dickson Street Liquor 241 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Commercial WA0173 Sine's Body Shop Dickson's Theater 227 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Commercial WA0175 Collier Drug Building Building At 100 W Dickson St 100 W Dickson St Art Moderne WA0176 Coca Cola Bottling French Metro Antiques 200 W Dickson St Art Deco Company Building WA0177 House At 206 W Dickson N/A 206 W Dickson St Queen Anne/Eastlake Street WA0178 Needham's Food Market 1936 Club Building East 302-304 W 20th Century Dickson St Standard Commercial WA0179 D-Lux Eat Shop 1936 Club Building West 306 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Commercial WA0181 Star Grocery Doe's Restaurant 318 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Commercial WA0183 Fashion Shop Gypsy Building 402 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Commercial WA0184 Christman Plumbers Gypsy Building 404 W Dickson St Italianate/Italianate Building Villa WA0185 Roger's Bar & Building at 406 W Dickson St 406 W Dickson St 20th Century Recreation Standard Commercial WA0186 Dowell Meat Market Brewsky's 408 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Commercial WA0187 Building At 410 W N/A 410 W Dickson St 20th Century Dickson St Standard Commercial WA0188 Citizens Bank Club 4-14 414 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Commercial WA0189 Taylor Building Lilly's Restaurant W Dickson St 20th Century 1416 Standard Commercial WA0190 Hodge's Cafe Condom Sense 418 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Commercial WA0191 McAdam's Drug Store Buster Belly's 420 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Commercial WA0192 Bates Brothers General Stir 422 W Dickson St 20th Century Mercantile 0 Standard Commercial WA0212 Frisco Depot Building At 550 W Dickson 550 W Dickson St Spanish/Mission St Revival WA0213 Uncle Sam's Store Jimmy John's 518 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Commercial WA0214 Building At 522 W The Rice Village 522 W Dickson St 20th Century Dickson St Standard Commercial WA0215 Flying Possum Leather Building At 526 W Dickson 526 W Dickson St 20th Century Store St Standard Commercial WA0216 Building At 540 W Kosmos Greek Kafe 540 W Dickson St 20th Century Dickson St Standard Commercial �W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 1 116 West Dickson NRHP Historic District continued SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0218 Building At 626-648 W Sonneman Building 1 626-648 W Dickson St Plain/Traditional Dickson St WA0225 Ozark McCord Qdoba Grill Building 603 W Dickson St 20th Century Wholesale Grocery Standard Commercial WA0227 The Courts Building At 623-641 W 623-641 W Dickson St Art Deco Dickson St WA0228 Sonneman Building li Building At 643-653 W 643-653 W Dickson St Art Deco U-Ark Theatre Dickson St WA0233 U-Ark Bowl U-Ark Events 622 W Dickson St Art Deco WA0867 Underwood Building Building At 611 W 611 W Dickson St Other Dickson St WA0946 U S Pizza Parking Lot Parking Lot At 202 W 202 W Dickson St Not Applicable Dickson St WA0947 Three Sisters Building Building At 212-248 West 212-248 W Dickson St French Colonial Dickson St. WA0948 Specialty Shop, The Crown Pub Building 303 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Commercial WA0949 Bordinos Building Building At 310 W 310 W Dickson St Plain/Traditional Dickson Street WA0950 Minute Man Restaurant Jose's & Toothpick's 324 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Commercial WA0951 Frisco Train Train car at 542 W 542 W Dickson St N/A Dickson St WA0952 Parking Lot At SW N/A 507 W Dickson St N/A Corner Of Dickson St & West Ave. WA0953 Frisco Warehouse Building at 548 W 548 W Dickson St 20th Century Dickson St Standard Commercial WA0954 Building At 604-624 W N/A 604-624 W Dickson St 20th Century Dickson St Standard Commercial WA0955 Lofts Site, The I N/A 607 W Dickson St N/A WA0956 Mr. Tux Building at 608 W 608 W Dickson St 20th Century Dickson St Standard Commercial WA0957 Bank Building Building at 703 W 703 W Dickson St Mid-20th Century Dickson St Modern WA0958 St. John Lutheran Christ On Campus 310 N Arkansas Ave Mid-20th Century Church Modern WA0959 Stevens Organ Repair Building at 330 N West 330 N West Ave 20th Century Shop Ave Standard Commercial :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 1 117 Wilson Park NRHP Historic District SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0580 Sanford House Stephens House 320 Ila St Bungalow WA0601 Duplex At 113-115 Ila St Young Duplex 113-115 Ila St Plain/Traditional WA0603 House At 201 Ila St Trice House 201 Ila St Craftsman WA0604 House At 205 Ila St Scott House 205 Ila St Plain/Traditional WA0605 House At 207 Ila St Glover House 207 Ila St Plain/Traditional WA0130 Walker House #1 Walker House 25 Davidson St Bungalow WA0243 Drake -Wade House #1 Drake -Wade House #1 603 Park Ave Bungalow WA0356 House At 605 Park Ave White House 605 Park Ave Bungalow WA0571 House At 202 Ila St Miller House 202 Ila St Plain/Traditional WA0599 House At 607 Park Ave Drake -Wade House 607 Park Ave Craftsman WA0600 Wiggles House Schreibman House 601 Park Ave Craftsman WA0602 House At 111 Ila St Cole House 111 Ila St Plain/Traditional WA0578 House At 525 Shady Ave Rahtz House 525 Shady Ave Plain/Traditional WA0579 House At 318 Ila St Stephens House 318 Ila St Other WA0581 House At 506 Vandeventer Ave Green House 506 Vandeventer Ave Plain/Traditional WA0582 House At 504 Vandeventer Ave Newby House 504 Vandeventer Ave Plain/Traditional WA0586 House At 421 Ila St Putnam House 421 Ila St Other WA0593 House At 503 Forest Ave January Apartments 503 Forest Ave Colonial Revival WA0596 House At 505 Forest Ave House At 506 Forest Ave 506 Forest Ave Plain/Traditional WA0577 House At 302 Ila St Douglas House 302 Ila St Colonial Revival WA0584 House At 525 Va n d eve nte r Ave Law House 525 Vandeventer Ave Plain/Traditional WA0587 House At 412 Ila St Thompson House 412 Ila St Not Applicable WA0588 House At 409 Ila St Risk House 409 Ila St Other WA0589 House At 414 Ila St West House 414 Ila St Bungalow WA0592 House At 501 Forest Ave Wade House 501 Forest Ave Craftsman WA0594 Rosen House Watts House 509 Forest Ave Plain/Traditional WA0595 House At 16 Maple St Fowler House 16 Maple St Craftsman WA0597 House At 508 Forest Ave Candido House 508 Forest Ave Craftsman WA0614 House At 14 W Davidson St Drake House #2 14 Davidson St Craftsman WA0608 House At 511 Forest Ave Adams House 511 Forest Ave Craftsman WA0612 House At 601 Forest Ave Brezeale House 601 Forest Ave Craftsman WA0620 Duplex At 558-560 Highland Ave Wilkins Duplex 560 & 558 Highland Ave Plain/Traditional WA0621 House At 513 Highland Ave Rudolph House 513 Highland Ave Craftsman WA0622 House At 512-512B Highland Ave Kinzer House 512-512B Highland Ave Craftsman WA0625 House At 14 W Maple St Russum House I 14 W Maple St Craftsman WA0609 House At 515 Forest Ave Walker House #2 515 Forest Ave Craftsman Al!—" Q HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 1 118 Wilson Park NRHP Historic District continued SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0610 Drake House #4 House At Ne Corner Of 98 Park Ave Craftsman Park Ave. & Maple St. WA0613 House At 16 W Davidson Drake House #1 16 W Davidson St Craftsman St WA0615 House At 9 W Davidson Feinstein House 9 W Davidson St Craftsman St WA0616 House At 601 Highland Drake House #3 601 Highland Ave Craftsman Ave WA0617 House At 521 Highland Tepfer House 521 Highland Ave Craftsman Ave WA0618 House At 526 Highland Garriss House 526 Highland Ave Plain/Traditional Ave WA0619 House At 517 Highland Goza House 517 Highland Ave Craftsman Ave WA0623 House At 12 W Maple St Standrod House 12 W Maple St Craftsman WA0624 House At 516 Highland Comstock House 516 Highland Ave Other Ave WA0626 House At 319 Ila St Hanna House #2 319 Ila St Other WA0627 House At 112 W Maple St Horan House 112 W Maple St Plain/Traditional WA0628 House At 202 W Maple Allen House 202 W Maple St Other St WA0629 House At 206 W Maple Frick House 200 W Maple St Other St WA0611 House At 15 W Davidson Long House 15 Davidson St Craftsman St WA0633 Building At 316 W Maple Hanna Apartments 316 W Maple St Plain/Traditional St WA0632 House At 505 Shady Ave Wolf House 505 Shady Ave Italianate/Italianate Villa WA0634 House At 326-328 W Hanna House #1 326-328 W Maple St Craftsman Maple St WA0635 House At 500 Cummings House 500 Vandeventer Ave Craftsman Vandeventer Ave WA0427 House At 515 Park Ave Ross House 515 Park Ave Plain/Traditional WA0447 Smith House Jordan House 126 Ila St Plain/Traditional WA0574 House At 276 Ila St Frakes House 276 Ila St Other WA0636 House At 502 Purette House 502 Vandeventer Ave Craftsman Vandeventer Ave :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 1 119 Individual Properties Individual ARHP Properties Name SHPO Site ID Year Listed or Determined Eligible Status Drake Field White Hangar WA0792 2008 Listed in the ARHP House at 1638 Price Avenue WA1063 2009 Listed in the ARHP Oaks Cemetery WA1234 2014 Listed in the ARHP First Christian Church WA1228 2014 Eligible for the ARHP Thomas -Tharp House WA1682 2018 Eligible for the ARHP Heffelfinger-Freund House WA1683 2018 Eligible for the ARHP De Weese House WA1684 2018 Eligible for the ARHP Holland - Bowen House I WA1690 12018 Eligible for the ARHP Lea House I WA1789 1 2021 Eligible for the ARHP Note; Properties listed in the NRHP are automatically listed in the ARHP Individual NRHP Properties Name SHPO Site ID Year [I- Criteria Area of Significance Level of Significance Anderson-Tayloristed House WA1747 2021 C Architecture Local Bank Of Fayetteville Building, Old WA0771 1994 C Architecture Local Business Administration Building - WA0347 1992 A, C Architecture, Education, Local University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Social History Chemistry Building, University of WA0349 1992 A, C Architecture, Education Local Arkansas Chi Omega Greek Theatre, University WA0348 1992 A, C Architecture, Education Local of Arkansas Chi Omega Sorority Chapter House WA0780 1995 C Architecture Local Clack House WA0937 2006 C Architecture Local Clark, Joe Marsh House WA0869 2020 C Architecture Local Clinton House/Clinton House Museum WA0979 2010 B, C Architecture, Politics/ State, Local Government, Law Durst House WA0899 2015 C Architecture State Ella Carnell Hall, University of WA086 1982 A, C Architecture, Education Not provided Arkansas Ellis Building WA1675 2019 A, C Architecture, Local Commerce, Transportation Evergreen Cemetery WA0153 1997 A Exploration/Settlement, Local Politics/Government Fayetteville Confederate Cemetery WA0425 1993 A Conservation, Military Local Fayetteville Fire Department Fire WA1244 2015 A, C Architecture, Social Local Station 3 History Fayetteville Fire Department Fire WA1225 2015 A Social History Local Station 1 Fayetteville National Cemetery WA0859 1999 A Military Local Fayetteville Veterans Hospital WA1059 2011 A, C Architecture, Health/ State Medicine, Politics/ Government :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 1 120 Individual NRHP Properties continued Name SHPO Site ID Year Listed Criteria Area of Significance Level of Significance Fitzhugh, Vernon, House WA1300 2017 C Architecture Local Fletcher, Adrian House WA0834 2013 C Architecture State Frisco Depot WA0212 1988 A, C Architecture, Transportation Local Goff Farm Stone Bridge WA0964 2010 A, C Engineering, Transportation Local Gordon, Troy House WA0417 1978 C Architecture Local Gregg House WA0002 1974 A, C Architecture, Education Not provided Guisinger Building WA0460 1984 A Commerce, Urban Design Local Hantz House WA0896 2001 C Architecture State Happy Hollow Farm WA0461 1986 A Literature Not provided Headquarters House WA0394 1971 A Military Local Hemingway House & Barn WA0430 1982 C Architecture Not provided Home Economics Building, University of Arkansas WA0119 1992 A, C Architecture, Education Local Jackson House WA0418 1982 C Architecture Not provided John Williams House No. 2 WA1669 2020 C Architecture Local Jones, Euine Fay House WA0830 2000 C Architecture State Lafayette Street Overpass WA0239 1995 C Engineering Local Lewis Brothers Building WA0384 1987 A, C Architecture, Commerce Not provided Magnolia Company Filling Station WA0089 1978 A, C Architecture, Commerce Not provided Maple Street Overpass WA0795 1995 C Engineering Local McNair, Wiley P., House WA1241 2016 C Architecture Local Men's Gymnasium, University of Arkansas WA0350 1992 A, C Architecture, Education Local Noll, Willis House WA0928 2005 C Architecture State Old Main, University of Arkansas WA0001 1970 A, C Architecture, Education Not provided Old Post Office, The WA0431 1974 A, C Architecture, Urban Planning Not provided Patrick, Dr. James House WA1283 2017 C Architecture Local Presbyterian Student Center WA1247 2022 A, C Architecture, Social History Local Ridge House WA0387 1972 I A, C Architecture, Education, Environmental Not provided Rieff's Chapel Cemetery WA1738 2020 I A Exploration/Settlement National Routh -Bailey House WA0341 1989 C Architecture Local Segraves, Warren, House WA1284 2017 C Architecture Local Shelton, Lynn American Legion Post #27 WA0786 1996 A, C Architecture, Social History Local Skillern House WA1020 2015 C Architecture Local Smyth, Peter House WA0728 2002 C Architecture State :rW HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 1 121 Individual NRHP Properties continued Name SHPO Site ID Year Listed Criteria Area of Significance Level of Significance Son's Chapel WA909 2003 A, C Architecture, Religion Local Strengthening The Arm of Liberty Monument WA0731 2000 A Social History State Student Union, University of Arkansas WA0141 1992 A, C Architecture, Education Local Tharp, Moses B. House WA0054 2004 C Architecture Local Vernon & Moore-Mcllroy Produce Warehouse WA0147 2020 A, C Architecture, Commerce State Vest, John S. House WA0195 1979 C Architecture Not provided Villa Rosa WA0073 1990 C, D Architecture, Archaeology, Literature State Vol Walker Library WA0031 1992 A, C Architecture, Education Local Wade-Heerwagen House WA0429 1978 A, C Architecture, Education, Local History Not provided Walker Family Plot WA1188 2012 A Exploration/Settlement, Politics/Government, Social History State Walker-Knerr-Williams House WA0413 1975 C Architecture Not provided Walker -Stone House WA0388 1970 C Architecture Not provided Washington County Courthouse WA0392 1972 A, C Architecture, Politics/ Government Not provided Washington County Jail WA0393 1978 A, C Architecture, Politics/ Government Not provided Waterman -Archer House WA0842 1999 C Architecture Local Wilson -Pittman -Campbell -Gregory House WA0395 1980 C Architecture Not provided Woolsey Farmstead Cemetery WA1731 2020 I A Exploration/Settlement Local Young, Mrs. Building WA0385 1999 C Architecture Local :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPENDIX 1 122 Fayetteville Historic Resources Survey Plan Fayetteville Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan May 2023 ,� ..a -_.mil^_. �_- _.- •' 1 Swimming pool of the Robert and Alice Alexander House also known as "Raheen" Fay Jones (1978), Fayetteville, AR Source; University of Arkansas Fay Jones Collection." Appendix I Contents 1 Introduction..........................................................................................................................125 2 Background Information and Analysis..................................................................................125 Washington County Assessor Construction Date Analysis..................................................125 PriorSurvey Analysis..........................................................................................................128 Need for a Comprehensive and Thematic Historic Context Statement.............................131 ExistingDesignations..........................................................................................................131 Limited Windshield Survey..................................................................................................131 Threats................................................................................................................................132 CommunityInput.................................................................................................................134 3 Survey Plan.........................................................................................................................134 PreparatoryWork................................................................................................................135 Phase 1. Thematic Historic Context Statement....................................................................136 Tasks...............................................................................................................................136 Phase 2. Citywide Windshield Survey..................................................................................137 Tasks...............................................................................................................................137 Phase 3. Reconnaissance -Level Documentation.................................................................140 Tasks...............................................................................................................................140 Repeat the Process Every 10 Years....................................................................................142 APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 124 1 Introduction Stantec developed a historic resources survey plan as part of this historic preservation plan. The recommended phased approach includes project preparation, developing a historic context statement to guide survey work, conducting a citywide windshield survey, and documenting select properties at the reconnaissance level. Very few of Fayetteville's historic -age properties have been surveyed, undocumented and undesignated historic properties and areas appear to exist, the city is experiencing development pressures, and there is public support for the identification and designation of historic places. This methodology allows for an expeditious, comprehensive, and cost-effective assessment of the city's resources and documentation of its most important places. This document begins with a presentation of the analysis conducted to inform the survey plan methodology. Next, the survey plan is presented with cost estimates for each phase and identification of responsible parties. Potential funding sources for conducting historic resources surveys are presented in Appendix D. 2 Background Information and Analysis Stantec conducted background analysis to inform the development of the survey plan presented in Section 3. This analysis included review of Washington County Assessor (WCA) construction dates, prior surveys, existing designations, a limited windshield survey, threats to historic resources, and community input. Washington County Assessor Construction Date Analysis WCA construction dates were analyzed to identify the number and geographic distribution of historic -age parcels.' For the purposes of this analysis, historic -age was defined as 1978 or earlier, 45 years prior to the current year.2 Of the city's 30,973 parcels, 6,664 or 22% have a 1978 or earlier WCA construction date, 16,459 or 53% have a 1979 or later construction date, and 7,850 or 25% have no construction date (Chart 1). Most historic -age properties were built in ' County assessors maintain construction date data for each parcel in the county to inform property valuations. These construction dates are generally relatively reliable but are sometimes missing or inaccurate. Absence of a construction date does not necessarily mean that there are no built resources on a property. Regardless of its limitations, assessor data can be a valuable tool for survey analysis and fieldwork. 2 Forty-five years was used to calculate the historic -age cut-off for this analysis because historic resources surveys typically document properties 45 years old or older. Resources typically have to be at least 50 years old to be eligible for listing in the NRHP so surveys with a 45-year cut-off date allow for identification of resources that may soon be eligible for designation. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 125 the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s during Fayetteville's post -World War II construction boom (Chart 2). As depicted in Figure 1, the oldest properties in the city are concentrated in central Fayetteville, and post -World War II development radiates outward. A large percentage of properties do not have WCA construction data; however, a comparison with historical aerial imagery indicates that many of these properties are developed with historic -age resources. Chart 1. Washington County Assessor Construction Dates for Properties in Fayetteville" No D ' 250 Historic -Age (1978 or earlier) 22% Not Historic -Age (1979 or later) 53% "Chart categorizes properties by their earliest WCA construction date. Properties without a construction date may be undeveloped, untaxed, or developed but missing property improvement information. Chart 2. Decade in which Historic -Age (Pre-1979) Properties were Built* 2500 2110 2000 1639 1500 1135 1000 613 467 500 296 1- 1 178 0- , 1 "Chart data is limited to parcels with a construction date noted in WCA records; the data reflects the earliest improvement date on each parcel. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 126 61 Harmon m y a Fayetteville Construction Date 1940-1949 o City Limits Pre-1900 1950-1959 Arbor -Acres -Rd ;o 1900-1909 1960-1969 1428 R a 1910-1919 — 1970-1978 Johnson / , 1 1920-1929 Post-1978 WL 1930-1939 No Data Wheeler N o zMiles m N N lir k� t� V- 71111 z 11 jilo!4 L'e"" � I` , ,'■ 'fir 1t- ' r ill t IIL f t�=i'L�a"I r II t w_ �y 'ti I i r ' = 1do .IEit6V llle E.1A ir Farmington Fajeaefr fjjlC r �• �� t. �I '1fR Harris r. 1 �leby 1889ft r Z 6 ,t4 Walnut Grove MILLER t ) MOUNTAIN G Elkin it Black Oak e l 1 i Figure 1. Map of Parcels by Earliest WCA Construction Date. Much of the city's post -World War 11 development, which radiates outward from central Fayetteville, has not been surveyed. A comparison of this map with historical and current aerials revealed that many properties that do not have accessor construction dates have historic -age buildings. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 127 Prior Survey Analysis In total, 1,032 Fayetteville resources on 770 parcels have been documented as part of 19 historic resources surveys.3 These projects represent an important investment in historic preservation and have led to the creation of numerous NRHP properties and districts; however, only a small percentage of the city has been surveyed. In total, 2% of Fayetteville's 30,973 parcels have been documented (Table 1). In consideration of just those properties with historic - age WCA construction dates and no WCA construction date, 5% have been documented. As depicted in Figure 2, surveyed resources are concentrated in central Fayetteville where the city's oldest resources are located. Few properties outside the historical core have been documented. Table 1. Number and Percent of Surveyed Properties in Fayetteville % of Total % of Historic-Age/No Date Properties Properties* (n=14,514) n=30,973 Surveyed properties 2% 5% n=700 *Defined as properties with a 1978 or earlier WCA construction date and properties without a WCA construction date. A primary goal of a historic resources survey is to evaluate each documented resource for eligibility for local, state, and/or federal historic designations. However, of the 1,032 surveyed resources in Fayetteville, nearly one-third were not evaluated for historic significance (Chart 3, Figure 3). Further, many were surveyed more than 15 years ago, and their documentation is outdated (Figure 2). Properties previously considered not eligible for historic designation may now be considered eligible. Chart 3. Historic Evaluation Status of Surveyed Resources* NRHP Listed: Individual Property, Delisted, 0.2% 0.3% ARHP Eligible, 0.6% *Data compiled from the eligibility field of the Arkansas SHPO survey form. NRHP Eligible: Individual Property, 3.8% NRHP Eligible: Contributing to a potential NRHP District, 4.8% 3 The 1,032 resources are documented in the Arkansas SHPO's GIS-based survey database. Additional resources have been documented as part of regulatory projects; however, the survey documentation was not available for this analysis. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 128 �0 r-W=�IVeII?�S.—' :�� 'INN—,1LJ`.`��'���L-1L_mJUY^/�Ju`������� lu.. U Fee Ir z —f � I • z E1 �M1\ r • I Z L.L • D yJw�❑�a E-Igockwooil �o �—�r a FF--7JJ7 Li �-�='WMaple_Sty��ii� �� [�• �� MOUNT 7•-ee��S Irk`• • ♦ • • • I� ,� 1 r Z •—�� N •• •• (. • �F "'I' 1� i SEQ'uOYAH �, • • LJ i� • • �W Lafayette St Wit— ���� • nrl =l �r -h—d`•T W�Dirkson'tSt ti�J�JIM•r��� �� • • •�/� U!—•I • ,:ll ,"R • .� 7� E-Qiokso-n StIF 61 AN • �J J� • a. _ ❑ • •� • 1719 ft • ��LJC7 !` �n �Faytltv lellle •»{.=.r••� t ry�l '1 I'� •' w`cI IC�1L�� I �w Tontitown upset Ave - hwa7 E�tabtason A� So In � N O armon s o Arbor Acres Rd a Fayetteville City Limits 112 Johnson -:,Park c 31 'UY r111 d_ m Wheeler Mud Creek Trail a Corridor • Habberton • M� • v yj amestring d q a • eek Trail v • •' o id • 2 • •- • rr White ock W We -n ton Dr• C •� • • • 20 9 S • • • . 646 • � .w � • 3ose Creeµ• aRe Sequoy � Xe. McNair • Pa,k • Farmington Fayeq Junction • Kessler Mountain Harris Appleby opal Par 2 n P Walnut Grove Greenl n Year Recorded • 2000-2009 1970-1979 • 2010-2019 1980-1989 • 2020-2022 1990-1999 • Unknown 0 2 � Miles Figure 2. Map of Previously Surveyed Properties in Fayetteville by Year Surveyed. Previously surveyed propert are concentrated in central Fayetteville, and most were documented more than 10 years ago. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 129 .'I� .v�elaiid-Sl--e 1j I� ° h 2,i)oo I lI v`u hr O Feet O Ib i ❑ �a��J�L` it �E O o �Do ° o � ���i E-- odkwood1x. u 'r iq •QS} jc • b CP n o• {{���}y O U N 7 �6•.,. ° O'O •• ��ri SEQ'UOYAH� t p' C� • e V o n • $Hen n °o° 8 g QQQ' - %?0 o0 o®r o I. I� ❑ °f7 s,l �I�Io o ;0 01 Fayetteville o ° 0 ToI � jL�JL LIJ���� - itcheSt._ f -- ;I �I _i �� m� ❑�I i����%��C� • - -o Arbor Acres Rd z a Fayetteville ° o City Limits ttz Johnson Fayettev0e Park 31 heeler r s Mud Creek Trail +' o Habberton • • _ o � z O ��, • Q ariamestring Q a ❑ Creek Trail c ❑ cC1 Corridor - = _ ° ❑0 • White ock N o 9 b • • m2gton Dr O � S • O ❑ O • O eµ 648 0 mm ODO • Goose Ore • ° O • o `so McNair 0 • Farmington Fa' tte • Junction 0 o A Kessler o i5 Mountain Harris Appleby ional Par Walnut Grove Greenl n Historic Evaluation/Designation Status ° 5-ARHP Listed rove 0 1-NRHP Eligible n 6-Eligible in a District I- 2-Not Eligible 8-Eligible in a Potential District • 3-NRHP Listed ° 9-Unknown \ ° 4-Delisted 10-ARHP Eligible H N 0 4 za Miles Figure 3. Map of Previously Surveyed Properties Categorized by Designation Status and Current Historic Evaluation. Nearly one-third of surveyed properties have not been evaluated for historic significance. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 130 Need for a Comprehensive and Thematic Historic Context Statement Historic context statements are written documents that describe the major historical trends, events, people, and architecture important to the physical development of a community. They are a critical component of historic resources surveys because they provide a framework for evaluating which resources are historically significant and which are not. Most of the City's prior survey projects did not include a historic context specific to the survey area, and a citywide and thematic historic context statement, the current industry standard, does not exist. A thematic historic context statement provides a broad understanding of the patterns and events that have shaped the history of an area. Historic resources may share a common theme, like a similar period of construction, cultural or historical association, architectural style or type, or another historical trend. Following the development of a historic context, a survey is conducted to identify resources with significant ties to important themes in history and evaluate them for NRHP, ARHP, and local historic designation eligibility. In Arkansas, local historic districts provide the best protections for historic properties, and they can comprise contiguous or noncontiguous properties connected thematically. Many opportunities exist to establish noncontiguous historic districts in Fayetteville. For example, a collection of noncontiguous post -World War II Modernistic residences could be a local historic district. Noncontiguous resources associated with Black ethnic heritage could be another local historic district. For this reason, a historic context that identifies the themes and subthemes that have significantly shaped Fayetteville's history is a critical need. Existing Designations As described in the historic preservation plan, Fayetteville has one local historic district comprising one building, three ARHP properties, 69 NRHP properties, and 11 NRHP historic districts. The number of NRHP designations is commendable; however, the lack of local historic districts is a missed opportunity. Most designated resources are in central Fayetteville and there may be historically significant properties outside the historical core not yet documented. Lastly, most properties are designated for their architectural significance. A survey could lead to the identification of more properties important for their historical or cultural significance, providing a richer understanding of Fayetteville's history. Limited Windshield Survey Stantec completed a limited windshield survey of Fayetteville in October 2022 to understand the city's broad patterns of development and building stock. The purpose of the survey was to drive select areas of Fayetteville noting the character and the predominance and general location of resources or groups of resources that may be historic. Surveyors noted Fayetteville's vibrant downtown; unsurveyed areas with pockets of mid -twentieth century resources that appeared to have potential to be historic districts; and infill development, particularly student housing, that does not reflect surrounding historical resources. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 131 Threats Historic places can be threatened by social, political, economic, natural, and other forces. In Fayetteville, key threats appear to be development and a lack of understanding of historic preservation processes and regulations.' Development Historic preservation is about managing development in a responsible way, not stopping it. During times of economic growth and development, it is critical for cities to operate with this mindset. The demolition of older buildings to make way for new ones, incompatible new development on formerly empty lots, infrastructure improvement projects that may affect nearby properties, inappropriate exterior alterations, and gentrification are issues associated with development pressures. A comprehensive historic resources survey can provide a roadmap for which properties or areas could be preserved through adaptive reuse, historically sensitive infill, design review, and other strategies, and which areas are better suited for development. The survey can also be designed to more intensely study and document areas experiencing rapid change to ensure that historic places that matter to people are part of development decisions and anti -gentrification efforts like aged -in housing, community organization, and affordable housing programs. City staff and Planning Commissioners utilize an infill suitability map to help guide development decisions, particularly related to properties proposed for rezoning. Properties that are closer to services, public safety, schools, utilities, and other public amenities were rated as being more suitable for infill development. Higher scoring areas are typically near transportation corridors and the city's older and historic neighborhoods (Figure 4), creating the potential for conflict with the City's goal to promote historic preservation. Staff and commissioners would be able to make better informed development decisions if the results of a comprehensive survey of historic resources were available to them in addition to other planning tools like the infill suitability score and a map of historical demolition data. ' According to FEMA's National Risk Index, Fayetteville is at low risk for natural hazards like extreme storms or flooding (https://hazards.fema.gov/nri/map). APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 132 i 1 I ,-W�-H.enri=de--T:onti=B.lvd T�ntitow w Y Harmon I � ---Arbor Acres -Rd-- Q rl � i Wheeler i Ja r 1324 ft ILI White R• ek Farmington Appleby 1'81 aA 3 .A Walnut Grove Z__ Oak Grove Springdale \ I W„S:unset_A:me 1 i v E=Robinson sonera�9hW ¢ I e � 1 A � � N N .� o Fayetteville City Limits Johnson Z \ E -ion Rd Guy Ter y Rd.. o c e Blvd�o'. � d u a Habberlon '.o O ° M\SS'oo y� O U Z ti20 O O O adington Dr O r0 O [, O Q tt6ville 0 0 McNa rB as&in Jurictiori� O e � Harris 1889ft C 0 Designated Greenland h• In Figure 4. Map of the City's infill development scores with designated historic properties and districts. Many of the city's older and historic areas are rated as highly suited for development creating the potential for conflict with the City's goal to promote historic preservation. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 133 Lack of Understanding of Historic Preservation Processes and Regulations The way in which historic preservation is structured in the U.S. can be confusing to the general public. Misunderstandings about the system of federal, state, and local laws and processes are common and can result in fear and distrust of historic preservation initiatives, like surveys, historic designations, and design review. For example, it is not uncommon for property owners to think that inclusion of their property in a survey means that the property is historic and therefore subject to regulations. Or, that if their house is listed in the NRHP, they cannot make interior changes. These kinds of misunderstandings can thwart preservation initiatives despite otherwise broad community support. Public outreach throughout the course of a survey project can clarify misconceptions, as well as inform the public about the purpose of the project and how the survey data could be used by private property owners and the City. It can also lead to historical information about properties not documented in traditional sources and foster enthusiasm and support for historic preservation and future initiatives, making public outreach a critical component of a survey plan. Community Input Members of the community who participated in the public engagement for this project overwhelmingly support historic preservation in Fayetteville and ranked identifying more historic properties, formally designating more historic properties and districts, developing history -related educational content, and getting young people excited about Fayetteville history and historic preservation as important activities. They also identified over 100 places that they would like to see preserved in locations all over the city, including many properties with social, ethnic, or other associations not evident from the exterior. This lends support for an investment in a thematic study and comprehensive survey that can serve as the foundation for identification and designation, interesting new educational content, and topics and ways to engage young members of the community. 3 Survey Plan Very few of Fayetteville's historic -age properties have been surveyed and the city is experiencing development pressures. Survey efforts to date have not fully reflected the social and cultural history of the community and there may be additional resources associated with the city's Modernistic architecture heritage that are not yet documented and evaluated. A comprehensive thematic historic context statement has not yet been developed, and opportunities exist for contiguous and noncontiguous local historic districts connected thematically. Lastly, members of the public have indicated that historic preservation is important to them, and they want more historic properties identified and designated as well as public engagement that can stem from a historic resources survey. For these reasons, a comprehensive yet expeditious survey approach is recommended for Fayetteville to meet its preservation goals and make the most of its budget. The recommended survey methodology is a phased approach involving preparatory work, development of a historic context statement, public involvement, and a citywide windshield survey to identify properties, districts, and landscapes with potential historic significance, followed by reconnaissance -level research and documentation. Rather than documenting every resource within a survey area —a task that requires considerable time and labor expenses —this approach allows for coverage of a broad geographic region in a short amount of time and the identification and documentation of the city's most important resources. As a result, time and APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 134 money are not expended on resources that have low potential to be eligible historic properties. Of note, this survey plan does not include evaluation and documentation of the University of Arkansas campus. Due to the complexity of the campus, ownership considerations, and funding opportunities, a separate evaluation of the campus (or portions thereof), should be pursued in collaboration with the school. The result of a windshield survey is a list of properties for which additional research and documentation is recommended. For example, surveyors may review over 3,000 properties during one day of windshield survey fieldwork (depending on conditions such as street grid, parcel size, and number of historic -age resources) and determine that, of those properties, 10 individual resources and 1 district have potential historical significance and should be documented and evaluated for local, state, and national eligibility. A windshield survey can also be used to identify properties for which right -of -entry is needed to view and assess historic -age built resources not visible from the right-of-way. Funding can be allocated in phases: • Preparatory Work (Ongoing, FY 2023-2033) • Phase 1. Historic Context Statement (FY 2024) • Phase 2. Windshield Survey (FY 2025) • Phase 3. Reconnaissance Survey (FY 2026, potentially recurring) Work recommended to complete this approach is outlined below, along with survey -related tasks, cost estimates, and timeline recommendations. Preparatory Work Performed by City staff As part of preparations for a historic resources survey, the City must implement ordinances and processes regarding local designation, identify funding, and prepare a request for qualifications (RFQ). The grant application and RFQ process may be repeated for subsequent phases. The main goal of a survey is to identify resources eligible for local, state, and NRHP historic designation. The City does not currently have criteria for local designation, which is necessary for surveyors to evaluate resources for eligibility for local listing. Before initiating survey work, the City must adopt via ordinance criteria for local designation and a process the public may use to apply for local designation (Fayetteville Heritage & Historic Preservation Master Plan, Goal 1, Action Item 1.1). This information should be made publicly accessible on the historic preservation program's website (Goal 4, Action Item 4.1). A combination of City funding and grants is recommended to complete the historic resources survey plan for Fayetteville. A windshield survey followed by custom reconnaissance -level documentation of select properties is a highly effective means for evaluating large land areas in a cost -effect manner; however, CLG grant funding may not be the best fit for funding these tasks since the CLG program typically requires a higher degree of documentation. If the CLG program is unable to fund the windshield and reconnaissance -level tasks, grants can be obtained from other federal, state, and local agencies and foundations (provided in Appendix D). Review and careful consideration of grant opportunities, available City funding, and survey needs, followed by completion of applications is a recommended first step to prepare for the upcoming survey efforts. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 135 Historic resources surveys are labor intensive projects that require specialized experience and technologies. The City should prepare an RFQ for consultants to perform the work, leveraging the content in the following survey plan. Because the phases and tasks in the plan build upon each other, the work would be best executed by the same consulting team. The retained consultant's staff should meet the SOI professional qualification standards for history or architectural history, and have demonstrated experience in the following: • writing historic context statements developed in preparation for comprehensive historic resources survey efforts; • developing custom GIS-based data collection platforms for surveys; • engaging the public during the survey process; • conducting a comprehensive windshield survey using GIS-based technologies; and • documenting and evaluating resources for historic significance at the reconnaissance - level under a range of historical themes using GIS-based technologies. Phase 1. Thematic Historic Context Statement Performed by consultants; Estimated cost: $50, 000 Consultant fee assumes approximately 50 pages of text; secondary source research Phase 1 consists of preparing a citywide historic context to provide a framework for evaluating properties for historic significance. Following industry standards, the context should be organized thematically by broad areas of significance such as community planning and development, economic development, public and private institutional development, and ethnic heritage, then by themes and subthemes. Given the predominance of post -World War II development in Fayetteville and lack of existing documentation of all but the most architecturally outstanding resources from this era, trends from the mid -twentieth century through the survey cut-off date (45 years prior to the survey date), should be of particular focus. Underrepresented histories should also be incorporated into the narrative. The historic context is intended to be a tool for surveyors rather than a comprehensive community history. It should be concise, to the point, and easily understood, with graphics to illustrate key concepts. In total, approximately 50 pages of text is preliminarily assumed for the document. Tasks 1. Research Design The research design should define the outline for the context, estimated page lengths for each section, research questions, anticipated sources, and a preliminary bibliography. 2. Research Research should be conducted according to the City -approved research design. Research is anticipated to be limited to secondary sources, focusing on prior cultural resource management documents, such as prior survey contexts and NRHP nominations, and published books, papers, and digitized newspaper articles. 3. Complete a Draft Historic Context Statement The draft historic context should follow the outline approved in the research design, synthesizing research findings from Task 2. The overall intent of the context should be to guide evaluation of historic resources during subsequent survey phases. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 136 4. Finalize the Historic Context Statement The consultant should address one round of consolidated comments from the City, as well as any grant funding stakeholders, to finalize the context. Phase 2. Citywide Windshield Survey Performed by consultants with support from City staff for Tasks 1 and 2; Estimated consultant cost: $40, 000—$60, 000 Phase 2 consists of preparatory data management work, community input, and the windshield survey fieldwork. Tasks 1. Data Management and Windshield Survey Preparation Completed by City staff and consultants Consultant scope assumes coordination with City to develop a list of survey items, development of a GIS-based data collection platform, creation of a digitized survey form, and development of GIS-based survey map Historic resources surveys result in a large amount of data that is most useful to planning department staff when it is readily accessible and when it can be searched, sorted, filtered, and updated, as well as viewed on a GIS-based map. During this task, the City should collaborate with the consultant to identify relevant survey fields for the reconnaissance -level documentation that meet the City's needs. This may include address, latitude and longitude, year built, architecture style(s), use, materials, height, ancillary resources, historical information, existing designation status, recommendation, and/or other items. The field formats should be defined (e.g., multiple choice vs. open text) and value lists should be created, such as a list of architecture styles. The consultant should also create a survey form that presents the collected data with the survey photographs. A PDF copy of each property's survey form would be provided by the consultant as a deliverable in addition to GIS-based survey data. This work is recommended at this stage to allow for sufficient time for the consultant to develop a GIS-based data collection system and survey form before reconnaissance -level documentation begins and to ensure that the City has a way to integrate the collected survey data into an existing internal system or adopt a new data management platform for the survey data. The consultant should also prepare the GIS-based map that will be used during the windshield survey. It should include the following layers: - High resolution current aerial background - Georeferenced historical aerial imagery and topographic maps - Points and polygons showing the properties and areas that members of the public identified as important in the community opinion survey (Section 4.3.1 of the historic preservation plan). This layer should include relevant notes from the community. - The most current WCA parcel data, color -coded by parcels with a historic -age WCA construction date (defined as 45 years prior to the survey date), no construction date, or a non -historic -age construction date - Previously surveyed resources from the AHPP GIS data, categorized by the evaluation field (i.e., not evaluated for historic significance, determined eligible, and designated) - Designated properties and districts. District polygons should include the data of designation, the date of the last survey, and the period of significance. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 137 Properties identified during contextual development that may have the potential for historic significance The map should be set up for tablet -based data collection and allow fieldworkers to take photographs and record data about each surveyed property using the finalized list of fields and data lists. The photographs and data should be automatically linked in GIS to the WCA parcel. During this task, the City should work to develop a website where the results of the survey can be posted with a GIS-based map of properties recommended eligible for local, state, and national designations as a result of the reconnaissance -level survey. 2. Community Input Completed by City staff and consultants Consultant scope assumes development of the public engagement plan, a presentation at one public meeting; and limited public engagement content (e.g., draft website content explaining the project). City staff responsible for additional public outreach including meeting planning and attendance, social media posts, public notices, press releases, etc. Public outreach is an incredibly valuable tool for historic resources survey projects and surveys provide an opportunity to engage members of the community in local history and historic preservation. The foundation for community -supported preservation efforts are residents who are well-informed and who are provided with the opportunity to participate in the process. A public engagement plan should be developed to identify opportunities to distribute information about the upcoming survey tasks and the project's goals, gather information about resources, and promote an appreciation for the historic built environment. Community involvement should involve regular interaction with the public using a variety of platforms and engagement opportunities, such as website content, social media posts, public meetings, press releases, email listservs, mailings, and other strategies. 3. Windshield Survey Completed by consultants A comprehensive windshield of Fayetteville is recommended with targeted review of properties with higher potential to have historic resources. The survey would consist of methodologically driving all publicly accessible streets in Fayetteville and noting those properties with the most potential to have historic significance, the boundaries of potential districts, and properties for which right -of -entry would be needed to complete an assessment. Driving should be conducted at a slow enough speed that surveyors can view resources visible from the right-of-way and categorize each property as reconnaissance documentation recommended, reconnaissance documentation not recommended, or right -of -entry needed for assessment. The survey should include targeted review of properties with higher potential to have historic resources. Surveyors should pay special attention to the types of properties listed below by driving by these properties more slowly and more carefully looking at the property's built resources: - Properties with historic -age WCA construction dates or no construction date APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 138 Properties and areas identified by members of the public during the community opinion survey Previously surveyed resources that were not evaluated for historic significance Previously surveyed resources that were determined eligible by the SHPO but have not been designated Properties identified during contextual development that may have the potential for historic significance Historic districts documented more than 10 years ago The city should be divided into geographic zones to facilitate the survey process and survey teams should complete one zone entirely before moving on to the next zone. Teams of fieldworkers who meet the SOI professional qualification standards for history or architectural history and who are familiar with the historic context statement developed during Phase 1 would drive each zone, referring to GIS-based field maps on a tablet computer displaying the earliest WCA date of each parcel, resources identified by members of the public, previously surveyed resources categorized by eligibility status, properties identified during contextual development, and currently designated resources and districts. Fieldwork teams should comprise two to three people per vehicle, including a driver and a navigator/notetaker recording in the GIS field map which parcels should be revisited and documented at the reconnaissance phase, which parcels need right -of -entry to complete an assessment, and which parcels do not need to be revisited. Surveyors should record the potential area or areas of significance and provide field notes, as needed, for properties identified for reconnaissance -level documentation. Potential new historic districts should be recorded in the map as polygons. Notes should be taken regarding existing historic districts more than 10 years old that appear to warrant updated documentation, an expanded boundary, and/or have potential for an expanded period of significance. All work should be completed from vehicles. At least one person in each vehicle should be a senior historian/architectural historian who exceeds the SOI professional qualification standards. The GIS field map should be set to automatically save progress to the consultant's web -based GIS account. 4. Produce Draft Windshield Survey Results Completed by consultants The consultant should review and refine the windshield survey data and prepare the following deliverables: - A table of properties with potential for significance to be revisited during the reconnaissance survey phase (Phase 3) of the project, including the following fields: parcel number, address, location (latitude and longitude), potential area(s) of significance, and surveyor notes. - A table of potential new historic districts with a description of potential boundaries and potential area(s) of significance. - A table of existing historic districts warranting updated documentation. - A table of properties for which right -of -entry is required to evaluate significance. - A geodatabase with the above information joined to parcels for individual properties and polygons for districts. To minimize costs for this phase, a written report would not be prepared. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 139 5. Produce Final Windshield Survey Results Completed by consultants As necessary, incorporate one round of consolidated comments from City staff and relevant stakeholders to finalize the list of properties recommended for reconnaissance -level documentation. Phase 3. Reconnaissance -Level Documentation Completed by consultants and City, Estimated consultant fee: $50, 000 Consultant fee assumes pre -field review of up to 50 properties not visible from the right-of-way; reconnaissance -level documentation of up to 200 properties total, including up to 20 properties requiring right -of -entry; a survey form with limited fields, no site plan, no property map, no incorporation or review of prior survey data, and reconnaissance -level research for only those properties with potential historic significance; and a presentation at one public meeting. Phase 3 consists of additional public engagement, preparatory work for the reconnaissance survey, and the reconnaissance survey fieldwork. The goal of the reconnaissance survey is to document potentially historic properties and districts identified during the windshield survey and properties for which right -of -entry is desired to assess historic significance. For budgetary reasons, this phase may be broken up into increments and repeated as necessary until all resources identified during the windshield survey have been documented at a reconnaissance level. Tasks 1. Continue to Engage the Public Completed by City The City should continue to keep the public appraised of the survey timeline and project status through press releases, website updates, social media posts, and other means. Communications should explain that some property owners may receive letters requesting right of -entry so surveyors can assess historic -age resources not visible from the right-of-way. 2. Refine List of Properties for Which Right -of -Entry is Desired and Request Right -of -Entry Completed by consultant and City If many properties are not visible from the right-of-way, the consultant should coordinate with City staff to refine the list to include only those for which right -of -entry is desired. The consultant should review historical aerial imagery and topographic maps to identify those with historic -age resources. Next, they should identify those with highest potential to be historically significant by comparing current and aerial imagery, the age of the historic -age resources, and the character of surrounding contemporaneous properties. This list should be reviewed and finalized with the City. The City should request right -of -entry for the selected properties. The letters should be sent to property owners on City letterhead explaining the project and its goals and soliciting access to photograph and document historic -age built resources. The letters should provide a form that property owners can complete and return to grant or deny access, and to provide additional information about access or coordinating access during fieldwork. The consultant would be responsible for following up with property owners who requested advance notification of fieldwork or who wanted to be present during fieldwork. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 140 3. Conduct Reconnaissance -Level Field Documentation Completed by consultant Reconnaissance -level field documentation would involve documenting individual properties identified during the windshield survey for their potential historic significance and properties for which right -of -entry is desired to assess historic significance. The GIS-based data collection system developed in Phase 2, Task 2 would be used to photograph and record information about each property. The camera should be set to capture photographs at the highest resolution (no less than 1200 x 1600 pixels). For cost efficiency, fieldworkers should document the primary historic -age resource on each property on the survey form; ancillary resources should be photographed and included on the form for the primary resource. A minimum of two photographs taken from different angles, when possible, should be required for each property. Historic -age resources on properties identified during reconnaissance -level field documentation with potential for historic significance would be documented from the public right-of-way. Surveyors may determine that properties for which right -of -entry was obtained may not possess potential historic significance, but since access was granted, all right -of -entry properties should be documented to provide a record for the City. For potential historic districts, the boundaries should be confirmed, all properties in the boundary should be documented, and representative photographs should be taken showing the general character of the area. 4. Produce a Draft Reconnaissance Survey Report Completed by consultant After fieldwork, reconnaissance -level research should be conducted on individual properties and districts with potential historic significance to inform eligibility recommendations. The level of research necessary would vary by resource, but may include review of historical aerial images, maps, and local history publications, archival newspaper research, review of digitized archives, and review of other sources that may provide information about a property's history or the people or groups associated with the property. Each resource and potential district should be evaluated for historic significance according to the themes and subthemes outlined in the historic context developed in Phase 1. The results of the research and a recommendation regarding eligibility for historic designation should be provided in the survey form for individual resources. Individual properties recommended eligible for designation should include a description of significance, applicable eligibility criteria, the identified area(s) and period(s) of significance, a boundary recommendation, and contributing and noncontributing resources. A PDF of each property's survey form should be generated that includes a minimum of two photographs and the required survey data. For new districts recommended eligible, the consultant should prepare a summary of the district and its historic significance, applicable eligibility criteria, the identified area(s) and period(s) of significance, a boundary recommendation, a list of contributing and noncontributing resources, and representative photographs. For existing districts in which changes are recommended, the changes should be summarized and an updated listed of contributing and noncontributing resources prepared, if applicable. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 141 A draft reconnaissance survey report should be prepared with an executive summary, a description of the methodology, key findings, survey forms, and results figures. The digital survey photographs and a geodatabase with the survey results should accompany the report. 5. Share Results with the Public Consultant scope assumes a presentation at one public meeting. City staff responsible for additional public outreach including meeting planning and attendance, sharing the draft report online, social media posts, public notices, press releases, etc. The draft survey results should be shared with the public via a public meeting and other means. At the meeting, City staff should explain the purpose of the project, the City's goals, the benefits of historic preservation, and next steps for owners of properties interested in pursuing historic designations. Consultants should present the survey findings and solicit feedback. 6. Finalize the Reconnaissance Survey Report As necessary, incorporate one round of consolidated comments from the City, other relevant stakeholders, and input from the public to finalize the reconnaissance survey report. Repeat the Process Every 10 Years Historic resources surveys are recommended every 10 years to ensure the survey provides an accurate record of a community's historic resources and serves as a useful tool for planners. The City should plan to repeat the survey plan described above every 10 years, building upon the findings of the past 10 years, and focusing on newly historic -age properties, newly recognized historical themes, and recent period(s) of significance. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 142 _ CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ARKANS ARKANSAS Copyright 2023 CA Fayetteville Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan Item Approvals Name: Britin Bostick Jonathan Curth Susan Norton Lioneld Jordan z r� Date: a10(-)