Preservation posts: the online journal of the Historic Preservation Division of the Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Feb. 2013

In this issue:
- Message from the Director - 2013 Weekend for Wildlife Archaeology Field Trip - A Quick Look at Historic Building Rehabilitation Issues: Compatible New Additions or Replacement Features - Staff Profile: Aimee Bouzigard - Recent News & Announcements - Upcoming Events
Message from the Director
By Dr. David Crass, Division Director & Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
Earlier this week I attended the annual meeting of the National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers, or NCSHPO, in Washington, D.C. This is a three-day affair that includes updates from our federal agencies (especially the National Park Service), workshops and legislative affairs briefings, and visits to our congressional delegations. It's also a great opportunity to catch up with our colleagues from across the country.
Several themes emerged from the conference this year. First, all of the SHPOs are dealing with the implication of the federal sequester, which will significantly reduce our federal allotment. At HPD we began planning for this reduction late last fall, and feel confident that we have contingency plans in place to weather that particular storm. Second, there has been much talk in Washington over the last several years about tax simplification in the federal code. This has obvious potential ramifications for the federal rehabilitation tax credit program. And third, several SHPOs spoke about how important it is to let our policymakers know about the role they play in economic development and community stabilization. This is something that HPD has emphasized for several years in our congressional visits.
During my visits to members of Georgia's congressional delegation, I talked to each of them about the importance of our Section 106 environmental review program and its role in insuring federal agency consultation. I also presented fact sheets prepared by HPD staff on Certified Local Governments (CLGs) and historic preservation tax projects in their districts. Alexandria, Virginia is just downstream from the District, and I pointed out that there is a reason Alexandria is such a great, walkable community, and that a big part of that reason is the underlying federal/state historic preservation partnership and the opportunities it offers through CLG status, tax incentives, and the like. I'm happy to report that all of the offices I visited were supportive of Historic Preservation Division in general and of the tax program in particular.
In news closer to home, be sure to check out the upcoming 2013 Georgia Statewide Preservation Conference & Historic Preservation Commission Training on April 26-27, 2013. We have an outstanding set of conference sessions, and I can promise you'll have a full slate of great speakers, topics, and opportunities for interaction with your colleagues. See you there!
2013 Weekend for Wildlife Archaeology Field Trip
By Dr. David Crass, Division Director & Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
Left: Guest Patricia Barmeyer finds a large Altahama pottery rim sherd! Right: Ryan Sipe shows off a large Altahama pot sherd. The "filfot cross" design is barely visible
as circular patterns on the left side of the sherd, which was brushed after the cross design was stamped.
Archaeologists from HPD and Georgia Southern University led Weekend for Wildlife guests on a field trip to a Guale (pronounced "wally") Indian village site on Richmond Hill Wildlife Management Area in February. The annual Weekend for Wildlife at The Cloister on Sea Island is a black tie benefit dinner and auction that includes field experiences for guests ranging from skeet shooting to fishing to bird watching. Proceeds go to various Wildlife Resources Division programs.
The Guale inhabited the Georgia coast from the mouth of the Savannah River down to the Altahama. Micos, or chiefs, ruled from pairs of villages, and according to Spanish sources, owed allegiance under a kind of confederacy to a "mico major". Ethnohistorians believe, again based on Spanish sources, that there were three such Guale chiefdoms along the coast. The Guale were subjugated by the Spaniards in the late 1500s and over the next century suffered demographic collapse due to the introduction of European foods and diseases as well as out-and-out violence perpetrated by the European colonizers. In the late 1600s the Spanish mission system itself collapsed due to increasing slave raiding by the English and their Indian allies, and the remaining Guale fled with the friars and soldiers to St. Augustine. In the 1760s the Spanish, as well as descendants of the Guale, retreated to Cuba under a treaty with Great Britain. Today there are no remaining Guale in their ancestral Georgia homeland, although recent research strongly suggests that Guale descendants may still live in Cuba.
Georgia Southern M.A. student Ryan Sipe has been carrying out limited excavations on the site under the direction of his thesis chair, Dr. Sue Moore, for several months. Prior to the Weekend excavations, he had successfully bounded the site and identified its cultural affiliation. Our fieldwork was intended to assess several large oyster shell middens (concentrations of food and household waste remains), and determine whether there are intact features, such as post molds, pits, or other soil stains. After a briefing on field techniques and goals, guests were divided into three crews and set to shoveling and screening under a cloudless blue sky.
Almost immediately large Guale potsherds with the characteristic "filfot cross" design began turning up, indicating a relatively undisturbed site (if the potsherds had been very small it would have indicated that they had been badly churned, and broken, by plowing or forest management). Other finds included projectile points, animal bones, and lots and lots of oyster shells. By the end of the day, excavators had uncovered several dark stains under a dense shell midden, possibly indicating a Guale house which was abandoned and subsequently covered over with food remains from a neighboring family.
Like all of HPD's Weekend for Wildlife trips, this one contributed to a real, ongoing archaeological project. In this case, the end result will be a thesis, the contents of which will be used by DNR to manage the site so that it is still here for archaeological research in the future, when we will have more advanced analytical techniques, different research questions, and, in all probability, fewer such large, undisturbed sites.
A Quick Look at Historic Building Rehabilitation Issues: Compatible New Additions or Replacement Features
By William Hover, Tax Incentives & Rehabilitation Guidance Program Manager and Architectural Reviewer
A free-standing addition (right) attached by a hyphen connector to the 1929 Morgan Indoor Tennis Court on Jekyll Island.
Historic building rehabilitation can often include replacement of missing features and new additions. When this type of work is planned or necessary, consistency with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation requires it be accomplished in a manner that retains the building's historic character, avoids creating a false sense of historical development, distinguishes the work as a contemporary alteration, associates the new with the old compatibly, and incorporates reversibility.
A common shorthand reference to these concepts is the expression "contemporarycompatible."
So just what does "contemporary-compatible" mean? Well, before getting into those details, a couple of clarifying points may be necessary. First, the missing features alluded to here are those for which no photographic or adequate physical evidence is available; if such information is available, it should be used to make a matching replacement for the missing feature. Second, "contemporary" means of our current time period, rather than a reference to modern or futuristic design styles and is intended as a counterpoint to "period" designs, which mimic architectural details commonly used as design elements at certain periods of the past.
For a replacement of a missing feature to be compatible, it should incorporate in its design the principal components of the feature that would be present for a building of its style and period of construction. For it to be contemporary, it should be constructed from presentday available materials.
For instance, in the case of a missing storefront for a small, early 20th century commercial/retail building, the principle components would include bulkheads, display windows, transoms, and entry door. In constructing the storefront, materials used might include wood and plywood, or hollow metal framing and metal panels, or aluminum storefront systems. In any case, the storefront should be of similar proportion to what was typical of its construction period regarding height/size of bulkheads and transoms. These proportions can be established by examining applicable existing historic storefronts, historic photographs, and period millwork or cast-iron catalogs. Along with these considerations, the replacement storefront should also blend in with the rest of the building in a manner that it doesn't become such a focal point as to relegate the historic portion of the facade to secondary status. Paint color, lighting, and use of awnings may be factors in how well a storefront blends in.
As another example, where the porch is missing from a house, the principal components would typically include foundation elements (walls or piers), steps and cheek walls, skirting/underpinning, floor, columns, balustrade, and eave elements. The overall appearance of the porch can be influenced by those of existing porches of houses of the same type/style and construction period or applicable design books, but should be a simplified version, for instance: using straight rather than tapered columns and using square rather than turned balustrade pickets may be applicable. If brick porch walls are appropriate, they should be close to the color of existing brick of the house, but not match the texture. Usually, too, eave or other architectural ornamentation should be avoided.
The main issues associated with new additions and their consistency with the Standards for Rehabilitation include location, size/scale, how they connect to the historic portion of the building, and how they are differentiated from the historic portion of the building.
Generally, the location of a new addition should be where it can't be seen from an adjacent street or doesn't create a significant visual impact to the front of the building/house. In this context, the most appropriate location is the rear, although additions set back from the front of the building/house can also be acceptable in some circumstances. Similar concepts are applicable to rooftop additions as well. While an entire additional story would be inappropriate, a rear dormer that doesn't extend above the main ridgeline, allowing conversion of attic space could be acceptable for a house and an addition set back from roof edges such that it is only minimally seen from the street could be acceptable for a downtown commercial building.
What may be acceptable in size and scale for an addition is dependent on the size and scale of the historic building. In general, an addition should be significantly smaller that the building so that it can be clearly recognized as secondary to the main portion of the building. In this context, an addition to a house should be limited to one or two rooms with overall square footage along the lines of the largest existing room or smaller. Quantifying size for a commercial building addition is somewhat more uncertain, as zero lot lines and other site constraints may play a part in determining what might be acceptable. Nevertheless, if there aren't other problematic issues, an addition that approaches or exceeds 25% of the historic building's footprint could be cause for concern.
Additions should also be connected to historic buildings with minimal impact to historic fabric and loss of historic material. Ways to achieve this include the addition as a freestanding building attached to the historic building with a hyphen connector and the addition incorporating an exterior wall of the historic building as an interior wall. In the former case, the connecting opening should utilize an existing doorway or convert an existing window into a doorway; for the latter case, the existing exterior wall finish should be left intact, either exposed or covered with a new finish material that could be removed in the future without resulting in significant damage to historic material.
Furthermore, all additions should be distinguishable as a contemporary alteration, which is applicable for other exterior changes as well. Ways to achieve this include using different materials, using similar materials with different profiles or textures, distinctly marking the connection between the historic building and the addition by offsetting walls (and rooflines) or using vertical "corner" boards. Closely matching materials and finishes between the new and old or using period designs should be avoided, as while they may look different when first installed, as they age, this difference will diminish and what once was new likely misinterpreted as original construction.
The Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings (which accompany the Standards for Rehabilitation), Preservation Brief No.14, New Exterior Additions to Historic Buildings: Preservation Concerns, as well as other subject-specific Preservation Briefs, provide additional guidance regarding appropriate replacement of missing features and new additions.
Staff Profile
Aimee Bouzigard, Staff Archaeologist - SPHS
Taking a look around the converted A.S. Varn & Son oyster and crab factory that is now the Pin Point Heritage Museum near Savannah.
Aimee joined HPD in Fall of 2012 as the State Parks and Historic Sites Archaeologist, conducting surveys on DNR properties and assessing sites for their National Register of Historic Places eligibility. Prior to her arrival at HPD, Aimee was an Interpretive Ranger for Parks at Wormsloe State Historic Site in Savannah. She also assisted HPD with numerous underwater archaeology projects. Aimee holds a Master's degree in Anthropology, with a concentration in Archaeology, from East Carolina University and a Bachelor's degree in Anthropology from North Carolina State University. Although her graduate studies were geographically focused on the Middle East, Aimee has worked on several prehistoric and historic sites in North Carolina, Mississippi, and Jamaica. She is particularly interested in Mississippian-period mound sites, and the later Muscogee (Creek) Confederacy.
How did you become involved in the field of archaeology? Well, I guess I just never grew out of the playing-in-the-dirt phase most of us leave behind after childhood. Plus I get to be outside and do science? Sign me up!
I have always enjoyed learning about different cultures and civilizations in history class, but these mainly focused on the ancient Romans, Greeks, and Egyptians, which all had writing systems and could record their own histories. I started to think more about the people who preceded the advent of writing, and how their experiences could be placed into the overall story of humanity. That is when my interest was sparked by the information we can gather from what these people leave behind, their material culture. Going to museums and seeing physical objects that survived for thousands of years underground was just the coolest thing to me, and I wanted to be a part of this detective work. Through archaeological techniques and analysis of artifacts, not only can these forgotten peoples be given a voice, but new insight can be gained about those who did record their histories, including the biases that influenced what was written. That was mind-blowing to me to realize that much of written history is essentially incomplete because of the cultural and political forces at play during specific periods in time.
I also enjoy the fact that archaeology is a multifaceted area of study that incorporates and borrows from other disciplines like history, anthropology, linguistics, geology, geography, ecology, botany, chemistry and so on, allowing for varied approaches of analysis. So as a discipline, archaeology is always changing and evolving, making it an exciting profession. Plus, you get to gain access to the vast store of human experience to help address current challenges that will in turn influence our future. And that is simply awesome.
What do you do on a typical day? What do you like most about your job? The best thing about my job is that it is not monotonous. Being the Parks Archaeologist, I get to travel all over the state and see the interesting sites Georgia possesses. I am in charge of protecting the cultural resources that exist on these state-owned lands for future generations. Days in the field involve testing and investigating areas where new construction projects are proposed to be installed. Days when I am in the HPD office involve researching for those field days, planning for public archaeology events, reviewing applications for Section 106 compliance, and participating in trainings to stay current in all facets of historic preservation.
What do you like to do outside the office? Besides biking, kayaking, and playing soccer, I like to explore. I have only been in the Atlanta metro area since November, so there is still plenty for me to discover. I have found a great fit in Decatur, where I live. I like the community's focus on health and walking, and enjoy the access behind my apartment to Glenlake Park and Decatur Cemetery. Plus, "Your DeKalb Farmers Market" is amazing! I also enjoy live music, and being in this metropolitan area has been beneficial for that, as well as for museums and professional sporting events. I am looking forward to the warmer weather and all the festivals and happenings!
Recent News & Announcements
Dublin is Georgia's 86th Certified Local Government (Press release - February 4)
Charles R. Adams Park Listed in the National Register of Historic Places (Press release - February 4)
Upcoming Events
April 9-11, 2013 - Section 106: An Introduction - Atlanta Learn the basics of project review under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. This seminar emphasizes practicalities-how to avoid pitfalls and victimization by myths. Discuss recent changes in regulations and procedures, with an emphasis on coordination with the National Environmental Policy Act and other laws. An agenda is available online at www.npi.org.
April 26-27, 2013 - Georgia Historic Preservation Conference - Milledgeville Up-to-date information - including the call for session proposals, agenda, travel recommendations, and more - will be posted to our website at www.georgiashpo.org/2013conference. Please contact Outreach Program Manager Leigh Burns at leigh.burns@dnr.state.ga.us with any questions.
Please send your comments or suggestions to charlie.miller@dnr.state.ga.us.
Not a member? Subscribe now! Our mailing address is: Georgia Historic Preservation Division Department of Natural Resources 254 Washington Street, SW, Ground Level Atlanta, GA 30334 Add us to your address book Copyright (C) 2013 Georgia Historic Preservation Division All rights reserved. Title image: The 1929 Morgan Indoor Tennis Court on Jekyll Island, which underwent a historic preservation tax incentivesupport rehabilitation in 2010.