Historic District Commission

113 W. Mountain St Fayetteville, AR 72701 Historic District Commission Agenda City Hall Meeting Room 101/ Virtual Meeting Via Zoom Thursday, March 12, 2026 5:30 PM Members Chair Christine Myres (Exp: 06/28) Vice Chair Cheri Coley (Exp: 06/27) Meredith Mahan (Exp: 06/26) Jennifer Didway (Exp: 06/27) Tommie Flowers Davis (Exp: 06/27) Mark Harper (Exp: 06/27) Karen Rorex (Exp: 06/28) City Staff Long Range and Historic Preservation Planner Kylee Cole Long Range Planning and Special Projects Manager Britin Bostick Historic District Commission March 12, 2026 Zoom Information Webinar ID: 840 2719 5015 Registration Link: https://fayetteville- ar.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_f7HGmAuqT-ipZ__Xsp5EzQ Call to Order Roll Call Minutes Approval of the February 12, 2026 Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes. Unfinished Business Oak Grove Design Guidelines Review draft guidelines for Oak Grove Local Historic District for adoption. Downtown Design Overlay District Review Citywide Survey Ph. 1 Update New Business Proposed Southeast Fayetteville Local Historic District Review proposal for the creation of a local historic district southeast of Downtown with emphasis on the historic Black community. Oak Grove Local Historic District Amendment Review proposed amendment to add the property at 515 N. Park Avenue to the Oak Grove Historic District. May Historic Preservation Month Planning City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Page 2 Historic District Commission March 12, 2026 Announcements Adjournment City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Page 3  Oak Grove Historic District Advisory Design Guidelines Acknowledgements Lorem Ipsum Dolor  Table of Contents Preface Introduction to Oak Grove .......................................................... 3 Purpose ....................................................................................... 7 General Application of Guidelines ............................................. 8 Advisory Guidelines Accessibility - Ramps, Lifts, Paving and Elevators ..................10 Additions......................................................................................11 Architectural Features.................................................................14 Chimneys......................................................................................15 Decks............................................................................................16 Doors and Entrances...................................................................16 Foundations.................................................................................17 Gutters and Downspouts.............................................................18 Lighting........................................................................................19 Masonry....................................................................................... 20 Materials...................................................................................... 21 Mechanical Systems and Energy Retrofits (Solar)................... 22 Paint and Colors......................................................................... 23 Porches....................................................................................... 24 Roofs........................................................................................... 26 Signs and House Numbers........................................................ 26 Windows..................................................................................... 27 Wood Siding............................................................................... 31 Advisory Guidelines - Setting Driveways.................................................................................... 32 Fences and Gates....................................................................... 33 Retaining Walls........................................................................... 34 Garages and Outbuildings.......................................................... 35 Walkways..................................................................................... 35 Landscaping................................................................................ 36 Appendices Terminology ................................................................................ 40 Planning Your Project ................................................................ 41  Introduction to Oak Grove The Oak Grove Historic District preserves a residential neighborhood located near Fayetteville’s Wilson Park and within walking distance of the Fayetteville Square, Dickson Street, and the University of Arkansas campus. Originally platted as Oak Grove Addition —a name referring to the many post oak trees in the area, many of which still stand today—the neighborhood is characterized by its wooded natural setting and rustic topography, its distinct vernacular architecture, and its significance in Fayetteville’s history. The neighborhood was largely developed by Dr. Noah F. Drake, a University of Arkansas geologist who helped establish City Park, later known Figure 1. 1908 Plat Map of Oak Grove Addition. as Wilson Park—the first public park in Portion in proposed district outlined in red. Fayetteville and a much-beloved outdoor space for the city’s residents today. Born on a farm in Washington County in 1864, then educated at Cane Hill College and Arkansas Industrial University (now the University of Arkansas) in civil engineering (class of 1888). Drake eventually completed his PhD in geology at Stanford University in California in 1897 and spent many years thereafter as a professor of geology in Tianjin, China, where he was involved in petroleum mining. In 1911, Drake moved back to the United States, first teaching at Stanford before returning to Arkansas in 1912. Upon his return to Fayetteville, Drake resided in a home within the present boundary of the Oak Grove Historic District at 513 North Highland Avenue, then bought many nearby lots in the Oak Grove Addition and the neighboring Englewood Addition that he would soon develop. Figure 2. Noah Fields Drake. Source: Orange County California Genealogical Society (Vera Wade Drake). Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 3  Introduction to Oak Grove These include the corner lot on Maple Street and Forest Avenue, where he built his own family home: a house that recalls the iconic California Craftsman Bungalow through its large front porch, overhanging roof, and exposed rafter tails, but also includes unusual features, like its terracotta tile roof, which perhaps recalls the tiled roofs on Stanford’s campus or the local architecture of Tianjin, a reference recorded in Drake’s family correspondence. Figure 3. Drake’s Family Home Drake also built the many “Rock Houses” in the neighborhood, including a distinct series of homes on West Davidson Street and North Park Avenue. These houses are defined by their use of local sandstone on their exterior facades. Drake created his own rock house style distinct from the “Ozark giraffe,” named for its resemblance to the distinctive patterning of giraffe hides, evoking his background as a geologist and representing an innovative use of local materials in this region. Figure 4. 16 Davidson Other residential properties in the Historic District incorporate wood shingles, stucco, and natural materials, creating a charming connection between nature and architecture; houses are set in landscaped plots defined by rock work, large trees, and gardens. As explained in a study of the notable historic structures throughout Arkansas, these homes are “subtle in their distinctions, romantic in their image. Their hilly, leafy siting contributes to their desirability. ... Floral gardens complement the grounds of many of the houses, visually connecting them with the Figure 5. 603 Park extensively planted beds of neighboring Wilson Park.”[1] [1] Cyrus A. Sutherland, with Gregory Herman, Claudia Shannon, Jean Sizemore, and Jeannie M. Whayne, Buildings of Arkansas (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2018), 54.  Introduction to Oak Grove The neighborhood was home to significant figures in the city’s and University of Arkansas’s early history. Drake, for example, purchased City Park in 1926 and developed it with a pool and stone tourist cottages, three of which still stand, before selling it to the City of Fayetteville in 1944. He experimented with cultivating native walnut trees at his orchard and farm in North Fayetteville; some of these trees still dot the streets of Oak Grove. Drake also provided money for purchasing the first portion of land at Drake Field, the municipal airport located in South Fayetteville; the White Hanger at Drake Field is now preserved as a Local Historic District. Other figures who lived in the boundaries of the Historic District are also significant in local history. Superintendent Wayne White (515 Forest Avenue) integrated the Fayetteville School District in 1954— Fayetteville was one of the very first districts in the former Confederacy to desegregate, and did so peacefully. Dr. Harry R. Rosen (509 Forest Avenue) advanced the science of crop production and is the namesake for the University’s Rosen Center for Alternative Pest Control, located up the road on Maple Street. His terraced backyard was once used for cultivating new varieties of garden roses which he bred and released, including Figure 6. 515 Forest Miriam’s Climber, named for his daughter. George Clifton Wade (501 Forest Avenue) served as a member of the Arkansas Senate (1955-1971) and a member of the Arkansas House of Representatives (1947-1955). The intent of the Oak Grove Historic District is to preserve this unique neighborhood—a cohesive and intact example of Ozark vernacular residential architecture and neighborhood design—for the future. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 5  Introduction to Oak Grove The Oak Grove Historic District was created by Fayetteville City Council on XXXXX, 2026 (Ord. No. XXX). Figure 7. Proposed Oak Grove Local Historic District Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 6  Purpose The design guidelines for the Oak Grove Historic District provide the HDC and property owners with best practices for residential rehabilitation[2] and new construction. The guidelines are practical approaches to specific design elements common for dwellings built in the early 20th century. Rehabilitation assumes that at least some repair or alteration of the historic building will be needed to provide for efficient contemporary use; however, these repairs and alterations must not damage or destroy materials, features, or finishes that are important in defining the building's historic character. Design guidelines aim to provide acceptable solutions to adapting historic buildings for modern lifestyles, striking a balance between function and preservation. The guidelines allow for change when it is accomplished in a sensitive manner that maintains the special character of the Historic District while meeting the practical needs of the residents and property owners. The guidelines direct the HDC, staff, and property owners in making appropriate decisions in the physical appearance of exterior elements of historic properties regarding primary residential buildings, as well as their associated outbuildings, site features, landscaping, driveways, walkways, and overall streetscapes. Of particular importance to the HDC and Historic District residents is preventing demolition of significant resources. Demolition of properties which contribute to the character of the district should only be a last resort and the burden of proof to justify demolition will be the responsibility of the property owner. Figure 8. Oak Grove Graphic, Illustration: Martin Schapiro [2] "Rehabilitation" is defined as "the process of returning a property to a state of utility, through repair or alteration, which makes possible an efficient contemporary use while preserving those portions and features of the property which are significant to its historic, architectural and cultural values.”  General Application of Guidelines The following guidelines only apply to exteriors; interior changes are not reviewed by the Historic District Commission. CORE TENENTS 1. Always repair existing original elements when possible. 2. When replacing original elements damaged beyond repair, match as closely as possible. 3. When replacing a missing element, research comparable historical examples to inform selection of a replacement. 4. When altering a historical element, take care to make changes that are reversable. This will allow future owners to restore historical elements to their original appearance. 5. Keep historical elements visible. Be gentle when cleaning. Take steps to keep them dry. SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S STANDARD FOR REHABILITATION The following standards, prepared by the federal government, serve as general principles for historic preservation of buildings in the United States and complement the core tenets articulated above. 1. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment. 2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. Avoid the removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property. 3. Each property shall 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 architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken. 4. Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a historic property shall be preserved. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 8  General Application of Guidelines 6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. 8. Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall 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. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 9  Advisory Guidelines The following guidance aims to help homeowners maintain and preserve the original features on the exterior of Historic District homes. Advisory guidelines do not require review by the Historic District Commission. 6. Accessibility - Ramps, Lifts, Paving and Elevators The addition of new ramps, wheelchair lifts, paved paths, and elevators to historic dwellings may be required to provide access and meet the needs of residents and visitors. Property owners should contact the City of Fayetteville staff at the start of planning. Staff will provide professional planning assistance and will work with building code officials to investigate alternative methods for meeting accessibility requirements on historical dwellings. If the need for access is only occasional, consider temporary ramps rather than permanent ones. Accessibility modifications should avoid loss of original fabric and should be reversible whenever possible. Guidelines 6.1 Install accessibility features with minimal effect to dwelling. To provide accessibility to residences, modifications may be needed to facilitate safe access for those with limited mobility. Make any alterations in such a manner that a historic property’s character-defining features are affected as minimally as possible. To diminish the impact of accessibility features, design these elements to be compatible with the architectural character, proportion, scale, materials, and finish of the historic dwelling. Elevators can sometimes be sensitively installed inside a house without affecting rooms, features, or details. 6.2 Install ramps on side or rear elevations to minimize their visual impact. 6.3 Use temporary ramps where possible. If the need for accessibility is intermittent, consider the use of temporary ramps which can be stored and not visible when not in use. 6.4 New walkways paved in stone, brick, concrete, and permeable materials are appropriate in the Historic District. The use of asphalt for walkways is not appropriate and the use of this material is discouraged. 6.5 Avoid loss of original fabric of a dwelling and design reversable modifications when possible. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 10  Advisory Guidelines 7. Additions Additions to dwellings are appropriate if they minimally affect historic materials, are not readily visible, are secondary in size and scale to the footprint of the original dwelling and maintain the dominance of the original structure. The new addition should be distinguishable from the character of the original dwelling while blending with the overall design. Additions that alter the original roof form may require review by the Historic District Commission, but additions that do not impact the original roof form or are not visible from the public right-of-way will not. Guidelines 7.1 Consider the location, size, and scale of the addition. A new addition should be secondary to the historic dwelling. Locate new additions on rear or side elevations not visible from the street. 7.2 Retain historic character. The addition should blend with the historic dwelling but appear as a discernible wing from the historical building. 7.3 Character-defining features of dwellings should not be radically changed, obscured, damaged, or destroyed by an addition. The existing historical fabric should not be damaged by the construction of a new addition. 7.4 Additions shall respect the scale and massing of neighboring historic buildings. Large additions may be required to be divided into smaller components similar in scale to the original building and neighboring historic buildings. 7.5 Additions should be designed to respect the established front and side yard setbacks present in the district. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 11  Advisory Guidelines Figure 9 and 10. Additions Graphic, Illustration: Martin Schapiro THREE APPROACHES TO REAR ADDITIONS: Adding an extension that dwarfs the original structure, as shown in example A, is not appropriate. The addition in example B is appropriately scaled and is difficult to see from the street. The addition in example C attempts to minimize the visual impact of the newly constructed addition on the street. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 12  Advisory Guidelines Figure 11. Building Up Graphic, Illustration: Martin Schapiro BUILDING UP: Do not add a full second story to a single story or one and half story home. Instead, consider a rear addition that is not visible from the street. Dormers that do not face the street may be an economical way to improve usable living space. Dormers should be scaled to match those found on historical properties in the district. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 13  Advisory Guidelines 8. Architectural Features The architectural details and features of a dwelling are important stylistic elements that contribute to its historic character. They should be preserved and should never be removed or concealed. If a feature is beyond repair, in-kind replacement elements should match the original as closely as possible in material, design, color, and texture. Guidelines 8.1 Preserve and maintain historic architectural details and features; do not cover or conceal them. The various architectural details of a building together visually convey the distinct historic character and specific style of the building. To maintain that special quality, these details should be preserved. Removing or covering original architectural details compromises the visual appearance of a building and diminishes the historic character of this building and the surrounding district. Guidelines provide direction for proper care and maintenance, preventing loss through deterioration of individual elements and overall integrity. 8.2 Cleaning architectural details. Depending on the material type, some architectural details and features may occasionally need cleaning to promote their longevity. Generally, the use of water with mild detergent and brushes is appropriate. For more complicated cleaning jobs, a historic architect or contractor with experience in historic buildings can provide specific recommendations. Do not use pressure washers or other abrasive methods on historic materials as they are likely to cause permanent damage. 8.3 Repair architectural features; return features to their original appearance. Consult with a historic architect, architectural conservator, or experienced contractor to determine the appropriate treatment. Wood: Deterioration of wood features can be rectified with the application of epoxy to fill in small openings. Larger areas of decay should be cut out and re-fitted with pieces of new wood. Metal: Light corrosion on historic metal features can be gently removed with a wire brush. Heavier corrosion may require alternative methods including low pressure grit or sand blasting, flame cleaning, and chemical treatment. These treatments are more hazardous, and consultation with a professional is recommended. Protect adjacent materials such as brick, glass, and wood with some form of temporary covering. Immediately following rust and paint removal, metal features should be painted. Epoxies may be used to fill small gaps. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 14  Advisory Guidelines 8.4 Do not embellish historic buildings; add features only with historical evidence in hand. The addition of historical architectural details muddles the building’s true historical character and will often overlay contemporary tastes instead. The best way to highlight a building’s original character is to ground modifications in archival, photographic, or material evidence that reflect and extrapolate the building’s earliest design. Some projects may require research into forms and detailing that would have been used in the region at the time the home was first constructed. 8.5 Replace missing or severely damaged historical architectural detail with in-kind elements that match the original. Replacement features should match the original feature in design, proportion, and detail. Historical photographs, drawings, graphics, or other physical evidence are useful in matching original features. If no historic documentation is available, select a simple design in keeping with the building’s historic architectural style and period. The replacement feature should be made of the same material as the original, but when necessary, substitute materials may be considered if they successfully match the original detail appearance. The use of substitute materials may be especially appropriate where they are not readily visible from the street, such as along upper facades and cornices. 9. Chimneys Retain and maintain original chimneys. Today, many fireplaces have gas inserts, and chimneys may only be used to vent furnaces. Even when they are no longer functioning, brick chimney stacks, their caps, and their decorative corbelling act as a visual reminder of a dwelling’s historical character. Chimneys should be preserved on dwelling exteriors as an architectural feature, unless it becomes a safety hazard. Maintain and preserve chimneys in accordance with the primary materials guidelines. Guidelines 9.1 Do not remove or alter original chimneys. Preserve and maintain functioning and non-functioning chimneys. Do not cover chimneys with stucco or other veneers unless the brick surfaces are in poor condition. Adding chimney caps made of concrete, slate, unglazed terra cotta or stone are appropriate to improve functionality. 9.2 Follow the guidelines for brick/masonry to promote the longevity of an original chimney. Use gentle cleaning methods as needed. When repointing is necessary, apply soft mortar compounds that match the original mortar density. 9.3 An unstable chimney can be rebuilt, matching the original as closely as possible. An unstable chimney may be rebuilt or otherwise supported with metal straps or brackets anchored to the roof framing. Use brick or other materials that match historical materials in shape, dimensions, mortar, color, and brick patterns. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 15  Advisory Guidelines 10. Decks Rear decks were not widely built until the mid-20th century when they became popular. Decks are typically not historical elements. As modern features, they should be designed and placed to minimize their impact on a dwelling’s appearance. Wood decks should only be built at the rear of dwellings or on non-readily visible side elevations. Installation of decks should not result in the loss of historic fabric and should be removable. Guidelines 10.1 Decks, patios, and other outdoor spaces should be located at the rear of dwellings. If built on the side of a dwelling, the deck should be screened from street view with fencing and/or landscaping. 10.2 Wood decks should be stained or painted to match or blend with the colors of the dwelling. 10.3 Decks should be simple rather than ornate and of a design that does not detract from the house, adjacent properties, or the historic district. 10.4 Decks of wood construction are recommended. Alternative materials, like engineered wood (Trex), may also be appropriate if the deck is not readily visible and if compatible with traditional materials in texture, design, and overall appearance. 11. Doors and Entrances A dwelling’s entrance acts as a focal point for a home’s stylistic and historical attributes. Several elements work together—porches, doors, transoms, sidelights, pediments, and door surrounds— to communicate historical character. Preserve and maintain all original entrance elements and keep them visible from the public right of way. Guidelines 11.1 Preserve and maintain original doors and entrances. Retain and keep in good repair all historic entrance components including jambs, sills, and headers of openings. Preserve primary doors on the main façade—they are character-defining features. Enclosing or covering original door openings is discouraged. 11.2 Make repairs to deteriorated or damaged historic doors that do not dramatically alter the design or materials. Repair historic doors with methods that retain their historic fabric and appearance as much as possible. Use epoxy to strengthen deteriorated wood. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 16  Advisory Guidelines 11.3 Replace a door that is beyond repair with a new door that matches the historical original. Replace a missing original door with a door style identified through comparative research of historical examples. Replacement doors should match the original door in materials, pane configuration, panel arrangement, and dimensions. The new doors should suit the dwelling’s style and date of construction. Photographs from the building’s historic period are helpful for researching appropriate styles when replacing doors. Additionally, similar dwellings that retain original doors may provide guidance for appropriate door design. 11.4 Do not introduce a new door opening where none exists on a readily visible facade. The installation of a new door opening is an alteration of the dwelling’s façade and compromises its architectural integrity. This practice is strongly discouraged. A new opening may be permitted on an elevation out of public view. The new entrance should still be compatible in scale, size, proportion, placement, and style to historic openings. Side or rear elevations are appropriate locations for the installation of a new door opening. 11.5 Use storm or screen doors if desired. Preserve historic screen doors, or select a screen or storm door design that allows full view of the original primary door. A storm door, security door, or screen door may be added, however these should be designed with minimal framework and full-view design to maintain visibility of the original door. These guidelines recommend screen doors made of wood, security doors made without extensive grillwork, and storm doors made of baked-enamel aluminum, color matched to the original doorframe. 12. Foundations Foundations may be both functional and reflect the dwelling’s design and style in texture, and color. Most foundations in the historic district are brick, stone, or rock-faced and poured concrete. Preserve and maintain these historic foundation materials. Keep historic foundations in good repair following the materials guidelines. Guidelines 12.1 Preserve and maintain original foundations and keep these foundations visible. Maintain original foundation materials, design, and detailing. The Historic District guidelines discourage covering or concealing original foundation materials with concrete block, plywood panels, corrugated metal, or similar materials. Follow Historic District materials guidelines for cleaning, care, and repair of foundations. 12.2 Follow Historic District materials guidelines for cleaning, care, and repair of foundations. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 17  Advisory Guidelines 12.3 If replacing foundation materials are necessary, match the original as closely as possible. Use in-kind materials for replacement of original foundations and install using similar construction techniques. 12.4 Avoid water coming in contact with or penetrating foundations. Water exposure over time causes deterioration of foundations. Direct downspouts and splash blocks away from the foundation. Also adjust irrigation systems to keep water a minimum of three feet away from foundations, with spray directed away from the foundations. Even better, install drip irrigation lines in foundation plantings to eliminate spray and keep moisture at ground level. It is also recommended to plant woody shrubs and trees well off the dwelling’s perimeter, as they can increasingly trap moisture at the foundation as they grow in size and fullness. 12.5 Do not conceal a historic pier foundation. Treat piers as an architectural asset by keeping them visible. Openings between the piers may be screened with lattice panels. Cut and fit lattice into the openings, and do not use lattice to cover piers. Historically, homeowners may have added brick infill between piers, and these should remain in place. Repair frame lattice panels between brick piers and replace lattice panels in keeping with traditional designs. Frame lattice panels should be set back from the fronts of the piers by at least 2 inches. Historically, homeowners may have added brick infill between piers, and these should remain in place. If brick lattice panels are used, the brick should be similar in color, texture and mortar joint profile to the original brick piers. 12.6 Foundations should not be painted or stuccoed unless there is historical evidence of this application. These treatments are only appropriate as means to hide mismatched or inappropriately repaired brick and/or mortar foundations. 13. Gutters and Downspouts Gutters and downspouts are essential to protecting a dwelling from the effects of rain and water. While their presence is functional, they can have aesthetic value through material or color, such as copper installations that take on a green patina over time or examples intentionally matched to the trim color of the dwelling. Figure 12. Gutters Graphic, Illustration: Martin Schapiro GUTTER PROFILES: Half round gutters allow better view of exposed rafter tails, a key feature of homes in the historic district. Half round is preferred over K-style, Ogee, box, or F-style gutters. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 18  Advisory Guidelines Guidelines 13.1 Maintain gutters, downspouts, and splash blocks. Diverting water off the roof and away from the dwelling is essential to home maintenance. Retain existing boxed or built-in gutters and remove any debris to keep them in good working order. Repair deteriorated or damaged gutters. 13.2 If original gutters are beyond repair, replace them with gutters of an appropriate type. For houses built before 1940, half-round gutters are the most appropriate design. Ogee gutters may be appropriate for buildings dating from or influenced by designs from the 1940s or later. If new gutters are required, half-round designs, “K” or ogee design aluminum gutters are appropriate. 13.3 Downspouts should be unobtrusive and should direct away from architectural features. Appropriately placed downspouts will protect the building and not detract from its historic character. Direct downspouts away from foundations, including those of neighboring dwellings. 13.4 Gutters and downspouts should be of colors that blend with the dwelling’s main body or trim colors. 13.5 The use of conductor heads (funnels that direct water from gutters to downspouts), where appropriate, is encouraged. 14. Lighting Original light fixtures on early 20th century dwellings are historical assets and should be preserved or maintained. New, reproduction light fixtures should be compatible with the architectural style of the dwelling and use traditional materials. Locate reproduction fixtures in traditionally illuminated spaces, such as flanking the main entrance door or mounted on the porch ceilings. Inconspicuous accent lighting on sidewalks or in front yards is appropriate. Guidelines 14.1 Maintain historic light fixtures. Preserve historic light fixtures as they contribute to the overall historic character of a dwelling. 14.2 Repair original fixtures whenever possible. Replace severely damaged original light fixtures with reproduction fixtures that match the originals. Replace missing lighting fixtures with reproduction fixtures selected through comparative historical research. Original light fixture design may be documented through photographic or physical evidence. Otherwise, select a design that blends with the style of other historic features of the historic dwelling. The use of modern, low-wattage, warm white, 3000-3500K bulbs is recommended. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 19  Advisory Guidelines 14.3 Select simple designs appropriate to the character of the building. If light fixtures of a modern design are desired, they should be inconspicuous and concealed with landscaping. 14.4 Do not allow light fixtures to damage or obscure architectural features or other building elements. The installation of new light fixtures should not damage masonry, siding, or other historic materials. Illumination should aid visibility without detracting from the building’s historic character. 14.5 Light fixture installed for security, such as flood lights, should be mounted on rear or sides of buildings rather than on the front. Floodlights mounted in yards to illuminate the front of the house are discouraged. The light from yard fixtures should be concentrated on the property and should not illuminate neighboring properties. Lighting of trees should be minimal. If adding lights to trees, down-lighting contributes less light pollution than up-lighting. 15. Masonry The key to preserving historical brick is to keep out water and use a soft mortar whenever repair is needed. Maintaining mortar and using appropriate cleaning methods are the best ways to protect brick from water intrusion. The use of hard mortars like Portland cement can cause the brick to crack and break when shifting temperatures expand and contract masonry. Low pressure water cleaning and the use of soft mortar mixes are best for brick dwellings. Abrasive cleaning methods, like sandblasting, erodes the skin of the brick. Guidelines 15.1 Preserve and maintain original masonry including brick, stone, stucco, terra cotta, cast concrete, and mortar. Masonry provides texture, finishes, and patterns that contribute to a dwelling’s distinct appearance. Proper maintenance of masonry preserves the historic character of a dwelling. Do not cover or conceal original masonry surfaces with novel materials such as stucco, metal, or vinyl. 15.2 Do not use abrasive cleaning methods on brick and masonry. Abrasive cleaning methods such as sandblasting erodes historic brick surfaces and risks eroding the integrity of the original material. 15.3 Use the gentlest means possible when cleaning masonry. Masonry generally needs infrequent cleaning, perhaps to stop deterioration or to remove graffiti and stains. Mild detergent diluted with water may be used to remove dirt or grime from masonry. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 20  Advisory Guidelines Gently scrub with a natural bristle brush. Alternatively, a non-harmful chemical solution may be used. In either case, finish with a low-pressure water rinse. Before applying a cleaning agent to brick, test it in a small, inconspicuous area to ensure it will not damage or discolor the masonry. 15.4 Do not paint historical masonry. Unpainted masonry is one of the most low-maintenance exterior building materials, but once it is painted, it requires repainting with similar frequency as wood siding. If original masonry is at risk of water penetration, apply a water-repellent coating like Cathedral Stone’s R-97 Water Repellent. Do not use silicone-based sealants on masonry walls. Silicone sealants do not allow the brick to “breathe” and can trap moisture within walls. Non-paint treatments are also highly effective in strengthening damaged sandblasted masonry. 15.5 Do not use power tools on historical masonry. When mortar is crumbling and needs to be removed and for re-pointing, use hand tools, not power tools. Hand tools allow for precision work, minimizing the chance for damage to adjacent brick and stone. 15.6 Preserve original mortar if possible, or repoint as necessary, using mortar mixes similar to the color and composition of the original. Before the 1930s, traditional mortar mixes had a high ratio of lime. Portland cement, a harder mortar, was used in small proportions, if at all. Brick production has also evolved, in composition and firing method. Therefore, historic brick has a porous property that does not pair well with hard mortars, which force water through the softer masonry, causing damage. Mechanical stresses cause expansion, contraction, settlement, and water-driven deterioration mechanisms like freeze-thaw will also be relieved in the masonry rather than the mortar if the latter is harder than the former. Modern mortars may also contain harmful soluble salts that further accelerate brick and stone deterioration. Match new mortar to the original mortar in width, depth, color, joint profile, and texture. 16. Materials In the Historic District, the most common materials for façade construction are wood, stone, brick, and stucco. Foundations are typically of stone, brick, or concrete construction, which may be covered by stucco. Proper maintenance of historic primary materials is key to preservation; avoid harsh or abrasive cleaning treatments. Do not cover or conceal historical primary materials, unless it is wood intended to be painted. Limited replacement of damaged original materials with matching materials may be considered. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 21  Advisory Guidelines Guidelines 16.1 Repair in-kind architectural features with materials, form, scale, and design which match the original. Use photo, archival, or physical evidence to select new materials that will best match the scale, location, proportions, form, and detail of original elements. 16.2 Replace architectural materials which match the original as closely as possible in form, scale, and design. 16.3 Removal or alteration of original architectural materials from the dwelling should be avoided. 16.4 Do not add inappropriate materials to a building. 16.5 Materials such as Exterior Insulation Finishing Systems (EIFS) and masonry veneers are not recommended. 16.6 The use of epoxies for wood repair and special masonry repair components may be appropriate when the extent of damage is relatively small 17. Mechanical Systems and Energy Retrofits (Solar) Mechanical systems such exterior HVAC system components should be placed at rear elevations. Systems placed on readily visible facades should be screened by landscaping or fencing. Property owners in the historic district may pursue methods for improving overall energy efficiency. It is important that such concerns be addressed in ways that do not compromise the character of the dwelling or the district. Many Historic District dwellings were constructed with wide eaves, large floor-to-ceiling heights, transom windows, and other elements that allow for natural heating and cooling. Taking advantage of energy-efficient architectural assets and responsibly retrofitting historic buildings can maximize their potential for energy conservation. Guidelines 17.1 Modern appliances such as satellite dishes and HVAC units should not be visible from the public right-of-way. Locate modern utilities out of public view, especially roof-mounted equipment. Screen HVAC units, and utility meters with landscaping, lattice panels, or fencing. Mechanical and HVAC equipment must be screened if visible from the public right-of-way. 17.2 Do not install mechanical systems on primary facades or readily visible side façades unless the systems are effectively screened with landscaping, fencing, or lattice panels. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 22  Advisory Guidelines 17.3 Window mounted air conditioning units should be mounted on rear or non-readily visible side elevations whenever possible. This installation should not result in the loss of the original window. Install with care so that that modifications are reversible if the unit is removed later. 17.4 Roof-mounted equipment should not be placed on front-facing or public-facing roof planes and should be set back from the edges of roofs and screened, so that it is not visible to pedestrians and does not detract from the historic character of the dwelling. 17.5 Retain and preserve the original energy-conserving features and materials that contribute to the overall character of a building or site, including projecting eaves, porches, front canopies, shutters, operable windows, transoms, and large trees. 17.6 Increase the thermal efficiency of historic buildings through appropriate, traditional practices, including the installation of weatherstripping and caulking, storm windows and doors, insulation in attics, floors, and walls, and, if appropriate, awnings and operable shutters. 17.7 Install new energy upgrades in areas and spaces that will require the least amount of alteration to the building exterior, historical building fabric and site features. 17.8 Minimize the visual impact of solar panels. Solar panels should be located on rear rooftops, back yards, or rear accessory buildings that are out of public view whenever possible. Mount solar panels on rooftops flush with the roofline. If not attached to the building, locate solar panels in side or rear yards. Do not use hardware, frames, and piping with a non-reflective finish. 17.9 Property owners may consider the use of reflective roofing surfaces to increase energy efficiency in warmer months. 18. Paint and Colors Owners may choose to match the original color of their home with the help of a paint analysis. Alternatively, owners may choose to select a color palette appropriate to the dwelling’s period and style. Masonry surfaces which have not been previously painted should not be painted. Guidelines 18.1 Maintain a building’s original historic painted or unpainted appearance. Historically painted building surfaces or features should be maintained in paint. Do not paint unpainted masonry surfaces. If paint has been applied in the past to masonry buildings, then the continued maintenance of paint is appropriate. Windows should not be painted shut but left operable. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 23  Advisory Guidelines 18.2 Remove paint using non-abrasive methods, protecting historic materials during the process. The removal of paint should be undertaken only with non-abrasive methods such as chemical cleaning, hand-scraping, or hand-sanding. The use of abrasive or high-pressure methods is not appropriate. Low heat stripping with a heat gun or heat plate, with a temperature of less than 450 degrees, may be used for paint removal. This method softens paint layers by applying heat which then allows scraping. Buildings constructed prior to 1978 may have lead paint. Test kits for lead are available, and it is advisable to seek professional assistance if lead is present. 18.3 Remove as little paint as possible. Remove damaged or deteriorated paint only to the next sound layer. If paint is blistered to the bare surface level, remove all paint completely. 18.4 Owners are encouraged to use paint colors in keeping with their dwelling’s style and age. Most commercially available paint companies offer historic color options, and there are numerous online resources to help you identify appropriate color schemes for each architectural style. These general color schemes are recommended: Greek Revival: Light colors such as white, gray and yellow. Frame Vernacular of Folk Victorian: Contrasting wall and trim colors. Bungalow/Craftsman: Earth tones, sometimes different colors for different floors, for walls and complementary trim. Minimal Traditional: Simple, understated pallets, including whites, muted blues and greens, or creamy yellows. 18.5. Use appropriate paint. Use oil-based or latex paint, which will adhere to a previously painted surface. Elastomeric paint should not be used because it lacks permeability and can trap moisture. 19. Porches Porches and their components (columns, valances, spindles, piers, stairs, railings and other wood trim) help express the historic character and architectural style of a dwelling. Guidelines 19.1 Retain, maintain, and repair wood and masonry porches. Follow the Historic District materials guidelines for wood and masonry, to maintain and preserve porches and their elements. 19.2 Repair when possible, replace when necessary. Retain as much original fabric as possible, replacing only those portions beyond repair. For example, replace only the damaged spindles and retain the portion of a valance that can be Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 24  Advisory Guidelines repaired. If an entire porch element is beyond repair, replace it completely with a design that matches the historic design. 19.3 Do not enclose a porch on a primary façade for living space. An open porch on the primary façade should never be enclosed with glass, wood siding, brick or other material. If enclosing a porch is desired, use screen panels with minimal structural elements. Fit the screen sections between the porch columns, posts, or other original divisions. The original openings should remain visible. Porches on rear or non-readily visible side facades may be enclosed with glass or wood panels as long as there is no removal of extensive historic fabric and as long as the enclosure work is reversible. 19.4 Carefully select any alternative materials. Wood and plastic composite products may be appropriate substitutes for historic wood porch floors. If an alternative material is used, choose a product that resembles wood and matches typical dimensions of wood floorboards. The porch floor should be painted to blend with the house colors. 19.5 Porches missing their original columns and balusters should be rebuilt based upon photographic or physical evidence. If no evidence exists, porches should be rebuilt in keeping with porches of houses built in a similar style of the same period. Wood columns are recommended but the installation of columns of alternative materials may be appropriate if they match historic designs in dimensions and overall appearance. Balusters (also called spindles) should be carefully sized for any replacement porch. 19.6 Retain historic porch steps and railings. Retain historic porch steps and railings whenever possible. Replace individual sections of porch stairs and railings, if possible, rather than a complete replacement. Use materials that match the porch’s materials. 19.7 Do not install pre-cast concrete steps on front porches. If replacement of original steps is necessary, do not replace them with pre-cast concrete steps on entrances that are readily visible from the street. 19.8 Keep replacement railings simple and in kind with original. Match replacement railings in style and appearance to the original railing. Simple painted wood railings with balusters between the top and bottom rail are appropriate. It is important to contact a building safety representative to discuss safety requirements for railings, including height. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 25  Advisory Guidelines 20. Roofs Original roof forms are a key character defining feature that must be preserved and maintained. Replacement of roofing material, for example re-shingling, does not require review by the Commission, however a change in materials or roof shape or structure must be reviewed. Sanborn Fire Insurance maps can be a helpful tool to determine historic roofing material. Please see the Mandatory Guidelines section on Roofs for additional information. Guidelines 20.1 Retain historic roof shapes and features. Preserve roofs in their original size, shape, and pitch. Retain original materials and decorative elements, and roof features such as eaves, brackets, parapets, cornices, and chimney flues. Historic roof materials such as metal standing seam, slate and clay tile should be repaired and preserved. 20.2 Preservation of a historic buildings depends on good roof maintenance. Inspect for and repair leaking roofs, gutters, and downspouts. Proper ventilation prevents condensation, which promotes decay. Anchor roofing materials solidly to prevent wind and water damage. 20.3 If an entire roof is beyond repair, wholesale replacement may be necessary. If the original roof is not salvageable, replacing the entire roof with new roofing materials may be appropriate. The new materials should be compatible with the historic character of the dwelling and the district and should match original materials as closely as possible. 20.4 Do not introduce new elements that compromise the building’s historic character. Skylights, balconies, and mechanical equipment are modern amenities that should be placed out of public view and should not obscure original features. Rear roof planes are typically the most appropriate location for installing these features. 20.5 New dormers shall not be introduced on front façades but new dormers may be added on rear façades or secondary façades which are not readily visible and if the dormers are in keeping with the character and scale of the structure. 21. Signs and House Numbers The Historic District is primarily residential in character, but there are sign provisions for home businesses. The Fayetteville Sign Ordinance should be referenced, and normal application procedures for sign permits shall be followed. Many sign types that are acceptable in areas zoned for commercial activity are inappropriate for a residential neighborhood. Free-standing or monument signs are not allowed. Wall signs and hanging signs are appropriate signs for residences. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 26  Advisory Guidelines House numbers can use a wide range of typefaces and should generally conform to the historical character of the neighborhood. Guidelines 21.1 Placement and scale of primary signs In the Historic District signs may be placed on the front wall of the house or hanging from the porch eave. The sign should not exceed 2’-0” in either dimension and not exceed four square feet in size. The sign should be made of compatible materials, such as wood or simulated wood. 21.2 Freestanding or monument signs are not permitted. 21.3 Internally illuminated or plastic-faced signs are not appropriate for the District. 21.4 Sign text should be set in a typeface that reflects the early 20th century or the period when the structure was constructed. 21.5 House address text and numerals for commercial and residential properties shall be set in a typeface that reflects the early 20th century or the period when the structure was constructed and shall not dramatically exceed the scale of house address text or numerals of historical properties in the district. 22. Windows Windows are often referred to as the “eyes of the home,” and are vital to preserving the historic character of a dwelling.[1] Preserve, maintain, and repair original windows in the Historic District. If original windows are beyond repair, replace them with windows that closely match the original design. Historic District guidelines suggest using wood windows as a first option. New windows should match the original windows’ opening size, number of panes, and configuration of lites. Preserve the original window configuration of readily visible elevations. Do not cover or enclose original windows: original window openings should not be enclosed for the addition of smaller windows. The installation of storm windows can help in lowering energy costs and are appropriate as long as they are full-view design or match the window’s design. [1] National Trust for Historic Preservation, “Repair or Replace Old Windows: A Visual Look at the Impacts,” https://www.westonma.gov/DocumentCenter/View/15438/Repair-or-Replace-A-visual-look- at-the-impacts-PDF. National Trust for Historic Preservation, “Historic Wood Windows,” https://www.westonma.gov/DocumentCenter/View/3040/Overview-of-Wood-Windows-Tips-from-the- National-Trust-for-Historic-Preservation-PDF.  Advisory Guidelines Guidelines 22.1 Preserve and maintain original windows, particularly on primary elevations. Window openings, windows, window details, and the size and shape of these elements help establish rhythm, scale, and proportion of buildings and reflect architectural style and character. These are important character-defining features of a dwelling and windows on primary elevations should be preserved, repaired as needed and retained. 22.2 Keep wood windows in good condition. Repair parts as needed, replace missing panes or deteriorated sashes, rather than entire windows. Make repairs as necessary, using epoxy to strengthen wood where it has deteriorated. Replace as little of the original window materials as necessary. Retaining as much historic window elements as possible will help ensure the building’s historic character and appearance. Preserving the original size, shape, and pattern is key. 22.3 Preserve, maintain, and repair original metal windows. During the mid-20th century, metal windows such as steel, aluminum, and bronze were widely in use. Preserving these materials as well as their original designs and details helps convey a sense of time and architectural style. Make repairs with materials that match the original as closely as possible. 22.4 Replace original windows if they are beyond repair, and install replacements that match the size, materials, and design. Take care to match the configuration of lites: the number and arrangement of these smaller panes often seen on the upper sash of Craftsman windows are important in establishing the historical character of a home. Ideally, original wood windows would be replaced with wood windows. Fiberglass composite windows and aluminum-clad windows may also be appropriate alternatives. Vinyl and vinyl-clad windows do not accurately replicate historic windows and are discouraged in the Historic District guidelines. Replace original metal windows with like materials. Replacement windows should match the appearance of historic wood or metal window through appropriate dimensions, depth of frame, and the appearance of true divided lites. If original hardware from the removed windows is sound and operational, salvage and re-use this hardware with the replacement windows. 22.5 Replacement windows should not have snap-on, flush, or simulated divided muntins. The Historic District guidelines do not recommend windows that feature muntins sandwiched between layers of glass, snap-on muntins, or surface-applied muntins. 22.6 New window openings should not be added to primary façades or to readily visible side elevations. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 28  Advisory Guidelines 22.7 Clear glass should be used in windows on the primary and readily visible side elevations. Do not use reflective, tinted, patterned, or sandblasted glass in windows. The addition of these glass materials may be used on rear elevations or those not readily visible. Stained glass should be preserved where it existed historically. 22.8 Shutters that are original to the dwelling should be preserved and maintained. Repair historic wood shutters with in-kind materials. 22.9 Replace severely damaged original wood shutters with wood reproductions that match the original. Replace missing shutters with reproductions selected through comparative historical research. Make sure these fit the window opening. New shutters should be of louvered or paneled wood construction. All shutters shall be appropriately sized to fit the window opening so that if working and closed, they would cover the window opening. 22.10 When installing window screens, use full-view screen panels made of wood or metal frames to allow the visibility of the historic window. 22.11 When installing storm windows, select full-view designs or designs that match the original window’s design. Storm windows should be wood or metal frames. Metal storm windows should be anodized or baked-enamel surfaces and not unfinished metal. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 29  Advisory Guidelines Why Preserve Original Windows The Economic, Historic, and Environmental Arguments Windows are a significant part of the original fabric of historical structures. They provide important architectural qualities that define and characterize an architectural style and time period, as well as the scale of a building and/or historic district. The loss of windows alters the defining qualities of the historic fabric, structure, and/or historic district. Rebuilding historical wood windows and adding storm windows makes them as efficient as new windows and more than offsets the cost of installation. Several comprehensive window studies have found that a wood window sealed with weatherstripping and covered with a storm window is as energy efficient as most new thermo-pane windows. These studies also find these maintained wood windows last longer.[2] The old-growth lumber used in historic window frames can last if well maintained, unlike new-growth wood, vinyl, or aluminum. In most cases, windows account for less than one-fourth of a home’s energy loss. Insulating the attic, walls and basement is a more economical approach to reducing energy costs than replacing historic windows. Any energy savings from replacing wood windows with aluminum or vinyl seldom justifies the costs of installation. For most buildings, it would take decades to recover the initial cost of installation, and with a life expectancy of 10 to 15 years or less, installing new vinyl or aluminum windows does not make good economic sense. [2] Kimberly Konrad Alvarez and John D. Alvarez II, “Restoring Our Appreciation of Historic Wood Windows: Making a Case for Restoration Versus Replacement,” New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation, https://www.westonma.gov/DocumentCenter/View/15436/Making-a-case-for-Restoration-v- Replacement-PDF. Shanon Peterson Wasielewski, “Windows: Energy Efficiency Facts and Myths,” Washington Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation, https://dahp.wa.gov/sites/default/files/Windows%20Energy%20Efficiency%20Facts%20and%20Myths .pdf. Community Preservation, “’Old’ Wood Window/Replacement Window Energy Analysis, https://www.communitypreservation.org/sites/g/files/vyhlif4646/f/uploads/windowenergyanalysis.pdf  Advisory Guidelines 23. Wood Siding Original wood siding materials should be preserved and maintained. If replacement is required it should be with materials to match the original as closely as possible. Always avoid concealing original wood siding materials with vinyl, aluminum, or other synthetic sidings because these materials do not successfully imitate the appearance of historic, wood siding. Synthetic materials are not “breathable” and may cause condensation and damage to the original siding beneath. Asbestos shingle siding is not hazardous as long as it is kept painted and encapsulated. If an owner is concerned about the potential hazard of the asbestos shingles they may be removed and replaced with appropriate alternative materials which match the original shingles as closely as possible. Guidelines 23.1 Preserve and maintain original wood siding. The texture, scale, and shape of original wood siding helps define a dwelling’s historic character and architectural style. Original wood siding is significant to the fabric of a structure, and new materials cannot adequately mimic its finish. Removal of original siding compromises a building’s architectural integrity. 23.2 Repair original siding when necessary and replace only if it is beyond repair. Regular maintenance of siding will ensure its longevity. A finished surface can be achieved with the application of an opaque stain. If replacement of siding is necessary due to deterioration, match new siding to the original in size, placement, and profile. Often commercially available products may not provide an exact match; it is recommended to consult with a carpenter for custom work when feasible. 23.3 Avoid synthetic or substitute materials such as vinyl and aluminum. Synthetic sidings do not adequately mimic the organic appearance of traditional materials and degrade a building’s historic character. Replacement or concealment of original wood materials with vinyl, aluminum or other synthetic materials is discouraged. When using vinyl or aluminum siding, these new materials should match the existing wood profile and be properly vented. New siding installation should not conceal window or door trim and should not require the removal or concealment of architectural details. 23.4 Clean siding by the gentlest means possible. Use a soft-bristle brush, mild soap, and low-pressure rinsing with a garden hose. Do not attempt to clean original siding with potentially destructive, dangerous, and/or abrasive cleaning techniques, such as propane torching, sand-blasting, or water-blasting. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 31  Advisory Guidelines - Setting The neighborhood’s “hilly, leafy setting” as described by Cy Sutherland and Gregory Herman in the Society for Architectural Historians Archipedia is vital to the Historic District’s character.[3] Setting is so important that it is one of the seven aspects of integrity that is used to evaluate the ability of a property to convey its historic significance. Properties are more than just the primary building; they are articulated with features such as accessory buildings, fences, walls, lighting, terraces, waterways, swales, fountains, patios, sculptures, arbors, pergolas, pools, furniture, and planters. Circulation patterns and intended use is defined with walkways, streets, alleys, driveways, and parking areas. Like site features, plantings such as hedges, foundation plantings, lawns, gardens, and tree canopies play a significant role in creating the character of the historic district. Sutherland and Herman help us understand the special connection the Historic District has with our historic city park. They write, “Floral gardens complement the grounds of many of the houses, visually connecting them with the extensively planted beds of neighboring Wilson Park.” Plantings may also reflect the regional climate. Historically, large shade trees were an important means of providing summer cooling to homes without air conditioning. Today, they still contribute shade to cool the neighborhood and provide distinctive character to the historic district. Mature trees are irreplaceable community assets. 24. Driveways The location of driveways and their spacing, dimensions, and materials are an important part of the historic district’s streetscapes. Parking areas are best placed on side and rear elevations of a dwelling, not in front yards. Traditional paving materials such as gravel, brick, stone, and concrete are encouraged over black asphalt and similar modern materials. The Historic District guidelines encourage use of permeable paving materials for driveways and parking areas. Permeable materials reduce neighborhood flooding by allowing water to be absorbed into the ground. Much of the Historic District was constructed when automobiles were new consumer products. As a result, district driveways and parking areas often reflect the smaller scale of this early car culture. Guidelines 24.1 Preserve original driveway materials such as crushed gravel or concrete. Original designs such as concrete “ribbon” driveways—two narrow ribbons of concrete that mimic tire treads— contribute to the distinctive, early 20thcentury character of a property and should be preserved. [3] Cyrus A. Sutherland, with Gregory Herman, Claudia Shannon, Jean Sizemore, and Jeannie M. Whayne, Buildings of Arkansas (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2018). See also Cyrus A. Sutherland, with Gregory Herman, Claudia Shannon, Jean Sizemore, and Jeannie M. Whayne “Wilson Park and Rock Houses,” SAH Archipedia, https://sah-archipedia.org/buildings/AR-01-WA20.  Advisory Guidelines - Setting 24.2 Limit driveway and curb cut widths to the width of a single car. Driveways and curb cuts should be limited in width to preserve the setting of the district and reflect the smaller scale of early 20th century automobiles. 24.3 Driveways and parking areas in side and rear yards should be of gravel (white or pea gravel), decomposed granite, brick, stone, concrete, textured concrete, or concrete ribbons (narrow strips). Non-historical materials such as asphalt are discouraged. 24.4 Screen and minimize the visual impact of parking areas in rear or side yards with hedges, shrubs, or fences. 24.5 Parking areas on vacant lots between buildings should align edge screening with front façades of adjacent buildings. On corner lots, they should have edge screening on both the primary and secondary street. 24.6 Sidewalks and driveways should be oriented perpendicular to the street. If historical documentation provides evidence of curvilinear designs or other shapes and designs on that site or other similar house styles, such shapes may be appropriate. 24.7 Locate new driveways and walkways so that the topography of the dwelling site and significant landscape features, such as mature trees, are retained. Protect mature trees and other significant landscape features from direct construction damage or from delayed damage such as destruction of root area or soil compaction by construction equipment. 24.8 Locate new additions so that the topography of the dwelling site and significant landscape features, particularly mature trees, are retained. Protect mature trees and other significant landscape features from direct construction damage or from delayed damage such as destruction of root area or soil compaction by construction equipment. 25. Fences and Gates The installation of new fences in keeping with traditional locations, designs and materials is appropriate for the historic district. Vinyl and similar synthetic fencing materials are inappropriate for the district in front and readily visible side yards. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 33  Advisory Guidelines - Setting Guidelines 25.1 Preserve historic fences. Historic fence materials such as stone, brick, and wood should be preserved and maintained. 25.2 Repair or replace fence or wall materials with in-kind materials. 25.3 Installation of new wood picket fences in front yards or privacy wood fences in side or rear yards is appropriate if they are in traditional and permitted dimensions and designs. Privacy fences constructed of wood board should only be located in rear yards and generally not exceed 6 feet tall. 25.4 Cast iron fences may be added to buildings constructed in the mid- to late-19th and early 20th centuries. Cast iron fences are not appropriate for dwellings built after the mid-20th century. 25.5 Chain link, concrete block, rolled wire, or synthetic materials are not recommended for the historic district in front yards or readily visible side yards. Split or horizontal rails, railroad ties, or timbers are also not recommended for front yards or readily visible locations. 25.6 Fence posts, rails, and other framing members should be on the inside of the fence facing the dwelling or adjacent property rather than the street and sidewalk. 25.7 Fence gates should be designed to be compatible with the overall fence design and consistent with the age and style of the dwelling. 26. Retaining Walls Low retaining walls of brick, stone, or finished concrete are common in the Historic District. Many of these walls enclose either a planting edge or simply the front lawn. Existing low walls are to be preserved. Any changes beyond in-kind repair or restacking of existing retaining walls requires review by the Historic District Commission. Please see the Mandatory Guidelines for more information. Guidelines 26.1 Preserve and maintain original or historic retaining walls whenever possible. Typically built of stone, brick or concrete, ensure historic retaining walls are in good condition and repointed when needed. Follow the maintenance recommendations for these materials. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 34  Advisory Guidelines - Setting 27. Garages and Outbuildings Outbuildings such as garages, sheds, carriage houses and smokehouses are part of the historical and architectural significance of the historic district. These structures reflect cultural changes over time. Historical outbuildings should be preserved and maintained. They should be repaired with materials and details to match the original. Guidelines 27.1 Preserve and maintain historic outbuildings. Preserve and maintain original outbuildings such as garages, carriage house and sheds, as they contribute to the history of a property. 27.2 Original outbuildings should be repaired with materials to match the original. If original garage doors on contributing buildings are missing or damaged, sectional overhead roll-up doors and side-hinged doors of wood in historic designs are appropriate. For non- contributing outbuildings these designs are also recommended and doors of metal, composite, and other alternative materials may be appropriate. 27.3 Replace damaged or deteriorated sections of historic garages and accessory structures, only if deteriorated beyond repair and with in-kind materials to match the original. Where possible, replace only the damaged or deteriorated portions rather than the entire feature. 27.4 Outbuildings were often built without gutters and those of frame construction may have deterioration of the sills and lower siding materials. If this is the case, consider only repairing these damaged areas rather than replacing the entire structure. 28. Walkways Walkways which lead from the public sidewalks to dwellings display a variety of materials. Some dwellings retain their brick and stone walkways laid in the 19th and early 20th centuries while others have concrete walkways original to the dwelling. Property owners should repair and retain historic walkway materials as long as possible. If replacement is needed, materials should match the original as closely as possible or owners may substitute traditional materials such as stone, brick and concrete. New walkways with these materials are appropriate. Permeable paving materials may also be appropriate.The use of asphalt for walkways is not appropriate and the use of this material is discouraged. Guidelines 28.1 Repair historic walkway materials with in-kind materials. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 35  Advisory Guidelines - Setting 28.2 Replace historic walkways if determined to be non-repairable with in-kind or compatible materials. 28.3 Retain existing historic walkway materials such as brick, stone, and concrete. 28.4 Replace damaged areas with in-kind materials as closely as possible. 28.5 New paving materials should be in traditional materials such as brick, stone, and concrete. 28.6 Avoid paving materials such as asphalt, bright white or tinted concrete, and other non- traditional materials and colors. 28.7 Permeable paving surfaces for walkways may be appropriate if they have the appearance of traditional materials. 29. Landscaping Landscaping is a critical part of the historic district's appearance. All property owners should make the effort to identify and retain existing trees and plants that help define the character of the area. Installing native, drought-tolerant plantings compatible with the existing neighborhood will further enhance the appeal of the area and retain the historic setting. Guidelines 29.1 Retain and preserve the building and landscape features that contribute to the overall historic character of the district, including trees, gardens, yards, arbors, ground cover, fences, accessory buildings, patios, terraces, fountains, fish ponds, and significant vistas and views. 29.2 Retain and preserve the historic relationship between buildings and landscape features of the district setting, including site topography, retaining walls, foundation plantings, hedges, streets, walkways, driveways, and parks. 29.3 Protect and maintain historic building materials and plant features through treatments, including routine maintenance and repair of constructed elements and pruning and vegetation management of plantings. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 36  Advisory Guidelines - Setting 29.4 Native significant trees [4] should be preserved. a. Replace a seriously diseased or severely damaged tree or hedge with a new tree or hedge that at maturity is of similar size and quality and appropriate for the climate. There are many options for native, durable species. Speak with one of the City’s Urban Foresters, or view the Recommended Tree List. b. It is inappropriate to remove, healthy, mature trees. c. Design new construction or additions so that large trees and significant site features, such as vistas, are preserved. d. Protect large trees and significant site features from immediate damage during construction and from delayed damage due to construction activities, such as loss of root area or compaction of the soil by equipment. It is especially critical to avoid compaction of the soil within the drip line of trees. Use tree protection fencing as advised by the Urban Forester. 29.5 Replace missing or deteriorated site features in kind or with new compatible substitute materials that maintain the character of the site and the historic district. 29.6 It is not appropriate to alter the topography of a site substantially through grading, filling, or excavating, nor is it appropriate to relocate drainage features, unless there is a specific problem. [4] Significant Tree: A tree with a diameter at breast height (DBH) of 24 inches or more for fast growth species, 18 inches or more for slow and moderate growth species, and 8 inches or more for understory species. A tree may also be considered significant because of advanced age for its species, or because it represents an uncommon or endangered species, or due to its location on a site designated as historic by local, state or federal authorities. Source: City of Fayetteville Tree Preservation, Protection, and Landscape Manual.  Advisory Guidelines - Setting INVASIVE SPECIES NATIVE TO ARKANSAS ALTERNATIVE SPECIES Asian wisteria (Wisteria sinense / floribunda) American Wisteria (Wisteria frutescens) Bigleaf / Littleleaf Periwinkle (Vinca major / Vinca Partridge Berry (Mitchella repens) minor) Allegheny Spurge (Pachysandra procumbens) Bradford Pear (Pyrus calleryana) Flowering Dogwood (Cornus florida) Fragrant Sumac (Rhus aromatic) Burning Bush (Euonymus alatus) Black chokeberry (Aronia melanocarpa) Bush Honeysuckle (Lonicera maackii / Carolina Buckthorn (Rhamnus caroliniana) fragrantissima) Winterberry (llex verticillata) Rusty Blackhaw (Viburnum rufidulum) Chinese Privet (Ligustrum sinense) Yaupon Holly (llex vomitoria) Creeping Euonymus (Euonymus fortune) Moss Phlox (Phlox subulata) Common Bearberry (Arctostphylos uva-ursi) Virginia Creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia) English Ivy (Hedera helix) Allegheny Spurge (Pachysandra procumbens) River Cane (Arundinaria gigantea) Golden Bamboo (Pyllostachys aurea) Yaupon Holly (llex vomitoria) Carolina Buckthorn (Rhamnus caroliniana) Heavenly Bamboo (Nandina domestica) Virginia Sweetspire (Itea virginica) Coral Honeysuckle (Lonicera sempervirens) Japanese Honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica) Trumpet-Creeper (Campsis radicans) Virginia Creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia) Kudzu (Pueraria montana) American Wisteria (Wisteria frutescens) Golden currant (Ribes aureum) Multiflora Rose (Rosa multiflora) Climbing Rose (Rosa setigera) Round Bush Clover (Lespedeza capitate) Serica Lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata) Big Bluestem (Andropogon gerardii) Fringetree (Chionanthus virginicus) Silktree, Mimosa (Albizia julibrissin) American Smoketree (Cotinus obovatus) Blue Wild Indigo (Baptisia australis) Shrubby Lespedeza (Lespedeza bicolor) Roundhead Lespedeza (Lespedeza capitate) Kentucky Coffee-Tree (Gymnocladus dioicus) Tree-of-Heaven (Ailanthis altissima) Kentucky Yellowwood (Cladrastis kentukea) Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 38  Advisory Guidelines - Setting NOT RECOMMENDED Some trees are not recommended as they are made vulnerable by climate change, common diseases, and pests or have the potential to become invasive. These include, but are not limited to: Bradford Pear (Pyrus calleryana) Chinese Pistache (Pistacia chinensis) Cottonwood (Populus deltoides) Eastern Red Ceder (Juniperus virginiana) Fringe Tree (Chionanthus virginicus) Green Ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) Japanese Zelkova (Zelkova serrata) Lacebark Elm (Ulmus parvifolia) Non-native Pines (Pinus taeda, Pinus strobe, etc. Pinus echinata is the only Pinus species native to the Ozarks) Persian Silk Tree (Albizia julibrissin) Sawtooth Oak (Quercus acutissima) Silver Maple (Acer saccharinum) Sugar Maple (Acer saccharum) White Ash (Fraxinus americana) Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 39  Appendices Terminology Terminology in the Guidelines There is a set of terms common to guidelines in general. This terminology is used throughout the Design Guidelines and reflects the principles that the Commission will consider when making decisions. These terms and their interpretation are as follows: Appropriate The term “appropriate” applies to a component, method, or design choice that is sensitive to the historic quality of a building and overall district. When “appropriate,” the project will be in compliance with the guidelines. Beyond Repair and Beyond Reasonable Repair The terms “beyond repair” and “beyond reasonable repair” describe deterioration that cannot be reversed. The damage to the building or feature is so extreme that not enough physical material remains for its repair. The burden of proof to demonstrate “beyond repair” will be the responsibility of the applicant. Character The term “character” means the attributes, qualities, and features that collectively convey the essence of a setting, place, or building. Compatible and Compatibility The terms “compatible” and “compatibility” mean “appropriate.” Compatibility also means the characteristics of different uses or activities that permit them to be located near each other in harmony and without anticipated conflict. Inappropriate An “inappropriate” feature, action, or design choice compromises the historic character of a building or district. An inappropriate project would not be in compliance with the design guidelines. In-Kind and Like-Kind When repair or replacement of specific elements of materials are needed, “in-kind” and “like-kind” substitutes match the existing, original, or historic in material, size, detail, profile, finish, texture, and appearance as closely as possible, and when installed will not be easily distinguishable from the original upon close inspection. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 40  Appendices Recommended The term “recommended” means suggested, but not mandatory actions outlined in the guidelines. Shall or Should Where the terms “shall” or “should” are used, compliance is specifically required. Visible or Readily Visible The terms “visible” or “readily visible” means easily visible from public streets and rights-of-way, including through parking lots and other open spaces. Planning Your Project Projects involving a historic structure or new construction within the Historic District and any locally designated district may include a variety of approaches, including maintenance, simple repairs, or additional living space. By understanding the history and architectural development of a structure and its use, its present condition and the actions necessary to complete your project, you can develop an overall approach. The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards address four types of projects: Preservation: Keeping an existing structure in its current state by initiating a program of maintenance and repair. Rehabilitation: Actions to return a structure to its original state by preserving features that contribute to its historic character. This can also include using appropriate in-kind or replacement materials, adaptive reuse and adding compatible additions. Most projects taken before the Commission for existing buildings would be considered rehabilitation. Restoration: This process involves reconstructing the appearance of the structure as it looked from a particular period of time. Reconstruction: Reconstruction is defined as the act or process of depicting by means of new construction the form, features and architectural character of a structure that no longer exists. This type of project typically involves replicating a historic structure to a particular point in time—often for interpretive purposes. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 41  Appendices After the project approach has been identified, the property owner should refer to this manual and apply the design guidelines in the initial stages of planning and design. The primary approach of the Commission and the design review guidelines emphasizes preservation instead of removal/replacement and the use of sustainable practices and materials where possible. These principles are demonstrated in the use of words such as repair, retain, maintain, compatible and replace in-kind. When planning a rehabilitation or new construction project, the Commission encourages property owners to consider a series of steps in their planning. One—What Is the Significance of the Property? What is the age of the property and how has it changed over time? Does the building contribute to the character of the historic district through its architectural design? The Commission and Staff can assist in determining if a property is contributing or non-contributing. Two—What Is the Building’s Condition and Integrity? A building with historic and architectural integrity will retain most of its character defining features on its primary and secondary elevations that are visible from the street. A property’s degree of integrity will help determine the desired outcome of the project. Three—What Is the Intent of the Project? Some projects may only require upgrades to interiors which are not reviewed by the Commission. Exterior changes may be limited to in-kind repair and replacement or involve entire structure rehabilitation. Projects may also involve adding living space to a historic structure. Four—What Is the Proposed Project Treatment Plan? An appropriate project treatment plan will be developed once the historical significance, integrity and project intent has been determined. A project may include a variety of actions such as maintenance of some elements, repair of deteriorated materials, replacement of deteriorated materials, in-kind or replacement of deteriorated materials with compatible new materials, and construction of an addition or ancillary building. When reviewing a property owner’s proposed project treatment plan the Commission will be guided by a series of principles as follows: Proposed projects should emphasize retaining, maintaining, preserving, and repairing original or historic features. If such features and elements cannot be retained, maintained, preserved, and repaired, then replacement in-kind is recommended. Replacement in-kind means that the new feature and element match the existing original, or historic material in size, detail, profile, finish, and texture as closely as possible. Architectural details and materials can be documented through drawings, photographs, or physical evidence. Such documentation will aid in defining appropriate rehabilitation activities. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 42  Appendices If material replacement in-kind is not feasible or practical, the Commission may consider the use of appropriate alternative materials that match the original as closely as possible in texture, design, and overall appearance. Rehabilitation will be reviewed to determine the impact, compatibility, and appropriateness of the proposed work to the existing structures, site, streetscape, and district. Rehabilitation shall be compatible with the historic building or structure for which it is proposed. Compatible rehabilitation efforts are those that protect and retain significant architectural features and elements of individual buildings and the district. New construction for primary buildings and outbuildings shall be compatible with adjacent buildings along the street and blockface in massing, scale, materials, and setback. Five—What Must be Submitted to the Commission for Review? In addition to a completed Certificate of Appropriateness application, the Commission also requires the following for specific projects: New retaining walls: A sample or photo of the proposed wall material. New exterior materials: A sample or photo of the proposed exterior material. Oak Grove Historic District - Advisory Design Guidelines 43  D R AFT Oak Grove Historic District Mandatory Design Guidelines Acknowledgements THANK YUO THANK YOU THANK YOU INSERT D R AFT  Table of Contents Preface Introduction to Oak Grove .............................................. 3 Purpose ........................................................................... 7 General Application of Guidelines ................................. 8 Mandatory Guidelines New Residential Construction ....................................,..10 Primary Dwellings...................................................10 D Garages and Outbuildings .....................................14 Sidewalks and Rights-of-Way ................................16 R Retaining Walls........................................................16 Changes to Historic Properties......................................17 FT Roofs........................................................................17 Relocation of Historic Buildings.............................18 Retaining Walls .......................................................19 A Demolition of Historic Properties...................................20 Demolition ...............................................................20 Appendices Terminology ....................................................................28 Planning Your Project .....................................................29  Introduction to Oak Grove The Oak Grove Historic District preserves a residential neighborhood located near Fayetteville’s Wilson Park and within walking distance of the Fayetteville Square, Dickson Street, and the University of Arkansas campus. Originally platted as Oak Grove Addition —a name referring to the many post oak trees in the area, many of which still stand today—the neighborhood is characterized by its wooded natural setting and rustic topography, its distinct vernacular architecture, and its significance in Fayetteville’s history. D The neighborhood was largely developed by Dr. Noah F. Drake, a R University of Arkansas geologist who helped establish City Park, later known as Wilson Park—the first public park in Figure 1. 1908 Plat Map of Oak Grove Addition. Portion in proposed district outlined in red. FT Fayetteville and a much-beloved outdoor space for the city’s residents today. Born on a farm in Washington County in 1864, then educated at Cane Hill College and Arkansas Industrial University (now the University of Arkansas) in civil engineering (class of 1888). Drake eventually completed his PhD in geology at Stanford University in California in 1897 and A spent many years thereafter as a professor of geology in Tianjin, China, where he was involved in petroleum mining. In 1911, Drake moved back to the United States, first teaching at Stanford before returning to Arkansas in 1912. Upon his return to Fayetteville, Drake resided in a home within the present boundary of the Oak Grove Historic District at 513 North Highland Avenue, then bought many nearby lots in the Oak Grove Addition and the neighboring Englewood Addition that he would soon develop. Figure 2. Noah Fields Drake. Source: Orange County California Genealogical Society (Vera Wade Drake). Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 3  Introduction to Oak Grove These include the corner lot on Maple Street and Forest Avenue, where he built his own family home: a house that recalls the iconic California Craftsman Bungalow through its large front porch, overhanging roof, and exposed rafter tails, but also includes unusual features, like its terracotta tile roof, which perhaps recalls the tiled roofs on Stanford’s campus or the local architecture of Tianjin, a reference recorded in Drake’s family correspondence. Figure 3. Drake’s Family Home D Drake also built the many “Rock Houses” in the neighborhood, including a distinct series of homes on West Davidson Street and North Park Avenue. These R houses are defined by their use of local sandstone on their exterior facades. Drake created his own rock house style distinct from the “Ozark giraffe,” named for FT its resemblance to the distinctive patterning of giraffe hides, evoking his background as a geologist and representing an innovative use of local materials in this region. Figure 4. 16 Davidson A Other residential properties in the Historic District incorporate wood shingles, stucco, and natural materials, creating a charming connection between nature and architecture; houses are set in landscaped plots defined by rock work, large trees, and gardens. As explained in a study of the notable historic structures throughout Arkansas, these homes are “subtle in their distinctions, romantic in their image. Their hilly, leafy siting contributes to their desirability. ... Floral gardens complement the grounds of many of the houses, visually connecting them with the Figure 5. 603 Park extensively planted beds of neighboring Wilson Park.”[1] [1] Cyrus A. Sutherland, with Gregory Herman, Claudia Shannon, Jean Sizemore, and Jeannie M. Whayne, Buildings of Arkansas (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2018), 54.  Introduction to Oak Grove The neighborhood was home to significant figures in the city’s and University of Arkansas’s early history. Drake, for example, purchased City Park in 1926 and developed it with a pool and stone tourist cottages, three of which still stand, before selling it to the City of Fayetteville in 1944. He experimented with cultivating native walnut trees at his orchard and farm in North Fayetteville; some of these trees still dot the streets of Oak Grove. Drake also provided money for purchasing the first portion of land at Drake Field, the municipal airport located in South Fayetteville; the White Hanger at Drake Field is now preserved as a Local Historic District. Other figures who lived in the boundaries of the Historic District are also significant in local history. Superintendent Wayne White (515 Forest Avenue) integrated the D Fayetteville School District in 1954— Fayetteville was one of the very first R districts in the former Confederacy to desegregate, and did so peacefully. Dr. Harry R. Rosen (509 Forest Avenue) FT advanced the science of crop production and is the namesake for the University’s Rosen Center for Alternative Pest Control, located up the road on Maple Street. His Figure 6. 515 Forest A terraced backyard was once used for cultivating new varieties of garden roses which he bred and released, including Miriam’s Climber, named for his daughter. George Clifton Wade (501 Forest Avenue) served as a member of the Arkansas Senate (1955-1971) and a member of the Arkansas House of Representatives (1947-1955). The intent of the Oak Grove Historic District is to preserve this unique neighborhood—a cohesive and intact example of Ozark vernacular residential architecture and neighborhood design—for the future. Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 5  Introduction to Oak Grove The Oak Grove Historic District was created by Fayetteville City Council on XXXXX, 2026 (Ord. No. XXX). D R AFT Figure 7. Proposed Oak Grove Local Historic District Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 6  Purpose The design guidelines for the Oak Grove Historic District provide the HDC and property owners with best practices for residential rehabilitation[2] and new construction. The guidelines are practical approaches to specific design elements common for dwellings built in the early 20th century. Rehabilitation assumes that at least some repair or alteration of the historic building will be needed to provide for efficient contemporary use; however, these repairs and alterations must not damage or destroy materials, features, or finishes that are important in defining the building's historic character. Design guidelines aim to provide acceptable solutions to adapting historic buildings for modern lifestyles, striking a balance between function and preservation. The guidelines allow for change when it is accomplished in a sensitive manner that maintains the special character of the Historic District while meeting D the practical needs of the residents and property owners. The guidelines direct the HDC, staff, and property owners in making appropriate decisions in the physical appearance of exterior elements of historic properties regarding primary residential buildings, as well as R their associated outbuildings, site features, landscaping, driveways, walkways, and overall streetscapes. FT Of particular importance to the HDC and Historic District residents is preventing demolition of significant resources. Demolition of properties which contribute to the character of the district should only be a last resort and the burden of proof to justify demolition will be the responsibility of the property owner. A Figure 8. Oak Grove Graphic, Illustration: Martin Schapiro [2] "Rehabilitation" is defined as "the process of returning a property to a state of utility, through repair or alteration, which makes possible an efficient contemporary use while preserving those portions and features of the property which are significant to its historic, architectural and cultural values.”  General Application of Guidelines The following guidelines only apply to exteriors; interior changes are not reviewed by the Historic District Commission. CORE TENENTS 1. Always repair existing original elements when possible. 2. When replacing original elements damaged beyond repair, match as closely as possible. 3. When replacing a missing element, research comparable historical examples to inform selection of a replacement. 4. When altering a historical element, take care to make changes that are reversable. This will allow future owners to restore historical elements to their original appearance. D 5. Keep historical elements visible. Be gentle when cleaning. Take steps to keep them dry. R SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S STANDARD FOR REHABILITATION The following standards, prepared by the federal government, serve as general principles for historic preservation of buildings in the United States and complement the core tenets FT articulated above. 1. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment. A 2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. Avoid the removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property. 3. Each property shall 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 architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken. 4. Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a historic property shall be preserved. Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 8  General Application of Guidelines 6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. 8. Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy D historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. R 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall 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. AFT Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 9  New Residential Construction The following guidelines are mandatory for new construction within the Historic District. 1. Primary Dwellings New construction of primary dwellings in the Historic District should maintain the pattern of existing historical structures in the neighborhood. New primary dwellings must carefully address multiple design considerations: setback; distance between homes; scale; materials; window size, style, and placement; and site features. New design should blend with, but need not attempt to replicate, historic dwellings. The general approach to new construction is for it to be compatible in character and scale with adjacent dwellings. Compatible means reinforcing typical features that dwellings display along the block. Architects and property owners are encouraged to design houses compatible with the context of the lot and the historic dwellings along the block. Appropriately scaled replications or reproductions of historic designs are acceptable but not required for the historic district. Guidelines D 1.1 Maintain existing historical patterns. R New primary dwellings shall reinforce the historical patterns along the block. Follow typical setbacks, materials, height, width, roof shapes, scale, and proportions. Setbacks are determined by the underlying zoning designation and may change via rezoning. Current setbacks should be FT checked using the City’s zoning map. Most houses in the District are set back a minimum of 15’ from the property line. This minimum setback is strongly recommended for new construction. 1.2 Orientation towards the street. A New dwellings should be oriented towards the major street. 1.3 Maintain existing patterns of building height. New dwellings shall be compatible with adjacent dwellings in terms of height. New dwellings should fall within the range of existing homes on the streetscape. Building height is measured from the average grade of the public street across the width of the building. Under the current zoning designations, the maximum height allowed in the district for new construction is three stories, but most houses are one to two stories in height, some with basements and attics. This maximum two-story height is strongly recommended for new construction. Note: Structures not originally designed as a residence shall not be considered a primary dwelling for the purposes of limiting building height and scale nor for understanding the intent of this article 1.3 and the following article 1.4. Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 10  New Residential Construction D Figure 8. Heights Graphic, Illustration: Martin Schapiro BUILD IN SCALE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD: Structure height is measured from the average grade of the public street across the width of the building. Here structure R A is the shortest, B is the tallest, and C maintains this existing pattern of build height by rising between heights A and B. 1.4 Maintain existing scale along the street. FT New dwellings shall be compatible with adjacent primary dwellings in terms of scale and proportions. 1.5 Maintain existing patterns of roof form. A Roof form of new dwellings should be compatible with those of adjacent dwellings. Roof pitch shall be 4:12 minimum. Appropriate roof types include gable or hip with a dormer at the front façade if desired. 1.6 Maintain historical setting designs. New construction should follow the traditional designs of setting such as location of retaining walls, driveway placement and outbuilding placement. Parking spaces should be located at the side or rear of the dwelling and not in front of the house or in front yards. 1.7 Match materials of surrounding dwellings. New dwellings should use traditional primary materials on their exteriors: Foundations: Within the Historic District, brick, stone, stucco, or concrete (not bare concrete block) are appropriate for foundations, piers, chimneys, and lower column piers. Foundations may be covered with real stone veneer. Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 11  New Residential Construction Retaining Walls: Within the Historic District, brick, stone, stucco, or concrete (not bare concrete block) are appropriate for retaining walls. Walls may be covered with real stone veneer. Siding: Within the Historic District, siding materials shall be wood or simulate the appearance of wood. Appropriate siding includes beveled siding, lap siding, and shingle siding. These materials appear in the historical homes in this district. Vinyl siding is discouraged; other engineered materials, like fiber-cement (Hardie products) better replicate wood. However, vinyl siding is allowed when installed with appropriate trim and fascia details in the historic district. Siding shall not protrude beyond the face of door and window frames and frieze boards. Materials such as faux-stone and Exterior Insulation Finishing Systems (EIFS) will not be approved as a siding material on new construction. Real stone and brick veneer is permitted. D Windows and Doors: For windows and doors, modern materials may be appropriate, and materials that simulate the appearance of wood are preferred. Hung windows (double, single, etc.) and grouped windows are appropriate. Large picture windows are not R permitted as they are most commonly associated with Ranch-style homes, which are not found in the District. AFT Figure 9. Example of existing windows on 14 Davidson Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 12  New Residential Construction Porches: Because porches are traditional focal points of Historic District facades, new primary dwellings should have front porches. Porches should be at minimum one-half of the total width of the front façade. Minimum depth of the front porch should be 7’ - 0” deep. Porch Columns and Posts: Porch columns and posts shall be wood or materials that simulate the appearance of wood, stone, or brick. Column/post types may include turned, rounded, rectangular, or square. These may have chamfered (beveled) corners or be fluted. Porches set on tapered piers may have pyramidal columns. Chimneys: Use traditional masonry (brick, stone, stucco, etc.) for chimneys whenever possible. Chimneys may be clad in the same material as the dwelling exterior. Chimneys that are not masonry, however, shall not be clad in the same material as the dwelling exterior beyond the point of roof penetration. Above that point, a properly installed D galvanized stove pipe type chimney shall be required. Chimney stacks must start at grade and shall not cantilever. R AFT Figure 10. Chimneys Graphic, Illustration: Martin Schapiro CAREFULLY CONSIDER MATERIALS: Chimneys finished with the siding should not use this siding material above the roof penetration. Do not float the chimney stack. Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 13  New Residential Construction Roofs: Appropriate materials for roofs of new dwelling include metal (low-profile strong back, corrugated, V-crimp), slate, terra cotta, or asphalt composition shingles. Craftsman details, such as exposed rafter tails and widely overhanging eaves can improve the compatibility of new construction within the established neighborhood. 1.8 Locate new additions so that the topography of the dwelling site and significant landscape features, particularly mature trees, are retained. Protect mature trees and other significant landscape features from direct construction damage or from delayed damage such as destruction of root area or soil compaction by construction equipment. 2. Garages and Outbuildings New garages and outbuildings should generally be secondary in scale and compatible with adjacent dwellings. Compatible means reinforcing typical features, such as roof pitches, eave D depth, materials, proportions and location of openings, architectural details, etc., found on the primary dwelling or other dwellings and outbuildings along the block. Reproductions of historical designs are also appropriate. Guidelines R 2.1 Design new garages and other accessory buildings to be compatible with existing properties FT within the Historic District. Design new garages and accessory buildings to be compatible with the architectural style and secondary in scale to the associated dwelling. Prefabricated accessory structures are only appropriate when the design is compatible with the main structure or similar to historic accessory A structures within the district. Most prefabricated accessory structures will not meet this standard. 2.2 New garages and accessory buildings shall be sited appropriately on the lot. Locate new garages and outbuildings to the rear of a dwelling or set back from the side elevations. Attached garages and accessory buildings shall be set back from the front façade of the primary dwelling at least one-third of the total depth of the dwelling. 2.3 Reconstruction of a missing or replacement garage or outbuilding shall be based on historically grounded evidence of the original configuration, form, massing, style, placement, and detail. The historical accuracy of a reconstruction design should be confirmed with photographs or other documentation of the original building or similar buildings. With proper documentation, historic garages and outbuildings may be constructed in locations that do not conform to the underlying zoning district, if fire code and life safety requirements are met. Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 14  New Residential Construction 2.4 The design of new garages and outbuildings should be secondary to that of the primary historic dwelling. Generally, new garages and outbuildings should be smaller and less ornamented than the primary historic dwelling. 2.5 Materials used for new garages and outbuildings should reflect historical development of the property. Materials used at exterior façades of garages and outbuildings were often different (and less costly) than that of the main dwelling. Materials that are appropriate for new secondary buildings include wood or brick. If frame buildings are constructed, alternative materials may be considered if they resemble traditional wood siding in texture, dimension, and overall appearance. Materials such as T1-11 siding are not sufficiently durable for exterior use and are not appropriate. D 2.6 Metal garage doors with a paneled design may be appropriate. These doors can be used on garages that are located at the back of the lot and are minimally visible from the street or public right-of-way. If the garage and garage doors are highly visible R from a public street or located on a corner lot, solid or paneled wooden garage doors are more appropriate. FT 2.7 Garages accommodating more than one vehicle, like double or triple garages, shall be constructed with single width garage doors rather than larger, double doors. Garage doors shall not exceed the width of a single vehicle. Single width doors maintain the scale and rhythm of older structures, making a larger garage seem smaller and more compatible with the primary dwelling. A 2.8 Ancillary outdoor features such as gazebos, arbors, trellises, etc. may be appropriate if they are located at rear or side elevations and not readily visible from the public right-of-way. These features should be scaled appropriately to their site. Ancillary outdoor features do not require review if they are under 10 ft. by 10 ft. in area. Such structures should be scaled to the site, adequately screened, and built with materials traditionally found in the historic district such as wood or brick. These features should complement the architectural design of the dwelling or main building. 2.9 New carports should be located at the rear of dwellings and not visible. Most carport designs have flat roofs and metal support columns and are not compatible with historic dwelling designs. Carports imitative of porte-cocheres (drive-thru wings on historic dwellings) with wood or brick columns, flat roofs, and wood construction may be added to sides of dwellings visible from the street. Carports should be reflective of the architecture of the house and not detract from the dwelling’s original design. Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 15  New Residential Construction 3. Sidewalks and Rights-of-Way Sidewalks are an integral part of the Historic District. Sidewalks should be constructed and/or repaired for all street frontages and shall match the historic width or the prominent width along the street. Sidewalks shall pass through driveways. Many of the platted streets in the Historic District were originally laid out with 30–45-foot rights- of-way. The Fayetteville Master Street Plan requires that all Residential Link Streets have a minimum of 45 feet of street right-of-way and are improved with a six-foot sidewalk, six-foot greenspace, and one-and-a-half-foot curb and gutter. This regulation is based on larger lot suburban standards developed in the mid-20th century. The Master Street Plan also requires that all Urban Center Streets have a minimum right-of-way of 39 feet and are improved with an eight- foot sidewalk, four-foot greenspace, and one-and-a-half-foot curb and gutter. The Historic District shall allow construction without the requirement of dedication of additional street right-of-way, D upon the granting of a variance by the Planning Commission. The smaller street rights-of-way of the District are a desirable feature and should be preserved. 4. Retaining Walls R Low retaining walls of brick, stone, or finished concrete are common in the Historic District. Many of these walls enclose either a planting edge or simply the front lawn. Existing low walls are to be preserved. Any changes beyond in-kind repair or restacking of existing retaining walls requires FT review by the Historic District Commission. All new retaining walls require review by Historic District Commission. Guidelines A 4.1 Preserve and maintain original or historic retaining walls whenever possible. Typically built of stone, brick or concrete, ensure historic retaining walls are in good condition and repointed when needed. Follow the maintenance recommendations for these materials. 4.2 New retaining walls should be of traditional historic materials and be of similar height to existing retaining walls along the street. Avoid rectilinear, cut stone blocks in favor of rough cut or rubble stone. Poured concrete or concrete block walls must be covered with stone veneer. 4.3 Bare concrete block, re-cast simulated stone, railroad tie, and landscape timber retaining walls are prohibited in the Historic District. Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 16  Changes to Historic Properties The following guidelines are mandatory for changes of historical structures within the Historic District. 5. Roofs Original roof forms are a key character defining feature that must be preserved and maintained. Replacement of roofing material, for example re-shingling, does not require review by the Commission, however a change in materials or roof shape or structure must be reviewed. Sanborn Fire Insurance maps can be a helpful tool to determine historic roofing material. Additions that disrupt the original roof form may require additional review from the Historic District Commission. Guidelines 5.1 Retain historic roof shapes and features. Preserve roofs in their original size, shape, and pitch. Retain original materials and decorative D elements, and roof features such as eaves, brackets, parapets, cornices, and chimney flues. Historic roof materials such as metal standing seam, slate and clay tile should be repaired and preserved. R 5.2 Preservation of historic buildings depends on good roof maintenance. Inspect for and repair leaking roofs, gutters, and downspouts. Proper ventilation prevents FT condensation, which promotes decay. Anchor roofing materials solidly to prevent wind and water damage. Check seams of metal roofs. 5.3 If an entire roof is beyond repair, wholesale replacement may be necessary. A If the original roof is not salvageable, replacing the entire roof with new roofing materials may be appropriate. The new materials should be compatible with the historic character of the dwelling and the district and should match original materials as closely as possible. 5.4 Do not introduce new elements that compromise the building’s historic character. Skylights, balconies, and mechanical equipment are modern amenities that should be placed out of public view and should not obscure original features. Rear roof planes are typically the most appropriate location for installing these features. 5.5 New dormers shall not be introduced on front façades but new dormers may be added on rear façades or secondary façades which are not readily visible and if the dormers are in keeping with the character and scale of the structure. Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 17  Changes to Historic Properties 6. Relocation of Historic Buildings Moving a contributing building in a historical district is strongly discouraged. It should only be considered after all other approaches to protect a historical dwelling on its site have been exhausted, and relocation to a compatible vacant lot for rehabilitation becomes the last resort. Before the Historic District Commission approves relocation of a historical dwelling, it will carefully evaluate the conditions that give rise to both the threat of demolition and subsequent proposal of relocation. Guidelines 6.1 Relocating dwellings and outbuildings should be in accordance with the design guidelines for new construction and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. 6.2 Relocating dwellings and outbuildings that contribute to the historic and architectural character of the district out of the Historic District should be avoided unless demolition is the only alternative. D 6.3 Relocating a building into the Historic District may be appropriate if: R [1] it is compatible with the district's architectural character through style, period, height, scale, materials, setting, and placement on the lot, and; [2] its location on the new site will be consistent with its original location and will respect FT the front and side yard setbacks, orientation, and foundation heights of the neighboring properties. 6.4 All features should be adequately protected, and windows and doors boarded or braced in the least damaging manner. A 6.5 Relocated buildings should be carefully rebuilt and placed on a foundation which replicates the original using masonry material compatible with traditional foundations. Salvaging and reuse of original foundation materials is strongly encouraged. 6.6 Porches and chimneys or any other projections that cannot be raised with the building should be carefully dismantled. Each member should be numbered and recorded to rebuild onto the building in the same place and manner at the new site. The chimney should be reconstructed using the removed materials with new mortar that matches the original in color, content and consistency. Any repair materials should match in kind to the original. 6.7 Buildings relocated into the Historic District must meet the guidelines for new construction, unless, as originally built, a building would have met the criteria for a contributing structure in this Historic District. If a building would have been considered contributing, it will be subject to the guidelines for existing structures. Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 18  Changes to Historic Properties 7. Retaining Walls Low retaining walls of brick, stone, or finished concrete are common in the Historic District. Many of these walls enclose either a planting edge or simply the front lawn. Existing low walls are to be preserved. Any changes beyond in-kind repair or restacking of existing retaining walls requires review by the Historic District Commission. All new retaining walls require review by Historic District Commission. Guidelines 7.1 Preserve and maintain original or historic retaining walls whenever possible. Typically built of stone, brick or concrete, ensure historic retaining walls are in good condition and repointed when needed. Follow the maintenance recommendations for these materials. 7.2 If it is necessary to reconstruct a dry-stack wall with mortar, recess the mortar joints so that it D is not visible from the front of the wall, retaining the appearance of dry-stack. 7.3 New retaining walls should be of traditional historic materials and be of similar heights to R existing retaining walls along the street. Avoid rectilinear, cut stone blocks in favor of rough cut or rubble stone. AFT Figure 11. Stone examples, from “A Field Guide to American Houses,” Virginia Savage McAlester 7.4 Bare concrete block, stone veneer, pre-cast simulated stone, railroad tie, and landscape timber retaining walls are prohibited in the Historic District. Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 19  Demolition of Historic Properties The following guidelines are mandatory for demolition of historical structures within the Historic District. 8. Demolition All demolitions within the Historic District must be reviewed and approved by the Historic District Commission prior to the issuance of a demolition permit. Demolition of dwellings that contribute to the historic or architectural significance of the Historic District should only be an action of last resort. Demolition of existing structures that are 50 or more years old within the Historic District must be approved by the Commission. Demolition through neglect is prohibited, and owners who do not conform to maintenance codes may be subject to legal action. The Commission will need ample evidence that a dwelling cannot be rehabilitated, and consultation with experts, such as licensed architects and engineers, may be necessary. The D burden of evidence is on the applicant. A decision can only be reached after thorough analysis of the structure’s history and extant condition through documentation provided by the applicant and/or external experts. If the building is planned for demolition to accommodate new R construction, expansion of another building, or new development, the Commission may not consider the future replacement designs and may not review redevelopment plans until after the demolition decision is reached. FT Guidelines 8.1 Demolition of a building that contributes to the historic or architectural significance of the historic district shall not occur, unless: A public safety and welfare require the removal of the building or structure; the building has lost its architectural and historic value or the building does not contribute to the historical or architectural character of the Historic District; the building’s removal will improve the architectural and historic integrity of the district. The removal will not adversely impact the integrity of the historical streetscape and the historic district. 8.2 In order for the Commission to approve demolition of a contributing building, the applicant should submit an application that includes [i] historic background and archival research, [ii] thorough documentation of the current state of the building and property, and [iii] a plan for the dismantling and removal of historic materials for salvage. Materials to be salvaged include historic timber framing, windows, doors, mantels, newel posts, balusters, moldings, flooring, hardware, metalwork, brackets, weatherboard, brick, stone, other masonry components, and any other interior or exterior decorative elements. Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 20  Demolition of Historic Properties 8.3 Relocation of contributing structures is preferrable to demolition, however relocation is not preferable to restoration in situ. The owner is encouraged to consider moving the building to another location within or near the historic district. The Commission may pursue measures with the owner and other parties to preserve the contributing building. 8.4 A licensed and qualified structural engineer or architect with experience in historic buildings should assess the condition of the subject building to evaluate the viability of relocation as an alternative to demolition. This assessment should estimate and enumerate the damage that relocation would inflict on the structure for the Commission to review. In situations involving contributing properties, further expert consultation by the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program and others may be necessary. 8.5 A plan for protecting mature trees and major vegetation must be submitted to the Commission as part of a demolition application. If demolition is approved, this tree preservation plan must be D shared with the demolition general contractor. The general contractor will be responsible for outlining the plan for subcontractors and posting it onsite for employees to review. The demolition must be accomplished in a manner that preserves existing trees and major vegetation, in order R for the Commission to grant or maintain approvals for redevelopment of the site. 8.6 If approved, the demolition should be accomplished in a manner which recycles as many FT materials as possible and has minimal environmental impacts on adjacent properties. The Commission may request a plan from the applicant prior to demolition which outlines materials to be salvaged, such as architectural details, wood flooring, bathroom and kitchen fixtures, and other recyclable items. Demolition should be conducted by qualified professionals to A minimize exposing neighbors and pets to hazards. 8.7 Pest control abatement should occur prior to demolition. Properties which have been vacant for lengthy periods of time may have infestations of rodents or insects and must be abated prior to demolition. When is Demolition Review Needed? Requests for demolition of any portion of or the entirety of any building, structure, or object shall require review by the Historic Preservation Commission when such demolition request affects: a. More than twenty-five percent (25%) of any exterior street façade of a building, structure or object; b. More than twenty-five percent (25%) of any combination of exterior foundations, walls, and/or roofs; c. Any purposefully designed landscape by a notable individual; or d. A significant, naturally occurring land or geological formation when such building, structure, object or site has been designated as a Historic Landmark or has been included within a designated Historic District. Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 21  Demolition of Historic Properties Demolition shall be considered only when all other redevelopment options for a building, structure, object, improvement, or site have been exhausted. D R AFT Figure 12. Demolition Flowchart, Illustration: Martin Schapiro Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 22  Demolition of Historic Properties A. Demolition Review Procedure Application Standards A complete demolition permit application shall contain the following: a. a legible, dimensioned, and accurate property map indicating location of all improvements proposed for demolition; b. written affidavit of the owner(s) of record of the property acknowledging the proposed demolition; c. sketched floor plans of all levels of the building or structure proposed to be demolished; d. photographs of all existing conditions including all exterior elevations, all significant architectural features (exterior and interior), and all rooms or spaces (exterior and interior) affected by the proposed demolition work; e. historic images of the property and general area of proposed work, if available; D f. a written chain of title investigation that identifies previous owners of the property upon which demolition is proposed; g. a detailed report of non-code-compliant elements and structural deficiencies, prepared R by a registered architect and/or structural engineer with expertise in the rehabilitation of existing and/or historic properties; h. a detailed list of irreparable or deteriorated building features, components or elements; FT i. a detailed cost estimate for the rehabilitation of the improvement, property, or site, prepared by a design professional or licensed contractor with expertise in the renovation of existing and/or historic properties; j. a comparison of the estimated rehabilitation cost of the property proposed for demolition A with market values for comparable improvements, properties, or sites within the municipal boundaries; k. a detailed cost estimate for the restoration of the site in the event that no new construction activity commences following demolition; l. a summary of potential sites, if any, to which the resource could be relocated within the Historic District with an estimate of the cost of the move to each proposed location, if any, by a qualified building mover; m. a proposed schedule for demolition activities; n. detailed protection plan for mature trees and vegetation. o. other reasonable information required by City ordinance or that may be requested by City staff Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 23  Demolition of Historic Properties Commission Action The Commission shall consider only the property, building, structure, architectural feature, or object proposed for demolition; the merit of any proposed redevelopment, reconstruction, or improvement shall not be a standard of review for a demolition request. The Commission may solicit expert testimony to evaluate information provided in the demolition application or at a public hearing. A public hearing may be continued to a later date if the Commission determines that additional information unavailable at the public hearing is warranted and necessary for a finding of fact. Additionally, the Commission may table the request to the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Commission to provide time to fully evaluate new evidence presented at the public hearing. The Commission may continue a public hearing regarding a request for demolition for a specified period of time, not -to-exceed one hundred and twenty (120) calendar days, for the sole purpose D of allowing the applicant and the Commission to seek alternatives to demolition when the Commission determines that all of the following conditions exist: R a. the historical structure itself, or the structure in relation to its environs, has significant historical, architectural, aesthetic or cultural value in its present condition; b. realistic alternatives for preservation of the historical structure—including adaptive FT uses—are believed to be neither cost prohibitive nor beyond the limits of local market value; and c. the historical structure, in its existing condition, does not present a public health or safety hazard to individuals, neighboring properties or the greater community. A The Commission may bring a request back to the table for discussion, when an applicant has: a. made a bona fide and reasonable, but unsuccessful, effort to locate a purchaser for the property who is willing to preserve, rehabilitate, or restore the historical structure, property, or site; b. made a bona fide and reasonable, but unsuccessful, effort to locate a purchaser for the improvement who is willing and able to relocate the historical structure to another property or site; c. made a bona fide and reasonable, but unsuccessful, effort to develop a cost-effective program for the preservation of the historical structure; and d. agreed to accept a demolition permit on specified conditions of the Commission. Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 24  Demolition of Historic Properties Documentation An applicant may be required, as a condition of demolition approval, to prepare and submit, prior to the issuance of a demolition permit the following documentation: a. Site Plan (scale not less than 1-inch equals 20’-0”); b. Floor Plans of each level (scale not less than 1/8” equals 1’-0”); c. Elevations of each side of the property improvement (scale not less than 1/8” equals 1’-0”); and d. Photographs of each elevation and significant, interior or exterior architectural feature as determined by the Commission (clear, color images). The Commission may grant a demolition request for a property within the Historic District if, upon review of all testimony, the maintenance, use, and/or alteration of the property would cause immediate and substantial hardship for the owners of record because rehabilitation in a manner which preserves the architectural, historic, or structural integrity of the property either: D a. is infeasible from a technical, mechanical, or structural perspective; or b. would leave the property with no reasonable economic value because it would R require an unreasonable expenditure when accounting for such factors as current market value, permitted uses of the property, and/or the cost of compliance with local, state, and federal codes applicable to the property. FT The Commission, by a simple majority vote, shall grant or deny the application for demolition. Site Restoration Upon completion of any approved demolition, a site must be restored and maintained as required A by City Code until such time that construction activity resumes at the property. Lapse of Demolition Approval Any approval granted by the Commission or Circuit Court for the demolition, in whole or in part, of any building, structure, object, improvement, or site shall be valid for a period of twelve (12) months from the date of the issuance of a demolition approval. Failure to complete the approved work in a timely fashion will require the re-application for approval of any outstanding demolition work. Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 25  Demolition of Historic Properties B. Standards for Demolition Request Review The Historic District Commission shall make findings related to a demolition request based upon the evidence presented to it in each specific case and shall not approve a proposed demolition unless demolition action improves or corrects one or more of the following conditions: 1. the historical structure constitutes a hazard to the safety and welfare of the general public or occupants of the improvement, property, or site as determined, in consultation with the City Planner, Building Official, Code Enforcement Officer, Chief of Police, and Fire Chief; 2. retention of the property will cause undue economic hardship to the owner of record when a governmental action, an act of God, or other events beyond the control of the applicant created the hardship and all feasible alternatives to eliminate the financial hardship (which may include sale of the property at fair market value or relocation of the improvement to another site) have been attempted and exhausted by the applicant; or D 3. the retention of the property is not in the best interest of the majority of the community. C. Demolition by Neglect and Deferred Maintenance R Buildings, structures, and objects lying within the boundaries of a Historic District shall be maintained and protected from demolition that results from neglect or undeterred deterioration of the exterior features or structural elements. FT 1. Duty to Maintain. Any building, structure, or object lying within the boundaries of a Historic District shall be preserved against material deterioration of exterior features and structural elements by its owner of record. A 2. Duty to Repair. The owner of record for any building, structure, or object lying within the boundaries of a Historic District shall, upon written notice from the City Code Enforcement Department, or other representative on behalf of the City, repair any deficient element that is contributing to material deterioration, including, but not limited to, damage to or decay of: a. foundations, flooring, or floor supports that causes leaning, sagging, splitting, listing, or buckling of all or part of the building, structure, or object; b. walls or other vertical supports that causes leaning, sagging, splitting, listing, or buckling of all or part of the building, structure, or object; c. ceilings, roofs, and their support systems or other horizontal members, that causes leaning, sagging, splitting, listing, or buckling of all or part of the building, structure, or object; d. fireplaces or chimneys that causes leaning, sagging, splitting, listing, or buckling of all or part of the building, structure, or object; e. exterior finishes, including, but not limited to wood, brick, stone, stucco, mortar or other material; Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 26  Demolition of Historic Properties f. any design detail, significant feature, or structural element that results in any appreciable loss of architectural, historic, or structural integrity of the building, structure, or object; g. any window, window frame, door, or doorway that, individually or collectively, results in any appreciable loss of architectural, historic, or structural integrity of the building, structure, or object; h. any feature intended to provide a watertight condition that results in significant moisture infiltration into the building, structure, or object; or i. any feature or element that results in the creation of a fire hazard or other nuisance to the welfare of the general public; and j. any vacant property, historic property, or archaeological site within a Historic District shall be adequately secured against unauthorized entry. D. Natural Destruction or Demolition D In the case of partial or complete destruction or demolition of a building, structure, object, improvement, or site within a Historic District as a result of an act of God or other natural disaster, the property may be completely demolished without Commission review provided that R the Building Official, Fire Department Chief, and Chief of Police, in consultation with the City Planner, jointly determine the improvement is structurally unsound and poses an immediate or imminent nuisance and/or hazard to the general health, safety, and welfare of the public. AFT Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 27  Appendices Terminology Terminology in the Guidelines There is a set of terms common to guidelines in general. This terminology is used throughout the Design Guidelines and reflects the principles that the Commission will consider when making decisions. These terms and their interpretation are as follows: Appropriate The term “appropriate” applies to a component, method, or design choice that is sensitive to the historic quality of a building and overall district. When “appropriate,” the project will be in compliance with the guidelines. Beyond Repair and Beyond Reasonable Repair The terms “beyond repair” and “beyond reasonable repair” describe deterioration that cannot be D reversed. The damage to the building or feature is so extreme that not enough physical material remains for its repair. The burden of proof to demonstrate “beyond repair” will be the responsibility of the applicant. Character R The term “character” means the attributes, qualities, and features that collectively convey the FT essence of a setting, place, or building. Compatible and Compatibility The terms “compatible” and “compatibility” mean “appropriate.” Compatibility also means the A characteristics of different uses or activities that permit them to be located near each other in harmony and without anticipated conflict. Inappropriate An “inappropriate” feature, action, or design choice compromises the historic character of a building or district. An inappropriate project would not be in compliance with the design guidelines. In-Kind and Like-Kind When repair or replacement of specific elements of materials are needed, “in-kind” and “like-kind” substitutes match the existing, original, or historic in material, size, detail, profile, finish, texture, and appearance as closely as possible, and when installed will not be easily distinguishable from the original upon close inspection. Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 28  Appendices Recommended The term “recommended” means suggested, but not mandatory actions outlined in the guidelines. Shall or Should Where the terms “shall” or “should” are used, compliance is specifically required. Visible or Readily Visible The terms “visible” or “readily visible” means easily visible from public streets and rights-of-way, including through parking lots and other open spaces. Planning Your Project D Projects involving a historic structure or new construction within the Historic District and any locally designated district may include a variety of approaches, including maintenance, simple repairs, or additional living space. By understanding the history and architectural development of R a structure and its use, its present condition and the actions necessary to complete your project, you can develop an overall approach. The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards address four types of projects: FT Preservation: Keeping an existing structure in its current state by initiating a program of maintenance and repair. Rehabilitation: Actions to return a structure to its original state by preserving features A that contribute to its historic character. This can also include using appropriate in-kind or replacement materials, adaptive reuse and adding compatible additions. Most projects taken before the Commission for existing buildings would be considered rehabilitation. Restoration: This process involves reconstructing the appearance of the structure as it looked from a particular period of time. Reconstruction: Reconstruction is defined as the act or process of depicting by means of new construction the form, features and architectural character of a structure that no longer exists. This type of project typically involves replicating a historic structure to a particular point in time—often for interpretive purposes. Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 29  Appendices After the project approach has been identified, the property owner should refer to this manual and apply the design guidelines in the initial stages of planning and design. The primary approach of the Commission and the design review guidelines emphasizes preservation instead of removal/replacement and the use of sustainable practices and materials where possible. These principles are demonstrated in the use of words such as repair, retain, maintain, compatible and replace in-kind. When planning a rehabilitation or new construction project, the Commission encourages property owners to consider a series of steps in their planning. One—What Is the Significance of the Property? What is the age of the property and how has it changed over time? Does the building contribute to the character of the historic district through its architectural design? The Commission and Staff can assist in determining if a property is contributing or non-contributing. D Two—What Is the Building’s Condition and Integrity? A building with historic and architectural integrity will retain most of its character defining features on its primary and secondary elevations that are visible from the street. A property’s degree of R integrity will help determine the desired outcome of the project. Three—What Is the Intent of the Project? Some projects may only require upgrades to interiors which are not reviewed by the Commission. FT Exterior changes may be limited to in-kind repair and replacement or involve entire structure rehabilitation. Projects may also involve adding living space to a historic structure. Four—What Is the Proposed Project Treatment Plan? A An appropriate project treatment plan will be developed once the historical significance, integrity and project intent has been determined. A project may include a variety of actions such as maintenance of some elements, repair of deteriorated materials, replacement of deteriorated materials, in-kind or replacement of deteriorated materials with compatible new materials, and construction of an addition or ancillary building. When reviewing a property owner’s proposed project treatment plan the Commission will be guided by a series of principles as follows: Proposed projects should emphasize retaining, maintaining, preserving, and repairing original or historic features. If such features and elements cannot be retained, maintained, preserved, and repaired, then replacement in-kind is recommended. Replacement in-kind means that the new feature and element match the existing original, or historic material in size, detail, profile, finish, and texture as closely as possible. Architectural details and materials can be documented through drawings, photographs, or physical evidence. Such documentation will aid in defining appropriate rehabilitation activities. Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 30  Appendices If material replacement in-kind is not feasible or practical, the Commission may consider the use of appropriate alternative materials that match the original as closely as possible in texture, design, and overall appearance. Rehabilitation will be reviewed to determine the impact, compatibility, and appropriateness of the proposed work to the existing structures, site, streetscape, and district. Rehabilitation shall be compatible with the historic building or structure for which it is proposed. Compatible rehabilitation efforts are those that protect and retain significant architectural features and elements of individual buildings and the district. New construction for primary buildings and outbuildings shall be compatible with adjacent buildings along the street and blockface in massing, scale, materials, and setback. Five—What Must be Submitted to the Commission for Review? In addition to a completed Certificate of Appropriateness application, the Commission also D requires the following for specific projects: New retaining walls: A sample or photo of the proposed wall material. New exterior materials: A sample or photo of the proposed exterior material. R AFT Oak Grove Historic District - Mandatory Guidelines 31 Phase 1 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Survey Windshield-Level Executive Summary Project Limits: Phase 1 Survey Area (see Map 1) Location: Fayetteville, Washington County, Arkansas Submitted to: City of Fayetteville​ Submitted by: Post Oak Preservation Solutions, LLC​ Report Author: Megan Warley McDonald and Rebecca Lapham Wallisch Final Draft Submitted: February 23, 2026​ Table Of Contents 1. Introduction​ 3 2. Summary​ 5 3. Glossary​ 6 4. Methodology​ 7 5. Phase 1 Windshield Survey - Results​ 11 6. Recommendations​ 14 6.1. Potential Historic Districts​ 14 6.1.1. Southeast Fayetteville’s Historic Black Community​ 14 6.1.2. Drake Field​ 18 6.1.3. South Fayetteville​ 20 6.1.4. Downtown Fayetteville​ 23 6.1.5. Native Stone Houses of 314 Nonnamaker Drive​ 25 6.1.6. Expansion of Washington-Willow National Register Historic District​ 27 6.1.7. Fayetteville Country Club​ 29 6.1.8. Fayetteville Pump Station​ 31 6.1.9. Crest Drive Residences​ 33 6.1.10. Intensive Level Survey and Documentation of Historic Cemeteries​ 34 6.2. Preservation Focus Areas​ 35 6.2.1. Fayetteville’s Black Heritage​ 35 6.2.2. Architecturally Significant Resources Associated with the U of A School of Architecture​ 36 6.2.3. Ozark Vernacular Houses​ 38 6.2.4. Rustic, Native Stone, and “Giraffe Rock” Houses​ 39 7. Bibliography/Relevant Resources​ 40 Appendix A. Types of Historic Designation​ 42 A. National Register of Historic Places (NRHP)​ 42 a. Criteria for Evaluation​ 42 b. Areas of Significance​ 43 c. National Register Criterion Considerations​ 43 d. Period of Significance​ 43 e. Seven Aspects of Integrity​ 43 f. National Register Historic Districts​ 45 B. National Register Multiple Property Documentation Form (MPDF)​ 45 C. Local Historic District Designation​ 45 Appendix B. Previously Designated Historic Properties​ 47 Appendix C. Maps​ 49 Appendix D. Tables​ 54 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 2 1.​ Introduction Post Oak Preservation Solutions LLC (Post Oak) was contracted by the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas to complete Phase 1 of a citywide windshield survey of historic properties. The project was funded in part by a Certified Local Government (CLG) grant, administered by the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program (AHPP) of the Division of Arkansas Heritage and the National Park Service (NPS), Department of the Interior. This project is the first phase of a multi-year survey effort to identify and characterize Fayetteville’s historic buildings to inform future land use planning and preservation efforts. Map 1. Phase 1 Windshield Survey Area. The Phase 1 survey area was established by the City of Fayetteville Planning Department and focused on southeast Fayetteville (see Map 1), an area that has been historically underrepresented in the City’s past historic resource survey efforts. At the direction of the City, Post Oak prioritized buildings constructed in 1970 or earlier; within the Phase 1 survey area, over 1,200 parcels included one or more buildings that met this criteria. A handful of properties constructed after 1970 were documented due to their high potential for architectural significance. Approximately 178 parcels in the survey area were previously surveyed, including those already listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or the Arkansas Register of Historic Places (ARHP); these properties were photographed to provide an updated record of their current condition. Though the survey primarily focused on properties within the Fayetteville city limits, at the Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 3 request of the City, Post Oak also conducted desktop aerial analysis of properties outside the city limits but within the Fayetteville Planning Area (the results of this desktop aerial analysis is provided in the inventory spreadsheet). FIELD SURVEY OVERVIEW ●​ The Phase 1 survey area includes approximately 6,200 total parcels ●​ A preliminary review identified 1,255 parcels with historic-age resources (i.e. resources constructed in 1970 or earlier) within the survey area. Post Oak conducted a desktop analysis of all historic-age parcels, removing parcels with historic buildings that had irreversibly lost integrity or had been demolished. ●​ A total of 1,048 resources were field-surveyed. ●​ Following desktop analysis and field survey, 486 properties were identified as potentially historically significant and included in the final inventory. ○​ An additional 7 properties located outside of the city limits but inside the Fayetteville Planning Area were identified as potentially significant through aerial analysis. As described in the NPS National Register Bulletin 24, "Guidelines for Local Surveys: A Basis for Preservation Planning,” the purpose of a windshield survey is: …not to gain detailed information on particular structures or sites, but to get a general picture of the distribution of different types and styles, and of the character of different neighborhoods…One of the important functions of a reconnaissance is to identify the boundaries of areas that may become the objects of intensive survey–perhaps potential historic districts, perhaps portions of the community having distinctive architectural, planning, or cultural characteristics.1 Based on this NPS guidance, Post Oak’s Phase 1 survey primarily sought to identify properties and groupings of properties that warrant further research and intensive-level survey. High-level background information on individual properties was included in the inventory table; no in-depth historic or archival research was conducted as part of this effort. This report summarizes broad recommendations for future intensive level survey, including preliminary boundaries; potential historic districts would be determined through further research and survey efforts during subsequent project phases. Post Oak Preservation Solutions would like to acknowledge the guidance, support, and feedback provided by Britin Bostick and Kylee Cole of the City of Fayetteville’s Long Range Planning Department as well as Iain Montgomery of the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program (AHPP). __________________________________________________________________________________ This material was produced with assistance from the Historic Preservation Fund, administered by the National Park Service, Department of the Interior and the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program, an agency of the Division of Arkansas Heritage. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this materials are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the view of the Department of the Interior or the Division of Arkansas Heritage. 1 “National Register Bulletin 24: Guidelines for Local Surveys: A Basis for Preservation Planning,” accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/upload/NRB24-Complete_Part1t.pdf. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 4 2.​ Summary Project Type: Fieldwork Dates: Historic Resource Survey (Windshield) October 19-24, 2025 November 10-13, 2025 Project Limits: Anticipated Completion: Phase 1 Survey Area as established by City of Draft 1: On or before January 9, 2026 Fayetteville Planning Department (See Map 1). Draft 2: On or before April 30, 2026 Final Submission of all Deliverables: On or before June 22, 2026 Project Cutoff Date for Historic Resources: Personnel: 1970 (date established by City of Fayetteville) Post Oak Preservation Solutions, LLC: ●​ Ellis Mumford-Russell (Founder) ●​ Megan Warley McDonald (Project Manager/Architectural Historian) ●​ Rebecca Lapham Wallisch (Senior Architectural Historian) ●​ Rachel Alison (Associate) ●​ Angela Jimenez (Architectural Historian) Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 5 3.​ Glossary AHPP Arkansas Historic Preservation Program (see SHPO) ARHP Arkansas Register of Historic Places BHPC Black Heritage Preservation Commission (Local Fayetteville Organization) CAD County Appraisal District CLG Certified Local Government FAA Federal Aviation Administration GIS Global Information Systems (Mapping Data) Historic-age For this HRSR, resources considered historic-age are those constructed in or before 1970 HPC Historic Preservation Commission HRSR Historic Resources Survey Report MPDF Multiple Property Documentation Form NPS National Park Service NRHP National Register of Historic Places NRHD National Register Historic District Property For this HRSR, a property is generally a single legal parcel that contains one or more historic-age resources Resource For this HRSR, a resource is a single building, site, object, or structure located on/within a property in the Phase 1 survey area. RFP Request for Proposals ROW Right-of-way SHPO State Historic Preservation Office (see AHPP) U of A University of Arkansas (Fayetteville) Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 6 4.​ Methodology Post Oak Preservation Solutions conducted a windshield-level survey of the Phase 1 survey area. As established in the City of Fayetteville Citywide Survey–Phase 1 Request for Proposals (RFP), all resources with buildings constructed in 1970 or earlier were evaluated, but only those with potential historic significance were surveyed. Properties with buildings were the focus of this effort; additional historic resource types, including structures, objects, or below-ground resources were generally not surveyed or inventoried. Exceptions included the NRHP-listed Goff Stone Bridge (Resource 451) and eight historic age cemeteries. The windshield survey was conducted following the standards set in National Register Bulletin 24, and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Identification. The results of the survey provide a high-level inventory of potentially historically significant resources (buildings, districts, or cemeteries) in the survey area, and include address and parcel number, approximate date of construction, resource type, architectural style, notes about potential significance, and integrity. Per the RFP, and through consultation with the City of Fayetteville and AHPP, a streamlined survey form was created and a form (with accompanying photograph) was submitted for each resource with potential historic significance. As a high-level windshield survey, Post Oak’s primary objective was to identify individual properties and groupings of properties that may embody or represent significant aspects of Fayetteville’s history. Further research and intensive-level survey will be required to formally evaluate eligibility for listing on the NRHP, ARHP or local designation. 4.1.​ Pre-Survey Preparation In coordination with the City, Post Oak obtained County Appraisal District (CAD) parcel data for all properties within the Phase 1 survey area that were constructed in 1970 or earlier. In most instances, Post Oak did not attempt to verify the build date provided by the CAD data, as it was outside the scope of the windshield survey. However, Post Oak did conduct aerial analysis of the survey area using overlayed historic aerial photographs to identify any historic-age (1970 or earlier) properties that were not included in the City’s pre-filtered parcel data. Post Oak did amend/verify build dates for properties where historic aerial imagery revealed that the build date was incorrect, or the appearance of the building suggested a different construction date. Where actual build dates were available from an existing AHPP form or other source, these were included and indicated as “actual” on the survey forms. Any future intensive level surveys should verify build dates through the use of Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps, digitized newspapers, historic aerial imagery, deed records, and other sources of available documentation. Several properties (18 individual properties and 3 districts) in the Phase 1 survey area were previously listed on either the National Register of Historic Places or the Arkansas Register of Historic Places (see Table 1, Appendix B). Fayetteville has two local historic designations: the White Hangar at Drake Field (Resource 483) and the Oak Grove Historic District (outside the Phase 1 survey area). Post Oak reviewed the nominations to extract basic information (date of construction, associated architect, architectural style) which was entered into the inventory spreadsheet. These properties were photographed during field survey and included in the overall inventory of historic resources. In addition to National Register and Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 7 Arkansas Register documentation, all previous survey documentation for properties within the Phase 1 survey area was obtained from AHPP, reviewed, and relevant data was added to the inventory. Post Oak also reviewed a collection of historic photographs provided by the City Planning department. Initially taken by the Code Department in the 1960s and 1970s, the photographs provided helpful integrity information for the properties documented in the Phase 1 survey area. Relevant information obtained by Post Oak during the course of developing the 2025 Historic Context Statement “The Historic Black Community of Southeast Fayetteville,” was also included in the inventory for properties with known historic associations. After all pre-existing documentation was entered into the inventory, Post Oak Architectural Historians, all of whom exceed the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications for Architectural History and/or History, conducted a preliminary review of each parcel with historic-age resources. Post Oak used Google Streetview and historic aerial images to preliminarily identify resource type, architectural style, potentially significant outbuildings, integrity, and potential eligibility. Per the City of Fayetteville RFP, Post Oak also identified properties within the initial inventory that had been demolished, substantially altered, or were ubiquitous and non-descript resource types with a low probability for historic significance and removed them from the inventory. During pre-survey planning, Post Oak also included any outstanding questions about individual properties to be addressed during field survey and noted these in the preliminary inventory. Mapping was undertaken simultaneously during the inventory process. Post Oak created a single GIS map point for each property with a building (or buildings) constructed in or before 1970, color coded by potentially significant or not significant. These points were then mapped on survey field maps, which outlined potentially significant individual properties and potentially significant clusters of historic buildings to be examined in the field as potential historic districts. Lastly, as agreed upon by Post Oak, the City, and AHPP, Post Oak conducted an aerial analysis of parcels outside of the city limits but within the Fayetteville Planning Area. These parcels were not field surveyed or photographed unless they appeared to be exceptionally significant. Ultimately, six parcels outside the city limits but within the Fayetteville Planning Area were slated for field survey (see inventory spreadsheet). 4.2.​ Field Survey Post Oak conducted the field survey in two phases: the first from October 19-23rd and the second from November 10-13th, 2025. Photographs were taken of the primary facade of the most prominent historic-age building on each identified property unless access was limited from the public right-of-way (ROW). Additionally, any significant information about integrity was recorded on field notes. If landscaping, fences, safety concerns, or other obstructions prevented clear photographs, Google Maps and Streetview were used to supplement the images in order to evaluate the resource. In some cases, a property was not visible from the ROW nor were photographs available online. It was discovered in the field that several inventoried buildings had been recently demolished, which was not yet reflected in either the parcel data or Google Streetview, and the property was subsequently removed from the inventory. Only potentially historically significant outbuildings were noted in the inventory and primarily included historic-age garages, ancillary dwellings, and sheds, but they were not individually photographed. Non-historic-age outbuildings were not documented, including prefabricated sheds and carports. Any future intensive-level historic resources surveys should include a closer evaluation of potentially historically significant outbuildings. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 8 Previously designated resources within the Phase 1 survey area were also photographed. As agreed upon with the City, only representative photos of the Mount Sequoyah NRHD were taken; the district consists of the Methodist Assembly property that was very recently listed (and therefore documented) in 2022. Each building within the Washington-Willow NRHD was photographed to document integrity in the event that the district is updated in the future. 4.3.​ Analysis & Report Upon completion of the field survey, Post Oak Architectural Historians analyzed the survey data and updated the inventory and GIS map points. Properties that were demolished or significantly altered were removed from the final inventory. In addition, per the City of Fayetteville RFP, properties that were not determined to be likely individually eligible or were not within the boundary of a potential historic district were also removed from the inventory. The resulting data was then used to refine the boundaries for potential new or expanded districts recommended for future intensive level survey, and to create an inventory of potentially individually eligible properties. An inventory table, individual survey forms for each property with potential historic significance, and this Executive Summary were prepared for the City’s future planning and preservation efforts. Upon completion of the final survey inventory, Post Oak outlined recommendations for potential new and expanded historic districts (pending future survey) and recommendations for general preservation focus areas (see Section 6.2). The first draft of the historic resources survey report and inventory was shared with the City of Fayetteville Long Range Planning Department and the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program, and feedback was incorporated into the final draft. 4.4.​ Evaluation of Potential Significance and Preservation Priority Preservation Planning Priority 1: “High” In addition to the criteria, below, a “High” preservation planning priority was assigned to properties that represent a rare resource type, are associated with a community that is underrepresented on the NRHP, or are facing major development pressure. In most cases, resources that are already listed on the NRHP were not assigned a “High” preservation planning priority unless facing development pressure or other threats. Criteria: ●​ Constructed or moved prior to 1970 OR constructed after 1970 and appears to be exceptionally significant architecturally or historically; AND, ●​ Contribute significantly to local history or broader historical patterns; OR, ●​ Had an association with longstanding residents of the area that likely made significant contributions to the community; OR, ●​ Are architecturally distinct or are a rare example of a specific building form, architectural style, or plan-type; OR, ●​ Are a good representative example of a common local building form, architectural style, or plan-type; AND, ●​ Retain good to excellent historic integrity, including historic materials, character-defining features, and physical context of the resource and/or landscape. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 9 Preservation Planning Priority 2: “Moderate” In addition to the criteria, below, a “Medium” preservation planning priority was assigned to properties that represent a common but significant historic building type that is represented on the NRHP and are not facing major development pressure. In most cases, resources that are already listed on the NRHP were assigned a “Medium” preservation planning priority. Criteria: ●​ Constructed or moved prior to 1970; AND, ●​ Contribute significantly to local history or broader historical patterns; OR, ●​ Had an association with longstanding residents of the area that likely made significant contributions to the community; OR, ●​ Are architecturally distinct or are a rare example of a specific building form, architectural style, or plan-type; OR, ●​ Are a good representative example of a common local building form, architectural style, or plan-type; AND, ●​ Retain only fair historic integrity due to moderate alterations or deterioration of the resource and/or landscape. Preservation Planning Priority 3 “Low”: Criteria: ●​ Constructed or moved prior to 1970; AND, ●​ Retains fair historic integrity and is in stable condition; AND, ●​ Requires more research to determine potential significance and eligibility, AND, ●​ Does not appear to be facing imminent development pressures. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 10 5.​ Phase 1 Windshield Survey - Results Of the approximately 1,250 parcels with historic-age (1970 or earlier) resources within the Phase 1 boundary of Fayetteville’s historic resources windshield survey, Post Oak staff surveyed and field verified 1,048 parcels. Following the methodology outlined above in Section 4, Post Oak determined that 486 properties contained one or more historic-age resources with potential historic or architectural significance. 5.1.​ Historic Properties by Age As outlined below in Table 1, the highest concentration of properties (39 percent) with potential historic significance date to the period between 1921 and 1945, followed by those constructed in the post-war era (1946-1970 - 25 percent), and those dating to the turn of the twentieth century (1900-1920 - 22 percent). The Phase 1 windshield survey revealed 47 properties within the study area dating to the nineteenth century per CAD data, although additional research is needed to verify these construction dates. Of these, there are seven cemeteries with burials dating to the nineteenth century: Resources 233, 236, 237, 451, 456, 434, and 457. Additional nineteenth century resources include one bridge (Resource 451), the former Henderson School (currently a residence - Resource 67), one masonry pump station (Resource 458), the St. James UMC Church (Resource 211), and 33 single family dwellings. Out of the 33 single family dwellings, 15 are located within the NRHP-listed Washington-Willow Historic District (Map 2). Post Oak noted that several of the remaining properties are heavily altered (Resource 240), while others were set back from the public ROW and difficult to document (Resources 417, 466). Several nineteenth century resources were dramatically modified over time (Resource 480), although some appear to retain historic integrity and may be significant due to their age, style, or historic association (for example, Resources 196, 428, 465). Table 2: Phase 1 Potentially Significant Properties by Approximate Year Built Year Built * # of Surveyed Properties Percent of Total 19th Century 47 10% 1900-1920 108 22% 1921-1945 192 40% 1946-1970 119 24% Post-1970 20 4% Total 486 100% *Most year built dates were sourced from Washington County, AR CAD Data, although other sources were utilized to verify year built dates for properties whose resources appeared mis-labeled by age in CAD. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 11 5.2.​ Historic Properties by Property Type The predominant resource type of inventoried properties within the Phase 1 windshield survey boundary were single family homes, which constituted 86 percent of the total. Only a handful (25 or fewer) each of commercial, religious, cemetery, multi-family, government/military, social, education-related, and infrastructure related property types were identified. Some of the inventoried single family dwellings are on large-lot suburban, rural, or agricultural properties. Due to the high-level scope of this windshield survey, small-scale residential farms and ranches were not enumerated as agricultural properties. Some single family dwellings may have historical significance associated with early settlement, agricultural development, or other historic themes, requiring additional research. Per NPS Bulletin 30, Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Rural Historic Landscapes, a small-scale family farm or ranch would, in most cases, need to retain its historic residence to retain sufficient integrity for NRHP-listing.2 As a result, documentation of historic residences on agricultural properties is sufficient for identifying properties with potential historic significance at the windshield level. Furthermore, agricultural outbuildings on properties that lack a historic residence, other clusters of buildings, or small scale elements are unlikely to be individually eligible for the NRHP. As a result, individual outbuildings were also not enumerated as part of this effort. When located on properties with associated residences, outbuildings were noted during field survey and briefly listed in the final inventory. Table 3: Phase 1 Potentially Significant Properties by Type Property Type # of Surveyed Properties Percent of Total Single Family Residential* 420 86% Multi-Family Residential 8 2% Education Related 5 1% Religious 10 2% Commercial 24 5% Funerary/Cemetery 8 2% Government/Aviation/Military 9 2% Social 2 <1% Bridge/Dam/Infrastructure 2 <1% Total 486 100% *Properties categorized as single family residential include those located on large agricultural lots with a main residence. Located in both suburban and semi-rural areas. They also include outbuildings associated with single family residential properties that are located on adjacent parcels. 2 “National Park Service Bulletin 30: Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Rural Historic Landscapes,” accessed December 4, 2025,” accessed December 10, 2025, https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/upload/NRB30-Complete.pdf. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 12 5.3.​ Historic Properties by Form and Style Of the 486 properties within the Phase 1 survey boundary there were a variety of building forms, material types, and architectural styles present. Some resources exhibited one or more styles, forms, or types. For example, there were several homes featuring giraffe rock or native stone that also exhibited elements associated with the Tudor Revival style (including Resources 454, 465, and 472). However, due to the high-level scope of this windshield-level survey, properties were enumerated by their style or form in only one category. Throughout the Phase 1 survey boundary, there was a high concentration of properties that exhibited giraffe rock or native stone exteriors (at least 50 properties, more than 10 percent total), which are recommended for further study (see Section 6.2.4). Another distinctive property type encountered in the survey were Ozark Vernacular houses, which are simple house forms dating to the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Common Ozark Vernacular house types include the single pen, double pen, gable front, and Gabled Ell or “Bent House.” Table 4: Phase 1 Potentially Significant Properties by Style/Form Architectural Style/Form # of % of Total Architectural Style/Form # of % of Surveyed Surveyed Total Properties* Properties* Art Deco/ 2 <1% Ranch 39 8% Streamline Moderne Bungalow 97 20% Modern Movement (Prairie, 43 9% Wrightian, Shed, Mid-century Modern, etc.) Colonial Revival (Dutch, 18 4% Minimal Traditional 34 7% Georgian, etc.) Craftsman 3 <1% Neoclassical Revival 6 1% Double Pen 7 1% Single Pen 3 1% Gable Front 45 9% Split Level 3 1% Gabled Ell/"Bent House" 23 5% Side Gable 25 5% Giraffe Rock/Rustic 51 10% Site (Cemetery) 8 2% Tudor/Gothic Revival 13 3% Victorian (Folk, Queen Anne, 47 10% Free Classic, etc.) One-part Commercial 8 2% No style/form identified/ 9 2% Block Other Quonset Hut 2 <1% TOTAL 486 100% *Some properties may fall into one or more categories in this table. Due to the high-level nature of this effort, properties were only categorized once based on their most easily recognizable style or form. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 13 6.​ Recommendations 6.1.​ Potential Historic Districts Several concentrations of historic resources within the Phase 1 survey area warrant further, intensive-level surveys due to their concentration of potentially significant resources. Recommendations are outlined in four categories: Intensive Level Survey, National Register of Historic Places, Local Designation, and Interpretation. In-depth research as part of future surveys would be key to determining any potential districts boundaries and areas of significance. PHASE 1 SURVEY: POTENTIAL HISTORIC DISTRICTS ●​ Potential Historic Districts ○​ Southeast Fayetteville’s Historic Black Community ○​ Drake Field ○​ South Fayetteville ○​ Fayetteville Downtown Square Historic District ○​ Stone Houses of Nonnamaker Drive ○​ Expansion of the Washington-Willow NR-Listed Historic District ○​ Fayetteville Country Club ○​ Fayetteville Pump Station ○​ Crest Drive ●​ Intensive Level Survey and Documentation of Historic Cemeteries 6.1.1.​ Southeast Fayetteville’s Historic Black Community Recommendations Survey ●​ An intensive-level survey would be an essential component of any efforts toward establishing an NHRP-listed historic district or a local historic district (see Map 2, Appendix C). ●​ While many resources associated with Fayetteville’s Black Heritage are concentrated in Southeast Fayetteville and were documented in Phase 1, there are likely other significant Black resources elsewhere in the city that may be encountered in future phases of survey. For example, Oaks Cemetery, the primary burial ground for Black residents for decades, is well outside of the neighborhood (about a mile and a half southwest and outside of the Phase 1 survey area). In addition, Black residents worked in local businesses and institutions throughout the city, and their representation in designation and interpretive efforts is essential. Current representation does not reflect the breadth of their contributions. National Register of Historic Places ●​ Based on the results of this survey, as well as the in-depth research compiled in Post Oak’s 2025 Historic Context Statement, there may be potential for a small NRHD related to Southeast Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 14  Fayetteville’s Black community. The district would be eligible under Criterion A: Ethnic Heritage: Black, and potentially Criterion A: Community Planning and Development, for the role of de-facto residential segregation in creating the Black residential enclave. Upon listing, income-producing properties within the district would be eligible for Federal Historic Preservation Tax Credits (though most properties in the district are owner-occupied residential). Listing may also open other funding opportunities for preservation and rehabilitation through state, federal, or non-profit grant programs. ●​ Depending on the results of further citywide survey efforts, a city-wide Multiple Property Documentation Form (MPDF) might aid in the nomination to the NRHP of resources related to Fayetteville’s Black Heritage. See Appendix A for a description of MPDFs. The MPDF could build upon the historic context developed by Post Oak in 2025 and facilitate the nomination of geographically disparate resources throughout Fayetteville. However, if few additional resources related to Black Heritage are found in other areas, individual NRHP and/or local designations or a small Southeast Fayetteville Historic District may be more appropriate. ●​ St. James United Methodist Church (Resource 211) is likely individually eligible under Criterion A, Social History and Criterion A, Ethnic Heritage: Black, due to its significant and central role in Fayetteville’s Black community. The church was a center for local community organizing and served as a meeting place amidst Civil Rights era efforts to desegregate public facilities. It was also the site of the city’s first Head Start program, a President Johnson-era “Great Society” initiative designed to address educational disparities through early intervention. St. James is a rare, extant, historic Black institution in Fayetteville; St. James Baptist Church was lost to fire in 1944, the Lincoln School was demolished c. 1965, and the Henderson School was irrevocably altered for use as a residence in the 1940s. Listing on the NRHD would not only honor and recognize the history of St. James United Methodist Church and its prominent role in Fayetteville’s Black community, but might also enhance its eligibility for grant or other funding mechanisms to ensure its long-term preservation.3 Local Designation ●​ Citizen efforts are underway to create a local historic district to protect resources associated with Southeast Fayetteville’s historic Black community. Many of the community’s historic resources have been lost to demolition or new infill, and development pressure, deterioration, and lack of funding and resources for preservation and maintenance threaten the remaining resources. If successfully designated, a local historic district would help safeguard Fayetteville’s Black Heritage through legally-enforceable local review by the City’s Historic District Commission of proposed alterations and demolitions in the community. Interpretation ●​ The Black Heritage Preservation Commission (BHPC) has an active historical marker program that could be leveraged to identify and recognize important Black spaces in Southeast Fayetteville. 3 St. James United Methodist Church may be eligible for a number of brick and mortar grants, including those funded by the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program (AHPP): https://www.arkansasheritage.com/arkansas-preservation/about/available-grants; the National Fund for Sacred Places: https://www.fundforsacredplaces.org/; or the African American Cultural Heritage Action Fund of the National Trust for Historic Preservation:, https://savingplaces.org/african-american-cultural-heritage. Though National Register listing is not necessarily required for these grants, it may help demonstrate the significance of the Church. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 15  ●​ In addition to traditional historical markers and walking tours, tremendous potential exists for thoughtful and creative interpretation of the neighborhood’s history, including significant resources that have been lost (including the Lincoln School, Sherman’s Tavern, St. James Baptist Church, the Black Masonic Lodge, demolished residences, etc), and the stories of prominent and influential residents. Buddy Hayes Park may be an ideal location for historic interpretation of the broader neighborhood. Left: Etched panel depicting lost structures at the Washington-on-the-Brazos State Historic Site in Texas; Right: “Looking Glass” panel depicting a historic photograph of a demolished building superimposed on the lot where it once stood in Elyria, Ohio.4 Left: Smokey Hollow commemoration in Tallahassee, Florida, depicting the building outlines of lost shotgun houses. Right: A “ghost structure” at the Mann-Simon Historic Site in Columbia, South Carolina; 5 4 “A Window on the Past,” Texas Parks and Wildlife Archive, accessed December 4, 2025, https://tpwmagazine.com/archive/2019/jan/scout5_parknews/; Owen MacMillan, “Historical Looking Glass Unveiled in Ely Square,” The Chronicle-Telegram, accessed December 4, 2025, https://chroniclet.com/news/440961/historical-looking-glass-unveiled-in-ely-square/. 5 “Mann-Simons Site,” Historic Columbia, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.historiccolumbia.org/tours/house-tours/mann-simons-site; “Smokey Hollow Commemoration,” Architect Magazine, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.architectmagazine.com/project-gallery/smokey-hollow-commemoration/. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 16 ●​ Interpretation of the Henderson School (Resource 67). Though the former Henderson School is one of the most significant extant resources associated with Fayetteville’s Black Heritage, it was renovated for use as a private residence in the 1940s and no longer retains integrity to convey its significance as a school. It is therefore not likely eligible for listing on the NRHD under Criterion A: Education or Ethnic Heritage: Black. However, in cooperation with the current property owner, it may be possible to recognize and educate the public about the significance of the property in the form of a historic marker, interpretive panel, or other preservation or interpretation tools. A historic marker is currently under consideration by the Black Heritage Preservation Commission (BHPC), which would be an effective first step at recognizing the historic significance of the property. The city’s historical marker program is an excellent tool for highlighting the history of significant places such as the Henderson School, though is entirely dependent upon continued funding by the City or grant funding. At the time of this report, only one known former student of the Henderson School is still living: Jessie Carr Bryant. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 17 6.1.2.​ Drake Field Left: The exterior of the White Hangar, currently the home of the Arkansas Air and Military Museum. Right: Interior of the White Hangar. Drake Field is a historic airport south of downtown Fayetteville that includes several potentially significant historic buildings: the White Hangar (Resource 483, WA0792), the Federal Aviation Administration Building (Resource 485, WA1809), and the Drake Field Terminal Building (Resource 484, WA1808). The buildings are potentially eligible for listing on the National Register as a district. The White Hangar, constructed in 1941, is listed on the Arkansas Register of Historic Places and is one of two locally designated districts in Fayetteville. Constructed during the wartime shortage of building materials, the construction team utilized local timber from the surrounding Boston Mountains, as well as junk metal for the nails and doors.6 Both the Terminal Building and FAA Building are midcentury modern buildings designed by E. Keith McPheeters, a member of the University of Arkansas College of Architecture faculty. Recommendations Survey ●​ The historic age buildings at Drake Field have all previously been surveyed and an intensive level survey is therefore not necessary at this time. National Register of Historic Places ●​ Fire Station No. 3 at Drake Field (Resource 482) is individually listed on the National Register. ●​ The White Hangar is listed on the ARHP, but not the NRHD. It may be eligible as part of a small Drake Field Historic District or individually. ●​ There is potential for a small Drake Field Historic District that includes the White Hangar, FAA Building, and Drake Field Terminal Building. The potential district would likely be eligible under Criterion C for Architecture and Engineering, and additional research may indicate other areas of significance. National Register listing may provide opportunities for grant or other funding mechanisms to ensure the long-term preservation of these significant buildings. See Map 5, Appendix C for an approximate potential historic district boundary. Local Designation ●​ The White Hangar is currently the only locally designated district in Fayetteville. If the FAA Building, the Drake Field Terminal Building, or Fire Station No. 3 are at risk of loss due to future airport expansion or local development, local designation would provide a layer of protection and review for these buildings. 6 “Fayetteville Municipal Airport Hangar ‘White Hangar,’” Arkansas Heritage, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.arkansasheritage.com/arkansas-register/fayetteville-municipal-airport-hangar-white-hangar. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 18 Interpretation ●​ The White Hangar currently houses the Arkansas Air and Military Museum, which includes some interpretation about the construction of the hangar itself. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 19 6.1.3.​ South Fayetteville A number of historic-age and potentially significant resources were surveyed in a residential area historically known as “South Fayetteville.” (see Map 2, Appendix C). The community is located in a roughly triangular area south of E. Huntsville Road and Nelson Hackett Boulevard and north of E. 7th Street. South Fayetteville largely consists of modest residential properties constructed during the 20th century. The community was primarily occupied by middle and working class residents, in contrast to the Washington-Willow area, which was occupied by middle and upper-class residents. The neighborhood is characterized by a diversity of modest house styles and types, which includes Ozark Vernacular building forms (single pen, double pen, gable front, side gable, gabled ell or “bent house”), early 20th century bungalows, Depression-era and midcentury Giraffe Rock homes, Folk Victorian houses, and more. Though primarily occupied by White residents, South Fayetteville also includes an area historically referred to as “the Valley,” by Black residents. The Valley was a residential area where both White and Black residents lived during the mid- to late- 20th century. Prominent Black residents included popular local musician, Buddy Hayes (Resource 377). In addition, the historically Black Combs Street Church of Christ (Resource 352) is located in the Valley. Due to the community’s working class origins, homes in South Fayetteville are typically modest in size and historically provided affordable housing near downtown. In recent years, however, South Fayetteville has experienced significant new development involving the demolition of historic-age resources and construction of new developments that are often incompatible with the scale and character of the neighborhood. Insensitive alterations to historic buildings has led to further loss of historic character. Recommendations Survey ●​ Intensive level survey with accompanying research is essential to future preservation planning efforts in South Fayetteville. Intensive level survey would also identify properties that may be individually eligible or could be listed under an MPDF. See Map 2, Appendix C for recommended survey area. National Register of Historic Places ●​ According to the 2023 Fayetteville Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan and Post Oak conversations with former HDC members, AHPP staff opined in 2016 that a South Fayetteville historic district was not likely to be successful (though no survey had been conducted). Based on Phase 1 survey efforts, Post Oak believes that there could be potential for a small district in South Fayetteville, though further research is required to determine the criteria under which it would be eligible and appropriate boundaries. The potential district could be eligible under Criterion C for Architecture due to the presence of several significant Ozark Vernacular homes and “Giraffe Rock” houses, however these resources are dispersed throughout the neighborhood. Further research into the community’s history may indicate that a stronger argument under Criterion A may be possible, perhaps under Criterion A: Social History (Labor) for associations with the working class residents of the area. Potential district boundaries would have to be carefully considered to ensure that over 50% of the buildings in the proposed district would contribute (i.e. be of historic age and retain integrity). Due to the amount of new infill and potential integrity issues in the area, the district would not likely encapsulate the full historic boundaries of the South Fayetteville community. In Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 20  addition, an inclusive definition of integrity would be essential to the successful listing of a South Fayetteville Historic District, in which alterations made during the period of significance (such as additions and enclosed porches) were understood in the context of a working class community that adapted their homes as their families grew or their financial circumstances improved. ●​ Though a South Fayetteville National Register district could be possible, a city-wide MPDF or MPDFs related to Ozark Vernacular Houses or Giraffe Rock Houses may be a more appropriate and successful strategy to nominating properties in South Fayetteville (see Sections 6.2.3 and 6.2.4). Local Designation ●​ To slow the rapid loss of historic buildings and protect the historic character of South Fayetteville, the City might consider local designation and accompanying design guidelines. Local designation, which carries enforceable protections for historic buildings, would likely be more beneficial to the South Fayetteville neighborhood than National Register designation, which does not come with any protections. 785 S. Washington pictured in 2014 (left) and 2025 (right). The new development was constructed between 2022-2023. 321 S. Washington is an example of an insensitive alteration that has erased the historic character of an early 20th century South Fayetteville home. Local designation would aid in the preservation of the neighborhood’s historic character through the careful review of new additions and alterations. Interpretation ●​ Further research is required to determine potential interpretive efforts regarding the broader history and significance of South Fayetteville’s working class community. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 21 6.1.4.​ Downtown Fayetteville Left: National Guard Armory (Resource 224) Right: Southwestern Electric Power Company (SWEPCO) building (Resource 116). Both buildings are on the east side of N. College Avenue, on the edge of downtown Fayetteville. The east side of N. College Avenue was included in the Phase 1 survey, which is the eastern edge of Fayetteville’s historic downtown core. Several downtown buildings in the survey area are already listed on the NRHD, including the Washington County Courthouse (Resource 218), Washington County Jail (Resource 229), and the Lynn Shelton American Legion (Resource 227). Several additional buildings along N. College Avenue are also likely eligible, either individually or as part of a potential Downtown Fayetteville Historic District. Further intensive-level survey would be necessary to determine the boundaries and areas of significance for a potential NRHP district, which is outside the scope of the Phase 1 survey area. If formally listed on the NRHP, income producing properties within the historic district would be eligible for federal historic rehabilitation tax credits and all properties may be eligible for other state, federal, and non-profit grant programs. Recommendations Survey ●​ An intensive level survey of Fayetteville’s historic downtown core, to include the east side of N. College Avenue, which was documented in the Phase 1 survey. See Map 2, Appendix C for recommended survey area. National Register of Historic Places ●​ There is high potential for a successful Downtown Fayetteville Historic District, which would likely be eligible under several National Register criteria, including Criterion A for Commerce, Community Planning and Development, and/or Government. Though several downtown properties are already individually listed, a district would capture buildings that may not be individually eligible but contribute to the broader significance of Fayetteville’s downtown core. Due to the high number of income-producing properties in downtown Fayetteville, a NRHD would render many properties eligible for federal historic rehabilitation tax credits. Local Designation ●​ Local designation of downtown Fayetteville may aid in the prevention of insensitive alterations to historic buildings. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 22 Interpretation ●​ Though outside the Phase 1 survey area, a handful of historic markers were noted downtown. There is likely abundant opportunity for interpretation of local businesses and the evolution of downtown Fayetteville. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 23 6.1.5.​ Native Stone Houses of 314 Nonnamaker Drive Native Stone Houses of 314 Nonnamaker Drive The parcel at 314 Nonnamaker Drive (Resource 454) contains a unique collection of twelve residences with native stone or giraffe rock exteriors, all located on a single parcel (Parcel # 765-15010-000). The houses range in construction date from 1901 to 1961, although a majority date to ca. 1926 (per CAD data). The majority are front gable bungalows, some with modest Craftsman and Tudor Revival influences. The neighborhood also includes a rare gambrel roof type not commonly seen in Fayetteville, although this residence is the newest (1960s) according to CAD data. Overall the residences are a cohesive collection of giraffe rock bungalows and an investigation of their development on a single parcel is warranted. Recommendations Survey ●​ Intensive level survey of this parcel to more closely document each of the rock houses and any significant outbuildings. See Map 4, Appendix C for recommended survey area. National Register of Historic Places ●​ Further research regarding the development of this parcel would determine the neighborhood’s eligibility as a NRHD and any associated areas of significance. The neighborhood may be eligible under Criterion C: Architecture as a distinctive grouping of Giraffe Rock houses, and may also be eligible under additional criteria pending further research. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 24 Local Designation ●​ The buildings do not appear to be facing imminent development pressure, though some of the houses show signs of deferred maintenance. Local designation does not appear to be a major priority at this time. Interpretation ●​ Further research is required to determine potential interpretive efforts. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 25 6.1.6.​ Expansion of Washington-Willow National Register Historic District Left: Resource 52 is within the existing Washington-Willow Historic District. Right: Resource 196 is just outside the boundaries of the Washington-Willow District, and would very likely contribute if the district boundary were expanded. The Washington-Willow Historic District is a residential neighborhood that was originally listed on the NRHP in 1980 and amended to expand the boundary and period of significance in 1995. The nomination amendment extended the period of significance to 1945, meaning that most buildings constructed after 1945 were identified as “non-contributing.” In the 30 years since the amendment, several buildings within the district have since surpassed 50 years of age and would likely contribute to the district if it were updated. In addition, a number of properties adjacent to the district were excluded from it due to their age or integrity at the time of listing. If the district was amended, additional nearby properties in the neighborhood could likely be added. Recommendations Survey ●​ Intensive level survey of areas outside the existing Washington-Willow Historic District, as well as properties that were initially identified as non-contributing, may indicate properties that were left out of the original boundaries due to age or integrity, and may now contribute to an amended district. Note: Only the southern half of the Washington-Willow NRHD was included in the Phase 1 survey. Later phases of survey may determine additional adjacent areas that may warrant inclusion in an amended district. National Register of Historic Places ●​ Results of intensive level survey surrounding the existing Washington-Willow NRHD would likely yield potential for a boundary and period of significance amendment. (See Map 2, Appendix C for proposed intensive level survey in Phase 1 survey area). Local Designation ●​ The Washington-Willow Historic District appears to be facing moderate development pressure. Post Oak noted the demolition of several historic resources as well as insensitive alterations. If development pressure leads to continued loss of historic properties, the City might consider local Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 26  designation to preserve the neighborhood’s historic fabric. However, past petition efforts to create a local Washington-Willow Historic District have been unsuccessful due to a lack of property owner support. If pursued in the future, a smaller boundary focused on the highest number of significant resources, the highest number of resources with integrity, or the area most at risk to development pressures, might prove more successful than adoption of the full NRHD boundary. Interpretation ●​ The Washington-Willow Historic District is well researched and documented, and significant opportunities exist for interpretation in the form of interpretive signage, walking tours, etc. Interpretation could focus on individual homes, significant works of architecture, and Fayetteville’s early history, among other topics. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 27 6.1.7.​ Fayetteville Country Club The Fayetteville Country Club (Resource 467) is reportedly one of the oldest golf courses in the region and the property includes the original 1927 clubhouse and golf course. The course itself was designed by prominent golf course architect Perry Maxwell, though further research is required into the course's integrity. Additional research would also be required to understand the property's evolution over time, and there are numerous additional buildings and structures on the property that were not accessible at the time of survey that could contribute to or detract from the property’s significance. The residential neighborhood immediately north of the golf course may be potentially eligible in the future, but most houses were constructed after 1970 and were therefore outside the scope of the current Phase 1 survey. One house was documented despite its age due to potential architectural significance: The Nelms Residence (Resource 467) was designed by E. Fay Jones and constructed in 1987. Left: 1927 Fayetteville Country Club clubhouse. Right: Nelms Residence designed by E. Fay Jones. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 28 Recommendations Survey ●​ Intensive level survey of the Country Club and golf course would determine if any additional historic age buildings are extant and provide an assessment of the integrity of the buildings and golf course. ●​ Intensive level survey of the associated neighborhood north of the golf course may yield additional architect designed properties in addition to the Fay Jones designed Nelms residence. National Register of Historic Places ●​ Pending further research and integrity assessments, the Fayetteville Country Club could potentially be eligible under several National Register criteria. The property may be eligible under Criterion A: Entertainment and Recreation. Depending on integrity, the clubhouse may be eligible under Criterion C: Architecture, and the golf course may be eligible under Criterion C for Landscape Architecture. ●​ Further survey of the c. 1970s neighborhood may identify architecturally significant resources and potential for a district. Local Designation ●​ Neither the Fayetteville Country Club nor the associated neighborhood appear to be facing major development pressure and local designation is not likely a priority at this time. Interpretation ●​ Further research is required to determine potential interpretive efforts, though research would likely yield interpretive opportunities related to the history of golf in Fayetteville and Arkansas, as well as golf course designer Perry Maxwell. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 29 6.1.8.​ Fayetteville Pump Station Left: the Pump Station House Right: the caretaker’s cottage. The West Fork White River and the remains of the ca. 1889 dam are behind the buildings. The Pump Station property (Resource 458) includes a c. 1889 stone dam (not surveyed), the Pump Station house, and a caretaker’s cottage, located along the banks of the West Fork White River. An informational sign on the property indicates that the pump station and cottage were constructed ca. 1925, though further research is required to confirm these dates. Though not surveyed, the remains of a ca. 1889 dam are also on site. Formed by the dam, the West Fork reservoir was Fayetteville’s first municipal source of drinking water. The buildings are in rapidly deteriorating condition, as they are vacant and have not been effectively sealed from the elements. To protect the buildings from further decay, Post Oak recommends that the City of Fayetteville (the owner of the property), consider “mothballing”7 the buildings until a future use and funding can be secured for their full preservation. Recommendations Survey/Conditions Assessment ●​ An intensive level survey of the Pump Station property is necessary to determine any additional extant structures associated with the provision of municipal water. Performed in tandem or as a separate undertaking, a conditions assessment would determine necessary stabilization measures and current state of the buildings. National Register of Historic Places ●​ The Pump Station was identified as likely eligible by AHPP staff in 2010. It would likely be eligible under Criterion A for Community Planning and Development, pending further research. National Register listing may provide opportunities for grant or other funding mechanisms to ensure the property’s long-term preservation. Local Designation ●​ The Pump Station property is owned by the City of Fayetteville. 7 Sharon C. Park, “Preservation Brief 31: Mothballing Historic Buildings,” accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/upload/preservation-brief-31-mothballing-buildings.pdf. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 30 Interpretation ●​ A small informational sign is currently on site, but a much greater opportunity for interpretation exists related to Fayetteville’s early municipal development as well as the West Fork White River, which is an important natural resource. Lastly, Frank Pierce, the first early European American explorer to the Fayetteville area arrived at the West Fork in 1819. Though the exact location is unknown, the Pump Station property may be an ideal location for interpretation regarding Fayetteville’s early exploration. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 31 6.1.9.​ Crest Drive Residences Left: 608 S. Crest Drive (Resource 17), Right: 609 S. Crest Drive (Resource 16) Post Oak documented a grouping of potentially architecturally significant houses constructed between c. 1960-1975 along Crest Drive (Resources 4, 7, 11, 16, 17, 20, 21, 26, 30, 38, 39). The houses are relatively large and situated on spacious lots with designed landscape elements. A variety of styles are present, including ranches and revival styles. Further research is required to determine if any of the houses were architect designed, were part of a cohesive planned neighborhood, or whether the neighborhood has other potential historic associations with mid-century residential development in Fayetteville. Recommendations Intensive Level Survey ●​ Intensive level survey of Crest Drive, to include both the north and south sides. (The Phase 1 survey area only included the southern end of Crest Drive; the north side of the street may contain additional architecturally significant resources with a shared historic or architectural context.) ●​ See Map 3, Appendix C for recommended survey area. National Register of Historic Places ●​ Further research regarding the development of the neighborhood and any associated architects and landscape architects would determine the neighborhood’s eligibility as a NRHD and any associated areas of significance. The neighborhood may be eligible under Criterion C: Architecture as well as additional criteria pending further research. Local Designation ●​ Crest Drive does not appear to be facing major development pressure, though several houses did appear to have been substantially altered. If the neighborhood is deemed to be architecturally and/or historically significant, local designation would help to preserve its character. Interpretation ●​ Further research is required to determine potential interpretive efforts. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 32 6.1.10.​ Intensive Level Survey and Documentation of Historic Cemeteries Left: 19th century headstones in Combs Cemetery (also known as Combs Chapel Cemetery), Right: Hester Cemetery Eight historic cemeteries were located in the Phase 1 survey area (Resources 233, 236, 237, 402, 432, 434, 456, 457, see Table 5). Two cemeteries, the Confederate Cemetery (Resource 233) and the Walker Family Plot (WA1188), are listed on the NRHD. Intensive-level surveys of the remaining six cemeteries would determine if any of the cemeteries are eligible for listing on the NRHD and opportunities for preservation and interpretation. An additional significant cemetery was noted outside of the city limits but within the Fayetteville Planning Area: Baldwin (African American) Cemetery. Cemeteries to Prioritize Survey Efforts: ●​ East Mountain Cemetery - Resource 236: Originally owned by David Walker, a prominent Arkansas politician and early White settler of Fayetteville, the cemetery is the final resting place of untold numbers of Black individuals, including those who were enslaved by Walker or employed by his family after emancipation. Many of the grave markers are in deteriorated condition or have been vandalized. Preserve Arkansas included East Mountain Cemetery on its 2025 Most Endangered Places list, noting that the property “is in need of comprehensive mapping and marker and fencing restoration.”8 In order to preserve its history and aid in the interpretation of the site, East Mountain Cemetery would benefit from archaeological documentation, grave marker restoration, and historic interpretation in the form of signage or other alternatives. The cemetery may also be eligible for local, state, or National historic designation. ●​ Baldwin (African American) Cemetery -Resource FPA005 (located outside the city limits but within the Fayetteville Planning Area). 8 “2025 Most Endangered Places Press Release,” Preserve Arkansas, accessed December 4, 2025, https://preservearkansas.org/what-we-do/most-endangered-2025/. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 33 6.2.​ Preservation Focus Areas In addition to the potential historic districts outlined in the previous section, Post Oak also identified several common historic themes throughout the Phase 1 survey area that may help inform City planning efforts. PHASE 1 SURVEY: RECOMMENDED PRESERVATION FOCUS AREAS 6.2.1 Fayetteville’s Black Heritage 6.2.2 Architecturally Significant Resources Associated with the U of A School of Architecture 6.2.3 Ozark Vernacular Houses 6.2.4 Native Stone and “Giraffe Rock” Houses 6.2.1.​ Fayetteville’s Black Heritage The Phase 1 survey area included a historically Black residential community (See “Southeast Fayetteville” on Map 2, Appendix C) that was extensively researched and documented in Post Oak’s 2025 Historic Context Statement: “The Historic Black Community of Southeast Fayetteville.”9 As was documented in that report, many historic resources associated with the community have been lost, and the remaining resources are at high risk of loss due to their age and development pressure. Many buildings in Southeast Fayetteville’s historic Black community were assigned a Preservation Priority of “1” in this survey due to their scarcity and risk of loss due to development and lack of resources for maintenance. As of 2025, no historic resources related to Fayetteville’s Black Heritage are listed on the NRHD or are locally designated, although recent efforts have been made by the City and local stakeholders to improve recognition of these significant historic resources. The only resource associated with Fayetteville’s Black Heritage on the Arkansas Register of Historic Places is Oaks Cemetery. The City should prioritize preservation planning initiatives that facilitate the preservation and recognition of Black spaces in order to acknowledge the essential contributions of Fayetteville’s Black citizens. Specific recommendations related to Fayetteville’s Black Heritage are outlined in Section 6.1.1 9 Megan Warley McDonald, “The Historic Black Community of Southeast Fayetteville Historic Context Statement,” accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/4353/The-Historic-Black-Community-of-Southeas. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 34 6.2.2.​ Architecturally Significant Resources Associated with the U of A School of Architecture Left: 1650 E. Clark Street (Resource 12) designed by E. Fay Jones. Right: 1607 E. Anson Street (Resource 34) designed by James Lambeth. Fayetteville is home to a plethora of architect-designed buildings, thanks to the presence of the University of Arkansas (U of A) School of Architecture. U of A faculty designed untold numbers of buildings in Fayetteville, some of which were documented in the 2024 Stantec Report “Historic Context Statement, University Heights and Haskell Heights.”10 Among the significant U of A architects who designed buildings in Fayetteville were John G. Williams, E. Fay Jones, Warren Segraves, Ernie Jacks, James Lambeth, and E. Keith McPheeters, all of whom designed buildings in the Phase 1 survey area. Though several properties designed by U of A faculty and students are already listed on the NRHP, dozens of others may be eligible and several avenues are available for the recognition of these architecturally significant resources. Though this report only documents the architect-designed properties in the Phase 1 survey area (see Table 6 in Appendix D), the recommendations, below, would apply to the entire City of Fayetteville. Recommendations: ●​ Amend the current draft of the “Residences of University Heights, Haskell Heights, and Markham Hill, Fayetteville, Arkansas” MPDF to be a city-wide document that more broadly focuses on properties designed by University of Arkansas School of Architecture faculty and students. The current draft of the above mentioned MPDF is well researched and provides a thorough historic context of the historic and architectural significance of the U of A School of Architecture. It clearly demonstrates the impact its faculty and students had upon the built environment of Fayetteville. As it is currently written, however, the MPDF is restricted to three Fayetteville neighborhoods and could not be used to nominate properties outside of that geographical area. As the Phase 1 survey results demonstrate, there are dozens of additional high-style properties designed by U of A architects elsewhere in the city. If the MPDF were successfully adapted to be a city-wide document, it would greatly streamline the process of nominating properties associated with U of A Architecture faculty in Fayetteville. Feedback from the National Park Service (NPS) on the most recent draft of the MPDF indicates that such a strategy may be successful: 10 Stantec Consulting Services, “Historic Context Statement of University Heights and Haskell Heights,” accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/4344/Historic-Context-Statement-of-University/. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 35  Given the emphasis on resources designed by those associated with the University of Arkansas’ School of Architecture, we suggest exploring the possibility of a city- or statewide MPDF focused on this architectural theme. While we cannot guarantee a particular outcome, such an approach might provide a broader and more effective framework for evaluating significance.11 Were the City to pursue this approach, information related to the U of A School of Architecture and its associated architects would be retained. Contextual information about the University Heights, Haskell Heights, and Markham Hill neighborhoods would be streamlined to focus on the context related to the concentration of architect-designed resources in those communities. Section F of the MPDF nomination form would be edited to more generally describe the property types designed by U of A faculty and students (i.e. Single Family Residential, Multi-Family Residential, Commercial, Government, etc). Geographical data would be amended to include the Fayetteville city limits (or specific boundaries agreed upon by City, SHPO, and NPS). ●​ Utilize the “The Arkansas Designs of E. Fay Jones, Architect” MPDF to nominate significant properties designed by E. Fay Jones. Euine Fay Jones was a prolific Arkansas architect who studied under Frank Lloyd Wright. He served as the first dean of the University of Arkansas School of Architecture, where he was a long-term member of the faculty. Several properties (see Table 6) designed by E. Fay Jones were identified in the Phase 1 survey area and could potentially be nominated under this existing statewide MPDF if they meet the registration requirements.12 ●​ Establish NRHP historic districts in areas with concentrations of architecturally significant resources. Pending future phases of citywide survey efforts, NRHD nominations may be possible for resources in close geographic proximity to one another. If a citywide MPDF were approved, historic districts could be nominated under the MPDF cover to streamline the process. Post Oak identified one prominent cluster architecturally significant resources in the Phase 1 survey area just south of Rockwood Trail on Mount Sequoyah (see Map 2). Further research and survey efforts may indicate a potential National Register historic district; the north side of Rockwood Trail was outside the Phase 1 survey area and further phases may identify additional architect designed resources in the immediate area. 11 Michelle Diedriech, Comments, Evaluation/Return Sheet for Residences of University Heights, Haskell Heights, and Markham Hill, Fayetteville, Arkansas MPDF, July 17, 2025. 12 Cheryl Nichols, “The Arkansas Designs of E. Fay Jones, Architect,” National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form, National Park Service, accessed December 4, 2025, https://npgallery.nps.gov/NRHP/AssetDetail/e6d04895-858b-4ef6-9875-27279cb8f569. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 36 6.2.3.​ Ozark Vernacular Houses Among the most at-risk historic properties in the Phase 1 survey area are modest, vernacular, wood-frame residences representing some of Fayetteville’s oldest houses and earliest building traditions. According to former U of A professor Jean Sizemore in her 1994 book on Ozark houses: Time is running out for the ordinary and unpretentious houses that people in the rural Arkansas Ozarks built for themselves in the period from 1830 to 1930 and for our opportunities to observe them. Since the structures are overwhelmingly constructed of wood, they are deteriorating rapidly. Many are vacant; the simplicity and practicality that are their essence are also their undoing, for they are largely unappreciated both by the families whose forebears built them and by most preservationists who are accustomed to prizing buildings that are imposing and unusual, rather than ordinary.13 Left: Resource 251, a remarkably intact Single Pen residence. Right: Resource 291, a Double Pen residence. Both houses are located in the South Fayetteville neighborhood. Post Oak documented several increasingly rare Ozark vernacular houses during the course of survey (see Table 7 in Appendix D for examples). Though vernacular houses are inherently modest and typically exhibit no distinguishable style other than their building form, they are some of the oldest residential buildings in Fayetteville and represent the city’s late 19th and early 20th century settlement. Vernacular residences were often constructed with readily available materials, including stone foundations and wood or log walls. Some of the most common vernacular house types in Fayetteville include the single pen, double pen, gable front, side gable, and the gabled ell (“bent house”). Alterations and additions were common, as the small homes were added onto as families grew and time and finances allowed. In many cases, these alterations have acquired significance in their own right. Ozark vernacular houses were documented throughout the Phase 1 survey area, with the largest concentrations noted in the Southeast and South Fayetteville neighborhoods. Recommendations: ●​ Create a city-wide MPDF to streamline the listing of Fayetteville’s Ozark vernacular houses. A city-wide MPDF may be an avenue to streamline the process of nominating Ozark vernacular houses. If pursued, this strategy should begin with a discussion with AHPP, to include a discussion 13 Jean Sizemore, Ozark Vernacular Houses: A Study of Rural Homeplaces in the Arkansas Ozarks 1830-1930. (The University of Arkansas Press: 1994), 1. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 37  of specific properties that might be nominated under the cover document. If an MPDF is not pursued, exceptionally intact examples may be individually eligible for National Register designation or warrant local designation. 6.2.4.​ Rustic, Native Stone, and “Giraffe Rock” Houses Left: 201 E. Huntsville Road, a Giraffe Rock bungalow (Resource 248). Right: 514 S. Willow, a Giraffe Rock house with blue/black mortar (Resource 371) Arkansas and the greater Ozarks region is well known for its native stone buildings. In Fayetteville, most native stone buildings consist of a wood frame building clad with slabs of native stone mortared together, a building type alternatively known as slab rock, Ozark Mosaic, native stone, or giraffe rock. The term “giraffe rock” was most commonly used when the mortar was painted white or black (instead of trying to match the stone) which resulted in a pattern that resembled a giraffe’s coat pattern.14 The majority of Giraffe Rock houses were constructed in the 1930s, when the building technique was popularized in the Ozark region by the Missouri Agricultural Extension Service, which held workshops on what they called “cobblestone construction.”15 Recommendations: Create a city-wide MPDF to streamline the listing of Native Stone and/or Giraffe Rock buildings. Post Oak documented Native Stone and Giraffe Rock Houses throughout the Phase 1 survey area. Due to their dispersal throughout the City, an MPDF may provide the most efficient route to nominating these property types to the NRHD. A number of standalone Giraffe Rock buildings could be listed under the MPDF, and Post Oak also noted several small clusters of Giraffe Rock Houses (2-3 buildings) that could be listed as small districts under the cover document. An MPDF would develop a single overarching context for this construction technique, and both minimize redundancy and streamline the nomination process for these buildings. 14 Milton D. Rafferty, The Ozarks: Land and Life, (The University of Arkansas Press, 2001), 274. 15 Debbie Sheals, “Ozark Rock Masonry in Springfield, ca. 1910-1955,” The Society of Architectural Historians MIssouri Valley Chapter, Vol XIII, No. 2A, Summer 2006, 5. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 38 7.​ Bibliography/Relevant Resources “2025 Most Endangered Places Press Release.” Preserve Arkansas. Accessed December 4, 2025, https://preservearkansas.org/what-we-do/most-endangered-2025/. “A Window on the Past,” Texas Parks and Wildlife Archive, accessed December 4, 2025, https://tpwmagazine.com/archive/2019/jan/scout5_parknews/. City of Fayetteville. “Heritage and Historic Preservation Plan.” Accessed December 4, 2025. https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/4231/Heritage-and-Historic-Preservation-Plan. City of Fayetteville. “Historic Sites” storymap. Accessed December 4, 2025. https://maps.fayetteville-ar.gov/HistoricSites/. “Fayetteville Municipal Airport Hangar ‘White Hanger.’” Arkansas Heritage. Accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.arkansasheritage.com/arkansas-register/fayetteville-municipal-airport-hangar-white-ha ngar. Hogan, J.B. and Kirby L. Estes. “The Early History of Fayetteville Municipal Airport.” Flashback 60, No. 2, (Summer 2010). MacMillan, Owen. “Historical Looking Glass Unveiled in Ely Square.” The Chronicle-Telegram. Accessed December 4, 2025, https://chroniclet.com/news/440961/historical-looking-glass-unveiled-in-ely-square/ “Mann-Simons Site,” Historic Columbia, accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.historiccolumbia.org/tours/house-tours/mann-simons-site; McDonald, Megan Warley. “The Historic Black Community of Southeast Fayetteville Historic Context Statement.” Accessed December 4, 2025. https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/4353/The-Historic-Black-Community-of-Southeas “National Register Bulletin 24: Guidelines for Local Surveys: A Basis for Preservation Planning.” Accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/upload/NRB24-Complete_Part1t.pdf. Nichols, Cheryl. “The Arkansas Designs of E. Fay Jones, Architect” National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form. National Park Service. Accessed December 4, 2025, https://npgallery.nps.gov/NRHP/AssetDetail/e6d04895-858b-4ef6-9875-27279cb8f569. Park, Sharon C. “Preservation Brief 31: Mothballing Historic Buildings.” Accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/upload/preservation-brief-31-mothballing-buildings.pdf. Rafferty, Milton D. The Ozarks: Land and Life. The University of Arkansas Press, 2001. Sheals, Debbie. “Ozark Rock Masonry in Springfield, ca. 1910-1955,” The Society of Architectural Historians MIssouri Valley Chapter XIII, No. 2A, (Summer 2006). Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 39 Sizemore, Jean. Ozark Vernacular Houses: A Study of Rural Homeplaces in the Arkansas Ozarks 1830-1930. The University of Arkansas Press, 1994. “Smokey Hollow Commemoration.” Architect Magazine. Accessed December 4, 2025, https://www.architectmagazine.com/project-gallery/smokey-hollow-commemoration/. Stantec Consulting Services. “Historic Context Statement of University Heights and Haskell Heights.” Accessed December 4, 2025. https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/4344/Historic-Context-Statement-of-University. Stevens, Craig W. The E. Fay Jones Guidebook: His Surviving Built Work. Blurb.com, 2011. Fay Jones Collection, Special Collections, University of Arkansas Libraries. https://libraries.uark.edu/specialcollections/manuscripts/fayjones/. Washington County Historical Society. Flashback: Journal of the Washington County Historical Society. Collection Digitized on Archive.org. Accessed December 4, 2025. https://archive.org/search?query=flashback+arkansas. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 40 Appendix A. Types of Historic Designation This section discusses the criteria that the National Park Service and the AHPP use to determine NRHD eligibility. It also outlines the use of National Register Multiple Property Documentation Forms, and the process of local designation. A.​ National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) The National Register of Historic Places is a federally maintained list of historic resources that have been determined worthy of preservation for their historic significance and is administered by the National Park Service at the federal level and by the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program (AHPP) at the state level. Both entities provide guidance for identifying and evaluating historic resources. Properties that may be listed on the National Register include: ●​ Buildings ●​ Sites ●​ Structures ●​ Objects ●​ Districts a.​ Criteria for Evaluation NPS National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation defines criteria used to determine eligibility for listing and provides guidelines on how to apply the criteria. The AHPP Survey Procedures Manual provides additional information as well as instructions for completing the AHPP’s Arkansas Architectural Resources Survey Forms and evaluating Arkansas’s historic resources. Per NPS National Register Bulletin 15, historic resources are evaluated based on their: ● Area(s) of Significance ● Period of Significance ● Integrity The areas and periods of significance are typically established during the preparation of a historic context, which is then used to evaluate whether a property or district has significant associations within them. A property or district is then evaluated for its historic integrity, which determines if enough of the historic fabric associated with the property’s history is intact and legible enough that the property can continue to convey that association.16 16 National Park Service, National Register Bulletin #15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation, Revised 1995. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 41 b.​ Areas of Significance The National Park Service has four established criteria under which a resource may be eligible for listing in the NRHD. One or more criteria must be satisfied for eligibility. The resource must be a district, site, building, structure, or object that retains integrity and meets one or more of the following criteria: ●​ Criterion A: Resources associated with events that have made a significant contribution to broad patterns of our history; ●​ Criterion B: Resources associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; ●​ Criterion C: Resources that embody the distinctive period 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 significance and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; ●​ Criterion D: Resources that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important to prehistory or history.17 The area of significance is a broad historical theme associated with a property or area. Each historic resource must be associated with a historic context in order to be determined eligible for the NRHP or contributing to a potential district. Criterion D is typically utilized for below-ground and archeological resources. c.​ National Register Criterion Considerations In general, resources eligible for listing in the NRHP are at least 50 years old and do not include cemeteries, birthplaces or graves of historic figures, structures that have been moved from their original locations, reconstructed historic buildings, properties primarily commemorative in nature, and properties that have achieved significance within the past 50 years.[3] However, NPS has determined seven criterion considerations under which properties in the aforementioned list may qualify for the NRHP: Criterion Considerations A through G.18 d.​ Period of Significance Period of significance refers to the time period during which a property or district achieved its historic significance, and may be limited to a single year (for example the year a building nominated for its architectural significance was constructed) or a range of years and/or decades (for example a commercial historic district that has continuously been a hub of business since its establishment to present day). The period of significance typically ends at or prior to the 50-year historic cutoff at the time a property is listed, although in some cases may extend beyond that date. e.​ Seven Aspects of Integrity 17 National Park Service, National Register Bulletin #15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation, Revised 1995. 18 National Park Service, National Register Bulletin #15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation, Revised 1995. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 42 In addition to a property’s association with the identified area and period of significance, for a property to be eligible for designation in the NRHP it must also retain integrity. Integrity is the retention of a substantial number of historic features, materials, or qualities (known as character-defining features) from the period of significance that give a resource “the ability [to] convey its significance.” Character-defining features will vary depending on the property’s areas and periods of significance, for example a property significant for its design would likely need to retain a majority of its original architectural elements and materials, while a historic district associated with a working class community that frequently modified their homes over time may emphasize form, setting, or neighborhood layout. NPS identifies seven aspects of integrity to evaluate for NRHP eligibility: ● Location ● Design ● Setting ● Materials ● Workmanship ● Feeling ● Association Historic resources must retain integrity in all or most of the seven aspects. A property will typically possess at least several aspects of integrity, if not all, but it does not necessarily need to retain all seven aspects as long as it is still able to convey its specific historic significance. Specific aspects of integrity may be more important depending on the area of significance. For example, if a building is significant for its architecture, then a high level of integrity of design, materials, and workmanship is important. If a building is significant for its association with historic events or communities, integrity of association, feeling, location, and setting may be more important. A property should generally retain its character-defining features from its period of significance, which may emphasize physical attributes like materials, workmanship, or design, or may focus on the associative characteristics of feeling and association, depending on the property type. A property may have been altered over time as different materials became available and as economic conditions allowed, impacting integrity of design and materials. However, if the essential physical features and historic significance of the property is still readable, such as through massing or other physical qualities, it may retain eligibility. For example, on a residential property located within a historically economically disadvantaged area, the use of inexpensive replacement materials on exterior features should not automatically reduce that property’s historic integrity to render it ineligible; rather, it may reflect the economic constraints faced by working class or low-income property owners and residents who endured systemic economic discrimination. Such alterations—often made with affordability and durability in mind—can serve as tangible evidence of long-term socio-economic inequality within a community. As a result, while these alterations may on the surface impact integrity of materials, design, or workmanship, these alterations should not automatically disqualify a property from conveying its historic significance, particularly under Criteria A or B.19 19 For more information, see “Architecture 101 – The Architecture of Arizona’s Working Class Communities,” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=385Dw_YXOac&ab_channel=ArizonaHistoric Preservation (for the discussion of integrity, forward to 36:54 of the video).; National Council on Public History, “Repairing National Register Nominations: Underrepresented communities and integrity,” accessed January 30, 2024, https://ncph.org/history-at-work/repairing- national-register-nominations-underrepresented-communities-and-integrity/. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 43 f.​ National Register Historic Districts Historic districts are areas with concentrations of historic resources that share a common area(s) of significance, period of significance, and that include a substantial number of resources that retain sufficient integrity to convey the identified area(s) and period of significance. Properties in a district may be contributing or non-contributing to the area and period of significance. For a historic district to be eligible for listing on the NRHP, 50 percent or more of the properties within the nominated boundary need to contribute to the district’s significance. 20 B.​ National Register Multiple Property Documentation Form (MPDF) A National Register Multiple Property Documentation Form (MPDF) is a cover document that establishes the historic context and significance for thematically related historic properties with a shared association with trends or patterns of history. An MPDF organizes information about related properties and defines National Register registration requirements tailored to specific types of properties, for example, properties related to the development of the railroad industry in a particular state or region, properties associated with or designed by a specific architect or in a shared architectural style, or properties associated with the history of a specific ethnic group in a state, region, or city, among others. An MPDF includes broad historic contexts that outline the historical patterns and trends that led to the creation of the property types that are eligible for listing under the MPDF. An MPDF enables listing of historic properties that share related historical associations or physical characteristics, regardless of geographic distance, and streamlines the process of National Register listing for thematically related property types. In theory, this allows for shorter and more efficient National Register nominations. C.​ Local Historic District Designation According to the State of Arkansas, per State Act 484, amended in 1965 by State Act 170 (§14-172-207), municipalities can designate local historic districts which are overseen by historic district commissions (HDCs). However, for a municipality to designate a local district it must either: a) already be listed in the NRHP; or, b) have the support of more than 50 percent of owners within the proposed district. Arkansas state law does not allow local designation of individual resources, however they may be listed in the Arkansas Register of Historic Places (ARHP), a state-level inventory of historic sites. 21 In Fayetteville, the City has a Historic Preservation Ordinance (Ordinance 2509, as revised, and City of Fayetteville Code 33.226), which created provisions for establishing an HDC. The City also has the ability to establish design guidelines for locally designated historic districts; currently there are design guidelines for the locally designated White Hangar historic district. The Fayetteville HDC, per Ordinance 2509, has design review authority over exterior alterations to properties within locally designated historic districts, and owners must submit Certificates of Appropriateness (COAs) that demonstrate that changes are in 20 National Park Service, National Register Bulletin #15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation, Revised 1995. 21 City of Fayetteville. “Heritage and Historic Preservation Plan.” Accessed December 4, 2025. https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/4231/Heritage-and-Historic-Preservation-Plan Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 44 keeping with the design guidelines in order to proceed with applications for building permits.22 The City has also established design guidelines for the NRHP-listed Washington-Willow NRHD, however because the district is not locally designated, these guidelines are not legally enforceable by the HDC. In January 2026, Fayetteville’s City Council voted to approve the creation of the Oak Grove Historic District. Consisting primarily of stone and craftsman houses, Oak Grove is the first residential local historic district in Fayetteville. A petition for a local historic district in Southeast Fayetteville’s historic Black community was recently certified by the city and review is underway. The City of Fayetteville has succinctly outlined the benefits of local historic designation on the City’s Historic Preservation FAQ page: A benefit of owning property in a local historic district is there are requirements in place that manage change to properties, so that any new or additional development has to fit with the existing neighborhood, according to the adopted design standards. It creates some certainty. There is often a public hearing for proposed changes so the neighborhood can be informed on what is being proposed and can comment on new development. The responsibility to comply with the design standards and get the required approvals is also applied to the neighborhood, with the expectation that exterior changes, additions and new construction will meet the adopted standards. When you have put a lot of investment into a historic property, this is a way to ensure that investment can be maintained after the property changes owners.23 22 City of Fayetteville. “Heritage and Historic Preservation Plan.” Accessed December 4, 2025. https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/4231/Heritage-and-Historic-Preservation-Plan 23 City of Fayetteville. “FAQ’s,” Accessed December 15, 2025, https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/FAQ.aspx?QID=930 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 45  Appendix B. Previously Designated Historic Properties Table 1. Previously Designated Historic Resources within the Phase 1 Survey Area # NAME ADDRESS TYPE OF AREA(S) OF PERIOD OF DESIGNATION SIGNIFICANCE SIGNIFICANCE 96 Clack House 725 E. Dogwood NRHP Architecture 1954-1956 Lane 233 Fayetteville Confederate Rock St., NRHP Military 1873-c.1910 Cemetery approximately 800 feet N of jct. with Willow Ave. 482 Fayetteville Fire Department 4140 S. School Ave NRHP Community 1963-1965 Fire Station # 3 Planning and Development; Politics/Governm ent; Architecture 483 Fayetteville Municipal Airport 4390 S. School Ave ARHP; Local Architecture 1943-4 Hangar “White Hangar” Designation 451 Goff Farm Road Stone Bridge Goff Farm Road NRHP Engineering; C. 1860-1960 Transportation 203 Happy Hollow Farm 1999 E. Citrine Link NRHP (Criterion B for C. 1909-1923 association with (inferred) writer WIlliam Rheen Lighton inferred) 109 Headquarters House 118 East Dickson NRHP Unclear (1971 Street nomination) FPA Henry Madison Wood 3300 Leo Ammons ARHP Architecture C. 1870 004 Farmstead Road 227 Lynn Shelton American 28 South College NRHP Architecture; 1939-1945 Legion Post No. 27 Ave Social History 191 Mount Sequoyah Cottages 808 and 810 East NRHD Entertainment/ C. 1920-1962 Skyline Drive Recreation 163/ Mount Sequoyah Historic 150 NW Skyline NRHD Religion C. 1922-1972 187 District Drive 33 Noll, WIllis, Residence 531 N. Sequoyah NRHP Architecture 1950 Drive Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 46 Table 1. Previously Designated Historic Resources within the Phase 1 Survey Area # NAME ADDRESS TYPE OF AREA(S) OF PERIOD OF DESIGNATION SIGNIFICANCE SIGNIFICANCE 66 Patrick, Dr. James, House 370 North Williams NRHP Architecture 1965-1966 Drive 150 Segraves, Warren, House 217 North Oklahoma NRHP Architecture 1959 Way 70 Wade-Heerwagen House 338 Washington Ave NRHP Architecture unclear (inferred) 237 Walker Family Plot 514 E. Rock Street NRHP Exploration/Settl 1838-1900 ement; Politics/Governm ent; Social History 277 Walker-Knerr-Williams House Knerr Road NRHP Architecture 1872 (inferred) 218 Washington County College Ave. and E. NRHP Community 1904-1922 Courthouse Center St. Planning and (inferred) Development; Politics/Governm ent; Architecture 229 Washington County Jail College and County NRHP Politics/Governm 1896 Aves. ent; Architecture (multi Washington-Willow Historic See Map 2 NRHD Architecture; 1853-1930 ple) District Community Planning; Economics; Education; Law 137 Wilson-Pittman- 405 E. Dickson St. NRHP Architecture C. 1866, Campbell-Gregory House 1870-1 Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 47 Appendix C. Maps Map 1. Overview map showing Fayetteville city Boundaries (dark blue), the Phase 1 Historic Resources Windshield Boundary including the City Planning area (red), and the Phase 1 boundary within city limits (light blue). Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 48 Map 2. Potential historic districts in the Phase 1 survey area. Potential districts requiring further survey are highlighted in purple. Existing NRHD districts are highlighted in orange. Potential boundary expansions for the Washington-Willow NRHD are highlighted in blue. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 49 Map 3. Potential historic districts in the Phase 1 survey area. Potential districts requiring further survey are highlighted in purple. Existing NRHD districts are highlighted in orange. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 50 Map 4. Potential Nonnamaker Drive Historic District, highlighted in purple. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 51 Map 5. Potential Drake Field Historic District. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 52 Appendix D. Tables Table 5: Historic Cemeteries In Phase 1 Survey Area # Cemetery Name Important Notes Address/Parcel 237 Walker Family Plot (NRHP Listed) 765-12817-100 233 Confederate (NRHP Listed) 514 E Rock Street Cemetery 765-12762-000 236 East Mountain Several marked graves of early Black 765-12817-001; Cemetery residents of Fayetteville, most of whom were 765-12817-102; associated with the family of David Walker. 765-12817-100 Many of the grave markers are damaged or in deteriorated condition and there is currently no interpretation in place. 402 Buckner Cemetery More research is required to determine age of 765-02313-100 burials and potential significance. 457 Combs Cemetery/ Though more research is required, this 765-15276-000 Combs Chapel appears to be a very old cemetery, with Cemetery burials dating as early as the mid-1800s. A historic metal sign is disassembled and stored on site. 456 Leeper Cemetery This is a small, enclosed plot containing the E Leeper Drive graves of the Leeper family, who were early 765-19962-100 Fayetteville settlers. The site was altered due to a nearby development and may not retain sufficient integrity for listing. 432 Hester Cemetery Oldest grave is Thomas A Hester, d. 1866 5595 E Huntsville Rd 001-10672-000 434 Holt Cemetery Sign on site says "Established 1855." 1100 Highbush Ave 765-13151-100 FPA Baldwin (African African American Cemetery. A recently S. Mally Wagnon Rd 005 American) Cemetery erected sign indicates that it was created c. 523-10011-000 1834, though further research is required. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 53  Table 6. List of Known Properties Designed by U of A Architects Within Phase 1 Survey Area # Property Name/Address Architect Year of Construction 66 Dr. James Patrick House (NRHP listed), 370 N WIlliams Drive Ernie Jacks 1966 96 Clack House (NRHP listed), 725 E Dogwood Lane John WIlliams 1954 23 510 N Assembly Dr E. Fay Jones c. 1950 14 William H. Pryor House, 1008 E Trust Street E. Fay Jones c. 1945 177 H.R. Snow House, 828 E Skyline Drive E. Fay Jones c. 1961 12 Sequoyah Project, 1650 E Clark Street E. Fay Jones 1956 1 Carl and Jan Collier House, 2165 Manor Drive E. Fay Jones c. 1969 18 Alma Goetsh and Katherine Winckler House, 1619 E Clark E. Fay Jones c. 1967 Street 467 2933 S College Drive E. Fay Jones 1987 460 The Rockwood Club, 380 W. 24th Street E. Fay Jones** 1947 117 SWEPCO Office, 300 N College Avenue Warren Segraves 1968 150 Warren Segraves House (NRHP listed), 217 N Oklahoma Way Warren Segraves 1959 400 Continuing Education Center, 612 S College Avenue Warren Segraves 1978 135 Fulbright Building Warren Segraves 1962 54 Segraves Building Warren Segraves c. 1970 27 1515 Clark Street James Lambeth c. 1970 24 Lambeth House, 1591 Clark Street James Lambeth c. 1971 34 1607 E Anson Street James Lambeth c. 1973 36 1585 E Anson Street James Lambeth c. 1980 485 Federal Aviation Administration Building at Drake Field E. Keith McPheeters c. 1962 484 Drake Field Terminal Building E. Keith McPheeters c. 1962 304 Happy Hollow Elementary School Gayland Witherspoon 1972 and Murray Smart Jr. **Jones’ involvement with the Rockwood Club may have been minimal Note: The Willis Noll House (Resource 33, listed on the NRHP) was designed by Fayetteville native, Edward Durrell Stone. Though Stone briefly attended U of A and was later a “visiting critic” he was not a member of the U of A faculty. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 54  Table 7: Representative Examples of Ozark Vernacular Houses in Phase 1 Survey Area # Address and Type Photo 251 235 S. East Avenue Single Pen 219 213 E. Center Street Single Pen Despite rear addition, replacement siding, and non-historic porch, the single pen form is still intact. This house appears to be depicted on an 1886 photograph taken from Mount Sequoyah, and is located in the historically Black neighborhood just southeast of downtown. 291 316 S. Block Avenue Double Pen 315 405 S. Locust Avenue Double Pen Note: Demolition permit recently issued (DEMO-2025-0127) 225 256 E. Mountain Street Gable Front Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 55  Table 7: Representative Examples of Ozark Vernacular Houses in Phase 1 Survey Area # Address and Type Photo 250 234 S. Willow Avenue Gable Front Note: Rezoning request approved; redevelopment is likely in near future (RZN-2025-045) 261 241 E. Huntsville Road Side Gable/Folk Victorian (Off centered door may indicate that it was originally been a Double Pen) 398 3398 E. Huntsville Road Double Pen Log House Joseph Lee and Elizabeth Kirkham Fritz House. Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 56  Table 8: Representative Examples of Native Stone and Giraffe Rock Houses in Phase 1 Survey Area # Address and Type Photo 248 201 E. Huntsville Road Giraffe Rock bungalow 294 338 S. Combs Avenue Giraffe Rock Note: Rezoning request approved; redevelopment is likely in near future (RZN-2025-038) 371 514 S. Willow Avenue Giraffe Rock with Blue/Black mortar Note: Rezoning request approved; redevelopment is likely in near future (RZN-2023-0005) 397 17 and 19 W. Martin Luther King Jr. Drive 395 Two nearly identical Giraffe Rock houses with contrasting white brick window and door surrounds. 13 700 N. Anna Place Ca. 1913 Native Stone residence and outbuildings Fayetteville Citywide Historic Resources Windshield Level Survey - Phase 1​ 57 TO: Historic District Commission FROM: Kylee Cole, Long Range & Preservation Planner MEETING DATE: March 12, 2026 SUBJECT: Proposed Southeast Fayetteville Local Historic District Background: On December 31, 2025, the City Clerk-Treasurer’s Office verified a resident-submitted a petition office to propose a local historic district referred to as “Spout Spring Historic District”. The Clerk- Treasurer’s office verified seventy-three (73) signatures out of the total of one-hundred forty- three (143) property owners within the proposed boundary. Their final calculation shows that 51% of property owners within the proposed district signed the petition. The required percentage of signatures according to the Arkansas Historic Districts Act is 51%. The creation of local historic districts is supported by four elements of the City’s Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan adopted in July 2023: Heritage and Historic Preservation Master Plan Relevant Goals and Action Items 1.9 Plan Review Include historic preservation staff in review of proposed major projects and zoning changes to determine impacts to historic resources. 1.10 Demolition Pass an ordinance to allow for the review of proposed demolitions Ordinance for resources forty-five years or older. Staff to evaluate each property for significance. Work with property owner to discourage demolition. Reviews should be taken up by HDC as needed. 3.7 Local Historic Poll NRHP historic district property owners to gauge interest in District becoming a local historic district. Based on poll results, prioritize Designation facilitation of local historic district designation. 4.9 Community Publish information about historic preservation reviews and Engagement: demolitions of historic properties to increase transparency. Transparency Boundary as Submitted: The proposed boundary encompasses two areas located southeast of downtown. The northern section includes 95 parcels roughly bounded by East Spring Street, North Walnut Avenue, East Huntsville Road, and North Washington Avenue. The southern section includes 44 parcels roughly bounded by South Willow Avenue, East 7th Street, South College Avenue., and East South Street/East Huntsville Road. More specifically, the proposed boundaries are shown in Figure 1. Figure 1. Proposed Local Historic District Boundary as Submitted by Petitioners Number of Resources within Boundary as Submitted: Preservation Priority Number of Properties 1-High 26 2-Moderate 25 3-Low 12 History: Forthcoming - Since the petition was submitted with the intent of creating a local historic district in the context of Black historic occupation, much of this section of the report will speak to that history and use information from the Historic Black Community of Southeast Fayetteville Historic Context Statement. Neighborhood Architecture Forthcoming. Discussion: Much of the proposed district is highly significant for its association with Black property ownership from emancipation to present (Criterion A). To date around 40 properties (buildings and vacant parcels) have been confirmed as historically or presently Black-owned. Currently, staff is continuing to review detailed chain of title for each property including vacant or undeveloped properties to understand the full extent of the historic Black neighborhood in and around the proposed boundary. Many other properties were likely Black-owned and additional time and research is needed to fully capture this history. Figure 2. Black-Owned Properties Recommendation: Staff requires additional time to complete research and formulate recommendations related to the proposed local historic district. Additional time will also allow for two public meetings scheduled for March 18th and April 12th. Properties: All photos from Google Streetview (March 2025) unless otherwise noted. Address Photo 216 E. Center Date of Construction: c.1910 Style/Form: Single Pen Association(s): Potentially one of the oldest buildings in the area depicted on early aerial photos. Charles Means, Laquita Perry Means Jake & Velma Perry, Esora Savage, Frank Whitney. Contributing to Local Historic T District: Y Preservation Priority: High 217 E. Center Date of Construction: c.1965 Style/Form: Split Level F A Association(s): Jake & Velma Perry. Contributing to Local Historic District: Y R Preservation Priority: High 323 E. Center D Date of Construction: c.1940 Style/Form: Gable Front Association(s): Lafayette & Dorothy Barker. Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: High 369 E. Center Date of Construction: c.1889 Style/Form: Gabled Ell/”Bent House” Association(s): Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: Low 377 E. Center Date of Construction: c.1999 Contributing to Local Historic District: N Preservation Priority: N/A 404 E. Center F T A Date of Construction: c.1951 Style/Form: Gabled Ell/”Bent House” Association(s): Preston & R Isabelle Lackey Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: High 410 E. Center D Date of Construction: c.1920 Style/Form: Gabled Ell/”Bent House” Association(s): Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: High 411 E. Center Date of Construction: c.1965 Style/Form: Side Gable Association(s): Romey & Thelma Thomason, Lois Dean Bryant. Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: Moderate 412 E. Center Date of Construction: c.1920 Style/Form: Front Gable Association(s): Home of Labe and Ballie Joiner, prominent early 20th century Black residents. On 1920 aerial. Jessie T Bryant. Contributing to Local Historic District: Y F Preservation Priority: High 417 E. Center Date of Construction: c.1955 Style/Form: Minimal Traditional Association(s): Home of significant local Black residents A Louis Bryant and Jessie Carr Bryant. Contributing to Local Historic District: Y R D Preservation Priority: High 600 S. College Date of Construction: 1932 Style/Form: Art Deco/Streamline Modern Association(s): Jefferson School was constructed by the WPA as a segregated school for white children and was integrated in 1965 following the closure of the Lincoln School. Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: High 612 S. College Date of Construction: c. 1978 Style/Form: Mid-Century Modern Association(s): Designed by Warren Seagraves Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: Moderate 322 S. Combs Date of Construction: c.1915 Style/Form: Gabled Ell/ “Bent House Association(s): White, working T class ownership history. Contributing to Local Historic District: Y F Preservation Priority: Moderate 335 S. Combs Date of Construction: 2023 A Style/Form: N/A Association(s): N/A Contributing to Local Historic District: N R Preservation Priority: N/A 338 S. Combs D Date of Construction: c. 1930 Style/Form: Ozark Giraffe Association(s): White, working- class ownership history. Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: Moderate 342 S. Combs Date of Construction: c. 1930 Style/Form: Ozark Giraffe Association(s): White, working- class ownership history. Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: Moderate 339 S. Combs Date of Construction: c. 1935 Style/Form: Gable Front Association(s): White, working- T class ownership history. Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: Moderate 344 S. Combs F A Date of Construction: c. 1905 Style/Form: Queen Anne Cottage Association(s): Older than most R houses in the area and higher style. White ownership history. Contributing to Local Historic District: Y D Preservation Priority: High 350 S. Combs Date of Construction: c.1975 Style/Form: Mid-Century Modern Association(s): Historically Black church founded in 1960s. Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: Moderate 209 E. MLK Date of Construction: c.1944 Style/Form: Side Gable Association(s): Zetta Ollison Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: Moderate 502 E. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. Date of Construction: c. 1955 Style/Form: Gabled Ell/”Bent House Association(s): Mary Geraldine T Wilks Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: Moderate 156 E. Meadow F A Date of Construction: c.1905 Style/Form: Gable Front Association(s): Hattie Bass, Josie Flowers, Gregory Flowers. R Contributing to Local Historic District: N Preservation Priority: Low D 159 E. Meadow Date of Construction: c.1925 Style/Form: Gable Front Association(s): Hayden & Lettie Hall, Dorothy Buchanan. Contributing to Local Historic District: N Preservation Priority: Low 160 E. Meadow Date of Construction: c.1940 Style/Form: Double Pen Association(s): Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: High 171 E. Meadow Date of Construction: c.1915 Style/Form: Gable Front Association(s): Helen Wilks, T Hattie Bass, Roosevelt Willis, Eddie Willis Jr., Cloteen Tucker Contributing to Local Historic F District: Y Preservation Priority: High 165 E. Meadow Date of Construction: c.1915 A R Style/Form: Gable Front Association(s): Henry & Cloteen Tucker Contributing to Local Historic D District: Y Preservation Priority: High 161 E. Meadow Date of Construction: c.1915 Style/Form: Gable Front Association(s): James & Mary Jane Logan Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: High 204 E. Meadow Date of Construction: c.1915 Style/Form: Gable Front Association(s): Hattie Bass, Elizabeth Jackson, Charles Ruffin, Ben Walton, Irene Walton Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: High 365 E. Meadow Date of Construction: c.1995 Contributing to Local Historic District: N Preservation Priority: N/A F T 220 S. Mill Date of Construction: c.1915 Style/Form: Gable Front A R Association(s): Historic white working class ownership. Currently owned by Mary Carr. Contributing to Local Historic D District: Y Preservation Priority: High 222 S. Mill Date of Construction: c.1915 Style/Form: Gable Front Association(s): White, working- class ownership history. Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: High 194 E. Mountain Date of Construction: 2025 Style/Form: N/A Contributing to Local Historic District: N Preservation Priority: N/A 256 E. Mountain Date of Construction: c.1915 Style/Form: Gable Front T Association(s): Ivy & Alfred Hunter, Will York, Tom & Sallie Barnes, JD & Clara Barnes, F Bobby & Sherry Barker. Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: High A R 267 E. Mountain Date of Construction: c.1963 Style/Form: Ranch Association(s): Charlie York, D David Dart, Arnold & Alice Blackburn, Elva Blackburn. Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: High 120 E. Rock Date of Construction: c.1915 Style/Form: Bungalow Association(s): White working- class ownership history. Contributing to Local Historic District: N Preservation Priority: Low 130 E. Rock Date of Construction: c.1925 Style/Form: Gable Front Association(s): Not associated with historic Black ownership, but relatively intact gable residence where many historic age homes have been lost. Contributing to Local Historic District: N Preservation Priority: Low 149 E. Rock Date of Construction: c.1941 T Style/Form: Gable Front Association(s): Not associated with historic Black ownership. F Contributing to Local Historic District: N Preservation Priority: Low 218 E. Rock Date of Construction: c.1965 Style/Form: Side Gable A R Association(s): Not associated with historic Black ownership. Contributing to Local Historic District: N D Preservation Priority: Low 240 E. Rock Date of Construction: c.1965/2025 Association(s): Yvonne Richardson Community Center Contributing to Local Historic District: N Preservation Priority: N/A 281 E. Rock Date of Construction: 2016 Contributing to Local Historic District: N Preservation Priority: N/A 106 N. Washington Date of Construction: c.1959 Style/Form: Minimal Traditional Association(s): Osborn Cox, T Maggie McDowell, Virginia Cravens. Contributing to Local Historic District: Y F Preservation Priority: High 115 N. Washington Date of Construction: c.1940 Style/Form: Minimal Traditional Association(s): Georgia A R Garrison, Erie Davis Stanton, William & Willie Deffebaugh. Contributing to Local Historic District: Y D Preservation Priority: High 116 N. Washington Date of Construction: c.1975 Style/Form: Minimal Traditional Association(s): Previously owned by Preston Lackey, one of the original seven students to integrate Fayetteville High School in 1954. Will York, Rufus & Rosa Torrence, Amos & Elnora Jackson, Preston & Isabell Lackey. Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: High 118 N. Washington Date of Construction: c.1940 Style/Form: Minimal Traditional Association(s): Henry Jordan, Leo Watson, Bennie Gene Watson. Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: High 139 S. Washington Date of Construction: c.1905 Style/Form: Bungalow T Association(s): Contributing to Local Historic District: Y F Preservation Priority: Moderate 309 S. Washington A Date of Construction: c. 1930 Style/Form: Bungalow Association(s): White, working- class ownership history. R Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: Moderate 313 S. Washington Date of Construction: 2019 D Contributing to Local Historic District: N Preservation Priority: N/A 318 S. Washington Date of Construction: c. 1933 Style/Form: Bungalow Association(s): White, working- class ownership history. Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: Moderate 319 S. Washington Date of Construction: c. 1925 Style/Form: Bungalow Association(s): White, working-class ownership history. Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: Moderate 321 S. Washington Date of Construction: c. 2021 Contributing to Local Historic District: N Preservation Priority: N/A F T A R 325 S. Washington D Date of Construction: c. 1930 Style/Form: Bungalow Association(s): White, working- class ownership history. Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: Moderate 411 S. Washington Date of Construction: c. 1940 Style/Form: Gabled Ell/”Bent House” Association(s): White, working- class ownership history. Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: Moderate 437 S. Washington Date of Construction: 2016 Association(s): Contributing to Local Historic District: N Preservation Priority: N/A 439 S. Washington Date of Construction: c.1915 F T A Style/Form: Side Gable Association(s): Cashmere Funkhouser Contributing to Local Historic R District: Y Preservation Priority: Moderate 517 S. Washington Date of Construction: 2002 Style/Form: Association(s): D Contributing to Local Historic District: N Preservation Priority: N/A 526 S. Washington Date of Construction: 2000 Style/Form: Contributing to Local Historic District: N Preservation Priority: N/A 531 S. Washington Ave. Date of Construction: c. 1925 Style/Form: Ozark Giraffe Association(s): Home of Ralph "Buddy" Hayes (local jazz musician) during the 1940s- 1970s. Sebel Tuttle. Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: High 532 S. Washington Date of Construction: c.1940 Style/Form: Minimal Traditional Association(s): Chrystal Funkhouser, Carolyn Funkhouser Bradford. T Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: Moderate 535 S. Washington Date of Construction: c.1915 Style/Form: Minimal Traditional F A Association(s): Rosie Parker Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: Moderate R 115 S. Washington D Date of Construction: c.1980s Style/Form: Contemporary Association(s): St. James Baptist Church. Replaced original 1927 church destroyed by fire in 1944. Contributing to Local Historic District: N Preservation Priority: N/A 7 N. Willow Date of Construction: c.1915 Style/Form: Double Pen Association(s): Parsonage of St. James UMC Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: Moderate 7 N. Willow Date of Construction: c.1884 Association(s): St. James UMC T Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: High F A R 14 N. Willow D Date of Construction: c.1910 Style/Form: Gable Front Association(s): Marden Carr, Charlotte Hayes, Kirk & Audrey Deffebaugh Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: High Photo by Post Oak Preservation Solutions 105 N. Willow Date of Construction: c.1923 Style/Form: Rustic Association(s): Former Webb’s Café (in the Negro Motorist’s Green Book) Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: High 106 N. Willow Date of Construction: c.1950 Style/Form: Ranch Association(s): Ozark Chapter #295 Order of the Eastern Star, Hill City Lodge #347, Elizabeth T Property as it appeared in 2023 (Google Streetview). F A Buchanan, Tommie Flowers Davis. Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Photo by Post Oak Preservation Solutions R Preservation Priority: High D 127 N. Willow Date of Construction: c.1965 Style/Form: Minimal Traditional Association(s): Amanda Baylor Tuttle, Willie C. & Hazel Buchanan Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: High Photo by Post Oak Preservation Solutions 119 S. Willow Date of Construction: c.1925 Style/Form: Gable Front T Association(s): Ralph & Mary Rogers Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: High F A 218 S. Willow Date of Construction: 1994 Style/Form: R D Association(s): Contributing to Local Historic District: N Preservation Priority: N/A 234 S. Willow Date of Construction: c.1905 Style/Form: Gable Front Association(s): Theopolis Hall Jr, Clara Hall, Loretta Blackburn Carr, Jack Carr Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: Moderate 437 S. Willow Date of Construction: c.1938 Style/Form: Gabled Ell/”Bent House” T Association(s): Alice Dennis, Jack Carr, Robert & Daisy Rucker, Henry & Marie Childress Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: Moderate F A 440 S. Willow Date of Construction: c.1930 Style/Form: Ozark Giraffe Association(s): White, working-class R ownership. Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: High 506 S. Willow Date of Construction: c.1930 Style/Form: Ozark Giraffe Association(s): Lafayette & Dorothy D Barker Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: High 514 S. Willow Date of Construction: c.1930 Style/Form: Ozark Giraffe Association(s): Bobby & Roberta Morgan Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: High 525 S. Willow Date of Construction: 1997 Contributing to Local Historic District: N Preservation Priority: N/A 619 S. Willow Date of Construction: c.1960 Style/Form: Front Gable Association(s): Clarence & Margaret F T A Smith Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: Moderate 588 S. Willow R D Date of Construction: 2026 Contributing to Local Historic District: N Preservation Priority: N/A Notes: Front building in photo. 576 S. Willow Date of Construction: 2026 Contributing to Local Historic District: N Preservation Priority: N/A Notes: Rear building in photo. Properties to Consider for Inclusion: Oaks Cemetery (PID: 765-14935-010) Date: c. 1867-1963 Associations: Only purposefully planned Black cemetery in Fayetteville. Listed in ARHP in 2014.1 T Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: High F Photo Source: Encyclopedia of Arkansas, “Oaks Cemetery,” 2021. A East Mountain Cemetery (PID: 765- 12817-000, 765-12817-001, 765-12817- 002) Date: c.1840-1961 R Association(s): Includes the burials of Black individuals who were enslaved and/or employed by the David Walker family along with burials of other white D Fayetteville families. The property was included on Preserve Arkansas’s 2025 Most Endangered Places List.2 Contributing to Local Historic District: Y Preservation Priority: High Attachments: • Excerpt from Arkansas Historic Districts Act • City Clerk Treasurer Verification Letter 1 J.B. Hogan, “Oaks Cemetery,” Encyclopedia of Arkansas, June 16, 2023, accessed February 3, 2026, https://encyclopediaofarkansas.net/entries/oaks-cemetery-16676/. 2 City of Fayetteville, Historic Context Statement – The Historic Black Community of Southeast Fayetteville, 15. Preserve Arkansas, “2025 Most Endangered Places,” September 15, 2025, accessed February 3, 2026, https://preservearkansas.org/what-we-do/most-endangered-2025/.  F T A R D  F T A R D TO: Historic District Commission FROM: Kylee Cole, Long Range & Preservation Planner MEETING DATE: March 12, 2026 SUBJECT: Proposed Amendment to Oak Grove Local Historic District Background: On February 3, 2026 property owners at 515 N. Park Avenue submitted a written request for inclusion in the Oak Grove Historic District. This proposed addition includes property to the west of the current boundary along Park Avenue. This property was not included within the original boundary as proposed by petitioners in the initial Oak Grove Historic District and the property owner requests to be included. The creation of local historic districts is supported by four elements of the City’s Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan adopted in July 2023: Heritage and Historic Preservation Master Plan Relevant Goals and Action Items 1.9 Plan Review Include historic preservation staff in review of proposed major projects and zoning changes to determine impacts to historic resources. 1.10 Demolition Pass an ordinance to allow for the review of proposed demolitions Ordinance for resources forty-five years or older. Staff to evaluate each property for significance. Work with property owner to discourage demolition. Reviews should be taken up by HDC as needed. 3.7 Local Historic Poll NRHP historic district property owners to gauge interest in District becoming a local historic district. Based on poll results, prioritize Designation facilitation of local historic district designation. 4.9 Community Publish information about historic preservation reviews and Engagement: demolitions of historic properties to increase transparency. Transparency Boundary: The proposed amendment would modify the district’s western boundary along North Park Avenue to encompass the subject property. More specifically, the boundaries are shown in Figure 1. Figure 1. Proposed Boundary Amendment History: The Oak Grove Historic District, located just north of Fayetteville’s historic commercial downtown, extends roughly between Highland Avenue on the east, North Park Avenue on the west, West Louise Street on the north, and West Maple Street on the south. This area contains land originally incorporated into the city through the Oak Grove and Englewood Additions in the early 1900s (Figures 2 & 3). Figure 2. 1907 Plat Map of Englewood Addition. Portion of proposed district outlined in red. This area broadly captures the eastern portion of the Wilson Park Historic District (NRHP). As outlined in the National Register of Historic Places nomination, “the initial development of the Wilson Park District occurred in the early part of the century during a boom period for Fayetteville.”1 The development of Oak Grove and the far eastern portion of the Englewood Addition was primarily led by Noah Fields Drake, a geologist and University of Arkansas professor.2 After the construction of his family home at 501 N. Forest Ave., Drake tried his hand at Figure 2. 1908 Plat Map of Oak Grove Addition. Portion in proposed district outlined in red. 1 Kenneth Story, “Wilson Park Historic District National Register of Historic Places Nomination”, Arkansas Historic Preservation Program, February 2, 1995. 2 Drake was born on January 30,1864 near Summers, around 20 miles west of Fayetteville. He graduated in 1888 from the Arkansas Industrial University (now University of Arkansas) with a degree in civil engineering. After graduation, he worked on the Arkansas Geological Survey, then relocated to Texas for work with the State Geological Survey. In 1893, he followed mentor Dr. J.C. Banner to Leland Stanford University in California, where he earned several degrees, including a Ph.D. in geology in 1897. Following graduation, he spent one year with the United States Geological Survey before accepting a position at Pei Yang University in Tientsin China to teach geology and mining and worked on several high-profile government projects. In 1911, Drake returned to the U.S. and accepted a position at the University of Arkansas as a professor of geology and mining. Drake served as the state geology, chair of the Geology Department, and curator of the University Museum before retiring from academia in 1920. residential and commercial real estate development. He purchased lots in the Oak Grove and Englewood additions, including the subject property, and revised the plats. Drake constructed eleven residences between 1925 and 1936, many of which are located in the Oak Grove Local Historic District.3 Other lots within and around the neighborhood were sold and developed by owners, including the property at 515 N. Park Ave. which Drake sold to James Gordon Davis and Mildred H. Davis on February 2, 1945. Drake was instrumental in the development of Wilson Park, Fayetteville’s original City Park, just northwest of the neighborhood. He and other businessmen formed the City Park Company, which improved the park and built the first permanent pool in 1926.4 Drake was also vital in the establishment of the municipal airport. In 1929, he donated $3,500 to the city to purchase the land for an airport, then in 1947 the City renamed the airport Drake Field in honor of Noah Fields Drake.5 Architecture of Oak Grove The Oak Grove neighborhood is architecturally distinctive, with a high concentration of Craftsman homes, including significant examples of residences constructed by Noah Fields Drake known locally as “Rock Houses.”6 Most of the homes within the boundary feature some level of Craftsman detail or influence. Many feature prominent front porches, deeply set windows, exposed rafter tails, and low-pitched gabled roofs, characteristic of the Craftsman style.7 The residence at 515 N. Park Avenue is primarily a plain/traditional design with some minor Craftsman details. Like the residences at 9 W. Davidson St., 506 N. Forest Ave., and 511 N. Forest Ave., the home leans almost to the minimal traditional with a simple rectangular form and very shallow overhanging eaves. Narrow, square railings, low-pitched side-gable roof, and textured lap siding provide some hints toward the Craftsman style seen elsewhere in the neighborhood. This home was constructed around 1945, later than most other homes in the district and during a period when the popularity of Craftsman style was beginning to wane and serves as an important bookend to the early construction of the neighborhood. Discussion: The proposed addition to the district is significant for its part in the development of the neighborhood and the end of Noah Fields Drake’s influence on residential development in Oak Grove. Recommendation: Staff recommend the Commission forward the Local Historic District amendment to the Planning Commission and State Historic Preservation Office for review and comment. Attachments: • Excerpt from Arkansas Historic Districts Act • Chain of Title • Property Photos • City Clerk Treasurer Verification Letter 3 He created Drake’s Replat of Block IV of the Revised Plat of Gate’s [sic] Subdivision to Oak Grove Addition and Drake’s Replat of Blocks I and VI of Englewood Addition. Four of Drake’s houses are located on Park Avenue, six of them on West Davidson Street and one on Highland Avenue. Dowling, “Building a Vernacular Neighborhood and Beyond.” 4 Story, “Wilson Park Historic District.” 5 Wappel and Garrison, On the Avenue, 9. 6 Cyrus A. Sutherland with Gregory Herman, Claudia Shannon, Jean Sizemore Jeannie M. Whayne and Contributors, "Wilson Park and Rock Houses", [Fayetteville, Arkansas], SAH Archipedia, eds. Gabrielle Esperdy and Karen Kingsley, Charlottesville: UVaP, 2012—, http://sah-archipedia.org/buildings/AR-01-WA20, accessed: October 6, 2025. 7 Virginia Savage McAlester, A Field Guide to American Houses, (New York: Knoft, 2023), 567.  Photos8 8 All photos from Zillow, accessed 3.6.2026, https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/515-N-Park-Ave- Fayetteville-AR-72701/72850274_zpid/?. Chain of Title Date Book/Page Grantee Grantor 11.15.2019 2019/35324 Max F. McAllister III Rahmat & Karen J. McAllister Sadelisoebagia Soemadipradja 8.10.2002 2002/116368 Rahmat Lewis Stanley Deen Sadelisoebagia Soemadipradja 6.23.1997 97/41810 Lewis Stanley Deen John M. & Kimberly Hooker 5.21.1997 97/37634 John M. & Kimberly Pine Tree Hooker Investments LLC 3/18/1997 97/16951 Pine Tree Robert Ross Investments LLC 8.21.1984 1118/314 Robert Ross Robert Scott Thompson 4.26.1984 1107/378 Robert Scott Douglas D. Knapp & Thompson Sandra J. Pringle 3.26.1983 1059/427 Douglas D. Knapp & Bennett Warren Sandra J. Pringle Holtzclaw & Mary Katherine Holtzclaw 12.20.1974 880/6962 Bennett Warren J. Foster Holtzclaw Holtzclaw & Mary & Grayce Fay Katherine Holtzclaw Holtzclaw 6.1.1970 791/327 J. Foster Holtzclaw Bennett A. Shiley &  & Grayce Fay Matilda Shiley Holtzclaw 5.1.1956 486/537 Bennett A. Shiley & Mildred H. Davis Matilda Shiley (widow of James Gordon Davis) 4.8.1954 461/14 James Gordon George McKinney & Davis Lillie Mae McKinney 2.2.1945 437/258 James Gordon N.F. Drake & Lota Davis & Mildred H. West Drake Davis