Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Creating Contexts and Using Multiple Property Documentation Forms
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Introducing the official SlideShare app

Stunning, full-screen experience for iPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Creating Contexts and Using Multiple Property Documentation Forms

311
views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
311
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • We’ve gone over “Context” development in previous CRE training sessions, so today my part of this presentation is going to focus more on “best practices” for actually applying the context statements, and MPDFs, we already have. Before we get to those examples, for the new folks in the room that aren’t familiar with our jargon, let’s go over a few things quickly.
  • What is a context and how is it used? We expect all Resource Survey Forms to provide us with some context to help us evaluate whether a resource is eligible for the NR and then even more context in the NR nom itself.From Barbara Wyatt’s paper: “The evaluation of properties for National Register eligibility involves an assessment of the significance of a property in terms of the history of the relevant geographical area, the history of associated historical themes or subjects, and within an historical and contemporary time frame—in other words, its context. The context in a listed MPDF should not be repeated in related nominations, although salient aspects should be summarized. Because the MPDF is considered the model for context development, this paper may seem like instructions for that form. In fact, individual nominations not related to an MPDF should contain a context that is essentially a microcosm of an MPDF context. Historic contexts should be considered a summary document, not a thesis. They should present relevant information, and avoid extraneous information. The author needs to evaluate what is relevant and understand that mere length does not lend credence to a subject.”
  • Visit our website for the entire list of contexts to date; some are available to view online, others can be requested from our office.
  • Some chapters of the Agricultural Context are available now through our website, others are being completed and will be available later this year.
  • These are the regions/chapters completed so far.
  • They are based on recent fieldwork, geographic regions, and historic data.
  • The overall document includes an Intro & User’s Guide; a chapter about Pennsylvania’s agriculture during the settlement period (there wasn’t much variety at that time); chapters about each of the identified regions; property types and registration requirements; and a bibliography.Each regional chapter is divided into subheadings that follow this format: a description of the location (counties included within), the physical distinctions that create the region, and period overviews (usually three periods) that extend from the end of the settlement period up to 1960. The Period Overviews describe trends in products; labor, tenancy, and gender roles; buildings and landscapes.
  • We’re going to look more closely at this region, and one particular farm.
  • The context chapter for the Allegheny Plateau provides an overview of the trends typically found here, and will include some charts and tabulations.
  • It will also include historic and current images of the typical (and not-so typical) types of buildings found within the region.
  • Materials were drawn from local historical societies, county ag extension offices, and other sources—especially helpful for some regions were the FSA, WPA, and other program documentation efforts that can be found online through the Library of Congress’s website.
  • The Schrot Farm is within the region. The family has a wealth of documentation, which we seldom ever are lucky enough to have available in our “regular” projects. But even without their private family records, other information that can be found locally or online is often enough to give us an understanding of how a property fits into the larger context. Schrot Farm Overview:
  • We really appreciate current aerial views, taken from some distance for perspective . . . . . (potential for district? Setting?) . . . . . .
  • As well as close-ups. These aerial photos can be used to help define property boundaries.
  • And they can also sometimes show great detail. Even in areas where “birds-eye” views aren’t available, we can still see truck patches or large vegetable plots, evidence of a farm lane, orchard remnants, the relationship of the house to the outbuildings . . . .
  • Site plans should also note landscape features, as well as buildings.
  • For farms and large resources, it’s often helpful to provide inset or close-up plans so that details are easier to read.
  • So let’s talk about the region quickly, and see how the Schrot farm fits.
  • To read the chapter covering the Allegheny Mountains Plateau Region, visit our website.
  • standard PA barn & variants, three-gable barn, basement barn, & English barn;
  • http://www.pennpilot.psu.edu/Penn Pilot, a project sponsored by the Pennsylvania Geological Survey, is an online library of digital historical aerial photography for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Using the interactive map provided on this website, you can browse, view, and download thousands of photos covering the Commonwealth from 1937 to 1942 and 1967 to 1972. The photos were produced by the United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Adjustment Administration (now known as the Farm Service Agency).
  • See the BHP Railroads of Pennsylvania Guidelines http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/research_tools/20176/guidelines_for_documenting_and_evaluating_railroads/943356
  • Transcript

    • 1. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices Creating Contexts and Using Multiple Property Documentation Forms 3-4PM Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 2. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices Context Information and perspective about related properties organized by theme, place, and time Required for both our Resource Survey Forms and National Register nominations Establishes the framework for evaluating significance NPS White Papers— Evaluating Common Resources & Components of a Historic Context are available to supplement the NR Bulletins and our Guidance Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 3. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices History Context Statement of Significance Context Context supplements an individual history, supports the statement of significance, gives us the perspective we need to assess if something is important•Explains role of individual property in relationship to broad historic trends, drawing on specific facts about the property and its community•Briefly describes the prehistory/history of the community as it directly relates—stays concise, relevant•Shows us what types of resources should be found to reflect trends and community, how this compares Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 4. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices Individual Contexts Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 5. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices Multiple Property Documentation Forms Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 6. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices Some Existing BHP Contexts and MPDFs •Adams County Properties Associated with the Battle of Gettysburg •African American Churches of Philadelphia, 1787-1949 •Agricultural Resources of Pennsylvania, c.1700-1960 •Allegheny County Owned River Bridges •Allegheny River Navigation System •Aluminum Industry Resources of SW PA •Bituminous Coal and Coke Resources of PA •Civil War Era National Cemeteries •Covered Bridges (for 22+ Counties) •Emergency Conservation Work in PA State Parks: 1933-1942 •Four Public Squares of Philadelphia •Highway Bridges Owned by PA Department of Transportation •Historic Educational Resources of PA •Industrial Resources of Huntingdon County, 1780-1939 •Iron & Steel Resources of PA Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 7. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices AgContext Info Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 8. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices Lake Erie Fruit & Vegetable Belt Potter County Potato & Cannery Crops Northwestern Woodland, Allegheny Grassland & Northern Tier Grasslands Specialized Mountain Plateau Diversified North & West Branch Susquehanna River Pocono Resort & & Part-Time Diversified Anthracite Coal Diversified Farming Central Southwestern Limestone Diversified & Valleys Sheep Adams County Fruit Belt Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 9. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 10. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices Ag Context Contents •Intro/User Guide •Agriculture in the Settlement Period (c.1700-c.1840) •Specific Region Descriptions •Property Types & Registration Requirements •Bibliography & Resources Within Each Regional Chapter •Location •Climate, Soils & Topography •Period Overviews (c.1840-1960) Products Labor & Land Tenure Buildings & Landscapes Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 11. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices Allegheny Mountain Plateau Diversified & Part-Time Farming Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 12. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices Centre County farm Crops, 1880, ten percent sample. Average farm size 133 acres, 77 tilled 1400 Farm Livestock by Region, 1880 bushels rye per farm bushels buckwheat per farm bushels potatoes per farm 1200 90 bushels wheat per farm 80 bushels oats per farm bushels corn per farm 1000 70 60 Number 800 50 40 Poultry 600 30 Sw ine 20 Sheep 400 Steers 10 0 Milk Cow s 200 Horses a h er y n y ni nc nt ai le Ti va ou nt ra al rn yl ou tB V C he ns e M 0 r es eg n te n rt r n gr sto t y t oo o tte e rW pa en Po P y ia ty n oe or d er n de g n tr F lege nn s ghles g th m on or s sh n s r lfm N ke nt ri gg ne io to o io rin a/ an er e or yl nn twh r ru si sh st pe Li gus lle mi ou ar un al ha po ta ai bo lib sp w rn lv l hu be co ho w m H C ow sy bu al er ha tre nn N sn en A Pe C en C Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 13. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 14. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices Knees Farm, Clearfield County, FSA/OWI photo, 1940, Library of Congress. Jack Delano, photographer. Digital ID fsa 8c02939 . Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 15. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices Schrot Family Farm Lawrence Township, Clearfield County c.1896 Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 16. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 17. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 18. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 19. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 20. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 21. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 22. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012 Best PracticesAllegheny Mountains Plateau Diversified Part-time Farming Region1830-1850: Farming & Small-scale IndustryProducts—sparsely settled; lackedeasy access to markets; extractiveindustries dominated; acreage mostlywoodedLabor & Land Tenure—farms oftenpart-time; women & childrenresponsible for much farm labor;tenancy rates low; neighborsexchanged services, work, goodsBuildings & Landscape—primarybuilding material wood; modestbuildings; few early outbuildingsremain Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 23. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012 Best PracticesAllegheny Mountains Plateau Diversified Part-time Farming Region1850-1920: Farming & Large-scale IndustryProducts—diversified; farm size varies/improved land increasing; livestockholding steady; low mechanization.Labor & Land Tenure—industrializationof lumbering; rise of coal mining;charcoal production continues;corresponding family labor or neighborparticipation; tenancy rates low.Buildings & Landscapes—balloonframing & manufactured brickreplacing log & plank; houses still small,additions more common than new;barns more modest than other regions;typical outbuildings; fields small andsquare-ish, woodlots prominent. Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 24. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 25. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 26. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012 Best PracticesAllegheny Mountains Plateau Diversified Part-time Farming Region1920-1960: Allegheny Mountain Industrial RegionsProducts: Subsistence level; croplandemphasis on hayLabor & Land Tenure: Part-timefarming accounts for 18% of familyincome; relatively unmechanized;conveniences more common; moresouthern/eastern EuropeanimmigrantsBuildings & Landscapes: small plots;multi-purpose buildings; similarconstruction and modestappearance; intertwining withindustry Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 27. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 28. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices Joe Schrot, RD 4, Clearfield Owner 2 males age 10 or older 3 females age 10 or older 17 acres total 10 acres in crops, all in “other tame hay” 50 apple trees, 4 peach trees, 5 pear trees 1 milk cow, 2 swine, 35 laying hens and 15 other chickens Furnace, automobile, telephone, electricity from power station Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 29. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices farm cows milk cows other sows & other sheep pullets chickens bee hives animals cattle breeding swine gilts # animals 618 705 201 102 913 75 8287 6017 155 Figure #12 1927: Lawrence Township - Kind and Number of Farm Animals (1927, Records of the Department of Agriculture Division of Crop Reporting Farm Census Returns, Clearfield County) Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 30. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices # of fruit trees/ farm 1 - 5 trees 6 - 10 trees 11 - 20 trees 21 - 30 trees 31 - 50 trees over 50 trees bearing apple/ farm 17 16 12 1 1 1 peach/ farm 9 1 1 1 1 1 pear/ farm 28 5 2 1 0 0 Schrot Farm bearing apple 0 0 0 0 1 0 Schrot Farm pear 1 0 0 0 0 0 Schrot Farm peach 1 0 0 0 0 0 Figure #11 1927: Lawrence Township - Kind and Number of Fruit Trees Planted (1927, Records of the Department of Agriculture Division of Crop Reporting Farm Census Returns, Clearfield County) Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 31. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 32. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices 1940 www.pennpilot.psu.edu Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 33. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices 1958 Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 34. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices 1968 Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 35. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 36. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices Buildingsthis an important example multi-purpose, reflect history of Is are modest, frame, some of farming trends in the Landscape reflects field patterns, products, products and livestock, gender for a small portion of family income Diversified; farmingPlateau Diversified & Part-time Region? level of Allegheny only accounts roles/labor patterns and woodlots, orchards mechanization Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 37. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best Practices A context should help us understand how a property fits into the bigger picture, and provide us with the information we need to assess if it is an important example of a specific type of resource within a specific place and time. Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 38. Cultural Resources Essentials 2012Best PracticesBest Practice Recommendations:•Current aerial views, close-up and surrounding area•Historic aerial views, ditto, and circle the subject property•“Relationship” photos•Specific references to existing contexts, and how this “fits” or doesn’t•Concise summaries•Focus the history & context on what’s relevant•Continue the history/use up to present-day (briefly)•Census data for specific property, and how it measures up to township/compares to surrounding farms•Summary of similar properties nearby•Could the property be eligible for other reasons? Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 39. EVALUATING RAILROADS
    • 40. A. Pennsylvania Railroad: Schuylkill Valley Branch(West Philadelphia to New Boston Junction)B. Bangor & Portland Railroad (Ackermanville segment)
    • 41. B. Bangor & Portland Railroad (Ackermanville segment)
    • 42. A. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad: Pittsburgh Division (Maryland line to city of Pittsburgh)B. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad: Philadelphia Branch (Philadelphia to Delaware State Line)
    • 43. A. B&O Pittsburgh Division
    • 44. A. Bessemer & Lake Erie Railroad [Western PA coal and steel industries]B. Reading Railroad [Northeastern PA anthracite coal industries]
    • 45. A and B
    • 46. A. Signals B. Track C. Sign D. Rolling StockE. Buildings and Structures
    • 47. E. Major Built Elements
    • 48. A B
    • 49. A. Switchback Gravity Railroad
    • 50. A. Trolley lineB. InterurbanC. Streetcar lineD. All of the above
    • 51. D. All of the Above
    • 52. Questions?
    • 53. Postwar Suburbs 1945-1965Urban Development 1945-1974 Modern Suburbs 1965-1975+ Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 54. Lancaster, PA 1910 The issues involved in addressing urban renewal projects are hardly new. The underlying challenge is to approach the task with an open mind, checking one’s assumptions at the door as it were, and acquiring a strong base of knowledge of pertinent source material. The widespread prejudices against urban renewal and much of the legacy of the second half of the 20th century generally must be set aside in order to assess the real significance of such initiatives. Our cities and towns changed dramatically during the postwar era, and we can ill afford to dismiss those transformations out of hand. Richard LongstrethLancaster, PA 1971 The Difficult Legacy of Urban Renewal
    • 55. “Plans for Downtown Renaissance” ca 1950 – Model of downtown Pittsburgh showing proposals for Point State Park, the Manchester and Point Bridges, Gateway Center, the ALCOA Building and Crosstown Boulevard Courtesy of Paul Slantis Photograph Collection, Historic Pittsburgh Image Collection
    • 56. Thousands of people who were formerly the victims of scurrilous, profit-greedy landlords, that provided dwellings of the most dilapidated sub-standard grade, many being potential fire traps and breeding places for diseases, now live, laugh, and are happier with a new lease on life in the clean, modern, and healthful surroundings of the Raymond Rosen Projects. Lloyd King Philadelphia Tribune, July 30, 1955 Immigrants and Suburbs: Growth and Distribution in Greater Philadelphia, 1970- 2000: A Tract-Level AnalysisPhiladelphia - Modern DesignThematic Historic Context 1945-1980(Malcolm Clendenin, PhD)
    • 57. Olivetti Underwood Typewriter FactoryLower Paxton Twp, Dauphin County,Louis Kahn, 1970
    • 58. Pittsburgh area 1970 Population 2,401,362 Developed land 212,200 acresPittsburgh area1990Population 2,094,447Developed land 249,100 acres
    • 59. Modern Suburbs
    • 60. Railroad Resources Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 61. Railroad Resources in Pennsylvania
    • 62. DERAILED• No consistency in naming resources – Baltimore and Ohio (Philadelphia Branch) – B&O Rr – Branch of the Balt.&Ohio RR• Resource type unclear – A bridge – A station – A segment of right of way (ROW)• New naming standardization – Baltimore & Ohio Railroad: Philadelphia Branch: trestle – Baltimore & Ohio Railroad: Station (Connellsville) – Baltimore & Ohio Railroad (West Homestead to Pittsburgh) Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 63. DERAILED• NO consistency with resource types – Stations recorded as structures, sites, and objects• New resource standardization – Stations – buildings – Bridges – structures – Right of Ways – districts – Yards – districts – Tunnels – structures Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 64. DERAILED• NO consistency in recording “historic function”• Engine House – Historic Function: • Domestic – Historic Sub-function and Particular Use: • Single Dwelling, Engine House• ALL railroad resources should at least have „Transportation: Rail-Related‟ as the Historic Function and Sub-function Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 65. DERAILED• NO way of linking a railroad‟s “associated resources”• Key# 086386 Lehigh Valley Railroad: Station (Bethlehem)• Key# 078945 Lehigh Valley Railroad: Station (Sayre) Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 66. Key# 102978 Pennsylvania Schuylkill Valley Railroad (Muhlenberg to Hamburg)Berks Montgomery Key# 124898 Pennsylvania Schuylkill Valley Railroad (Plymouth Twp. To Norristown)
    • 67. Central Railroad of New JerseyLehigh Valley Railroad Key# 155754 Key# 156109 Pittsburg, Shawmut & Northern Railroad Key# 156193 Pittsburg & Shawmut Railroad Cumberland Valley Railroad Monongahela RailwayKey# 156194 Key# 155448 Philadelphia &156260 Key# Columbia Railroad Bessemer & Lake ErieWestern New York & Pennsylvania Railway Railroad Philadelphia & Erie Railroad 156141 156895 Key# Key# Key# 155731 Key# 155661
    • 68. TRACKS AHEAD• Continue to “clean up” database entries – Naming standardization, historic function, etc.• Continue researching and mapping “aggregate files”• Map unmapped, previously surveyed railroad resources• Apply “Aggregate File” blueprint to historic roads and waterways Bureau for Historic Preservation
    • 69. Bureau for Historic Preservation