HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 05-04-2004-5mORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: May 4, 2004
Action Agenda
Item No. rJ' - m
SUBJECT: Options for the Laws House (Little River Regional Park and Natural Area)
DEPARTMENT: Environment and Resource
Conservation, Recreation and
Parks
PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No
ATTACHMENT(S):
1) Location Map and Exterior Photos
2) Staff Memo (3/22/04)
3) Stabilization Analysis Chart
4) Letter from Restoration Contractor
5) HPC Memo (4/2/04)
6) Staff Meeting Summary (3/22/04)
7) Example -Preserving Building Shell in
Park Setting
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dave Stancil, 245-2590
Lori Taft, 245-2660
Tina Moon, 245-2583
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough 732-8181
Chapel Hill 968-4501
Durham 688-7331
Mebane 336-227-2031
PURPOSE: To consider options far the disposition of the Laws House, an existing turn of the
century dwelling located at the Little River Regional Park and Natural Area,
BACKGROUND: On March 18, the Board approved the funding plan for Little River Park capital
facility improvements, Included within that item was a notation regarding one unresolved
question regarding the park -the disposition of the Laws House, located at the entrance to the
park,
Over the last few months, as the opening date for the new Little River Park and Natural Area
approaches, Orange and Durham County staffs have been exploring the issue of what to do
with the Laws House. Currently in a state of disrepair, the house is located near the park
entrance and will be visible to visitors entering and leaving the property (Attachment 1). Faced
with a limited time frame to make the entranceway attractive in time for the park opening (fall
2004), Orange and Durham staffs have evaluated a range of seven options for the house:
1) Demolish house
2) Deconstruct house
3) Move house off site
4) Relocate house on site
5) Stabilize house
6) Renovate for reuse
7) Renovate exterior shell, only
(A detailed analysis of the different options is included as Attachment 2.)
2
Much of the discussion about the Laws House regards striking a balance between 1) preserving
a building that is representative of Orange County's architectural heritage, and 2) maintaining
reasonable expenses for a park project that has exceeded budget estimates, and 3)
determining the homestead's long-term potential contribution, if any, to the park,.
On March 17~h, after collecting approximate cost estimates for most of the seven options,
Orange County staff walked through the house with the County Manager for a final evaluation of
the building. Based on this site visit, ERCD staff recommends that the Commissioners pursue
Option #5 and aesthetically stabilize the house for the short term, using funding that will not
take away from park facilities. This stabilization option will allow for the house to be made
presentable for the park opening and provide the Commissioners the opportunity to consider all
of the options far the building in a timely manner within the next year.
Durham County shares concerns over the appearance of the house, particularly during the park
opening, and about how the house would be integrated into the park design. The Durham
County approved development budget for the park allocates sufficient funding for
deconstruction of the house. Durham staff has indicated a willingness for their portion of the
deconstruction expense ($6,500) to be used towards any stabilization efforts. Any expenses
beyond this related to the Laws House stabilization, renovation, or maintenance would be the
responsibility of Orange County alone.
The Little River Park Advisory Committee did not take a position on use of the Laws House.
Orange County staff recognizes that the Laws House is a simple vernacular farmhouse, one of
many constructed throughout the County. However, this once ubiquitous house form is
disappearing from the viral landscape at an increasing rate. Orange County ERCD staff
believes that the Laws House can contribute to the Little River Park and Natural Area, if vat as
an integral part of the park design, then as a backdrop to the overall rural atmosphere and a
visual reminder of the past agricultural use, and would like to preserve the option to pursue the
reuse of the house, if it proves to be economically feasible.
One of the Capital Investment Plan (CIP) items coming before the Board in future months will
involve a comprehensive look at building renovation and stabilization at new County-owned
sites.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The cost of Option #5 (stabilization) is approximately $12,000 to
$15,000. A portion of this cost may be funded by Durham County, pending further discussion.
A summary of costs associated with stabilization is included as Attachment 3. It is proposed
that these funds be appropriated from the Lands Legacy Opportunities Fund, as it is a
stabilization of property acquired through Lands Legacy. A budget amendment would be
presented at a subsequent meeting toward this end.
For future projects, the potential for a more permanent funding source and comprehensive
assessment process for building stabilization may be addressed during CIP discussions this
spring.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board, in light of the short
timeframe between now and park opening, approve the expenditure of up to $15,000 for Option
#5 -stabilizing the Laws House prior to the opening of the Little River Park. The Board may
wish to consider the larger context of building disposition as part of CIP discussions later this
spring.
~
~
.. o~~~~
'
U
d .><~ ~ !
..
~
N~e~. ~~
e~
~ ~
1 ~ V J \ rat ~f .
~'
II V ~~ \ n
j` 1.
`
`
,
4 , ,
; ~ ,
~;
'
~
\' V o
ZZe
~
~ ~ vo i
n .^ i
\ ~~
E-' 1
~
D
~` ~ Ike <m
°
~ ' p V
~
81 ~p
=~" pr
u+0
\ ~o ~z
`, i ~~ 5~ ~_
~ 6 LL
6
(~
\
`
`
\
w V~
~ V
~ <a
a
O
~ o0
V_ yU ~
Z~Y J$Z
~
V
a LL
a~ ~' _
Or`
O~
-'~ J
{
n
U4 ~~d F
~
~
~
--- 1 I
\ ~~ y ~ 1 , ~ r f)
~ ~ tl ~
'I
y so ~ rr ~~ r ~~~ 2r ~~ ~ o
\' ~ / \
\~ ~ •~\ 4 ' l ~QU
,rte _\ ~! u.Y~ VC
1 O~ rva
1 I,a ~ Y a
1'! 1 r a ~ o
' ~ ~ o
~~~ --~ ~ 3
i
•r V
u
~~ ~ y 1
~~~,
~ ~..~~n, vv u
~ p w
///~~~t l
~,'~ ~i NZ Zpp p~
~J~/',' ~ ~ (1 v ~ 6 Q u61 ~ w
war j R SiL Y
~{%: ^~~ e 1 O VQ
R'~~~I'~
r ~,
!.~h: 1 i 1 1 ~:l i
~ `.- P~,
r~ .. ` y
1 ~?: 3~~1
~^ \.. ~.
Q •i~~Y .uy4pY 171
,:~. 1;€~
`LL 9f~1
J
J
3
X
Laws House
Little River Regional Park and Natural Area
Southeast Elevation (View from entranceway)
South Elevation
West Elevation
West Elevation
North Elevation (back)
Northeast Elevation
~--~~
ORANGE COUNTY
ENVIRONMENT AND RESOURCE CONSERVATION
DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
To:
David Stancil, Environment and Resource Conservation Director
Lori Taft, Recreation and Parks Director
From: Tina Moon, Land Use/Preservation Planner
Date: March 2, 2004
Updated, March 22, 2004
Re: Laws House -Little River Park and Natural Area
Reuse & Stabilization
As the budget requirements associated with the Little River Park and Natural Area continue to
increase staff from both counties have looked far options to reduce costs. Qne major question
is what to do with the Laws House, the existing turn-of-the-century dwelling located near the
park entrance.. There are several viable options, and county staff should consider each option
carefully since the first few park projects are likely to be precedent setting.
There are seven basic alternatives for the Laws House:
1) Demolish the house;
2) Deconstruct the house;
3) Move the house off the site;
4) Relocate the house to another area on the site;
5) Stabilize the house and consider future use(s) and renovation plans;
6) Renovate the house for immediate re-use; or
7) Renovate the exterior of the house as an attractive shell for atmosphere,
use the interior for storage.
1) Demolish the house. Demolition offers a "quick-and-dirty" albeit shortsighted
solution. The immediate costs would be those associated with contracting out a
wrecking crew to obtain a demolition permit, bulldoze the stricture, separate the
materials, transport the materials to the landfill, and pay for disposal. Unfortunately,
once the house is destroyed it (along with any associated information) is gone forever.
This is particularly important if there is any interest in developing interpretative signs or
historic trails on the park site, The mill sites, though interesting, are gone; any display
signage would be largely speculative. The caretaker's cottage is a substantially altered
dwelling, from another time period, moved from another part of the county. It has no
historic significance to the property and may in fact cause visitors confusion over the
progression of history on the site. The Laws farmstead is the only building complex that
people can actually see and touch that is linked the to the property, not to mention its
association to the Laws family--prominent Qrange County landowners dating back to the
1700s. This touches on some hardcore preservation philosophies about misinforming
the public with rewritten history,
Orange County's policy to encourage deconstruction whenever it appears feasible may eliminate demolition as an
option. The administrative issues associated with storing salvaged construction material and setting up a mechanism
to reuse it within a reasonable length of time, however, may limit the practically of deconstruction for this project.
J
2) Deconstruct the house. Deconstructing the house, in part, or in its entirety, may be
more politically correct that demolishing it, but it really doesn't do much for preservation
efforts in the long run, Deconstruction is a "green" alternative to demolition. It only
contributes to preservation when the materials are reused in other buildings. Local
governments should not get into the salvage or stockpiling business. Deconstructing the
Laws House can only be a viable alternative if another building is earmarked to receive
the salvage materials at the time that the older building is dismantled, Proper material
storage is essential.. It would be inappropriate to deconstruct the house because it's
considered unattractive and then leave the piles of material at the park site, particularly if
there is no place to store them.
Another option is to demolish or deconstruct part of the house and leave part for reuse.
The back portien is the older part of the house,. It would be difficult, however, without
any additional information about the evolution of the house to use the back portion as a
stand-alone display to represent a "typical" house, or to help visitors visualize what was
once there.
3) Move the house off the site. Orange County could try to sell the house to a private
buyer. Preservation North Carolina http://www.presnc.org/ is a private non-profit
preservation organization, which sells buildings with preservation covenants through a
revolving fund program. PNC would not buy or arrange for the house to be removed, but
the County could advertise the house for sale through their listings, which has a large
audience, and specify that the building has to be moved within a certain period to avoid
demolition.
The house has an exterior stone chimney on the west elevation, a trademark Orange
County feature. While masonry chimneys can be moved, they add significantly to the
complexity of moving a structure. Chimneys are typically dismantled and reconstructed
at the new site,
4) Relocate the house to another area on the site. Relocating the house to another
area on the park site may provide a way to save the building. However, the County
should study this option further before pursuing a moving company. The building would
need to be stabilized, lifted off of its foundation Qacked up) and temporarily supported on
cribbing. An experienced moving crew would place I-beams under the floorjoists and
slowly move the house to its new location and lower it onto a new foundation. The
chimney would be expensive to move or to rebuild properly--a modern concrete block
chimney with stone veneer, would be historically inappropriate and would look out of
place, If the County would like to move the house, it should begin initial efforts to
stabilize the building while determining its new location. The new location should be part
of the overall plan for the park site.
5) Stabilize the house and consider future use(s) and renovation plans. This
choice provides the most options for the future.. "Mothball" the building during this fiscal
year, and study potential uses which would contribute to the overall theme of the park.
Once a potential use or reuse is determined, staff could prepare a more detailed
renovation plan with specific cost estimates, or proceed with arrangements to move the
building to another location on the park site. If on the other hand, after careful
consideration the County determines that the building cannot add to the park complex in
any capacity, all of the demolition/deconstruction options are still available.
6) Renovate the house for immediate re-use. Considering the time constraints to
assemble budget information it is unlikely that the County can complete a full renovation
as part of the upcoming fiscal year, Staff should evaluate potential use(s) for the
C9Documenis and Settings\Administrator\Local Settings\Temp\CIP budget 2004-Laws-Extra doc
C~~
structure and examine relevant building code requirements to determine what uses are
really feasible.
'7) Renovate the exterior of the house, only. This option acknowledges the value of
the house as a historic backdrop far the park entrance along with the fact that the
Advisory Committee failed to determine a specific use for the building. The exterior of
the building would be cleaned up--the reof and siding painted. The windows could be
repaired, ar covered from the inside or outside to look presentable and prevent
unauthorized entry.. It is not uncommon for parks to have buildings on site, which are not
accessible to the public--the mere presence of these buildings contributes to overall
atmosphere of the park setting,
Perhaps the most important consideration, before determining the course of action, is to
evaluate the value of the Laws House. The Laws House is a typical turn-of-the century middle
class dwelling with awell-executed stone chimney.. Orange County has always been amiddle-
class county containing modest houses; it is not a region filled with large plantation houses with
two-story columns. What makes the Laws House significant is its Zink to amiddle-class tobacco
farmer. "Laws" is an old Orange County name and worthy of its own display just like Blackwood
or Strayhorn The Little River site has the potential to fill in a missing part of the Orange County
agricultural heritage puzzle since the Cate Farm and Blackwood Farm are more closely linked to
dairy farming.
The Laws House also reveals some interesting information about Orange County architectural
history, It documents the common practice of combining buildings, using an existing structure
as a wing (usually rear ell) for a new building. It shows the traditional use of stone in chimneys
and foundations. The mantel in the front block shows a common vernacular use of diamond
motifs. The rear room, in particular, illustrates the use of wide-board interior sheathing well into
the late nineteenth century-a treatment found in other Orange County houses but not in other
areas such as Eastern North Carolina where the use of wide board sheathing ended with the
Civil War.. The upstairs loft contains a fireplace, documenting its intended use as a livable
space. The enclosed corner stairwell, which is virtually a ship ladder, is another example of
what some architectural historians call "retarditaire" meaning it was old fashion when it was
built. Evidence in the kitchen shows the former cooking stove (in the corner) along with the
current heating stove venting the fireplace. The house also retains the traditional pantry closet
off the kitchen and the large sink on the back porch-trademark features of rural Orange County
houses.
As Orange County's Preservation Planner, I would recommend pursing Option #5 -stabilize the
building this year and spend the next year evaluating ways to re-use the house and developing
cost estimates. The front rooms could easily be used for information and display space and
perhaps a staff office, The back room could be roped off as a museum room, where visitors
look in the doorway but not actually enter the room,. This area could be viewed from the
connecting room and the back porch, which could be made wheelchair accessible. The front
section of the building appears to be stable. The floor is reasonably level, the joists appear to
be 2x8s, and there is ample clearance under the floor to prevent moisture related problems.
The back portion would need more attention, but by prohibiting public access the amount of
stn~ctural upgrades would be minimized. The back porch could be rebuilt and the sink re-
installed.. The northern section of the back porch could offer a handicapped passageway to the
front rooms,. The eastern section of the back porch could be updated to house a small staff
bathroom and kitchenette..
The house is currently somewhat of an eyesore. It weuld be reasonable to "mothball" the
house, make it more attractive far the park opening, and label it as a future display area. The
C:~Ilocrn~n~;nls and Se4line)stAdministr2twLOCaI Setlings\Teinp~ClP budget 2bi)4-Laws-Ca(ra doc~
<~
building should be weatherproofed--fix the roofs--and structurally sound--check the sills. Paint
the exterior one quick coat of white paint to make it look better. Board the windows with
matching plywood painted to look like windows and put one louvered metal vent in each
"window" to provide a little airflow. Make sure the doors are secure and can be locked. Rebuild
the front porch so no one can fall through, Block off the back porch using the fake window look.
(I would recommend leaving the back porch on for now. Removing it would expose interior
materials to the elements and likely lead to more serious (costly problems) in the long run.)
I would be happy to participate in future sessions to consider possible uses for the Laws House
and to facilitate the preparation of cost estimates for renovation. All of the buildings at our future
park sites will require maintenance plans, We should be careful not to eliminate a part of our
rural heritage without considering all options carefully.
Ballpark cost estimates for the seven alternatives:
O tions Other considerations Pro'ect Costs
1) Demolish house Bid to demolition crews
Landfill costs
2) Deconstruct house Estimates for Pete Hendricks, may wish to bid $13,000-$15,000
out to other contractors
What to da with the material: storage, reuse
issues
3) Move house off site Time constraints & finding a willing buyer Give ar sell building to
Expect $40,000 to move house plus someone who will move i
rehabilitation costs o tion #6 $100,000
4) Relocate house on site Moving costs plus $40,000-$45,000
rehabilitation ex enses o tion #6 $100,000
5) Stabilize Casts contribute toward total renovation $9,000-$12,000
o tion #6
6) Renovate for reuse Quality restoration includes same if not all $100,000-$125,000
rofessional desi n services
7) Renovate exterior, only Costs may contribute toward total renovation i $20,000-$25,000
ursued in future as later hase
C:AUocuinenlS and Settlnys~Adminlstrztor~LUCaI Sclltng,~,~Semp~ClP budge( 2004-Laws~Eztra (Joc
C
m 0
L ~
Q N
.~ +~+
R~
Z
O?J f~0
L Q.
a o
~ m
~_
d
h
d
J =
N ~_
O.
m
(A ~
d
R ~
J ,_
a
W
N
O
p
o
O
V N N
V
(p EFy E9
9
O
a`~
L o 0 0
y T 3 O
"= p N
Qm O N .O >.
°~~
~
'3 0
°~~
~~' ~~= o
a~- m
s~ap~
.
,a ~ mN m~ °~
cc
m
E ° m3
o ~ Ts Ems
O~o>
Y
wi i
a
~~
m mE O
>
.v v a~ E ~ 5 3 'E ~ ~ ~O m d E ~ ~ N `o.
O d .n N... ~ m-O
- ° m m p `°--. d.c o
vi ~ -° m= ° m~ ° o ~ E N ~ ° N E-o
QZ o~3O°m-o
d
s
' m~
N E°p~°c
o N
°' o
y o . ° c
m
N
N ° L rn
N
>
C
Q1 >
(0 (0 Y O
~ C V `p ~ O X- N N G
G N d N ~ O=
[0
N O
~- >.
1 O
~o ° .n o 3 E C
.
E- o
O O~ W N U O p O c T O~ L O
N
~
~
d m d W ~ (0 (0 (0 O)
> d C (
O
~~. d y= =p U
N
~
~~oo imm•=a
iE
a
e I-' dom. (0 ~.... ~S] 3 ~
~(a ~ ~ N "O
o>'o
~
r ' .
'O
~ ~
d
a
~ m
o
m .c d N c
~
o>o N
~ ~ 0 0 o
m 5 E m ~~ c ~°~ o
rn~o 0
C z
C
G l0 N "O N o N
C N
C fn
N N +.
U
-C L
O N
5,
Nd"'CCNdX CN N
C ~ O y.C NU .
.
NFL tpO)
.G Y W O d O
G 3 0 0 .O O .O L N` 'O ~ N y p :.
0 .
N N
O N~ .
N tL U ~ ~ ~ ~ Q N d O O E O) d~ N
d
'y N
C
°c 3~~0' m-oo N y
. ~~ ~~ v~vi3~ ~U3
O O).c O O C,C N N Y~
,
o
3
~
3 ~
~ v
a ..`.D
. T~ d 0~0 c 0 O dY
c d
p
O =
-
-c ~
=~
c
o
=omu~m oo p ,= o
..o ova,,., o~
dC m`o
E ~ m
d~-,.c
~"°' mma~~E
> C x N Y C N N N p O m~ C S' ~ (0 G p ~ U 3 U U
m
d
' ,n°d°p-~~o.°
mc
W
E Omc~oU
U=
o „-
'm$ g
aU g
.=dmNm~m
.~N~m~~
C m
om•
ma
io~
3
v
o ~~
o
'
°' o
~'~ "o=
d
E
m
~ g
E
~E
~~NU QK°~u
iU a~~ ~~~o~
~~
N
0 Cn • e • ~' a e e v e R' e e • •
~ ~
t ~ ~ ~ s
' ~
'
O
r
~. CA
N .
~,~~ fi
~
C
~
H ? N ~ ~ LL vY _ ~~.w- '
`
{tee ~ ~ ~ ~ `
n
f0
Z
m
s
=
~
i>o 1 ..,,_..
~
m ~~
m
~~" ~•. ~ ;
~ m
W f~ o
~
"f ~ °
~ i ~
4 ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ O
~
"
a
~ (~
~9~
c
ra 0
L ~
Q N
i ,Q
~ R
Zy ~
W 10
L Q.
a o
d
d H
d
J p~
~ G
~ ~_
O ~
m
~ N
3~
J L
a
h
L
~
C
G
i/
N
W
N
O
O
O
~
v o o
'~
a
o ~
a` ''
t c
~ °O-o ~ o~ ~° ~
`~
3 ~ Lo X~
~~ cos
~ imo mcm
a
~a
'o
~
y":. m
O
3 o~
O.~ °'
O~a ~
m
COO. m >~~
'O
TAN '6
_
~ W
O
U tJ 'L" N d ..N. ~ ~ ~ U O p ~ =
~ ~ ~ N
uOi 01 a~Oi Oorn °v oc ai° 03~ m>, o ~p~ -~~s
Vl O L '~ '"' N> N U
O N U
~ .
S ~ N "p 0
C .
:O N y d U~ N O N
_
N Z
G ~ O _N
d ~O O ~ a
- to y E
O >.
~~ ~ O
C -6 O U
/
'O C
O >..= m ~
G S] _ ~ L D 4=.
C 00
O Off'-' O O
47 p
L
Y O "_ N N ~. L N N .Y y
A N N .
y. ~ f0 U U U (II ~~ L
31 N O) ~~ N N
U S] C 'O N ` _ E - (0 1] ST
O U N ~ ~ `p C N C
~ . N O O N EL,,,
E
4
'- ~°~a>i'o~aoio.3
o
- E °-3
m~ ~a`~i
~ o-~a
¢' mNy~
2'v a~io~oa
io~o
E
>
w~w
d 0 0
LL o
~"- °~.o o
c oU
a~L U sN ~n
o o~o
.a
.
I-~o ma,.. o. ~m 'owm
v
e
m
°_ w
a ~
a~ ~
~ °>
a m
47
~ v ~ ° E3mo m c `c-o
~
~~ ~
oc
m
°
s~ E .o
m
c _
c o w
~
'
~
~ o
~ a~ y
Y 3a
c o c r ~
?
o
~ .3 '
m
~ U O L 3
N
L~'O (0 U ~ NF"' E ~ T~O U
.1:1 Y ~ N~ m O
O O' C N U .O ~ O m D.
L
`O .
C
o>= L O
d
N W
m>
a
?
. y
~
~ 3 ca~,c co ~
>oOc
,
"'
~ mcL~ m
3~3 m o ac~oa
° °E~ ~ ~
~ w-o
i
G
C ~
°
O. VJ
'
o ~ x
~- N
i ~ o ~,
N /0 O L l0
rn~ c ~ a
T C O 'O
m
~
~
y oo~
o~o
G O U
n.-a~~
o~m g
cm
N-
m o~On
C N
00 .
N o
c
C E O (p U
o~m~
o~~-
C
~~ c
ron
a
~o o
Xi'ms o
~~~~ o
m
~~`c-
°
o
a i
a
.
~moo.~oCC a
~d3 o
o`omco m
oa
ia
i
a~Uc>v~~c
d
f, o
~ e v
m
d v
v O1
d
>•
a' '
~"
o
~ ~ i # r =~,~ .
I
~
' J
f
Uf ~~
' 1 ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~{ °
d *.
a
~
>"~'.~'~
'~
>
d
W
n
~
>
~ ~ ~
I ~(r1y~~~3~'
`~
~ _
>
G ~ ~ a~ f d
°n ra
Z
~ ~. N
~ w i ~3 r r ~,~
~'
'
I~'~ w
~,5 ~ ~
_ ~
~, in 1
s
, in
~.,.s ... :~ 3
~
Z "~~~
'`
~~
N
c
R O_
L ~
aN
L
p R
R ~
Z
o?S t0
is
a o
~. Q~
~ ~
~aL
J
~ C
H
O.
S m
f/1 ~
~ m
J ~
a
H
ce
i
/
R
i+
W
y~ +
° o
$ N
N
fA (fl
,+~~
,1.
•
L
- ~
~ ~
a` '~
~~ Y
`
,C m ~
m m
++ m m o~ ~ n.~ c
3 C U C C O O_ O
oN~ ~~~~o
~ N ~ ~~ p`~ '~ N ~ a
.di
t0 EN~~~o.?o~
.
0
o c
~
3
0~ c
TY
> m= d m
p
~ .o
c x o o a~ m
~ c
y
j
(q ~ ~
d ~
p
~ p ~ ~ U
~
~ `
m
~ c
3
G7 = m
-o m o~~
m ~ ~ o r o~3 u, `°
C ~a L mo o.~ o
.
p 3=~~ m a o~ N~
.
OL. 33ccnoo.U).~?c
Q
v o e
L_
~ y
~ l9
~ ~~
a, E
o'
o
a~ m
m
~ E
~ C N N N 1C
~
~ D ~
, w
O
i
° ~ ~~co
a
~ s ~,~E-
w. ~o~;~wa~a,
p E ~ ~ .. ~ m
C ~ ~
o L ~
L~
.
..
~~~_~
a ~-L a~
~L ~ N O o. V
J
Na
O
y n. W
C ~
~+
~ o
U v • v v ~-
d N ~
V ~ O "~ ? C
~ 2w N A
~
G ~ = 3 °
~ v
m -~ gm o
S N~ U N
d
Q
x
~~
M
Mx. David Stanch
Environment and Resource Director
Orange County
PO Box 8181
Hillsborough, NC 27278
Mazch 12, 2004
Re: Laws House's future
Deaz Mr. Stanch:
~~I
A couple of years ago I was invited to accompany Orange and Durham Planners
on a inspection of the Laws House, located near the entrance of the new two county park
on Guess Road. Time has passed since that visit, but recently, Tina Moon, of your staff,
has consulted with me on my impressions of the house and its potential use to Orange
County. She and I had an interesting discussion and she shazed her thoughts and
estimates of the costs to stabilize the structure.
/~
I found that I agreed 100% with Moon's assessment of the house's value as a link
to the agricultural past of our County, the importance of setting a proper preservation
example by reusing the house on site if'possible, and the costs to be expected in the short
term to accomplish this preservation. The reaz wing of the house is of especially great
value. The house as it now stands is a living record of how our local farmsteads grew
and prospered. Her arguments against demolition: Loss of a piece of the history of the
County, and wasted money to remove it, aze compelling. The recently fashionable
"deconstruction option" is not a way to save our heritage, only a method of conserving
some space at the dump. Moving and relocating an endangered historic structure are only
considered last ditch options in the preservation community. Preservation and the
interpretation of a structure on its original site are pillars of the modern preservation
philosophy. Since the structure is endangered by our government's choice; demolition
by neglect or by crowbaz or bulldozer, we have in our hands the preservation tool most
palatable and responsible to the Heritage of Orange County and the preservation of our
built environment. This is the temporary stabilization and eventual preservation and reuse
of the structure on its original site as an integral part of our fabulous new park, right
where and when it will serve the County the best.
Ms Moon sent me her estimates of costs and I find them accurate. Should this
cost still be prohibitive, there are lower (and less expensive) levels of stabilization that
will preserve the stnrcture until adequate funds can be raised for a proper restoration:.
Thought and planning should be put into designing a future use for hou~c: so that it can
earn its keep. In the meantime, it should be documented and placed on the Orange
County inventory. It was obviously missed since it was so well hidden in the woods,.
Thank you for your attention, I will be glad to offer any assistance to aid in the
preservation of the Laws House. Flease do not hesitate to call me with any questions I
may be able to answer.
Yours Most Sincerely,
~~_~°~ `
Todd IDickinson
Ce: Tina Moon, Orange County Flanner
~~
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Memorandum
To: Barry Jacobs, Chair, Orange County Board of Commissioners
From: Betsy Underwood, Chair, Historic Preservation Commission
Date: April 2, 2004
Subject: Laws House at Little River Park and Natural Area
The Historic Preservation Commission, at it March 24, 2004 regular meeting, discussed the
status of the Laws House, the vernacular farmhouse located near the entrance of the Little River
Park and Natural Area. The Commission had hoped to visit the site prior to preparing a
statement but inclement weather canceled several planned field trips. The HPC recognizes the
role of the Commission to offer advice on preservation matters and thanks the Board for the
opportunity to comment,
Our discussion on the Laws house revolved around an evaluation of the architectural and social
value of the house, Is a simple farmhouse worthy of county-funded preservation efforts, and if
so, how much money should be funneled into the project? Can the house be integrated into the
park design at some point? Are there monies available for restoration work and long-term
building stewardship at the, now several, park properties purchased through the Lands Legacy
Program?
The Historic Preservation Commission agreed that the modest house is representative of the
type of dwelling that many Iccal residents lived in during the turn of the century and that the
County should make an attempt to preserve that heritage, Members would like to see the
building stabilized and used in some capacity, in its current location, If there is only enough
funding to stabilize the exterior of the house the building shell will provide a historic backdrop, a
reminder of our rural heritage, for park visitors.. The HPC further recommends that a plaque or
informational sign be placed in front of, ar to the side of, the building to the tell visitors about the
house and its former use.
In summary, the HPC felt that their discussion on the appropriate treatment for the Laws House
brought to the forefront the larger stewardship issue for all of the historic buildings on county-
owned property, and the allocation of funds for stabilization, renovation, and long-term
maintenance, We would like to volunteer our expertise to assist in developing preservation
plans for the buildings on these properties, and to offer recommendations for prioritizing needs.
r ~'I~
" ~~' ORANGE COUNTY RECREATION & PARKS
',' P,a Box alal
.300 West Tryon Street
Hillsborough, NC 27278
OrangeCounry Phone:919-245-2660 Fax 919-G44-.3042
Recreation & Parks
M~'MO~'tI ND CTM
To: .lolm Link
From: Lori Taft
Re: Laws House Disposition
Date: March 22, 2004
<~~5
A meeting was held last week, for the purpose of discussing the options for the fate of the Laws
House at Little River Park. Present at this meeting were Dave Stancil, Rich Shaw, Tina Moon,
David Cannell, Paul Laughton, Ryan Elting, and myself, as well as Jane Korest and Mike Giles
from Durham County.
Staff was able narrow the choices available to us for this project because of the timing of
alternative courses of action relative to the proposed park opening during the summer of 2004.
From the original seven choices identified by Tina Moon, staff agreed that there are six basic
alternatives remaining for the Laws House:
1) Demolish the house;
2) Deconstruct the house;
3) Move the house off the site;
4) v „r,....~ ~r.o i .............. ..~wo. ,.~.
5) Stabilize the house and consider future use(s) and renovation plans;
6) Renovate the house for immediate re-use; or'
7) Renovate the exterior of the house as an attractive shell for atmosphere,
use the interior for storage,
Tina Moon prepared a report that describes each of the solutions noted above, The option which
has been eliminated, was determined to be an unreasonable choice by staff due to the fact that
both Boards of Commissioners have approved the site plan, and staff can make no strong
argument for using the building even at this location, let alone elsewhere in the park.
Staff expressed differing opinions, points of view and "positions" at the meeting, but all agreed
on certain points:
• The Little River Park Advisory Committee took no position with regard to the Laws
House..
• Tina Moon, Orange County's Preservation Planner, as well as Todd Dickinson, a well
respected, local Restoration Contractor recommend option #5 -Stabilization for future
/~
consideration. Although it may be an ordinary house, ,just like many that dotted the
countryside at the turn of the twentieth century, it is this which makes it significant and
worth consideration of the argument to save it.
• Eddie Belk, a subcontractor of the park design firm, providing a cursory analysis of the
property, did not recommend using the house in the park.
• The house is situated on Orange County land, however, its disposition concerns both
counties as it is within the park property, which is subject to the term of a Memorandum
of Agreement in which both counties are to agree "...on what uses will and will not be
allowed in the Park."
• Staff agreed that the house must either be gone, or look good at the time the park opens
this summer.
• During the past couple of years, while the park development was being planned, staff and
consultants considered use of the house for the caretaker residence and also for the park
office. It was decided not to use it for either of these purposes. At this point there is no
foreseeable use for it within the park. In addition, both Boards of County Commissioners
have approved the master plan, which does not include the house as a feature of the park.
• Option # 5 which would allow deferral of a permanent decision, is estimated to cost
$12,000-$20,000. Should the decision be made to demolish the house in the future, this
may not prove to have been money well spent.
• "Ballpark" cost estimates associated with each of the remaining options above aze
expected to be within these general limitations:
Option 1: unknown
Option 2: >$15,000
Option 4: $0-15,000
Option 5: $12-20,000
Option 6: $100-$125,000
Option 7: $20-$25,000
We look forward to accompanying you to view the house on Wednesday.. No doubt you can
assist us in clarification of this issue,
Cc: Gwen Harvey
Jane Korest
Mike Giles
Pam Jones
Donna Dean
Dave Stancil
Rich Shaw
Tina Moon
Ryan Elting
~nlti h~` GOO
~j~~,,,,,s,~t~e :. Q~-~s lYf v~h~ ~tw~ ~~ryf~f
a iM it ~~r4 .fz~ff>t~
s~G //
l~
Preservation plays an essential role in telling the
story of why we're, fighting (the war on terrorismJ-
to protect the places where events shaped who
we are as Americans,
Obviously, the National Pazk Service should play a deaz role. But the Park Service doesn't
necessarily have the skills to market programs to tourists.
I had a great conversation with the superintendent of San Antonio Missions National
Historical Pazk. Because of the Alamo's success-two million visitors ayear-you'd think all the
missions were getting big numbers. Yet they had one of the lowest visitations in the park system.
Then I went to the Alamo, and if became very obvious why There was no reference that said
look, if you want more of this architecture, just go down the road r5 miles. It's called coupon-
bounce-back marketing If you get m percent to go down the road, everybody's happy When
we created the Texas Independence Trail, we made sure to include the missions.
~ What role do you see for the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation?
A First and foremost, the council has to continue its role as manager of the preservation
process. I assure everyone that this will continue. But when you read the original ~q66
National Historic Preservation Act, it clearly says the council is to advise the President, the
administration, and Congress on issues of preservation.
Well, to the members of Congress, preservation is a very local thing. It seems to me, based on
my experience in Texas, that the way to help preservation on the local level is through the eco-
nomic development model. Give people a way to help themselves
I see our role as working with the Park Service, with Commerce, with the Federal Highway
Administration, wfth all the agencies to aeate the best possible business environment.
Absolutely, the council has to encourage efficient preservation reviews, eliminate duplication,
and help the states At the same time, it has to advocate for a strong heritage tourism program
Above left: Independence Ha(!, inhere the state
declared itselJautonamaus in r836; Above: Relic
of frontier days.
and help the Federal Government play that
type of role.
Q A consulting role.
A Part cheerleader, part consultant
B$ In Texas, how did you engage then-
Governor Bush and the First Lady in
preservation?
A In President and Mrs. Bush you have
two people who understand the story of
America as told through its places. The
largest preservation program by a state was
undertaken by then-Governor Bush-the
Texas Historic Courthouse Preservation
Program.
I saw Governor and Mrs. Bush walk
through these tremendous cathedrals of the
prairie, reborn as part of our economic
TO COMMON GROUND SPRING 2004