Project Links
Proposed NPS Approval, Rehabilitation of c.1930 Garage at Private Property Under Easement
Green Springs National Historic Landmark District » Proposed NPS Approval, Rehabilitation of c.1930 Garage at Private Property Under Easement » Document List
The National Park Service (NPS) proposes a determination of No Adverse Effect to historic properties by (and thus its proposed approval of) a project planned and to be funded by the owner of a 40-acre, privately owned parcel in the Green Springs National Historic Landmark District, Louisa County, Virginia: the rehabilitation there of a c. 1930 one-story, wood frame, board-and-batten, standing-seam-metal- and hip roofed, pier-supported garage. Its access is via two sets of full-height doors on the front (west) elevation.
NPS reviews the owner's proposal (the review constituting a federal undertaking) as required of it by the terms of an NPS-held conservation easement. The then-owners of the parcel created the easement via deed of easement in 1973; they and the original easement-grantee conveyed the easement in 1978 via deed of assignment to the Department of the Interior, with NPS thereafter representing the Department as grantee.
For a detailed description of the proposed work, see text below. See "Plans & Illustrations Proposed Rehabilitation c.1930 Garage" packet in "Document List" linked at upper left of this webpage for: location map, overview/area of potential effect (APE) map, site plan, elevations and floorplans, and photographs.
The rehabilitation of the c. 1930 garage would create a three-bedroom cottage through:
- - -the conversion of the interior of the extant, one-story c. 1930 garage building—measuring 24'3" in width and 16'3" in depth—to a kitchen space by installing: two windows on the north and south elevations; a continuous, concrete foundation (replacing the extant, pier-only underpinning) for greater stability for the building; and an adaptation of the front/west elevation of the original garage that would retain its character-defining, board-and-batten front/west doors and four posts in-between, by retaining the posts and presenting the existing board-and-batten siding when those four doors are closed and, when those are open, presenting a wood, horizontal-siding front/west elevation with a door and two windows (see also "Front B" and "Front A" on sheet A.2.0 of elevations and floorplans in illustrations packet, attached in Document List).
- - -the construction at the rear (east) side of the garage, and on a downslope behind it, a two-story, wood, frame, gable-roof addition—to measure 18'0" in width (including the lesser width of 12'8" of a two-story, wood frame, rear porch) and 27'3" in depth (including the lesser depth of 6'0" of the porch)—that would house three bedrooms. An existing, small (closet-sized extension) on the rear, or east, of this floorplan would be removed for a more-stable tie-in with the proposed addition.
The above work would necessitate ground disturbance to a maximum depth of 4' (feet) along the edges of the footprint of the extant building and of 5' (feet) along the edges of the footprint of the proposed addition, and to a maximum width of 6" (inches) on either side of all of the above. Also, a trench to carry a utility line to the north side of the addition would necessitate a excavation of 18' long, 18" wide, and 30" deep.
-Conservation-easement provisions: Restriction 3 of the easement states that "outbuildings commonly or appropriately incidental to a single-family dwelling, including without limitation a...guest house," may be erected on the parcel in a way that would, in the opinion of the Grantee (NPS) "be in keeping with the historic character of the manor house, its setting and the character of the Green Springs Historic District, and further provided that the prior written approval of the Grantee to such action shall have been obtained." As a federal agency, NPS reaches the decisions for prior, written approval, required by this and other conservation easements, under the terms of the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended. NPS has requested concurrence by the Virginia State Historic Preservation Officer, for NPS expediting this review, per 36 CFR 800.3(g), by combining the steps of: Initiation of Consultation, Identification of Historic Properties, and Assessment of Adverse Effects. The NPS review is limited to the scope and terms of the easement and does not also imply or address any additional reviews, requirements, or restrictions of Louisa County, Virginia or other authorities, such as those of the county Code of Ordinances.
-Identification of historic properties, Area of Potential Effect (APE), National Register listing: NPS proposes the following identification of such properties within an APE (denoted in yellow on map in the illustrations-packet linked at upper left of this webpage) bounded by the outermost limit of the trees, shrubbery, and other vegetation that conceal the garage from neighboring parcels contributing to the Green Springs National Historic Landmark District as well as concealing the garage from other buildings within the same parcel and from the nearest public thoroughfare (Rt. 613). Within the APE are situated the garage; the site of the proposed addition to it; the parcel's principal dwelling described in the 1973 conservation easement as "'the manor house"; six structures arrayed in parallel ranges to the south of the manor house; two cemeteries described in the 1973 conservation easement as the "Overton family graveyard" and the "old slave graveyard;" and a portion of the parcel that hosts its other buildings, including what the 1973 National Register of Historic Places nomination for the Landmark District describes as an "Icehouse, kitchen, smokehouse, servant's quarters." The c. 1930 garage is not itself included on this National Register of Historic Places enumeration from 1973.
-identification of historic properties: scope of prior archeological survey at the c. 1930 garage. In 2016, NPS conducted a daylong, Phase I archaeology survey on the immediate grounds of the garage, as part of the identification-phase of an NPS review of a proposal by the then-owner, to rehabilitate the garage (a proposal subsequently approved by NPS but not implemented by the then-owner), at the same project-footprint (but a different design/elevation) as is now, 2024, proposed by the current owner. In 2016, the NPS archeologist excavated two 1-meter by 1-meter units to the immediate rear (east) of the garage, to assess the stratigraphy of the site and evaluate the possibility of any unmarked graves in the area of the proposed construction-footprint. The nearest, fence-marked boundary of the nearest of the two cemeteries mentioned in the easement- -the Overton Family Cemetery- -is situated 38.5 feet to the south of the south wall of the garage and the project area. The stone-memorial-marked location of the farthest of the two cemeteries—that identified in the easement as the burial ground of the property's enslaved residents—is situated 350 feet to the west of and on the opposite side of a parking-lot from the c. 1930 garage and the proposed project-area.
-identification of historic properties: findings of prior archeological survey at the c. 1930 garage. The NPS archeologist's excavations of 2016, summarized in his Executive Summary dated March 22, 2016, primarily revealed 20th-century trash and 20th-century structural items such as nails. He found no archeological features or intact cultural deposits, nor any evidence of unmarked burials. Additionally, the archeologist in 2016 noted the presence of a landform upon which the garage is situated and that likely shares its date of c.1930. (The southern half of the buried-utility trench proposed in 2024 for the garage-rehabilitation would occupy a segment of this same, fill-like landform; the northern half of the buried-utility trench would occupy a segment of an equally visible, fill-like landform fringing the structure adjacent to the garage on the north, along an area of that adjacent structure that hosts an addition dating c. 1970's and that had necessitated excavation for a foundation). Based on these considerations, the NPS archeologist in 2016 had recommended no further archaeological investigations. Given the similar construction-footprint, and modest scope and scale of the rehabilitation of the garage proposed in 2024, and in light of the 2016 archeological findings above for the same location, the NPS archeologist in 2024 does not recommend archeological work.
-Proposed NPS Determination of No Historic Properties Adversely Affected: on the recommendation of the NPS Section-106 advisers in the fields of historic architecture; archeology; and historic landscape architecture for this and its other reviews in the Green Springs National Historic Landmark District, NPS proposes a determination of No Adverse Effects for the rehabilitation of the c. 1930 garage. That recommended determination includes NPS consideration of:
- - -per the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic Properties, the proposed, two-story addition to the rear (east) of the garage would be differentiated from the original, board-and-batten-sided garage through the use of horizontal weatherboards on the upper story of the addition and brick-veneer over concrete on the lower story, yet would be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features of the original garage through the use of the same exterior color (yellow) and materials—wood siding on upper story, brick-veneer on first story to match foundation-color and brick foundations on building neighboring on the north and elsewhere on property, and standing-seam metal roof—and also by adopting a roofline not exceeding the height of that of the original garage, and a footprint-width narrower than that of the original garage.
- - -reflecting extensive and innovative preservation planning, the original garage would retain its character-defining, board-and-batten front/west doors, and four posts in-between, through an innovative design that would retain the posts and present the board and batten doors when those are closed (and, when those are open, presenting a wood, horizontal-siding front/west elevation with a door and two windows when the outer, board-and-batten doors are open- -"Front B" and "Front A" on sheet A.2.0 in elevations- and floorplans section of attached illustrations packet); use board-and-batten shutters on the window proposed for the north and south elevation of the garage; conceal the new front/west exterior lighting through insets in the soffit ; and reflect the spacing of the building's current, concrete piers through representative incisions, at the same intervals as the piers, in the concrete of the new continuous, concrete foundation that would replace the piers for greater stability.
- - -the locating of the proposed addition on a steep slope behind the existing garage and behind the dense, mature trees and shrubbery surrounding—together with the proposed use of the same yellow color, for the addition, as the garage and the other buildings on the property, and the narrower width and equal roof-height of the addition, as described above—for complete or near-complete concealment of the proposed addition from the buildings; grounds; and cemeteries of the surrounding parcel and also from County Route 613, the nearest public thoroughfare.
- - -the locating of: the proposed new foundation of the existing garage; the addition to the existing garage; and the utility trench in an area where an NPS archeological survey in 2016 found no archeological features or intact cultural deposits, nor any evidence of unmarked burials. Additionally, that survey, as mentioned above, noted a fill-like landform under and surrounding the garage and likely created in c. 1930 to host it. (The southern half of the proposed utility trench would pass through this c. 1930 landform; the northern half through an adjoining, similar landform bordering a c. 1970's addition to the neighboring building to the north.)
- - -the relative distances from the nearest edge of ground-disturbance necessary for the proposed rehabilitation—an area extending 6 inches from the outer edge/footprint of the existing garage—to the cemetery of the property's enslaved residents, the memorial stone of which is 350 feet to the west of the garage and on the opposite side of a parking lot, and to the Overton cemetery, 38.5 feet to the south of the garage.
-Proposed NPS approval-conditions: As with NPS consideration of approval for any proposal made under the terms of a Green Springs National Historic Landmark District conservation easement and that would entail ground disturbance, the owner/builder will cease work and notify NPS, for next steps, in the event that human remains or Native American cultural or religious artifacts are encountered during excavation work. And although the garage rehabilitation would necessitate only 6 inches of ground-disturbance beyond the nearest edge of the garage and in the direction of the Overton cemetery 38.5 feet distant, the NPS proposes to make approval also conditional on no ground-disturbance beyond 2 feet of that south edge of the garage, to allow for owner's/builder's discretion in the event that ground disturbance proves necessary within that 2 feet from the edge of the garage.
Manager of Easements
(540) 424-0512
NPS reviews the owner's proposal (the review constituting a federal undertaking) as required of it by the terms of an NPS-held conservation easement. The then-owners of the parcel created the easement via deed of easement in 1973; they and the original easement-grantee conveyed the easement in 1978 via deed of assignment to the Department of the Interior, with NPS thereafter representing the Department as grantee.
For a detailed description of the proposed work, see text below. See "Plans & Illustrations Proposed Rehabilitation c.1930 Garage" packet in "Document List" linked at upper left of this webpage for: location map, overview/area of potential effect (APE) map, site plan, elevations and floorplans, and photographs.
The rehabilitation of the c. 1930 garage would create a three-bedroom cottage through:
- - -the conversion of the interior of the extant, one-story c. 1930 garage building—measuring 24'3" in width and 16'3" in depth—to a kitchen space by installing: two windows on the north and south elevations; a continuous, concrete foundation (replacing the extant, pier-only underpinning) for greater stability for the building; and an adaptation of the front/west elevation of the original garage that would retain its character-defining, board-and-batten front/west doors and four posts in-between, by retaining the posts and presenting the existing board-and-batten siding when those four doors are closed and, when those are open, presenting a wood, horizontal-siding front/west elevation with a door and two windows (see also "Front B" and "Front A" on sheet A.2.0 of elevations and floorplans in illustrations packet, attached in Document List).
- - -the construction at the rear (east) side of the garage, and on a downslope behind it, a two-story, wood, frame, gable-roof addition—to measure 18'0" in width (including the lesser width of 12'8" of a two-story, wood frame, rear porch) and 27'3" in depth (including the lesser depth of 6'0" of the porch)—that would house three bedrooms. An existing, small (closet-sized extension) on the rear, or east, of this floorplan would be removed for a more-stable tie-in with the proposed addition.
The above work would necessitate ground disturbance to a maximum depth of 4' (feet) along the edges of the footprint of the extant building and of 5' (feet) along the edges of the footprint of the proposed addition, and to a maximum width of 6" (inches) on either side of all of the above. Also, a trench to carry a utility line to the north side of the addition would necessitate a excavation of 18' long, 18" wide, and 30" deep.
-Conservation-easement provisions: Restriction 3 of the easement states that "outbuildings commonly or appropriately incidental to a single-family dwelling, including without limitation a...guest house," may be erected on the parcel in a way that would, in the opinion of the Grantee (NPS) "be in keeping with the historic character of the manor house, its setting and the character of the Green Springs Historic District, and further provided that the prior written approval of the Grantee to such action shall have been obtained." As a federal agency, NPS reaches the decisions for prior, written approval, required by this and other conservation easements, under the terms of the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended. NPS has requested concurrence by the Virginia State Historic Preservation Officer, for NPS expediting this review, per 36 CFR 800.3(g), by combining the steps of: Initiation of Consultation, Identification of Historic Properties, and Assessment of Adverse Effects. The NPS review is limited to the scope and terms of the easement and does not also imply or address any additional reviews, requirements, or restrictions of Louisa County, Virginia or other authorities, such as those of the county Code of Ordinances.
-Identification of historic properties, Area of Potential Effect (APE), National Register listing: NPS proposes the following identification of such properties within an APE (denoted in yellow on map in the illustrations-packet linked at upper left of this webpage) bounded by the outermost limit of the trees, shrubbery, and other vegetation that conceal the garage from neighboring parcels contributing to the Green Springs National Historic Landmark District as well as concealing the garage from other buildings within the same parcel and from the nearest public thoroughfare (Rt. 613). Within the APE are situated the garage; the site of the proposed addition to it; the parcel's principal dwelling described in the 1973 conservation easement as "'the manor house"; six structures arrayed in parallel ranges to the south of the manor house; two cemeteries described in the 1973 conservation easement as the "Overton family graveyard" and the "old slave graveyard;" and a portion of the parcel that hosts its other buildings, including what the 1973 National Register of Historic Places nomination for the Landmark District describes as an "Icehouse, kitchen, smokehouse, servant's quarters." The c. 1930 garage is not itself included on this National Register of Historic Places enumeration from 1973.
-identification of historic properties: scope of prior archeological survey at the c. 1930 garage. In 2016, NPS conducted a daylong, Phase I archaeology survey on the immediate grounds of the garage, as part of the identification-phase of an NPS review of a proposal by the then-owner, to rehabilitate the garage (a proposal subsequently approved by NPS but not implemented by the then-owner), at the same project-footprint (but a different design/elevation) as is now, 2024, proposed by the current owner. In 2016, the NPS archeologist excavated two 1-meter by 1-meter units to the immediate rear (east) of the garage, to assess the stratigraphy of the site and evaluate the possibility of any unmarked graves in the area of the proposed construction-footprint. The nearest, fence-marked boundary of the nearest of the two cemeteries mentioned in the easement- -the Overton Family Cemetery- -is situated 38.5 feet to the south of the south wall of the garage and the project area. The stone-memorial-marked location of the farthest of the two cemeteries—that identified in the easement as the burial ground of the property's enslaved residents—is situated 350 feet to the west of and on the opposite side of a parking-lot from the c. 1930 garage and the proposed project-area.
-identification of historic properties: findings of prior archeological survey at the c. 1930 garage. The NPS archeologist's excavations of 2016, summarized in his Executive Summary dated March 22, 2016, primarily revealed 20th-century trash and 20th-century structural items such as nails. He found no archeological features or intact cultural deposits, nor any evidence of unmarked burials. Additionally, the archeologist in 2016 noted the presence of a landform upon which the garage is situated and that likely shares its date of c.1930. (The southern half of the buried-utility trench proposed in 2024 for the garage-rehabilitation would occupy a segment of this same, fill-like landform; the northern half of the buried-utility trench would occupy a segment of an equally visible, fill-like landform fringing the structure adjacent to the garage on the north, along an area of that adjacent structure that hosts an addition dating c. 1970's and that had necessitated excavation for a foundation). Based on these considerations, the NPS archeologist in 2016 had recommended no further archaeological investigations. Given the similar construction-footprint, and modest scope and scale of the rehabilitation of the garage proposed in 2024, and in light of the 2016 archeological findings above for the same location, the NPS archeologist in 2024 does not recommend archeological work.
-Proposed NPS Determination of No Historic Properties Adversely Affected: on the recommendation of the NPS Section-106 advisers in the fields of historic architecture; archeology; and historic landscape architecture for this and its other reviews in the Green Springs National Historic Landmark District, NPS proposes a determination of No Adverse Effects for the rehabilitation of the c. 1930 garage. That recommended determination includes NPS consideration of:
- - -per the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic Properties, the proposed, two-story addition to the rear (east) of the garage would be differentiated from the original, board-and-batten-sided garage through the use of horizontal weatherboards on the upper story of the addition and brick-veneer over concrete on the lower story, yet would be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features of the original garage through the use of the same exterior color (yellow) and materials—wood siding on upper story, brick-veneer on first story to match foundation-color and brick foundations on building neighboring on the north and elsewhere on property, and standing-seam metal roof—and also by adopting a roofline not exceeding the height of that of the original garage, and a footprint-width narrower than that of the original garage.
- - -reflecting extensive and innovative preservation planning, the original garage would retain its character-defining, board-and-batten front/west doors, and four posts in-between, through an innovative design that would retain the posts and present the board and batten doors when those are closed (and, when those are open, presenting a wood, horizontal-siding front/west elevation with a door and two windows when the outer, board-and-batten doors are open- -"Front B" and "Front A" on sheet A.2.0 in elevations- and floorplans section of attached illustrations packet); use board-and-batten shutters on the window proposed for the north and south elevation of the garage; conceal the new front/west exterior lighting through insets in the soffit ; and reflect the spacing of the building's current, concrete piers through representative incisions, at the same intervals as the piers, in the concrete of the new continuous, concrete foundation that would replace the piers for greater stability.
- - -the locating of the proposed addition on a steep slope behind the existing garage and behind the dense, mature trees and shrubbery surrounding—together with the proposed use of the same yellow color, for the addition, as the garage and the other buildings on the property, and the narrower width and equal roof-height of the addition, as described above—for complete or near-complete concealment of the proposed addition from the buildings; grounds; and cemeteries of the surrounding parcel and also from County Route 613, the nearest public thoroughfare.
- - -the locating of: the proposed new foundation of the existing garage; the addition to the existing garage; and the utility trench in an area where an NPS archeological survey in 2016 found no archeological features or intact cultural deposits, nor any evidence of unmarked burials. Additionally, that survey, as mentioned above, noted a fill-like landform under and surrounding the garage and likely created in c. 1930 to host it. (The southern half of the proposed utility trench would pass through this c. 1930 landform; the northern half through an adjoining, similar landform bordering a c. 1970's addition to the neighboring building to the north.)
- - -the relative distances from the nearest edge of ground-disturbance necessary for the proposed rehabilitation—an area extending 6 inches from the outer edge/footprint of the existing garage—to the cemetery of the property's enslaved residents, the memorial stone of which is 350 feet to the west of the garage and on the opposite side of a parking lot, and to the Overton cemetery, 38.5 feet to the south of the garage.
-Proposed NPS approval-conditions: As with NPS consideration of approval for any proposal made under the terms of a Green Springs National Historic Landmark District conservation easement and that would entail ground disturbance, the owner/builder will cease work and notify NPS, for next steps, in the event that human remains or Native American cultural or religious artifacts are encountered during excavation work. And although the garage rehabilitation would necessitate only 6 inches of ground-disturbance beyond the nearest edge of the garage and in the direction of the Overton cemetery 38.5 feet distant, the NPS proposes to make approval also conditional on no ground-disturbance beyond 2 feet of that south edge of the garage, to allow for owner's/builder's discretion in the event that ground disturbance proves necessary within that 2 feet from the edge of the garage.
Contact Information
Noel Harrison,Manager of Easements
(540) 424-0512