PLANNING FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION
Text Only Version
THE FUTURE OF OUR PAST:
PLANNING FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION
IN DELAWARE, 2001-2005
April 2001
Our Thanks for Help Received
The DE SHPO is greatly indebted to Preservation Delaware who assisted in the planning process, and to all those who completed the questionnaire, attended public meetings, or consented to be interviewed. We thank our own staff members and professional colleagues for all their input. Many thanks to Alice Guerrant, Planning Coordinator, and Patricia Ojea, Planning Intern, of the DE SHPO staff, for all their hard work in organizing and holding meetings, researching topics, interviewing people, and writing the plan.We thank these organizations for providing meeting facilities for our public workshops: City of Seaford City Hall; City of Harrington Town Hall; Delaware Technical and Community College, Georgetown; Dover Public Library; Hockessin Public Library; Lewes Public Library; MOT Senior Center, Middletown; New Castle Public Library; St. Joseph's Church, Wilmington; and University of Delaware Center for Historic Architecture and Design.
We are especially grateful to the members of the Technical Committee who donated their time to reviewing a large packet of information, attending the meeting, and providing a wealth of ideas and perspectives on the state's preservation needs and goals:
Margaret S. Alexander, Site Supervisor, Gov. William Ross Plantation, Seaford Historical Society
Kay Wood Bailey, President, Wyoming Historical Commission
Steven Boyd, Main Street Program Coordinator
Wade Catts, New Castle Co. Historic Review Board
Kenneth S. Clark, Chief, Nanticoke Indian Association
Dennis J. Coker, Tribal Chairman, Lenape Indian Tribe of Delaware
Harriett Donofrio, Director, Delaware Teacher Center
George M. Elliott, President, Lewes Historical Society
Dr. Susanne N. Fox, History Department, Wesley College
Deborah Haskell, Executive Director, Delaware Heritage Commission
Michael Mahaffie, Office of State Planning Coordination
Michael Miller, Manager, Delaware Folklife Program
Sally Monigle, New Castle Historic Area Commission
Carlton Moore, President, Historic Georgetown Association
Dr. Jeanne Nutter, Director, African-American Museum
Ralph Prettyman, citizen member
Lewis Purnell, citizen member
Carolyn Roland, Historic Homes Division, Patterson-Schwartz Realty
Gene Ruane, Board of Directors, Delaware Chapter of the American Planning Association
Lucreatia C. Wilson, Acting Chair, Delaware State Review Board for Historic Preservation
As always, our grateful thanks to the members of the State Review Board for Historic Preservation, who provided their expert guidance and perspective on Delaware's historic preservation needs:Richard B. Carter - citizen member
Dr. Susanne N. Fox - historian
William H. Holloway - architect
Dr. William Flayhart - historian
Bayard Marin, Esq. - citizen member
Michael H. McGrath - planner
Dr. David G. Orr - archaeologist
Dr. Damie Stillman - architectural historian
Lucretia C. Wilson - citizen member
Why Plan for Historic Preservation?Relationship to State Planning Goals
Revising the Goals for FY2001-2005
Appendix 1. State Planning Goals and Guiding Principals
Appendix 2. Producing the Plan: the Nuts and Bolts
Appendix 3. Delaware's Historic Preservation Program, 1995-2000
Appendix 4. Delaware SHPO Current Publics and Clients: 2000
Appendix 5. Summary of Economic and Demographic Trends: 1995-2010
Appendix 6. Our Knowledge of Historic Properties: 1995-2000
Appendix 7. New Laws Supporting Historic Preservation, 1995-2001
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Federal Historic Preservation Fund, DelawareFigure 2. Federal Historic Preservation Funds for Delaware, FY1971-FY2000
Figure 3. Number of SHPO Environmental Review Cases Per Year
Figure 4. Number of Environmental Review Cases by Federal Agency
Figure 5. Economic Trends in Delaware, 1987-2005
Figure 6. Delaware Population, 1900-2020
Figure 7. Distribution of National Register Properties
THE FUTURE OF OUR PAST:
PLANNING FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION
IN DELAWARE, 2001-2005
When people reminisce about where they grew up and called home, chances are that particular places come to mind: the local school, the fire station, the drug store on the corner, a favorite store. These places remind them of the people who lived and worked there. Whether they still reside in the community where they grew up or only return to visit, they look for the landmarks that are familiar and meaningful to them as they walk down the street or drive along a road. The legacy of the past defines our communities for ourselves and for our children as special, recognizable places. It is largely through the physical presence of these reminders of our history that the contributions of past Delawareans are remembered and celebrated today.Indeed, we are justly proud of our past and our historic buildings and landscapes. Our historic places are often the sights that attract visitors to our communities. One of the main reasons individuals vacation in a region or a state is to sightsee. People travel to the City of New Castle to feel surrounded by the 18th and early 19th century, when it was an important port and governmental center. The revitalization of downtowns often depends upon successful preservation efforts that draw tourists to the area.
Delawareans and their visitors can see and touch the unique heritage preserved in historic buildings, rural landscapes, small town streetscapes, and maritime environments. They can visit archaeological sites and catch a glimpse of forgotten pasts. Today, more and more Delawareans are recognizing the need to protect their heritage and to integrate their historic places wisely into the continuing development of their state. For this plan, a wide range of individuals, private non-profit organizations, commercial enterprises, and governmental agencies proposed ideas, strategies, and needs. From these, we present a common set of goals, for all of us to contribute to for the cause of historic preservation in Delaware. Top
Why Plan for Historic Preservation?
Historic places contribute insights into our history and are integral components of our dreams for the future. Too often, though, we are caught unprepared for actions that can destroy our most meaningful historic buildings and artifacts. And, too late, we realize that when we lose an important historic property we also lose a part of the people and the eras that came before us that helped build the present. Only by consciously planning to protect historic places can we reduce these losses and prevent unnecessary ones.
In Delaware historic preservation is part of the daily business of many groups. These include federal, state, and local government agencies who work with and plan for the preservation of important historic properties in their projects and in their long-range planning; historical, environmental, and archaeological societies like the Historical Society of Delaware, Delaware Nature Society, and the Archaeological Society of Delaware, concerned about Delaware's history, historic buildings, and archaeological sites in their communities; ethnic groups who want to ensure that their unique places and history are not overlooked; nonprofit organizations like Preservation Delaware, Inc. (PDI) that undertake special historic preservation projects and lobby on behalf of historic preservation issues; museums like Delaware State Museums, Hagley, and Winterthur, that maintain and exhibit a variety of Delaware's most significant historic properties for the public to visit, and also produce special exhibits and publications on Delaware's history and historic places; and educational institutions like the University of Delaware, Delaware State University, and Wesley College that teach Delaware history, archaeology, and historic architecture, and train historic preservation professionals for the future. Most importantly, historic preservation includes the many citizens who proudly own, reside in, restore, and maintain historic buildings for their own private purposes.Because so many groups and individuals are involved in historic preservation around Delaware, we have to plan to work together, so we do not accidentally work against one another, and so we can support one another's efforts. And without agreeing to and writing down our overarching goals, we in the preservation community can lose sight of our ultimate aims in the day to day shuffle to meet immediate crises and the constant demands on our time. The goals need to be broad and sufficiently responsive to adapt to changing circumstances, accommodate new needs, and incorporate new strategies as old ones are achieved or proven impractical. Everyone who works in historic preservation or on projects that include historic preservation or who is simply concerned about retaining the look and feel of Delaware's unique places can contribute to and be part of reaching these goals.
Top Public Comments for the Plan
The comments we heard in our public meetings and questionnaire responses (see Appendix 3 for a description of the public outreach efforts) fell into four categories (listed in descending order of importance based on frequency of response):
Public education on the importance of historic preservation
Improved ways of identifying endangered historic properties and built environments
Funding for rehabilitation of Delaware's historic properties
Enhanced federal and state historic preservation services
In discussing the positive factors for historic preservation, the most frequently mentioned community strengths were the quality of Delaware's built environment, land use and development planning, small town livability, open space and greenway corridor preservation, community appearance, and the quality of Delaware's historic resources. Other strengths mentioned were the presence of higher educational institutions that offer advanced degrees in planning and historic preservation, the many cultural and recreational activities offered in historic environments, and Delaware's ability to draw tourists to the area.
Negative factors identified included the lack of consistent outreach to the public on historic preservation issues, the need for better coordination among various planning agencies, the lack of funding for rehabilitation or purchase of threatened historic environments by local governments, the lack of adequate zoning and local enforcement, deteriorating inner-city buildings, the lack of coordination between the private sector and government, and the diminution of open space and regional character. People were particularly concerned about over-development along resort corridors and the lack of long-term vision for Wilmington's historic character. Also of concern was the loss of open space and the lack of coordination between local, state, and federal governments. Most people who commented about DE SHPO services were satisfied, yet expressed dismay at the lack of communication between the DE SHPO and the general public. Several strategies were suggested for involving the public in DE SHPO endeavors. Several also suggested that DE SHPO should take a pro-active stance when historic properties are threatened.
More than 50% of the questionnaire respondents selected additional funding as the action most needed to protect our historic treasures, or voiced their concern over the lack of monetary incentives for rehabilitation. In some cases, even respondents who felt that private organizations or local government should have the most responsibility for preservation in the state stated that financial assistance from other entities is necessary for these two groups to carry out preservation functions successfully.
In interviews with community and preservation leaders, the leaders gave several suggestions (listed below in descending order of importance):
Improved government efficiency and effectiveness in identifying threatened environments
Regular government-sponsored workshops and publicity on historic preservation activities
Government funding to preserve community character
Improvements in political/social/cultural environment for historic preservation efficiency and effectiveness
Asked what it would take to accomplish such improvements, the community leaders overwhelmingly responded with comments about commitment and cooperation, followed by more money. When asked what role the DE SHPO played or should be playing in their communities, their responses matched those gathered from the questionnaire and public meetings: education, funding, protection and enhancement, coordination, identification and evaluation, and planning. TopRelationship to State Planning Goals
As noted in the 1996 plan, all of the preservation plan goals contribute to the broader state goals set forth in Shaping Delaware's Future (see Appendix 1 for revised goals, 1999, and guiding principals, 1998). Historic preservation is a major approach for adhering to all the guiding principals developed for state planning in 1998, especially "The environmental and cultural amenities of the state are protected and enhanced." While not specifically mentioned in the state's goals, historic preservation has emerged as an important part of the strategies that need to be implemented to reach those goals. Historic preservation strategies especially contribute to protecting critical areas from ill-advised development, encouraging reuse and redevelopment of Delaware's urban and small town communities and improving their livability, and providing access to educational opportunities for all Delawareans.
Revising the Goals for FY2001-2005
The Technical Committee did not see a need for major changes to most of the goals adopted in the 1996 plan. However, the members did see a need for taking the desired outcome for improved information quality and availability out of the goal for state government's role as the leader in historic preservation and elevating it to a goal in its own right. This was needed because available, accurate information is fundamental to all the other goals, and needs to be emphasized more in the coming years.
The Review Board accepted all of the Technical Committee's revised goals and most of the desired outcomes under each goal. They did add another outcome to the education goal, addressing the needs of programs offering advanced education in historic preservation and related subjects. They then voted to assign an overall priority to each goal and to rearrange the goals according to priority. (In the 1996 plan, priorities were assigned to the desired outcomes and not to the overarching goals.) Thus the goals from the 1996 plan are intact, but they have different numbers and a new order. The new goal developed by the Technical Committee was assigned the lowest priority and is therefore Goal V in this document. (While this goal has a lower priority within this overall statewide plan, the DE SHPO, which maintains the central databases and archive on historic properties, is placing a high priority on this need within its internal strategic planning.) TopOrganization of the Goals and Strategies
The following plan presents each historic preservation goal separately, from higher to lower priorities. Each goal is followed by a note on its linkage with the statewide planning goals. Then under each goal is a set of desired outcomes, which are more specific statements about what we are working towards. Under each outcome then are the actual strategies, the things to do to meet our goals.
The strategies for reaching each desired outcome are followed by the acronyms for the groups that will be most involved in implementing that strategy (see the inside of the front cover for the acronym list). This is not intended to be a complete list of groups, or to exclude others from working on the same strategy. Implementation of these strategies will be tracked and reported quarterly by the DE SHPO. No dates for completing implementation actions are given here; we found that changing priorities on our part as well as by many of our partners, coupled with problems in printing the 1996 plan, made the schedules immediately out of date. Rather, these are the recommended strategies to target within the next five years. We realize that not all of these strategies will be implemented fully before the next planning cycle. We intend this plan to be a flexible guide to action, not an iron-cased demand for groups to work in certain ways. If other opportunities arise or new groups with different agendas appear, producing actions that contribute to these goals, we will be happy to see those different strategies pursued.
Our pride in where we live rests in part on our understanding and appreciation of the past inherent in the surviving historic buildings, structures, landscapes, streetscapes, and archaeological sites that surround us. We envision a Delaware in which every citizen knows about and appreciates his or her community's unique contribution to Delaware's heritage, and takes pride in maintaining and protecting that heritage, and in which governmental agencies at all levels set the example of good stewardship and support their citizens' efforts. Top
Goal I: Convey to Delaware's citizens an awareness and understanding of Delaware's history and heritage and educate them about the community benefits of historic preservation.
Desired Outcome 1: Increased dissemination through all media including speakers, news articles, newsletters, brochures, pamphlets, workshops, and searchable databases on local computer systems and on the Internet, of information on Delaware's history, architecture, archaeology, historic preservation, and heritage tourism opportunities directed to different audiences, including the general public, historic communities, ethnic and other minority groups, community officials, legislators, planners, state and local officials.
Contributes to State Planning Goal 10, improving access to educational opportunities for all Delawareans.Actions:
Continue committee on public outreach to generate ideas and coordinate outreach efforts, and encourage wider participation. (DE SHPO, PDI, DSM, DPA)
Investigate what is currently being done to provide historical and preservation information to Delawareans and make resource list of on-going efforts and providers. (DE SHPO, PDI)Explore current local publications and guidebooks, and provide articles or announcements about Delaware's preservation programs and sources of historical and technical information. (PDI, DE SHPO, NCC, KC, SC)
Participate in merit badge programs for Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts. (DE SHPO, PDI, preservation planners)Produce brochure targeting misconceptions about National Register and federal and state preservation laws. (DE SHPO, PDI)
Publish National Register information through a searchable database on DE SHPO's home page on the Internet. (DE SHPO)
Review existing material in DE SHPO, DSM, UDCHAD, and other depositories of unpublished documents dealing with cultural resources and historic preservation issues, and explore production of summaries or excerpts and ways to publish them. (DE SHPO, DSM, UDCHAD, UDCAR, DelDOT, DNREC)
Continue to develop new activities and programs for Delaware Archaeology Month, Historic Preservation Week, and Main Street Month (all in May). (ASD, PDI, DEDO, DE SHPO)
Expand PDI's and ASD's Archaeology Month committee's speakers bureaus to occasions outside of May. (PDI, ASD)Produce workshop for homeowners and occupants of historic buildings on appropriate rehabilitation and maintenance techniques, with hand-on-experts. (PDI, SHPO)
Continue development of Delaware's Scenic Byways program. (DelDOT, DA)
Develop series of exhibits on historic preservation programs, preservation themes, or types of historic properties, and make these available for community heritage festivals or other appropriate venues. (PDI, universities, DE SHPO, HSD, DelDOT, DNREC)
Continue existing volunteer training programs in archaeology and explore ways to train and use volunteers in other branches of historic preservation. (DNREC, PDI, ASD)Assure that outreach programs, exhibits, web pages, and videos provide access for disabled citizens by every means possible, including large print, cassette tape, braille, closed caption, text alternatives, etc. (PDI, DE SHPO, HSD, DelDOT, DNREC, DSM, DPA, historic house museums)
Desired Outcome 2: Positive community view of how preservation can contribute to strengthening community values and quality of life.
Contributes to State Planning Goal 1, directing investment to existing communities, Goal 2, protecting important farmlands and critical natural resources areas, Goal 3, improving housing quality, variety, and affordability for all income groups, and Goal 6, encouraging redevelopment and improving livability of existing communities and urban areas.
Actions:
Develop annual award for excellence in: 1) design of compatible new construction within a historic district, 2) restoration or adaptive reuse of a historic property, and 3) innovative community preservation planning, with budget for brochure, video, and/or other publicity for award-winning projects. (AIA, APA, Governor's Office, DHCA)
Encourage communities to identify and celebrate their own significant historic resources. (HSD, PDI, historical societies, neighborhood associations, DE SHPO, county and City of Wilmington Preservation Planners)
Cultivate positive relationships with print and visual reporters to encourage the promotion of historic preservation issues, information, and events in the media. (PDI, DE SHPO, UD, DSU, WC, DelDOT, DNREC, HSD, ASD)
Adapt workshops for government officials on economic benefits and on incentive programs for historic preservation (see goal IV) to more general audiences, including homeowners, service organizations, realtors, businessmen, developers, special interest groups, historical societies, and other community groups, and present to them. (PDI, DE SHPO, preservation planners)Document and publicize historic resources, such as Fork Branch and Dupont schools, and African American churches, that represent Delaware's heritage from all points of view, including the African-American and Native American experience. (DSU, Nanticoke Indian Museum, African-American Historical Museum, HSD, local historical societies)
Desired Outcome 3: Increased heritage tourism throughout Delaware and in cooperation with nearby states.Contributes to State Planning Goal 2, protecting important farmlands and critical natural resources areas, Goal 3, improving housing quality, variety, and affordability for all income groups, Goal 6, encouraging redevelopment and improving livability of existing communities and urban areas, and Goal 7, providing high quality employment opportunities.
Actions:
Find funding and/or free outlets for disseminating material on Delaware's heritage tourism opportunities. (DEDO, PDI, DE SHPO)
Provide continuing help and training for Delaware communities, history professionals, and other interested parties to prepare for heritage tourism, including information on needed infrastructure, logistics, local history, publicizing local resources, etc. (DEDO, PDI)Seek opportunities to partner with neighboring states on developing and publicizing heritage trails. (DEDO, DE SHPO, PDI, HSD, historical societies)
Find funding and create a video that showcases Delaware's historic places and tourism potential. (WC, DSU, DEDO, PDI)Encourage participation in National Trust Main Street programs in Delaware. (DEDO, DE SHPO, PDI)
Promote linkages of historic preservation information with existing programs, such as Greenways, and include this information in tourist brochures. (DE SHPO, DNREC)
Advertise Delaware's historic highlights nationally in publications issued by the National Trust. (PDI, DEDO, DE SHPO)
Help individual communities publicize their own histories, with such things as driving or walking tour brochures on historic areas, or a booklet series on Delaware's historic communities. (DEDO, PDI, DE SHPO, HSD, UD, DSU, WC)Desired Outcome 4: Strong preservation leadership in the public and private sectors.
Contributes to State Planning Goal 4, ensuring objective measurement of long-term community effects of land use policies and infrastructure investments, and Goal 11, coordinating public policy planning and decisions among state, counties, and municipalities.
Actions:
Continue PDI's annual conferences for partnership building and discussions of current issues. (PDI, DHCA, commercial and private supporters)
Continue Preservation Round Table meetings and encourage participation by additional preservation professionals. (PDI, DE SHPO, UD, DSU, DNREC, DelDOT, preservation planners, consulting firms, Main Street managers)Encourage grassroots groups that form around specific issues by providing technical assistance and professional support to reach their goals, and adding them to centrally maintained list of preservation-minded organizations and individuals. (PDI, DE SHPO)
Develop an "alert" system to inform concerned citizens about proposed threats to historic properties and about opportunities available for effective public action. (PDI)
Continue development of revolving fund and publicize program. (PDI)
Continue support of Young Friends for Old Buildings and encourage their participation and activism in historic preservation issues. (PDI) Top
Goal II: Improve integration of historic preservation into formal education at every level.Desired Outcome 1: A curriculum that teaches the preservation ethic, that involves the use of historic properties in teaching state and local history, other academic subjects, and technical skills, and that provides information on the contributions of all segments of past society, utilizing the standards established for Delaware's public schools in social studies, science, and other applicable fields.
Contributes to State Planning Goal 10, improving access to educational opportunities for all Delawareans.
Actions:
Continue committee on educational outreach to generate ideas and coordinate efforts. (DE SHPO, DSM, DPA, PDI)
Find or create a resource list of existing, available technical support, i.e. distance learning equipment and facilities, conference facilities, electronic bulletin boards, etc. (DE SHPO)Go through all standards and test questions, list most relevant ones, and provide copies of these to preservationists interested in producing teaching packages. (DE SHPO)
Produce lists of educational materials developed by Delaware's historic preservationists: videos, published documents, manuscripts, slide shows, National Register nominations by school district boundaries, etc. (DE SHPO, PDI, UD, DSU, WC)
Provide teaching portfolios with historic preservation content (information essays in field of expertise and bibliographies of resources on Delaware history, historic properties, archaeology, historic architecture, and/or preservation and rehabilitation techniques), graphical illustrations such as posters or transparencies, and guidance on how to integrate this information into standards-based activities for teachers to use in their classrooms. (DE SHPO, DSM, DPA, ASD, PDI) [SIDEBAR: DPA & DSM portfolios]Provide teacher in-service training and workshops with continuing education credits to develop historic preservation portfolios or on using the portfolios. (DE SHPO, DSM, DPA, ASD)
Find funding for copying and distributing teaching portfolios. (DHCA)
Provide additional guidance for teachers of masonry, carpentry, and other building trades about historic preservation and rehabilitation issues, through workshops, in-service training, and technical assistance. (PDI, DE SHPO)Desired Outcome 2: Successful and well publicized undergraduate and graduate programs in historic preservation at Delaware's institutions of higher learning.
Contributes to State Planning Goal 10, improving access to educational opportunities for all Delawareans.
Actions:Continue development and support of the University of Delaware Center for Historic Architecture and Design as a resource for students concentrating in historic preservation. (UDCHAD, DE SHPO, PDI)
Continue development and support of Delaware State University's master's program in historic preservation. (DSU, DE SHPO, PDI)
Develop both volunteer and paid intern opportunities for students in a wide range of organizations across the state, to provide practical experience related to historic preservation programs, techniques, and/or planning issues. (DE SHPO, PDI, DNREC, DelDOT, preservation planners)
Produce list of practicing preservationists available and willing to participate as resource people or guest lecturers for higher level courses. (DE SHPO, PDI, UD, DSU, WC) Top
Goal III: State government must set the example in historic preservation and assist others in the preservation of Delaware's significant historic and cultural resources.
Desired Outcome 1: A permanent state program established for historic preservation.
Contributes to State Planning Goal 1, directing investment to existing communities, Goal 2, protecting important farmlands and critical natural resources areas, Goal 3, improving housing quality, variety, and affordability for all income groups, Goal 4, ensuring objective measurement of long-term community effects of land use policies and infrastructure investments, Goal 6, encouraging redevelopment and improving livability of existing communities and urban areas, and guiding new employment into underused commercial and industrial sites, and Goal 11, coordinating public policy planning and decisions among state, counties, and municipalities.Actions:
Ensure that State-assisted development grants, construction and redevelopment programs, loans, etc., are preservation friendly. (DHCA, DE SHPO)
Continue permanent, staffed, statewide Main Street program. (DEDO)
Desired Outcome 2: Appropriate maintenance, rehabilitation, or re-use of state-owned historic properties.
Contributes to State Planning Goal 1, directing investment to existing communities, and Goal 6, encouraging redevelopment and improving livability of existing communities and urban areas, and guiding new employment into underused commercial and industrial sites.
Actions:
Have state agencies give priority to use of historic buildings. (CCSPI, OSPC, DAS, DE SHPO)
Produce brochure or other publication on State-owned historic buildings, and add National Register status to State Property List. (DE SHPO, DAS)Support funding for appropriate rehabilitation, interpretation, and maintenance of State-owned historic properties. (CCSPI, DHCA, DAS)
Desired Outcome 3: Increased incentives and improved coordination of historic preservation efforts by and among state agencies, local governments, and the private sector.
Contributes to State Planning Goal 1, directing investment to existing communities, Goal 2, protecting important farmlands and critical natural resources areas, Goal 3, improving housing quality, variety, and affordability for all income groups, Goal 4, ensuring objective measurement of long-term community effects of land use policies and infrastructure investments, Goal 5, streamlining regulatory processes and providing flexible incentives and disincentives to encourage growth in desired areas, Goal 6, encouraging redevelopment and improving livability of existing communities and urban areas, and guiding new employment into underused commercial and industrial sites, Goal 7, providing high quality employment opportunities for citizens with various skill levels, and Goal 11, coordinating public policy planning and decisions among state, counties, and municipalities.
Actions:
Research ways in which banking and insurance industries affect historic preservation, and produce lists of changes that should be considered and technical assistance that could be provided. (DE SHPO, PDI)
Assess treatment approaches, such as recordation of buildings and archaeological data recovery excavation, for informational value and redundancy, cost effectiveness, and preservation priorities. (DE SHPO, UD, DSU)
Establish permanent program to document historic properties scheduled for demolition and for excavation of threatened archaeological sites. (DHCA, PDI, UD, DSU) Top
Goal IV: Encourage municipal and county governments to promote incentives and remove disincentives for historic preservation, and to improve protection for historic properties.Desired Outcome 1: Preservation-friendly, flexible codes, with incentives that promote growth yet preserve the historic character of communities or rural areas by encouraging adaptive reuse of historic buildings and allowing developers to extend appearance, character, and feel of an existing community into infilled areas and new developments.
Contributes to State Planning Goal 1, directing investment to existing communities, Goal 2, protecting important farmlands and critical natural resources areas, Goal 3, improving housing quality, variety, and affordability for all income groups, Goal 5, streamlining regulatory processes and providing flexible incentives and disincentives to encourage growth in desired areas, and Goal 11, coordinating public policy planning and decisions among state, counties, and municipalities.
Actions:Encourage local governments to research incentives and code alternatives, such as cluster development, transfer of development rights, easement donations, and local preservation tax credits. (DE SHPO, OSPC, county governments, municipal governments)
Create a list of local codes that contain preservation incentives and make these available to other local governments for their consideration. (DE SHPO, PDI)
Desired Outcome 2: County and municipal governments participating as partners in preserving and protecting historic properties.Contributes to State Planning Goal 1, directing investment to existing communities, Goal 2, protecting important farmlands and critical natural resources areas, Goal 3, improving housing quality, variety, and affordability for all income groups, Goal 4, ensuring objective measurement of long-term community effects of land use policies and infrastructure investments, Goal 5, streamlining regulatory processes and providing flexible incentives and disincentives to encourage growth in desired areas, and Goal 11, coordinating public policy planning and decisions among state, counties, and municipalities.
Actions:
Continue existing preservation planner programs and explore ways to extend these programs to other local governments. (DE SHPO, DNREC, county governments, City of Wilmington)
Explore ways of providing access to a preservation/rehabilitation professional for local governments and communities without preservation planners. (OSPC, DE SHPO, PDI, county preservation planners)Continue committee on local government outreach to generate ideas and coordinate efforts. (DE SHPO, PDI)
Explore land use alternatives that promote historic preservation, develop technical assistance materials about them, and provide training on land development and zoning alternatives for local officials. (DE SHPO, OSPC, PDI)Demonstrate economic benefits of historic preservation and heritage tourism in Delaware, and produce workshops for local officials and community leaders. (DEDO, DE SHPO, OSPC, PDI)
Provide maps and lists of National Register-listed and eligible properties for each municipality that does not have such maps developed in-house; for those with GIS capability, provide these electronically. (DE SHPO) TopGoal V: Obtain and maintain high-quality information on Delaware's historic properties in secure and accessible formats.
Desired Outcome 1: All pre-1950 historic buildings and structures identified and evaluated for National Register eligibility.
Contributes to State Planning Goal 11, coordinating public policy planning and decisions among state, counties, and municipalities.Actions:
Complete inventory of State-owned historic properties. (DE SHPO)
Complete survey and evaluation of Ellendale. (DE SHPO)
Prepare prioritized list of remaining towns to be surveyed and explore ways to complete those surveys. (DE SHPO, UD, DSU)
Explore ways to update survey information, especially for areas where original surveys had biases (against 20th century buildings, roadside architecture, or commercial and industrial buildings, for example) or problems with missing information. (DE SHPO, UD, DSU)Review existing context documents, and explore funding for and prioritize development of new ones, including those for industrial and maritime properties. (DE SHPO, UD, DSU, WC, HSD)
Desired Outcome 2: All existing inventory information entered into DE SHPO's Cultural Resource Information Management System (CRIMS)
Contributes to State Planning Goal 11, coordinating public policy planning and decisions among state, counties, and municipalities.Actions:
Explore additional funding and/or partnerships to develop CRIMS and populate the data fields more rapidly than with existing DE SHPO resources. (DHCA, CCSPI, DelDOT, DNREC, county governments, City of Wilmington)
Complete GIS point mapping of existing Cultural Resource Survey (CRS). (DE SHPO, UD, DSU)
Complete polygon mapping of National Register properties' boundaries. (DE SHPO, UD, DSU)
Complete Access database development for CRIMS. (DE SHPO)Eliminate backlog of National Register properties' data entry, and then complete data entries into CRIMS on new National Register properties within one month of listing. (DE SHPO)
Complete data entry of basic locational and identifying CRS information into CRIMS. (DE SHPO, UD, DSU)
Continue data entry of expanded cultural and historical CRS information into CRIMS. (DE SHPO, UD, DSU)
Provide regular maintenance of CRIMS through regular GIS mapping, data entry, and quality checks of newly acquired CRS information. (DE SHPO, consulting firms w/ GIS capability, county and City of Wilmington preservation planners)Desired Outcome 3: Information in DE SHPO data room (manual formats) and in CRIMS (electronic formats) readily accessible for agency and public use, within limits necessary to preserve security of data, especially archaeological site locations.
Contributes to State Planning Goal 10, improving access to educational opportunities for all Delawareans, and Goal 11, coordinating public policy planning and decisions among state, counties, and municipalities.
Actions:
Develop policy outlining ways to partner with DE SHPO on CRIMS, restrictions on use, and costs for disseminating electronic and manual information to agencies, consultants, and the general public. (DE SHPO)
Enter into partnerships with preservation planners' agencies to provide CRIMS in exchange for regularly updated information on properties within planners' jurisdiction. (DE SHPO, DNREC, county governments, City of Wilmington)
Eliminate backlog of microfilming of CRS and National Register information, and then perform regular yearly filming of newly acquired information. (DE SHPO)
Provide summaries of types of information available, costs of copies, and any restrictions on use on DE SHPO web site and in brochure. (DE SHPO)Provide searchable database on National Register properties on DE SHPO web site. (DE SHPO)
Desired Outcome 4: Information on currently threatened properties maintained, and recordation of significant properties performed.
Contributes to State Planning Goal 11, coordinating public policy planning and decisions among state, counties, and municipalities.
Actions:
Create central list of threatened properties (PDI, DE SHPO).
Develop program to check on and update information about threatened properties regularly. (PDI, DE SHPO)Encourage county and municipal governments to require historic review of properties as part of demolition permit process, along lines of New Castle County's process. (PDI, DE SHPO)
Explore funding opportunities for threatened resource recordation projects. (PDI, DHCA, UD, DSU) Top
Brandywine Village, Inc. Old Brandywine Village: A Walk Through the Past.Brandywine Village Revitalization Steering Committee. Brandywine Village Voice. August 1998.
City of Dover Planning Department. Dover Comprehensive Plan. 1999.
Delaware Office of State Planning Coordination. Shaping Delaware's Future. 1995.
Delaware Office of State Planning Coordination. Managing Growth in 21st Century Delaware: Strategies for state policies and spending. December 1999.
Delaware Agricultural Lands Preservation. Preserving Delaware's Farmland: It Pays!Delaware Archaeology Month Committee. Delaware Archaeology Month Calendar of Events. 1999.
Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control. Landowners Options: A Guide to Voluntary Land Protection in Delaware.
Delaware Dept. of Transportation. Dig Up the Past at the Hickory Bluff Site. 1999.
Delaware Office of State Planning Coordination. 1997 Annual Assessment Report. July 1998.
Delaware Office of State Planning Coordination. Absorption Analysis. 2000.
Delaware Office of State Planning Coordination. Gross Land Use Changes In Delaware, 1992 to 1997. August, 1999
Greenbank Mill Associates, Inc. Millrace. Summer 1999.Guerrant, Alice H., and Carolyn Cusamono. The Future of Our Past: Planning for Historic Preservation in Delaware. 1996.
Kent County Department of Planning. Kent County Comprehensive Plan. 1996.
Lawson, Barry R., Ellen P. Ryan, and Rebecca Bartlett Hutchison. Reaching Out, Reaching In: A Guide to Creating Effective Public Participation in State Historic Preservation Planning. 1993.
Lewes Chamber of Commerce and Visitors Bureau. Lewes Visitors Guide and Walking Tour.
New Castle County Department of Land Use. New Castle County Comprehensive Land Use Plan. 1996.
New Castle County Department of Land Use. Unified Development Code. 1999.
Nicholas Gilstrap, Inc. Tourism in Delaware: State of the Industry Report. For the Delaware Tourism Office. March 1999.
Preservation Delaware, Inc. Preservation Primer. 1997.
Riverfront Development Corporation. Tubman-Garrett Riverfront Park Celebration. 1999.
Town of Bethany Beach. Bethany Beach Comprehensive Plan. 2000.
Town of Georgetown. Georgetown Comprehensive Plan. (Draft, 2001).Town of Milton. Milton Comprehensive Plan. 1999.
Town of Wyoming. Wyoming Comprehensive Plan. 1999.
Town of Smyrna. Smyrna Comprehensive Plan. 1999.
University of Delaware Center for Public Policy. City of New Castle Comprehensive Plan. 1999.
University of Delaware Center for Public Policy. Town of Clayton Comprehensive Plan. 1999.
University of Delaware Center for Public Policy. Town of Middletown Comprehensive Plan. 1999.
University of Delaware Center for Public Policy. Update to the Middletown Comprehensive Plan. (Draft, 2001).
White, Bradford J., and Richard J. Roddewig. Preparing a Historic Preservation Plan. 1994.
Whitman Requardt and Associates. Sussex County Comprehensive Plan. 1996. Top
Appendix 1. State Planning Goals and Guiding Principals.Shaping Delaware's Future: Revised Goals, 1999
from Delaware Office of State Planning Coordination
1. Direct investment and future development to existing communities, urban concentrations and growth areas.
2. Protect important farmlands and critical natural resource areas.
3. Improve housing quality, variety and affordability for all income groups.
4. Ensure objective measurement of long-term community effects of land use policies and infrastructure investments.
5. Streamline regulatory processes and provide flexible incentives and disincentives to encourage growth in desired areas.
6. Encourage redevelopment and improve livability of existing communities and urban areas, and guide new employment into underused commercial and industrial sites.
7. Provide high quality employment opportunities for citizens with various skill levels to retain and attract a diverse economic base.
8. Protect the state's water supplies, open spaces, farmlands and communities by encouraging revitalization of existing water and wastewater systems and the construction of new systems.
9. Promote mobility for people and goods through a balanced system of transportation options.
10. Improve access to educational opportunities, health care and human services for all Delawareans.
11. Coordinate public policy planning and decisions among state, counties and municipalities.
Guiding Principals, 1998:Housing and business development is focused in existing communities and in clearly defined "growth" areas of the state, with limited development occurring outside of these areas.
People live in communities where they have options to their automobiles for getting to work, shopping, and recreational activities.
New housing and business developments are designed to be visually appealing and minimize the negative impacts on the environment.Redevelopment brings stronger economies and growing populations to existing cities and towns throughout the state.
A wide variety of good paying jobs are available which match the abilities of Delawareans.
Agriculture and tourism remain a major part of the state's economy.
The cost of roads, water, sewage and other such public facilities and services is minimized by focusing these investments in existing or planned communities.Technological advances are used to make the production and delivery of facilities and services more efficient.
Public policy decisions are made in a open and coordinated fashion among state, county and municipal levels of government.
All citizens have improved housing, health care and education opportunities.
The environmental and cultural amenities of the state are protected and enhanced. Top
Appendix 2. Producing the Plan: the Nuts and Bolts.Planning for anything, to be effective, goes through three main steps. First, you investigate the background, examining the factors and constraints that can help or hurt your efforts. Second, you talk to as broad a group of people as possible, to get their ideas on what really needs to be done, what's standing in our way, and what are the best strategies to see our efforts succeed. Any sound planning effort - one which truly benefits the residents of our state - must be one that encompasses the needs and visions of the people of Delaware. And finally, you formulate your goals and strategies and decide on their priorities, and write it all down.
This document presents the results of these three steps. It summarizes the background factors and the public comments we received and delineates the approaches we can take together to preserve Delaware's historic and built environments. These approaches are expressed as broad goals, given in order of priority, and are then broken down into more specific desired outcomes. Under each outcome are specific strategies to accomplish the desired outcome, with a list of the main agencies and organizations that will be working on those particular strategies.
Who writes the plan? The Delaware State Historic Preservation Office (DE SHPO) is charged by the National Park Service (NPS) to prepare this comprehensive statewide historic preservation plan and to update it at regular intervals, as a requirement for receiving Delaware's annual portion of the federal Historic Preservation Fund. In Delaware, the first such plan was prepared in 1974, and the most recent plan in 1996. Now in its fifth year of implementation, Delaware's historic preservation plan is once again being updated.
Gathering background information. To examine the current environment for historic preservation activities, we compiled information on economic and population trends, open space and farmland preservation, governmental policies and preservation programs implemented since 1995, and the current state of our knowledge about historic properties and threats to them. (See background summary updates in the following appendices.)
Gathering public comments. To gather an understanding of community needs and values, we began in February 1999 by distributing a questionnaire to solicit comments, concerns, and priorities from the general public and preservation constituencies. PDI provided support in organizing and circulating the survey to its contacts, as well as a current mailing list of its membership, both in and out of state. The 336 responses received represented a broad spectrum of historic preservation interests. People from 38 of Delaware's 61 communities (identified by zip code) participated in the survey. Respondents from areas as distant as Pittsburgh, PA, Baltimore, MD, and Richmond, VA, completed questionnaires. The survey provided information on the effectiveness of various preservation programs and on preservation needs around the state. Then, during the spring of 1999, a series of 10 planning forums was held, with meetings in Seaford, Georgetown, Middletown, Newark, New Castle, Harrington, Lewes, Hockessin, Dover, and Wilmington. Attendees at the meetings discussed ways to improve communities and aired concerns and issues over historic preservation in these areas. Although the forums were advertised as widely as resources would allow, attendance was low.A statewide meeting for preservation professionals was held in April 1999 to air historic preservation concerns and to discuss preservation accomplishments. DE SHPO staff then interviewed more than fifteen historic preservation professionals and community leaders. The leaders included public officials and citizens from a range of professions and service organizations. They were asked to describe the strengths and weaknesses of their planning efforts and communities. They were then asked to discuss their views on historic preservation within the context of overall community qualities, problems, needs, and priorities.
Formulating the goals and strategies. To guide the revision of the 1996 plan's goals, we formed a technical committee. Members represented historic preservation and archaeological organizations, professional planners, academic institutions, rural interests, minority groups, state and local government planning officials, and interested citizens. This committee met once and discussed all the information gathered from the survey, the public meetings, and the background scans. From this they recommended changes to the goals and desired outcomes.
These recommendations were then brought before the State Review Board for Historic Preservation, who adopted them with some additions, and then set the broad priorities for the goals. Top
Appendix 3. Delaware's Historic Preservation Program, 1995-2000.
Historic Preservation Fund (HPF) Activities: As predicted in 1996, federal funding for the State's program has been level or slightly cut, with a very small increase for the FY2000 grant. (See Figure 1.) Because costs for the SHPO continue to rise, there have been fewer funds available for the subgrant program. In FY1996, for the first time since Survey and Planning subgrants became available, the Delaware SHPO kept more money in-house than it granted out. By FY2000, only one-third of the federal HPF money was being re-directed to subgrantees. (See Figure 2.)Figure 1: [ADD FIGURE]
This reduction in subgrant money has meant a reduction in the number of subgrantees and in the types of grants given. Consideration of the goals set in the 1996 plan led the State Review Board for Historic Preservation to decide to continue funding only the preservation planner grants. Even the small amount of money given for threatened resource recordations has been eliminated from the grant program, although recapture of money from individual grants (due to personnel changes) has allowed the SHPO to contract with the University of Delaware for some recordation projects. The SHPO and the preservation planners are continuing to survey and nominate historic properties, and the SHPO has invested time, money, and a position in developing a geographic information system (GIS) and databases to store and retrieve cultural and locational information on Delaware's historic properties.
Rehabilitation Tax Incentive and Other Funding Programs: The federal Tax Incentive program has nearly come to a standstill: there have been no approved projects for rehabilitation since 1994. However, the SHPO is expecting several new applications this year. Some local programs have started: Kent County and the City of Newark both developed tax credit programs for rehabilitation of National Register-listed properties, and the State of Delaware has recently passed legislation for such a program on the state level, with the first implementation of the tax credit scheduled for (state) FY02.
The State legislature also recently established a revolving fund through Preservation Delaware, Inc., which has established a Revolving Fund office with a director, and will soon provide direct money for rehabilitation. In addition, the legislature passed the Delaware Land and Historic Resources Protection Incentives Act of 1999, which provides a tax credit for placing a preservation covenant on a historic property. The State also provided over $2.5 million to communities, preservation groups, and historical societies for restoration, revitalization, and acquisition projects in FY1999 alone from the 21st Century Fund.
Open Space Acquisitions: Among the State's recent acquisitions to meet open space goals was the Judge Morris Estate and the S. Halleck DuPont property, which together add two 18th-century buildings, the archaeological site of a ceramic clay mining operation, and a large area with the potential for both prehistoric and historic archaeological sites to the White Clay Creek Preserve, and the Dayett Mill Complex at Cooch's Bridge, which includes the water system and the 19th century mill, to the Division of Historical and Cultural Affairs' holdings. State Parks is working now on a revised management plan for the White Clay Creek Preserve, to include these additional historic resources.
State and Local Land Use Planning: The three counties completed their land use plans in accordance with the 1995-6 changes to the State's Land Use Planning Act (LUPA), which included a new mandate for consideration of historic preservation issues. Kent and Sussex counties thus included historic preservation sections for the first time in their land use plans. Some further changes in LUPA provided additional guidance for municipal governments and their land use plans. The DE SHPO reviewed and commented on the three county plans prior to their adoption, and has so far reviewed and commented on eleven municipal plans. Of these, nine have included historic preservation issues to some extent, in some cases for the first time and in other cases strengthening what was previously there. These include Bethany Beach, Clayton, Dover, Georgetown, Middletown, Milton, New Castle, Smyrna, and Wyoming. New Castle County, following up on the new land use plan, completely revamped its regulations into the Unified Development Code, which strengthened the County's historic preservation program and integrated historic preservation considerations in appropriate places throughout the Code.
The Office of State Planning Coordination has revised the original Shaping Delaware's Future goals (see Appendix 1) and led the effort to develop strategies to implement those goals. Among the guiding principals developed for these strategies, is that "The environmental and cultural amenities of the state are protected and enhanced." Staff of the Division of Historical and Cultural Affairs have been active on the technical advisory committee, pointing out where historic preservation can play a part or has issues to address. All three counties are now revising their plans or will shortly begin on a revision, mainly aimed at incorporating changes to reflect the State's infrastructure investment zones. The University of Delaware's Center for Public Policy is developing a unified set of strategies for small towns to use in managing growth and appropriate development. These strategies include historic preservation, particularly through the Main Street program, but also in planning, economic development, and housing issues. Top
Appendix 4. Delaware SHPO Current Publics and Clients: 2000.
The DE SHPO continues to work with the same wide range of publics and clients as described in the 1996 plan:
Federal Agencies: Federal agencies are some of the most frequent users of our services. In 1989-1990, federal review cases numbered between 100 and 200 cases per year, but since 1992, they are numbering between 350 and 450 per year: as much as our total caseload in the early 1980s. This increase of course was seen at the time of our 1995 plan, but because of the continuing high federal case load, in 1997 the SHPO decided to stop reviewing local cases, outside of the LUPA process. (See Figure 3.)Figure 3: [ADD FIGURE]
Most of this increase is coming from only a few agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service, always one of our highest users, has doubled the number of its cases since 1993. The Corps of Engineers and the Department of Housing and Urban Development are the next highest users. In some years, their cases have risen by 33 per cent and 100 per cent, respectively. The Department of Transportation has also increased the number of their cases by about 200 per cent, although still providing only half of the number of cases as the Corps and HUD. In 1999, the Federal Communications Commission and the Federal Emergency Management Administration, from having only two or three cases per year, suddenly rose to 85 and 29 cases respectively, the FCC responding to changes in the cellular phone industry and FEMA to a recent flood disaster. The Department of Energy, on the other hand, has had very few cases over the last four years, whereas they once had as many as 50 cases in a year. (See Figure 4.)
Figure 4: [ADD FIGURE]
State and Local Agencies: Many times, state and local agencies are involved in federal projects, so become users of our services at those times. The Delaware Department of Transportation, the State Housing Authority, and the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control are among the most frequent users of our services at the state level.
As noted previously, the SHPO still maintains a special relationship with the counties, the City of Wilmington, and DNREC through the grant-supported preservation planner program.
Because of the changes to the Land Use Planning Act, the SHPO and the DHCA are working with municipalities on their planning efforts, helping them to recognize and provide for their unique historic resources within their land use plans. The SHPO is also reviewing certain local projects as part of the State's technical review of projects affecting more than one jurisdiction or having regional impacts.
Preservation Professionals: Because of the increase in federal review cases, the SHPO is working with more cultural resource consulting firms, and thus is seeing an increase in the use of the SHPO's data room and in calls for information in digital forms.Preservation professionals and preservation students who use SHPO services and cooperate with the SHPO in recordation projects and outreach efforts remain at Preservation Delaware, Inc. and the University of Delaware, in the preservation planning programs in the counties and the City of Wilmington, in the Delaware Main Street programs (now in seven municipalities), and in state positions in Delaware State Museums, DelDOT, and DNREC. Recently, the SHPO is working more closely with the History Department at Wesley College, and will be working with Delaware State University as their new Master's program in Historic Preservation develops. The SHPO participates in the Preservation Roundtable and the Wilmington Roundtable, which provide forums for professionals to share information about current projects and to discuss issues and needs.
The SHPO and DHCA are also involved in the planning and activities for Archaeology Month, and work with a wide range of archaeologists from private and public organizations and with avocational archaeologists in this effort.
Private Non-Profit Organizations: The DHCA and the SHPO work with Preservation Delaware, Inc., assisting in PDI's annual conference and in outreach and other efforts. However, because the grant funds are no longer available for projects outside of the preservation planner programs, the SHPO is not interacting with historical societies or other groups as closely as we once did. Through a forum for environmental groups, the SHPO is maintaining contact with groups such as the Delaware Nature Society.
Teachers: The SHPO has worked with several groups recently to develop material using Delaware's historic properties that teachers can use in their classrooms to teach a variety of subjects. The Delaware Teachers Center provides a way to disseminate this material. Also, material developed for teachers workshops or for classroom use will be placed on the SHPO's web site for downloading.
Minorities: Recently, the DHCA has instituted an outreach program to the Native American community in Delaware, hiring Dr. Virginia Busby to facilitate that effort. This complements a program to involve and to receive comment from the African-American community that was established some years ago.
General Public: The SHPO is participating in a number of new outreach activities, including developing exhibits for festivals and special events, expanding the Web site, and providing some financial assistance and speakers for Archaeology Month. In addition, we have formed small partnership committees with other preservation professionals to explore outreach possibilities and to accomplish outreach projects in the areas of the general public, formal education, and local governments. Top
Appendix 5. Economic and Demographic Trends: 1995-2010.
A basic economic indicator, gross state product, shows the major pattern projected for economic trends - rapid growth from 1980 through 2000, and a projected slowing of growth through 2005. (See Figure 5.) This slowing could benefit historic preservation somewhat, by slowing the growth of new housing developments, transportation changes, and industrial uses of currently open space and farm land. However, these are still growing, and preservationists will have to join forces with planners at every level who hope to encourage smart growth and sustainable development. General economic growth can also be a benefit to historic preservation, making it easier for owners of historic places, from individuals to governments, to afford maintaining their buildings properly, but as the economy slows, maintenance costs tend to be sacrificed to more pressing needs. And growth in certain sectors of the economy, such as tourism, can give a large impetus to preservation of historic places, as the benefits of heritage tourism become better known and more pursued by small and large communities statewide.
Figure 5: [ADD FIGURE]
The State Planning Office's summary of land use trends in Delaware, 1992-1997, demonstrated that developed land increased by nearly 14% from its 1992 total, while agricultural and forested lands decreased by almost 4%. Agricultural and forested lands still covered about 58% of Delaware's surface in 1997, while developed uses covered about 17%, matching the significant contribution agriculture still makes to the state economy. Agriculture remains the number one industry in Delaware, although the Delaware Department of Agriculture's figures show that only 2,600 farms with 580,000 acres remained in 1999. This is about 46% of the state's land area, down from 87% at the peak of agricultural usage in the 1880s.Some progress is being seen in the slowing of the loss of acres of farmland statewide. Loss of farmland, as high as 6,000 acres per year from 1970-1990, slowed to 1,500 acres per year from 1991-1999. The Department of Agriculture credits the Agricultural Lands Preservation Program, which went into effect in July 1991, in large part for this change. Protected agricultural lands, around 126,000 acres, now make up nearly 22% of the total land in farms, with half of these permanently protected by the sale of development rights to the state.
Delaware continues to purchase open space, to add to the acres of forests, fields, streams, ponds, and marshes already preserved by federal, state, and county ownership. Private citizens are participating in these efforts by signing preservation easements, transferring development rights to other areas, and by donating or selling development rights to the state. DNREC now owns or has protective covenants on nearly 64,000 acres. The Delaware Division of Forestry owns about 15,000 acres. With protected agricultural lands, about 16% of the state is now protected from development. This benefits, in particular, archaeological sites located in these areas, but can also lead to the preservation of buildings, for example, DNREC's purchase of the Mt. Pleasant Methodist Church and parsonage to add to Bellevue State Park. However, maintenance of historic buildings is as much of a problem for the state as for the private homeowner.
Population growth increased rapidly in the 1980s and 1990s, although the rate of increase is projected to slow over the next 20 years. (See Figure 6.) State planners estimate that the current land already subdivided could accommodate all of this projected growth. However, the rapid increase in households compared to general population growth, as family size becomes smaller and more and more people live alone, is pushing development more rapidly than predicted.
Figure 6: [ADD FIGURE]
(Population figures from the Delaware Population Consortium, current to 6/29/2000)Tourism dollars can fuel the rehabilitation and preservation of historic towns and buildings, as places for tourists to visit. In 1999, the Economic Development Office's Tourism Office funded a study of the tourism industry in Delaware, which recognized the benefit of heritage tourism in an overall mix of active and passive recreation, cultural and sporting events, and shopping and entertainment offerings. Heritage tourism particularly attracts a higher-spending, longer-staying tourist. The study showed that the number of tourists coming to Delaware increased substantially in the 1990s. However, this was only a minor increase compared to our neighboring states and principal competitors, which experienced two to three times the growth that Delaware did. This is despite the perception that Delaware's tourist attractions are of good value, and the industry has developed a number of new, high quality attractions, that increase the number of return visitors. The primary cause pinpointed by the report is a lack of overall image and a coordinated marketing campaign on Delaware's part. The Governor is now recommending a 50% increase in budget for the Tourism Office for FY02. In the meantime, the Tourism Office has prepared coordinated television and radio campaigns and a new web site, all of which mention Delaware's rich heritage and interesting historic places. Top
Appendix 6. Our Knowledge of Historic Properties: 1995-2000.
Threats to Properties: The loss of farmland to development is still accelerating, especially in southern New Castle County. Farm landscapes and agricultural complexes continue to disappear. The SHPO program still has no funding for archaeological investigations in advance of private development projects, so there has been a continuing loss of archaeological sites in the past five years as well. Recordation of threatened buildings continues, especially in New Castle County where the Historic Review Board can require recordation before the demolition of a historic building, but this too does not happen for every historic building lost.In urban areas and town centers, where about 90 per cent of Delaware's listed buildings are located, there is a continuing loss to neglect, demolition, and inappropriate redevelopment, including, for example, the Aldine Theater and Bassett Hall in Wilmington. On the other hand, several significant historic properties have been saved over the last five years from such threats, through local citizen action. These include the Talleyville Grange, the Claymont School, two of the three historic houses within the Elderwood project area in Dover, the Booker T. Washington School in Dover, the Brick Hotel in Georgetown, and the Smyrna Opera House. Until the detailed results of the 2000 census are available, we do not have an updated measure of the rate of loss.
While programs do exist to assist preservation, including the Main Street program, 21st Century redevelopment funds, and some local tax credits, many of the reported instances of preservation of a building involve the action of only one or two individuals. For instance, the Van Dyke and Fox houses were restored by their owners. In other cases, continuing preservation groups have formed around the threat to a community treasure, for example, the Friends of the Capitol Theater, Preservation Brandywine, the Delaware Seashore Preservation Foundation, and the Friends of the Claymont Stone School.
A wide range of other entities have also made contributions to the preservation of Delaware's historic places. For example, the Nation of Islam has purchased the Hearn and Rawlins Mill in Seaford and plans to restore the water power system. The City of New Castle restored the trolley barn for use by their Public Works Department. The Claymont Business Association is using Main Street recommendations to help with the revitalization of Philadelphia Pike. MBNA donated the Allied Kid Office Building to become the African-American History Museum. The Zenith Products Corp. saved an 18th-century farmhouse within their industrial complex, restoring it for a conference center. The New Castle County Historic Review Board has been effective in working with developers to save historic buildings within their development plans, for example, the preservation of the Carpenter-Lippincott House.
National Register-Listed Properties: Fifteen new nominations have been listed in the National Register of Historic Places since the 1996 plan was completed, and two existing nominations have been amended. These have added 440 acres, over 100 buildings, 75 structures, 13 sites, and 25 objects to Delaware's listings. (See Figure 7.) The greatest percentage increase has been in the number of objects listed, which more than doubled. These nominations come from all areas of the state, but the preponderance of the additional properties are located in New Castle County and the City of Wilmington.Figure 7: [ADD FIGURE]
Since the additions to the Register only provided a 2.6 per cent increase to the total listings, we do not anticipate that any significant changes in the trends seen in the 1996 plan have occurred. The new nominations do represent the first additional archaeological nominations since 1982. Most of the newly listed nominations are primarily for properties with Domestic and Agriculture functions, as was the case previously. However, two new ones, Fort Dupont Historic District and the Wilmington Rail Viaduct, add to our list of properties with Military and Transportation functions.
Archaeological Properties: While the SHPO has not been able to conduct archaeological surveys itself or fund broad-area archaeological surveys, the booming economy of the 1990s led to a number of federally funded projects which have sponsored archaeological surveys. More than thirty reports on archaeological surveys and data recovery excavations have been added to the SHPO's library since 1995. These surveys added fewer than 20 sites to the inventory, however. While there were two underwater archaeological surveys included among these, they did not produce definitive evidence for new submerged or shipwreck sites.
The data recovery excavations have produced substantial additions to our knowledge of Woodland I and early historic tenancy sites. A scholarly publication on the Island Field Site is scheduled for publication soon, with support from the Crystal Trust.
Two large cemeteries, both in Wilmington, have recently been excavated under the Unmarked Human Remains Act. Reports will examine a 19th century African-American population, and a 19th- 20th century Catholic population.
Architectural Properties: Unlike archaeological surveys, most architectural surveys in recent years have been conducted by the SHPO or through an HPF subgrant; a small number have been donated. Twenty reports have been added to the library since 1995.
We have focused much of our effort on areas of poor survey or towns with no survey, including West Dover Hundred, Rehoboth Beach, Ellendale, and Greenwood. We also have surveyed state-owned historic buildings. The University of Delaware's threatened resource recordation program produced documentation on 25 buildings in 1996 and 1997. (Counts for more recent recordations are not available.)Surveyors have been trained in the use of the SHPO's revised and expanded forms, and we are now seeing more complete forms than was previously the case. The introduction of a GIS system to map property locations is producing benefits in better data quality as well as greater accessibility and management of our data.
The study of Delaware architecture has also been the subject of scholarly work, with two book published recently or scheduled for publication soon: Everyday Architecture of the Mid-Atlantic: Looking at Buildings and Landscapes by Lanier and Herman, and Buildings of Delaware by Herman and Quimby.
Historic Contexts: While the SHPO has not had the funds to provide grants for historic context development, we have worked on some contexts, and there has been considerable scholarly research published in recent years.
Research on African-American contexts in particular has been very active. The African-American Settlement Pattern context provided a model for settlement; this model has been tested, and we have identified additional models that can apply, and areas to expand the context. The African-American Education context was published recently: African-American Education in Delaware: A History Through Photographs, 1865-1930 by Skelcher. We have recently been working on an associational context for the Underground Railroad, grappling with the problems of how to define a landscape of covert action, and exploring ways to integrate our information with local groups providing educational workshops and tours of identified sites. Two histories on slavery in Delaware have been published recently as well: Slavery and Freedom in Delaware, 1639-1865 by Williams, and A House Divided by Essau. Top
Appendix 7. New Laws Supporting Historic Preservation, 1995-2001
The State established a Revolving Fund for the rehabilitation of historic properties in 1996, now established as a separate entity but related to and supported by Preservation Delaware, Inc.
In January 2001, the Historic Preservation Tax Credit Act passed the State legislature and was signed into law. Once regulations are written, the program will begin accepting applications from owners of National Register-listed properties, or of properties designated historic by a local government and certified by the State as meeting National Register criteria. Rehabilitations must meet the Secretary of the Interior Standards, or such other standards as the DE SHPO chooses. The Act provides for a 20% credit for those properties that qualify for the federal credit, and a 30% credit for those (non-income producing) properties that do not. These credits are increased to 30% and 40% for certain low-income housing projects. Tax credits are also now available at the local level in the cities of Newark and Dover, and in Kent County.The City of Wilmington adopted New Jersey's revised building code for historic properties, which has removed a barrier to the renovation of historic properties in the city.
Recently a bill to require further, inter-governmental review of development projects within the Inland Bays zone of Delaware included non-residential projects located within one mile of a state-owned historic property, or any National Register-listed or eligible historic property, as determined by the Division of Historical and Cultural Affairs.
