CGW - Draft General Management Plan January 2012

5/14/2018 CGW - Draft General Management Plan January 2012 - slidepdf.com

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cgw-draft-general-management-plan-january-2012 1/198

Carter G. Woodson Home National Historic SiteDistrict of Columbia

National Park Service

U.S. Department of the Interior

General Management Plan /

Environmental Assessment /Interpretation Plan

JANUARY 2012



Front cover: Artwork painted by National Park Service employee Sandra Harris(2011). Painting based on a February 1948, Scurlock Studio black and whitephotograph o Dr. Carter G. Woodson. Photograph contained in the ScurlockStudio Records, Archives Center, National Museum o American History,Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.



i

General Management Plan / Environmental Assessment / Interpretation PlanCarter G. Woodson Home National Historic Site

Washington, D.C. __________________________________________________________________________

Congress authorized Carter G. Woodson Home National Historic Site (referred to as site or national historic site in thisdocument) on December 19, 2003, by Public Law 108-192. The site was set aside to preserve, protect, and interpret for the

benefit, education, and inspiration of present and future generations the home (and legacy) of the preeminent historian andeducator Dr. Carter G. Woodson, founder of the organization known today as the Association for the Study of AfricanAmerican Life and History. As a new unit of the national park system, the national historic site has not had a previouscomprehensive planning effort. This General Management Plan / Environmental Assessment/ Interpretation Plan presentsand analyzes alternative directions for the future management and use of Carter G. Woodson Home National Historic Site.The national historic site includes Woodson’s home at 1538 9th Street, NW, and two row houses adjacent to it at 1540 and1542 9th Street, NW.

This document examines two alternatives for the development, use, and management of the national historic site. The no-action alternative describes the baseline for comparison with the preferred alternative. Under the no-action alternative,the National Park Service would take steps to preserve the historic structures because it is the minimum action acceptablefor maintaining the structures and to meet congressional intent for the site. Preservation efforts would include restoring orstabilizing the façades and rear sides of Woodson’s home (building 1538) and building 1540 and rehabilitating the façadeand rear side of building 1542. Periodic minor repairs would be made to the interiors of the historic structures. Visitors

would experience the site from the outside via interpretive wayside exhibits in front of Woodson’s home and aninterpretive walking tour of the neighborhood. The historic structures would not be open to visitors. Interpretation andeducation staff would be hired to manage the day-to-day operations of the site. Their offices would be located off-site.

The preferred alternative presents two options. Option one addresses the Woodson home (building 1538) and the twoadjoining row houses (buildings 1540 and 1542). Option two addresses these three structures and an adjacent fourthproperty, 1544 9th Street, NW (building 1544). Option two would be implemented only if this property is acquired andadded to the park boundary authorized in Public Law 108-92. Under the preferred alternative (both options), the façadesand rear sides of Woodson’s home and building 1540 would be restored, and the façade and rear side of building 1542would be rehabilitated. The interior of the Woodson home would be restored to the time period Dr. Woodson lived there(1922–1950). The interiors of buildings 1540 and 1542 would be rehabilitated to provide space for interpretive exhibits,offices for NPS and Association for the Study of African American Life and History employees, access (via an elevator,wheelchair lift), retail sales, mechanical systems, and restrooms. Under option two, the exterior treatment for building 1544would be determined after the acquisition of the structure, and the interior rehabilitated and the space would be used for

educational programs, interpretive exhibits, public meetings, classroom activities, administrative purposes, and restrooms.In both options, the interpretation plan would be fully implemented, and visitors would experience the site throughinterpretive exhibits, videos, and programs inside the structures, including a ranger-guided tour of Woodson’s home.There would also be interpretive wayside exhibits in front of Woodson’s home and a walking tour of the neighborhood.Interpretation and education staff would be hired to manage the day-to-day operations of the site. The offices for theseemployees would be located at the national historic site.

The potential environmental impacts of the alternatives have been identified and assessed. Implementation of the no-action alternative would result in negligible to minor, adverse, site-specific, long-term impacts to historic structures;negligible to minor, long-term, adverse impacts to visitor use and experience; short- and long-term, beneficial impacts tothe socioeconomic environment; and long-term, beneficial impacts to park operations.

Implementation of either option of the preferred alternative would result in moderate, adverse, site-specific, long-termimpacts to historic structures; long-term, beneficial impacts to visitor use and experience; short- and long-term, beneficial

impacts to the socioeconomic environment; and long-term, beneficial impacts to park operations.

This General Management Plan / Environmental Assessment / Interpretation Plan has been distributed to interested agencies,organizations, and individuals for their review and comment. The public comment period for this document will last 30days. Readers are encouraged to submit comments on this draft plan at: http://parkplanning.nps.gov/cawo. You may alsosend written comments to Carter G. Woodson Home National Historic Site General Management Plan, National ParkService, Denver Service Center – P, P.O. Box 25287, Denver, CO 80225. Please read “How to Comment on this Plan” on thenext page for more information regarding submitting comments and the disclosure of your personal identifyinginformation.



ii

HOW TO COMMENT ON THIS PLAN

Comments on this General Management Plan / Environmental Assessment / Interpretation Plan arewelcome and will be accepted during the 30-day public review and comment period. During thecomment period, comments may be submitted using one of the methods noted below.

Online: It is preferred that readers submit comments online through the park planning websitehttp://parkplanning.nps.gov/cawo. This method will allow comments to be incorporated into theNational Park Service comment system. An electronic public comment form is provided through thiswebsite.

Mail: Carter G. Woodson Home National Historic SiteGeneral Management PlanNational Park ServiceDenver Service Center – PP.O. Box 25287Denver, CO 80225

or

Hand delivery: Comments can be hand delivered to the public meetings the National Park Servicewill hold regarding this General Management Plan / Environmental Assessment / Interpretation Plan.The public meetings will be announced in the media following the release of this plan. Commentscan also be hand delivered to the following address:

National Park ServiceNational Capital Parks East1900 Anacostia DriveWashington, D.C. 20020

Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifyinginformation in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including yourpersonal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. Although you can askthe National Park Service to withhold your personal identifying information from public review inyour comment, the National Park Service cannot guarantee your request will be granted.



iii

SUMMARY

BACKGROUND

Dr. Woodson was the son of former slaves,and earned his Ph.D. from HarvardUniversity in 1912—only the second AfricanAmerican to do so, after W. E. B. DuBois.This achievement was even moreextraordinary since he did not begin hisformal education until he was 20 years old.He had been denied access to publiceducation in Canton, Virginia, where he wasborn in 1875, and did not start school untilhe moved to Huntington, West Virginia. Hereceived his high school diploma two yearslater, a bachelor’s degree from Berea Collegein 1897, and went on to earn A.B. and M.A.degrees from the University of Chicagobefore attending Harvard. Dr. Woodson wasan educator, historian, publisher, advocate,and prominent member of the AfricanAmerican community in Washington, D.C.

Congress authorized the Carter G. WoodsonHome National Historic Site (also referred

to as national historic site or site throughoutthis document) on December 19, 2003,under Public Law 108-92. After acquisitionof Woodson’s home and the two adjacentrow houses to the north (buildings 1540 and1542), the Secretary of the Interiorestablished the national historic site onFebruary 27, 2006, making it the 389th unitof the national park system. As a new unit,the Carter G. Woodson Home NationalHistoric Site has not had a previouscomprehensive planning effort. The

National Parks and Recreation Act of 1978and National Park Service (NPS) policymandate the development of a generalmanagement plan for each unit of the systemto determine how the site should bemanaged, developed, and interpreted to thepublic.

As seen from left to right: Dr. Woodson’s home (red brick with sign above the entryway) and buildings 1540, 1542, 1544.



SUMMARY

iv

The Carter G. Woodson Home NationalHistoric Site is a unit of the National ParkService’s National Capital Parks-East group,which includes 12 major park areas at 98locations in Washington, D.C. and areas east

of the city. The National Capital Parks-Eastsuperintendent oversees the management of the national historic site along with his/herstaff. National Capital Parks-East is part of the NPS National Capital Region.

At present, the national historic site is notopen to the public. This General Management Plan / Environmental Assessment / Interpretation Plan is tailored to

meet the specific needs of this new nationalhistoric site. The plan sets forth direction forachieving desired future conditions at thenational historic site, and it will be theprimary document for managing the site forthe next 15 to 20 years.

It also provides guidance to assist NPSmanagers in opening the national historicsite to the public. Included in this generalmanagement plan is an interpretation planthat will assist NPS managers in developing

interpretive exhibits and programs for thesite.

THE SITE

Woodson’s home is one of three adjoiningstructures within the national historic site.Woodson’s home, at 1538 9th Street, NW,and the two row houses adjacent to it, at

1540 and 1542 9th Street, NW, wereacquired by the National Park Service in2005 and 2006, respectively, and the parkboundary established, as authorized inPublic Law 108-92 (see figure 2).

To the north is 1544 9th Street, NW, aprivately owned structure that wasauthorized for acquisition through donationor purchase from a willing seller underPublic Law 108-92. This building isconsidered in the plan because it isauthorized for acquisition and subsequentaddition to the boundary.

The Woodson home was designated anational historic landmark in 1976 for its

association with Dr. Woodson’s place inAmerican history as an extraordinaryeducator, historian, leader, and “father of Black history.” The home is also significantfor its association with the Association forthe Study of African American Life andHistory, the Associated Publishers, Inc.(publishing company), The Journal of NegroHistory, and The Negro History Bulletin,organizations and publications Dr.Woodson founded between 1915 and 1920and ran out of his home on 9th Street. Theperiod of significance for Woodson’s homeis 1922 to 1950, the years that he lived in thehouse. All four historic structures (1538,1540, 1542, and 1544) are listed in theNational Register of Historic Places ascontributing resources in the Mount VernonWest National Historic District (listed in1999). The buildings are also contributingresources in the Shaw Historic District, aWashington, D.C.-designated historicdistrict.

After Dr. Woodson’s death in 1950, theAssociation for the Study of AfricanAmerican Life and History used hisresidence as their headquarters until 1971.After the Association for the Study of African American Life and History movedout, they rented the building to a publisherthat used the space until the late 1980s(Historic Structures Report 2008). Sincethen, the building has remained unoccupied.



Summary

v

Woodson’s home and buildings 1540 and1542 are components of a block of nine rowhouses on 9th Street, NW, that originally hadidentical façades exhibiting the simple,vernacular, Victorian Italianate architectural

style of the late 19th century. These threestructures were constructed between 1872and 1874.

THE ALTERNATIVES AND IMPACTS

The alternatives for the development, use,and management of the national historic siteinclude a no-action alternative, whichdescribes what is happening now at the siteand the management direction that has been

adopted by current (2011) parkmanagement, and the preferred alternative.The no-action alternative assumes theNational Park Service would take someactions to preserve the historic structures forfuture generations, including some exteriorstabilization, restoration, and rehabilitationwork, because the work is the minimumaction thought to be acceptable forpreservation of the national historic site andto meet congressional intent. The preferredalternative outlines the full development,

use, and management of the national historicsite.

The No-action Alternative

Concept

The neighborhood surrounding Woodson'shome retains much of the historic characterfrom the time Dr. Woodson lived andworked there. The emphasis under the no-action alternative would be the opportunity

for visitors to experience Dr. Woodson’sneighborhood, view the restored and/orstabilized and rehabilitated historic structurefaçades, and understand how thisneighborhood influenced his life and work.While visitors would not have access to theinteriors of the structures, they would learnabout Dr. Woodson’s life and legacy throughthe park website and brochure and the

wayside exhibits in front of Woodson’shome. Visitors would also learn about Dr.Woodson by going on a ranger or volunteer-led interpretive walking tour of theneighborhood. The tour would stop at the

Shiloh Baptist Church, YWCA, and othersignificant neighborhood locationsassociated with him.

Historic Structures

Under the no-action alternative, the façadesand rear sides of Woodson’s home (1538)and building 1540 would be stabilized orrestored to the way they looked during thetime period Dr. Woodson lived there (1922–1950). The façade and rear side of building1542 would be rehabilitated to look

compatible with the other two structures.The exterior of the three structures wouldhave the appearance of a set of maintainedhistoric structures similar in appearance andfeel. The interiors would be periodicallyinspected and minor repairs made asneeded. A heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning system (HVAC) would beinstalled in building 1540 to service the threestructures. A fire suppression system wouldbe installed throughout the three structures.The rear yards would be maintained.

Visitor Use and Experience

Visitor use and experience would be limitedunder the no-action alternative because theinteriors of the historic structures would notbe restored and rehabilitated, and as a result,visitors would not be allowed inside. Thepublic would learn about Dr. Woodson andhis legacy through the park website, parkbrochure, and an interpretive walking tourof the neighborhood led by a NPSinterpretive ranger or volunteer. Visitorswould also learn about Dr. Woodson fromtwo or three interpretive wayside exhibits infront of Woodson’s home. The exhibitswould meet accessibility standards, and thedesign of them would follow sustainable/green design standards includingemphasizing environmental sensitivity inconstructing the exhibits, using nontoxic



SUMMARY

vi

materials, conserving resources, andrecycling materials.

Under the no-action alternative, theAssociation for the Study of African

American Life and History would not beprovided administrative space since theinteriors of the historic structures would notbe rehabilitated for use. The Association forthe Study of African American Life andHistory would assist the National ParkService with interpretive and educationalprogramming, including the park website,park brochure, exterior wayside exhibits,and interpretive programs like the walkingtour. The Association for the Study of African American Life and History would

assist the National Park Service with thecoordination of NPS Black History Monthevents.

Socioeconomic Environment

The national historic site is located withinthe Shaw neighborhood. This large, historicneighborhood possesses a unique characterinfluenced by its late 19th century and early20th century architecture and its history as acenter of African American culture inWashington, D.C. The neighborhood is an

attraction to some cultural heritage tourismtravelers, but it lacks retail businesses andlodging for these travelers.

Park Operations

Under the no-action alternative, four full-time equivalent (FTE) interpretation andeducation staff would be hired to managethe day-to-day operations of the site.National Capital Parks-East may also hire amaintenance worker, resource managementspecialist, or an administrative assistant (twoFTEs total) to support the operation of thenational historic site. These two employeeswould be shared with other National CapitalParks-East park units. The offices of thesite’s employees would be located off-site atanother National Capital Parks-East park oroffice. Additional operational support wouldbe provided by existing National CapitalParks-East staff.

The site’s interpretation and education staff would take visitors on a scheduled walkingtour of the neighborhood during regularpark hours. Volunteers might also guide thetours. The maintenance worker and

resource management specialist wouldcheck on the historic structures periodicallyand make any necessary repairs, as well asclean the site as needed. U.S. Park Policewould continue to regularly patrol thenational historic site.

Impacts of the No-action Alternative

Implementation of the no-action alternativewould result in negligible to minor, adverse,site-specific, long-term impacts to historicstructures and contribute a small increment

to the adverse, minor and long-termcumulative impacts.

Implementation of the no-action alternativewould result in impacts that are adverse,long term, and negligible to minor to visitoruse and experience and contribute a minuteincrement to the long-term, adverse, andnegligible cumulative impacts.

Implementation of the no-action alternativewould result in short- and long-term,

beneficial impacts to the socioeconomicenvironment and contribute a smallincrement to the long-term, beneficialcumulative impacts.

Implementation of the no-action alternativewould result in impacts to park operationsthat are beneficial and long term andcontribute a slight increment to the long-term, beneficial cumulative impacts.

The Preferred Alternative

Concept

In addition to experiencing theneighborhood as described in the no-actionalternative, the emphasis under thepreferred alternative would be to experienceDr. Woodson’s life as if he just stepped outof his house and away from his work.



Summary

vii

Visitors would learn about Dr. Woodson bygoing on a guided tour of his restored home,and through innovative and interactiveinterpretive exhibits, videos, materials, andprograms in the adjacent buildings.

Two Options

The preferred alternative consists of twooptions. Option one addresses Dr.Woodson’s home and the two adjoining rowhouses (buildings 1540 and 1542). Thisoption would be implemented immediatelyupon approval of the plan. Option twoaddresses these structures as well as 1544 9thStreet, NW (building 1544). This optionwould be implemented only if the propertyis acquired and added to the park boundary.

Historic Structures

Under the preferred alternative (bothoptions), the same exterior work would bedone on Dr. Woodson’s home and buildings1540 and 1542 as proposed in the no-actionalternative. The interior of Woodson’s homewould be restored to look like it did, to theextent possible, when Dr. Woodson livedthere. The interiors of buildings 1540 and1542 would be rehabilitated to provide space

for interpretive exhibits, offices, access (viaan elevator, wheelchair lift), retail sales,mechanical systems, and restrooms.Entryways between Woodson’s home andbuilding 1540 would be considered on all fourlevels to provide the highest level of accessibility to all visitors in a way that wouldavoid the loss of significant historic features,spatial relationships, and without jeopardizingthe structural integrity of the building. Anelevator would be installed in building 1540,and an elevator house would be constructed

on the roof of building 1540 (during thepreparation of design and constructiondrawings, it may be determined that theelevator is better suited in building 1542). Asecond stairway would be constructed onthe rear addition of building 1540 toaccommodate fire safety egress. An HVACsystem would be installed in building 1540 toservice the three structures. A firesuppression system would be installed

throughout the three structures (possiblyfour). The rear yards of the three structureswould be maintained.

Under option two, the exterior treatment for

building 1544 would be determined after theacquisition of the structure. The interior of the structure would be rehabilitated toprovide space for educational programs,interpretive exhibits, public meetings,classroom activities, administrativepurposes, and restrooms.

Under option one of the preferredalternative, building 1542 would serve as themain entrance to the site. Under option two,building 1544 would serve as the main

entrance. Both buildings would providebarrier free accessibility to the nationalhistoric site.


Under both options of the preferredalternative, the National Park Service wouldimplement the interpretation plan (chaptersix) by creating interactive interpretive andeducational exhibits, videos, materials, andprograms using innovative technologies andaccessibility guidelines to engage visitors in

the life, work, and contributions of Dr.Woodson. The design of the interpretiveexhibits and spaces would followsustainable/green design standards andwould meet accessibility standards. Theinterpretive exhibits would primarily be inbuildings 1540 and 1542. Like the no-actionalternative, visitors would also learn aboutDr. Woodson and his legacy from the parkwebsite and brochure, wayside exhibits infront of Woodson’s home, and aninterpretive walking tour of the

neighborhood led by a NPS interpretiveranger or volunteer.

It is estimated that groups of six to eightvisitors would tour the Woodson home ledby a NPS interpretive ranger or volunteerwho would provide history and relevantfacts about the house, Dr. Woodson, and hiswork. An estimated two tours of six to eightpeople would be allowed in the house at one



SUMMARY

viii

time. The other two (possibly three) historicstructures would provide orientation to theWoodson story through interpretiveexhibits, information panels, videos, andretail sales items.

Under the preferred alternative (bothoptions), the agreement between theNational Park Service and Association forthe Study of African American Life andHistory would be fully implemented. TheAssociation for the Study of AfricanAmerican Life and History would beprovided no less than 500 square feet of administrative space. They would assist theNational Park Service in providinginterpretive and educational programs about

Dr. Woodson’s legacy, as well as programsabout African American history, life, andculture, including the impact that Dr.Woodson and the Association for the Studyof African American Life and History havehad in America. The Association for theStudy of African American Life and Historywould continue to assist the National ParkService with the coordination of NPS BlackHistory Month events, among other specialevents.

Also, under the preferred alternative (bothoptions), the National Park Service would beable to provide local schools, universities,and other organizations with interpretiveranger programs at the national historic site.Small-scale special events open to the publicwould occur at the national historic site.These events would take place inside thebuildings and possibly in the backyards,during normal business hours and in theevenings.


The national historic site is located withinthe Shaw neighborhood. This large, historicneighborhood possesses a unique characterinfluenced by its late 19th century and early20th century architecture and its history as acenter of African American culture inWashington, D.C. The neighborhood is anattraction to some cultural heritage tourism

travelers, but it lacks in retail businesses andlodging for these travelers.

Park Operations

Under the preferred alternative, seven and a

half FTE interpretation and education staff would be hired to manage the day-to-dayoperations of the site. National CapitalParks-East may also hire a maintenanceworker, resource management specialist,and an administrative assistant (three FTEstotal) to support the operation of thenational historic site. These three employeeswould be shared with other National CapitalParks-East park units. The offices of thesite’s employees would be located at thenational historic site. Additional operational

support would be provided by existingNational Capital Parks-East staff.

The interpretation and education staff would orient visitors to the site and leadthem on tours of Dr. Woodson’s home andthe neighborhood. Volunteers may also leadthe tours. The maintenance worker wouldprovide custodial support and make neededrepairs to the historic structures and utilitysystems, the resource management specialistwould support preservation of cultural

resources, and the assistant would provideadministrative support. U.S. Park Policewould continue to regularly patrol thenational historic site.

Impacts of the Preferred Alternative

Implementation of the preferred alternative(either option) would result in impacts tohistoric structures that are moderate,adverse, site-specific, and long term andcontribute a small increment to the adverse,minor, and long-term cumulative impacts.

After applying the Advisory Council onHistoric Preservation’s criteria of adverseeffects (36 CFR Part 800.5, Assessment of Adverse Effects), the National Park Serviceconcludes the proposed undertakingsoutlined in the preferred alternative (eitheroption) would most likely be an adverseeffect on historic structures. The adverse



Summary

ix

effect determination would result from theconstruction of entryways between theWoodson home and building 1540, and theconstruction of an elevator house on theroof and stairway addition on the back of

building 1540. These actions would alter theintegrity of Woodson’s home, including theworkmanship, design features, materials,and feeling.

As a result of the adverse effectdetermination, a memorandum of agreement, in accordance with 36 CFR Part800.6, Resolution of Adverse Effects, would benegotiated between the National ParkService and the District of ColumbiaHistoric Preservation Office and, if

necessary, the Advisory Council on HistoricPreservation. The memorandum of agreement would stipulate how the adverseeffects would be mitigated.

Implementation of the preferred alternativewould result in impacts to visitor use andexperience that are beneficial and long termand contribute a small increment to thelong-term, beneficial cumulative impacts.

Implementation of the preferred alternativewould result in short- and long term,beneficial impacts to the socioeconomicenvironment and contribute a slightincrement to the long-term, beneficialcumulative impacts.

Implementation of the preferred alternativewould result in impacts to park operationsthat are beneficial and long term andcontribute a small increment to the long-

term, beneficial cumulative impacts.





xi

CONTENTS

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

A GUIDE TO THIS DOCUMENT 3

OVERVIEW OF THE NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE 5 Introduction 5 Dr. Carter Godwin Woodson 11 Dr. Woodson’s Legacy 12 History of the Site and Surrounding Area 14

BACKGROUND 16 Why We Do General Management Planning 16 Purpose of the Plan 16 Need for the Plan 17 Requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act 17

PLANNING ISSUES AND CONCERNS 18

Introduction 18 Issues 18

GUIDANCE FOR THE PLANNING EFFORT 20 Foundation for Planning 20 Park Purpose 21 Park Significance 21 Primary Interpretive Themes 22 Fundamental Resources and Values 22 Mandates and Laws 23 Impact Topics Considered within this Document 24 Impact Topics Dismissed from Further Analysis 25 Relationship of Other Planning Efforts to this General Management Plan 31 The Next Steps 34 Implementation of the Plan 35

CHAPTER TWO: MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES

INTRODUCTION 39

MANAGEMENT ZONES 40 Overview 40 Management Zone Descriptions 40 National Park Service Facility Planning Model 42

USER CAPACITY 43

THE ALTERNATIVES 48 Elements Common to Both Alternatives 48 The No-action Alternative (Continuation of the Current Management Direction) 51 The Preferred Alternative 52 Mitigation Measures 56 Cost Estimates 66

ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERABLE ALTERNATIVE 69

SUMMARY TABLES 71

ALTERNATIVES AND ACTIONS CONSIDERED BUT DISMISSED FROM FURTHER ANALYSIS 76

CHAPTER THREE: THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

INTRODUCTION 79

CULTURAL RESOURCES 80



CONTENTS

xii

Introduction 80 Historic Structures 80

VISITOR USE AND EXPERIENCE 82 Current Visitor Experience 82 Heritage Tourism in the Shaw Neighborhood 82 Visitor Access and Transportation 83

SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT 84 Community Character: The Shaw Neighborhood 84 Local Economy: Neighborhood Issues – Lack of Retail 85 Cultural Heritage Tourism and the Shaw Neighborhood 85

PARK OPERATIONS 88

CHAPTER FOUR: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

INTRODUCTION 91 General Methodology 91 Terms and Assumptions 91 Cumulative Impact Analysis 91 Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and Impacts to Cultural Resources 93

IMPACTS TO HISTORIC STRUCTURES 95 Methodology 95 Impacts of the No-action Alternative 95 Impacts of the Preferred Alternative 96

IMPACTS TO VISITOR USE AND EXPERIENCE 99 Methodology 99 Impacts of the No-Action Alternative 99 Impacts of the Preferred Alternative (Both Options) 100

IMPACTS TO THE SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT 103 Methodology 103 Impacts of the No-action Alternative 104 Impacts of the Preferred Alternative (Both Options) 104

IMPACTS TO PARK OPERATIONS 107

Methodology 107 Impacts of the No-action Alternative 107 Impacts of the Preferred Alternative (Both Options) 108

CHAPTER FIVE: CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT 113 Introduction 113 Public Meetings and Newsletters 113

CONSULTATION WITH ORGANIZATIONS AND OTHER AGENCIES AND OFFICIALS 115 Section 7 Consultation 115 Section 106 Consultation 115 American Indian Consultation 116

AGENCIES, ORGANIZATIONS, AND INDIVIDUALS RECEIVING A COPY OF THIS DOCUMENT 117 Federal Agencies and Officials 117 Congressional Representatives 117 District of Columbia Agencies and Officials 117 Organizations and Businesses 117

CHAPTER SIX: CARTER G. WOODSON HOME NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE INTERPRETATION PLAN

INTRODUCTION 123

FOUNDATIONS 124 Purpose 124 Significance 124



Contents

xiii

Primary Interpretive Themes 125

VISITOR EXPERIENCE—VISIONS FOR INTERPRETATION 126

VISITOR EXPERIENCE GOALS RELATED TO PRIMARY INTERPRETIVE THEMES 127

PARTNERSHIPS 133

ELEMENTS OF VISITOR EXPERIENCE 134

APPENDIXES, REFERENCES, PREPARERS, AND CONSULTANTS

APPENDIX A: LEGISLATION – CARTER G. WOODSON HOME NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE 137

APPENDIX B: FEDERAL LAWS, REGULATIONS, AND POLICIES 139

APPENDIX C: SERVICEWIDE LAWS AND POLICIES AND DESIRED CONDITIONS 144

APPENDIX D: COMPLETED STUDIES AND FUTURE STUDIES NEEDED 149

APPENDIX E: REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 106 OF THE NATIONALHISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT 152

APPENDIX F: CONSULTATION CORRESPONDENCE 153

APPENDIX G: BOOKS AUTHORED, CO-AUTHORED, OR EDITED BY CARTER G. WOODSON 159

APPENDIX H: GLOSSARY OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION TERMS 161

REFERENCES 163

PREPARERS AND CONSULTANTS 179



CONTENTS

xiv

FIGURES

Figure 1: Vicinity Map 9

Figure 2: Park Map 10

Figure 3:

Preferred

Alternative,

Option

One,

Basement

Floor

Plan

58

Figure 4: Preferred Alternative, Option One, First Floor Plan 59

Figure 5: Preferred Alternative, Option One, Second Floor Plan 60

Figure 6: Preferred Alternative, Option One, Third Floor Plan 61

Figure 7: Preferred Alternative, Option Two, Basement Floor Plan 62

Figure 8: Preferred Alternative, Option Two, First Floor Plan 63

Figure 9: Preferred Alternative, Option Two, Second Floor Plan 64

Figure 10: Preferred Alternative, Option Two, Third Floor Plan 65

TABLES

Table 1: Potential Indicators, Standards, and Management Actions for the National Historic Site 44

Table 2:Estimated Costs 67

Table 3: Summary of Key Differences Among the Alternatives 71

Table 4: Summary of Key Impacts of the Alternatives 74

Table 5: General Demographic Characteristics of the Shaw Neighborhood 87



1




2



3

A GUIDE TO THIS DOCUMENT

This General Management Plan/ Environmental Assessment/ InterpretationPlan is organized in accordance with theCouncil on Environmental Quality’simplementing regulations for the NationalEnvironmental Policy Act and NPS Management Policies 2006.

“Chapter One: Introduction” sets theframework for the entire document,describing why the plan is being preparedand what needs it must address. It givesguidance for the alternatives that are beingconsidered, which are based on the nationalhistoric site’s legislation, its purpose, and thesignificance of its resources. The alternativesalso are based on special mandates andadministrative commitments andservicewide mandates and policies, and takeinto consideration other planning efforts inthe area.

The introduction also details the planningopportunities and issues that were raisedduring public scoping meetings and initialplanning team efforts. “Scoping” helps theplanning team to identify issues and todetermine the range of alternatives thatwould be addressed. During scoping, theNPS staff provides an overview of theproposed project. Members of the publicthen have the opportunity to makecomments and suggestions or to expresstheir concerns.

The first chapter concludes with a statementof the scope of the environmental impactanalysis—specifically what impact topicswere or were not analyzed in detail.

“Chapter Two: Management Alternatives”begins with an explanation of themanagement directions that could be used tomanage the national historic site in thefuture. It also includes information about thealternatives: a description of what is

happening now at the site and themanagement direction that has beenadopted by current (2011) park management(the no-action alternative) and the preferredalternative. Mitigation measures that wouldbe proposed to minimize or eliminate theeffects of some proposed actions are thendescribed. Next are tables comparing thealternative actions and the environmentalconsequences of implementing bothalternatives. The chapter ends with anevaluation of the environmentally preferablealternative.

“Chapter Three: The AffectedEnvironment” contains descriptions of theareas and resources that would be affectedby carrying out the actions of the twoalternatives. Such affected resources arehistoric structures, visitor use andexperience, the socioeconomicenvironment, and park operations.

“Chapter Four: EnvironmentalConsequences” are analyses showing howimplementing each alternative would affectthe resources described in the “AffectedEnvironment” chapter. At the beginning of this chapter, the methods used for assessingthe direct and cumulative impacts areoutlined, including the intensity, duration,and type of impacts.

“Chapter Five: Consultation andCoordination” contains descriptions of thepublic and agency coordination undertakenduring the planning effort and any possiblefuture natural and cultural compliancerequirements. Agencies and organizationsthat will receive copies of the document alsoare listed in this chapter.

“Chapter Six: Interpretation Plan”contains the interpretation plan forCarter G. Woodson Home National HistoricSite completed in November 2009 by the



A Guide to this Document

4

National Park Service Harpers Ferry Center.The plan was integral to the development of this General Management Plan/ Environmental Assessment/ InterpretationPlan because it helped guide how the

interior spaces of the historic structures may

be used for visitor, administrative, andoperational purposes.

“Appendixes, References, Preparers, andConsultants” contain supporting

information for this document.



5

OVERVIEW OF THE NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

INTRODUCTIONDr. Woodson was the son of former slaves,and earned his Ph.D. from HarvardUniversity in 1912—only the second AfricanAmerican to do so, after W. E. B. DuBois.This achievement was even moreextraordinary since he did not begin hisformal education until he was 20 years old.He had been denied access to publiceducation in Canton, Virginia, where he wasborn in 1875, and did not start school untilhe moved to Huntington, West Virginia. He

received his high school diploma two yearslater, a bachelor's degree from Berea Collegein 1897, and went on to earn A.B. and M.A.degrees from the University of Chicagobefore attending Harvard. Dr. Woodson wasan educator, historian, publisher, advocate,and prominent member of the AfricanAmerican community in Washington, D.C.

Woodson’s home is one of three adjoiningstructures in the Carter G. Woodson HomeNational Historic Site’s authorized

boundary. Woodson’s home is at 1538 9thStreet, NW, and the two row housesadjacent to it are at 1540 and 1542 9th Street,NW.

Commemoration of the Home

Dr. Woodson lived in the row house at 15389th Street, NW, from 1922 until his passingin 1950. Dr. Woodson's home was listed inthe National Register of Historic Places onMay 11, 1976, as a national historiclandmark. This designation is the highestpossible status awarded to historicproperties. The Woodson homecommemorates a place where pivotal eventstook place and where an importantAmerican lived and worked.

Authorization of the NationalHistoric Site and Acquisition

Public Law 108-192 (117 Stat. 2873) wassigned on December 19, 2003, authorizingCarter G. Woodson Home National HistoricSite. It was set aside to preserve, protect, andinterpret for the benefit, education, andinspiration of present and future generations

the home (and legacy) of the preeminenthistorian and educator, Dr. Carter G.Woodson, founder of the organizationknown today as the Association for theStudy of African American Life and History(2003 H.R. 1012; 108 H.R. 1012).

In 2005 and 2006, the National Park Serviceacquired three of the four buildingsauthorized for acquisition as stated in PublicLaw 108-92. With acquisition of thesebuildings, the Secretary of the Interior

established the national historic site onFebruary 27, 2006.

The fourth property authorized foracquisition through donation or purchasefrom a willing seller is 1544 9th Street, NW,which is adjacent to the park boundary tothe north.




6

Stabilization of the Buildings

At the time the National Park Serviceacquired the Woodson home (building 1538)and the two adjacent historic structures tothe north (buildings 1540 and 1542), all three

row houses were in a state of advanceddeterioration. The roofs leaked, windowswere broken, walls were cracking andbulging, there was extensive insect andmoisture damage to ceilings, walls, andfloors, and no utility systems werefunctional. Unauthorized trespass in and outof the historic structures was occurringfrequently. The National Park Serviceundertook a stabilization project thatsecured the structures, reinforced floors,removed debris, replaced broken windows,

and installed a new roof on the Woodsonhome.

The Immediate Neighborhood

The west side of 9th Street, as Dr. Woodsonwould have known it, is remarkably intact.The church Dr. Woodson attended, ShilohBaptist Church, remains the anchor on thesouth end of the 1500 block. Attached to the

church is the only modern structure, thefive-story, brick Henry C. Gregory III FamilyLife Center. Nine three-story row housescomprise the central core of the block. TheWoodson row house is the seventh from the

south. On the north end of the row houseblock is the two-story, early 20th centurycommercial “corner store” structure(building 1544).

Woodson’s home and the other row houseson the block were constructed of red brickbetween 1872 and 1874. These three-storyrow houses are in a late 19th century simple,Victorian Italianate architectural style typicalof speculative housing constructed duringthe post-Civil War era. The façades are flat

and simple, with decorative detail limited tothe cornice and door surrounds. Windowlintels and a water table separating thebasement level from the first floor are of stone. The interior and exteriorornamentation was of mass producedarchitectural components: mantels,windows, doors, woodwork, stair elements,gaslight fixtures, brackets, finials, moldings,and cast-iron elements.



Overview of the National Historic Site

7

The former “corner store” or cornercommercial structure at 1544 9th Street,NW, is an early 20th century brick structureof two stories designed for commercialenterprise with large glass windows and

doors on the 9th Street side. It has flat,simple front and north elevations with abracketed cornice on the front.

The triangle park to the north of the 1500block is being developed by the city of Washington as a commemorative city parkwith a planned seated bronze sculpture of Dr. Woodson. Across the park at RhodeIsland Avenue is the Phyllis WheatleyYWCA, a neighborhood fixture during Dr.Woodson’s life in the neighborhood and it

still remains in use today (see figure 2).

Dr. Woodson would easily recognize theimmediate neighborhood. The streetscapethat surrounds the national historic site islargely intact. While there are a few

deteriorated structures, on the whole itretains much of the historic appearance thatcharacterized it during Woodson’s residencyin the home. The site’s setting, both withinthe immediate area and in the two larger

historic districts, provides important contextfor interpreting, in full, the story of Dr.Woodson’s life on 9th Street.

Access to the Site

Carter G. Woodson Home National HistoricSite is a stop on the Black History NationalRecreation Trail, on the African AmericanHeritage Trail, and on the Shaw HeritageTrail. Each trail is designed to be both awalking and driving trail.

The national historic site is easily reached bythe Washington Metro Subway, city bus,and/or car. There is currently (2011) no on-site parking, only street parking.





R h o d e I

s l a n d A v

e, N W

6 t h S t ,NW

Constitution Ave, NW

The Nat ional Mal l

The

WhiteHouse

Mary McLeod Bethune Council HouseNational Historic Site

Carter G. Woodson HomeNational Historic Site

WashingtonConvention

Center

U St, NW

1

29

50

29

29

50

1 5 t h

S t , N

W

E St, NW

M St, NW

1 7 t h

S t , N W

1 3 t h S t , N W

P e n n s y l v a n i a Av e , N W

F l o r i d a A v e , N W

D St, NW

N e w Y o r

k A v e, N

W

1 6 t h S t

, N W

E S t , N W

V e r m

o n t A

v e , N W

0 0.5 10.25 Miles

AUTHORIZED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE BOUNDARY

OTHER NATIONAL PARK UNITS

SHAW NEIGHBORHOOD

SHAW HISTORIC DISTRICT

MOUNT VERNON WEST NATIONAL HISTORIC DISTRICT

Washington, D.C.

Figure Vicinit

Carter G. Woodson Home National Historic SUnited States Department of the Interior • National Park Se



29

P St, NW

9 t h S t , N W

Q St, NW29

R h o d e I

s l a n d A v

e, N W

R h o d e I

s l a n d A v e, N W

Phyllis WheatleyYWCA

ShilohBaptistChurch

Carter G. WoodsonPark

Carter G. WoodsonHome

1544

1538

1542

1540

0 100 20050 Feet

AUTHORIZED NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE BOUNDARY

NPS OWNED

AUTHORIZED FOR ACQUISITION, BUT NOT

CURRENTLY WITHIN THE BOUNDARY

Inset

See Inset

0 50 10025 Feet

Figure Park Ma

Carter G. Woodson Home National Historic SUnited States Department of the Interior • National Park Se




11

DR. CARTER GODWIN WOODSON

Dr. Carter Godwin Woodson’s story is oneof extraordinary determination to overcomethe obstacles facing an African Americanmale in a southern state during the era of Jim

Crow laws and the aftermath of the CivilWar. He was born December 19, 1875, inrural Buckingham County Virginia, near thetown of New Canton. His parents, AnneEliza Riddle and James Henry Woodson,had been plantation slaves. James Henry,during slavery, had been a skilledcabinetmaker; but after the war, he became afarmer. Together Anne Eliza and JamesHenry raised nine children on their smallfarm.

As a child, Woodson worked on the familyfarm and sporadically attended theelementary school run by his mother’sbrothers. As an adult, Woodson maintainedthat this early education grounded him wellin scholarly fundamentals (Romero 1971)and piqued his lifelong interest in education.

As a youth, Woodson and his brother,Robert, moved to West Virginia to lay tiesfor the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad.Much of his spare time was spent in a local

mercantile store reading newspapers aloudto illiterate locals.

In 1892, at the age of 16, Woodson and hisbrother went to work in the coal mines.Determined to get an education, he left themines in 1895 and entered FrederickDouglass High School in Huntington, WestVirginia. Two years later, he graduated,having compressed a four-year educationinto two years, and immediately enrolled inBerea College in Kentucky. Taking mostly

correspondence courses, he earned aBachelor of Literature degree in 1903, justprior to the Kentucky legislature’s decisionto outlaw integrated education. Whileworking toward his degree, Woodson taughtschool in Winona, West Virginia, and thenbecame the teaching principal at his almamater, Frederick Douglass High School.

Woodson then enrolled as a student inresidence at the University of Chicago, butleft to accept a teaching position with theU.S. War Department in the Philippines. Heleft that position in 1907 after four years and

traveled extensively in Asia and Europe.Already fluent in Spanish, he learned Frenchand studied briefly at the Sorbonne in Paris.

In March of 1908, Woodson earned aBachelor of Arts in history from theUniversity of Chicago, and in August of thesame year, he earned a Master of Arts inhistory from the same university.

He became the second African American toearn a Ph.D. from Harvard in 1912 (the

degree was in history); his dissertation wasentitled “The Disruption of Virginia.”

By 1915, now Doctor Woodson, he returnedto Chicago where he and other like-mindedindividuals founded the Association for theStudy of Negro Life and History (today it isknown as the Association for the Study of African American Life and History), leadinghim down the path to his life’s work:researching, writing, and disseminating thehistory and cultural experience of AfricanAmerican people in American life.

In 1916, he started the Journal of NegroHistory, still published today by theAssociation for the Study of AfricanAmerican Life and History as the Journal of African American History.

Dr. Woodson became the principal of Armstrong High School in Washington, D.C.in 1918, and then was appointed Dean of theSchool of Liberal Arts at Howard Universitythe following year. He was a member of theinfluential fraternity group Omega Psi Phifounded at Howard University in 1911.

Finding mainstream publishers unwilling topublish the works of African Americans, Dr.Woodson founded Associated Publishers,Inc., in Washington, D.C., to provide anoutlet for disseminating both his work andthat of other African Americans to a mostly




12

African American audience. In the sameyear, 1921, Dr. Woodson was appointedDean of West Virginia State College, but leftafter one year to settle into his newlypurchased home at 1538 9th Street, NW,

Washington, D.C.

From 1922 on, Dr. Woodson dedicated hislife to writing, publishing, and disseminatingAfrican American scholarly and popularworks designed to explain and validate theAfrican American experience.

In 1926, he founded and promoted “NegroHistory Week,” as a way of focusingattention on the accomplishments of AfricanAmericans and promoting pride in the

history and cultural achievements of AfricanAmericans in America. He was awarded theSpingarn Medal by the National Associationfor the Advancement of Colored People thatsame year in honor of his dedication to theadvancement of African Americans.

At the urging of Mary McLeod Bethune,another prominent African American inWashington, D.C., Dr. Woodson foundedthe Negro History Bulletin—designed for ageneral audience—in 1937 as an additionalmeans of disseminating his life’s work to awider audience.

In 1950, Dr. Woodson died of heart failure athis home at 1538 9th Street, NW. Dr.Woodson and his home were important tothe African American community, as well asother minority communities, in Washington,D.C. The African American communityconsisted of people from diverse trades,professions, and economic backgrounds,from whom he both learned and taught anappreciation for African American history inthe United States and beyond.

From his early childhood to his death, Dr.Woodson exhibited a singular dedication toeducation, both his own and that of otherAfrican Americans. As a community leaderand publisher, Dr. Woodson initiatedprograms of scholarly research and populareducation that reached all levels of African

American society. Through difficult times,he continued to research the history andculture of African Americans. He found away to surmount every obstacle heencountered. Through his perseverance, he

took advantage of every opportunity toeducate himself, becoming a respectedscholar and publisher.

Dr. Woodson was not the first to write aboutAfrican American history; GeorgeWashington Williams (1849–1891) wroteHistory of the Negro Race in America from1619 to 1880 (Dagbovie 2009). Dr. Woodsonwas not the only trained scholar to delve intothis subject; Dr. William Edward Burghardt(W.E.B.) Du Bois (1868–1963) has been

called “the dean of black scholars” (Williams2009), and was the first African American toearn a Ph.D. from Harvard University (Dr.Woodson being the second). Dr. Woodsonwas not alone in collecting, researching,narrating, and publicizing African Americanhistory; John Edward Bruce (1856–1924) andArthur Alfonso Schomburg (1874–1938)each gathered African American historicalmaterials, did historical writing, gave publiclectures, and together founded the scholarlyNegro Society for Historical Research in1911 in New York City. However, it is Dr.Woodson who has come to be known as the“father of Black history,” following a lifededicated to African Americanhistoriography—researching, writing, andpublishing an impressive array of AfricanAmerican history and historiography (bodiesof historical literature). Dr. Woodsonrepresents all of the scholars, educators,teachers, and businesspeople that camebefore and after him that helped instill andrestore a unique and needed pride inhumanity which was segregated andsubjective in mainstream American history.

DR. WOODSON’S LEGACY

No one worked harder than Dr. Woodson to“legitimize, publicize, and popularize thestudy of black [African American] history aswell as the history of other Africandescendants” (Dagbovie 2007). Prior to Dr.




13

Woodson’s work, African American historywas not considered a legitimate field of study. However, beginning with the AfricanAmerican community and then withAmericans at large, Dr. Woodson helped to

instill a sense of importance to the study of the history and culture of AfricanAmericans. Today, African American studiesare a major force in the curricula of manycolleges and universities in the United States.

Dr. Woodson’s meticulous attention to thefacts and his use of the scientific methodensured that truth and objectivity wereconveyed in his work. Because of thescholarly manner in which he wrote, hiswork was not subject to the dismissal

suffered by other writers of the period. Hepursued objectivity in the belief that truthitself, once known and distributed withoutfanfare, would further the cause of racialequality, equal opportunity, and mutualunderstanding for the betterment of personsof all races and of American society as awhole (Wesley 1951, Dagbovie 2009). Heexpected his students to practice the sameprinciples.

Dr. Woodson’s personal working library isavailable today as a special collection atEmory University in Atlanta, Georgia, whereit is part of the university’s Manuscript,Archives, and Rare Book Library and whereit continues to be a unique source of information for scholars. The Associationfor the Study of African American Life andHistory—the organization Dr. Woodsonfounded—housed the library in his homeafter his death in 1950, but transferredownership to Emory University in 1976. Forresearchers, it complements the collection of Dr. Woodson’s papers at the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C.

The collection at Emory University and itscatalog represent a historic database of African American scholarship that directlypertains to Dr. Woodson’s extraordinaryefforts “to educate and inform about AfricanAmerican history, life, and culture” (Goggin1993). The Woodson database continues to

contribute to the field of African Americanscholarship, and is a tribute to the quality of Dr. Woodson’s research. Similarly, Dr.Woodson’s stature in African Americanscholarship is reflected in the Carter G.

Woodson African American HistoryCollection at the Queens Borough CentralLibrary in New York City (Mitchell 1990).

Dr. Woodson not only researched andauthored works on African American cultureand history, but he also published anddisseminated it primarily through AssociatedPublishers, Inc. His work was pertinent toeducation at all levels from elementarythrough graduate school.

Dr. Woodson gave formal presentations andinformal extemporaneous talks as a way toshare and disseminate his work. He regularlyled discussions after dinner withneighboring residents of the YWCA near hishome, where he took most of his meals andwas known to be quite an accomplishedspeaker.

Black History Month has grown from Dr.Woodson’s founding of Negro HistoryWeek. It evidenced an evolving progressionof increasing cultural and social appreciationof the diversity of race, ethnicity, andmulticulturalism in the United States. Theconcept for the week was a celebration of African American heritage, a time for allpeople of African descent to feel proud of their singular identity. As it has grown inimportance, other countries have taken upthe concept and made it their own.

Through the Association for the Study of African American Life and History thepromotion of African American culture andhistory continues the mission of Dr.Woodson. Through its annual meetings,college and university chapters, publications,celebrations of important events, andpromotion of all things associated withAfrican American culture, the Associationfor the Study of African American Life andHistory continues to further the legacy of Dr. Woodson.




14

HISTORY OF THE SITE ANDSURROUNDING AREA

Archeological and historical evidenceindicates that American Indian tribes lived inthe vicinity of what is now Washington,D.C., long before European contact. Theirknown history goes back approximately13,000 years. In the early 17th century, at thetime of first European contact, there were 42villages along the Potomac and Anacostiarivers from what is now the city of Washington downstream to the mouth of the Potomac River at Chesapeake Bay(Rountree et al. 2007). Within theboundaries of today’s city were theNacotchtank Indians, an Algonquian-speaking people. Their descendants still livein Virginia and Maryland. No archeologicalsites or artifacts associated with AmericanIndians have been identified within thenational historic site.

Washington City became the seat of federalgovernment by an act of Congress in 1790.As finally laid out, the city encompassed onlya little more than one-tenth of the entireoriginal district, but Revolutionary WarMajor Pierre Charles L’Enfant’s 1791 planfor Washington, as revised by AndrewEllicott and others in 1792, is still obvious.He laid out broad avenues radiating likespokes of a wheel from centers placed withinthe rectangular pattern of streets. One of these broad spokes was Rhode IslandAvenue, NW, near Dr. Woodson’s home.L’Enfant envisioned the resulting numeroustriangles, squares, and other oddly shapedpieces of land found at the intersections of these many streets to house monuments andstatues.

The Shaw Neighborhood

Woodson’s home is located within thehistoric Shaw neighborhood. Theneighborhood was named after ColonelRobert Gould Shaw (1837-1863) whocommanded the 54th MassachusettsInfantry during the Civil War; the enlistedmen of this unit were all African American.The neighborhood grew from encampments

of freed slaves in the then rural outskirts of the city of Washington. Some of the keyplaces in the Shaw neighborhood with anaffiliation to Dr. Woodson include theShiloh Baptist Church where he attended

services and the Phyllis Wheatley YWCAwhere he took his meals (see figure 2). Dr.Woodson’s involvement in the church,YWCA, and Howard University made him arecognizable figure in the Shawneighborhood.

The Shaw neighborhood thrived in the late19th and early 20th centuries as a center of African American intellectual life that influ-enced the nation. It has been called the“Heart of Black Washington” (Association

for the Study of African American Life andHistory 2009). It is the home of HowardUniversity, which enrolled its first studentscirca 1866. Poet and writer Langston Hughes(1902–1967) lived in the neighborhood andworked for Dr. Woodson in 1925. EdwardKennedy “Duke” Ellington (1899–1974),nationally and internationally known jazzcomposer, pianist, and bandleader, was bornin the Shaw neighborhood.

In April 1968, street riots erupted in theneighborhood following the assassination of the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. In theShaw neighborhood, as in many AfricanAmerican neighborhoods, these violentdisruptions of community life, along withsubsequent new opportunities afforded byintegration and increased freedom of movement away from the inner city, markeda trend toward economic decline for theShaw neighborhood. However, in the lastdecade, the Shaw neighborhood and similarcentrally located neighborhoods have seenan upsurge in interest. The structures thatcomprise the national historic site arecontributing resources in the Shaw HistoricDistrict, a city-designated historic district(see figure 1).




15

The Mount Vernon WestNational Historic District

Like the Shaw Historic District, the threenational historic site structures arecontributing resources of the Mount VernonWest National Historic District, listed in theNational Register of Historic Places in 1999(see figure 1). The district is significant for itslarge collection of historic 19th and 20thcentury structures that retain architecturalintegrity. It is also significant for itsassociation with events of importance inAmerican history, primarily its social history,ethnic heritage, and for its history of community development.

Woodson’s home is singled out in thedistrict’s national register nomination. Itpossesses particular significance to thedistrict for its relationship to the ethnicheritage of the community and the civil

rights movement.

The Mount Vernon West National HistoricDistrict is partially contained in the ShawHistoric District, but is largely south of thenational historic site (see figure 1). Thehistoric district’s distinguishing feature isMount Vernon Square on MassachusettsAvenue and 7th to 9th Streets, NW.



16

BACKGROUND

WHY WE DO GENERAL

MANAGEMENT PLANNINGThe National Parks and Recreation Act of 1978 and NPS Management Policies 2006 require each unit of the national park systemto have a general management plan todetermine how the site should be managedand the types of visitor experiences offered.

The purpose of a general management planis to ensure that a national park system unit(in this case, Carter G. Woodson HomeNational Historic Site) has a clearly defined

direction for resource preservation andvisitor use. This enables the unit to achievethe NPS mandate to preserve resourcesunimpaired for the enjoyment of futuregenerations. In addition, generalmanagement planning makes the NationalPark Service more effective, collaborative,and accountable by:

achieving a balance between continuityand adaptability in decision making—defining the desired conditions to be

achieved and maintained at the nationalhistoric site would provide atouchstone that allows managers andstaff to constantly adapt their actions tochanging situations while stayingfocused on what is most importantabout the national historic site

analyzing the national historic site inrelation to its surrounding ecosystem,cultural setting, and community wouldhelp managers and staff understandhow the national historic site can

interrelate with neighbors and others inways that are ecologically, socially, andeconomically sustainable

giving everyone who has a stake indecisions affecting the national historicsite an opportunity to be involved in theplanning process and to understand thedecisions that are made. National parksare often the focus of intense public

interest. Public involvement throughout

the planning process provides focusedopportunities for the managers andstaff to interact with the public andlearn about public concerns,expectations, and values. Publicinvolvement also providesopportunities for managers and staff toshare information about the nationalhistoric site’s purpose and significance,as well as opportunities and constraintsfor its management.

General management plans are intended tobe long-term documents that establish andarticulate a management philosophy andframework for decision making and problemsolving in units of the national park system.

Actions directed by general managementplans or by subsequent implementationplans are accomplished over time. Budgetrestrictions, the need for more data orregulatory compliance, and competingnational park system priorities prevent the

immediate execution of many actions. Majoror especially costly actions could becompleted 10 or more years into the future.Some actions could never be funded.

PURPOSE OF THE PLAN

The purpose of this General Management Plan / Environmental Assessment / Interpretation Plan is to guide the decisionmaking and problem solving processesrelated to development of the site, resource

protection, and the visitor experience atCarter G. Woodson Home National HistoricSite. The plan would set forth directionconcerning the desired future conditions tobe achieved at the national historic site, andwould be the primary document formanaging the national historic site for thenext 15 to 20 years. The approved planwould provide a framework for proactive



Background

17

decision making, including decisions aboutdevelopment of the site, visitor use, and themanagement of cultural resources (i.e.,historic structures, cultural landscapes,archeological resources, ethnographic

resources, and museum objects). Thatframework would allow managers to addressfuture opportunities and problemseffectively.

This general management plan wouldprescribe the resource conditions and visitorexperiences that are to be achieved andmaintained at the national historic site overtime. Management decisions must be madewhen laws, policies, and regulations do notprovide clear guidance or when limitations

must be based on the national historic site’spurpose, public input and desires, resourceanalysis, and the evaluation of environmental consequences and costs.

NEED FOR THE PLAN

As a new unit of the national park system,this plan represents the first comprehensiveplanning effort for Carter G. WoodsonHome National Historic Site. It is essentialto guide the management of the national

historic site for the next 15 to 20 years and toensure the preservation of this nationallysignificant property while presentingopportunities for visitors to have a high-quality and enjoyable experience.

REQUIREMENTS OF THE NATIONALENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT

This plan is subject to the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) that mandate an assessment of the environmental impacts, both adverseand beneficial, of those actions proposed bythe federal government before those actionsare implemented. Actions that could have asignificant impact on the natural or humanenvironment are required to prepare anenvironmental impact statement. Actionsthat do not appear to have a significantimpact may use a shortened environmentalassessment process. Because the actions inthis document do not appear to have thepotential for major environmental

consequences, this document incorporatesan environmental assessment.

The environmental assessment for this planhas been prepared in accordance with theNational Environmental Policy Act of 1969,as amended, and implementing regulations,40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts1500–1508, NPS Director’s Order 12 and theHandbook for Environmental Impact Analysis.



18

PLANNING ISSUES AND CONCERNS

INTRODUCTIONDuring the scoping (early informationgathering) phase of this General Management Plan / Environmental Assessment / Interpretation Plan, NPS staff,park partners, District of Columbia agencies,and the general public identified variousissues and concerns about the developmentof the structures into a national historic site.An issue is defined as an opportunity,conflict, or problem regarding thedevelopment of the national historic site.

To understand the size and condition of theinterior spaces, the National Park Servicehad a historic structure report completed forWoodson’s home in 2008 (Robinson et al.2008). This report also maderecommendations for uses for all fourbuildings. The suggestions in the historicstructure report contributed to thedevelopment of this general managementplan, as did the content of the interpretationplan (see chapter 6).

ISSUES

The issues raised regarding this generalmanagement plan, discussed in no particularorder below, include use of the interiorspaces, tight interior configurations, andappropriate historic preservation treatmentsfor the buildings, administrative spaceneeded for the Association for the Study of African American Life and History, and parkoperations within the framework of theNational Park Service National CapitalParks-East group.

Use of Interior Spaces

This plan needs to address how the interiorspaces could be programmed for the park’soperational and visitor use needs includingwork and storage space for NPS staff, an

orientation area for visitors, interpretiveexhibit areas for visitors, restroom facilities,an area for the sale of educational andinterpretive materials, an elevator, and a newHVAC system.

Tight Configuration ofInterior Rooms

The size of Woodson’s home and theadjacent structures with their tightconfigurations of hallways and turningpoints, present challenges in modifying them

for reuse in a way that can accommodatelarge tour and school groups as well aswheelchair access. This general managementplan needs to consider how best to providean enjoyable and meaningful visitorexperience within the available space.

Preserving the Historic Structures

Because the national historic site consists of three historically significant structures, theNational Park Service would need to address

how the structures would be treated toensure their historic integrity remains intact.

Space for the Association for theStudy of African American Life andHistory

Both the enabling legislation for the nationalhistoric site and the general agreementbetween the National Park Service and theAssociation for the Study of AfricanAmerican Life and History declare that theAssociation for the Study of AfricanAmerican Life and History would be allowedto “use a portion of the historic site for itsown administrative purposes” (Public Law108–192). This plan needs to consider if theadministrative space for the Association forthe Study of African American Life andHistory should be in the Woodson home(where it was historically) or in one of theother buildings.



Planning Issues and Concerns

19

Park Operations

Organizationally, the national historic site ispart of the National Park Service NationalCapital Parks-East group that includes 12major park areas at 98 locations in

Washington, D.C., and areas east of the city.This plan needs to determine which

operational functions, such as sitemanagement, routine maintenance, lawenforcement, and resource management,would be handled independently by thenational historic site and which ones it

would share with the National CapitalParks-East group.



20

GUIDANCE FOR THE PLANNING EFFORT

FOUNDATION FOR PLANNINGThere were several planning effortsundertaken for Carter G. Woodson HomeNational Historic Site between 2000 and2011. In particular, the Historic StructureReport on the Carter G. Woodson Home(2008) and Carter G. Woodson HomeNational Historic Site Interpretation Plan (2009) fulfilled the needs of the nationalhistoric site when it came to tentativelyprogramming the space inside the historicstructures with interpretive, educational,

and administrative needs. These two plansgreatly helped with the writing of thisgeneral management plan.

Special Resource Study

Prior to the establishment of the nationalhistoric site, a Special Resource Study of theCarter G. Woodson Home (2001) wasundertaken by the National Park Service todetermine whether the site met thesuitability and feasibility requirements of

properties added to the national parksystem. This study provided anunderstanding of the history, condition, andneighborhood setting of Woodson’s home,and ended with a determination that the sitewas both suitable and feasible for inclusionin the national park system.

Historic Structure Report

In 2008, the Historic Structure Report on theCarter G. Woodson Home was completed(Robinson et al. 2008). A historic structure

report (HSR) provides documentary,graphic, and physical information about aproperty's history and existing condition. Italso addresses the use or re-use of theproperty. The Woodson home historicstructure report provided a professionalassessment of the condition of the residenceand recommended preservation,rehabilitation, and restoration treatments

(see appendix H for definitions of theseterms). The document also providedsuggestions on programming the interiorspaces of the adjacent two row houses(buildings 1540 and 1542) and the formercorner commercial structure (building1544), should this property be acquired andsubsequently added to the park boundary.

Foundation Statement

Around the time the historic structure reportwas being written, National Park Service and

Association for the Study of AfricanAmerican Life and History staff weredrafting a foundation statement, for thenational historic site. Each planning effortfor a new park unit begins with theidentification of the property’s legislatedpurpose, what is significant about theproperty, what messages or information(e.g., interpretive themes) the visitor shouldtake away from the site, what resources andvalues are fundamental to the understandingof the site, and what legislative constraints or

requirements need to be incorporated. Thiseffort may be developed into a separate,stand-alone, foundation statement or it maybe incorporated into the site’s generalmanagement plan. The foundationinformation compiled and written by theNational Park Service and Association forthe Study of African American Life andHistory was incorporated into this General Management Plan / Environmental Assessment / Interpretation Plan. Staff reliedon the data provided in the special resource

study and the historic structure report tocomplete the foundation statement in 2008.The national historic site significance,primary interpretive themes, andfundamental resources and values sectionswritten below transpired from thefoundation statement.



Guidance for the Planning Effort

21

Interpretation Plan

Building from the foundation statement, theNational Park Service, in consultation withthe Association for the Study of AfricanAmerican Life and History, completed the

Carter G. Woodson Home National HistoricSite Interpretation Plan in 2009, which isincorporated into this general managementplan (chapter six). The interpretation planoutlines the national historic site’s purpose,significance, primary interpretive themes,visions for interpretation, and visitorexperience goals, all of which would help thenational historic site develop interpretiveexhibits and materials for the site. The planalso helps guide where it may be appropriateto install interpretive exhibits and hold

programs that educate visitors about Dr.Woodson’s life, work, and legacy. From theinterpretation plan, a comprehensiveinterpretive plan can be written. Thecomprehensive interpretive plan is a tool tohelp parks decide priorities for theirobjectives, determine what stories to tell,identify their audiences, and describe themost effective mix of media and personalservices to use.

Historic Resource Study

A historic resource study is the primarydocument used by a national park systemunit to identify and manage the historicresources within its boundaries. A historicresource study on the national historic site,written by noted Woodson scholar Dr.Pero G. Dagbovie, will be finalized in 2011.Drafts of the document have been used toaid in the writing of this general managementplan.

The special resource study, historic structurereport, foundation statement, interpretationplan, and historic resource study wereintegral to the completion of this generalmanagement plan.

PARK PURPOSE

The purpose of a unit of the national parksystem is the reason for which it was setaside and preserved by the president orCongress. The purpose statement, which is

based on interpretation of the unit’sauthorizing legislation, supplies thefundamental criteria against which theappropriateness of all planningrecommendations, operational decisions,and actions are evaluated. The authorizinglegislation for the national historic site is inappendix A. The purpose of Carter G.Woodson Home National Historic Site is asfollows:

“To preserve, protect, and interpret for thebenefit, education, and inspiration of present and future generations the home[and legacy] of the preeminent historianand educator Dr. Carter G. Woodson, founder of the organization known todayas the Association for the Study of African American Life and History.” (2003 H.R.1012; 108 H.R. 1012)

PARK SIGNIFICANCE

Significance statements define what makes

the national historic site important enoughto American heritage to warrant designationas a unit of the national park system.Statements of significance are tools forsetting resource protection priorities and foridentifying interpretive themes andappropriate visitor experiences. They helpfocus efforts and funding on the resourcesand experiences that matter most. Duringearlier planning efforts, the followingsignificance statements were developed:

The Dr. Carter G. Woodson Home was

his residence from its purchase in 1922until his death in 1950 and served as thebase for his pioneering work in AfricanAmerican history and publishing.

In 1915, Dr. Woodson founded theAssociation for the Study of Negro Lifeand History, now the Association forthe Study of African American Life and




22

History, and, in 1921, he establishedAssociated Publishers, Inc.

Because he was a leader, Dr. Woodson’shome was an important communityfocus for the interaction of African

Americans of diverse trades,professions, and economicbackgrounds; Dr. Woodson bothlearned from and taught these manypeople, spreading appreciation forAfrican American history through thisnation and beyond.

Dr. Woodson founded Negro HistoryWeek (now Black History Month) thatcontinues to have broad impact acrossAmerica and the world.

Dr. Woodson initiated programs of scholarly research and educationdesigned to reach both the academiccommunity and a general audience.

PRIMARY INTERPRETIVE THEMES

Interpretive themes define the primaryinterpretive messages or stories that wouldbe emphasized at the national historic sitethrough exhibits, interpretive talks, videos,brochures, and publications. The themes

would help visitors to understand the lifeand times of Dr. Woodson. The nationalhistoric site would use the following fivethemes as the foundation of its interpretiveprogram:

Through decades of struggles andtriumphs, Dr. Carter G. Woodson wasdriven to change our understanding of American history.

Dr. Woodson’s scholarly work,organizational vision, and

entrepreneurial spirit have impacted abroad spectrum of society.

A visionary, Dr. Woodson devoted hislife, not just to education, but also toinfluencing the content of our nation’seducational curricula.

The Woodson home served as aresource for the African Americancommunity and provides contemporary

visitors with a tangible link to Dr.Woodson, his social focus, and hiscultural legacy.

A realist, Dr. Woodson recognized thathe could not accomplish his visions of

American history without theparticipation of others throughorganization.

FUNDAMENTAL RESOURCESAND VALUES

Fundamental resources and values are themost important resources, ideas, or conceptsto be communicated to the public about thenational historic site. These resources and

values warrant primary consideration duringplanning and management because theysupport and contribute to the nationalhistoric site’s significance and are critical toachieving the purpose for which the site wasestablished. They could include systems,processes, features, stories, scenes, sounds,or scents. Without these resources andvalues, the national historic site would nothave national importance and could notaccomplish the purpose for which it wasestablished.

In general, fundamental resources aretangible (e.g., a structure or a place) andfundamental values are intangible.

Other important resources and values couldhave particular importance that warrantsspecial consideration during planning, eventhough they do not contribute directly to thepurpose and significance of the nationalpark system unit. These can be tangible orintangible resources and values, but the lossof which would not necessarily diminish thepurpose or significance of the site.

The house in which Dr. Woodson lived andworked from 1922 to 1950 is the maintangible fundamental resource remainingconnected to Dr. Woodson. His home is theplace where he wrote many of his articlesand books and community meetings wereheld. His home also served as the




23

headquarters for the Association for theStudy of African American Life and Historyfrom 1922 until 1971. Dr. Woodson is anicon within the African Americancommunity and the house provides a

tangible connection to his life and works. Itspreservation and interpretation make it theparamount fundamental resource within thenational historic site.

The streetscape and alleyscape surroundingWoodson’s home are also fundamentalresources because they have not changedsignificantly since the time Dr. Woodsonlived on 9th Street, NW. They give a sense of what Dr. Woodson’s surroundings were likewhen he lived there, which makes for a

tangible connection to the era in which Dr.Woodson lived. The boundary of thestreetscape and alleyscape is made from thewest side of 9th Street, NW between P Streetand Q Street; Q Street, NW between 9thStreet and Rhode Island Avenue; the eastside of the alley between P Street and QStreet; and the north side of P Streetbetween the alley and 9th Street (see figure2). While these resources are fundamental tothe history of Dr. Woodson, they are notpart of the authorized boundary of thenational historic site.

A fundamental value of the site is itsconnection to the struggle for civil rights forall Americans and the belief that everyonedeserves dignity and basic human rights.

No other fundamental resources remainwithin the national historic site boundary.However, the Shaw neighborhood is animportant connection to the site. It retainsmany of the structures Dr. Woodson sawregularly, such as the Shiloh Baptist Church,and the Phyllis Wheatley YWCA (see figure2).

MANDATES AND LAWS

Special Mandates andAdministrative Commitments

Special mandates and administrative

commitments refer to park-specificrequirements or those that affect severalnational park system units. Formalagreements often are establishedconcurrently with the creation of a unit of the national park system or as a result of congressional action.

Public Law 108–192, December 19, 2003

The law further allows entry intocooperative agreements with public orprivate entities to provide publicinterpretation and education of AfricanAmerican heritage in the Shawneighborhood and to achieve costefficiencies in the restoration of thestructures within the national historic site.

The law also allows for the entry into anagreement with the Association for the Studyof African American Life and History for itsadministrative use of a portion of thenational historic site.

The General Agreement to Document aCooperative Relationship Between and Among the National Park Service andthe Association for the Study of African American Life and History

Public Law 108–192 acknowledges thehistorical connection between theAssociation for the Study of AfricanAmerican Life and History and theWoodson property, and directs the NationalPark Service to work with the organization

for the development and interpretation of the property. A general agreement, signedMarch 16, 2005, outlines the cooperativerelationship between the National ParkService and the Association for the Study of African American Life and History anddescribes the responsibilities of each. Theresponsibilities of the National Park Serviceare the restoration, operation, andinterpretation of the Carter G. Woodson




24

Home National Historic Site, and theprovision of utilities and generalmaintenance, safety, and security measures.The responsibilities of the Association forthe Study of African American Life and

History are to collaborate with the NationalPark Service with respect to restoration,interpretation, operation, and maintenanceof the national historic site, and tocoordinate its activities to complementNational Park Service programs. Theagreement further allows the Association forthe Study of African American Life andHistory use and occupancy of not less than500 square feet of space within the nationalhistoric site for its administrative needs.

Servicewide Laws and PoliciesServicewide laws and policies are those lawsand policies that pertain to all units of thenational park system. Actions identified inthis plan are subject to these federal laws andthe policies of the National Park Service.“Appendix C: Servicewide Laws and Policiesand Desired Conditions” provides guidanceon the laws and policies that pertain to thespecific resources affected by actionsdescribed in this General Management Plan/ Environmental Assessment/ Interpretation

Plan.

IMPACT TOPICS CONSIDEREDWITHIN THIS DOCUMENT

Impact topics are those elements of thegeneral management plan that would beaffected by actions proposed in thealternatives, should they be implemented.These topics (historic structures, visitor useand experience, socioeconomic

environment, and park operations) wereselected on the basis of federal law,regulations, executive orders, NPS expertise,and concerns expressed by other agencies ormembers of the public during projectscoping.

Cultural Resources

Historic Structures

Both alternatives propose uses andtreatments that would directly impact the

three historic structures within theauthorized national historic site boundary;therefore, this topic has been retained forfurther analysis.


Visitor use and experience was identified asan important issue during scoping that couldbe appreciably affected by the alternatives.The Organic Act (the law that created theNational Park Service) and National ParkService Management Policies 2006 direct the

National Park Service to provide visitorswith opportunities that are uniquely suitedand appropriate to the resources found inthe national historic site, to the extent thatvisitor activities do not constituteimpairment of those resources. Visitor uses,access (including universal accessibility),orientation, and recreational activities aredirectly affected by the proposedalternatives; therefore, this topic has beenretained for further analysis.

Socioeconomic EnvironmentThe National Environmental Policy Actrequires an examination of social andenvironmental impacts caused by federalactions. Rehabilitation of the historicstructures and visitation to the nationalhistoric site could have an appreciableimpact on the socioeconomic environmentof the Shaw neighborhood, including theDistrict of Columbia’s CommunityDevelopment Plan for the Shaw Historic

District; therefore, this topic has beenretained for further analysis.

Park Operations

Park operations, including site managementand administrative and maintenancefunctions, would be greatly affected by thetwo alternatives. Actions that are happeningnow and the management direction for the




25

site adopted by the current park manage-ment compared with making the site a fullyoperational park would be appreciablydifferent; therefore, this topic has beenretained for further analysis.

IMPACT TOPICS DISMISSEDFROM FURTHER ANALYSIS

Some impact topics that are commonlyconsidered during the planning processwere not relevant to the development of thisgeneral management plan for Carter G.Woodson Home National Historic Site dueto the following: (a) they would not beaffected by implementing the alternatives,(b) implementing the alternatives would

have no effect/impact or a negligibleeffect/impact on the topic or resource, or (c)the resource is not found in the nationalhistoric site authorized boundary. The topicsdismissed from further analysis arediscussed below.

Cultural Resources

Cultural Landscapes

A cultural landscape is defined as:

… a reflection of human adaptation and useof natural resources and is often expressed inthe way land is organized and divided, patterns of settlement, land use, systems of circulation, and the types of structures that are built. The character of a cultural landscape is defined both by physical materials, such as roads, buildings, walls,and vegetation, and by use reflecting cultural values and traditions (Director’s Order 28:Cultural Resource Management Guideline[2002]).

While the national historic site is part of alarger urban landscape, the authorizedboundary incorporates three historicstructures and their backyards. Preliminarycultural resource evaluation of the backyardsdid not identify significant landscapecharacteristics that meet NRHP eligibility asa cultural landscape distinct and separatefrom the Carter G. Woodson Home

National Historic Site. The backyards arevoid of trees or ornamental plantings. Due tothe lack of significant landscape patterns orfeatures inside the boundary, this topic hasbeen dismissed from further analysis.

Ethnographic Resources

Ethnographic resources are “objects andplaces, including sites, structures,landscapes, and natural resources, withtraditional cultural meaning and value toassociated peoples” (NPS Management Policies 2006). NPS Management Policies2006 requires professional cultural resourcespecialists, in consultation with associatedpeoples and appropriate local historicpreservation officials, to evaluate potential

ethnographic resources; in this caseWoodson’s home. After the evaluation andconsultation has been completed, a formaldetermination is made as to whether theresource is a significant ethnographicresource. While there is some sense thatWoodson’s home is a potential ethnographicresource, the breadth of its ethnographicsignificance is unknown; therefore, thehome needs to be evaluated and a formaldetermination made. If the Woodson homeis determined to be an ethnographic

resource, the actions proposed in thisgeneral management plan would havebeneficial impacts on the resource becausethe Woodson home would be preserved.This topic has been dismissed from furtheranalysis.

Archeological Resources

Archeological resources, the physicalevidence of past human activity, representpossible prehistoric and historic occupationsat what is now the Carter G. Woodson

Home National Historic Site. Although noarcheological surveys have been conductedat the national historic site to date, therecould be archeological evidence presentunder the topsoil. Such evidence couldinclude privies, vegetable or flower gardens(pollen studies could identify the kinds of species that could have been planted there),fences, stone or concrete paths, or other




26

backyard structures, all of which couldprovide additional information about Dr.Woodson's use of the property.

The National Park Service does not

anticipate any impacts to archeologicalresources; however, before any ground-disturbing activities described in this generalmanagement plan could be undertaken, suchas the excavation of the basements, anarcheological survey and inventory would becompleted. The National Park Service wouldprepare and submit a report to the District of Columbia Historic Preservation Office fortheir review and comment as required undersection 106 of the National HistoricPreservation Act. Because this plan would

not entail actions that would affectspecifically known archeological resources,this topic has been dismissed from furtheranalysis.

Museum Collections

Museum collections comprise such things asprehistoric and historic artifacts, works of art, archival materials including papers andphotographs, and natural history specimens.The national historic site’s museumcollection consists of first addition

publications written by Dr. Woodson and approximately eight magazines from theAssociation for the Study of AfricanAmerican Life and History. These items are stored at the Mary McLeod BethuneCouncil House National Historic Siteapproximately eight blocks west of Carter G.Woodson Home National Historic Site. NPSstaff may eventually move these items to the NPS Museum Resource Center in Landover, Maryland. In the future and as fundingbecomes available, the National Park Service

plans to acquire additional items for thesite’s museum collection to display in theWoodson home and throughout thebuildings. These items would beaccessioned, cataloged, preserved,protected, and made available for publicaccess and use in accordance with NPSstandards and guidelines. This plan wouldnot affect the national historic site’s museum

collection; therefore, this topic has beendismissed from further analysis.

Sacred Sites

Sacred sites are defined as any specific,

discrete, narrowly delineated location onfederal land that is identified by an AmericanIndian tribe, or Indian individualdetermined to be an appropriatelyauthoritative representative of an Indianreligion, as sacred by virtue of its establishedreligious significance to, or ceremonial useby, an Indian religion; provided that the tribeor appropriately authoritative representativeof an Indian religion has informed theagency of the existence of such a site(Executive Order 13007 of May 24, 1996).

There are no known sacred sites within theauthorized boundary of the national historicsite; therefore, this topic has been dismissedfrom further analysis.

Indian Trust Resources

Carter G. Woodson Home National HistoricSite is not a property or resource reservedfor American Indian tribes through treaty,statute, judicial decision, or executive order,nor is there a fiduciary obligation on the part

of the United States government with regardto Indian tribes and this site. Therefore, thistopic has been dismissed from furtheranalysis.

Conflicts with Land UsePlans or Policies

During the development of this generalmanagement plan, the National Park Serviceconsulted with the District of ColumbiaPlanning Office regarding their February2005 Convention Center Area Strategic

Development Plan (the national historic siteis within blocks of the convention center).Upon review of the city’s plan, the NationalPark Service determined no proposedactions in this general management planwould conflict with the strategicdevelopment plan. Rather, this generalmanagement plan furthers the goals of thecity’s plan.




27

Likewise, actions proposed in this generalmanagement plan do not conflict with theDistrict of Columbia Historic PreservationPlan 2008–2012, “Preserving Communitiesand Character,” but rather further the goals

outlined in the city’s plan. The National ParkService will work with the District of Columbia Historic Preservation Office tofurther meet the requirements of section 106of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, before this generalmanagement plan is implemented.

Since there are no conflicts with either plan,this topic has been dismissed from furtheranalysis.

Energy Requirements andConservation Potential

National Park Service Management Policies2006 require that the National Park Serviceadhere to all federal policies governingenergy and water efficiency, renewableresources, use of alternative fuels, andfederal fleet goals as established in theEnergy Policy Act of 1992. The NationalPark Service also must comply withapplicable executive orders, includingExecutive Order 13123, “Greening the

Government through Efficient EnergyManagement” and Executive Order 13149,“Greening the Government through FederalFleet and Transportation Efficiency.”The national historic site is expected to havea small carbon footprint due to its size (threehistoric row houses, possibly a fourthstructure in the future). The national historicsite would plan to use energy efficientlighting, heating, and air-conditioning,purchase green energy (if available), as wellas other sustainable energy practices.

These issues would be addressed during theimplementation phase of the actionsproposed in this general management plan.Therefore, this topic has been dismissedfrom further analysis.

Climate Change

Climate change may be one of the most far-reaching and irreversible threats to thenational park system. Federal law and policyrequire the National Park Service to address

the issue of climate change in all generalmanagement plans because it is likely toaffect the units of the national park systemand visitors within the planning horizon of 15–20 years.

The effects of climate change includevariables such as temperature changes, sealevel changes, and changes in precipitationpatterns that could have direct implicationsto resource management and parkoperations, and could influence the way

visitors use and experience the nationalhistoric site.

Climate change science is a rapidlyadvancing field and new information iscontinually being collected and released, yetthe full extent of climate change impacts toresource conditions is unknown. As such,park managers and policy makers have notdetermined the most effective responsemechanisms for minimizing impacts andadapting to change. Because of this, the

management strategy proposed in thisgeneral management plan does not providedefinitive solutions or directions; rather, itprovides science-based managementprinciples to consider when implementingthe broader management direction of thepreferred alternative. Further elaborationand adaptation of these principles areanticipated as implementation of the generalmanagement plan proceeds.

Needed actions include the following:

Identify key resources and processes atrisk from climate change.

Establish baseline resource conditions,identify thresholds, and monitor forchanges.

Use adaptive management to minimizerisks to resources.




28

Use best management practices toreduce stress on infrastructure.

Reduce or mitigate greenhouse gaseswhere possible.

Develop partnerships with other similarentities to develop strategies for dealingwith climate change impacts onresources.

In analyzing climate change and the nationalhistoric site, there is one basic question to beanswered: What is the contribution of theproposed project to climate change, asindicated by greenhouse gas emissionsassociated with the project? Compared tothe ongoing development occurring within

the metropolitan Washington, D.C., area, theactions proposed in this plan wouldcontribute a negligible amount of greenhouse gases that contribute to climatechange. Therefore, this topic has beendismissed from further analysis.

Natural Resources

Soils

The National Park Service Organic Act andNPS Management Policies 2006 require theNational Park Service to protect andconserve geologic resources, including soilsthat could be affected by visitors and parkoperations. Soils are not a key resource atthe national historic site. Located in a highlydeveloped urban area, the historicstructures’ backyards are the only placeswhere soil can be found and it has beenheavy disturbed. Any impacts to soils fromactivities associated with the preservation of the historic structures would be short termand negligible. Therefore, this topic has beendismissed from further analysis.

Air Quality

The President’s Council on EnvironmentalQuality guidelines for preparing environ-mental assessments requires the NationalPark Service to analyze the impacts of theproposed actions and alternatives on airquality. Also, section 118 of the 1963 CleanAir Act (42 USC 7401 et seq.) requires a

national park system unit to meet all federal,state, and local air pollution standards.

The entire Washington, D.C., metropolitanarea and adjacent counties in Virginia and

Maryland are classified as nonattainment forthe ozone national ambient air qualitystandard. Ozone, a secondary pollutant, isformed when vehicular emissions (volatileorganic hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides)combine with sunlight as a catalyst.Exceeding the standard generally occurs inthe summer and is regionwide rather thanlocalized. The national historic site is incompliance with all other standards forpollutants. The implementation of eitheralternative would not be expected to result

in a sufficient amount of vehicular traffic toraise the level of ozone and further exceedthe attainment standard. Any increases invehicle emissions would have negligibleeffects on local air quality.

The national historic site structures thatwould undergo rehabilitation andrestoration would be surveyed for asbestos-containing material or other hazardousmaterials prior to any construction activities.If asbestos, lead-based paint, or otherhazardous materials are present, appropriatework practice requirements would beimplemented to prevent the release of contaminated dust into the atmosphere. Thework practice requirements would specifyappropriate removal, handling, andappropriate storage, disposal, and land-filling requirements for all hazardous wastematerials. All operations would be requiredto maintain records, including wasteshipment records, and would be required touse appropriate warning labels, signs, andmarkings.

Construction activities, including equipmentoperation and the hauling of material, couldresult in temporarily increased vehicleexhaust and emissions. Overall, there couldbe local, short-term, negligible impacts to airquality during construction activities;however, no measurable effects outside of the immediate national historic site would be




29

anticipated. Any adverse impacts on airquality would be temporary, lasting only aslong as the rehabilitation and restorationwork.

None of the actions described in the twoalternatives would violate any air qualitystandard or result in a cumulative netincrease or any criteria pollutant underfederal ambient air quality standards.Implementation of either of the alternativesdescribed in this plan would have negligibleimpacts upon air quality. Therefore, airquality has been dismissed from furtheranalysis.

Water Resources

There are no intermittent or perennialstreams or wetlands within or adjacent to thenational historic site. The implementation of either alternative would not be anticipatedto noticeably add to local water and waste-water treatment requirements. Any impactsto the water/wastewater systems’ capacityand the city’s water quality would be longterm and negligible.

Executive Order 11988, “FloodplainManagement” requires an examination of

impacts on floodplains and of the potentialrisk involved in having facilities within afloodplain. The national historic site is at 82feet above sea level, 59 feet above the 500-year floodplain of 13 feet above sea level.Executive Order 11990 requires federalagencies to avoid impacts on wetlands wherepossible. Wetlands are identified on the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service’s National WetlandInventory map for the Washington, D.C./Maryland area. The map indicates thenearest delineated wetlands are primarily

within the banks of Rock Creek, severalmiles away from the national historic site.Due to the lack of streams and wetlandswithin or near the national historic site, thisimpact topic has been dismissed fromfurther analysis.

Vegetation and Wildlife

The National Environmental Policy Actrequires the examination of federal actionson components of affected ecosystems. NPSpolicy is to protect the abundance and

diversity of natural resources. The nationalhistoric site is situated in a highly developedurban setting that has been cleared of allnative vegetation, including rare and unusualspecies. The vegetation that does exist at thesite (trees, grasses, forbs) is nonnative andconsidered part of the historic scene.

Wildlife species in the neighborhood arethose associated with disturbed areas andhuman development in large metropolitanareas. No important wildlife or wildlife

habitat have been identified within theboundaries of the national historic site.

Implementation of either alternative wouldhave no or negligible impacts to vegetationand wildlife; therefore, both topics weredismissed from further analysis.

Threatened or Endangered Species

The Endangered Species Act requires theexamination of impacts federal actionswould have on federally threatened or

endangered species. The U.S. Fish andWildlife Service was consulted with regardto threatened or endangered species thatmight be affected by this generalmanagement plan (correspondence datedApril 22 and May 29, 2008). No proposed orfederally listed threatened or endangeredspecies were identified in or near thenational historic site by the U.S. Fish andWildlife Service. At such time as the design iscompleted and prior to commencement of work at the national historic site, both the

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and theDistrict of Columbia Department of theEnvironment would be consulted onceagain. Implementing either alternative wouldhave no impact to threatened or endangeredspecies; therefore, this topic has beendismissed from further analysis.




30

Lightscape Management

In accordance with NPS Management Policies 2006, the National Park Servicestrives to preserve natural ambientlightscapes, which are natural resources and

values that exist in the absence of humancaused light.

Preserving a natural lightscape is not a goalof the national historic site because it islocated in Washington, D.C. However, thestaff would strive to limit the use of artificialoutdoor lighting to that which is necessaryfor basic security and safety requirements.The outdoor lighting would be shielded tothe maximum extent possible to keep lighton the intended area and out of the night

sky. The lighting used at the national historicsite would have long-term, negligibleimpacts to the night sky; therefore,lightscape management has been dismissedfrom further analysis.

Soundscape Management

In accordance with NPS Management Policies 2006 and Director’s Order 47: Sound Preservation and Noise Management , animportant part of the NPS mission ispreservation of natural soundscapes

associated with national park system units.Natural sounds exist in the absence of human-caused sound. The natural ambientsoundscape is the aggregate of all the naturalsounds that occur in park units, togetherwith the physical capacity for transmittingnatural sounds. The frequencies, magnitude,and duration of human-caused soundconsidered acceptable varies among parksystem units, being generally greater indeveloped areas and less in undevelopedareas.

The national historic site is in Washington,D.C., where the protection of a naturalambient soundscape and/or the opportunityfor visitors to experience a natural soundenvironment is highly unlikely. Visitorswould not come to the national historic siteto seek the quieter, intermittent sounds of nature. Any construction activities

associated with the rehabilitation andrestoration of the historic structures asoutlined in the alternatives, such as haulingof materials or the operation of equipment,could result in loud sounds, but such sounds

would be negligible, short term, and not out-of-place in an urban setting. Since,protection of a natural ambient soundscapeand/or an opportunity for visitors toexperience natural sounds environments isnot an objective of the national historic site,soundscape management has been dismissedfrom further analysis.

Environmental Justice

Federal agencies are required by Executive

Order 12898, “General Actions to AddressEnvironmental Justice in MinorityPopulations and Low-Income Populations,” to identify and address disproportionatelyhigh and adverse human health orenvironmental effects on minority and low-income populations. According to theEnvironmental Protection Agency,environmental justice is the

… fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people, regardless of race,color, national origin, or income, with

respect to the development, implementation,and enforcement of environmental laws,regulations, and policies. Fair treatment means that no group of people, including aracial, ethnic, or socioeconomic group,should bear a disproportionate share of thenegative environmental consequencesresulting from industrial, municipal, and commercial operations or the execution of federal, state, local, and tribal programs and policies.

The alternatives in this general managementplan would not result in a disproportionatelyhigh or adverse effect on any minority orlow-income population or community. Thereasons for this conclusion are as follows:

The actions proposed in eitheralternative to preserve and protectWoodson’s home and the adjacent tworow houses would not result in any




31

identifiable adverse effects on humanhealth. Therefore, there would be nodirect, indirect, or cumulative adverseeffects on any minority or low-incomepopulation or community.

The effects on the natural and physicalenvironment from the proposed actionsof either alternative would notsignificantly and adversely affect anyminority or low-income population orcommunity.

The two alternatives would not result inany identified effects that would bespecific to any minority or low-incomecommunity.

The planning team actively solicited

public comments when developing thisgeneral management plan and gaveequal consideration to all input,regardless of the commenter’s age, race,income status, or other socioeconomicor demographic factors.

For these reasons, environmental justice hasbeen dismissed from further analysis.

Public Health and Safety

National Park Service Management Policies

2006 recognizes the obligation to eliminateall health and safety hazards to the extentpossible at national parks. As design andconstructions drawings for the historicstructures are developed, the National ParkService would ensure the incorporation of public health and safety requirements, aswell as standard accessibility requirements,into the design (accessibility is addressed inchapters two and four). During theimplementation phase, the National ParkService would mitigate any hazardous

materials found on the interiors andexteriors of the buildings including, but notlimited to, lead-based paint and asbestos.None of the actions in either alternativewould result in any identifiable adverseimpacts on human health or safety. Thealternatives were designed withconsideration for these factors. Therefore,

this topic has been dismissed from furtheranalysis.

RELATIONSHIP OF OTHER

PLANNING EFFORTS TO THISGENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN

Mary McLeod Bethune CouncilHouse National Historic Site 2001General Management Plan

In December 2001, the National Park Servicecompleted a final general management planfor the Mary McLeod Bethune CouncilHouse National Historic Site in Washington,D.C. At 1318 Vermont Avenue, NW, in the

Logan Circle neighborhood, this nationalpark system unit is approximately eightblocks west of Carter G. Woodson HomeNational Historic Site (see figure 1).

Thematically, the two sites are linked, aseach commemorates the life and work of aprominent African American. Mary McLeodBethune (1875–1955) and Dr. Woodson(1875–1950) were contemporaries and closecolleagues. She was the first female presidentof the Association for the Study of African

American Life and History and its longest-serving president to date, holding this postfrom 1936 to 1951. In addition to her manyother contributions, Mary McLeod Bethunefounded the National Council of NegroWomen, which is dedicated to improving thequality of life for African American womenand their communities. The house onVermont Avenue was the council’s firstheadquarters and McLeod Bethune’spersonal residence. Although both nationalpark system units preserve three-story row

houses, the Mary McLeod Bethune CouncilHouse is much larger and more elegant than

Dr. Woodson’s modest home. The NationalCouncil of Negro Women hosted manyprominent visitors within the residence,including First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt andforeign dignitaries.

The general management plan for the MaryMcLeod Bethune Council House National




32

Historic Site is available for reference athttp://www.nps.gov/mamc/parkmgmt/planning.htm. Because the two national parksystem units would likely attract a similaraudience—including many of the same

visitors—the plan for the Mary McLeodBethune Council House should prove usefulfor resource and visitor management at theCarter G. Woodson Home National HistoricSite.

Development of theCarter G. Woodson Park

A small triangular parcel of land that isdefined by Rhode Island Avenue to thenorth, Q Street to the south, and 9th Streetto the east, lies a short distance to the northof the Woodson home (see figure 2).Dedicated as Carter G. Woodson Park, thisarea is one of 429 such “triangle parks” within the city of Washington.

Formerly owned by the National ParkService, this triangle park was transferred tothe District of Columbia Department of Parks and Recreation and renamed in Dr.Woodson’s honor. President William J.Clinton dedicated the memorial park duringa ceremony on Veterans Day 1996(Goodspeed 2006).

A historic iron fence defines the park on twosides, although the remainder of the park isminimally developed. Sidewalks run parallelto the three streets at its perimeter. Wornasphalt paving covers much of the property.Areas of turf and sparsely planted vegetationbeds occupy the remainder. A few matureoaks form an open canopy, but otherwise,vegetation is minimal.

In October 2009, the District of ColumbiaDepartment of Parks and Recreationannounced that a conceptual design forredevelopment had been approved. Plansdepict a paved central plaza, flanked by areasof turf and groupings of ornamental treesand shrubs. The focal point of the park is tobe a sculpture of Dr. Woodson seated on apedestal of masonry steps. Artist Raymond

Kaskey will create the sculpture. Among hisother works are the architectural sculpturesof the World War II Memorial on theNational Mall (Convention CenterCommunity Association 2009).

Due to its formal design and its prominentlocation, this memorial park is certain toattract attention when completed. BothRhode Island Avenue and 9th Street are busythoroughfares and the site is highly visiblefrom them. The development of the citymemorial park may raise awareness of thenearby Carter G. Woodson Home NationalHistoric Site.

Carter G. Woodson Park presents

opportunities for the National Park Serviceto collaborate with the District of ColumbiaDepartment of Parks and Recreation.Although the site is noisy due to the busystreet traffic, the triangle park could be asuitable setting for community events.Potentially, it could also serve a role inNational Park Service interpretive andeducational programs or visitor staging.

Convention Center AreaStrategic Development Plan

The District of Columbia government andother entities prepared numerous studiesand plans intended to guide developmentand enhance community character withinthe Shaw neighborhood. Applicable plansinclude the November 2000 Downtown Action Agenda, and the March 2008Conceptual Streetscape Design Guidelines forShaw. One of the more comprehensive plansis the Convention Center Area StrategicDevelopment Plan (CCASDP) completed bythe District of Columbia Office of Planning

in February 2005. Incorporating input fromresidents, business organizations, and localgovernment officials, this document buildsupon direction contained in prior plans(District of Columbia Office of Planning2005).

The plan’s project area stretches fromMount Vernon Square and the Washington




33

Convention Center in the south to U Streetin the north; and from 12th Street in thewest—just east of Logan Circle—to New Jersey Avenue in the east. This areacorresponds to the informal boundaries of

the Shaw community. Carter G. WoodsonHome National Historic Site is near thecenter of this area.

The development plan identified develop-ment issues within the community. Due toproperty values rising rapidly in the past,long-time residents viewed displacement as aparticular threat. Therefore, the continuedavailability of affordable housing wasdescribed as one of the community’sprimary challenges. The development plan

also noted that the community was severelyunderserved by the retail sector. It discussedthe need to strengthen existing businessesand to attract new retail activity that wouldbetter serve the needs of current and futureresidents and area visitors (District of Columbia Office of Planning 2005).

The development plan contains threeprimary objectives:

Strengthen Neighborhood Businesses—Retain existing businesses and attract

new business to the Shaw neighbor-hood through capital investment, meetthe needs of visitors and tourists, andcreate job opportunities and taxrevenues for local services

Generate Quality Housing—Preservehistoric housing and create additionalhousing that would ensure thecommunity remains demographicallydiverse and would continue to offer awide range of housing types

Improve the Public Realm—Determinethe best use of public assets in thecommunity; balance the need forpedestrian and vehicular movement;coordinate the activities of criticalDistrict agencies; and, create astreetscape environment that drawsfrom the corridor’s existing characterand accommodates contemporary

business requirements (District of Columbia Office of Planning 2005)

The development plan providedrecommendations and design guidelines by

subarea. Within the 1500 block of 9th Street,the national historic site falls within“Subarea I. Historic Row-House.”Recommendations for this subarea areaimed at maintaining the historic residentialsetting (District of Columbia Office of Planning 2005). The plan noted that vacantlots and empty buildings along 9th Streetinhibit pedestrian movement between theWashington Convention Center andpotential destinations to the north, such asthe national historic site (District of

Columbia Office of Planning 2005). Designguidelines encouraged responsible infilldevelopment that is compatible with thesetting. This type of development wouldrespect historic architectural elements suchas row house width, materials, exteriorornamentation, roofline, and fenestrationpatterns. The plan also acknowledged thatcorner stores and historic storefronts help toestablish community character, and itoffered guidelines for the design andrehabilitation of these commercial buildings(District of Columbia Office of Planning2005).

The development plan reported that in somesectors of the Shaw neighborhood, theconfiguration of roadway and otherstreetscape elements created anuncomfortable environment. For example,some principal streets were excessively wide,resulting in pedestrian walkways that werenarrow and positioned immediately adjacentto lanes of traffic. In such places, streetscaperedesign could provide greater benefit toarea residents and businesses (District of Columbia Office of Planning 2005).

The city is studying possibilities forreworking circulation along 7th and 9th

streets—the Shaw neighborhood’s twomajor north-south arteries. Options forthese streets could include designating themfor one-way traffic and reducing the number




34

of traffic lanes. Such changes could perhapsimprove efficiency while also enhancing thestreetscape—for instance, by opening upmore space for wider sidewalks andlandscaping. These proposals could affect

visitor access and parking at the nationalhistoric site. The National Park Servicewould continue to work with the cityregarding these plans.

The development plan described thechallenges facing schools in the Shawneighborhood and raised the possibility of extensive redevelopment. According to theplan, selected school sites could beredeveloped for a mix of uses, includingeducation, recreation, and housing. Such

mixed-use development could be proposedif it has the potential to address pressingcommunity needs such as retail developmentand affordable housing. The plan called outSeaton Elementary School and Shaw JuniorHigh School as possible redevelopment sites(District of Columbia Office of Planning2005). Flanking both sides of Rhode IslandAvenue, these two schools are within a fewblocks of the national historic site.

The Historic Preservation Plan for

the District of Columbia 2008–2012The District of Columbia HistoricPreservation Office developed a five-yearhistoric preservation plan (2008–2012) titled“Preserving Communities and Character.”“This preservation plan outlines the specificpolicies and goals necessary to identify,protect, and capitalize on the District’shistoric resources, while establishing theframework for implementation andintegration of the city’s preservationactivities. The plan is intended to be used by

the D.C. [sic] Historic PreservationOffice, federal and District agencies...toguide decisions for the utilization anddistribution of preservation resources,surveys and documentation efforts, publicoutreach programming, and thestewardship, reuse, and promotion of ourcity’s heritage” (“Preserving Communitiesand Character,” p. 1). Because the historic

structures that comprise the national historicsite are listed in the National Register of Historic Places, the National Park Servicewould work closely with the District of Columbia Historic Preservation Office to

ensure that proposed treatments for theCarter G. Woodson Home National HistoricSite further the broad goals set forth in theDistrict of Columbia’s historic preservationplan. Actions proposed in this generalmanagement plan would be reviewed by theDistrict of Columbia Historic PreservationOffice to ensure compliance with section 106of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966.

THE NEXT STEPSAfter this General Management Plan/ Environmental Assessment/ InterpretationPlan is distributed, the public will have a 30-day review and comment period. Then theplanning team will evaluate the comments ithas received from organizations, businesses,individuals, and other federal agencies.Following the review of public comments, adecision document may be prepared. Afinding of no significant impact (FONSI)may be finalized or a notice of intent (NOI)

to complete an environmental impactstatement may be prepared and submitted tothe Federal Register. The planning team mayrespond through the use of errata sheets tocomments that do not increase the degree of impact described in the environmentalassessment. The combination of theenvironmental assessment and the erratasheets would form the complete and finalrecord upon which the FONSI or decision toprepare an environmental impact statementis based. If substantive issues are raised that

have not been covered adequately in theplan, or new alternatives are suggested thatthe NPS staff should consider, the generalmanagement plan would be rewritten toincorporate them and reissued for a second30-day review.




35

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLAN

Once the General Management Plan/ Environmental Assessment/ InterpretationPlan has been approved, the National ParkService would be able to take immediate

steps toward acquiring funding for, as well asthe completion of, the following tasks:finalizing the functions of the interior spacesof the historic structures; preparing astructural engineering report to address theexcavation of the basements and bowingexterior walls; preparing design andconstruction drawings to restore andrehabilitate the historic structures; designingthe interpretive exhibits, materials, andprograms; and hiring for some of thepositions. The approval of this plan does not

guarantee that the funding and staffingneeded to implement the plan will beforthcoming. The national historic site mustcompete for funding with other nationalpark system units. Full implementation of this plan could be many years in the future.

Once this plan has been approved, thenational historic site should complete thefollowing plans or reports, which will helpthe site become fully operational (seeappendix D for details).

A visitor use management plan toanalyze and develop strategies formanaging visitor flow and staging fornormal operations and special events.The plan would further identifyapproaches for regulating use levels andmanaging tour operations.

A future boundary study to analyzeexpansion of the authorized boundaryof the national historic site to include anadditional property. The additional

space could be used for visitor use andservices.

A comprehensive interpretive plan tosupplement the interpretation plan inthis document. The comprehensiveinterpretive plan would help define theoverall vision and long-term (5–10years) interpretive goals of the nationalhistoric site.

A scope of collections statements andhistoric furnishings reports to guide theacquisition and preservation of historicartifacts and period furnishingsacquired to tell Dr. Woodson’s life story

to visitors. An ethnographic overview would

gather data about the national historicsite (both written and oral history) todocument ethnographic resources andthe group(s) that traditionally definesuch cultural resources at the site assignificant to their ethnic heritage andcultural viability.

An archeological survey of the threebackyards, and basements of buildings

1540 and 1542 to determine how theywere possibly prehistorically andhistorically used.

A resource stewardship strategy toprovide guidance on achieving thedesired conditions identified in thisgeneral management plan and thecultural resources being managed at thesite.

A historic furnishings report to providea history of how Woodson’s home wasused and the type of furnishing

Woodson had or may have had in hishome.

A survey of the backyards of Dr.Woodson’s home and buildings 1540and 1542 is needed to determine if significant cultural landscapecharacteristics exist. Thesecharacteristics may include spatialorganization, cultural traditions,circulation, vegetation, views, andsmall-scale features. The report would

also discuss how the backyards wereused historically.

As required, the National Park Servicewould carry out additional compliance forthese plans under the National Environ-mental Policy Act, National HistoricPreservation Act, and other relevant lawsand policies. Before this general manage-ment plan can be implemented, the National




36

Park Service would need to initiate culturalcompliance with the District of Columbia

Historic Preservation Office and possiblyother agencies.



37

CHAPTER TWO:MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES



38



39

INTRODUCTION

This chapter presents two alternatives—noaction and a preferred—for the managementof the Carter G. Woodson Home NationalHistoric Site for the next 15 to 20 years. Thealternatives were developed in concert withan ongoing public involvement process,described in chapter five under “PublicInvolvement.” This chapter includes tablesthat summarize the key differences betweenthe alternatives and the key differences inthe impacts that are expected fromimplementing either alternative. Thischapter also describes management zones,carrying capacity, mitigation measures thatmay be used to lessen or avoid impacts, anda discussion of the environmentallypreferable alternative.

Many aspects of the desired future conditionof Carter G. Woodson Home NationalHistoric Site are defined in the site’sestablishing legislation, the site’s purposeand significance statements, and NationalPark Service policies and mandates. Withinthese parameters, the National Park Servicesolicited input from the public, NationalPark Service staff, government agencies, andother organizations, including theAssociation for the Study of AfricanAmerican Life and History, regarding issuesand desired conditions for the nationalhistoric site. Their input helped create thetwo alternatives presented in this chapter.



40

MANAGEMENT ZONES

OVERVIEWManagement zoning is the method used bythe National Park Service to identify anddescribe the appropriate variety of resourceconditions and visitor experiences to beachieved and maintained in different areasof a park. Management zoning provides forsome variety of resource conditions andvisitor experiences consistent with the park’spurpose and significance and the differentinherent characteristics (especially of fundamental resources and values) of

different areas in the park, or in this case,national historic site.

To help the planning team developmanagement zones for the national historicsite, the National Park Service held a space-use charrette and hired an architect fromBeyer Blinder Belle Architects & PlannersLLP, to participate in the November 2009meeting. The purpose of the meeting was todevelop preliminary concept floorplans forthe historic structures that illustrated the

desired interpretive, administrative, andmaintenance/mechanical elements neededto make the national historic site fullyoperational. The meeting participantsdiscussed whether or not the desiredelements could be accommodated in thespace available, as well as the desired logicalflow of visitors through the buildings. Thedecisions made were broad in scopeallowing for flexibility when the interiorspaces are formally programmed in thefuture by an architect and interpretive

planner.

During the charrette, an assumption wasmade that all elements proposed werepossible. It was assumed that basementfloors could be lowered, sections of interiorwalls could be safely removed, an elevatorcould be installed, and electrical, plumbing,an HVAC system, and fire suppression needscould be accommodated. These assumptions

could be validated or proven to be infeasibleonce more detailed information is knownafter the next phase of this project, design,and construction drawings are completed.

Taking into account input received duringpublic scoping and discussions from thespace-use charrette, the planning teamdeveloped two management zones for thenational historic site: historic Woodsonhome zone and visitor use and parkoperations zone.

MANAGEMENT ZONE DESCRIPTIONS

Historic Woodson Home Zone

The historic Woodson home zone wouldinclude the interior (all floors) of Woodson’shome and would be managed primarily as ahouse museum, which would be a housewith the look and feel of a museum that isfilled with historically accurate furnishingsdisplayed in a way that may reflect their

original location and usage in the home. Low(visitors who come in off the street) to high(school and tour groups) numbers of visitorswould enjoy and learn about the life, work,and legacy of Dr. Woodson throughstructured activities (such as a ranger- orvolunteer-led tour).

Desired Resource Conditions

The interior of Woodson’s home would berestored to the time period that Dr.Woodson lived there (1922–1950) and

maintained as a house museum. The historicintegrity of the interior would be maintainedto give it a feeling as if Dr. Woodson had juststepped away from his work and home.Appropriate time period furnishings wouldbe used.



Management Zones

41

Desired Visitor Experiences

Visitors would be provided an opportunityto walk back in time to when Dr. Woodsonlived and worked in the home. Visitoractivities would include a ranger- or

volunteer-led tour of the historic home, one-on-one interaction with the ranger orvolunteer, and photography. Visitors wouldlearn about Dr. Woodson’s home, life, work,and legacy during the tour. It is estimatedthat two tours of six to eight people wouldbe allowed in the home at one time. The timecommitment would be less than an hour.Encounters with another visitor tour groupwould be likely.

Appropriate Facilities and Functions

There might be some allowances forrehabilitation of nonessential spaces (i.e.,spaces that are not critical to showcasing thestory and legacy of Dr. Woodson) foradministrative purposes such as offices andstorage. Otherwise, the home would betreated like a house museum. Interpretiveexhibits might be incorporated. New HVACand fire suppression systems would beaccommodated in an unobtrusive manner.

Visitor Use andPark Operations Zone

This management zone would provide forvisitor orientation, education, and othervisitor use opportunities (such as classroomactivities). Low (visitors who come in off thestreet) to high (school and tour groups)numbers of visitors would enjoy and learnabout Dr. Woodson’s life, work, and legacy.This zone also would support the nationalhistoric site’s administrative and operationalfunctions.

Desired Resource Conditions

Building interiors would be rehabilitated andadaptively used to accommodateinterpretive, educational, administrative,maintenance/mechanical/utility needs. Anelevator and egress stairway would beconstructed and maintained for accessibilityand safety.

Desired Visitor Experiences

This would be the first zone visitors wouldencounter. Visitors would be offered avariety of opportunities for orientation,interpretation, and education. Conveying

the primary interpretive themes from theinterpretation plan would be a high priority.Common visitor activities might includebecoming oriented to the site, interactingwith an interpretive ranger or volunteer,watching an educational video, viewinginterpretive exhibits, attending interpretiveprograms, and waiting to take a ranger-guided tour of Woodson’s home. In thiszone, larger groups would be staged whilewaiting to take a tour of Woodson’s home ingroups of six to eight people (estimated); an

estimated two tours at one time would beallowed. While the two smaller groups tourWoodson’s home, the remaining membersof the group would be assisted by a ranger orvolunteer who would provide them with anopportunity to learn about Dr. Woodsonand his legacy through interpretive exhibits,talks, and media. Time commitment wouldvary, depending on amount of informationdesired, but most likely would be one to twohours. Low to high visitation levels would beaccommodated (from people walking in off

the street to tour and school groups).Encounters with other visitors would belikely.

Appropriate Facilities and Functions

Adaptive use of spaces to accommodatevisitor use and park operations includingorientation to the site, interpretive exhibits,staging area(s), retail sales, offices, storage,restrooms, and accessibility would beaccommodated. New HVAC and firesuppression systems would beaccommodated in an unobtrusive manner.

The management zones are illustrated on thefloorplans in figures 3 through 10.




42

NATIONAL PARK SERVICEFACILITY PLANNING MODEL

The National Park Service Facility PlanningModel is a computer-based programdesigned to predict realistic project sizebased on answers to a series of basicquestions. This planning model was run forthe national historic site to predict therealistic amount of space needed to operatethe site as a visitor facility. Since the nationalhistoric site is not open to the public yet,visitation figures for the Mary McLeodBethune Council House National HistoricSite were used. The approximate square foottotals for the historic structures are:

4,000 square feet of floor space in

Woodson’s home (four floors) 4,200 square feet of floor space in

buildings 1540 and 1542 combined(four floors in each building; assumingthat the basement floors could belowered)

5,000 square feet of floor space inbuilding 1544 (three floors)

Square foot totals for the preferredalternative options are

Option one: 8,200 square feet(Woodson’s home and buildings 1540and 1542)

Option two: 13,200 square feet(Woodson’s home and buildings 1540,1542, and 1544)

The National Park Service Facility Planning

Model recommends a minimum of 3,440 anda maximum of 5,520 gross square feet forvisitor facilities at the national historic site.With approximately 8,200 to 13,200 squarefeet available, the facility model substantiatesthat the size of the national historic site islarge enough to provide for visitor facilities.

The historic structures that comprise thenational historic site are irregular in shape.They were not constructed for the purposeof housing visitor facilities, which results in

space in the floorplans being taken up forhallways, stairways, and basements—spacesthat cannot otherwise be used. However, it isanticipated the required space for visitorfacilities will exceed the NPS FacilityPlanning Model and the space available forvisitor facilities is sufficient for the nationalhistoric site. This would be studied further inthe next phases of this project (design andconstruction drawings and visitor usemanagement plan).



43

USER CAPACITY

General management plans for national parksystem units are required by law to identifyand address implementation commitmentsfor user capacity. The National Park Servicedefines user capacity as the types and extentof visitor use that can be accommodatedwhile sustaining the quality of parkresources and visitor experiences consistentwith the purposes of the park. User capacityis not a set of numbers or limits, but rather aprocess of establishing desired conditions,monitoring impacts, evaluating the impactsagainst standards, and taking actions toensure park values are protected. Thepremise behind this process is that withvisitor use of a park there would be a level of impacts to natural or cultural resources, orvisitor opportunities. It is the responsibilityof the National Park Service to determinewhat level of impacts would be acceptableand what actions would be needed to keepimpacts within acceptable limits. Instead of solely tracking and controlling visitation,park staff would manage the levels, types,and patterns of visitor use and other publicuses in a fashion that would preserve thecondition of the resources and the quality of the visitor experience. The monitoringcomponent of the user capacity processwould keep management in touch with thechanging conditions in the park, and wouldprovide the basis for corrective actions. Theever-changing nature of visitor use in parkunits would require a deliberate andadaptive approach to use capacitymanagement.

As part of the National Park Servicecommitment to implement user capacity,this general management plan addresses usercapacity in the following ways:

It describes the overall direction forallowing visitor use at the nationalhistoric site (in this chapter, see the“Management Zones” section and“Visitor Use and Enjoyment” found

under “Elements Common to BothAlternatives” and “The PreferredAlternative”). Visitor use at the nationalhistoric site would model how similarnational park system units likeFrederick Douglass, Mary McLeodBethune Council House, Maggie L.Walker, Martin Luther King Jr. nationalhistoric sites and IndependenceNational Historical Park allow visitoruse (i.e., guided tours and interpretiveand educations exhibits and programsare the main elements of visitor use).When considering where to provide forand encourage visitor use, the NationalPark Service would take into accountthe issues of accessibility, risk of damage to the historic structures, andthe need to preserve the historicstructures. This overall strategy forallowing and managing visitor use at thenational historic site would be the mostimportant implementation commitmentfor user capacity in this plan.

Potential user capacity-relatedconcerns are described to help raiseawareness of potential issues that couldarise with new and changing usepatterns at the national historic site.

Potential indicators and standards andconsideration for monitoring areincluded to more clearly define anddraw attention to potential usercapacity-related concerns that mightdevelop as visitors begin using thenational historic site. Given the

unknowns of how visitors wouldspecifically interact with the resourcesof the site, the likely patterns of visitoruse, and the resulting impacts thatmight be of most concern, highlyspecific and measurable indicators andstandards were not developed as part of this general management plan, but




44

would be further defined as part of future planning efforts.

Potential management strategies areoutlined that could be considered toprevent or minimize key impacts from

visitor use.

This approach is not intended to becomplete and final; rather the nationalhistoric site staff would abide by thesedirectives for guiding the types and extent of visitor use that would be accommodated atthe site. As more information becomesknown about the visitors who come andenjoy the site, further elaboration andadoption of this approach would need to be

developed in a visitor use management plan.

Regardless, final selection of measurable

indicators and standards for monitoringpurposes, and implementation of management actions that affect use, wouldcomply with the National EnvironmentalPolicy Act, section 106 of the National

Historic Preservation Act, and other lawsand NPS management policies, asappropriate.

Table 1outlines potential concerns fromvisitor impacts, indicators, standards, andmanagement actions for the national historicsite. Until a visitor use management plan iscompleted, the national historic site staff would use the concerns, indicators,standards, and management actions in thetable as a guide to help manage visitor use at

the site.

Table 1: Potential Indicators, Standards, and Management Actions for theNational Historic Site

Potential VisitorImpacts ofConcern

Potential Indicator Topics Considerations forMonitoring and Potential

Standards

Potential ManagementActions

Crowding:

complaints, noise,competition forviewing interpretiveexhibits, safetyissues

number/percent

increase in visitorcomplaints specific tovisitor crowding andconflicts

number of times thephysical capacity ofthe structures are ator above capacity

wait times to takethe guided tour ofWoodson’s home

number or percentincrease in incidences

of accidents,conflicts, or othersafety issues

excessive human-caused noise (% oftime audible)

Document and evaluate trends

in visitor complaints.Periodically evaluate crowdingand congestion events duringpeak use times. Conductregular visitor surveys toevaluate and track trends invisitor characteristics, usetrends, and visitor perceptions.

increase advance

planning informationthat encouragesvisitation at off-peaktimes

real-time informationon wait times

temporarily orpermanently restrictaccess to specific areas

regulate the amount ofuse, possibly includinglimits on group sizes



User Capacity

45



Standards


Accessing theSite: parking

number/percentincrease in visitor

complaints specific toaccessing the site

wait times to findparking near the site

Document and evaluate trendsin visitor complaints. Conduct

regular visitor surveys toevaluate and track trends inwait times and ability to findparking.

increase advanceplanning information

that encouragesvisitation at off-peaktimes

enter into anagreement with ShilohBaptist Church to usetheir parking lot duringregular business hours

explore otheralternativetransportation optionsto facilitate access tothe site

Conflicts withGroups: groupsinteracting withindividual visitors,groups interactingwith other groups

number/percentincrease in visitorcomplaints specific toconflicts with groups


number ofchaperones tominors in organizedgroups

number of groups

showing up withoutnotifying the nationalhistoric site or areservation

people at one time(or number of groupsat one time) inbuildings 1540 and1542 (and 1544, ifacquired)

Document and evaluate trendsin visitor complaints. Tracktrends and evaluate group usepatterns throughout the year.Conduct regular visitor surveysto evaluate and track trends invisitor characteristics, usetrends, and visitor perceptions.

disseminate pre-tripplanning information,including targetedcontact with organizedgroups

coordinate the arrival(day and time) anddistribution oforganized groupswithin the nationalhistoric site via areservation system

on-site contact withindividual visitors andgroups to provideinformation and directuse, in order to avoidconflicts

roving staff fororientation andinformation

increased staffing andcoordination todistribute groupsthroughout thenational historic site to

avoid crowding andconflicts

pre-trip planninginformation toencourage voluntaryredistribution of use tooff-peak days andtimes




46



Standards


Conflicts withSpecial Events:

special eventsconflicting withindividual visitors

number/percentincrease in visitor

complaints specific tospecial events


Document and evaluate trendsin visitor complaints.

Periodically evaluate numbersof individual visitors (peopleunaware of the scheduledspecial event) during specialevents. Conduct regular visitorsurveys to evaluate and tracktrends in visitor characteristics,use trends, and visitorperceptions.

on-site contact withindividual visitors and

groups to provideinformation and directuse, in order to avoidconflicts

roving staff fororientation andinformation

pre-trip planninginformation toencourage voluntaryredistribution of use todays and times with nospecial events

Vandalism: defacing of historicstructures,furnishings, andinterpretive exhibits

number of incidentsof vandalism

level of visitorunderstandingregarding thesensitivity of theresource

Collect baseline data on thecondition of the resources.Assess the relationshipbetween the degree of visitoraccess and the types anddegree of vandalism occurringand where it is occurringmost.

educate visitors onregulations andsignificance and valueof the resources(especially the historicstructures andfurnishings)

increase number ofrangers who lead theguided tour ofWoodson’s home

increase number ofrangers who rovethroughout the site

change the routes ofvisitor access

temporarily orpermanently restrictaccess to specific areas

regulate the amount ofuse



User Capacity

47



Standards


Theft of Artifacts: removing artifacts

number of incidentsof theft

level of visitorunderstandingregarding thesensitivity of theresource

Collect baseline data on whatartifacts are on-site (should be

in ICMS database) and theircondition. Assess therelationship between thedegree and type of visitoraccess and the number ofartifacts removed.

educate visitors onregulations and

significance and valueof the artifacts

increase number ofrangers who lead theguided tour of theWoodson home

increase number ofrangers who rovethroughout the site

change the routes ofvisitor access

move/remove artifacts

from public viewing temporarily or

permanently restrictaccess to specific areas


Wear on HistoricStructures: deterioration ofhandrails, floors,walls, etc., frompeople

number of timesrepairs need to bemade to handrails,floors, walls, etc.

Complete conditionassessments for each structureonce a year. Assess therelationship between thedegree of visitor access andthe types and degree ofdeterioration occurring and

where it is occurring most.

protect areas mostaffected by peoplewith things like rugs,plastic coverings, etc.

temporarily orpermanently restrict

access to specific areas




48

THE ALTERNATIVES

In the process of developing this General Management Plan/ Environmental Assessment/ Interpretation Plan, the planningteam examined different approaches to siteuse, development, and management. Theseapproaches were narrowed to a no-actionalternative that describes the baseline forcomparison with the preferred alternativeand the preferred alternative. The no-actionalternative assumes the National ParkService would take actions to preserve thebuildings for future generations includingsome exterior restoration or stabilizationand rehabilitation work because it is theminimum action thought to be acceptablefor the preservation of the national historicsite and to meet congressional intent. Thepreferred alternative consists of two possibleoptions that would rehabilitate the historicstructures for public use and create aninteractive and educational visitorexperience.

The alternatives (and the interpretation planin chapter 6) focus on what resourceconditions, visitor uses, and experiences oropportunities should be at the nationalhistoric site rather than on details of howthese conditions, uses, and experiencesshould be achieved. Thus, the alternatives donot include many details on managingresources or visitor use.

In developing the alternatives, thefoundation statement, interpretation plan,historic structure report, and historicresource study were used, along withcomments received from the public duringthe scoping period.

Work to preserve the structures in the parkboundary is an urgent need. Still, imple-menting any alternative would depend onsecuring funding and possibly furtherenvironmental and cultural resourcecompliance. This plan does not guarantee

that the funds to carry out the selectedalternative would be forthcoming. Thenational historic site would have to competeagainst other units of the national parksystem for limited funding. This generalmanagement plan is intended to establish avision of the future that would guide thedevelopment of and the day-to-day andyear-to-year management of the nationalhistoric site; however, the full execution of the plan could take many years.

ELEMENTS COMMON TOBOTH ALTERNATIVES

The management directions that arecommon to both alternatives are describedin this section. Examples include measuresnecessary to protect the structures fromfurther deterioration, such as roof repairs.Some actions relate directly to the parkpurpose, derived from the legislationdesignating Carter G. Woodson HomeNational Historic Site, such as those actions

necessary to make the home useable andopen to the public as a tribute to Dr.Woodson.

Historic Structures

To date, the National Park Service hasreplaced broken window panes, temporarilysealed openings that allowed unauthorizedaccess, and instituted U.S. Park Policesurveillance of the empty structures.

Work on the historic structures wouldfollow the Secretary of the Interior’sStandards for the Treatment of HistoricProperties. In keeping with the standards,historically appropriate materials would beused to make repairs and/or replacementsin-kind. Please see appendix H for thedefinition of the standards along withdefinitions for preservation, rehabilitation,restoration, and stabilization.



The Alternatives

49

Elements common to all three historicstructures are as follows. The roofs of thebuildings would be replaced or repaired asneeded to prevent moisture from leakinginto the structures and causing water

damage. Exterior woodwork and metal trimwork would be repaired. Security grillswould be removed from windows anddoors. Original windows would be repairedand/or replaced in kind. Missing ornonhistoric windows and exterior doorswould be replaced with historically accuratewindows and doors. Bulging or unstablebrickwork would be repaired. Brickworkwould be cleaned and repointed. Thechimneys would be repointed as needed.Nonhistoric infill materials would be

removed and historic openingsreconstructed. Nonhistoric miscellaneoussurface-mounted lighting, conduit, andwiring would be removed. An HVAC systemwould be installed in building 1540 to serviceall of the buildings. The HVAC systemwould be designed and installed to cause theleast alteration of each building’s floorplanand the loss of historic fabric would beminimized. A fire suppression system wouldbe installed to protect the buildings.

Woodson’s Home and Building 1540

The exteriors (front and back) of theWoodson home and building 1540 would berestored to the time period Woodson livedthere (1922–1950). The marble entrancestairways and cast-iron railings would berestored. The original door on the Woodsonhome would be restored and a historicallyaccurate door would be installed on building1540. The other entryway features would berestored to their historic appearance. Thebasement door and stairs would be restored

on the Woodson home.

The Associated Publishers sign would berecreated and hung on the front of the

Woodson home (The Associated Publisherswas the publishing company Dr. Woodsonestablished and operated out of his home).Prior to the restoration work taking place,the exteriors of the buildings may bestabilized.

Building 1542

The façade of building 1542 has beenextensively altered and may no longer havehistoric integrity; the exterior would berehabilitated to the extent possible to make

it look compatible with the other twobuildings. The rear side of building 1542would be rehabilitated to be compatible withthe adjacent structures. From the street, thethree structures would have the appearanceof a set of maintained historic structuressimilar in appearance and feel.

Backyards

The backyards would be maintained topresent an attractive appearance for the

neighborhood. Care would be taken toensure that any feature that may be culturallyrelevant to the national historic site wouldnot be altered until studied further.




50

Visitor Use and Enjoyment

Interpretation

The public would learn about Dr. Woodsonand his legacy through the park website,park brochure, and an interpretive walkingtour of the neighborhood led by a NPSinterpretive ranger. Visitors would also learnabout Dr. Woodson from two or threeinterpretive wayside exhibits in front of theWoodson home that would meetaccessibility standards. The design of theinterpretive exhibits and spaces wouldfollow sustainable/green design standardsincluding emphasizing environmentalsensitivity in constructing the exhibits, usingnontoxic materials, conserving resources,and recycling materials. The interpretivewalking tour and wayside exhibits are part of the management direction adopted bycurrent site management staff.

The Association for the Study of African American Life and History

The National Park Service would continueto partner with the Association for the Studyof African American Life and History asoutlined in the park’s enabling legislationand the general agreement between the two

parties. The Association for the Study of African American Life and History wouldassist the National Park Service withinterpretive and educational programming,including the park website, park brochure,interpretive and educational exhibits, andinterpretive ranger-led programs like thewalking tour. The partnership would includeworking together to provide educational andinterpretive materials to the public and otherpotential partners. As part of the manage-ment direction adopted by current sitemanagement staff, partnerships with localschool districts, universities, and otherorganizations would be developed to affordopportunities to learn about Dr. Woodsonand his work. The national historic sitewould develop interpretive ranger programsto be given to educational groups and civicorganizations. These programs could be

delivered at the national historic site or atpartner locations. Partnering with localinstitutions and organizations would help toexplore ways that the national historic siteand schools could work together, combiningneeds and resources to create new learningopportunities. The Association for the Studyof African American Life and History wouldassist the National Park Service with the



The Alternatives

51

coordination of NPS Black History Monthevents.

Self-guided Walking andCommercial Tours

As part of the management directionadopted by current site management staff,the National Park Service would work withexisting cultural tourism companies inWashington, D.C. These companies offerself-guided walking or commercial tours of historic sites throughout the city.Cooperating with these entities wouldincrease awareness of the national historicsite among visitors who might not otherwiseknow about Dr. Woodson and his legacy.

Park Operations

Staffing

The national historic site would be managedindependently, and not in conjunction withanother national park system unit under thepurview of the National Capital Parks-Eastsuperintendent. An option considered wasto share NPS staff with the Mary McLeodBethune Council House National HistoricSite. However, the Mary McLeod BethuneCouncil House National Historic Site does

not have the staff available to manage,operate, and serve visitors at both nationalhistoric sites. Unless otherwise mentioned,all positions hired would be full-timeequivalent (FTE) employees. Hiring of full-time equivalent employees would depend onavailable funding and visitation demands.

The national historic site’s operations wouldalso be supported by shared NationalCapital Parks-East staff, such asadministrative personnel, maintenance

workers, and resource specialists.

Cooperation with District of Columbia

The National Park Service would work withthe District of Columbia and its historicpreservation office to ensure that actionssuch as street lighting, street parking,widening or narrowing of the 9th Streetright-of-way, or amenities such as parking

meters, street trees, power poles, or othermodern features (all of which are under themanagement of the District of Columbia) donot diminish the national historic site’shistoric integrity.

Visitor Safety

The national historic site would work withU.S. Park Police, District of Columbia lawenforcement, emergency medical services,and firefighting agencies to achieve effectivevisitor protection. Appropriate energy-efficient lighting would be incorporated toenhance the safety and security of the site.

Parking

As part of the management directionadopted by current site management staff,the National Park Service would work withthe District of Columbia to add one or twoaccessible street parking spaces in front of the buildings, and possibly a designatedparking space for site employees somewhereon the block.

Sidewalk and Streetscape

The National Park Service would continueto work with the District of Columbia to

ensure that the sidewalk and streetscape aremaintained for visitor safety and to providean inviting appearance consistent with thehistoric period of significance of the site andhistoric districts.

THE NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE(CONTINUATION OF THE CURRENTMANAGEMENT DIRECTION)

Overall Vision

The neighborhood surrounding Dr.Woodson's home retains much of thehistoric character from the time Dr.Woodson lived and worked there. Theemphasis under the no-action alternativewould be the opportunity for visitors toexperience Dr. Woodson’s neighborhood,view the restored and rehabilitated historicstructure façades, and understand how this




52

neighborhood influenced his life and work.While visitors would not have access to theinteriors of the structures, they would learnabout Dr. Woodson’s life and legacy throughthe park website and brochure and the

wayside exhibits in front of Dr. Woodson’shome. Visitors would also learn about Dr.Woodson by going on a ranger- orvolunteer-led interpretive walking tour of the neighborhood. The tour would stop atShiloh Baptist Church, the YWCA, and othersignificant neighborhood locationsassociated with him.

The no-action alternative describes what ishappening at the national historic site andthe management direction adopted by

current site management, as well as whatactions need to be taken to maintain thehistoric integrity of the buildings. Theprimary purpose of the no-action alternativein a general management plan is to serve as abaseline for comparing the effects of thepreferred alternative. The no-actionalternative consists of the previouslydescribed “elements common to bothalternatives” plus the elements describedbelow.

Historic StructuresUnder the no-action alternative, theinteriors of Dr. Woodson’s home andbuildings 1540 and 1542 would beperiodically inspected for insect and rodentdamage, unauthorized entry, and otherdeterioration. Periodic, minor repairs wouldbe undertaken. Existing utilities (electric andplumbing) may be repaired as needed.


Visitor use and experience would be limitedunder this alternative because the buildingswould not be restored and rehabilitated forvisitor use; and therefore, visitors would notbe allowed inside the buildings. Implemen-tation of the interpretation plan would belimited to using the interpretive themes, tothe extent possible, on the park website andthe wayside exhibits, while items like visitorexperience goals would not be

implementable since the structures wouldnot be reused.

Under the no-action alternative, theAssociation for the Study of African

American Life and History would not beprovided administrative space since theinteriors of the structures would not berehabilitated for use.

Park Operations

Under the no-action alternative, four FTEinterpretation and education staff would behired to manage the day-to-day operationsof the site. National Capital Parks-East mayalso hire a maintenance worker, resourcemanagement specialist, or an administrative

assistant (two FTEs total) to support theoperation of the national historic site. Thesetwo employees would be shared with otherNational Capital Parks-East park units. Theoffices of the site’s employees would belocated off-site at another National CapitalParks-East park or office. Additionaloperational support would be provided byexisting National Capital Parks-East staff.

The site’s interpretation and education staff would take visitors on a scheduled walking

tour of the neighborhood during regularpark hours. Volunteers might also guide thetours. The maintenance worker and culturalresource specialist would inspect the historicstructures periodically and make anynecessary repairs, as well as clean the site asneeded. U.S. Park Police would continue toregularly patrol the national historic site.

THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

Overall VisionIn addition to experiencing theneighborhood as described in the no-actionalternative, the emphasis under thepreferred alternative would be to experienceDr. Woodson’s life as if he had just steppedout of his house and away from his work.Visitors would learn about Dr. Woodson bygoing on a guided tour of his restored home,



The Alternatives

53

and through innovative and interactiveinterpretive exhibits, videos, materials, andprograms in the adjacent buildings.

The preferred alternative has two options

(see figures 3 through 10). Under optionone, the national historic site wouldmaintain and operate the Woodson homeand the two adjacent structures to the north(buildings 1540 and 1542), which are withinthe current (2011) authorized boundary. If the preferred alternative is selected, thisoption would be implemented immediatelyfollowing approval of the plan. Option twoaddresses these properties as well as 15449th Street, NW (building 1544). This optionwould be implemented only if the property

is acquired and subsequently added to thepark boundary. The preferred alternativeconsists of the previously describedmanagement zones, “elements common toboth alternatives,” and the elementsdescribed below.

Historic Structures

Architectural Barriers Act Accessibility Standards

Under both options of the preferred

alternative, visitors would be encouraged toenter and explore the historic structures.Therefore, the National Park Service wouldfollow the Architectural Barriers ActAccessibility Standards when restoring andrehabilitating the structures. This wouldinclude making the entrance to the nationalhistoric site accessible or barrier free,installing an elevator and a wheelchair lift,installing appropriate equipment for firesafety egress (such as an evacuation chair),and opening up a wall on each floor between

the Woodson home and building 1540 sothat visitors have access between thebuildings. Consultation with engineers,architects, and appropriate user groupswould be required to ensure interior spaceswere appropriately designed includingmeeting egress needs for people with limitedmobility. All of these alterations would bedesigned by a historical architect to becompatible with the historic features of the

buildings (exteriors and interiors). Thedesign of these alterations would bereviewed by the District of ColumbiaHistoric Preservation Office.

Interpretive exhibits would be madeaccessible as appropriate. Accessiblerestrooms would be available as well.

Sustainable Design and Development

The National Park Service would usesustainable design and developmentpractices during the restoration andrehabilitation of the buildings in accordancewith the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation & Illustrated Guidelines onSustainability for Rehabilitating Historic

Buildings. Sustainable practices minimize theshort-term and long-term environmentalimpacts of developments and other activitiesthrough the adaptive re-use of the historicstructures, resource conservation, recycling,waste minimization, and the use of energy-efficient and ecologically responsiblematerials and techniques.

Woodson Home(1538 9th Street, NW)

The interior of the Woodson home would berestored. This includes two parlor roomsand the stair hall on the first floor, tworooms and the stair hall on the second floor,and the entire third floor. There are somespaces that are not accessible by wheelchairdue to the way the floorplan of the housewas originally designed; no visitors wouldenter these rooms, but rather look from thedoorways, if feasible and practical. Thesewould include the basement level, a bath,and two rooms at the rear of the first floor,and a bath, kitchen, and storage room in therear of the second floor.

These rooms could be refurnished in ahistorically appropriate manner. Allcharacter-defining features of the house,regardless of location, would be preserved tothe extent possible. These features wouldconsist of woodwork, original doors,




54

flooring, electrical fixtures, window lights,radiators, mantels, and other features.

Public spaces would be refurnished withoriginal, reproduction, or similar furnishingsto recreate the historic appearance of theWoodson home when he lived there. Thehome would have the feel of a historic housemuseum. If, in the future, museum objects orcollections are acquired by the nationalhistoric site through archeological surveys,donations or purchase, standard policies asoutlined in the NPS Management Policies2006, Director’s Order 28: Cultural Resources Management Guideline, Director’sOrder 24: Museum Collections Management ,and the National Park Service MuseumHandbook would be implemented.

Museum objects that are acquired would beaccessioned and catalogued, preserved,protected, displayed, and made available foraccess and use according to NPS standardsand guidelines (Director’s Order 24 and theNational Park Service Museum Handbook).

Pieces donated or purchased andauthenticated would form the basis of the

refurnished house. Any on-site display orstorage would be designed to meet NPSstandards for interpretive exhibits andmuseum storage. Museum objects andartifacts not on display would be housed atthe National Park Service Museum ResourceCenter, a state-of-the-art facility inLandover, Maryland.

National Park Service policy requires that nomuseum objects be allowed within the 500-year floodplain without an evacuation plan.Under both options of the preferredalternative, museum objects would not be

exhibited within a designated floodplain.The flood elevation for the 100-yearfloodplain in Washington, D.C., is 10 feet.The flood elevation for the 500-yearfloodplain is 13 feet. The elevation of 15389th Street, NW, is 82 feet (Safford 2009), so itis not within either floodplain.

Appropriate climate control measures wouldbe incorporated into the design of thebuildings to ensure preservation of allobjects and furnishings on display.

1540 9th Street, NW

Two exterior changes to the building wouldinclude the construction of a third story onthe rear addition of the house toaccommodate a second stairway for firesafety egress and the construction of anelevator house on the roof to accommodatea new elevator. This new construction wouldbe designed to be compatible with the rest of the structures, but would clearly be modernadditions. The architectural style of the

addition would follow the Secretary of theInterior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.

The interior of the structure would berehabilitated and adaptively used for visitoruse and park operations. The public andadministration spaces would be used forinterpretive and educational exhibits, anelevator, retail sales area (educationalmaterials), offices, restrooms, storage, andmaintenance/mechanical needs.

Entryways between Woodson’s home andbuilding 1540 would be considered on all fourlevels to provide the highest level of accessibility to all visitors in a way that wouldavoid the loss of significant historic features,spatial relationships, and without jeopardizingthe structural integrity of the building. Theseentryways allow visitors using the elevator inbuilding 1540 access to the Woodson home.



The Alternatives

55

The entryways would be in slightly differentlocations on each floor. Also, the basementof building 1540 would be excavated toallow enough ceiling height to make it afunctional space for administrative and

possibly visitor use activities.

1542 9th Street, NW

The front entrance of this building wasmodified prior to National Park Serviceacquisition of the building. The modificationallows for access directly from street levelinto the structure rather than by steps and amarble stoop like the Woodson home andbuilding 1540. In option one of the preferredalternative, this street-level entry would berepaired and/or modified as needed and

serve as the main entrance into the nationalhistoric site (in option two, building 1544would function as the main entrance).

Under option one, the interior would berehabilitated to function in harmony withthe interior of building 1540. Functionswould include orientation area, interpretiveand educational exhibits, offices, awheelchair lift, retail sales area (educationalmaterials), and restrooms. A similarapproach would be taken under option two;

however, the interior would be rehabilitatedto work in harmony with both buildings1540 and 1544, and mechanical systems maypossibly be housed in 1542. The basement of building 1542 would be excavated to allowenough ceiling height to make it a functionalspace for administrative and possibly visitoruse activities.

1544 9th Street, NW

Option two proposes actions for building1544 that would take place only upon itsacquisition through donation or purchasefrom a willing seller and subsequent additionto the park boundary. If added to the parkboundary in the future, building1544 wouldprovide additional space for visitor use, parkoperations, and maintenance/mechanicalfunctions that otherwise would be providedin buildings 1540 and 1542. Work onbuilding 1544 would follow the Secretary of

the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. Under option two, thisstructure would become the main entranceto the site. The exterior treatment forbuilding 1544 would be determined after the

acquisition of the structure.

The interior would be rehabilitated andadaptively used in a way that would becompatible with the rehabilitation of structures 1540 and 1542. The space wouldbe used for additional educational programs,public meetings, classroom activities,interpretive exhibits, administrativeactivities, and restrooms. The basement of building 1544 would be excavated to allowenough ceiling height to make it a functional

space for administrative and possibly visitoruse activities.


Under both options of the preferredalternative, the National Park Service wouldimplement the interpretation plan bycreating interactive interpretive andeducational exhibits, videos, materials, andprograms using innovative technologies andaccessibility guidelines to engage visitors inthe life, work, and contributions of Dr.

Woodson.

The Woodson home would be thecenterpiece of the national historic site. Dueto the small size of the rooms in the home, itis estimated that groups of six to eightvisitors would tour the house with aninterpretive ranger or volunteer who wouldprovide history and relevant facts about thehouse, Dr. Woodson, and his work. It isestimated two tours would be allowed in thehouse at one time. Visitors would be staged

in buildings 1540 and 1542 before taking thetour. Visitors waiting to take the tour wouldenjoy the interpretive and educationalexhibits, videos, and programs and retailsales items (sold by an authorized NPScooperating association) offered in buildings1540 and 1542, which would orient them tothe Woodson story. The specific logistics of managing visitor use within the site would be




56

revisited and further analyzed as part of afuture visitor use management plan.

It is likely that school groups and bus tourswould comprise a large proportion of site

visitation. To create space large enough tohandle school and tour groups, entrywayswould be created between the Woodsonhome and building 1540 to provideappropriately sized spaces and accessibilityfor people with limited mobility.

Under the preferred alternative (eitheroption), the agreement between the NationalPark Service and Association for the Study of African American Life and History would befully implemented. The Association for the

Study of African American Life and Historywould be provided no less than 500 squarefeet of administrative space in one of thebuildings (most likely not in the Woodsonhome). They would assist the National ParkService in providing interpretive andeducational programs about Dr. Woodson’slegacy, as well as programs on AfricanAmerican history, life, and culture, includingthe role of Dr. Woodson and the Associationfor the Study of African American Life andHistory in American history. TheAssociation for the Study of AfricanAmerican Life and History would alsodisplay their own publications andinformational pamphlets for visitors andparticipate in National Park Service specialevents and programs at the national historicsite.

The National Park Service would be able toprovide local schools, universities, and otherorganizations interpretive ranger programsat the national historic site. Small-scalespecial events related to Dr. Woodson andopen to the public would occur at thenational historic site. These events wouldtake place inside the buildings and in thebackyards, during normal business hoursand in the evenings.

Park Operations

Under the preferred alternative (eitheroption), seven and a half FTE interpretation

and education staff would be hired tomanage the day-to-day operations of thesite. National Capital Parks-East may alsohire a maintenance worker, resourcemanagement specialist, and an

administrative assistant(three FTEs total) tosupport the operation of the nationalhistoric site. These three employees wouldbe shared with other National Capital Parks-East park units. The offices of the site’semployees would be located at the nationalhistoric site. Additional operational supportwould be provided by existing NationalCapital Parks-East staff.

The interpretation and education staff would orient visitors to the site and lead

them on tours of Dr. Woodson’s home andthe neighborhood. Volunteers may also leadthe tours. The maintenance worker wouldprovide custodial support and make neededrepairs to the historic structures and utilitysystems, the resource management specialistwould support preservation of culturalresources, and the assistant would provideadministrative support. U.S. Park Policewould continue to regularly patrol thenational historic site.

MITIGATION MEASURES

Congress has charged the National ParkService with managing the lands under itsstewardship “in such manner and by suchmeans as would leave them unimpaired forthe enjoyment of future generations” (NPSOrganic Act, 16 USC 1). As a result, theNational Park Service routinely evaluatesand applies mitigation measures wheneverconditions could adversely affect thesustainability of national park system

resources.

The National Park Service would conductappropriate environmental and culturalresource review as required by the NationalEnvironmental Policy Act, the NationalHistoric Preservation Act, and other relevantlegislation for any future proposed actions.The National Park Service would avoid,



The Alternatives

57

minimize, or mitigate any adverse impacts,whenever possible.

The following mitigation measures and bestmanagement practices would be used to

avoid or minimize potential impacts onnatural and cultural resources fromconstruction activities, use by visitors, andNational Park Service operations. Thesemeasures would apply to all alternatives.Specific mitigation measures would be asfollows:

Continue to research, inventory, anddocument archeological resources,historic structures, ethnographicresources, and cultural landscapecharacteristics to better understand and

manage these resources. Continue tofollow federal regulations and NPSguidelines in managing culturalresources.

Apply site-specific planning andcompliance to projects. Minimizeadverse impacts by applying theSecretary of the Interior’s Standards for

Archeology and Historic Preservation and the Secretary of the Interior’sStandards for the Treatment of HistoricProperties, and by using sensitive designthat would be compatible with historic

resources. If adverse impacts areunavoidable, strategies to mitigate themwould be determined throughconsultation with all interested parties.

Conduct a phase I archeologicalinvestigation, analyze the findings,document the findings and conclusionsabout national register eligibility of anysites found, and send the report out forreview by regional NPS staff and theDistrict of Columbia HistoricPreservation Office.

Implement steps and approachesduring the construction phase of thisproject to reduce greenhouse gasemissions, which would help thenational historic site keep its carbonfootprint low.



Figure 3Preferred Alternative

Option 1, Basement Floor Pla

Carter G. Woodson Home National Historic Sit

United States Department of the Interior • National Park Serv

PRIVATELY OWNED


Visitor Use and Park Operations Zone

Disclaimer: Please note the functions shown in buildings 1540, 1542,and 1544 (option 2) are conceptual only; actual design and constructiondrawings may change the size, configuration, and location of functions.

Legend

Alley

9th Street, NW

North

1538 1540 15441542

STORAGE

RESTROOMS

OFFICE

ELEVATOR

MECH./ SERVICE

UNEXCAVATED

WOODSONHOME

UP

U P

UP




Option 1, First Floor Plan

Carter G. Woodson Home National Historic Sit

United States Department of the Interior • National Park Servic




Legend

Alley

9th Street, NW

North

1538 1540 15441542

ELEVATOR

MECH./

SERVICE

BOOKSTORAGE

RECEPTION

CLERICAL

ORDER&

SHIPPING

INFORMATION&

ORIENTATION

EXHIBITS

&

BOOKSTORE

OFFICE

LIFT

PRIVATELY OWNED

U P

D N

U P

U P

U P

UP






Legend

Figure Preferred Alternative

Option 1, Second Floor Pla

Carter G. Woodson Home National Historic Si

United States Department of the Interior • National Park Serv

Alley

9th Street, NW

North

1538 1540 15441542

ELEVATOR

MECH./ SERVICE

STORAGE

WOODSON’SLIBRARY

KITCHEN

EXHIBIT/ MULTI-PURPOSE

OFFICE PRIVATELY OWNED

WOODSON’S

OFFICE D N

U P

DN

U P

DN

U P



DN


Option 1, Third Floor Plan

Carter G. Woodson Home National Historic Site

United States Department of the Interior • National Park Service

Alley

9th Street, NW

Q S t r e e t , N W

North

445104518351 1542

ELEVATOR

WOODSON’SBEDROOM

ROOFBELOW

OFFICE

EXHIBIT

ROOFBELOW

WOODSON’SLIVING ROOM

BOOKS

RESTROOM

ONE STORY ADDED

ROOFBELOW

D N



Disclaimer: Please note the functions shown in buildings 1540, 1542,and 1544 (option 2) are conceptual only; actual design and construction

drawings may change the size, configuration, and location of functions.

Legend






Legend

Alley

9th Street, NW

North

1538 1540 15441542

STORAGE

RESTROOMOFFICE

ELEVATOR

MECH./ SERVICE

UNEXCAVATED

WOODSONHOME


Option 2, Basement Floor Plan



CLASSROOM

MECH.

STORAGE

UP

U P

UP






Legend

Alley

9th Street, NW

Q S

N W

North

1538 1540 15441542

CLERICAL

EXHIBITS

ELEVATOR

MECH./ SERVICE

BOOKSTORAGE

RECEPTION


Option 2, First Floor Plan



INFORMATION

&ORIENTATION

LIFT

EXHIBIT

STORE

RESTROOMS

ORDER&

SHIPPING

UP

U P

D N

U P

U P

DN






Legend

Alley

9th Street, NW

North

1538 1540 15441542

WOODSON’SLIBRARY

EXHIBIT

ELEVATOR

MECH./ SERVICE

STORAGE

WOODSON’S

OFFICE


Option 2, Second Floor Plan



OFFICE

LIFT

RESTROOMS

KITCHEN

OFFICEDN

U P

DN

U P

UP

U P

D N





Disclaimer: Please note the functions shown in buildings 1540, 1542,and 1544 (option 2) are conceptual only; actual design and construction

drawings may change the size, configuration, and location of functions.

Legend

Alley

9th Street, NW

North

1538 1540 15441542

WOODSON’SBEDROOM

EXHIBIT

ELEVATOR

RESTROOM

WOODSON’S

LIVINGROOM


Option 2, Third Floor Plan



ROOFBELOW

ROOFBELOW

ROOFBELOW

BOOKS

ONE STORY ADDED

DN

D N




66

COST ESTIMATES

To make sound planning and managementdecisions for the national historic site,National Park Service decision makers andthe public must consider an overall picture

of the advantages, disadvantages, andgeneral costs of the no-action and preferredalternatives. By including the no-actionalternative, a comparison can be madebetween the preferred alternative andcurrent national historic site management.

It is important that the cost estimatescontain the same elements for eachalternative and that they be developed withthe same general assumptions so there isconsistency and comparability among

alternatives. In the following table, the costsare presented as applied to the types andgeneral intensities of development; they arepresented by alternative and in acomparative format. The following caveatsapply:

These costs are not appropriate forbudgeting purposes. Actual costs wouldbe determined during the next phase of the project, design and constructiondrawings. These drawings wouldinclude detailed cost estimates that canbe used to request funding toimplement this general managementplan.

The costs presented have beendeveloped using industry standards tothe extent available.

Approval of this plan does notguarantee that funding or staffing forproposed actions would be available.

Full implementation of this plan could

take years to complete.

When evaluating costs, there are two typesof costs that must be considered: annualoperating and one-time costs. Annualoperating costs are the ongoing costs to keepthe national historic site running. One-time

costs are costs that are expected to be shortterm in duration and nonrecurring. Annualoperating and one-time costs for thenational historic site are as follows:

Annual Operating Costs Staff salaries and benefits,

supplies/equipment, maintenance,utilities, resource monitoring, andcontract services.

One-Time Costs

Restoring and rehabilitating theexteriors and interiors of the historicstructures.

Installing new utility, HVAC, and firesuppression systems.

Design and installation of interpretivemedia (audiovisual programs, exhibits,wayside exhibits, publications).

Cultural resource surveys and plans(archeological survey, ethnographicstudy, resource stewardship strategy).

Visitor use management plan.

New equipment, office furniture, andsupplies.

Please note this list is not comprehensive.There may be additional annual operatingand one-time costs not listed above.

Land Acquisition

This plan does not propose acquisition of any lands or buildings beyond what isauthorized in Public Law 108-92.

National historic site enabling legislation

authorizes the acquisition of building 1544(tract 101-04) through donation or purchasefrom a willing seller and its subsequentaddition to the park boundary. The NationalPark Service is deferring the acquisition of this property.



The Alternatives

67

Table 2: Estimated Costs

No-action

Alternative

PreferredAlternative

Option One

PreferredAlternativeOption Two

Annual Operating Costs*:

Woodson Home Staff

Shared NACE Staff

Supplies & Equipment

Services

Utilities

Total

Total with Shared NACE Staff

$258,000

($115,200)

$2,000

$1,000

$35,000

$296,000

($411,200)

$443,000

($212,900)

$28,000

$25,000

$60,000

$556,000

($768,900)

$443,000

($212,900)

$28,000

$25,000

$75,000

$571,000

($783,900)

Woodson Home Staffing*

Woodson Home and Shared

NACE Staffing*

4 FTE

(6 FTE)

7.5 FTE

(10.5 FTE)

7.5 FTE

(10.5 FTE)

One-time Costs**:

Facility Cost – Phase 1

Facility Cost – Phase 2

Non-facility Cost

Total

$1,000,000

$0

$60,000

$1,060,000

$2,000,000

$3,000,000

$2,900,000

$7,900,000

$2,500,000

$3,500,000

$3,000,000

$9,000,000

*NACE refers to National Capital Parks-East

All costs are in 2011 dollars. All costs have been rounded to the nearest $1,000. These costs are for planningpurposes only and actual costs may vary depending on visitor use and park operational needs. These costs reflect afully functional national historic site.

*Annual operating costs are the total costs per year for maintenance and operations associated with each alternative,including utilities, supplies, staff salaries and benefits, and other materials. Cost and staffing estimates assume thatthe alternative is fully implemented as described in the narrative.

The FTE numbers above are an estimate. It will take the national historic site several years to become fullyfunctional. As the site’s operational needs and visitation patterns become more established, operating costsmay need to be revisited and revised.

For estimating purposes only, the positions considered for the no-action alternative included: GS-11 supervisory park ranger and three GS-5 park guides. For estimating purposes only, the positionsconsidered for the preferred alternative (both options) included: GS-11 supervisory park ranger,GS-9 park ranger, four GS-5 park guides, and three seasonal GS-4 park guides (0.5 FTE each). Theshared NACE staffing shown above in parentheses would include shared resource management,maintenance, and administrative staff with other National Capital Parks-East (NACE) park units.Law enforcement functions would be handled by U.S. Park Police. An option considered was toshare NPS staff with the Mary McLeod Bethune Council House National Historic Site. However, theMary McLeod Bethune Council House National Historic Site does not have the staff available tomanage, operate, and serve visitors at both national historic sites.

Staffing costs are based on the Office of Personnel Management 2011 salary table, Locality Pay Area OfWashington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia, DC-MD-VA-WV-PA; benefits for permanent FTE positions werecalculated at 38% of the salary and 8%of the salary for seasonal positions; salary information taken from thetable was at a step 5 for each grade (GS) level (e.g., GS-11, step 5).

Full-time equivalent is defined by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) as the number of total hoursworked by an employee divided by the maximum number of compensable hours in a work year as defined bylaw.




68

**One-time Costs

Facility Cost – Phase 1 of the no-action alternative includes stabilizing and restoring/rehabilitating theexteriors of Woodson’s home and buildings 1540 and 1542. Phase 1 of the preferred alternative-option oneincludes preparing a structural engineering report, preparing design and construction drawings, stabilizingand restoring/rehabilitating the exteriors, and stabilizing the interiors of Dr. Woodson’s home and buildings1540 and 1542. Phase 1 of the preferred alternative-option two includes everything listed under option one,

plus the costs for rehabilitating building 1544, if it was acquired in the future. Facility Cost – Phase 2 does not apply to the no-action alternative since all the work on the buildings would

be completed under phase 1. Phase 2 of the preferred alternative-option one includes restoring andrehabilitating the interiors of Dr. Woodson’s home and buildings 1540 and 1542. Phase 2 of the preferredalternative-option two includes restoring and rehabilitating the interiors of Dr. Woodson’s home andbuildings 1540, 1542, and 1544.

A more detailed facility cost estimate and analysis for the preferred alternative-option one is being preparedby the National Park Service and the information should be available in the fall of 2011.

The estimates for non-facility costs are based on cost estimates provided by the NPS Harpers Ferry Center andexisting NPS cost estimates for office furnishings, equipment, and studies/reports. The non-facility costsinclude:

o Under the no-action alternative, creating and fabricating wayside interpretive exhibits for the front ofthe national historic site.

o Under both options of the preferred alternative, creating interpretive exhibits for interior spaces and,creating and fabricating wayside exhibits for the front of the national historic site; preparing a historicfurnishings report for Dr. Woodson’s home and producing/purchasing historic furnishings; creating ahigh-definition audiovisual program; producing a park brochure; purchasing office furnishings andequipment; and preparing studies/reports that are needed to fully implement this plan, such as ascope of collections statement (relates to museum collections), comprehensive interpretive plan, visitoruse management plan, ethnographic overview and assessment, archeological inventory and survey ofthe basements, cultural landscape characteristics survey and reports for the backyards, etc.



69

ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERABLE ALTERNATIVE

The environmentally preferable alternativeis the alternative that promotes the nationalenvironmental policy expressed in theNational Environmental Policy Act (Sec.s101(b)). This includes alternatives that:

(1) Fulfill the responsibilities of eachgeneration as trustee of the environmentfor succeeding generations.

(2) Ensure for all Americans safe, healthful,productive, and esthetically and cultu-rally pleasing surroundings.

(3) Attain the widest range of beneficial usesof the environment without degradation,risk of health or safety, or other undesir-able and unintended consequences.

(4) Preserve important historic, cultural, andnatural aspects of our national heritageand maintain, wherever possible, anenvironment that supports diversity andvariety of individual choice.

(5) Achieve a balance between populationand resource use that would permit highstandards of living and a wide sharing of life’s amenities.

(6) Enhance the quality of renewableresources and approach the maximumattainable recycling of depletableresources: (NPS Director’s Order 12:Handbook, Section 2.7D).

The environmentally preferable alternativeis the alternative that causes the least damageto the biological and physical environmentand the alternative that best protects,

preserves, and enhances historic, cultural,and natural resources.

The alternatives do not differ considerablywith respect to criteria 1 and 2; therefore, theevaluation focuses on criteria 3, 4, 5, and 6.

The no-action and preferred alternativeswould slow down the deterioration of thestructures comprising the national historic

site. However, because only the preferredalternative allows use of the structures’interiors, it provides a wide range of beneficial uses. Thus, criterion 3 is met onlyby the preferred alternative.

The actions outlined in both alternativespreserve important historic and culturalaspects of our national heritage bypreserving, rehabilitating, and restoring thehistoric structures. However, the no-actionalternative neither supports diversity norinhibits it. It does not provide a variety of individual choices for the visitor. It does notallow access to the interiors of thestructures. The preferred alternative wouldallow the visitor to experience the nationalhistoric site’s various resources as they aredeveloped, such as a retail sales area, thehistoric Woodson home, educational classes,an interpretive film, and personal servicesprovided by NPS staff. The preferredalternative supports diversity throughprograms that would place Dr. Woodson’slegacy in the framework or context of American history. These programs wouldhelp the visitor develop a sense of theimportance of diversity in American culture.Criterion 4 is met only by the preferredalternative, which preserves importanthistoric cultural and national aspects of ourAmerican heritage regarding Dr. Woodson’slegacy of African American historiography.

The no-action alternative does not allow useof the structures, so there can be no balancebetween population and resource use.Therefore, it does not provide a basis forincreasing the standard of living or a widesharing of life’s amenities. The preferredalternative provides a forum for theeducation of people about the legacy of Dr.Woodson and his contemporaries. Thepreferred alternative better meets therequirements of criterion 5.




70

Neither alternative enhances the quality of renewable resources. Both alternativeswould maximize recycling of depletableresources to the extent possible.

After considering the environmentalconsequences of the alternatives, includingconsequences to the human environment,

the National Park Service has concluded thatthe preferred alternative is also theenvironmentally preferable alternative. Thisalternative best realizes the full range of national environmental policy goals as stated

in section 101 of the NationalEnvironmental Policy Act.



71

SUMMARY TABLES

This summary table highlights key differences between the no-action and preferred alternatives.

Please refer to “Elements Common to Both Alternatives” at the beginning of this chapter tounderstand all the proposed actions for the two alternatives. Option two would be implementedonly upon acquisition of building 1544 and its subsequent addition to the park boundary.

Table 3: Summary of Key Differences Among the Alternatives

No ActionWoodson Home and

Buildings 1540 and 1542

Preferred Alternative(Option One):

Woodson Home and Buildings1540 and 1542

Preferred Alternative(Option Two):

Woodson Home and Buildings1540, 1542, and 1544

WoodsonHome -Interior

Conduct periodic inspectionsand perform minor repairs asneeded

Restore the interior and refurnishit with historic furnishings

Same as option one

Exteriors -Buildings1540, 1542,and 1544

Building 1544 not acquired

Construct a third story on therear addition of building 1540 toaccommodate a new stairway forfire safety egress

Construct an elevator house onthe roof of building 1540

Building 1542 would serve as themain entrance

Building 1544 not acquired

Same as option one

Same as option one

Building 1544 would serve as themain entrance

The appropriate exteriortreatment for building 1544would be determined after itsacquisition and addition to thepark boundary

Interiors -Buildings1540, 1542,and 1544

Conduct periodic inspectionsand perform minor repairs asneeded for buildings 1540 and1542

Rehabilitate and adaptively usethe interiors of buildings 1540and 1542 for interpretive andeducational exhibits, an elevator,retail sales area (educationalmaterials), offices, restrooms,storage, andmaintenance/mechanical needs

Construct new entryways oneach floor between Dr.Woodson’s home and building1540

Excavate the basements inbuildings 1540 and 1542 toallow enough ceiling height tomake it a functional space

Same as option one; rehabilitateand adaptively use the interior ofbuilding 1544 for educationalprograms, public meetings,classroom activities, interpretiveexhibits, administrative activities,and restrooms

Same as option one

Same as option one; and inaddition, excavate the basementin building 1544 to allow enoughceiling height to make it afunctional space




72







Visitor Use

andExperience

The interpretation plan would

not be fully implemented

The agreement between theNational Park Service andAssociation for the Study ofAfrican American Life andHistory would not be fullyimplemented; they would notbe provided administrativespace

The interpretation plan would be

fully implemented

Dr. Woodson’s home wouldhave the look and feel of ahouse museum

Groups of an estimated six toeight visitors would tour Dr.Woodson’s home with a NPSinterpretive ranger or volunteer;an estimated two tours would beallowed in the house at one time

Interactive interpretive andeducational exhibits, videos,materials, and programs wouldbe available for visitors toexperience and enjoy insidebuildings 1540 and 1542

Retail sales (educationalmaterials) would be availablethrough an authorized NPScooperating association

The agreement between theNational Park Service andAssociation for the Study ofAfrican American Life andHistory would be fullyimplemented; they would begiven no less than 500 sq. ft. ofadministrative space

The Association for the Study ofAfrican American Life andHistory would assist the NationalPark Service in providinginterpretive and educationalprograms

The Association for the Study ofAfrican American Life andHistory would provideinformation and materials ontheir organization to visitors, andparticipate in National ParkService special events andprograms related to Dr.Woodson

Same as option one

Same as option one

Same as option one

Same as option one; and someadditional interpretive andeducational exhibits would beinstalled in building 1544

Same as option one

Same as option one

Same as option one

Same as option one



Summary Tables

73







Visitor Use

andExperience(continued)

The National Park Service would

provide local schools,universities, and otherorganizations interpretive rangerprograms at the site

The National Park Service wouldhost small-scale special eventsrelated to Dr. Woodson at thesite

Same as option one

Same as option one

ParkOperations

Four FTE interpretation andeducation staff would be hiredto manage the day-to-dayoperations of the site; their

offices would be off-site. Twoadditional FTEs may be hiredfor maintenance, resourcemanagement, or administrativesupport for the site. These twoemployees would be sharedwith other National CapitalParks-East park units. Theoffices of the site’s employeeswould be located off-site atanother National Capital Parks-East park or office.

Seven and a half FTEinterpretation and educationstaff would be hired to managethe day-to-day operations of the

site. National Capital Parks-Eastmay also hire a maintenanceworker, resource managementspecialist, and an administrativeassistant (three FTEs total) tosupport the operation of thenational historic site. These threeemployees would be shared withother National Capital Parks-Eastpark units. The offices of thesite’s employees would belocated at the national historicsite.

Same as option one




74

Table 4: Summary of Key Impacts of the Alternatives

HISTORIC STRUCTURES

No-action Alternative Preferred Alternative (Both Options)

Implementation of the no-action alternative wouldresult in negligible to minor, adverse, site-specific, long-term impacts to historic structures. Cumulative impactswould be adverse, minor and long term.

Implementation of the preferred alternative (both options)would result in impacts to historic structures that aremoderate, adverse, site-specific, and long term. Cumulativeimpacts would be adverse, minor, and long term.

Section 106 SummaryAfter applying the Advisory Council on HistoricPreservation’s criteria of adverse effects (36 CFR Part 800.5,

Assessment of Adverse Effects), the National Park Serviceconcludes the proposed undertakings outlined in thepreferred alternative (either option) would most likely be an adverse effect on historic structures. The adverse effectdetermination would result from the construction ofentryways between the Woodson home and building 1540,and the construction of an elevator house on the roof and

stairway addition on the back of building 1540. Theseactions would alter the integrity of the building includingthe workmanship, design features, materials, and feeling.

A memorandum of agreement, in accordance with 36 CFRPart 800.6, Resolution of Adverse Effects, would benegotiated between the National Park Service and theDistrict of Columbia Historic Preservation Office and, ifnecessary, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.The memorandum of agreement would stipulate how theadverse effects would be mitigated.

Work done to the historic structures would be undertakenin accordance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards

for the Treatment of Historic Properties when applicable.VISITOR USE AND EXPERIENCE

No-action Alternative Preferred Alternative

Implementation of the no-action alternative wouldresult in impacts that are adverse, long term, andnegligible to minor to visitor use and experience.Cumulative impacts would be long term, adverse, andnegligible.

Implementation of the preferred alternative would result inimpacts to visitor use and experience that are beneficialand long term. Cumulative impacts would be long termand beneficial.

SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT


Implementation of the no-action alternative would resultin short- and long-term, beneficial impacts to thesocioeconomic environment. Cumulative impacts wouldbe long term and beneficial.

Implementation of the preferred alternative would resultin short- and long-term, beneficial impacts to thesocioeconomic environment. Cumulative impacts wouldbe long term and beneficial.



Summary Tables

75

PARK OPERATIONS


Implementation of the no-action alternative would resultin impacts to park operations that are beneficial and longterm. Cumulative impacts would be beneficial and longterm.

Implementation of the preferred alternative would resultin impacts to park operations that are beneficial and longterm. Cumulative impacts would be beneficial and longterm.



76

ALTERNATIVES AND ACTIONS CONSIDERED BUTDISMISSED FROM FURTHER ANALYSIS

In April 2009, the National Park Servicemailed out General Management PlanNewsletter 2 to the friends and neighbors of Carter G. Woodson Home National HistoricSite. The purpose of the newsletter was toask the public for their feedback on threeconceptual alternatives the planning teamdrafted. Details found in the Woodson homehistoric structure report, interpretation plan,and foundation statement helped create thealternatives.

Conceptual alternatives 1 and 3 wereconsidered and dismissed from furtheranalysis based on feedback received fromthe public and subsequent planning teamdiscussions. See below for the conceptualalternative descriptions and reasons fordismissal. Conceptual alternative 2 wasmodified, taking elements from the initialalternative, and has become the currentpreferred alternative.

Conceptual Alternative 1This concept proposed a full-servicenational park system unit dedicated to Dr.Woodson and his career and works. Theemphasis would be on rehabilitating, orrepairing and altering, the interior of Woodson’s home and displaying informalinterpretive signs and historic photographsthat visitors would see on a guided tour of his home. Woodson’s home would notinclude historic furnishings. Additionswould be made to the back sides of buildings1540 and 1542 to provide moreadministrative space for the operation of thenational historic site.

Conceptual Alternative 3

This concept proposed making Dr.Woodson’s home an epicenter for scholarlyactivity. Students of all grade levels andresearchers would be encouraged to use theWoodson home to conduct research on Dr.Woodson’s life, work, and legacy, the Shawneighborhood, and African American lifeand culture via reference materials on siteand the Internet. Special areas would be set

up in the home for people to conductresearch (library and computer areas), holdlectures and meetings, and engage inintimate conversations with otherresearchers/scholars. To accommodatethese uses, the interior of Dr. Woodson’shome would be altered significantly.

Reasons for Dismissal

After reviewing the proposed actions inconceptual alternatives 1 and 3, it wasdetermined there would be too great of an

environmental impact to the nationalhistoric site to consider these optionsfurther. Under the National EnvironmentalPolicy Act, the impacts to historic structureswould be adverse, long term, and major.Under section 106 of the National HistoricPreservation Act, the proposed actions toDr. Woodson’s home would constitute anadverse effect . Significantly altering theinterior of the Woodson home woulddestroy the integrity of the character-defining features of this national historic

landmark, likely making it ineligible forlisting in the National Register of HistoricPlaces. Therefore, these two alternativeswere dismissed from further analysis.



77

CHAPTER THREE:THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT



78



79

INTRODUCTION

In this chapter, the existing environment of the Carter G. Woodson Home NationalHistoric Site is described. The guidelines of the Council on Environmental Quality forimplementing the National EnvironmentalPolicy Act require that the description of theaffected environment focus on describingthe resources and communities that might beaffected by implementing the alternatives.

Impact topics (resources to be affected),presented in chapter one, were developed tofocus the environmental analysis and toensure that the impacts of each alternative

on relevant resources would beappropriately evaluated.

The identification of impact topics wasbased on federal laws and other legalrequirements, CEQ guidelines, NPS Management Policies 2006, NPS expertiseand knowledge of limited or easily affectedresources, and issues and concernsexpressed by other agencies or the publicduring project scoping. A brief rationale foreliminating or including each impact topicwas provided in chapter one.



80

CULTURAL RESOURCES

INTRODUCTIONThe National Park Service is charged withthe stewardship of many of the nation’s mostimportant cultural resources and isresponsible for preserving these resourcesfor the enjoyment of present and futuregenerations. By their nature, these resourcesare finite and nonrenewable; as a result, NPSmanagement activities and policies mustreflect awareness of their irreplaceablecharacter. Therefore, NPS cultural resourcemanagement involves research, evaluation,

documentation, and inclusion in theNational Register of Historic Places, alongwith the establishment of priorities to ensurethat these resources are appropriatelypreserved, protected, and interpreted to thepublic. This section summarizes the currentconditions of historic structures at thenational historic site.

HISTORIC STRUCTURES

The Woodson Home (building 1538) andthe two adjacent row houses to the north(buildings 1540 and 1542) were constructedbetween 1872 and 1874 in what is nowknown as the Shaw neighborhood. As statedin the Carter G. Woodson Home historicstructure report, the three buildings were“…designed in the Victorian Italianate Styleand contribute to a row of houses on NinthStreet that form a relatively intactrepresentation of [an African American,middle class] residential development inWashington D.C. in the late 1800s”(Robinson et al. 2008).

The three row houses were built from redbrick. The façade of each building originallyhad a door and two windows on the firstfloor and three windows on the second andthird floors. The doors were originally insetwith an oversized transom and door hood.Surrounding the door inset was wood

paneling. The façade of building 1542,especially the windows and door, wasaltered significantly in the mid- to late 1900s,and it retains little of its historic appearance.The façade of building 1540 has beenmodified as well: original windows werereplaced, the exterior was painted a tancolor, and the basement stairway wasbricked in, but the building retains itshistoric appearance. Other originalconstruction details still visible today are thestone water tables between the basementand first floor levels and the matching stonelintels and sills at the windows, which breakup the expanse of brick. Both exterior andinterior elements took advantage of theavailability of mass-produced architecturalcomponents available in the late 1800s.

When originally constructed, each buildingwas “L-shaped” with a small walkwaybetween the structures in the rear. In 1880, atwo-story addition was added to the rear of the Woodson home. The other structuresretain their original footprint. The buildings’roofs are flat with the original bracketedcornice still visible from the street on theWoodson home and building 1540.

The rear elevations on the three buildingsremain red brick, and they showconsiderable damage due to age, settling,and the repairs/modifications made overtime. Several doors and windows have beenbricked in.

Building 1544, the former corner store, is atwo-story building constructed early in the20th century and typical of such structuresof that time period. Although not Italianatein construction, it is also brick, with abracketed cornice on the 9th Street side.Second-floor windows appear to be in theiroriginal locations, but have been alteredsomewhat from their original design. Thefirst floor elevations have been considerably



Cultural Resources

81

altered. At the time this document waswritten, building 1544 was being renovated.

In 1976, the Woodson home was listed in theNational Register of Historic Places as a

national historic landmark. The threehistoric structures that comprise the nationalhistoric site are also contributing resourcesin two different historic districts. The Shawhistoric district (city designated) is known asthe “heart of Black Washington.” “There areover 70 sites within the Shaw [neighbor-hood] that contribute to African Americanheritage of Washington, including theWoodson home. Within close proximity tothe Woodson home are several sites that aredirectly linked to Dr. Woodson’s life. The

Mary McLeod Bethune Council House,located a short distance away on VermontAvenue, was the home of one of theAssociation for the Study of Negro Life andHistory’s presidents. Dr. Carter G. Woodson

knew Ms. Bethune well. To the north of Rhode Island, a brief walk from theWoodson home, is the Phyllis WheatleyYMCA where Carter Woodson ate most of his meals” (Robinson et al. 2008). The

buildings are also listed in the NationalRegister of Historic Places as contributingresources in the Mount Vernon WestNational Historic District. They are listedfor their contribution to the architecturalhistory of Washington, D.C.

Dr. Woodson’s home and buildings 1540and 1542 have been vacant for more than 20years. Minimal maintenance has beenperformed on the buildings, including somestabilization work to the three structures. As

time has gone by, the structures have falleninto poor condition. The buildings are notopen to the public primarily because of thedeterioration of the interiors, which makesthe structure unsafe for visitors.



82

VISITOR USE AND EXPERIENCE

Providing for visitor use, enjoyment, andunderstanding of natural and culturalresources is central to the mission of theNational Park Service. This sectionsummarizes the current situation regardingvisitor use at the Woodson home. Becausevisitor access is such an importantcomponent of visitor experience, thissection also describes the existingtransportation network that serves thenational historic site and the immediatesurroundings.

CURRENT VISITOR EXPERIENCE

The national historic site is not open to thepublic at this time because the National ParkService is in the early stages of planning forthe restoration, rehabilitation, and adaptiveuse of the buildings. Visitors who come tothe site are only able to see the exteriors of the buildings. Currently, there are nointerpretive exhibits immediately outside thebuildings for visitors to read. However, there

is an interpretive sign on 9th Street acrossfrom the Woodson home placed by theorganization Cultural Tourism DC. Of thosewho experience the site in this way, a largenumber are probably residents of Washington, D.C., who are passing by thenew park unit during their daily activities oron their way to someplace else. The nationalhistoric site’s inclusion on the maps of several established self-guided, heritagetrails likely draws a number of people withan interest in local history or African

American heritage to walk by the nationalhistoric site. The public also learns about thenational historic site through its website andbrochure.

Even though the national historic site is notopen to the public at this time (2011), visitorscan learn about Dr. Woodson’s life andlegacy at several events held throughout theyear. The National Park Service partners

with the Association for the Study of AfricanAmerican Life and History and members of Dr. Woodson’s family, Omega Psi PhiFraternity (Dr. Woodson was a member),and Shiloh Baptist Church (the church Dr.Woodson attended) to produce severalBlack History Month events every February;events are held at different locations inWashington, D.C. Visitors are invited toattend the Association for the Study of African American Life and History’s BlackHistory Month luncheon held everyFebruary in Washington, D.C., as well astheir annual conference held in differentcities each year. At the conference, theNational Park Service has an exhibit for theCarter G. Woodson Home National HistoricSite where people can learn about thenational park system unit and Dr. Woodson.The National Park Service hosts an annualbirthday celebration for Dr. Woodson inWashington, D.C. that is open to the publicand attended by members of the Associationfor the Study of African American Life andHistory. Visitors can also learn about Dr.Woodson at the bookstore and welcomingcenter located at the Mary McLeod BethuneCouncil House National Historic Site.

HERITAGE TOURISM IN THESHAW NEIGHBORHOOD

(Heritage tourism is also addressed in thesocioeconomic section of this chapter.) Overthe years, the city and federal governments,as well as private citizens and local nonprofit

organizations, have worked to establishthree distinct heritage trails that include Dr.Woodson’s home. The first of these efforts,the Washington, D.C. Black History Trail, isa National Recreation Trail that wasestablished in 1988. The second is theAfrican American Heritage Trail, unveiled in2003. Both of these trails consist primarily of interpretive guidebooks that direct visitorsto sites within the neighborhoods that




83

illustrate African American history(McQuirter 2003; NPS n.d.). The third trail,entitled the “Shaw Heritage Trail: Mid-Cityat the Crossroads,” is specific to the Shawneighborhood and interprets diverse aspects

of the neighborhood’s history. In addition toa guidebook, the trail includes 14interpretive markers that have been erectedin outdoor locations throughout theneighborhood. One of the signs is on the eastside of 9th Street, opposite the Woodsonhome. Entitled “Working for The Race,” itbriefly discusses Dr. Woodson’s life andrelated topics (Levey 2006).

Many of the sites highlighted on theseheritage trails could be of interest to visitors

of the Carter G. Woodson Home NationalHistoric Site. Sites of interest within a 10-block radius of the national historic siteinclude Howard University, the MaryMcLeod Bethune Council House NationalHistoric Site, the Phyllis Wheatley YWCA,the Lincoln Theater, the African AmericanCivil War Memorial and Museum, andCarter G. Woodson Memorial Park. Visitorsmay choose to visit some of these sites inconnection with a visit to the nationalhistoric site.

VISITOR ACCESS ANDTRANSPORTATION

The national historic site is on the west sideof 9th Street, NW, a busy north-southcorridor that links U Street and HowardUniversity to the north of the Woodsonhome, with Mount Vernon Square and theNational Mall to the south. Nearby is RhodeIsland Avenue. This east-west artery extendsfrom downtown Washington, D.C. to the

eastern portion of the District of Columbiaand into suburban Maryland. Thosetraveling by automobile could choose manyroutes to the national historic site, but a largenumber would likely travel on these tworoads. Sidewalks line these roads, providing

pedestrian access to the national historicsite.

Parking

Street parking is very limited in front of and

around the national historic site. Parallelparking is currently permitted along 9thStreet; however, this is a residential streetand local residents also require parking. Infact, limited street parking is becoming apressing issue throughout the Shawneighborhood. According to the ConventionCenter Area Strategic Development Plan, thearea between 7th and 12th streets, NW,ranks among the highest in the District of Columbia in terms of the number of cars toon-street parking spaces (District of

Columbia Office of Planning 2005).

Bus/Public Transit

Bus lines run along Rhode Island Avenueand P Street, NW, providing close access tothe national historic site. A north-south busline of the D.C. Circulator also runs nearby,looping from Mount Vernon Square along7th, O, and 9th streets, NW. O Street is lessthan two blocks south of the nationalhistoric site.

Washington, D.C. also features a subwaysystem. Metrorail connects the entire city,making transportation very convenient,especially for destinations in the center of the city and for close-in neighborhoods. TheShaw neighborhood is served by the yellowand green lines. The two stations closest tothe national historic site are the MountVernon Square/7th Street/ConventionCenter station to the south, and theShaw/Howard University station to thenorth. From the Mount Vernon Square/7th

Street/Convention Center station, it is about0.25 miles to the national historic site. Fromthe home to the Shaw/Howard Universitystation is approximately 0.40 mile.



84

SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT

Socioeconomic information is valuable in ageneral management plan because itillustrates the population and physicalenvironment that would be affected byimplementation of the actions described inthis document.

The national historic site is near the centerof the Shaw neighborhood. This large,historic neighborhood possesses a uniquecharacter influenced by its late 19th centuryand early 20th century architecture and itshistory as a center of African Americanculture. This section summarizes currentsocioeconomic conditions and trends withinthe Shaw neighborhood.

COMMUNITY CHARACTER:THE SHAW NEIGHBORHOOD

The immediate socioeconomic context forCarter G. Woodson Home National HistoricSite is the Shaw neighborhood. Today, thisname generally refers to the area bounded by

M Street, NW; New Jersey Avenue, NW;Florida Avenue, NW; and 11th Street, NW(see figure 1). This area was not known bythe name “Shaw” until the late 1960s. Beforethat time, residents identified with a numberof smaller neighborhoods such as FrenchStreet, Westminster Street, Blagden Alley,and O Street Market (District of ColumbiaOffice of Planning 2005). Areas at theperiphery of the neighborhood areconnected to it, but also retain their ownindependent identities. These include the

upscale neighborhood of Logan Circle to thewest; the historic and thriving commercialcorridor of U Street to the north; HowardUniversity and Le Droit Park to thenortheast; and Mount Vernon Square to thesouth (District of Columbia Office of Planning 2005).

The Shaw neighborhood has traditionallybeen a dense, residential neighborhood with

a diversity of residents and housing types.Before the turn of the 20th century, theneighborhood population was a mix of professional and working classes. During thefirst few decades of the 20th century, at atime in American history when segregatedneighborhoods existed in cities across thecountry, the population of this neighbor-hood experienced an influx of AfricanAmerican residents and, as a result,developed into a center of African Americanintellectual and cultural life. Within theneighborhood, leaders in many disciplinestaught and studied at Howard University.Legendary jazzman Duke Ellington grew upin the Shaw neighborhood, playing in theclubs of U Street, along with other jazz“greats” (Smith 2008).

Shaw was one of the neighborhoods thatexperienced destructive rioting in 1968. Theriots struck the 7th Street corridorparticularly hard. Buildings in the areasustained so much damage that entire blockswere razed for planned urban renewal(District of Columbia Office of Planning2005). Recently, the Shaw neighborhoodexperienced an influx of investment, spurredin part by the new Washington ConventionCenter and hotel, a major developmentnorth of Mount Vernon Square that openedin 2003 (District of Columbia Office of Planning 2005).

Other commercial and residential develop-ments are in the planning stage. One suchdevelopment centers on the historic O StreetMarket at 7th and O Streets, located just afew blocks from the national historic site.Built in 1881, the O Street Market is one of three surviving historic markets in the city.Redevelopment plans call for a new 200-room hotel, 630 residential units, and 87,000square feet of retail space to be locatedaround the local landmark. Similar to otherneighborhood development projects, the




85

plans for O Street include affordablehousing. Private residents have also beeninvesting substantial sums to renovate someof the Shaw neighborhood’s existinghousing (District of Columbia Office of

Planning 2005; Gaynair 2009).

Population trends reveal a transition indemographic characteristics for the Shawneighborhood. While the population of many Washington neighborhoods continuedto drop during the 1990s, Shaw is one thatgrew during the decade. Like the city as awhole, its population is becoming moreracially and ethnically diverse. Table 5provides demographic data for the censustracts that define an area that approximates

the boundaries of the Shaw neighborhood.Citywide data are provided for context(District of Columbia Office of Planning2005).

Between 1990 and 2000, the population of the Shaw neighborhood changedsignificantly. The Caucasian percentage of the population grew from 18% to 25%; theHispanic percentage of the population rosefrom 11% to 19%; and the African Americanpercentage of the population dropped from73% to 57%. The portion of the populationover the age of 65 decreased, while theportion of the population between the agesof 18 and 65 rose. Between 2000 and 2005,the overall population of the Shaw areaincreased by 0.7% (District of ColumbiaOffice of Planning 2005; Urban Institute2008).

Between 1990 and 2000, income trends wereon the rise in the Shaw area, and the numberof housing units that were occupied rosemodestly, as did the percentage of housingunits that were occupied by owners. Ingeneral, these demographic trends appear tobe moving through the neighborhood fromwest to east (Urban Institute 2008; District of Columbia Office of Planning 2005).

Please note, at the time this generalmanagement plan was written, 2010 censusdata for the Shaw area were not available.

LOCAL ECONOMY: NEIGHBORHOODISSUES – LACK OF RETAIL

The amount and variety of retail in the Shawneighborhood is a key concern. Accordingto the Convention Center Area StrategicDevelopment Plan, existing retail establish-ments do not adequately serve localresidents. There are no continuous retailcorridors within close proximity to thenational historic site. Rather, retail outletsare scattered throughout the Shawneighborhood. The U Street corridor doespossess a strong retail presence. A modestconcentration of retail can also be foundalong 9th Street near the WashingtonConvention Center. However, these areasare more than two blocks from the national

historic site and are not that convenient forvisitors. This current situation is likely to berelevant to national historic site visitors whomay desire food and other services while inthe area. Residents, elected officials, andbusiness interests have expressed interest inpromoting ground floor retail and theconditions required to sustain it, whichinclude a safe, comfortable streetscapeenvironment (District of Columbia Office of Planning 2005).

CULTURAL HERITAGE TOURISM ANDTHE SHAW NEIGHBORHOOD

Most visitors to Washington, D.C., confinetheir visits to the vicinity of the NationalMall. The city government and localorganizations are working to broadenvisitation—and its economic impact—todowntown and Washington’s in-townneighborhoods. The National Trust forHistoric Preservation defines cultural

heritage tourism as “traveling to experiencethe places and activities that authenticallyrepresent the stories and people of the pastand present” (National Trust for HistoricPreservation 2009). According to the TravelIndustry of America, cultural heritagetravelers tend to have higher income levelsthan the average visitor; are more likely tostay in hotels and to remain longer; andgenerally spend about 50% more than other



CHAPTER THREE: THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

86

American tourists. The Travel Industry of America further reports that Washington isalready the number one travel destinationfor this type of traveler. During the 1990s,District of Columbia residents began to

realize the tremendous potential forencouraging visitors to stay in the city longerin order to visit its less well-knownattractions (National Trust for HistoricPreservation 2009; Smith 2008).

Incorporated in 1999, Cultural Tourism D.C.is a nonprofit coalition of more than 185historical and performing arts organizations(Smith 2008). In 1999, Cultural TourismD.C. released Capital Assets: A Report on theTourist Potential of Neighborhood Heritage

and Cultural Sites in Washington D.C. Thisreport revealed that the city contained morethan 60 museums beyond the National Mall,as well as 560 buildings, 100 parks and

historic sites, and 39 historic districts listedin the National Register of Historic Places(Smith 2008). In the years since, theorganization has partnered with others topromote preservation of, and visitation to,

many of these cultural sites. The Shawneighborhood has become a focus of theseefforts. For instance, Cultural TourismD.C.’s first self-guiding, marked neighbor-hood heritage trail was in the Shaw and theU Street area. The “Shaw Heritage Trail:Mid-City at a Crossroads” consists of 14interpretive signs erected at outdoorlocations throughout the neighborhood.Along with a guidebook that is available atlocal attractions, these markers encourageexploration of the neighborhood and

understanding of its social, religious, civic,entertainment, and cultural history (Smith2008).




87

Table 5: General Demographic Characteristics of the Shaw Neighborhood

General Demographic Characteristics of the Shaw Neighborhood(Census Tracts 44, 48.01, 48.02, 49.01, 49.02, and 50)

1990 Data – Shaw 2000 Data – Shaw

2000 Data –

City-wide

Population 17,011 18,895 572,059

Age

Under 18 18% 18% 20%

Between 18 and 65 61% 73% 68%

Over 65 21% 9% 12%

Race and Ethnicity

African American 73% 57% 60%

White 18% 25% 31%

Hispanic Origin 11% 19% 8%

Income

Median Household Income $20,751 $29,103 $40,127

Housing

Occupied Housing Units 7,250 units 8,637 units 248,338 units

% Owner Occupied16% 22% 41%

Source: District of Columbia Office of Planning



88

PARK OPERATIONS

Park operations at Carter G. WoodsonHome National Historic Site are limitedbecause the site is not open to the publicand, therefore, there are no NPS employeesstationed on-site. The superintendent andinterpretation staff from the Mary McLeodBethune Council House National Historic

Site manage the operations includingcoordinating with the National CapitalParks-East maintenance laborers andcarpenters who periodically perform basicpreservation and maintenance work on thebuildings and the U.S. Park Police whoregularly patrol the national historic site.



89

CHAPTER FOUR: ENVIRONMENTALCONSEQUENCES



90



91

INTRODUCTION

GENERAL METHODOLOGYThe National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 mandates that environmentalassessments disclose the environmentalimpacts of a proposed federal action. In thiscase, the proposed federal action is theimplementation of the General Management Plan/ Environmental Assessment/ Interpretation Plan for Carter G. WoodsonHome National Historic Site. Thealternatives in this document are tailored tothe specific needs of the national historic

site. Taking a more detailed approach, ratherthan a programmatic approach, was donespecifically to address the needs of thenational historic site as a new unit of thenational park system. Before undertakingspecific actions to implement the approvedgeneral management plan, NPS managerswould need to determine if more detailedenvironmental and/or cultural resourcedocuments must be prepared, consistentwith the provisions of the NationalEnvironmental Policy Act and the National

Historic Preservation Act.

The first part of this section discusses termsand assumptions used in the discussions of impacts. The second part covers policy andterminology related to cumulative impactsthat would likely affect the national historicsite. The third part discusses the relationshipof the impact analyses to requirements of section 106 of the National HistoricPreservation Act. The impacts of thealternatives are then analyzed by impact

topic (historic structures, visitor use andexperience, socioeconomic environment,and park operations) and then by alternativeunder each impact topic. Each impact topicincludes a description of the methodologyused, a description of the impacts of thealternative, a discussion of cumulativeeffects, and a conclusion. A section 106summary is also included for historicstructures. The impacts of each alternative

are briefly summarized in table 4 at the endof chapter two.

TERMS AND ASSUMPTIONS

Each impact topic includes a discussion of the type, duration, and intensity of theimpact. The type of impact refers to whetherthe impact on the resource or value wouldbe beneficial (positive) or adverse (negative).Duration of the impact considers whetherthe impact would occur over the short term

or long term. The intensity of an impactdescribes the degree, level, or strength of animpact as negligible, minor, moderate, ormajor. An intensity level is not given forbeneficial impacts.

CUMULATIVE IMPACT ANALYSIS

Council on Environmental Qualityregulations, which implement the NationalEnvironmental Policy Act, require

assessment of cumulative impacts in thedecision-making process for federalprojects. A cumulative impact is described inthe CEQ regulation 1508.7 as follows:

Cumulative impacts are incrementalimpacts of the action when added toother past, present, and reasonablyforeseeable future actions, regardless of what agency (federal or nonfederal) orperson undertakes such other action.Cumulative impacts can result fromindividually minor, but collectively

significant, actions taking place over aperiod of time.

To determine potential cumulative impacts ,other projects at the national historic siteand within the Shaw neighborhood wereidentified in discussions with the park staff,federal land managers, and representativesof District of Columbia government offices.Potential projects considered in the impact




92

analysis include any planning or develop-ment activity currently being implementedor planned for implementation in thereasonably foreseeable future. Other actionswere considered in the analysis only if they

would have an impact on the alternatives.

These actions were then evaluated inconjunction with the impacts of eachalternative to determine if they would haveany cumulative effects on a particular type of resource. For those cumulative actions thatare in the early planning stages, thequalitative evaluation of cumulative impactswas based on a general description of theproject.

Past ActionsPrior Treatment of the Buildings

Prior to the NPS acquisition of the Woodsonhome and the two adjacent row houses, thestructures remained unoccupied or unusedfor years. Minimal maintenance and repair,as well as modifications to the exteriors andinteriors of the structures, were notinformed by the Secretary of the Interior’sStandards for the Treatment of HistoricProperties, which would best preserve the

existing form, integrity, and materials of ahistoric property.

Building Acquisition

In 2005 and 2006, respectively, the NationalPark Service acquired the Woodson homeand the two row houses adjacent to it, 1540and 1542. After acquiring the buildings, theNational Park Service undertook astabilization project that secured thestructures, reinforced floors, removeddebris, replaced broken windows, and

installed a new roof on the Woodson home.Other minor repairs were made as needed.

Creation of Heritage Trails

The District of Columbia, National ParkService, and a private organization createdthree self-guided heritage trails. The trailsare: Washington, D.C. Black History Trail,African American Heritage Trail, and “Shaw

Heritage Trail: Mid-City at the Crossroads.”The National Park Service created a nationalhistoric site website and brochure for thepublic.

Washington Convention CenterThe city constructed and opened themultimillion dollar Washington ConventionCenter in 2003. The convention center isfour blocks south of the national historic siteand sits partially within the Shawneighborhood. The convention center is themajor socioeconomic driver in the southernportion of the Shaw neighborhood.

Present Actions

Building 1544Recently, the former corner commercialbuilding, or building 1544 located north of the national historic site, was purchased by aprivate entity. Renovation of the building fora new use is underway (as of 2011).

Convention Center Area StrategicDevelopment Plan (2005)

The purpose of the plan is to strengthenneighborhood businesses, generate quality

housing, and improve the public realm whilemaintaining the historic residential setting(see “Relationship of Other Planning Effortsto this General Management Plan” inchapter one).

District of Columbia HistoricPreservation Plan (2008–2012)

The purpose of the plan is to identify,protect, and capitalize on the city’s historicresources (see “Relationship of OtherPlanning Efforts to this General

Management Plan” in chapter one).

Washington Convention Center Hotel

Construction of a companion hotel for theWashington Convention Center isunderway. The 14-story hotel plans to have1,175 rooms and 5 retail outlets andrestaurants on the ground floor. The hotel is



Introduction

93

six blocks south of the national historic site(The Washington Post 2010).

O Street Market

Redevelopment of the historic O Street

Market is underway. The market is oneblock south of the national historic site, andwas once a bustling center in the Shawneighborhood, but closed in 1968. Theredevelopment is planning to provide morethan 87,000 square feet of retail andrestaurant space, a large grocery store, morethan 600 units of residential and affordablehousing, and parking (AFRO 2010).

Future Actions

The City of Washington has developed plansfor the rehabilitation of the Carter G.Woodson Park in the triangle of land northof the national historic site (see“Relationship of Other Planning Efforts tothis General Management Plan” in chapterone). A sculptor has been selected to create abronze statue of Dr. Woodson. Thelandscape of the entire park would berehabilitated, preserving the large trees andthe historic fence.

SECTION 106 OF THE NATIONALHISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT ANDIMPACTS TO CULTURAL RESOURCES

In this document, the impact analysis forhistoric structures is intended to complywith the requirements of both the NationalEnvironmental Policy Act and section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, asamended. In accordance with the AdvisoryCouncil on Historic Preservation’sregulations implementing section 106 of theNational Historic Preservation Act (36 CFR Part 800, Protection of Historic Properties),“effects,” rather than impacts, to culturalresources were identified and evaluated by(1) determining the area of potential effects(project area); (2) identifying culturalresources (historic buildings) present in thearea of potential effects that are either listedin or eligible to be listed in the National

Register of Historic Places; (3) applying thecriteria of adverse effect to affected, nationalregister-eligible or national register–listedcultural resources; and (4) considering waysto avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse

effects.

Unlike analyses under the National Environ-mental Policy Act, under the section 106process, an “effect” is defined as “analteration to the characteristics of a historicproperty qualifying it for inclusion in oreligibility for the National Register” (36 CFR 800.16i). According to the criteria of “adverse effect” in the regulations (36 CFR 800.5(a)(1)):

an adverse effect is found when an

undertaking may alter, directly orindirectly, any of the characteristicsof a historic property that qualify the property for inclusion in theNational Register in a manner that would diminish the integrity of the property’s location, design, setting,materials, workmanship, feeling, orassociation.

A determination of “no adverse effect”means there is an effect, but the effect would

not diminish the characteristics of thecultural resource that qualify it for inclusionin the national register.

The regulations further specify that:

consideration shall be given to all qualifying characteristics of a historic property, including those that may havebeen identified subsequent to the original evaluation of the property’s eligibility for the National Register. Adverse effectsmay include reasonably foreseeable

effects caused by the undertaking that may occur later in time, be fartherremoved in distance or be cumulative.

Under the Advisory Council’s regulations, adetermination of either adverse effect or noadverse effect must be made for affectedeligible or listed national register culturalresources.




94

The Council on Environmental Qualityregulations and National Park ServiceDirector’s Order 12: Conservation Planning Environmental Impact Analysis and Decision Making also call for a discussion of

mitigation, as well as an analysis of howeffective the mitigation would be in reducingthe intensity of a potential impact, e.g.reducing the intensity of an impact frommajor to moderate or minor. Any resultantreduction in intensity of impact due tomitigation, however, is an estimate of theeffectiveness of mitigation under NEPAonly. It does not suggest that the level of effect as defined by section 106 is similarlyreduced. Cultural resources arenonrenewable resources; adverse effects

generally consume, diminish, or destroy theoriginal historic materials or form, resultingin a loss in the integrity of the resource thatcan never be recovered. Therefore, althoughactions determined to have an adverse effectunder section 106 may be mitigated, theeffect remains adverse.

While the impact analysis provided in thisdocument are intended to comply with theNational Environmental Policy Act andsection 106 of the National HistoricPreservation Act, it must be emphasized thatthe National Park Service does not intend touse this General Management Plan/ Environmental Assessment/ Interpretation

Plan to meet section 106 compliance inaccordance with 36 CFR 800.8(c) forindividual actions discussed in thisdocument. The National Park Service wouldcomply with section 106 in accordance with

36 CFR 800 under separate communicationas it continues planning, designing, andrefining the proposed treatment options forthe historic buildings. As is required under36 CFR 800, the National Park Servicewould consult with the District of ColumbiaHistoric Preservation Office and otherconsulting parties to determine areas of potential effects; to identify culturalresources and evaluate their NationalRegister of Historic Places eligibility; todetermine effects on historic properties; and

to develop measures to avoid, minimize, ormitigate adverse effects on historicproperties. Measures to avoid, minimize, ormitigate adverse effects would be outlined ina memorandum of agreement (orprogrammatic agreement).

A section 106 summary is included forhistoric structures for the preferredalternative only (e.g., the proposedaction).This summary is an assessment of effect of the undertaking (implementation of the alternative) on historic structures, basedupon the criterion of effect and criteria of adverse effect found in Advisory Councilregulations.



95

IMPACTS TO HISTORIC STRUCTURES

METHODOLOGYThe methodology for assessing impacts onhistoric structures is based on theassessment of impacts to structures in thearea of potential effects. The area of potential effects is defined as the geographicarea or areas within which an undertaking oraction may cause changes in the character oruse of the cultural resource (historicstructure). The area of potential effects forboth alternatives is inclusive of theauthorized national historic site boundary

(buildings 1538, 1540, and 1542).

Potential impacts (direct, indirect, andcumulative effects) are described in terms of type (beneficial or adverse), duration (shortterm, long term, or permanent), andintensity (negligible, minor, moderate, ormajor). The methodology also includesmaking a determination of effect undersection 106 of the National HistoricPreservation Act.

Type

Beneficial impacts would move the resourcetowards a desired condition. Adverseimpacts would move the resource away froma desired condition.

Duration

Impacts could be short term, lasting less thanone year; long term, lasting more than oneyear but reversible; or permanent, lasting

indefinitely.

Intensity

Intensity refers to the significance or degreeof the impact to historic structures. Thethresholds to determine impact intensity aredefined as follows:

Negligible: Impacts would be at the lowestlevels of detection – barely perceptible andmeasurable. For purposes of section 106, thedetermination of effect would be no adverseeffect .

Minor: Impacts would affect character-defining features but would not diminish theoverall integrity of the building or structure.For purposes of section 106, thedetermination of effect would be no adverseeffect.

Moderate: Impacts would alter severalcharacter-defining features, but would notdiminish the overall integrity of the buildingor structure to the extent that its NationalRegister of Historic Places eligibility couldbe jeopardized. For purposes of section 106,the determination of effect would be adverseeffect.

Major: Impacts would alter character-defining features, diminishing the overallintegrity of the building or structure to theextent that it would no longer be eligible tobe listed in the National Register of HistoricPlaces. For purposes of section 106, thedetermination of effect would be adverseeffect.

IMPACTS OF THENO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE

Analysis

The exteriors of the Woodson home(building 1538) and building 1540 would bestabilized or restored, while the exterior of building 1542 would be rehabilitated. Theinteriors of the buildings would beperiodically inspected and necessary repairsmade to prevent further deterioration. AnHVAC system would be installed in building1540 to service all three buildings. TheHVAC system would be designed and




96

installed to cause the least alteration of eachbuilding’s floorplan and minimize the loss of historic fabric. A fire suppression systemwould also be installed. Due to thedeteriorated state of the buildings, both the

interior and exterior work would requiresome irreparable historic fabric be replacedin kind, as needed, to preserve the buildings.All work would be undertaken inaccordance with the Secretary of theInterior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. This would ensure thatthe character-defining features and integrityof the buildings are minimally affected. Anyadverse effects would be negligible to minor,site-specific, and long term.

Any materials removed during preservationefforts would be evaluated to determinetheir value to the national historic site’smuseum collection and/or for theircomparative use in future preservation workat the site.

Cumulative Impacts

Prior to the National Park Service’sacquisition of the Woodson home and thetwo adjacent row houses, the structuresremained unoccupied or unused for years.

Minimal maintenance and repair, as well asmodifications to the exteriors and interiorsof the structures, were not informed by theSecretary of the Interior’s Standards for theTreatment of Historic Properties, whichwould best preserve the existing form,integrity, and materials of a historicproperty. Impacts to historic structures fromthis past action would be adverse, site-specific, permanent, and minor to moderate.

The past action of acquiring the buildings

has resulted in the historic structures beingput under federal protection and saved fromdeterioration. Impacts to historic structureswould be beneficial, site-specific, and longterm.

The present action of the District of Columbia historic preservation plan (2008–2012) is in agreement with the National ParkService’s proposed plan of restoring and

rehabilitating the exteriors of the buildingsto keep their historic look and associationintact. Impacts to historic structures wouldbe beneficial, local, and long term.

As described above, implementation of theno-action alternative would result in impactsthat are adverse, site-specific, long term, andnegligible to minor. These impacts, incombination with both the long-termbeneficial and long-term, minor to moderateadverse impacts of other past and presentactions, would result in long-term, minoradverse cumulative impacts to historicstructures. The adverse impacts of the noaction alternative would be a smallcomponent of the adverse cumulative

impact.

Conclusion

Implementation of the no-action alternativewould result in negligible to minor, adverse,site-specific, long-term impacts to historicstructures due to the removal of historicmaterials. Cumulative impacts would be sitespecific, adverse, minor, and long term.

IMPACTS OF THE PREFERRED

ALTERNATIVE

Option One

Analysis

The exteriors of the Woodson home(building 1538) and building 1540 would berestored, while the exterior of building 1542would be rehabilitated. The restoration andrehabilitation work would be undertaken inaccordance with the Secretary of theInterior’s Standards for the Treatment of

Historic Properties. Due to the deterioratedstate of the buildings, and the extensivemodifications to building 1542, exteriorwork on the structures would require someirreparable historic fabric be replaced inkind, as needed, to preserve the buildings,resulting in impacts that are adverse, site-specific, long term, and negligible to minor.The interior of the Woodson home would berestored and refurnished to the time period



Impacts to Historic Structures

97

that Dr. Woodson lived there. The interiorsof buildings 1540 and 1542 would berehabilitated to accommodate nationalhistoric site interpretive, administrative, andoperational functions. Care would be taken

to ensure that the rehabilitation wouldminimally affect historic materials, features,and finishes. Work would follow theSecretary of the Interior’s Standards for theTreatment of Historic Properties. A HVACsystem would be installed in building 1540 toservice all three buildings. The HVACsystem would be designed and installed tocause the least alteration of each building’sfloorplan and minimize the loss of historicfabric. A fire suppression system would alsobe installed. The restoration and

rehabilitation work would require in kindreplacement of historic materials due totheir deteriorated state, which would resultin impacts that are adverse, site-specific,long term, and negligible to minor.

Any materials removed during restoration orrehabilitation efforts would be evaluated todetermine their value to the national historicsite’s museum collection and/or for theircomparative use in future preservation workat the site.

An elevator would be installed in building1540. Installation of the elevator would alterthe size, configuration, proportion andrelationship of interior spaces and damagethe building’s existing ceilings, walls, floors,and other historic fabric. The addition of anelevator to the building would require theconstruction of an elevator house on theroof. This addition may affect the viewshedfrom the adjacent historic structures and thesurrounding area. Installation of the elevatorand elevator house would result in impactsthat are adverse, site-specific, permanent,and of moderate intensity.

New entryways between the Woodson homeand building 1540 would be installed onevery floor. The entryways would be clearlyidentified as modern and sympathetic tointerior historic features and spatialrelationships. The entryways would permit

elevator access to each level of the Woodsonhome. Construction of the entryways wouldrequire the removal of historic fabric fromoriginal walls. Construction of the entrywayswould result in impacts that are adverse, site-

specific, long term, and moderate.

A third story rear addition would beconstructed on building 1540 to allowinterior stairway access to all floors. Theaddition would be designed to be clearlydifferentiated from the historic building, toavoid creating a false historical appearance,but would be compatible in terms of mass,scale, materials, and color. The impacts fromthe construction of the rear stairwayaddition would be adverse, site-specific, long

term, and of moderate intensity.

Visitation to the national historic site isexpected to be about 20,000 to 40,000visitors annually (similar to that of theFrederick Douglass National Historic Siteand the Mary McLeod Bethune CouncilHouse National Historic Site). The historicbuildings could suffer wear and tear fromincreased visitation. Monitoring the carryingcapacity of the buildings could result in theimposition of visitation levels or constraintsthat would contribute to the stability orintegrity of the historic structures withoutunduly hindering interpretation for visitors.Impacts to the buildings from visitationwould be adverse, site-specific, long term,and negligible to minor.

Option Two

Analysis

Option two includes all of the actions of option one, and those actions proposed forthe two-story “corner store,” (building1544). The exterior treatment for building1544 would be determined after theacquisition of the structure, while theinterior would be rehabilitated in a similarfashion as buildings 1540 and 1542, so all of the interiors would function together.Exterior and interior work on the buildingwould be undertaken in accordance with theSecretary of the Interior’s Standards for the




98

Treatment of Historic Properties. The workwould require the in kind replacement of historic materials due to their deterioratedstate which would result in impacts that areadverse, site-specific, long term, and

negligible to minor.

Cumulative Impacts(Options One and Two)

Prior to the NPS acquisition of the Woodsonhome and the two adjacent row houses, thestructures remained unoccupied or unusedfor years. Minimal maintenance and repair,as well as modifications to the exteriors andinteriors of the structures, were notinformed by the Secretary of the Interior’sStandards for the Treatment of Historic

Properties, which would best preserve theexisting form, integrity, and materials of ahistoric property. Impacts to historicstructures from this past action would beadverse, site-specific, permanent, and minorto moderate.

The past action of acquiring the buildingshas resulted in the historic structures beingput under federal protection and saved fromdeterioration. Impacts to historic structureswould be beneficial, site-specific, and long

term.

The present action of the District of Columbia historic preservation plan (2008–2012) is in agreement with the NPSproposed plan of restoring and rehabilitatingthe exteriors of the buildings to keep theirhistoric look and association intact. Impactsto historic structures would be beneficial,local, and long term.

As described above, implementation of the

preferred alternative would result in impactsthat are adverse, site-specific, long term, andmoderate. These impacts, in combinationwith both the long-term beneficial and long-term, adverse, minor to moderate impacts of

other past and present actions, would resultin long-term, minor adverse cumulativeimpacts to historic structures. The adverseimpacts of the preferred alternative wouldbe a small component of the adverse

cumulative impact.

Conclusion

Implementation of the preferred alternative(either option) would result in impacts tohistoric structures that are moderate,adverse, site-specific, and long term due tothe removal of historic materials. Cumulativeimpacts would be adverse, minor, and longterm.

Section 106 Summary

After applying the Advisory Council onHistoric Preservation’s criteria of adverseeffects (36 CFR Part 800.5, Assessment of Adverse Effects), the National Park Serviceconcludes the proposed undertakingsoutlined in the preferred alternative (eitheroption) would most likely be an adverseeffect on historic structures. The adverseeffect determination would result from theconstruction of entryways between theWoodson home and building 1540, and the

construction of an elevator house on theroof and stairway addition on the back of building 1540.These actions would alter theintegrity of the building including theworkmanship, design features, materials,and feeling.

A memorandum of agreement, inaccordance with 36 CFR Part 800.6,Resolution of Adverse Effects, would benegotiated between the National ParkService and the District of Columbia

Historic Preservation Office and, if necessary, the Advisory Council on HistoricPreservation. The memorandum of agreement would stipulate how the adverseeffects would be mitigated.



99

IMPACTS TO VISITOR USE AND EXPERIENCE

METHODOLOGYThis impact analysis considers variousaspects of visitor use and experience at theCarter G. Woodson Home National HistoricSite. Impacts of the alternatives are de-scribed in terms of the followingcomponents:

visitation, including levels of visitationand visitor profile

diversity of opportunities and quality of experiences

visitor understanding, education, andinterpretation

safe and enjoyable access andcirculation to and within the nationalhistoric site

Type of Impact

Beneficial impacts are those that mostvisitors would perceive as desirable. Adverseimpacts are those that most visitors wouldperceive as undesirable.

Duration

Duration is the length of time that the impactwould affect the visitor experience at thenational historic site. Short-term impactswould be less than two years. A long-termimpact would last more than two years.

Intensity

Intensity refers to the significance or degreeof the impact to the visitor experienceincluding visitation, diversity of opportunities, visitor understanding, andsafe and enjoyable access to the nationalhistoric site. The thresholds to determineimpact intensity are defined as follows:

Negligible: Most visitors would likely beunaware of any effects associated withimplementation the alternative.

Minor: Changes in visitation, diversity of opportunities, visitor understanding, safeand enjoyable access to the national historicsite, or setting conditions would be slight butdetectable, would affect few visitors, andwould not appreciably limit or enhanceexperiences identified as fundamental to thenational historic site’s purpose andsignificance.

Moderate: Some aspects of visitation,diversity of opportunities, visitor

understanding, safe and enjoyable access tothe national historic site, or settingconditions would change, and many visitors(less than 50%) would likely be aware of theimpacts associated with implementation of the alternative; some changes to experiencesidentified as fundamental to the nationalhistoric site’s purpose and significancewould be apparent.

Major: Multiple aspects of visitation,diversity of opportunities, visitor

understanding, safe and enjoyable access tothe national historic site, or settingconditions would change, includingexperiences identified as fundamental to thenational historic site purpose andsignificance; most visitors (more than 50%)would be aware of the impacts associatedwith implementation of the alternative.


Analysis

Visitation Levels and Visitor Profile

There would be a slight increase in visitationto the national historic site as a result of theNational Park Service interpretive ranger-led walking tours. The visitor profile is likelyto be more diverse as a result of the walkingtours because it would draw people to the




100

national historic site who may not otherwisevisit. Because the national historic sitebuildings would remain closed to the public,impacts to visitation levels and visitor profilewould be adverse, long term, and negligible

to minor.

Diversity and Quality of Experiences

The diversity and quality of the visitorexperience would change slightly with theaddition of the interpretive wayside exhibitsin front of the buildings and the interpretiveranger-led walking tours because therewould be more to experience than what iscurrently offered (the national historic sitewebsite and brochure). While there wouldbe some improvement, impacts to the

diversity and quality of experiences wouldbe adverse, long term, and negligible tominor.

Visitor Understanding, Education,and Interpretation

Impacts to visitor understanding, education,and interpretation would be beneficial andlong term due to the increase in informationprovided about Dr. Woodson.

Safe and Enjoyable Access andCirculation to and within the Site

Under the no-action alternative, Woodson’shome and the two adjacent row houseswould remain closed to the public. Visitorswould only see the national historic sitefrom the outside. Visitors would still be ableto access the national historic site via publictransportation, walking and driving by, andcommercial bus tours. With only outsideaccess to the national historic site, impacts toaccess and circulation to and within the site

would be adverse, long term, and negligible.

Cumulative Impacts

The past action of heritage trail creation, andpossibly the addition of the WashingtonConvention Center to the Shaw neighbor-hood, has resulted in some visitation to thenational historic site and visitor under-standing, education, and interpretation of

Dr. Woodson by visitors coming to theWoodson home and reading about him inthe guidebooks/brochures. Impacts wouldbe beneficial and long term.

The present actions of the WashingtonConvention Center hotel construction andO Street Market redevelopment would resultin opportunities for increased visitation andvisitor understanding, education, andinterpretation (from the exterior interpretivewayside exhibits and interpretive ranger-ledwalking tours). Impacts would be beneficialand long term.

As described above, implementation of theno-action alternative would result in overall

impacts that are adverse, long term, andnegligible to minor because the nationalhistoric site buildings would remain closedto visitors. These impacts, in combinationwith the long-term, beneficial impacts of other past and present actions, would resultin long-term, adverse, negligible cumulativeimpacts to visitor use and experience. Theoverall adverse impacts of the no-actionalternative would contribute a relativelylarge increment of the cumulative impacts.

ConclusionImplementation of the no-action alternativewould result in impacts that are adverse,long term, and negligible to minor to visitoruse and experience. Cumulative impactswould be long-term, adverse, and negligible.

IMPACTS OF THE PREFERREDALTERNATIVE (BOTH OPTIONS)

Analysis

Visitation Levels and Visitor Profile

Under the preferred alternative, visitationlevels would greatly increase as a result of the buildings being rehabilitated and openedto the public. Visitation to the nationalhistoric site is expected to be about 20,000 –40,000 visitors annually, similar to that of theFrederick Douglass National Historic Siteand the Mary McLeod Bethune Council



Impacts to Visitor Use and Experience

101

House National Historic Site (NPS 2009).National historic site visitors would likelyinclude a diverse mix of neighborhoodresidents, inhabitants of the greaterWashington, D.C., metropolitan area, and

domestic and international travelersvacationing in the city or in town for otherreasons. Students on organized educationaltrips would form another visitor group.Some visitors would be associated witheducational institutions such as nearbyHoward University. Impacts to visitationlevels and visitor profile would be beneficialand long term.

Diversity and Quality of Experiences

The diversity and quality of experiences for

visitors would change as a result of thenational historic site being open to thepublic and the buildings being filled with avariety of interpretive exhibits, videos,materials, and programs, including theguided tour through the Woodson home,which would explain Dr. Woodson’s life,work, home, and contributions to Americanhistory. Educational retail items would alsobe available at the national historic sitethrough an authorized NPS cooperatingassociation. Visitors would be able to

interact with staff from the Association forthe Study of African American Life andHistory on-site, which would help themlearn about Dr. Woodson and his legacy. If building 1544 could be acquired in thefuture, the additional space would be usedfor additional educational programs, publicmeetings, classroom activities, andinterpretive exhibits. Impacts to diversityand quality experiences would be beneficialand long term.

Visitor Understanding, Education,and Interpretation

Under the preferred alternative, theinterpretation plan could be implemented,which would result in an increase in visitorunderstanding, education, andinterpretation through interpretive andeducational exhibits, videos, materials, andprograms. Visitors would experience a

stimulating environment for learning aboutDr. Woodson’s life, legacy, andcontributions to scholarship and society.Visitors would be encouraged to appreciatethe contemporary relevance of Dr.

Woodson’s work. Interpretive media andprogramming would offer visitors theopportunity to learn about and takeinspiration from Dr. Woodson’s example. Arange of interpretive messages would beavailable. Rotating exhibits would ensurethat there was always something new to seeand learn. Guest lectures and other specialevents would help the national historic sitestay up-to-date and relevant. Impacts tovisitor understanding, education, andinterpretation would be beneficial and long

term.

Safe and Enjoyable Access andCirculation to and within the Site

Under the preferred alternative, visitorswould have safe and enjoyable access andcirculation to and within the site as a resultof the buildings being rehabilitated andopened. Visitors would enter the site eitherthrough building 1542 (option one) or 1544(option two) at grade. The wheelchair lift,elevator, and new entryways between the

Woodson home and building 1540 wouldallow visitors with limited mobility access toall floors. The stairway addition wouldprovide another way for visitors to movearound from floor to floor. The interpretiveranger guided tour of the Woodson home(estimated limit of two at a time) would givevisitors access to the Woodson home in away that would prevent overcrowding. Theinterpretive exhibits, videos, and programswould be designed to maximize efficientflow of visitors through the buildings to

prevent bottlenecking. In option two,building 1544 would provide additionalspace for visitors to learn about Dr.Woodson through educational programs,public meetings, classroom activities, andinterpretive exhibits. Universal accessibilitywould be incorporated into the design of theexterior entrance and interior circulationpatterns and interpretive exhibits, videos,and programs. Visitors would be encouraged




102

to take advantage of public transportation;however, some visitors would drive.Therefore, traffic within the historicneighborhood surrounding the Woodsonhome would increase slightly. Those who

drove would be able to find street parkingnearby. Tour and school buses would besafely loaded and unloaded in front of thenational historic site, and buses parked inappropriate nearby locations. Commercialtours would drop off and pick up visitors tothe national historic site at a nearby location.Impacts to access and circulation to andwithin the site would be beneficial and longterm.

Cumulative Impacts

The past action of heritage trail creation, andpossibly the addition of the WashingtonConvention Center to the Shawneighborhood, has resulted in somevisitation to the national historic site andvisitor understanding, education, andinterpretation of Dr. Woodson by visitorscoming to Woodson’s home and readingabout him in the guidebooks/brochures.Impacts would be beneficial and long term.

The present actions of the Washington

Convention Center hotel construction and

O Street Market redevelopment would resultin increased visitation and visitor under-standing, education, and interpretation bythe national historic site being open tovisitors and the additional interpretive

exhibits, materials and programs availableinside the buildings. Impacts would bebeneficial and long term.

As described above, implementation of thepreferred alternative would result in overallimpacts that are beneficial and long termbecause the national historic site would befully operational and open to visitors. Theseimpacts, in combination with the long term,beneficial impacts of other past and presentactions, would result in long-term, beneficial

cumulative impacts to visitor use andexperience. The overall beneficial, long-termimpacts of the preferred alternative wouldbe a large increment of the cumulativeimpacts.

Conclusion

Implementation of the preferred alternativewould result in impacts to visitor use andexperience that are beneficial and long term.Cumulative impacts would be long term andbeneficial.



103

IMPACTS TO THE SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT

METHODOLOGYThe National Park Service appliedprofessional judgment to analyze the effectson the social and economic conditions thatwould result from both alternatives. Analysisconsidered economic data, anticipatedvisitor use, the development concept forCarter G. Woodson Home National HistoricSite, and other planned developments withinthe Shaw neighborhood.

Type of Impact

Beneficial impacts are those that wouldprovide opportunities to improve quality of life and economic development. Adverseimpacts are those that would not provideopportunities to improve quality of life andeconomic development.

Duration

Duration refers to the length of time theimpact would affect social and economicconditions. Short-term impacts would be

less than two years. This duration waschosen to approximate the length of timeinitial construction work would take place(for example, restoration and rehabilitationof the historic buildings). A long-termimpact would last more than two years.

Intensity

Intensity refers to the significance or degreeof the impact to the social and economicenvironment. The thresholds to determine

impact intensity are defined as follows:Negligible: The effects on social andeconomic conditions would beunnoticeable. The action would not yieldany noticeable or measurable changes toquality of life or the local economy.

Minor: The effects on social and economicconditions would be detectable, but onlyslight and limited to a small portion of the

surrounding community and local economy.The action would minimally influence thequality of life or the local economy.

Moderate: The effects on social andeconomic conditions would be readilyapparent and would influence multiplesegments of the community or localeconomy. The action would yield changesthat are noteworthy or modest to the qualityof life or the local economy.

Major: The effects on social and economicconditions would be very apparent,significant, and/or widespread throughoutthe community and local economy. Theaction would yield considerable changes tothe quality of life or the local economy.

Primary Factors

Analysis evaluates the impact of the twoalternatives on the local character and localeconomy. Primary factors for this evaluation

include the following:

Community Character

Analysis of this topic deals with the Shawneighborhood. This topic incorporatesaspects such as physical appearance andatmosphere, community identity and pride,and demographic characteristics includingpopulation, race, or ethnicity. Publicknowledge and appreciation of Dr.Woodson and his contributions are alsoincluded in this discussion.

Local Economy

The impact of an alternative on the localeconomy encompasses the contributionfrom visitor expenditures and from NPSmanagement, which would include salariesand contracts.




104

IMPACTS OF THE NO-ACTIONALTERNATIVE

Analysis

Community Character

Under the no-action alternative, the physicalappearances of the Woodson home andadjacent buildings (1540 and 1542) would beimproved through their restoration (orstabilization) and rehabilitation resulting inan overall appearance that is consistent withthe historic neighborhood. Installingwayside interpretive exhibits and offering aninterpretive ranger guided tour would resultin visitors gaining greater understanding of Dr. Woodson and his contributions to theShaw neighborhood and to Americanhistory. Impacts to community characterwould be beneficial and long term.

Local Economy

Restoring (or stabilizing) and rehabilitatingthe exterior of the buildings would bringconstruction workers to the national historicsite for a short period of time resulting inthese workers patronizing retail andrestaurant establishments in the Shawneighborhood. Visitors drawn to the

national historic site by the wayside exhibitsand interpretive ranger-led walking tour, aswell as National Park Service employeescoming to work or check on the buildings,may also patronize local retail and restaurantestablishments. Impacts to the localeconomy would be slight, beneficial, andboth short and long term.

Cumulative Impacts

The past action of heritage trail creation mayresult in a slight increase in visitation to thenational historic site. Some of these visitorsmay have made purchases at retail stores inthe Shaw neighborhood. Impacts to the localeconomy would be long term and beneficial.

The present actions of the WashingtonConvention Center hotel construction andthe O Street Market redevelopment would,upon completion, most likely bring more

visitors to the national historic site. Some of these visitors are apt to make purchases atShaw neighborhood retail and restaurantestablishments, including the O StreetMarket. Impacts would be beneficial and

long term for the local economy.

The future action of the Carter G. WoodsonPark rehabilitation may also draw morevisitors to the national historic site due totheir close proximity to one another. Visitorsto the park may want to learn more aboutDr. Woodson and as a result walk over to thenational historic site. Some of these visitorsare likely to make purchases at Shawneighborhood retail and restaurantestablishments, including the O Street

Market. Impacts would be beneficial andlong term for the local economy.

As described above, implementation of theno-action alternative would result inbeneficial, short- and long-term impacts.These impacts, in combination with the longterm, beneficial impacts of other past,present, and future actions, would result inlong-term, beneficial cumulative impacts tothe socioeconomic environment. The overallbeneficial, short- and long-term impacts of the preferred alternative would be arelatively small increment of the cumulativeimpacts.

Conclusion

Implementation of the no-action alternativewould result in short- and long-term,beneficial impacts to the socioeconomicenvironment. Cumulative impacts would belong term and beneficial.


Analysis

Community Character

Under the preferred alternative – optionone, the physical appearances of the



Impacts to the Socioeconomic Environment

105

Woodson home and adjacent buildings(1540 and 1542) would be improved throughtheir restoration and rehabilitation resultingin an overall appearance that is consistentwith the historic neighborhood. In tandem

with the renovation of the privately ownedbuilding 1544, these actions may encouragesimilar efforts in the neighborhood.

The national historic site would bedeveloped to educate and serve visitorsthrough interpretive exhibits, videos,materials, programs, and special events (likeDr. Woodson’s birthday celebration andBlack History Month). It might become animportant heritage attraction for the Shawneighborhood that locals and Washington

D.C., visitors seek out. The national historicsite would reinforce the Shaw neighbor-hood’s identity as a community that played asignificant role in the intellectual andcultural life of the African Americancommunity—and therefore the Americancommunity. Under this alternative, thenational historic site would become a focalpoint of community pride. The fact that theformerly vacant buildings would beoccupied, with people coming and going ona regular basis, would foster an atmosphere

of community activity.

Through interpretive exhibits, videos,materials, programs, and special events, thenational historic site would contribute to thepublic’s knowledge and understanding of

Dr. Woodson’s life and work. Newcomersto the neighborhood would have anopportunity to learn about and connect withDr. Woodson and his contribution to theShaw community. The national historic sitewould also serve the community as a venue

for meetings and events if building 1544could be acquired.

Impacts to the community character wouldbe long term and beneficial.

Local Economy

Similar to the no-action alternative, the localeconomy would likely experience a small

boost in the short term due to the presenceof construction workers during therestoration and rehabilitation of thebuildings. There would also be a long-termsustained economic effect due to the

National Park Service employees beingstationed at the national historic site and theincrease in visitors. Shaw neighborhoodretail and restaurant establishments andhotels would most likely benefiteconomically from the increase in people atthe national historic site, especially from thevisitors. Depending upon visitation levels,new food service or retail establishmentscould open near the national historic site.Impacts would be small, beneficial, and longterm to the local economy.

Cumulative Impacts

The past action of heritage trail creation hasresulted in a slight increase in visitation tothe national historic site. Some of thesevisitors most likely made purchases at retailstores in the Shaw neighborhood. Impacts tothe local economy would be long term andbeneficial.

The present actions of the WashingtonConvention Center hotel construction and

the O Street Market redevelopment would,upon completion, most likely bring morevisitors to the national historic site. Some of these visitors are apt to make purchases atShaw neighborhood retail and restaurantestablishments, including the O StreetMarket. Impacts would be beneficial andlong term for the local economy.

The future action of the Carter G. WoodsonPark rehabilitation might also draw morevisitors to the national historic site due to

their proximity. Visitors to the park mightwant to learn more about Dr. Woodson andas a result walk over to the national historicsite. Some of these visitors would likely tomake purchases at Shaw neighborhood retailand restaurant establishments, including theO Street Market. Impacts would bebeneficial and long term for the localeconomy.




106

As described above, implementation of thepreferred alternative would result inbeneficial, long-term impacts. Theseimpacts, in combination with the long-term,beneficial impacts of other past, present, and

future actions, would result in long-term,beneficial cumulative impacts to thesocioeconomic environment. The overallbeneficial, short- and long-term impacts of the preferred alternative would be arelatively small increment of the cumulative

impacts, but it is anticipated it would begreater than the no-action alternative.

Conclusion

Implementation of the preferred alternative

would result in short- and long-term,beneficial impacts to the socioeconomicenvironment. Cumulative impacts would belong term and beneficial.



107

IMPACTS TO PARK OPERATIONS

METHODOLOGY

For the purposes of this analysis, park(national historic site) operations refers tothe adequacy of staffing levels and qualityand effectiveness of the infrastructure usedin the operation of the park in order toadequately protect and preserve vital parkresources, like the three, possibly four,historic structures, and provide for a positiveand informative visitor experience.

Type of ImpactBeneficial impacts would improve NPSoperations and/or facilities. Adverse impactswould diminish NPS operations and/orfacilities and could hinder NPS staff’s abilityto provide adequate services and facilities tovisitors and staff.

Duration

Duration is the length of time that the impactwould affect park operations. A short-term

impact would last less than one year andwould affect only one season’s use byvisitors. A long-term impact would last morethan one year.

Intensity

The thresholds of change for the intensity of impacts on park operation are defined asfollows:

Negligible: Park operations would not beaffected or the effect would be at low levels

of detection and would not have anappreciable effect on park operations.

Minor: Impacts would be detectable andwould be of a magnitude that would nothave an appreciable effect on parkoperations.

Moderate: Impacts would be readilyapparent and result in substantial change inpark operations in a manner noticeable tothe staff and public.

Major: Impacts would be readily apparent,result in a substantial change in parkoperations in a manner noticeable to staff and the public, and would be markeddifferent from recent operations.


Analysis

Under the no-action alternative, four FTEinterpretation and education staff would behired to manage the day-to-day operationsof the site. The interpretation and educationstaff would take visitors on scheduledwalking tours of the neighborhood duringregular park hours. Most likely thesupervisory interpretation and education

staff would train other interpretation andeducation staff on how to conduct theneighborhood walking tours. Supervisoryinterpretation and education staff wouldsupervise other interpretation and educationstaff. National historic site employees’offices would be offsite at another NationalCapital Parks-East park or office.

National Capital Parks-East may also hire amaintenance worker, resource managementspecialist, or an administrative assistant (two

FTEs total) to support the operation of thenational historic site. These two employeeswould be shared with other National CapitalParks-East park units. The maintenanceworker and resource management specialistwould check on the historic structuresperiodically and make any necessary repairs,as well as clean the site as needed. Ongoingmaintenance of the national historic site




108

would increase the workload of the NationalCapital Parks-East maintenance staff. Whenthe exteriors of Dr. Woodson’s home andbuildings 1540 and 1542 were restored andrehabilitated, maintenance staff would

monitor any contractors hired to performthe work. This would cause a temporaryincrease to their workload. There would bevery little impact to the U.S. Park Policebecause they would continue to patrol thesite as they have been doing. Impacts to parkoperations would be beneficial and longterm due to the increase in staffing andimproved infrastructure that wouldadequately protect the historic structures,and provide for an improved visitorexperience.

Cumulative Impacts

After acquiring the buildings, the NationalPark Service undertook a stabilizationproject that secured the structures,reinforced floors, removed debris, replacedbroken windows, and installed a new roof on the Woodson home. Other minor repairswere made as needed. Impacts to parkoperations would be beneficial and longterm.

As described above, implementation of theno-action alternative would result in overallimpacts that are beneficial and long term.These impacts, in combination with thelong-term, beneficial impacts of other pastactions, would result in long-term, beneficialcumulative impacts to park operations. Theoverall beneficial, long-term impacts of theno-action alternative would be a largerincrement of the cumulative impacts.

Conclusion

Implementation of the no-action alternativewould result in impacts to park operationsthat are beneficial and long term. Cumulativeimpacts would be beneficial and long term.


Analysis

Under the preferred alternative, seven and a

half FTE interpretation and education staff would be hired to manage the day-to-dayoperations of the site. Supervisoryinterpretation and education staff hiredwould supervise other interpretation andeducation staff. The supervisoryinterpretation and education staff member’sworkload would increase incrementally bythe number of interpretation and educationemployees he/she had to supervise. Mostlikely the supervisory interpretation andeducation staff would train other

interpretation and education staff. The staff would be responsible for interpretingidentified themes, offering educationalservices, guiding tours of the Woodsonhome, guiding walking tours of theneighborhood, and providing informationand orientation through personal andnonpersonal services such as the parkwebsite, publications, exhibits, and theVolunteers-in-Parks program. Theinterpretation and education staff wouldorient visitors to the site as well. The offices

for these employees would be located at thenational historic site.

National Capital Parks-East may also hire amaintenance worker, resource managementspecialist, and an administrative assistant(three FTEs total) to support the operationof the national historic site. These threeemployees would be shared with otherNational Capital Parks-East park units.

The extensive restoration and rehabilitation

work required to open up the buildings tovisitors would most likely be contracted outby the National Park Service. NationalCapital Parks-East maintenance staff wouldmonitor the contractors daily until theproject is complete. Once the nationalhistoric site is fully operational, NationalCapital Parks-East maintenance staff wouldmanage and attend to the day-to-daymaintenance and custodial needs. These



Impacts to Park Operations

109

actions would increase the workload formaintenance staff. The resource manage-ment specialist would support preservationof cultural resources, and the assistant wouldprovide administrative support. Their

workloads would increase as the site becamefully operational and as visitation grew. U.S.Park Police would continue to patrol the siteunder the preferred alternative, and mostlikely with more frequency, which wouldincrease their workload. Impacts to parkoperations would be beneficial and longterm due to the increase in staffing andimproved infrastructure that wouldadequately protect the historic structures,and provide for an effective visitorexperience.

Cumulative Impacts

After acquiring the buildings, the NationalPark Service undertook a stabilizationproject that secured the structures,reinforced floors, removed debris, replaced

broken windows, and installed a new roof on the Woodson home. Other minor repairswere made as needed. Impacts to parkoperations would be beneficial and longterm.

As described above, implementation of thepreferred alternative would result in overallimpacts that are beneficial and long term.These impacts, in combination with thelong-term, beneficial impacts of other pastactions, would result in long-term, beneficialcumulative impacts to park operations. Theoverall beneficial, long-term impacts of thepreferred alternative would be a muchgreater increment of the cumulative impacts.

ConclusionImplementation of the preferred alternativewould result in impacts to park operationsthat are beneficial and long term. Cumulativeimpacts would be beneficial and long term.





111

CHAPTER FIVE: CONSULTATION ANDCOORDINATION



112



113

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT

INTRODUCTIONThe General Management Plan / Environmental Assessment / InterpretationPlan for Carter G. Woodson Home NationalHistoric Site represents the work of theNational Park Service planning team,National Capital Parks-East staff, and otherNational Park Service subject matter experts,as well as comments and suggestionssolicited from the public. Consultation andcoordination among different agencies andthe public were important throughout the

planning process. Members of the publichad three primary avenues through which toparticipate during the development of theplan. They could send comments to thenational historic site’s planning website athttp://parkplanning.nps.gov/cawo, respondto newsletters in writing, and participate inpublic meetings.

PUBLIC MEETINGS ANDNEWSLETTERS

Public meetings and newsletters were usedto keep the public informed and involved inthe planning process for the national historicsite. A mailing list consisting of members of government agencies, organizations,businesses, legislators, and interestedcitizens was compiled.

The first newsletter, issued in September2008, described the planning effort andasked for input in four areas: top priorities

that should be addressed at the nationalhistoric site, visions of what this unit of thenational park system should look like in 20years, the most important issues affecting thenational historic site, and ideas of how arelationship could be built with thesurrounding neighborhood.

Five thousand copies of this newsletter wereprinted and distributed. Most were mailed;

however, 400 copies were made available fordistribution at the 93rd Annual Conventionof the Association for the Study of AfricanAmerican Life and History held inBirmingham, Alabama, October 1–5, 2008.

Additional copies of the newsletter weresent to the Association for the Study of African American Life and Historyheadquarters in Washington, D.C., the MaryMcLeod Bethune Council House NationalHistoric Site, and National Capital Parks-East for distribution. The National ParkService received more than 60 comments inresponse to the first newsletter.

A second newsletter, distributed in April2009, described the draft alternativeconcepts for managing the national historicsite. Copies of this newsletter were madeavailable in a similar manner as the firstnewsletter. This distribution included the94th Association for the Study of AfricanAmerican Life and History AnnualConvention held in Cincinnati, Ohio,September 30–October 4, 2009. At bothannual Association for the Study of AfricanAmerican Life and History conferences, asession was devoted to the National ParkService and the ongoing general manage-ment planning for Carter G. WoodsonHome National Historic Site.

Twenty-one electronic and mailedcomments were received in response to thesecond newsletter. The comments gavepositive feedback on the planning processand the alternatives presented. Of thosecommenting, most people expressed apreference for memorializing Dr. Woodsonat his home, as the setting for the bulk of hisimportant work.

Public scoping meetings were held duringthe Association for the Study of AfricanAmerican Life and History conferences in




114

Birmingham, Alabama, October 1–5, 2008; inCincinnati, Ohio; September 30–October 4,2009; and in Washington, D.C., November 2,2008, at the Thurgood Marshall Center.

Comments collected at these meetings wereused to define the issues in this generalmanagement plan.



115

CONSULTATION WITH ORGANIZATIONS AND OTHERAGENCIES AND OFFICIALS

SECTION 7 CONSULTATION

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service As required by Section 7 of the EndangeredSpecies Act, the National Park Service hascoordinated with the Chesapeake Bay FieldOffice of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serviceduring the preparation of this document. Aletter dated May 29, 2008, from Dr. Mary J.Ratnaswamy, Program Supervisor,Threatened and Endangered Species,

indicates “no proposed or federally listedendangered or threatened species are knownto exist within the project area.” The full textof the letter is reproduced in appendix F. Inaccordance with the Endangered Species Actand relevant regulations in 50 CFR 402, theNational Park Service has determined thatthe actions of the alternatives of this planwould not affect any federally listedthreatened or endangered species since noneare known to exist at the national historicsite.

District of ColumbiaDepartment of the Environment

A copy of this plan will be sent to the wildlifebiologist of the Fisheries and WildlifeDivision of the District of ColumbiaDepartment of the Environment with arequest for written concurrence that noDistrict-listed species would be affected byany actions of the alternatives of this generalmanagement plan. That would include any

District of Columbia rare, threatened, orendangered species at the national historicsite.

District of Columbia Officials

The national historic site superintendentmet informally with representatives from theAdvisory Neighborhood Commission Ward2c on several occasions. The superintendent

also met frequently with the office of Congressional Representative Norton andthe Mayor’s office. The purpose of themeetings was to update the officials on thestatus of the project.

SECTION 106 CONSULTATION

Section 106 of the National HistoricPreservation Act of 1966, as amended (16

USC 470 et seq.) requires that federalagencies with direct or indirect jurisdictionover cultural resources consider the effectsof their undertakings (actions) on resourceslisted or eligible for listing in the NationalRegister of Historic Places. Directionprovided in 36 CFR 800.2 resulted in theNational Park Service starting an informalsection 106 consultation process with theDistrict of Columbia Historic PreservationOffice and the Advisory Council on HistoricPreservation. A letter dated May 2, 2008, wassent to both organizations informing themthe National Park Service was preparing ageneral management plan for the nationalhistoric site. The District of ColumbiaHistoric Preservation Office replied and nocomment was received from the AdvisoryCouncil on Historic Preservation (seeappendix F). Both organizations alsoreceived a copy of the two scopingnewsletters, and the National Park Servicedid not receive any comments from eitherorganization. Both organizations will receivea copy of this general management planduring the 30-day public review andcomment period.

During the planning process for this generalmanagement plan, National Park Servicestaff from the National Capital Parks-Eastgroup and the National Capital RegionalOffice have informally met withrepresentatives from the District of




116

Columbia Historic Preservation Office todiscuss proposed ideas on how the historicstructures would be rehabilitated andrestored for public use as a national historicsite. The District of Columbia Historic

Preservation Office representative(s)provided verbal feedback during theseinformal section 106 consultations. Meetingsat the national historic site took place onSeptember 9, 2009, and January 14, 2011,and included touring inside the buildingsand the backyards. A meeting at the Districtof Columbia Historic Preservation Officeoccurred on November 17, 2009. Theoutcome of these informal consultationsresulted in both the National Park Serviceand District of Columbia Historic

Preservation Office having a better under-standing of the overall proposed actions tothe historic structures and what effect theseactions would have on the building asprescribed under section 106.

Because this General Management Plan / Environmental Assessment / InterpretationPlan purposefully does not include enoughdetail about how the historic buildingswould be rehabilitated and restored, onlyinformal section 106 consultation has takenplace with the District of Columbia Historic

Preservation Office and the AdvisoryCouncil on Historic Preservation. After thisgeneral management plan has been finalized,design and construction drawings detailinghow the historic structures would be

rehabilitated and restored would beprepared. The superintendent would usethese drawings and associated details toenter into formal consultation under section106 with the District of Columbia HistoricPreservation Office and Advisory Council onHistoric Preservation.

AMERICAN INDIAN CONSULTATION

The National Historic Preservation Act and36 CFR 800.2 require the National Park

Service to formally consult with federallyrecognized American Indian tribestraditionally associated with a parkregarding actions that could impactresources and values. Because there are nofederally recognized American Indian tribestraditionally associated with theWashington, D.C., area, formal consultationfor this General Management Plan / Environmental Assessment / InterpretationPlan was not necessary.



117

AGENCIES, ORGANIZATIONS, AND INDIVIDUALSRECEIVING A COPY OF THIS DOCUMENT

FEDERAL AGENCIES AND OFFICIALS

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation

Chesapeake Bay Program Office

Frederick Douglass National Historic Site

Library of Congress

Mary McLeod Bethune Council HouseNational Historic Site

National Archives and RecordsAdministration

National Park ServiceNational Capital Parks-East

Natural Resource Conservation Service

U.S. Department of Agriculture

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

CONGRESSIONAL REPRESENTATIVES

Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton,Representative to Congress

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AGENCIESAND OFFICIALS

Advisory Neighborhood Commission Ward2c

City of Washington Archeologist RuthTrocolli

Community Outreach Coordinator PatsyFletcher

District of Columbia City Council Members

District of Columbia Department of theEnvironment

District of Columbia Department of Transportation

District of Columbia Office of Planning

District of Columbia Preservation League

District of Columbia State HistoricPreservation Officer

District of Columbia State HistoricPreservation Office, Senior HistoricPreservation Specialist Andrew Lewis

ORGANIZATIONS AND BUSINESSES

African American Experience Fund Trustees

American University

Association for the Study of AfricanAmerican Life and History

Catholic University

The George Washington University

Georgetown University

Howard University

Martin Luther King Jr. Foundation

National Association for the Advancementof Colored People

National Council of Negro Women

National Park Foundation

National Parks and ConservationAssociation

National Trust for Historic Preservation

National Urban League

Omega Psi Phi Fraternity, Inc.

Phyllis Wheatley YWCA

Shaw Main Streets

Shaw Neighborhood Association

Shiloh Baptist Church

Smithsonian Institution (AnacostiaCommunity Museum and NationalMuseum of African American Historyand Culture)

University of the District of Columbia





119

CHAPTER SIX:CARTER G. WOODSON HOME

NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE INTERPRETATION PLAN



120



121

INTERPRETATION PLANNOVEMBER 2009

Prepared by

Department of Interpretive PlanningHarpers Ferry Design Center

and the Staff and Partners of


National Capital Parks – East

and the National Capital Regional Office

Carter G. Woodson Home

National Historic Site



122



123

INTRODUCTION

Interpretation and education are primaryduties of the National Park Service, essentialto achieving the mission of protecting andpreserving our nation’s natural and culturalresources. Carter G. Woodson HomeNational Historic Site is part of a nationalpark system where people and organizationscollaborate on teaching and learning aboutthe interconnections of human culture andnature, natural systems, the values of America’s diverse heritage, and theprinciples of democracy. Parks provide the

setting for unique and powerful individualexperiences, including opportunities forsolitude, recreational activities, and scientificinquiry, which help shape understandingand inspire personal values.

This Interpretation Plan for Carter G.Woodson Home National Historic Site wascreated in 2009 in conjunction with thedevelopment of the site’s generalmanagement plan. It builds upon and

incorporates elements of the foundationstatement described in chapter one. Itdescribes visitor experience goals, andsuggests ways to achieve those goals throughinterpretive media, educational programs,and personal services.

The goal of this plan is to present aframework from which a complete long-range interpretation plan can be created inthe near future, with input from a variety of park partners and stakeholders. The long-

range interpretation plan is the keystone of the comprehensive interpretation plan (CIP)and is a required planning document forsites within the national park system. Oncecreated and approved, the park staff shouldpursue implementation of the long rangeinterpretive plan through a series of annualimplementation plans. Throughout thecomprehensive interpretive plan process, thepark staff should also compile and maintainthe park's interpretation database.



124

FOUNDATIONS

PURPOSEThe national historic site’s purpose is thespecific reason the national historic site wasestablished as a unit of the national parksystem. Statements of purpose are groundedin the national historic site’s legislation andlegislative history, including studies prior toauthorization and shared assumptions aboutwhat the law means in terms specific to thenational historic site.

In the original bill presented by

Representative Eleanor Holmes Norton toestablish Carter G. Woodson HomeNational Historic Site, the purpose of thenational historic site is described as follows:

“To preserve, protect, and interpretfor the benefit, education, andinspiration of present and futuregenerations the home [and legacy]of the preeminent historian andeducator Dr. Carter G. Woodson,founder of the organization known

today as the Association for theStudy of African American Life andHistory.” (2003 H.R. 1012, 108 H.R.1012)

Note: The discussion in the congressionalrecord focuses on Dr. Woodson’s legacy, notthe house, so “and legacy” has been insertedabove explicitly in the purpose statement.Congressional Record—House, Vol. 149,No. 72.

SIGNIFICANCE

Significance statements express why thenational historic site’s resources and valuesare important enough to warrant nationalpark system designation. These statementsare directly related to the national historicsite’s purpose, are substantiated by data orconsensus, and reflect the most current

scientific or scholarly inquiry and culturalperceptions, which could have changedsince the national historic site’sestablishment. Significance statements donot inventory resources; rather, theydescribe the national historic site’sdistinctiveness and help to place the nationalhistoric site within its regional, national, andinternational contexts. Defining the nationalhistoric site’s significance helps managersmake decisions that preserve the resourcesand values necessary to accomplish thenational historic site’s purpose. The historicsite’s significance statements include

The Dr. Carter G. Woodson Home washis residence from its purchase in 1922until his death in 1950 and served as thebase for his pioneering work in studyingAfrican American history and thegroundbreaking publications heproduced.

In 1915, Dr. Carter G. Woodsonfounded the Association for the Studyof Negro Life and History, now the

Association for the Study of AfricanAmerican Life and History, and in 1920,he established Associated Publishers.

Because he was a leader, Dr. Woodson’shome was an important communityfocus for the interaction of AfricanAmericans of diverse trades,professions, and economicbackgrounds; Dr. Woodson bothlearned from and taught these manypeople, spreading appreciation for

African American history through thisnation and beyond.

Dr. Woodson founded Negro HistoryWeek (Now Black History Month) thatcontinues to have broad impact acrossAmerica and the world.

Dr. Woodson initiated programs of scholarly research and education



Foundations

125

designed to reach both the academiccommunity and a general audience.

PRIMARY INTERPRETIVE THEMES

Interpretive themes convey parksignificance. Primary interpretive themes arethe key ideas through which the park’snationally significant resource values areconveyed to the public. They connect parkresources to the larger ideas, meaning, andvalues of which they are a part. They are thebuilding blocks—the core content—onwhich the interpretive program is based.Each primary theme can connect to anunlimited number of specific stories orsubthemes.

The following interpretive themes are basedon the purpose and significance of Carter G.Woodson Home National Historic Site. Thethemes connect the national historic site’sfundamental resources and values torelevant ideas, meanings, concepts, contexts,and beliefs. These themes support thedesired interpretive outcome, which is toincrease visitor understanding and

appreciation of the site’s resources andencourage stewardship of those resources.

Through decades of struggles andtriumphs, Dr. Carter G. Woodson wasdriven to change our understanding of

American history.

Dr. Carter G. Woodson’s scholarlywork, organizational vision, andentrepreneurial spirit have impacted abroad spectrum of society.

A visionary, Dr. Woodson devoted hislife not just to education, but toinfluencing the content of our nation’seducational curricula.

The house served as a resource for theAfrican American community, and

provides contemporary visitors atangible link to Dr. Woodson, his socialfocus, and his cultural legacy.

A realist, Dr. Woodson recognized thathe could not accomplish his visions of American history without theparticipation of others throughorganization



126

VISITOR EXPERIENCE—VISIONS FOR INTERPRETATION

Stepping outside the comfort zone of mainstream delivery methods and messages(as Dr. Woodson did), Carter G. WoodsonHome National Historic Site would providean interactive experience using innovativetechnologies and universal design (meetingAmerican with Disabilities Act standards) tocreate distinctive opportunities for visitorsto become engaged in the life, organizationalwork, and contributions of Carter G.Woodson. Opportunities for outstandingand new experiences at the site would be

such that visitors would return with otherson multiple visits.

Through a compelling message of invitationand by developing a reputation for inventiveexcellence, Carter G. Woodson Homewould become a premier destination forvisitors, and a springboard for Shawcommunity revitalization.

Carter G. Woodson Home National HistoricSite would be a place that attracts, engages,educates, and inspires a multicultural anddiverse audience to develop a sense of prideon a personal level, pride in themselves andtheir ancestors, and, on a larger scale, pridein this country and its history.

The site would provide an educationalexperience around Woodson as a scholarand an institution builder that would inspirevisitors to appreciate the impact of his workand vision during his lifetime and beyond,and would motivate them to share the workof Dr. Woodson and the Association for theStudy of African American Life and History(ASALH).

Through interpretation of how Dr.Woodson’s focus, determination, and

dedication transformed this nation, Dr.Woodson and Association for the Study of African American Life and History wouldbecome “household” names, and visitorswould be inspired to continue his legacy.

Interpretation of the Woodson home wouldadd to the rich context of African Americanintellectual life and activism within the cityof Washington as represented by the MaryMcLeod Bethune Council House NationalHistoric Site, the Frederick DouglassNational Historic Site, the African AmericanCivil War Memorial and Museum, and theinterpretive trails developed throughout thecity.



127

VISITOR EXPERIENCE GOALS RELATED TO PRIMARYINTERPRETIVE THEMES

Through decades of struggles andtriumphs, Dr. Carter G. Woodson wasdriven to change our understanding of American history.

Knowledge: Visitors would have theopportunity to

Learn about Dr. Woodson’s youth andeducation

Think about the role of race and racismin historic and contemporary United

States Make a connection between Dr.

Woodson’s life challenges and theirown

Understand how Dr. Woodson’s earlylife influenced his character

Learn about the beginning of theAfrican American history movementand multiculturalism

Understand Dr. Woodson’s messagethat mainstream American history is nota separate and collateral developmentto African American history, but thatmainstream American history isinextricably linked to the dynamics of African American life and history

Learn about how knowledge of the pastis obtained and transmitted, and howDr. Woodson’s work in historiographyexamined authorship, sources,interpretation, style, and bias tocontribute to a more correct

historiography of this country Understand the widespread ignorance

and scanty information available beforeDr. Woodson’s work in research andoutreach

Attitude: Visitors would have theopportunity to

Appreciate the social and racial climateof Dr. Woodson’s era

Be inspired by how a person canaccomplish great things with so verylittle, as exemplified by Dr. Woodson’ssingle-minded focus on his work

Be affected by Dr. Woodson’s courageand scholarship

Behavior: Visitors would have theopportunity to

See examples of the racistmisinformation and propaganda thatDr. Woodson identified in scholarlybooks and articles

Practice and develop their own skills of discernment by searching today’spublications for examples of misinformation and propaganda

Sensory: Visitors would have theopportunity to

Be accosted by racist propaganda and Jim Crow, as a way to understand whatdrove Dr. Woodson’s work

Listen to period radio broadcastsfeaturing relevant programming

Dr. Carter G. Woodson’s scholarly workand entrepreneurial spirit have impacts

across a broad spectrum of society.


Learn the process of the developmentof scholarship, as exemplified by Dr.Woodson’s work

Realize the pioneering nature of Dr.Woodson’s ASALH work




128

Learn about similar programs of research

Learn about other African Americansites in the National Park System

Think about the overriding issues thatDr. Woodson wanted to address,sometimes through articles publishedunder pseudonyms

Understand why Dr. Woodson stoppedaccepting grants as an effort to maintainindependence

Learn about Dr. Woodson’sinternational activities, including travel,lecturing, study, and his publishing of foreign scholars’ writings

Learn about Dr. Woodson’s promotionof the rich intellectual and creativelegacy of African Americans

Understand the role of Dr. Woodson inthe creation of greater AfricanAmerican identity and community

Realize the importance of systematicstudy of African American history andculture

Learn about the publishing business Dr.Woodson conducted in the house and

the mailing operation that sentpublications on African Americanhistory throughout the nation


Thrill in seeing Dr. Woodson’s originalhandwritten documents

Feel that Dr. Woodson’s work isrelevant to their own lives

Feel welcome and “fit in” even if they

are not of African American lineage,and/or do not know anything of thestory

Feel that they have “come home” to aplace of respect for African Americans


Type on a typewriter similar to Dr.Woodson’s

Have an intelligent conversation with ascholar and subject matter expert

View historical footage of Dr.Woodson’s era that illustrates racistmisinformation and misrepresentation


Handle reproduction manuscripts orletters

See samples of Dr. Woodson’s

handwriting Smell and see shelves full of books

A visionary, Dr. Woodson devoted his lifenot just to education, but to influencingthe content of our nation’s educationalcurricula.


Learn the origins of Association for theStudy of African American Life andHistory and its affiliated resources, andAssociation for the Study of AfricanAmerican Life and History’s continuingeducational role in dissemination of information on African American lifeand history, as exemplified by Dr.Woodson’s research

Learn about the preponderance of ignorance and racist propagandaimbedded in educational materials of

Dr. Woodson’s era

Learn to recognize “voice” in media,and to discern differences in voiceacross perspectives, international lines,and eras

Learn about Dr. Woodson’s work as ateacher and educator



Visitor Experience Goals Related to Primary Interpretive Themes

129

Learn about Dr. Woodson’s role as acommunity leader

Learn about Dr. Woodson’s efforts tomentor the next generation


Feel inspired by Dr. Woodson’sdedication to a cause

Reflect on their own education, and thepossibility of their own mis-education


Participate in onsite curriculum-basededucation programs, and find adequatespace, facilities, and instructors at thesite

Participate in a Junior Ranger programthat features activities specific to Dr.Woodson’s work

See contemporary students learning

Read quotes and passages from Dr.Woodson’s writings on education (andmis-education)

Electronically access collections that

are housed at the Carter G. WoodsonCollection of the Library of Congress,and at the Carter G. Woodson Libraryof the Archives, Manuscripts, and RareBook Library of the main Woodruff Library of Emory University in Atlanta

Electronically access a databaseinventory of Dr. Woodson’s work andcollections, searchable by words andthemes

Disseminate and receive information

using contemporary technology, as Dr.Woodson did


Hear Dr. Woodson’s writings spoken

See examples of educational materialsfrom Dr. Woodson’s era that illustratethe presence of racist propaganda

Experience aspects of Jim Crowthrough visual cues (such as signs forseparate water fountains), or hearingrelevant recordings (such as courtverdicts)

The house served as a resource for theAfrican American community, andprovides contemporary visitors a tangiblelink to Dr. Woodson, his social focus, andhis cultural legacy.


Be provided with information beforetheir visit including directions, how to

arrange a visit for a large group, sitehours, and what to expect

Learn how Carter G. Woodson Homenational historic site fits into the largernational park system

Learn about the architectural elementsand features of Victorian Italianate stylerow houses

Learn about the many people whoworked with, were influenced by, andinfluenced Dr. Woodson


Feel that they are in a shrine

Feel intimacy of being in Dr.Woodson’s private home and workspaces

Feel dignity for themselves, their fellowcitizens, and for our country’s AfricanAmerican ancestors

Develop a sense of stewardship for thissite and others

Feel a sense of connectedness to theNational Park Service mission

Feel the historical richness of the Shawcommunity

Imagine themselves in Dr. Woodson’stime period and circumstances and ask




130

themselves, “How would I feel; howwould I react?”


Use a site “Community Room” forneighborhood and scholarly functions

Contribute to a wall or other spacededicated to the contemporary Shawcommunity

Converse with subject matter experts,researchers, local and non-localvisitors, and historians

Encounter well-informed, professionalstaff

Purchase educational, reproduction,and souvenir items at site sales outlet

Find convenient parking

Find accessible and clearly understoodinformation

Locate other businesses in thecommunity to meet their needs

Help preserve the physical resources of Dr. Woodson’s home and community

Interact with engaging, understandable

exhibits Find a welcome through adequate

facilities

Get their National Park Servicepassport stamped

Pose for a souvenir photograph in oneof Dr. Woodson’s “scholarly” settings

Find complementary experiencesbetween the new Smithsonian Museumof African American Experience andCulture and Carter G. Woodson HomeNational Historical Site

Tour the Shaw community to learn of Dr. Woodson’s life and relations there


See primary resources, includingdocuments, manuscripts, andpublications

View a film of historian Dr. John HopeFranklin talking about Dr. Woodson

Hear oral histories from people whohave had contact with Dr. Woodson

Listen to radio programming from the Jim Crow era

View film from the Jim Crow era

View footage from 1915 Birth of aNation

Listen to sounds of the Shawneighborhood during the period of significance

Hear sounds of the row house utilitiesduring the period of significance. Thiscould include phone rings, typewriters,steam radiators, etc.

See the house as it might have lookedduring Dr. Woodson’s residency

See representations of the appropriatevolumes and manuscripts as they filled

Dr. Woodson’s workspaces Feel themselves in the narrow spaces of

the row house

Sense the pressing overload of workand business that took place in thehouse

Smell and see the musty basement areaof the house

Listen to appropriate period music

Have a virtual YWCA lunch experience

A realist, Dr. Woodson recognized that hecould not accomplish his visions of American history without theparticipation of others throughorganization.



Visitor Experience Goals Related to Primary Interpretive Themes

131


Learn the history of Association for theStudy of African American Life andHistory

Learn about the current work of Association for the Study of AfricanAmerican Life and History

Learn how to add their research to thecurrent work of Association for theStudy of African American Life andHistory and its affiliated resources

Learn about Dr. Woodson’s leadershipin the documentation of local historythrough Association for the Study of African American Life and History

branches and how to add to theseefforts

Learn about the creation of NegroHistory Week, its evolution to BlackHistory Month, and continuing effortsto spread appreciation for AfricanAmerican history through this nationand beyond

Recognize how the “month of remembrance” concept has spread tocommemoration of other cultures

Understand the importance of organization and institution building, asexemplified by Dr. Woodson’s work

Learn about the early publishingprocess, as used by Dr. Woodson

Understand why Dr. Woodson gotinvolved in publishing

Learn about the Associated Publishers

Put Dr. Woodson in the context of other African Americans who have

contributed to the formation of thisnation’s history and culture

Understand Dr. Woodson’s focus onthe need for the results of research andscholarship to reach the masses


Feel that they can be part of Dr.Woodson’s outreach efforts

Feel that their voice is important and isheard

Feel they can add to current and futureresearch efforts of Association for theStudy of African American Life andHistory, its affiliated resources, andothers

Feel “at home” with other Associationfor the Study of African American Lifeand History members

Feel compelled to check their own

language and behavior for perpetuationof racism

Be inspired to recognize racistpropaganda in contemporary media

Value and respect themselves, as well ascontemporary and past AfricanAmericans


Volunteer at/for Carter G. Woodson

Home National Historic Site Volunteer for Association for the Study

of African American Life and History

Join Association for the Study of African American Life and History

Participate in inter-generationalconversations with other Associationfor the Study of African American Lifeand History members

Support the legacy of Dr. Woodsonthrough political action

Support the legacy of Dr. Woodsonthrough media articles and comments

Voice their concerns and enthusiasms

Participate in the theme of the currentyear’s Black History Month




132


Feel the intensity of being in the centerof operations for Dr. Woodson’sbusiness

Smell the scents associated with aprinting operation, such as newsprintand ink

Handle reproduction publications

View original publications on display

Hear the sounds of work, such as thatproduced by vintage typewriters,

doorbell, telephone, and officeconversation



133

PARTNERSHIPS

Success of the site would rely onpartnerships with professionalorganizations, educational institutions, andother D.C. sites. These could include:

Advisory Neighborhood CommissionWard 2c

African American Heritage Trail of Washington, D.C.

Association for the Study of AfricanAmerican Life and History

Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton,Representative to Congress

Convention Center, airports, and othervisitor portals

D.C. Office of Cultural Tourism

D.C. Historic Preservation Office

D.C. Office of Planning

D.C. Historic Preservation Office SeniorHistoric Preservation Specialist AndrewLewis

Historically Black College and Universities

Howard UniversityMary McLeod Bethune Council HouseNational Historic Site

Moorland-Spingarn Research Center atHoward University

National Association for the Advancementof Colored People

National Council for Black Studies

National Council of Negro Women

National Pan-Hellenic Council

National Park Foundation

National Park Service sites in D.C.

National Park Service sites that deal withthe same period in American History

National Parks and ConservationAssociation

National Trust for Historic Preservation

National Urban League

Phyllis Wheatley Club YWCA

Schomburg Center for Research in BlackCulture

Shaw Heritage Trail

Shaw Main Street

Shiloh Baptist Church

Smithsonian Museum for AfricanAmerican History and Culture (not yet

open)U Street corridor businesses

Visitors Bureaus for Maryland, Virginia,and D.C.



134

ELEMENTS OF VISITOR EXPERIENCE

Invitation: Where and how can visitors beinvited to the park?

Electronic media:Park website

Websites of other National ParkService sites

Association for the Study of AfricanAmerican Life and History websiteand e-newsletters

Other partners’ websites and e-newsletters

Use of new technology, i.e., socialnetworking sites and culturalbloggers’ sites

Exhibits:Airport exhibit

Exhibit at Smithsonian NationalMuseum for African AmericanHistory and Culture

Panels created for Metro buses andtrains

Panels created for Amtrak trains

Panels created for other local sites

Exhibit at Convention Center

Exhibits created for neighborhoodlibraries and public schools

Media:Get President Obama to announceopening in a special proclamation

Travel/feature articles

Press releasesTelevision

National Public Radio

Include site in Black History Monthoutreach

Partners:Association for the Study of AfricanAmerican Life and History mailings

Send information out withAssociation for the Study of AfricanAmerican Life and Historyconference and luncheonpromotions

Convention and Visitors Bureaus forMaryland, Virginia, and D.C.

Other websites

Local businesses

Taxi drivers

Include site in Shaw Main Street tour

Personal Services:Through friends’ referrals

Tour guides for other local sites andtours

From previous visits

Outreach programs

Off-site curriculum-based education

programsInquiries to park (telephone, written,and email communications to thesite)

Publications:Direct mailings

Newsletters

Passport books

Update site information in theAfrican American Heritage Trail

guideFlyers handed out at street cornersannouncing opening

Something to be distributed byhotels



135

APPENDIXES, REFERENCES, PREPARERS ANDCONSULTANTS



136



137

APPENDIX A: LEGISLATION – CARTER G. WOODSON HOMENATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

PUBLIC LAW 108–192—DEC. 19, 2003117 STAT. 2873

Public Law 108–192108th Congress

An Act

To establish the Carter G. Woodson Home National Historic Site in the District of Columbia, andfor other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America inCongress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the "Carter G. Woodson Home National Historic Site Act".

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

As used in this Act:(1) CARTER G. WOODSON HOME.—The term "Carter G. Woodson Home" means the

property located at 1538 9th Street, Northwest, in the District of Columbia, as depicted on themap.

(2) HISTORIC SITE.—The term "historic site" means the Carter G. Woodson Home NationalHistoric Site.

(3) MAP.—The term "map" means the map entitled "Carter G. Woodson Home NationalHistoric Site", numbered 876/82338–A and dated July 22, 2003.

(4) SECRETARY.—The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of the Interior.

SEC. 3. CARTER G. WOODSON HOME NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE.

(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—Upon acquisition by the Secretary of the Carter G. Woodson Home,or interests therein, the Secretary shall establish the historic site as a unit of the National Park

System by publication of a notice to that effect in the Federal Register.

(b) ADDITIONS TO HISTORIC SITE.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may acquire any of the 3 properties immediately north of the Carter G. Woodson Home located at 1540, 1542, and 1544 9th Street, Northwest, describedon the map as "Potential Additions to National Historic Site", for addition to the historic site.

(2) BOUNDARY REVISION.—Upon the acquisition of any of the properties described inparagraph (1), the Secretary shall revise the boundaries of the historic site to include the property.



APPENDIXES, REFERENCES, PREPARERS AND CONSULTANTS

138

(c) AVAILABILITY OF MAP.—The map shall be available for public inspection in theappropriate offices of the National Park Service, Department of the Interior.

(d) ACQUISITION AUTHORITY.—The Secretary may acquire the Carter G. Woodson Home

or any of the properties described in subsection (b)(1), including interests therein, and anyimprovements to the land by donation, purchase from a willing seller with donated orappropriated funds, or exchange.

(e) ADMINISTRATION.—(1) The Secretary shall administer the historic site in accordancewith this Act and with laws generally applicable to units of the National Park System, includingthe Act of August 25, 1916 (16 U.S.C. 1, 2–4) and the Act of August 21, 1935 (16 U.S.C. 461 et seq.).

(2) GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN.—The Secretary shall prepare a general managementplan for the historic site not later than three years after the date on which funds are madeavailable for that purpose.

SEC. 4. COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS.

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may enter into cooperative agreements with public orprivate entities to provide public interpretation and education of African-American heritage inthe Shaw area of the District of Columbia.

(b) REHABILITATION.—In order to achieve cost efficiencies in the restoration of propertieswithin the historic site, the Secretary may enter into an agreement with public or private entitiesto restore and rehabilitate the Carter G. Woodson Home and other properties within theboundary of the historic site, subject to such terms and conditions as the Secretary deemsnecessary.

(c) AGREEMENT WITH THE ASSOCIATION FOR THE STUDY OF AFRICAN-AMERICAN LIFE AND HISTORY.—In order to reestablish the historical connection betweenthe Carter G. Woodson Home and the association Dr. Woodson founded, and to facilitateinterpretation of Dr. Woodson’s achievements, the Secretary may enter into an agreement withThe Association for the Study of African-American Life and History that allows the association touse a portion of the historic site for its own administrative purposes. Such agreement shall ensurethat the association’s use of a portion of the historic site is consistent with the administration of the historic site, including appropriate public access and rent, and such other terms andconditions as the Secretary deems necessary.

SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out this Act.

Approved December 19, 2003.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 1012:SENATE REPORTS: No. 108–138 (Comm. on Energy and Natural Resources).CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 149 (2003):

May 14, considered and passed House.Nov. 24, considered and passed Senate, amended.Dec. 8, House concurred in Senate amendment.



139

APPENDIX B: FEDERAL LAWS, REGULATIONS, AND POLICIES

In developing the General Management Plan/ Environmental Assessment/ InterpretationPlan for the Carter G. Woodson HomeNational Historic Site, the National ParkService would follow all applicableregulations, laws, policies, and executiveorders. A list of those relevant to thisplanning effort follows.

LEGISLATION

National Environmental Policy Act of1969, as amended, (NEPA)

This act is the basic national charter for theprotection of the environment. It establishespolicy, sets goals, and provides means forcarrying out the policy. Section 102(2)contains “action-forcing” provisions tomake sure that federal agencies actaccording to the letter and spirit of the act.NEPA procedures must ensure thatenvironmental information is available topublic officials and citizens before decisions

are made and before actions are taken.Accurate scientific analysis, expert agencycomments, and public scrutiny are essentialto implementing NEPA procedures. Mostimportant, NEPA documents mustconcentrate on the issues that are trulysignificant to the action in question. NEPA’sgoal is better decisions.

Endangered Species Act of 1973, asamended (PL 93-205; 87 Stat. 884)

The Congress found and declared that“various species of fish, wildlife, and plantsin the United States have been renderedextinct as a consequence of economicgrowth and development untempered byadequate concern and conservation; otherspecies of fish, wildlife, and plants have beenso depleted in numbers that they are indanger of or threatened with extinction;these species of fish, wildlife and plants are

of aesthetic, ecological, educational,historical, recreational, and scientific valueto the nation and its people; the UnitedStates has pledged itself to conserve to theextent practicable the various species of fishor wildlife or plants facing extinction . . . .”

Clean Air Act, as amended (PL 360; 69Stat 322; 42 USC 7401 et seq.)

The main purpose of this act is to protectand enhance the nation’s air quality to

promote the public health and welfare. Theact establishes specific programs thatprovide special protection of air resourcesand air quality related values (AQRVs)associated with National Park Service units.For example sections 160–169 of the actestablish a program to prevent significantdeterioration of air quality in clean airregions of the country.

American Indian Religious Freedom Act(PL 95-341; 92 Stat. 469; 42 USC §1996)

This act declares policy to protect andpreserve the inherent and constitutionalright of the American Indian, Eskimo, Aleut,and Native Hawaiian people to believe,express, and exercise their traditionalreligions. It also calls for a now-completedevaluation of federal procedures,programmatic objectives, and policies.Statute imposes no specific proceduralduties on federal agencies. Religiousconcerns should be accommodated oraddressed under the National

Environmental Protection Act or otherappropriate statutes.

Antiquities Act of 1906 (PL 59-209; 34Stat. 225; 16 USC §432 and43 CFR 3)

This act provides for the protection of historic or prehistoric remains, “or anyantiquity” on federal lands, establishes




140

criminal sanctions for the unauthorizeddestruction or taking of antiquities,authorizes the president to declare nationalmonuments by public proclamation, andauthorizes the scientific investigation of

antiquities on federal lands, subject topermit and regulations. The law alsoprotects historic monuments and ruins onpublic lands. The National Park Service doesnot have to seek permits for activities carriedout on National Park Service land byauthorized personnel. The ArcheologicalResources Protection Act (1979) supersededthe Antiquities Act as an alternative federaltool for prosecuting antiquities violations inNational Park Service areas.

Archaeological and HistoricPreservation Act of 1974 (PL 93-291; 88Stat. 174; 16 USC §469)

This act amends and updates the ReservoirSalvage Act of 1960 to broaden legislationbeyond dam construction. Provides for thepreservation of significant scientific,prehistoric, historic, or archeological data(including relics and specimens) that mightbe lost or destroyed as a result of (1) theconstruction of dams, reservoirs, andattendant facilities, or (2) any alteration of

the terrain caused as a result of any federalconstruction project or federally licensedproject, activity, or program. It also providesfor the recovery of data from areas to beaffected by federal actions.

Archaeological Resources Protection Actof 1979 (PL 96-95, 93 Stat. 712,16, USC§470aa et seq., and 43 CFR 7, subparts Aand B, 36 CFR 79)

This act secures the protection of

archeological resources on public or Indianlands and fosters increased cooperation andthe exchange of information between theprivate, governmental, and professionalcommunity to facilitate the enjoyment andeducation of present and future generations.The law regulates excavation and collectionon public and Indian lands. It also definesarcheological resources to be any materialremains of past human life or activities that

are of archeological interest and are at least100 years old. The law requires that Indiantribes that may consider a site of religious orcultural importance be notified before apermit is issued. It was amended in 1988 to

require the development of plans forsurveying public lands for archeologicalresources and systems for reportingincidents of suspected violations.

Historic Sites Act of 1935 (PL 49; Stat.666,16 USC sections 461–467, and 36CFR 65)

This act establishes “ . . . national policy topreserve for public use historic sites,buildings and objects of significance for theinspiration and benefit of the people of the

United States.” It directs the secretary of theinterior to carry out wide-ranging programsin the field of history and places with thesecretary the responsibility for nationalleadership in the field of historicpreservation. It authorizes the HistoricAmerican Buildings Survey, HistoricAmerican Engineering Record, and NationalSurvey of Historic Sites and Buildings(national historic landmarks).

Management of Museum Properties Act

of 1955 (PL 84-127, 69 Stat. 242, 16 USC§18f)

This act authorizes the National Park Serviceto accept donations or bequests of museumproperties, purchase them from donatedfunds, exchange them, and receive and grantmuseum loans.

National Historic Preservation Act of1966 (NHPA), as amended (PL 89-665, 80Stat. 915,16 USC §470, et seq. and 36

CFR 18, 60, 61, 63, 68, 79, 800)This act declared a national policy of historicpreservation, including the encouragementof preservation on the state and privatelevels. It authorized the secretary of theinterior to expand and maintain a NationalRegister of Historic Places, includingproperties of state and local as well asnational significance, authorized matching



Appendix B: Federal Laws, Regulations, and Policies

141

federal grants to the states and the NationalTrust for Historic Preservation for surveysand planning and for acquiring anddeveloping national register properties,established the Advisory Council on Historic

Preservation (ACHP), required federalagencies to consider the effects of theirundertakings on national register propertiesand to give the ACHP staff opportunities tocomment (§106). Amended in 1976 (PL 94-422) to expand §106 to properties eligible foror listed in the national register. Amended in1980 (PL 96-515) to incorporate EO 11593requirements, to give national historiclandmarks extra protection in federalproject planning, and to permit federalagencies to lease historic properties and

apply the proceeds to any national registerproperties under their administration.Amended in 1992 to, among other things,redefine federal undertakings, address“anticipatory demolition,” and emphasizethe interests and involvement of AmericanIndians and Native Hawaiians.

Native American Graves Protection andRepatriation Act (PL 101-601, 104 Stat.3049, 25 USC sections 3001–3013)

This act assigns ownership or control of

American Indian human remains, funeraryobjects, sacred objects, and objects of cultural patrimony that are excavated ordiscovered on federal lands or tribal landsafter the passage of the act to linealdescendants or culturally affiliated AmericanIndian groups. It also establishes criminalpenalties for trafficking in remains or objectsobtained in violation of the act and providesthat federal agencies and museums thatreceive federal funding shall inventoryAmerican Indian human remains and

associated funerary objects in theirpossession or control, identify their culturaland geographical affiliations within fiveyears, and prepare summaries of informationabout American Indian unassociatedfunerary objects, sacred objects, or objectsof cultural patrimony. This is to provide forthe repatriation of such items when linealdescendants or American Indian groupsrequest it.

Architectural Barriers Act of 1968,Rehabilitation Act of 1973, andAmericans with Disabilities Act of 1990

In keeping with the intent of these laws, allNational Park Service structures must be

accessible to all Americans to the greatestdegree possible.

Executive Order 11998, “FloodplainManagement,” Special Directive 93-4,“Floodplain Management, RevisedGuidelines for National Park ServiceFloodplain Compliance” (1993)

Natural floodplain values would bepreserved or restored. Long-term and short-term environmental effects associated with

the occupancy and modification of floodplains would be avoided. When it is notpracticable to locate or relocatedevelopment or inappropriate humanactivities to a site outside the floodplain, orwhere the floodplain would not be affected,the National Park Service would prepare astatement of findings according to Director’sOrder 77-2.

Executive Order 11990, “WetlandProtection,” Director’s Order 77-1,

“Wetland Protection,” and ProceduralManual 77-1

The National Park Service is required toprotect and enhance the natural andbeneficial values of wetlands. It hasimplemented a “no net loss of wetlands”policy and strives to achieve the longer-termgoal of net gain of wetlands through therestoration of previously degraded ordestroyed wetlands.

Executive Order 12898, “Federal Actions

to Address Environmental Justice inMinority Populations and Low-incomePopulations”

Each federal agency will make achievingenvironmental justice part of its mission byidentifying and addressing, as appropriate,disproportionately high and adverse humanhealth or environmental effects of itsprograms, policies, and activities on minority




142

populations and low-income populations inthe United States and its territories andpossessions.

CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS

43 CFR 3 (Antiquities Act)

The act establishes procedures to befollowed for permitting the excavation orcollection of prehistoric and historic objectson federal lands.

43 CFR 7, Subparts A and B(Archaeological ResourcesProtection Act, as amended)

“Protection of Archeological Resources,Uniform Regulations” and “Department of the Interior Supplemental Regulations,”provide definitions, standards, andprocedures for federal land managers toprotect archeological resources andguidance for Department of the Interiorbureaus on definitions, permittingprocedures, and civil penalty hearings.

36 CFR 2.5 (National Park ServiceOrganic Act of 1916)

The act states conditions under which parksuperintendents may permit the collectionof plants, fish, wildlife, rocks, and minerals,including museum catalog requirements.

36 CFR 60 (NHPA and EO 11593)“National Register of Historic Places”

The regulation addresses concurrent stateand federal nominations, nominations byfederal agencies, the revision of nominations, and the removal of properties

from the National Register of HistoricPlaces.

36 CFR 61 (NHPA and EO 11593),“Procedures for Approved State, Tribal,and Local Government HistoricPreservation Programs”

The regulation establishes standards for the

approval of state historic preservationprograms and requires state historicpreservation officers to conduct statewidesurveys of cultural properties, prepare andimplement state preservation plans, andcooperate with federal agencies in §106compliance.

36 CFR 63 (NHPA and EO 11593),“Determinations of Eligibility forinclusion in the National Register ofHistoric Places”

The regulation establishes a process forfederal agencies to obtain determinations of eligibility on properties.

36 CFR 65 (Historic Sites Act of 1935),“National Historic Landmarks Program”

The regulation establishes criteria andprocedures for identifying properties of national significance, designating them asnational historic landmarks, revisinglandmark boundaries, and removing

landmark designations.

36 CFR 68(National Historic Preservation Act)

The regulation contains the “Secretary of theInterior’s Standards for HistoricPreservation Projects,” includingacquisition, protection, stabilization,preservation, rehabilitation, restoration, andreconstruction.

36 CFR Part 79 (NHPA and ARPA),“Curation of Federally Owned andAdministered Archeological Collections”

The regulation provides standards,procedures, and guidelines to be adequatelong-term curatorial services forarcheological collections of prehistoric andhistoric artifacts and associated records thatare recovered under §110 of the NHPA, the



Appendix B: Federal Laws, Regulations, and Policies

143

Reservoir Salvage Act, ARPA, and theAntiquities Act.

36 CFR Part 800 (NHPA), “Protection ofHistoric Properties”

The regulation contains the regulations of the Advisory Council on HistoricPreservation that implement §106 of theNational Historic Preservation Act, asamended, and presidential directives issuedpursuant thereto.

DIRECTIVES

DO-24: Museum CollectionsManagement

This Director’s Order ensures that NPSmanagers and staff have information on thestandards and actions for successfully andethically complying with NPS managementpolicies on museum collections and providesa means of measuring and evaluatingprogress in preserving, protecting,documenting, accessing, and using museumcollections.

DO-28:Cultural Resource Management

Guideline (Release No. 5, 1997)The National Park Service will protect andmanage cultural resources in its custodythrough effective research, planning, andstewardship and in accordance with thepolicies and principles contained in theNational Park Service Management Policies.

DO-75A:Civic Engagement and Public Involvement

The purpose of this Director’s Order is to

articulate our [National Park Service]commitment to civic engagement, and tohave all National Park Service units and

offices embrace civic engagement as theessential foundation and framework forcreating plans and developing programs.Civic engagement is a continuous, dynamicconversation with the public on many levels

that reinforces public commitment to thepreservation of heritage resources, bothcultural and natural, and strengthens publicunderstanding of the full meaning andcontemporary relevance of these resources.The foundation of civic engagement is acommitment to building and sustainingrelationships with neighbors andcommunities of interest.

SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S

STANDARDS

Archeology and Historic Preservation:Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines, 48 Federal Register 44716,September 29, 1983.

Interpreting the Secretary of the Interior’sStandards for Rehabilitation, Vols. I, II, andIII. National Park Service.

The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for

the Treatment of Historic Properties withGuidelines for the Preservation,Rehabilitation, Restoration, and Reconstruction of Historic Buildings,1995.

Pamphlet: National Park Service, Cultural Resources, Preservation Assistance, 1992.

The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards forthe Treatment of Historic Properties withGuidelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes, National Park Service, Cultural

Resource Stewardship and Partnerships,Heritage Preservation Services, 1996.



144

APPENDIX C: SERVICEWIDE LAWS AND POLICIES ANDDESIRED CONDITIONS

Many management directives are specifiedin laws and policies guiding the NationalPark Service and are, therefore, not subjectto alternative approaches. In other words, ageneral management plan is not needed todecide, for instance, that it is appropriate toprotect endangered species, controlnonnative species, protect historic andarcheological sites, conserve artifacts, orprovide access for persons with disabilities.Laws and policies have already decided

those and many other things for us. Thealternatives considered in this documentincorporate and comply with the provisionsof these mandates and policies. Althoughattaining some of the conditions set forth inthese mandates and policies could have to bedeferred until there is the appropriate levelof funding and staffing available.

To truly understand the implications of analternative, it is important to combine theservicewide mandates and policies with themanagement actions described in analternative. In addition to the nationalhistoric site’s enabling legislation, the lawsand policies explained in the tables belowgovern the management of Carter G.Woodson Home National Historic Site withor without a new general management planin place.

Conditions prescribed by servicewidemandates and policies that are particularlyimportant to this document are summarizedin the tables below.

HISTORIC STRUCTURES

Current laws and policies require the following desired conditions for the resources:

Desired Condition Source

The qualities that contribute to the listingor eligibility for listing of historic structureson the National Register of Historic Placesare protected in accordance with theSecretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation.

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended

36 CFR 800 Advisory Council on Historic PreservationRegulations for the Protection of Historic Properties

Archeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974

The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelinesfor Archeology and Historic Preservation

The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for theTreatment of Historic Properties

The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for theTreatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for theTreatment of Cultural Landscapes

Programmatic agreement among the National ParkService, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation,and the National Conference of State HistoricPreservation Officers (2008)

NPS Management Policies 2006

Director’s Order 28 “Cultural Resource ManagementGuideline” (1998)



Appendix C: Servicewide Laws and Policies and Desired Conditions

145

Actions

Current laws and policies require that the National Park Service would need to take the following actionsto meet its legal and policy requirements:

Regularly update/certify the List of Classified Structures.

Update the National Register of Historic Places nomination for the Carter G. Woodson HomeNational Historic Site as new information is learned.

Determine, implement, and maintain the appropriate level of preservation treatment for each historicstructure formally determined or considered eligible for inclusion in the National Register of HistoricPlaces in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of HistoricProperties.

Before modifying any historic structure found eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, theNational Park Service would consult with the District of Columbia Historic Preservation Office and theAdvisory Council for Historic Preservation, as required.

Ensure that preservation practices are in accordance with the National Park Service “Climate FriendlyParks” initiative.

RELATIONS WITH PRIVATE AND PUBLIC ORGANIZATIONS, ADJACENT LANDOWNERS,AND GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

Current laws and policies require that the following conditions be achieved at the national historic site:


The national historic site is managed as part ofa greater ecological, social, economic, andcultural system.

Good relations are maintained with adjacentproperty owners, surrounding neighborhoods

and communities, and private and publicgroups that affect, and are affected by, thenational historic site. The national historic site ismanaged proactively to resolve external issuesand concerns and ensure that park values arenot compromised.

Because the national historic site is an integralpart of a larger regional environment, theNational Park Service works cooperatively withothers to anticipate, avoid, and resolve potentialconflicts, protect national historic site resources,and address mutual interests in the quality oflife for community residents. Such cooperation

involves federal and District of Columbiaagencies, neighboring property owners, and allother concerned parties.


Director’s Order 75A: Civic Engagement and PublicInvolvement

ActionsCurrent laws and policies require that the National Park Service would need to take the following actionsto meet its legal and policy requirements:

Continue to establish and foster partnerships with public and private organizations to achieve themission and purposes of the National Park Service. Partnerships would be sought for resourceprotection, research, education, and visitor enjoyment.




146

To foster a spirit of cooperation with neighbors and encourage compatible adjacent land uses,national historic site staff would keep property owners, District of Columbia government agencies,and the public informed about national historic site management activities. Periodic consultationswould occur with those who might be affected by visitor use and management actions.

SUSTAINABLE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT

Sustainability can be described as the result achieved by managing units of the national park system inways that do not compromise the environment or its capacity to provide for present and futuregenerations. Sustainable practices minimize the short-term and long-term environmental impacts ofdevelopments and other activities through resource conservation, recycling, waste minimization, and theuse of energy-efficient and ecologically responsible materials and techniques.Current laws and policies require that the following conditions be achieved at the national historic site:


National Park Service visitor management

facilities are harmonious with national historicsite resources, compatible with natural processes,aesthetically pleasing, functional, as accessible aspossible to all segments of the population,energy efficient, and cost effective.

All decisions regarding national historic siteoperations, facilities management, anddevelopment reflect principles of resourceconservation. Thus, all national historic sitedevelopments and operations are sustainable tothe maximum degree possible and practicable.New developments and existing facilities arelocated, built, and modified according to the

Guiding Principles of Sustainable Design (NPS1993) or other similar guidelines.


EO 13123,“Greening the Government throughEfficient Energy Management”

EO 13101, “Greening the Government throughWaste Prevention, Recycling, and FederalAcquisition”

NPS Guiding Principles of Sustainable Design*

Director’s Order 13: Environmental Leadership

Director’s Order 90: Value Analysis

“Greening Federal Facilities: An EnergyEnvironmental, and Economic Resource”

“Guide for Federal Facility Managers and

Designers,” 2nd ed.

Director’s Order 90: Value Analysis

*The National Park Service Guiding Principles of Sustainable Design (1993b) directs NPS managementphilosophy. It provides a basis for achieving sustainability in facility planning and design, emphasizes theimportance of biodiversity, and encourages responsible decisions. The guidebook articulates principles tobe used in the design and management of tourist facilities that emphasize environmental sensitivity inconstruction, the use of nontoxic materials, resource conservation, recycling, and integrating visitors withnatural and cultural settings. Sustainability principles have been developed and are followed forinterpretation, natural resources, cultural resources, site design, building design, energy management,water supply, waste prevention, and facility maintenance and operations. The National Park Service alsoreduces energy costs, eliminates waste, and conserves energy resources by using energy-efficient and cost-

effective technology. Energy efficiency is incorporated into the decision-making process during the designand acquisition of buildings, facilities, and transportation systems emphasizing the use of renewableenergy sources.


Have NPS staff work with appropriate experts to make facilities and programs sustainable. Performvalue analysis and value engineering, including life cycle cost analysis, to examine the energy,environmental, and economic implications of proposed developments.



Appendix C: Servicewide Laws and Policies and Desired Conditions

147

Support and encourage suppliers, permittees, and contractors to follow sustainable practices.

Promote the reduction, reuse, and recycling of materials; support the rehabilitation (recycling) ofexisting buildings and facilities over new construction; require new developments or modifications ofexisting facilities to be built using NPS sustainability guidelines.

Ensure that design practices are in accordance with the National Park Service “Climate FriendlyParks” initiative.

TRANSPORTATION TO THE NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

Current laws and policies require that the following conditions by achieved at the national historic site:


Visitors have reasonable access to the nationalhistoric site by way of local and regionaltransportation systems as appropriate toexisting and future conditions.

The National Park Service participates in alltransportation planning forums that couldresult in links to the national historic site oraffect its resources. Working with federal andDistrict of Columbia agencies ontransportation issues, the National Park Serviceseeks reasonable access to parks andconnections to external and alternativetransportation systems.

NPS Transportation Planning Guidebook



Participate with the U.S. Department of Transportation, the Federal Highway Administration, theDistrict of Columbia Department of Transportation and the District of Columbia Office of Planning,and other sources to encourage effective regional and local transportation planning andenhancements.

Encourage, where appropriate, alternative transportation systems that contribute to maximum visitorenjoyment of and minimum adverse impacts on national historic site resources and values.

VISITOR USE

Current laws, regulations, and policies leave considerable room for judgment about the best mix of types

and levels of visitor use activities, programs, and facilities. For this reason, most decisions related to visitoruse are addressed in the alternatives. However, all visitor use of national park system units must beconsistent with the following guidelines.

Desired Conditions Sources

National historic site resources aremaintained “unimpaired” for theenjoyment of future generations.Visitors have opportunities forenjoyment uniquely suited to the

NPS Organic Act of 1916

National Park System General Authorities Act





148

resources of the national historic site.No activities occur that would causederogation of the values and purposesfor which the national historic site wasestablished.

Types and levels of visitor use areconsistent with the desired resourcecondition and desired visitor experienceprescribed for each management zone.

Visitors would have opportunities tounderstand and appreciate thesignificance of the national historic siteand its resources, and to develop apersonal stewardship ethic by directlyrelating to the resources.

To the extent feasible, programs,services, and facilities in the nationalhistoric site are accessible to and usableby all people, including those withdisabilities.

Title 36 Code of Federal Regulations

Architectural Barriers Act Accessibility Standards, 2006

Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990

28 CFR 36

DO-42 Accessibility for Visitors with Disabilities in NPSPrograms, Facilities, and Services

Rehabilitation Act of 1973

43 CFR 17 Subpart E Enforcement of Nondiscrimination onthe Basis of Handicap in Programs or Activities Conductedby the Department of the Interior


Provide a range of opportunities for visitors to understand, appreciate, and enjoy the resources ofthe national historic site.

Continue to monitor visitor comments on such issues as crowding, encounters with other visitors,etc.

Conduct periodic visitor surveys to stay informed of changing visitor demographics and desires tobetter tailor programs to visitor needs, desires, and interests.

Ensure accessibility to all visitors to the extent feasible and consistent with legal and policyrequirements.

Continue to enforce the regulations promulgated in 36 CFR with regard to visitor use limitations.

Ensure that all facilities, programs, and services are designed and implemented in accordance withapplicable rules, regulations, and standards.

Evaluate facilities, programs, activities, and services to determine the degree to which they areaccessible to and usable by people with disabilities; identify barriers that limit access, and developstrategies for removing those barriers.



149

APPENDIX D: COMPLETED STUDIES ANDFUTURE STUDIES NEEDED

INTRODUCTION

The Carter G. Woodson Home NationalHistoric Site is one of the newer additions tothe national park system. In the comingyears, the national historic site would seekfunding to complete several culturalresource studies and interpretation plans. Alist of completed studies and studies to becompleted follows.

COMPLETED STUDIES

Historic Resource Study

A historic resource study (HRS) is theprimary document used to identify andmanage the historic resources in a park. It isthe basis for understanding their significanceand interrelationships, a point of departurefor development of interpretive plans, andthe framework within which additional

research should be initiated. Dr. Pero G.Dagbovie, a noted Woodson scholar,completed a final draft historic resourcestudy in 2010 for the Carter G. WoodsonNational Historic Site. The final version of the study will be printed in 2011.

Historic Structure Report

A historic structure report (HSR) is theprimary guide to treatment and use of ahistoric structure and may also be used inmanaging a prehistoric structure. A historicstructure report for the Woodson home wascompleted in 2008. The report includes thedevelopmental history, physical description,condition assessment, workrecommendations, treatment and use for theWoodson home. The report also maderecommendations for adaptively usingbuildings 1540 and 1542.

STUDIES THAT NEED TO BECOMPLETED

Visitor Use Management Plan

As identified in the alternatives and the usercapacity section, a visitor use managementplan is needed to refine the specificapproach for managing visitor use at the site.The plan would analyze and developstrategies for managing visitor flow andstaging for normal operations and specialevents. The plan would also further identifyapproaches for regulating use levels andmanaging tour operations. As part of thevisitor use management plan, more specificand measurable indicators and standardswould be identified to support long-termmonitoring and protection of desiredconditions.

Ethnographic Overview

and AssessmentThe ethnographic overview reviews andsummarizes existing ethnographic data forpeople and resources associated with parks;the assessment evaluates them and identifiesdata gaps. Information is derived primarilyfrom existing archival and publishedmaterials and is supplemented withethnographic interviewing of knowledgeablecommunity consultants. The data gathered(both written and oral history) woulddocument ethnographic resources and thegroups that traditionally define such culturaland natural resources as significant to theirethnic heritage and cultural viability as itrelates to the national historic site. The parkmay also choose to conduct additionalstudies to document ethnographic historyand resources at the site.




150

African American settlement is associatedwith urban growth as the city of Washingtonwas established and as it developed as thenation’s capital. The seminal relationship of African Americans with the Carter G.

Woodson National Historic Site is wellestablished through the work and legacy of Dr. Woodson and the continuing mission of the organization he founded in 1915 — theAssociation for the Study of AfricanAmerican Life and History.

Archeological Survey

Archaeological investigations can provideevidence of the development, uses, andmodifications of an area over time, such as

the backyards and the ground underneaththe buildings. This information is critical toour understanding of how Dr. Woodson andhis neighbors at the time used the backyardsand how prehistoric people may have usedthe ground beneath the buildings prior totheir construction. Information gatheredduring archeological investigations wouldallow the National Park Service to makesound management decisions on potentialuses for the backyards and whether thebasements of building 1540 and 1542 should

be excavated for additional space. Allsurveys would be documented in a reportthat would be sent to the District of Columbia Historic Preservation Office fortheir review and comment.

Resource Stewardship Strategy

A resource stewardship strategy forCarter G. Woodson Home National HistoricSite would provide the guidance necessaryfor achieving the desired conditions

identified in the general management planand the cultural resources being managed atthe site. Guidance for this strategy will comefrom the Woodson home historic structurereport as well as the interpretation plan,

Historic Furnishings Reportfor the Woodson Home

A historic furnishings report (HFR) providesa history of a structure's use and documents

the type and placement of furnishings to aperiod of interpretive significance. If adecision is made to furnish a historicstructure, a detailed plan lists eachrecommended item. The report providesguidance for the care and maintenance of furnishings that are exhibited in thestructure, including specific instructions forthe care of newly acquired objects. Thereport also recommends appropriate levelsof historic housekeeping for interpretation.

Scope of Collections Statement

As the basic curatorial planning documentfor guiding museum collecting, the Scope of Collection Statement (SOCS) defines thepurpose and significance of a museumcollection; establishes limits for subjectmatter, geographic location and time periodsto which the collection relates, states whattypes of objects would be acquired to fulfillthe purpose of the park’s museumcollection, and briefly outlines policies,

priorities and procedures for the acquisition,preservation and use of the collections.

Cultural Landscape Characteristics

A survey of the backyards of Woodson’shome and buildings 1540 and 1542 is neededto determine if significant cultural landscapecharacteristics exist. These characteristicsmay include spatial organization, culturaltraditions, circulation, vegetation, views, andsmall-scale features. The report would also

discuss how the backyards were usedhistorically. All surveys would bedocumented in a report that would be sentto the District of Columbia HistoricPreservation Office for their review andcomment.



Appendix D: Completed Studies and Future Studies Needed

151

Comprehensive Interpretation Plan

Using the interpretation plan in chapter sixas a foundation, the national historic siteneeds to complete a comprehensive

interpretation plan that includes a long-range interpretation plan as part of thedocument. The comprehensiveinterpretation plan is a tool to help parksdecide priorities for their objectives,determine what stories to tell, identify theiraudiences, and describe the most effectivemix of media and personal services to use.The plan should describe the futureinterpretive program, including both non-personal media and personal services

programs, address visitor experience goalsand visitor issues and influences, and includean implementation strategy that is achievableover five to seven years. NPS managers thenshould pursue funding for implementation

plans such as an education plan.

Future Boundary Study

Due to the recent purchase of building 1544,its acquisition by the National Park Service isnot feasible for the foreseeable future. If theacquisition of an additional property appearsto be warranted, then the park would assesspossible options through a boundary study.



152

APPENDIX E: REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPLIANCE WITHSECTION 106 OF THE

NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT

The general undertakings of the preferred alternative are listed in the table below. The list showsthe National Park Service determinations of how those individual undertakings relate to the 2008Nationwide Programmatic Agreement between the National Park Service, the Advisory Councilon Historic Preservation, and the National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers inrelation to cultural resources. A Memorandum of Agreement among the District of ColumbiaHistoric Preservation Officer, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and the NationalPark Service may be written to cover all actions that could affect historic or cultural properties.

Action Compliance Requirement

Carter G. Woodson Home, 1538 9th Street NW, WashingtonD.C.Restore exterior and interior to the period of significance, 1922-1950. Further consultation with District of

Columbia Historic Preservation Officeneeded.

1540 9th Street NW, Washington D.C.Restore the façade and back side to the period of significance, 1922-

1950.

Further consultation with District ofColumbia Historic Preservation Officeneeded.

Rehabilitate the interior for adaptive use. The rehabilitation wouldinclude cutting an entryway between 1540 and the Woodson home

on each floor, constructing an addition on the back side of thebuilding for safe entry and egress, and constructing an elevator andelevator house to make the Woodson home accessible via building1540.

Further consultation with District ofColumbia Historic Preservation Office

needed.

1542 9th Street NW, Washington D.C.Rehabilitate the exterior and interior of the building. Further consultation with District of

Columbia Historic Preservation Officeneeded.

1544 9th Street NW, Washington D.C. (if acquired)The appropriate exterior treatment would be decided after thebuilding is acquired; rehabilitate the interior of the building.

Further consultation with District ofColumbia Historic Preservation Officeneeded.



April 22Mr. De

United177 AdAnnapo SUBJE

Dear MThankcommeSite, Wamanagefor the

resourc I am rethe vici The CarA map i Dr. CartresearcnewsletDependsome ineducati This lettpursuanappreciYours s SIGNELarry VNationa

APPEN

, 2008in Ray, Wild

tates Fish aniral Cochralis, Maryland

T: ReqWas

. Ray:ou for talkincing a Gene

shington, Di

ment goals aext 15 to 25

plans based

uesting a curity of the Ca

ter G. Woodattached. T

er G. Woodsed and wroter on Africaing on how t-house rehabnal program

er serves as at to the Endate your attencerely,

n Horn, Ph.l Park Servic

DIX F: C

UNI

ife Biologist

d Wildlife See Drive21401

est for Speciington, D.C

with me yesal Managemtrict of Colud identify reears. Specifi

later on the

rent list of feter G. Wood

son Home ise site’s coor

on (1875–19journal artiAmerican he General M

ilitation to acs about Dr.

record that tngered Specition. Please

., Planninge, Post Office

ONSUL

ED STA

OF T

NationDenve

Plan12795 We

Post ODenver, C

rvice

es List, Carte

terday over tent Plan (GMmbia. This loources for ptypes of res

eneral Man

erally listedson Home, a

ocated at 15inates appea

0) was a pioles and book

istory. His hoanagementcommodateoodson’s ac

he Nationales Act and Nirect any res

ivision, DeBox 25287,

153

ATION

ES DE

E INTE

l Park Sr Service Cening Divisiot Alameda Pffice Box 25lorado 802

r G. Woodso

e telephoneP) for the Ca

ng-term, cootection andurces would

gement Plan

plant and anind designate

8 9th Streetr to be38° 54

eer scholar is and foundeme is a threelan developsisitors to lea

complishme

ark Service itional Parkonses to me

ver Serviceenver CO 8

CORRE

ARTME

IOR

rviceter

narkway2875-0287

n Home Nat

. The Nationrter G. Wooprehensivepreservatiobe managed

.

mal species tcritical hab

W, Washin′ 37″ N 77

n African Ad an academ-story red br, the Nationarn through its and contr

s initiating cervice mana

:

enter225-0287

PONDE

NT

onal Histori

al Park Servicson Homelan would defor the nati

under separ

hat might poitat, if any, fo

gton, District1’ 26″W.

erican historic journal anck house witl Park Servicterpretive exbutions.

nsultation wgement polic

NCE

Site,

e isational Histfine overallnal historicte, more spe

sibly occur isuch specie

of Columbia

iography. Hepopulara back yardwould perf

hibits and

ith your agenies. We

ric

itecific

s.

.

.rm

cy




154



Appendix F: Consultation and Correspondence

155




156



Appendix F: Consultation and Correspondence

157




158



159

APPENDIX G: BOOKS AUTHORED, CO-AUTHORED,OR EDITED BY CARTER G. WOODSON

Authored by Carter G. Woodson

1915 The Education of the Negro Prior to 1861. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons.

1918 A Century of Negro Migration. Washington, District of Columbia: Associated Publishers.

1921a The Negro Church. Washington, District of Columbia: Associated Publishers.

1921b Carter G. Woodson’s Appeal. Reprinted in 2008 as the Limited Lost Manuscript EditionBound in Genuine Leather. Washington, District of Columbia: Association for the Study of African American Life and History.

1922a Early Negro Education in West Virginia. Institute, West Virginia: West Virginia InstitutePress.

1922b The Negro in Our History. Washington, District of Columbia: Associated Publishers.

1925 Free Negro Heads of Families in the United States in 1830. Washington, District of Columbia: Association for the Study of Negro Life and History, now the Association forthe Study of African American Life and History.

1926a Free Negro Owners of Slaves in the United States in 1830. Washington, District of Columbia: Association for the Study of Negro Life and History, now the Association forthe Study of African American Life and History.

1926b The Mind of the Negro as Reflected in His Letters Written During the Crisis, 1800-1860.Washington, District of Columbia: Associated Publishers.

1928a African Myths, Together with Proverbs. Washington, District of Columbia: AssociatedPublishers.

1928b Negro Makers of History. Washington, District of Columbia: Associated Publishers.

1930 The Rural Negro. Washington, District of Columbia: Associated Publishers.

1933 The Mis-education of the Negro. Washington, District of Columbia: Associated Publishers.

1934 The Negro Professional Man and the Community. Washington, District of Columbia:Associated Publishers.

1935 The Story of the Negro Retold. Washington, D.C.: Associated Publishers.

1936 African Background Outlined. Washington, D.C.: Associated Publishers.

1939 African Heroes and Heroines. Washington, D.C.: Associated Publishers.

Co-authored by Carter G. Woodson

1929 The Negro as a Businessman. Co-authored with James H. Harmon and Arnett G. Lindsay,Washington, D.C.: Associated Publishers.

1930 The Negro Wage Earner. Co-authored with Lorenzo J. Green. Washington, D.C.:Associated Publishers.




160

Edited by Carter G. Woodson

1942 Works of Francis J. Grimke. Washington, D.C.: Associated Publishers

19161950 Journal of Negro History. Washington, D.C.: Associated Publishers

19371950 Negro History Bulletin. Washington, D.C.: Associated Publishers



161

APPENDIX H: GLOSSARY OFHISTORIC PRESERVATION TERMS

National Historic Landmarks – are nationally significant properties that possess exceptionalvalues or qualities in illustrating or interpreting the heritage of the United States; these propertiesare designated by the Secretary of the Interior.

National Register of Historic Places - is the official list of the Nation's historic places worthy of preservation.

Period of Significance - is the span of time when a historic property was associated withimportant events, activities, persons, cultural groups, and/or land uses, or attained importantphysical qualities or characteristics.

Preservation- the act or process of applying measures necessary to sustain the existing form,integrity, and materials of a historic property. Work, including preliminary measures to protectand stabilize the property, generally focuses upon the ongoing maintenance and repair of historicmaterials and features rather than extensive replacement and new construction.

Reconstruction - the act or process of depicting, by means of new construction, the form,features, and detailing of a non-surviving site, landscape, building, structure, or object for thepurpose of replicating its appearance at a specific period of time and in its historic location. (As arule the National Park Service does not reconstruct cultural resources.)

Rehabilitation- the act or process of making possible a compatible use for a property throughrepair, alterations, and additions while preserving those portions or features which convey its

historical, cultural, or architectural values. In rehabilitation, historic features are identified,protected, retained, and preserved. Changes that have acquired significance in their own rightgenerally are retained and preserved. Historic features that have been changed or havedeteriorated may be repaired.

Restoration - the act or process of accurately depicting the form, features, and character of aproperty as it appeared at a particular period of time by means of the removal of features fromother periods in its history and reconstruction of missing features from the restoration period.Restoration aims toward the period of significance of a historic property.

Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings - the

Standards are neither technical nor prescriptive, but are intended to promote responsiblepreservation practices that help protect our Nation's irreplaceable cultural resources. Forexample, they cannot, in and of themselves, be used to make essential decisions about whichfeatures of the historic building should be saved and which can be changed. But once a treatmentis selected, the Standards provide philosophical consistency to the work.

Stabilization - may include structural reinforcement, weatherization, or correcting unsafeconditions. Temporary stabilization should always be carried out in such a manner that it detractsas little as possible from the historic building's appearance.




162



163

REFERENCES

Ahmann, Elizabeth and Anne O’Neill with Stephen Potter2009 “The Native Woodland Peoples of the Rock Creek Valley: Rock Creek National

Park Curriculum Guide.” National Park Service, Washington, D.C.. Accessedonline February 10, 2009 at http://www.swerdloff.us/Washington/indians-RCP.htm

Adscape International

2009 “Charles H. Drew, M.D.” The Black Inventor On-Line Museum. Accessed onlineMay 5, 2009, at http://www.blackinventor.com/pages/charlesdrew.html

African American Almanac

1997 “Arthur A. Schomburg, (1874-1938).” Seventh edition. New York: Gale PublishingGroup.

African American Heritage Trail

2009 “Database.” Washington, D.C.: African American Heritage Trail. Accessed onlineFebruary 2, 2009 at http://www.culturaltourismD.C.org/info-url3948/info-url.htm

AFRO

2010 “D.C., Community Break Ground on O Street Market Development.” AFRO,September 4, 2010. Accessed online January 20, 2011, athttp://www.afro.com/sections/news/washington/story.htm?storyid=2447

Association for the Study of African American Life and History (ASALH)

2007 Reflections September 29, 2006, on Carter G. Woodson with John Hope Franklinand Adelaide M. Cromwell at ASALH’s 91st Annual Convention. Washington, D.C.:Association for the Study of African American Life and History.

2009 “The Carter G. Woodson Home.” Washington, D.C.: Association for the Study of African American Life and History. Page last revised December 13, 2008. Accessedonline March 23, 2009, at http://www.asalh.org/WoodsonHome.html

Associated Press

2009a “'The Gift of Black Folk: The Negroes in the Making of America' [by W. E. B.DuBois] to be Republished.” The Denver (Colorado) Post, Wednesday, February 18,2009, page 2A.

2009b “Newly Minted Maestro: Duke Ellington.” The Denver (Colorado) Post, Wednesday, February 25, 2009, page 2A.

2009c “New Bust at U. S. Capitol Honors Sojourner Truth.” The Denver (Colorado) Post,Wednesday, April 29, 2009, page 14A.




164

Barna, Dave and Gerry Gaumer

2009 “Celebrating African American Heritage in the Parks.” Inside NPS: InformationGateway for National Park Service Employees, February 5, 2009. Accessed online onFebruary 5, 2009, at http://www.nps.gov/pub_aff/african_am/celebrate.htm

Bethune, Mary McLeod1950 “True Leadership is Timeless.” Negro History Bulletin 13 (8, May): 173.

Black Academy of Arts and Letters

1970 Carter G. Woodson induced into the Hall of Fame: Inventory of the Records of theBlack Academy of Arts and Letters, 1968-1980, New York: Historical Statement,Black Academy of Arts and Letters, Arthur A. Schomburg Center for Research inBlack Culture, The New York Public Library, New York, New York. Accessedonline on July 8, 2009, at http://nypl.org/research/sc/scm/marb.html

Brooks, Joseph K., reviser

2000 “The Carter G. Woodson Collection of Negro [now African American] Papers andRelated Documents, A Register [Revised] of His [and Others’] Papers in the Libraryof Congress.” Register originally prepared by Lloyd A. Dunlap and MichaelMcElderry, 1997. Washington, D.C.: Manuscript Division Library of Congress.

Bruce, John Edward

1907 The Black Sleuth. Reprinted in 2002: Boston: Northeastern Library of BlackLiterature of Northeastern University Press, . Edited with an Introduction by JohnCullen Gruesser. First published 1907-1909 serially in McGirt's Magazine. TheBlack Sleuth is one of the earliest African American fictional works to depict adetective of African or African American ethnicity.

1971 The Selected Writings of John Edward Bruce: Militant Black Journalist. Edited byPeter Gilbert. New York: Arno Press and The New York Times.

Bureau of Labor Statistics, United States Department of Labor

2009 “Metropolitan Area Employment and Unemployment.” News. PDF from onlinesource: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives. Accessed 11.27.2009.

Burkett, Randall K.

2006 “Carter G. Woodson: Master Craftsman of Black Print Culture.” In The Mind of Carter G. Woodson, As Reflected in the Books He Owned, Read, and Published. ACatalog of the Library of Carter G. Woodson and the Association for the Study of

African American Life and History in the Manuscript, Archives, and Rare BookLibrary of the Robert W. Woodruff Library, Emory University. Pages 11- 24. ByRandall K. Burkett, Pellom McDaniels, III, and Tiffany Gleason. Atlanta, Georgia:Emory University.



References

165

Burkett, Randall K., Pellom McDaniels, III, and Tiffany Gleason

2006 The Mind of Carter G. Woodson, As Reflected in the Books He Owned, Read, andPublished. A Catalog of the Library of Carter G. Woodson and the Association forthe Study of African American Life and History in the Manuscript, Archives, andRare Book Library of the Robert W. Woodruff Library, Emory University. Atlanta,

Georgia: Emory University

City of Toronto

2009 “Toronto Celebrates Black History Month.” Accessed online February 5, 2009, asCity of Toronto, Ontario, Canada at<http:www.toronto.ca/blackhistory/index.htm>

Columbia College of Columbia University

2009 “Michele M. Moody-Adams Named Next Dean.” Accessed online March 1, 2009,from Columbia College of Columbia University in the city of New York athttp://www.college.columbia.edu/michelle-m-moody-adams-named-next-dean

Convention Center Community Association

2009 “Current Plans for Proposed Carter G. Woodson Park, 1600 Block of 9th St., NWTriangle Park." Washington, D.C., Accessed online November 24, 2009.

Cornell University

2009 “Biographical Sketch, Michele M. Moody-Adams.” Accessed online March 1, 2009,from Cornell University, Ithaca, New York athttp://reading_project_05/moody_adams_bio.pdf

Crowder, Ralph

2004 John Edward Bruce: Politician, Journalist, and Self-Trained Historian of the African

Diaspora. New York: New York University Press.

Culver, Virginia

2009 “Obituary: Bill Baker, TV Cameraman Had Stories to Tell and to Follow.” TheDenver (Colorado) Post , Sunday, January 25, 2009, page 7B.

Dagbovie, Pero Gaglo

2007 The Early Black History Movement, Carter G. Woodson and Lorenzo JohnstonGreene. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press.

2009 “Willing to Sacrifice, Carter G. Woodson (1875-1950) and the Carter G. Woodson

Home National Historic Site.” The Carter G. Woodson Home Historic ResourceStudy 50 Percent Draft. East Lansing, Michigan: Department of History, MichiganState University. Prepared by Pero Gaglo Dagbovie on contract with the NationalPark Service, U. S. Department of the Interior. Submitted June 2, 2009.

Daniel, Constance E. H.

1949 “Two North Carolina Families – The Harrises and the Richardsons.” The NegroHistory Bulletin 13 (October, 1): 3-12, 14, 23.




166

Dao, James

2009 “First Woman [Command Sergeant Major Teresa L. King] Ascends to Top DrillSergeant Spot.” The New York Times, September 22, 2009, page A1, New Yorkedition. Accessed online on September 29, 2009, athttp://www.nytimes.com/2009.09/22/us/22sergeant.html

Denver Post

2009a “President Taking Recovery Show on Road to Hollywood: Comedian Jay Leno WillWelcome the First Sitting President of the United States, President Barack Obama,to The Tonight Show on Thursday, March 19, 2009.” The Denver (Colorado) Post,Tuesday, February 17, 2009, page 2A. Reprinted from The Los Angeles Times.

2009 “Obama Rolls a Gutter Ball, But Some of the Reaction to his Gaffe is OverlySensitive.” The Denver (Colorado) Post, Saturday, March 21, 2009, page 14B.

Destination D.C..

2009 “Washington, D.C.’s Travel and Tourism Industry Reports Modest Gains in 2008.”Online at http://www.washington.org/planning/press-room. Accessed 11/27/2009.

District of Columbia Department of Employment Services

2008 “Employment Status for the Civilian Population.” Online athttp://www.does.ci.washington.D.C..us/. Accessed 11/27/2009.

District of Columba Office of Planning

2005 Convention Center Area Strategic Development Plan. Assisted by Stull & Lee, Inc.;Abt Associates, Inc.; Economics Research Associates; and Mary Means&Associates.

2008 “Preserving Communities and Character: The Historic Preservation Plan for theDistrict of Columbia, 2008-2012.” Historic Preservation Office.

Dodson, Howard with Amiri Baraka, Gail Buckley, John Hope Franklin, Henry Louis Gates, Jr.,Annette Gordon-Reed, and Gayraud S. Wilmore

2002 Jubilee: The Emergence of African-American Culture. Washington, D.C.: NationalGeographic Society with the A. A. Schomburg Center for Research in Black Cultureof the New York Public Library.

Downing, Darenda

2005 “The Historic Phillis Wheatley YWCA Celebrates 100 Years of Service.” Washington

(District of Columbia) Informer, May 18, 2005.

Draper, Electa

2009 “A First in Faith: Coloradan’s Road to Ordination as Rabbi Breaks New Ground.”The Denver (Colorado) Post , Friday, June 5, 2009, pages 1A, 9A.



References

167

Du Bois, W. (William) E. (Edward) B. (Burghardt)

1899 The Philadelphia Negro: A Social Study. Reprinted in 2007, New York and London,Oxford University Press, and in 1995, 1996, and 1998, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, the original publisher.

1903 The Souls of Black Folk. Re-published in 2003 with an introduction and notes byFarah Jasmine Griffen. New York: Barnes and Noble Classics, Barnes and NobleBooks.

1915 The Negro. New York: Henry Holt Publisher.

1924 The Gift of Black Folk: The Negroes in the Making of America. Re-published in 2009.Garden City Park, New York: Square One Publishers.

1950 “A Portrait of Carter Woodson.” Masses and Mainstream 3 (June): 19-25.

Dunlap, Lloyd A. and Michael McElderry, preparers

1997 “The Carter G. Woodson Collection of Negro [now African American] Papers andRelated Documents, a Register of His [and Others’] Papers in the Library of Congress.” Washington, D.C.: Manuscript Division Library of Congress.

Ebony

1958 “Newest Member of Hall of Fame: Honor Goes to Historian Carter G. Woodson.”Ebony Magazine 13: 26-27.

Eastern National Parks and Monuments Association

1997 The [Colonel Robert Gould] Shaw Memorial: A Celebration of an AmericanMasterpiece [of Augustus Saint-Gaudens]. Fort Washington, Pennsylvania: EasternNational Parks and Monuments Association.

Feest, Christian F.

1978 “Virginia Algonquians.” In Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 15 of 20,Northeast . William C. Sturtevant, general editor; Bruce G. Trigger, volume editor.Pages 253-270. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution.

Flemming-Hunter, Sheila

2009 Self-submitted Statement in Support of Sheila Flemming-Hunter’s Nomination forExecutive Council Member, Class of 2012, Association for the Study of AfricanAmerican Life and History (ASALH). In the Memorandum to ASALH Members

from Janet Sims-Wood, Co-Chair, ASALH Nominating Committee, Titled Ballot for the 2009 Executive Council Election and dated July 17, 2009. Washington, D.C.:Association for the Study of African American Life and History.

Franklin, John Hope

1950 “The Place of Carter G. Woodson in American Historiography.” Negro HistoryBulletin 13 (8, May): 174-176.

1957 “The New Negro History.” Journal of Negro History 42 (April):89-97.




168

1985 George Washington Williams: A Biography. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

1986 “On the Evolution of Scholarship in Afro-American History.” In The State of Afro- American history: Past, Present, and Future. Edited by Darlene Clark Hine. Pages 13-22. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press.

Funk, Robert E.

1978 “Post-Pleistocene Adaptations.” In Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 15of 20, Northeast . William C. Sturtevant, general editor; Bruce G. Trigger, volumeeditor. Pages 16-27. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution.

Gaynair, Gillian

2008 “O Street Market development hangs on TIF Financing.” Washington Business Journal online.http://washington.bizjournals.com/washington/stories/2008/05/19/story12.htmlAccessed 11.26.2009.

Gerald, Kelly

2009 “Spotlight: John Hope Franklin (1915-2009).” The Key Reporter of Phi Beta Kappa 74 (2, Summer): 3, 11.

Gicker, William J., editor

2009 “Vintage Black Cinema, Duke Ellington and his Cotton Club Orchestra.” USAPhilatelic: The Official Source for Stamp Enthusiasts 14 (1, Spring): 6, Washington,D.C.: Stamp Services, United States Postal Service.

Gilbert, Peter, editor

1971 The Selected Writings of John Edward Bruce: Militant Black Journalist. New York:Arno Press and The New York Times.

Gilsdorf, Ethan

2008 “Where Black History Began: Carter G. Woodson Home National Historic SiteReflects the History of a Man who Expanded the Meaning of the Word.” National Parks 82 (3, Summer): 58-59.

Goff, Keli

2009 “Naomi Sims.” Time Magazine 174 (6, August 17): 20.

Goggin, Jacqueline Anne

1993 Carter G. Woodson: A Life in Black History. Baton Rouge and London: LouisianaState University Press.

Gordon-Reed, Annette

2008 The Hemingses of Monticello: An American Family. New York: W. W. Norton andCompany.



References

169

Government of the District of Columbia

2005 “Convention Center Area, Strategic Development Plan, Draft Development Guidefor a Diverse Mixed-Use Neighborhood in Washington D.C.’s ShawNeighborhood. Office of Planning, Government of the District of Columbia.

2008 “Shaw Historic District.” Map and Text. February 14, 2008. Washington, District of Columbia: Office of Planning, Government of the District of Columbia.

2009 “Triangle Parks of Washington.” Department of Parks and Recreation,Government of the District of Columbia. Accessed online October 2, 2009, athttp://app.dpr.D.C..gov/DPR/information/parks/parks.asp?type=2

Graves, Lynne Gomez

1975 Carter G. Woodson House. Nomination Form, National Register of HistoricPlaces. Washington, D.C.: National Register of Historic Places, National ParkService, United States Department of the Interior. Preparation date October 30,

1975.

Greene, Lorenzo J.

1996 Selling Black History for Carter G. Woodson: A Diary, 1930-1933. Edited, with anIntroduction, by Arvarh E. Strickland. Columbia: University of Missouri Press.

Gruesser, John Cullen

2002 “Introduction” to The Black Sleuth by John Edward Bruce, pages ix – xxxiii. Editedby John Cullen Gruesser. Boston: Northeastern Library of Black Literature of Northeastern University Press, First published serially, McGirt's Magazine of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 1907-1909. Hale, Noreen

1969 “Carter Godwin Woodson: Historian of the Negro American.” Master of Arts inHistory Thesis. San Francisco, California: Department of History, University of SanFrancisco.

Hale, Noreen

1969 “Carter Godwin Woodson: Historian of the Negro American.” Master of Arts inHistory Thesis. San Francisco, California: Department of History, University of SanFrancisco.

Haley, Dan

2009 “A Pardon for Jack Johnson: President Obama Silent on Congressional Plea.” The

Denver (Colorado) Post Sunday, Section D, Perspective, pages 1D and 3D.

Holmes, Marian Smith

2009 “The Freedom Riders: Fighting Racial Segregation at Bus Depots in the Southnearly Half a Century Ago, They Were Insulted, Beaten and Arrested. A New BookCatches Up with Them Down the Road.” Smithsonian Magazine 39 (11, February):70-75.




170

Hoxie, Frederick E., editor

1996 Encyclopedia of North American Indians. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Hughes, Langston

1967 “When I Worked for Dr. Woodson.” Negro History Bulletin 30 (October, 1): 17.

Jeanne, La Verne Masayesva

1996 “Languages.” In Encyclopedia of North American Indians. Edited by Frederick E.Hoxie. Pages 329-334. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Joyce, Donald Franklin

1991 Black Book Publishers in the United States: A Historical Dictionary of the Presses,1817-1990. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press.

Kachun, Mitch

2008 Book review. Freedom’s Journal: The First African American Newspaper. By

Jacqueline Bacon. The Journal of African American History 93 (2, Spring): 287-289.

Kindred, Ralph, II

2008 “National Park Service, D.C. Residents Discuss Future of Carter G. Woodson’sNorthwest Home.” The Hilltop, The Daily Student Voice of Howard University, 92(62, November 20): 5.

Kunjufu, Jawanza

2000 “Profile [of Carter G. Woodson], Introduction, and Study Questions.” Pages iii-x,216. In The Mis-Education of the Negro by Carter G. Woodson. Chicago: AfricanAmerican Images, Publisher. First published in 1933, Washington, D.C.: The

Associated Publishers.

Lakewood, Ohio, Public Library

2009 “Phillis Wheatley.” Women in History Series. Accessed online January 3, 2009, at<http://www.lkwdpl.org/WIHOHIO/whea-phi.htm>

Levey, Jane Freundel, Paul K. Williams, Richard T. Busch, J. Brendan Meyer, Anne W. Rollins,and Joan M. Mathys

2006 “MiD.C.ity at the Crossroads Shaw Heritage Trail”” Brochure. Washington, D.C.:Cultural Tourism D.C. of the Government of the District of Columbia..

Lewis, Andrew

2009a Telephone conversation of Senior Historic Preservation Specialist Andrew Lewis of the District of Columbia State Historic Preservation Office with Planning TeamMember Lawrence F. Van Horn about the Carter G. Woodson Home NationalHistoric Site, October 28, 2009.

2009b Electronic mail message from Senior Historic Preservation Specialist Andrew Lewisof the District of Columbia State Historic Preservation Office to Planning TeamMember Lawrence F. Van Horn about 1542 9th Street NW, Washington D.C. notbeing historically significant, October 29, 2009.



References

171

Lindsay, Arnett G.

1950 “Dr. [Carter G.] Woodson as a Teacher.” Negro History Bulletin13 (May): 183, 191,

Logan, Frenise A.

1959 “Forty-one Years of the Journal of Negro History.” Journal of Negro History 44

(January): 26-33.

Lutz, Lara

2008 “Piscataway Park's Role Evolved From Saving a View to Sharing a Point of View.”The Chesapeake Bay Journal , December.

McGrath, Dorn

1991 “Carter G. Woodson National Historic Site and Management District Study.” TheAfro American Institute for Historic Preservation and Community Developmentand the Institute for Urban Development Research, School of Business and PublicManagement, the George Washington University.

McQuirter, Marya Annette

2003 “American Heritage Trail, Washington, D.C..” Washington, D.C.: Cultural TourismD.C. of the Government of the District of Columbia.

Migoya, David

2009 “Denver’s Rotary Picks Black President, Roland Thornton.” The Denver (Colorado)Post , October 27, 2009, Business Section, page 9B.

Mitchell, Judylyn

1990 “The Father of Black History, Carter G. Woodson: A Living Legacy.” School kit.Washington, D.C.: Association for the Study of African American Life and History.

Mount Vernon West Historic District

1999 Mount Vernon West Historic District . Nomination Form, National Register of Historic Places. Washington, D.C.: National Register of Historic Places, NationalPark Service, United States Department of the Interior, with certification datesAugust 6, 1999 and September 9, 1999.

National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)

2009 “NAACP Profiles in Courage, Carter G. Woodson, Father of Black History.”Baltimore, Maryland: National headquarters, accessed online April 8, 2009, athttp://www.naacp.org/about/history/cgwoodson/index.htm

National Park Service, U. S. Department of the Interior

n.d. “In Memory of Carter G. Woodson.” In the brochure “Washington, D.C. BlackHistory National Recreation Trail.” Pages 16-17. Washington, D.C.: National ParkService, United States Department of the Interior.

n.d. Black History National Recreation Trail.




172

1998 “The White House and President’s Park: Comprehensive Design Plan and DraftEnvironmental Impact Statement.” Denver, Colorado: Denver Service Center,National Park Service, U. S. Department of the Interior, October 1998.

2001a “Draft General Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement, Mary McLeod

Bethune Council House National Historic Site, Washington, D.C.” Denver,Colorado: Denver Service Center, National Park Service, U. S. Department of theInterior. June 2001.

2001b “Final General Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement, Mary McLeodBethune Council House National Historic Site, Washington, D.C.” Denver,Colorado: Denver Service Center, National Park Service, U. S. Department of theInterior, December 2001. Document can be found at:http://www.nps.gov/mamc/parkmgmt/planning.htm

2002 “Draft Management Plan/Environmental Assessment, Fort Circle Parks,

Washington, D.C.” Denver, Colorado: Denver Service Center, National ParkService, U. S. Department of the Interior, September 2002.

2005a “Rock Creek Park and the Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway. Final GeneralManagement Plan/Environmental Impact Statement, Volume 1.” Denver,Colorado: Denver Service Center, National Park Service, U. S. Department of theInterior, July 2005.

2005b “Rock Creek Park and the Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway. Final GeneralManagement Plan/Environmental Impact Statement, Volume 2.” Denver,Colorado: Denver Service Center, National Park Service, U. S. Department of the

Interior, July 2005.

2006 “Management Policies 2006.” Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, U. S.Department of the Interior.

2008 “Historic Structure Report, Carter G. Woodson Home, 1538 Ninth Street, N.W.,Washington, D.C.” By Judith H. Robinson (historian), Robert Silman (structuralengineer), G. H. T. Limited (mechanical-electrical-plumbing-fire safety engineer)and their associates. Washington, D.C.: Beyer Blinder Belle, Architects andPlanners. Contract No. C3000060016 for the National Park Service, U. S.Department of the Interior, January 2008.

2009 Frederick Douglass National Historic Site Visitation. From online source:http://inside.nps.gov Accessed online 11/28/2009

National Trust for Historic Preservation.

2009 Cultural Heritage Tourism Fact Sheet . PDF from online source:http://www.preservationnation.org/issues/heritage-tourism/additional-resources/2009-CHT-FactSheet.pdf Accessed 11/27/2009.



References

173

Noel, Tom

2009 “Justice Center Honor Long Overdue: Recommendation that the Long-awaitedDenver Justice Center Courthouse be Named the Lindsey-Flannigan Courthouse.”The Denver (Colorado) Post , Sunday, March 8, 2009, page 5D.

Obama, Barack H.2009 “National African American History Month, 2009: By the President of the United

States of America, a Proclamation, Monday, February 2, 2009.” Washington, D.C.:The White House. Accessed online April 15, 2009, athttp://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/nationalafricanamericanhistorymonth2009/

Orwell, George

1949 1984. New York: Harcourt, Brace, and World Publishing Company.

Osher, Christopher N.

2009 “Justice-site Honors Still Unsettled [for the Late Benjamin Barr Lindsey and theLate James C. Flannigan].” The Denver (Colorado) Post , Tuesday, March 10, 2009,page 3B.

Parker, Robert

2009 Affirmation by telephone: “No plans are underway by the District of ColumbiaGovernment that will compete with the general management plan for the Carter G.Woodson Home National Historic Site.” This is the site manager’s statement,October 20, 2009.

Potter, Everett

2009 “Travel Smart: Visit Civil Rights Sights.” USA Weekend Magazine, February 6-8: 4.

Purnell, Brian

2009 “Interview with Dr. John Hope Franklin [June 20, 2007, Duke University, Durham,North Carolina].” The Legacy of Dr. John Hope Franklin. Special Issue. Journal of African America History 94 (3, Summer): 407-421.

Pyne, Charlynn Spencer

1994 “The Burgeoning 'Cause,' 1920-1930: An Essay on Carter G. Woodson.” TheLibrary of Congress Information Bulletin 53 (3, February 7).

Reid, Mark, editor

2009 “History Matters: News from Canada's National History Society. HistoricAchievements, History Society Celebrates Excellence in Canadian History.” TheBeaver, Canada's History Magazine 89 (1, February-March): 59-61.

Residents of the Phyllis Wheatley YWCA, Washington, D. C.

1950 “The Death of the Founder [Dr. Carter G. Woodson].” Negro History Bulletin 13 (8,May): 170, 176.

Righter, Robert, Jr.

2009 “In-box: Know Your Black History.” Time Magazine 173 (8, March 2): 8.




174

Robinson, Judith H., Robert Silman, Jablonski Berkowitz, GHT Limited, and U.S. Cost,

2008 “Carter G. Woodson Home, Historic Structure Report.” Washington D.C.: Beyer,Blinder, Belle – Architects and Planners, dated January 15, 2008, contract numberC3000060016.

Rogers, Kim Lacy2006 “Aging, the Life Course, and Oral History: African American Narratives of Struggle,

Social Change, and Decline.” In Handbook of Oral History. Edited by Thomas L.Charlton, Lois E. Myers, and Rebecca Sharpless. Pages 297-335. Lanham,Maryland: Altamira Press of Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.

Romero, Patricia Watkins

1971 “Carter G. Woodson: A Biography.” Columbus: Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of History, Ohio State University.

Rountree, Helen C.

1996 “Powhatan Confederacy.” In Encyclopedia of North American Indians. Edited byFrederick E. Hoxie. Pages 510-513. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Rountree, Helen C., Wayne E. Clark, and Kent Mountford

2007 John Smith's Chesapeake Voyages, 1607-1609. Charlottesville: University of VirginiaPress.

Safford, Matthew (natural resource/geographic information system specialist)

2009 “500- Year and 100-Year Floodplain Boundary Elevations, Draft National Mall Planand Environmental Impact Statement, Washington, D.C..” Denver, Colorado:Denver Service Center, National Park Service, United States Department of theInterior.

Scherbaum, Peggy

2009 “Draft Carter G. Woodson Home National Historic Site Interpretive Plan,November 2009.” Harpers Ferry, West Virginia: Department of InterpretivePlanning, Harpers Ferry Design Center, National Park Service, United StatesDepartment of the Interior.

Schomburg, Arthur A.

1925 “The Negro Digs Up His Past.” Survey Graphic 6 (March): 670–672

Scott, Daryl Michael, editor

2008 “About Carter G. Woodson.” In Carter G. Woodson’s Appeal: By Carter G.Woodson. Edited by Daryl Michael Scott. Limited Lost Manuscript Edition. Pages169-171. Washington, D.C.: The ASALH (Association for the Study of AfricanAmerican Life and History) Press.

Smith, Kathryn Schneider

2008 “Cultural Heritage Tourism in Washington, D.C.: A Community Based Model forNeighborhood Economic Development.” Global Urban Development 4.1 (August2008).



References

175

Spencer, Robert F. and Jesse D. Jennings

1977 The Native Americans: Ethnology and Backgrounds of the North AmericanIndians. New York: Harper and Row, Publishers.

Stone, Peter

2009 “Piscataway Indians of Washington, D. C.” Accessed online February 25, 2009 atAssociated Content at http://www.associateD.C.ontent.com/company_info.shtml

Styles, Margaret

2004 “Eugene and Carlotta O’Neill Return to Tao House [Danville, California].” Arrowhead, The Newsletter of the Employees and Alumni Association of the National Park Service 11 (1, Winter): 1, 7.

United States Department of the Interior

2009 “National African-American History Month, 2009.” Nationwide electronic mail toall U.S. Department of the Interior employees, February 20, 2009.

Unrau, Harlan D.

2001 “Cultural Resources.” In “Draft General Management Plan/Environmental ImpactStatement, Mary McLeod Bethune Council House National Historic Site,Washington, D.C.” Pages 55-72. Denver, Colorado: Denver Service Center,National Park Service, U. S. Department of the Interior. June 2001.

Urban Institute

2008 State of Washington, D.C.’s Neighborhoods. Prepared by Peter A. Tatian et. al. for theOffice of Planning, the Government of the District of Columbia.

Washington Afro-American

2005 “100 Years of Service; Wheatley YWCA Gala.” Washington (District of Columbia)Afro-American, May 13, 2005.

Washington, D.C. Economic Partnership

2008 “Fast Facts.” From online source: http://www.wD.C.ep.com Accessed 11/27/2009.

Washington Post

2010 “Nearly Two Decades in the Making, D.C.'s Convention Center Hotel BreaksGround.” The Washington Post , November 11, 2010. Accessed online January 20,2011, at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/10/AR2010111007048.html

Weisskopf, Michael

2009 “The Prosecutor: Eric Holder, Jr. the First Black Attorney General, Made His NameFighting Violent Crime. Now He Faces His Toughest Task: Cleaning Up the JusticeDepartment.” Time Magazine 173: (6, February 16): 24-25.




176

Wesley, Charles H.

1951 “Carter G. Woodson as a Scholar.” Journal of Negro History 36 (January, 4): 12-24.

1965 Neglected History: Essays in Negro-American History by a College President.Wilberforce, Ohio: Central State College Press.

1969 Neglected History: Essays in Negro History by a College President. Washington, D.C.:Association for the Study of Negro Life and History.

Wheatley, Phillis

1989 The Poems of Phillis Wheatley. Edited with an introduction by Julian D. Mason, Jr.Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. First edition of this volume by thispress was in 1966.

1995 The Poems of Phillis Wheatley. Bedford, Massachusetts: Applewood Books. From the1838 edition published as Memoir and Poems of Phillis Wheatley.

Wheeler, Linda

2002 “Modern Lives Dwell in the Indian Past.” The Washington (District of Columbia)Post , Sunday, October 20, 2002; Page C5. Accessed online April 3, 2009, athttp://www.washingtonpost.com

Williams, George Washington

1883 History of the Negro Race in America from 1619 to 1880. New York: G. P. Putnam'sSons.

Williams, Lillian S.

2009 Review: Segregated Scholars: Black Social Scientists and the Creation of BlackLabor Studies, 1890-1950. By Francille Rusan Wilson, Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2006. In the Journal of African American History 94 (2, Spring): 296-299.

Wilson, Francille Rusan

2006 Segregated Scholars: Black Social Scientists and the Creation of Black LaborStudies, 1890-1950. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press.

Wisconsin Historical Society

2009 “African-American Newspapers and Periodicals: Freedom’s Journal.” Accessedonline March 5, 2009, at

http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/libraryarchives/aanp/freedom/

Wish, Harvey, editor

1964 The Negro since Emancipation. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall,Incorporated.



References

177

Wittenauer, Cheryl

2009 “Rights Lawyer had ‘Will of Steel.’” The Denver (Colorado) Post, Thursday, August13, 2009, page 14A.

Wolf, Naomi

2009 “Poised, Clever, Savvy, Shrewd, Mother, Wife, First Lady, Intelligent MichelleObama.” The Denver Post , Sunday, March 22, 2009, page 1D.

Woodson, Carter Godwin

1803 “Carter G. Woodson Collection of African American Papers and RelatedDocuments 1803-1972 (bulk 1830-1927) of Dr. Woodson and Others.”Washington, D.C.: Manuscript Division, Library of Congress.

1919 “Negro Life and History in the Schools.” Journal of Negro History 4 (July): 273-280.

1921a Carter G. Woodson’s Appeal. Written in 1921. Manuscript lost but found and

published in 2008. Limited Lost Manuscript Edition edited by Daryl Michael Scott.Washington, D.C.: The ASALH (Association for the Study of African American Lifeand History) Press.

1921b A History of the Negro Church. Washington, D.C.: The Associated Publishers.

1922a The Negro in Our History. Washington, D.C.: The Associated Publishers.

1922b “Some Things Negroes Need to Do.” Southern Workman 51 (January): 33-36.

1926 “Negro History Week.” Journal of Negro History 11 (April): 238-242.

1927 “History Made to Order.” Journal of Negro History 12:330-341. Reprinted in TheNegro since Emancipation, 1964. Edited by Harvey Wish. Pages 91-104. EnglewoodCliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Incorporated.

1933 The Mis-Education of the Negro. Washington, D.C.: The Associated Publishers.

1934 The Negro Professional Man and the Community. Washington, D.C.: AssociatedPublishers.

1940 “An Accounting for Twenty-five Years.” Journal of Negro History 25 (October): 422-431.

1944 “My Recollections of Veterans of the Civil War.” The Negro History Bulletin 29(February): 103, 115-119.

1945 “Negro Historians of Our Times.” The Negro History Bulletin 8 (April, 7): 155-156.




178

1947 “Review of Democracy’s Negroes: A Book of Facts Concerning the Activities of Negroes in World War II by Arthur Furr.” Journal of Negro History 11 (October,1): 509-510. Boston: The Publishing House of Edinboro.

1949a “What Makes a Family Distinguished?” The Negro History Bulletin 13 (October, 1):

1.

1949b “Two North Carolina Families – The Harrises and the Richardsons.” The NegroHistory Bulletin 13 (October, 1): 3-12, 14, 23.

1950 “Disconnected Narrative, Not History.” The Negro History Bulletin 13 (January, 4):95-96

1964 “History Made to Order.” In The Negro since Emancipation. Edited by Harvey Wish.Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Publisher. First published in the Journal of Negro History.

2000 The Mis-Education of the Negro. Introduction, profile, and study questions by Jawanza Kunjufu. Chicago: African American Images Publishing Company. Firstpublished in 1933, Washington, D.C.: The Associated Publishers.

2005 The Mis-Education of the Negro. Edited by Daryl Michael Scott. Washington, D.C.:Association of the Study of African American Life and History Press. Firstpublished in 1933, Washington, D.C.: The Associated Publishers.

Woodson, Carter G., and Charles H. Wesley

1959 The Story of the Negro Retold. Fourth edition. Washington, D.C.: AssociatedPublishers.

Wormser, Richard

2009 “A. Philip Randolph, 1889-1979.” In The Rise and Fall of Jim Crow. Washington,D.C.: Public BroaD.C.asting System (PBS), Television station WNET. Accessedonline on April 2, 2009.

Yates, Emily

2009 This is a personal communication with the D.C. Ward 2 neighborhood planner whois Emily Yates. The location was her office at the Office of Planning, Frank D.Reeves Municipal Center, 2000 14th Street, NW, 4th Floor, Washington, D.C..

Participating were Craig Cellar, project manager, and Thomas Gibney, landscapearchitect, Denver Service Center of the National Park Service, United StatesDepartment of the Interior, November 5, 2009.



179

PREPARERS AND CONSULTANTS

NATIONAL PARK SERVICEPLANNING TEAM(NATIONAL CAPITAL PARKS-EAST)

Alex Romero, Superintendent

Gayle Hazelwood, Former Superintendent

Joy G. Kinard, District Manager

Eola Dance, Cultural Resource Specialist

Robert Parker, Former Cultural ResourceSpecialist and District Manager

Kirsten Talken-Spaulding, Chief of Interpretation and Visitor Services

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE PLANNINGTEAM (NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION)

Joel Gorder, Regional Planning andEnvironmental Coordinator

David Hayes, Regional Planner andTransportation Liaison

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE PLANNINGTEAM (WASHINGTON SUPPORTOFFICE)

Carol Cook, Program Analyst, Park Planningand Special Studies

Patrick Gregerson, Chief, Park Planning andSpecial Studies

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE PLANNINGTEAM (DENVER SERVICE CENTER)

Craig Cellar, Project Manager (retired).Responsible for overall project

coordination; 36 years with the NationalPark Service. B.A. in History and B.A. inAnthropology.

Pam Holtman, Project Manager and CulturalResource Specialist. Resumed projectmanagement duties upon Mr. Cellar’sretirement. Eleven years working for theNational Park Service as a historian, historicpreservationist, and cultural resourcespecialist at three national parks and twoNational Park Service offices. B.A. inEconomics and a M.A. in History.

Erin Flanagan, Community Planner.Responsible for early-in-the-project datagathering on visitor use and on facilities andoperations; 6 years with the National ParkService, 10 years with the EnvironmentalProtection Agency. Masters in ResourcesLaw Studies and Masters in Urban andRegional Planning.

Tom Gibney, Landscape Architect.Responsible for describing socioeconomicsand visitor use in the affected environmentand environmental consequences sections of each alternative for these resources.Threeyears with the National Park Service and fiveyears with Shapins Associates, a privatelandscape architecture/planning firm inBoulder, Colorado. Worked on planningprojects for the National Park Service, theU.S. Forest Service, and U.S. Fish andWildlife Service. B.A. in ClassicalCivilizations and Masters in LandscapeArchitecture (M.L.A.).

Larry Van Horn, Cultural ResourceSpecialist (retired). Wrote first draft of thedocument. Thirty years as a culturalanthropologist and cultural resourcespecialist in the National Park Service andone year as a National Park Servicevolunteer. B.A. in History, M.A. inAnthropology, and Ph.D. in Anthropology.




180

PUBLICATION SERVICES(DENVER SERVICE CENTER)

June McMillen, Writer-Editor (retired).

Wanda Lafferty, Writer-Editor (contractor).

Glenda Heronema, Visual InformationSpecialist (retired).

Damien Joseph, Visual InformationSpecialist.

Nell Blodgett, GIS Specialist.



As the nation’s principal conservation agency, the Department o the Interior has responsibility ormost o our nationally owned public lands and natural resources. This includes ostering sound useo our land and water resources; protecting our fsh, wildlie, and biological diversity; preservingthe environmental and cultural values o our national parks and historic places; and providing orthe enjoyment o lie through outdoor recreation. The department assesses our energy and mineralresources and works to ensure that their development is in the best interests o all our people byencouraging stewardship and citizen participation in their care. The department also has a majorresponsibility or American Indian reservation communities and or people who live in islandterritories under U.S. administration.

NPS 876 / 100936-B JANUARY 2012

Printed on recycled paper



National Park ServiceU.S. Department of the Interior

Carter G. Woodson Home National Historic SiteDistrict of Columbia

Experience Your America